16ga.com ~ View topic

Joined: 24 Jul 2016 Posts: 548 Location: Ohio

Does anybody make one?

Joined: 15 Jun 2010 Posts: 1358 Location: Twin Cities, MN

remington

Member Joined: 09 Aug 2004 Posts: 401 Location: Tennessee

The Remington is a bit thinner at the mouth than the base so you could say it is "tapered" but it is still a Reifenhauser hull with a separate basewad. No tapered base.

OK . So you are talking interior taper. WW compression formed 16ga hulls were manufactured. Why do you ask?

Joined: 24 Jul 2016 Posts: 548 Location: Ohio

I was curious about wads.Apparently all 16 ga. wads are designed for straight walls and the only difference is stack height. Correct?

No, OH Wirehair, some have smaller diameter over-powder cups that make them unsuitable for thin-walled hulls. Though the RGL is the Reiffenhauser design, its walls are considerably thicker. Those wads that would be generally unsuitable for the thin-walled hulls are the Remington R16 and SP16, and the old original Winchester AA16. You may have trouble squeezing European-made wads made specifically for Cheddite, Fiocchi, and other thin-walled Rieffenhauser hulls, into RGL's for instance. Some folks have great results with Gualandi 20 gauge wads in those thick-walled RGL's. Those aforementioned Remington and Winchester wads work best with very coarse-grained powders, if used in thin-walled hulls. Otherwise, powder migration problems arise. If you are loading RGL's, use Remington wads, or the current Claybuster WAA16 clones, or the DR16. For the thin-walled hulls as mentioned above, including the current Winchester X-perts and Herter's (both are Cheddites, really), use the European wads -- Gualandi, B&P, Cheddite, etc. Get them from Precision Reloading, Inc. Ballistic Products, Inc. or Grafs, Gamaliel, etc.

Joined: 24 Jul 2016 Posts: 548 Location: Ohio

Good information,what do you think of Federals? I'm currently using DR16's but will switch to ClayBusters when their gone do to cost.

Member Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Posts: 2168 Location: Florida

IMO Federals are one the better hulls available to the 16ga loader . The Claybuster wad is not a good fit unless you are using a large flake powders to control migration . The 7/8oz wad needs filler to load 7/8oz of shot in the straight wad hulls .

Joined: 24 Jul 2016 Posts: 548 Location: Ohio

I'm currently loading 17.4 grains of Green Dot behind 7/8 oz of 7 1/2 shot with a DR16 wad. Switching to ClayBuster because I can buy them for half of DR's price. I don't mind the time it takes to add filler. And I really like the Federals,much better then Remington's. You have no concern with the paper base wad? I ran a test of 6 loadings to the same 25 shells with no adverse effects to the base wad and the crimps still look excellent. Besides, theres just something about a old gun and Purple shells made in the USA. Smile

If you dont mind using a filler wad the Cheddite wad is a good fit in Fed hulls.

www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/2495

Actually, OH Wirehair, the Claybuster (CB)clones of the WAA16 should work pretty well in the thin-walled hulls. I think CB realized the justification for cloning the WAA16 could not rely on W-W compression formed hulls, because those hulls are not so plentiful anymore, so they increased the size of the over-powder seal on their clones to make it useful in the hulls typically available today -- Euro-hulls and Federals. CB's clones are not dead-ringers, dimensionally, for the original WAA16. Note in my earlier post I said "the old original Winchester AA16" when talking about thick-walled hulls, and then later mentioned the CB clones for thick-walls because original WAA16 wads are pretty hard to come by.

I have some CB 16's and the over-powder seal design is probably not as good as the Euro wads with their anti-migration rings, and maybe not quite as big a seal as the DR-16 has, but I doubt you'd have powder migration problems with it in Euro hulls if you had good, tight-fitting loads with solid crimps, and powders that aren't super-fine. Hell, you're probably going to wind up using Unique, Green-Dot, Blue-Dot or the like anyway -- even Universal, International, or PB are fairly big-flake powders. Longshot? -- better use a tight fitting wad.

The DR-16, by the way, has what appears to be an anti-powder-migration ring. It often seems a little incomplete, like the mold doesn't quite fill for that small feature, and it's ring isn't nearly as pronounced as on the Euro wads, but the DR-16 seems to do OK migration-wise because its powder seal is of sufficient diameter, even though it seems a little thick-edged to be very flexible on compression when loading -- and compression on loading is a bit of a problem because the DR-16's recoil section is long and flimsy -- it works, for people though, and many like it, but I digress. Of course some Euro wads do not have the anti-migration rings, and use the 'brute-force" solution to powder migration -- big diameter. The beauty of the CB 16 clones is that they have a flexible enough over-powder seal to expand and seal against thin-walled hulls if seated with force, yet still be usable in the thick-walled RGL's and taper-walled compression-formed W-W's. I like the Claybuster wads.

Of course, with care, you can actually make anything work, wad-and-hull-wise. Many folks here have posted simple solutions they use -- heating and expanding powder seals, auxiliary spacers, wads and sheets of plastic, etc, etc. I like to start with components that have the best chance of working without fiddling, but I will fiddle. To each his own -- the beauty of hand-loading.

Cheers!

One more thing . . . My post might have led some to believe folks should stay up at night worrying about powder migration. I think powder migration is over-emphasized, and seldom a problem. Having said that, I think it is obvious that certain combinations of hull, wad and powder should be avoided. I just hate holding shells up to the light and seeing a bunch of powder in the recoil section of the wad. Maybe I shouldn't look Laughing

I believe powder migration is minor to unimportant in target loads made and fired with little carry time.

For uplAnd loads long carried and bounced around it should be a consideration

Member Joined: 09 Jan 2013 Posts: 2168 Location: Florida

"old colonel" I believe powder migration is minor to unimportant in target loads made and fired with little carry time.

With Flake powders yes with ball and fine grain powders , migration call happen by just transporting them to the range .

Guest

I have a replay of a hard earned wild rooster pheasant from a marginal biome and a ruffed grouse ETCHED in my mine from bloopers caused by poor wad/hull compatability way back when I started reloading 16 gauge. More like reoccurring nightmares! Max Smoke is right, pick the best fitting wads for the hull.