Federal one-piece plastic hulls

[No Name XII]

I am looking for some 2 3/4" Fed. one-piece plastic hulls for reloading. Can anybody tell me which federal shells use this hull?

[Poodleshooter]

All of Federal's hunting and cheaper target hulls use a paper basewad to my knowledge.
Their higher end target "Gold Medal" hulls use a seperate plastic basewad.

The only one-piece plastic hulls that I commonly find anymore are Remington's unibody hulls,which are actually found in the cheap Walmart dove loads. That ammo is an excellent source of good hulls,IMHO. There's also the Remington STS hulls. I think AA's are now a 2 piece hull.

[No Name XII]

All of Federal's hunting and cheaper target hulls use a paper basewad to my knowledge.
Their higher end target "Gold Medal" hulls use a seperate plastic basewad.

That's what I thought, except I figured that the cheap target loads were in cheaper gold medal hulls, like the gun club hulls are cheap sts hulls. The only thing is in alliant's manual and on their website, they list loads for a one-piece hull from federal, and for what I want to try, it is either find some of those, or find some activ t42 wads (no longer made), which, by the way, if anyone is selling I might be interested in buying.

[Poodleshooter]

What are you looking to do?
I reload the Federal paper base hulls since they're cheap;ditto for the Remington unibody designs.
I'm stretching my memory here,but isn't the T-42 the really high capacity short wad that Activ used in some of their heavyweight 3" shot loads? It's similar to the Winchester red WAA12R's in that respect, IIRC.

[No Name XII]

I am curious to try out an ounce and five-eigths load. The only two that I have found are here and here. That's funny; last time I looked I thought that there was only one load at each of those, and I also could have sworn that the one in the federal hull was an RP12 with blue dot and not and SP12 with Herco... I'll have to check my hard copies... I know if I want something that heavy I should just go to 3", but I like doing things just because I can... Anyway, my only real option is to use the load in the federal hulls; I seriously doubt that I would find any of those activ wads no matter how hard I looked... It should be illegal to stop manufacturing or change the design of components once you've put them on the market... It's such a pain in the ass... Like Winchester changing their AA hulls; it's not as big of a deal, but it was still stupid to go and change a good thing that everyone is used to...

[Poodleshooter]

Hmm, for a big capacity load like that, I'd seriously look into a home baked recipe with Remington unibodies rather than the Federals,and possibly the WAA12R wad that I mentioned. It's a darn short wad column, allowing tons of space for a heavy shot charge. You'd probably end up using Herco,Hodgdon's Longshot or HS 7. I'll add that I've never,ever had luck igniting Blue Dot in a magnum shotgun load. Granted, I haven't used CCI209M's,but Winchesters are what I choose to stock.
Anyway, the red Winchester wad is the shortest wad column I've seen. All of my heavy load patterns with it have sucked since it's short and not very cushioning of the shot column. I think the BPI wads are the way to go for heavy loads. Those are so expensive though, that you might as well just buy ammo.

[No Name XII]

How would you go about making up a load for something like that? All of the loading software packages I have seen that give you a starting point, etc, are only for metallic cartridge loading. Is there a book that gives guidelines for shotshell load development? Also, how can you get a handle on pressures? Shotgun pressures are so low that it seems like you would blow something up before you could tell that it is over pressure.

[K80Geoff]

I have two books in my reloading library that get used! One is Lyman's "Shotshell Reloading Handbook" 4th Edition (1995). The other is "Reloading for Shotgunners" by Fackler and McPherson (1997).

Both books are dated but still contain a wealth of info, the Fackler book gives ranges for powders/primers/hulls/ that give you an idea what the safe range of loads are.

Also the powder manufacturers put out handbooks that are a must have for reloaders.

I recommend using Remington STS/Nitro 27 hulls exclusively as they are designed for reloading and have an integral base wad.

Most shells can be reloaded but are made for the market that does not reload.

A good rule of thumb is to look at the number of folds in the crimp, hulls with a 8 fold crimp are generally of better quality, 6 folds are generally made with lower grade plastic and separate base wads and are really designed to be shot once and tossed.

All euro brand shotshells are designed for one time use, although they can be reloaded, the plastic is not the same quality as the Remington hulls, or the older Winchester AA hulls.

[No Name XII]

Thanks for the info Geoff. I have been reloading for trap for a while (mostly the remington gun club hulls, which are basically cheap STSs as you probably know, and they actually do quite well, and aren't too much worse than the STSs). I thought that the 6-point crimps were for field loads, which I guess goes along with what you are saying, since field loads will probably be thrown out. Although, I have some old federal hi-powers that look pretty sturdy. The old AAs seem to split after too few reloads compared to the federal gold medals and the remington hulls, but we still use them for odd-ball loads.
The main thing is that I haven't done much besides trap loads, so my knowledge on field loads is pretty incomplete; so I basically only use what is in the manufacturer's load book.

[K80Geoff]

The "Gun Club" hulls are black, correct? I believe these are the same shells Rem used before developing the STS/Nitro 27 hulls. They are integral basewad and sturdy enough to reload many times.

I have many of the old Green Rem shells (Pre STS) and they work fine. Many have been reloaded many times. I use tem for #9 shot. Reserving the STS for 8 and Nitro for 7.5. That way I know what I am shooting

I have heard many complaints about Win AA's. Too bad, they were the standard before the STS came out.

My reloading machine (MEC 9000G) does not like any federal hulls, so I eschew them

Except 28 GA where I use whatever I can find

[No Name XII]

The gun clubs are green, but they are a lighter, and more flat color than the STS hull. They also have a brass colored steel head instead of actual brass, I think. I also have some old blue remington-peters. I think they were called blue magic. The only black hulls I have are about a box-worth of old black AA handicaps.

