16ga.com Forum Index
Author Message
<  16ga. Ammunition & Reloading  ~  Substituting primers
Little Creek
PostPosted: Sat Mar 15, 2014 4:56 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 367
Location: Anchorage, AK

I just put a set of Michelins on my truck last fall. I tested them by getting up to 100 MPH and slamming on the brakes. Actually I tested them by having a previous set for 80k miles...they worked well.

On the other hand, I think it's nice to know Arbruster or another reputable source tested a load I want to use in my damascus Belgian gun.

No fiddling around with the loads, and I appreciate the info I gain from this site and the 16 Ga reloaders group and members of the PGCA> Thanks again

Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
verp
PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:18 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 7
Location: Luxembourg

It is highly likely that my reply will cause some rants and I will be put in stocks and pelted with Euro trash hulls. . However .... I am not convinced by the data dogchaser supplied. The lot number of the Federal primers was carefully noted, but for the Win primers the lot number was unknown. Another comment I would like to make is the number of significant digits in the average is bigger than in the individual measurements.
The comparison cries .. REPEAT.... REPEAT. Was the crimp depth noted down , was the hull from the same batch? Were the powder charge and the shot load individually weighed? Crushed wad? Total weight of the shell?
One conclusion you can draw is that the DR16 Wad causes high pressures.
Compare it to Hodgdon published data:
Same hull, same powder 22.0 grain 1 oz. shot Fed 209A 8200 PSI BPG/BP wad.
I also question the purpose of this trial. There are enough recipes for 7/8 loads.
European continental 16 gauge shotguns have been proofed for 780 bar
maximum loads. (11310 Psi) Why would anyone want to come close to that?
If you stay close to 9000 psi MAX. there will be no problem. Metallic cartridge reloading data will supply min and max loads. Why is that not done for shot shells? OK, enough ranting from my side!

Mike, did you also check the cornering of your new tires? Here they will last about 40.000 KM.

Piet
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanLee
PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:35 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 601
Location: Virginia

verp wrote:
Mike, did you also check the cornering of your new tires? Here they will last about 40.000 KM.


Mike lives in Alaska. I doubt there is enough straight stretch of freeway there to get up to 60 mph for more than ten minutes at a time. Europe, no limit on the autobahn, right? It's always been a source of puzzlement to me that Europeans want to get somewhere fast when everything is comparatively close together.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
16gaugeguy
PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 2:20 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 6535
Location: massachusetts

[quote="verp"] "...One conclusion you can draw is that the DR16 Wad causes high pressures...".

Please note. Wads do not cause high pressures. Reloaders who fail to consult proven data and properly adjust the powder charges when swapping out wads cause high (or low) pressures.

The DR16 wad base design has been taken from the original Winchester AA wad design. It is a very efficient design which forms a hemispherical shaped combustion chamber and an excellent gas seal as well. Equal charges of the same powders in a given load will very likely generate higher average peak pressures under the DR16 wad than most other 16 ga wads, so charges must be reduced. Only research and testing will determine how much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogchaser37
PostPosted: Sun Mar 16, 2014 4:54 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 1946
Location: Central CT

verp,


Don't take this wrong. but you don't have any f*****g idea as to what you are talking about.

All powder and shot loads were weighed.

Tom Armbrust noted the Winchester primer lot number in the first load.

DR-16 wads do not build excess pressure. Those loads were purposely run as close to max as I could get them, so I could back them down a bit if I wanted to.

The Cheddite hulls were brand new.

The Federal hulls were once fired from ammo that I bought.

All my crimps are .060 to .065 deep.

I missed your point on the repeat thing but it doesn't matter.

Stop behaving like a an internet troll just because you don't have a clue as to the subject matter.

_________________
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
verp
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:29 am  Reply with quote



Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Posts: 7
Location: Luxembourg

I don't take it wrong because I have met enough opinionated people.
Mind your manners please.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogchaser37
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:03 am  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 1946
Location: Central CT

My post was not opinion it was and remains fact.

