shotshell component substitution

[fenriswulf]

I've been experimenting with component substitution for a few months now. Since components are still somewhat scarce, finding exactly what you need for a recipe isn't always possible. On another forum people had made a lot of comments regarding this topic which implied that It was foolish to go "offmenu" and that I would almost certainly damage my gun or self.

I've mainly substituted federal primers for Winchester. Popular opinion says that the federal primers burn hotter and are therefore dangerous to use as substitutes. I've also used different wads than the recipe called for although the wads I selected were labeled as adequate for the federal hulls im using. Getting a good fit seems to be necessary for performance and possibly safety reasons, particularly when dealing with high pressure loads.

I've been running the max allowable powder load of hogdon hs6, federal 12 gauge 2.75 hulls, along with these primers. Not once have I had any problems with these rounds.

I've also done some comparison of load data and determined that the difference in pressure between these two primers in comparable loadings is generally less than 6% which is well within the factor of safety used for weapons design. The funny thing is, the data I found shows the federal primers actually having a lower pressure than the Winchester primers despite popular opinion.

In conclusion, cautious substitution of components could be a viable approach to reloading when components are scarce. I don't understand why people will so readily dismiss this possibility and insist that everyone follow recipes to the letter.

[rlc323]

I will not go as far as to recommend that freely substituting shotshell components is a good idea. But it is pretty common knowledge that most modern shotguns are very forgiving of the mistakes people make when reloading. Usually if the barrel is not plugged the reloader gets away with his error.

That said, I believe that everyone who reloads has the responsibility to keep safety in mind first. Not only your own safety, but the safety of the innocent people who are shooting alongside you.

With the major powder companies more than willing to take call and e-mail questions on loads that do not appear in their published data charts. I see no need to experiment without asking the professionals for their advice first.

[BigJimP]

Shotshells are different than metallic...in metallic you can mix any small pistol primer for another brand of small pistol primer....and the shotshell reloading manuals all tell you, you should stick with the primer listed in the recipe...and not just mix them.../ or you may significantly spike the pressures in a shell.

So part of the caution is to make sure everyone knows shotshell primers - even though many are labeled 209's - are just not the same ....and each of them react differently, with different powders ( sadly because folks don't research things, don't read manuals, and in general just assume things...) and in reloading that is not a great plan .
-------------
Will replacing one of the 209 primers - for another ---be dangerous / probably not, if you are shooting a solid relatively newer shotgun...but why take the risk....??

I think with some research ....you will probably find its reasonable to substitute some components for others....where you can find similar recipes ...and it may be ok to interpolate what is reasonable....but everyone should understand the risks of not using published recipes.

The closer you get to max velocities and max payload...the more critical all of this becomes...

But honestly, most of us are looking for a quality shell...with a good crimp / that will hold its shape ....so its about making the best shell we can ...for crimp quality, and reliable velocity and performance. Some wads are designed for certain types of hulls...and if you don't use the right wads, you may get powder migrating beyond the base of the wad - causing all kind of variations in performance or even a squib...and just like in handguns .../ if the wad does not exit the barrel ( in a squib ) and a second shell is fired behind it ...it will probably result in significant damage to the gun / or injure the shooter...

Squibs make me nervous....and I've see a Squib round -- on Skeet fields, station 7 --- break an incoming high house target, yet the wad was still stuck in the barrel. The light muzzle blast - alerted the members of the squad and we stopped the shooter from reloading the barrel before he checked it ...so no problem, but he did not hear the difference...( and its not easy to see into the barrel on a pump gun or semi-auto ) like it is on an O/U...where most of us habitually check our barrels on O/U's to make sure they're clear before we load more shells for next pair of targets.

and I see most of these kinds of issues on bad reloads......from guys just assuming they can load any hull they pick up off the ground, mix primers, or use a wad that was not designed for that hull.../ as an example, today Win AA hulls are very different from what they were 20 yrs ago / today they are HS hulls and many are 2 piece and tapered...and you need different components than the old AA hulls...and guys need to review all of this data, for whatever hulls they choose to use...

[Marco Califo]

I have never had 100% recipe matching components for shotshell. I have substituted whichever primer I had (209's). Claybuster wads were available to substitute for WWAA. In my opinion, recipes for shotshells are a very useful guideline, but, I tried to get as close as I could. Certain loads were fairly universal in similar hulls: xx.x grains Red Dot, 1 1/8 oz shot, etc.
Even with powder measures (MEC bushings), close was as good as I could get, until I got an adjustable charge bar.
But for metallic, stick closely to published data.

[BigD_in_FL]

Without listing your components and what you subbed, your statements have no meaning.
Subbing Federal primers, especially 209As for regular 209, is a dangerous pressure situation best avoided.

Without knowing what wads are involved, nothing can be determined.

There ARE acceptable substitutions, but until I know what you are using, I will refrain from telling you what they are

[zippy13]

I've been running the max allowable powder load...

- - -

In conclusion, cautious substitution of components could be a viable approach...

IMHO, max load and cautious substitution are mutually exclusive. Big Jim and I have been reloading target loads for more than 40-years, and our main caution is a possible squib. Typically, we're well below the pressures of a max load; so, occasionally swapping a Fed 209A for WW209 is okay except for inconsistent velocities. (99% of the time, I use a primer that matches the hull.) On the other hand, swapping components with a max load may cause higher pressures that can damage your gun. You may be avoiding a catastrophic failure; but, you may notice that your gun seems to be getting looser and looser.

Swapping primers is not the same as using wads labeled as a direct substitution for the wad in the recipe book. Most of us do a lot of equivalent wad swapping depending on price and availability.