As far as the federal hulls go, I have several thousand old gold medals (the ones with the fluted/skived bodies), but for some reason they stick in the gun that I use most of the time, so they are relegated to odd loads. The only problem is that they are really thin-walled, and bulge with large shot charges. The new gold medals are much better in that respect. I use a Ponsness-Warren Platinum 2000. I can't believe how nice the shells that come out of that are. The big problem is that the primer feed would jam up at first. But after that was fixed, it runs like a dream.

[Poodleshooter]

How would you go about making up a load for something like that?

Well this is probably not perfect procedure, so I'll add the disclaimer that this is: "Horrible to do. It will kill you. Do not follow this advice".

Now with that said, I use the manuals that K80Geoff recommended for beginning data to work with. With regards to buckshot and slugs, there is very little data, so you have to extrapolate from data that is already listed,substituting one component at a time. That's the only reason I ever got into experimenting with new loads.
So for this load, I'd start by looking for a 1-1/2oz load that has components such as those you're looking at using. Find a load that uses a powder that is on the slower end of the data for the 1-1/2oz loads. Ditto for finding a wad-you want one that has enough capacity to hold your hefty shot charge, or at least one that is short enough to allow the charge to fit under the crimp. Hopefully you can find a 1-1/2oz load like this. Once you find it, experiment with the book load by reducing the powder perhaps 15% from the 1-1/2oz load,seating the wad and adding your new charge,then crimping. This is simply to find out whether you have room under your chosen crimp for the heavier shot charge and lighter powder load. In this guess on powder charge weight, it helps to have a powder that is used in several different "weight classes". For example, a powder that is used for 1-3/8 and 1-1/2oz loads could help extrapolate what reduction is needed from the 1-1/2oz loads in order to create a 1-3/8oz load.
Once you're comfortable with the fit,crimp and the adequate safety of your improvised load, I'd take it out and run it over a chronograph. As with regular loads,unburned powder in the barrel will mean that you powder charge is insufficient,and burning or other tearing of the hull will indicate an overcharge. I'm usually cautious enough that my first loads leave a stream of powder down the barrel from low pressure. With luck, the powder you select is within the proper burning range for optimum performance.
Anyway, that's what I do....

[No Name XII]

Poodle shooter; thanks for the information. The only thing was that I thought that unburned powder meant that you had a load with too much powder or it was too slow of a powder. How does having too little powder leave some behind? Sorry, I am just having trouble grasping this; I'm sure it will just hit me any second now...
As far as powder goes, I guess I will probably try blue dot, since it seems to be about the slowest shotshell powder around (I think I recall seeing some loads using 2400 though, but I am not sure...), it is used for 1 1/4 up to the other 1 5/8 loads plus several for longer shells, and I have some. For wads, it appears that the AA red and the RP12 are pretty close in shot capacity, but I haven't measured them yet. When I find the time to try something, I will post the results here.

A quick question; since there are no loads (that I have seen at least) that go above 11,500 psi, I would assume that the limit is about 12,000. Is this just insurance for older guns like they do with the 45-70, or is this the structural limit for all shotguns? I realize that hotter loads will wear things out faster. Also, just curious, do the longer shells have a higher pressure limitation?

BTW, nice disclaimer.

[Poodleshooter]

Poodle shooter; thanks for the information. The only thing was that I thought that unburned powder meant that you had a load with too much powder or it was too slow of a powder. How does having too little powder leave some behind?

Your statements are correct, however I worded mine awkwardly. Too little of a slow burning powder generates insufficient pressure. I basically presumed for this load that it would be a very slow powder for 12gauge loads. So it's really the pressure and slowness of the given powder that leave unburned grains in the barrel.

As far as powder goes, I guess I will probably try blue dot, since it seems to be about the slowest shotshell powder around (I think I recall seeing some loads using 2400 though, but I am not sure...), it is used for 1 1/4 up to the other 1 5/8 loads plus several for longer shells, and I have some. For wads, it appears that the AA red and the RP12 are pretty close in shot capacity, but I haven't measured them yet. When I find the time to try something, I will post the results here.

Good luck with it. I found it to be too slow in my buckshot loads,but I was trying to use loads of 35grs and more. I'd recommend a hot primer.... Herco is another good magnum shotgun powder,BTW.
I've not used the RP12. I don't have any of them for comparison, however I did check out the WAA12R the other night. I'm pretty sure it will work,but I think it might blow patterns. You're basically not going to get much more than 1100fps from these loads according to the listed data I've seen for 1-5/8oz loads. Please do post results.

A quick question; since there are no loads (that I have seen at least) that go above 11,500 psi, I would assume that the limit is about 12,000. Is this just insurance for older guns like they do with the 45-70, or is this the structural limit for all shotguns? I realize that hotter loads will wear things out faster. Also, just curious, do the longer shells have a higher pressure limitation?

I've always assumed that it's structural. Plastic cases with brass coated steel case heads can't be that strong.
I don't worry too much about loading heavy loads with very slow powders in most calibers. It's too hard to overcharge with powders that barely fit in the case. Shotguns are even safer,since they'll usually bulge up the crimp (dropping pressure) if you're loading with a slow bulky powder. The scary part of loading is messing with higher charges of fast or medium burning powders-trying to get high velocity from mid weight bullets or shot charges. That's the kind of experimentation that kills reloaders. I don't extrapolate 12 gauge loads with powders such as Clays,Bullseye or Red Dot. I stick to listed data,which is fortunately quite available with those powders

BTW, nice disclaimer.

I'm sure some reloaders would agree with my evaluation of the info I gave.