.......and I don't take to sucker punches kindly.


Last edited by Dogchaser37 on Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:51 am; edited 1 time in total

_________________
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scraggley
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:34 am  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 363
Location: connecticut

I am not a max load kind of guy whether rifle, handgun or shot shell. I do however really appreciate Dave in Maine's comments regarding extreme variation as noted . I have to admit that in the past I was only interested in the velocity and pressure information on the data sheets .I guess one is never to old to learn!

And no I do not substitute primer or wads in shot shell loads.
Art

_________________
A thing of beauty is ajoy forever!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zoli 16ga.
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:44 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Posts: 295
Location: Southern Ontario

'However .... I am not convinced by the data dogchaser supplied'
'One conclusion you can draw is that the DR16 Wad causes high pressures'

Verp - Fact overrules opinion…..every day.

Perhaps you meant to ask specific questions about dogchaser's tests, so that relevant facts can be ascertained, regarding variances reveled in his samples tested? Perhaps your post was not meant to come across as unmannered.

Mark, many thanks for taking the time to post the results of your efforts, and trying (however painful it may be sometimes) to help others along.

Don.

_________________
1959 16ga. Antonio Zoli sxs 28"
1949 16ga. Model 12 28"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogchaser37
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:20 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 1946
Location: Central CT

Sorry for the rudeness, but sometimes...........I always try my best to give proof when I have it available. I wish that all my tests were available to me , but most were not mine and belonged to Precision Reloading. There are hundreds of loads that would prove that primer swapping isn't a top notch under taking, especially with the medium and slow burn powders used in the 16 Gauge.

_________________
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
renaudnw
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 6:50 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 10 Feb 2011
Posts: 217
Location: Pacific Northwest

Dave in Maine wrote:
Look closely at that image. As far as I am concerned, the critical number is not the maximum pressure. Rather, it is the "EV" for pressure - "extreme variation". The two dog loads had EV of 1900 psi and 1000 psi, and the #3 best load was an EV of 900 psi. In loads which are close to the max psi to begin with, that kind of variability is risky. If not to your fingers and eyes, to your favorite gun's structural integrity.
Dave;

I'm not quite sure I understand your comment. Obviously load 4 has some interesting velocity swings (which could point to borderline performance so I, for one, would probably not use it) but your comments on pressure don't make sense to me. In fact, in relation to load 3 and 4, they seem backwards (based on the SAAMI standard and relative statistical variation).

For load 4...
ave = 10000 psi
s.d. = 745
S.E. = 333
MPLM = 10666 psi
MPSM = 10999 psi

These numbers for load 4 are all well within the SAAMI standard. In fact, they are better than load 3 with respect to pressure limits.

For load 3...
ave = 10820 psi
s.d. = 390
S.E. = 174
MPLM = 11169 psi
MPSM = 11691 psi

As a refresher, the SAAMI pressure limits for 16Ga are...
MAP = 11500 psi
MPLM = 12100 psi
MPSM = 13000 psi

So even though load 3 has a smaller standard deviation and standard error than load 4, load 3 is considerably closer to the pressure limits. Add to this that these sample sizes are only one half the standard sample size in number (10), then the allowed variances are considerably larger than published.

So, I am at a loss for why you consider any of these loads to be "risky". Could you please explain your reasoning?

_________________
Matt

Nothing makes a gun more effective than practice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dogchaser37
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 7:12 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 1946
Location: Central CT

So that everyone understands the relevance of EV's and SD's.

When we reload we are manufacturing ammunition. Just like the factories, we are using data that is first tested, with weighed powder and shot payloads. The difference between what the factories do and what we do is, the factories also test ammo as it is being produced.

EV or exteme variation is held to a tolerance. For the reloader the max EV should be held to 35 FPS.

SD or Standard Deviation will fall into line around 18 FPS or less.

For pressure I used to hold EV to 1,500 PSI.

Those EV and SD are perhaps bit tighter than the big boys use but, these parameters keep loads from acting up when the temps drop and assure you of a decent load even when you are loading in a normal sequence using dropped powder and shot charges rather than weighed charges.

What the data for load 3 is telling you is that for velocity you can expect the majority of loads to fall between 1377 and 1391 FPS, which falls well within the max EV of 35 FPS.

As far as the pressure goes SAAMI does NOT use EV or SD as a consideration for MAP (Maximum Average Pressure). If you read SAAMI Standards you will understand how that works.

MPLM or MPSM are average figures also and they are there to help with the manufacture of NEW AMMUNITION, never for reloaded ammunition!

_________________
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mike campbell
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 8:59 pm  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Posts: 1338

Rolling Eyes


Last edited by mike campbell on Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
renaudnw
PostPosted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:50 pm  Reply with quote



Joined: 10 Feb 2011
Posts: 217
Location: Pacific Northwest

mike campbell wrote:
I can expect that 95% of my shells will fall within +/- 2 SD of my average.

For example, with an average of 1384 fps and a SD = 7, I can expect 95 of the next 100 shells I shoot will chronograph between 1370 and 1398 fps.
Except that you don't know the true standard deviation, only the sample standard deviation. This is why you need to determine a confidence interval for the sample SD based on an assumed distribution and sample size.

You can't actually make the population assumptions your making because you haven't performed the statistical estimation of the true population characteristics. My point here is simple, you either accept the specification as a baseline (monitoring and SPC included), or you do the statistical groundwork and form your own baseline process. You can't mix and match; the mathematics don't allow it. MAP means nothing without the population limits and continuous testing. The one time test of 5 rounds of a population sample can not tell you anything about the ongoing population statistics without monitoring. And simply choosing a standard deviation limit or an E.V. limit with no determined population statistic and confidence interval is no better than using no limits at all.

The bottom line is that "load testing" is useless unless 1) you have standard manufacturing processes with SPC and 2) you understand the meaning of the statistics you are collecting. Regardless of the average pressure, velocity, standard deviations, or extreme variations provided back to you on some test sheet, no single test of five rounds can tell you if what you are loading is good, bad, or indifferent. Statistics is about control and process feedback; it's an all or nothing game. If you aren't going to do it all, you should quit wasting your money on "test" loads. Because the one time results mean nothing.

_________________
Matt

Nothing makes a gun more effective than practice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dogchaser37
PostPosted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 2:09 am  Reply with quote
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Aug 2011
Posts: 1946
Location: Central CT

Give it up renaudnw.

It has been proven over and over again that for loads like you see on the data page I presented that while not perfect, 5 loads gives you a solid base to work from. These are light loads, with the pressure over 9,000, using stout primers with fast to medium burn rate powders.

If you run 10 over a chronograph it will work out just fine with the velocities staying within the limits I have outlined.

If these loads were for publication, they would have to be tested in a 10 round sample.

When working with heavier payloads and slower burning powders 10 round samples are a must.

When developing these loads for my own use. I send what I beleive to be loads as close to max as I get and then back them off to get the velocities I want. I know the pressures will be less than max and I can chronograph the 10 loads for myself, to make sure they are within my EV limits.

BTW the procedure of shooting 10 loads recording Velocity and Pressure with SD and EV figures is exactly the SAAMI standard for getting the correction values for a test station, while using SAAMI Reference ammo. Please read the standards.

You might understand samples and SPC and statistics, however you do not understand SAAMI Standards and how they are applied.

SD and EV readings for velocity are calculated by every decent chronograph out there. The chronos are setup to give you the proper SD for the sample size you check. No one is using the wrong or fudged SD figure for the application.,

_________________
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
All times are GMT - 7 Hours

View next topic
View previous topic
Page 3 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
16ga.com Forum Index  ~  16ga. Ammunition & Reloading

Post new topic   Reply to topic


 
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB and NoseBleed v1.09