2005 US3G Shotgun Chronoing

[SVI4ME]

Thats good data Rigger, Thanks. It means that most Benelli shooters have nothing to worry about. The gas guns however, are gonna run the same stuff slower due to the variability of porting and gas bleedoff's.

I will be posting some gas breather results from my 11-87 after tomorrow, but I only have the Federal low recoils available so if anyone will be at RRGC tomorrow and has some Rem low recoils, bring em on by.

I guess my Benelli will be making the trip to Vegas and the Remmy will be sitting home waiting for the results !!!!

I feel better now !!!!!

[Buff87]

Just started reading this thread and IMHO chrono of shotgun factory ammo is outright silly. Could go on and on, but what about choke factor in impact (e.g. an IC or Mod wll take down a popper that will stay standing after being hit with same load from a cylinder).

It's just a major snafu waiting to happen.

[Religious Shooter]

Well since everybody is sharing. Went to the range today. Out of an 1100 with a 21" barrel (stock smoothbore w/rifle sights) and a 1" turkey choke (didn't have another one handy) I got:

Brand

Description/Type

DRAM EQ/Shot Size/Weight(oz)/Weight(gr)

V1/V2/V3/Average Velocity

Power Factor

Estate

Red Hull. Super Sport Comp Target Load. / Shot

2.75 DRAM / #7.5 / 1.125 / 492

1152 / 1148 / 1147 / 1149

566 PF

Estate

Red Hull. Heavy Game Load. / Shot

3.75 DRAM / #6 / 1.25 / 547

1231 / 1214 / 1240 / 1228

672 PF

Fiocchi

Purple hull. 12SSCX9. 1250 fps on box / Shot - Spreaders

MAX / #9 / 1.125 / 492

1287 / 1258 / 1226 / 1257

619 PF

Remington

Game Load - UPC 477003980. $3 per box at Wal-Mart. / Shot

N/A / #8 / 1 / 438

1339 / 1338 / 1338 / 1338

586 PF

Remington

Heavy Game Load - UPC 4770004050 / Shot

3.75 / #4 / 1.25 / 547

1327 / 1312 / 1276 / 1305

714 PF

Wolf

Green hull. Dove & Quail / Shot

3.25 / #7.5 / 1 / 438

1279 / 1232 / 1249 / 1253

548 PF

Wolf

Orange Hull. Pheasant load. / Shot

3.75 / #6 / 1.25 / 547

1277/1290/1268 / 1278

699 PF

Wolf

Orange Hull. Pheasant load. / Shot

3.75 / #4 / 1.25 / 547

1316/1298/1304 / 1306

714 PF

Fiocchi

Clear Hull. 12LESLUG. 1150 fps on box. / Slug

N/A / N/A / 1 / 438

1119/1129/1123 / 1124

492 PF

Remington

Green hull. High base. RL12RS. 1200 fps on box. / Slug

N/A / N/A / 1 / 438

1163/1177/1139 / 1160

507 PF

Wolf

Clear Hull / Slug

N/A / N/A / 1 / 438

1465/1475/1457 / 1466

641 PF

No real worries with birdshot. 2.75 DRAM, 1 1/8 oz Estates made it with no problem.

The Remington slugs and the Fiocchi slugs failed to make power factor in my gun.

I guess that makes three gas guns where the Remington's failed.

The Fiocchi's are advertised as 1150 fps. You KNOW those won't make it since 1150 fps x 438 grains / 1000 = 503.7 PF.

[Chuck Anderson]

Well I just got done chronoing my loads and looks like I'll be buying some new slugs. Ran them out of my Remington 11-87 with 22" bbl. Remington Red Recoil Slugs were very close to factory specs, 1167-1189 fps. Still don't make it. The Winchester Red. Recoil slugs were even worse in the 1130 FPS range. The Federal Barnes Sabot Slugs and Winchester Std Slugs I don't think I got good results on but they are definitely over. The Barnes with a 5/8 oz slug were reading between 1500-2000 fps. The Winchester were in the 2000-2220 fps range. The Spreaders I tried next topped out at 2700 fps. I'm fairly certain my chrono is not giving good results since the birdshot is coming out at double the spec'd velocity. Should be very interesting to see how the chrono's hold up down there.

[George]

Ok Folks, here is my range data for two different shotguns using lite shot, low recoil slugs and low recoil 00 buckshot. To say I was surprised by what I found out earlier today is an understatement. I fully expected exactly the opposite of what I got. I also expected my gas chuffer to suffer compared to a straight-up recoil operated shot launcher. Man, was I surprised!

I highly recommend you all go find this out for yourselves, it is very enlightening. O, BTW, I made PF across the board. I felt the 2.75 Dram shot results were a little close so I am now the proud owner of a case of WW 3.25 Dram 1.125 OZ 7.5 trap loads which will probably wind up PF'ing out nearer the Federal Tactical Slugs in my 11--87. I will be running these WW's tomorry at our long gun match (which I just finished setting up, whew! Miller Time :-b ).

PACT MKIV Chrono 4' to first screen in shade with sunshades in place.

70 degrees, sea level, 75% humidity, 9:40am 09-24-05

Remington 11-87 26" bbl with porting and JP mid-barrel compensator modified choke.

RIO 2.75 Dram 1.125 OZ 7.5

1082, 1088, 1095, 1078, 1081

1084.8 fps average x 492.18 = 533.91 PF

Federal Tactical (Low Recoil) 1 OZ Slug

1290, 1240, 1270, 1285, 1267

1270.4 fps average x 437.5 = 555.80 PF

Federal Tactical (Low Recoil) 1 OZ 00 Buckshot

1105, 1127, 1115, 1094, 1132

1114.6 fps average x 437.5 = 487.63 PF

Benelli M1 Super 90 18.5" bbl no porting improved cylinder choke.

RIO 2.75 Dram 1.125 OZ 7.5

1045, 1060, 1066, 1080, 1051

1060.4 fps average x 492.18 = 521.90 PF

Federal Tactical (Low Recoil) 1 OZ Slug

1216, 1234, 1196, 1217, 1230

1218.6 fps average x 437.5 = 533.13 PF

Federal Tactical (Low Recoil) 1 OZ 00 Buckshot

1089, 1080, 1075, 1077, 1104

1085.0 fps average x 437.5 = 474.68 PF

I hope this info is as informative to all of you out there as it was to me, especially concerning the low recoil buckshot!

BTW, thanks to all who have constructively replied to this topic while I was still kvetching. I am still mad about the timing, but think I will survive the ordeal ;-)

--

Regards,

Edited September 25, 2005 by George

[9x45]

I talked to 'El Prez' at the Pala 3 gun on Sunday. He said there is nothing to this issue so just keep practicing.

[Chuck Anderson]

Nothing to this issue as in...what. Are they dropping the power factor, not chronoing slugs? What.

[George]

I heard that there will be an announcement on the USPSA website within a week. I guess that means good news when you couple it with what Mike said to 9x45.

--

Regards,

[outerlimits]

ok-back from chrono-appears to be a pattern developing. this is out of an 1100, 22" bbl, IC and magna-ported.

Remington 1 oz reduced recoil:

avg 1191 fps

Remington 1 oz managed recoil:

avg 1180 fps

Remington 1 oz Slugger:

avg 1508 fps (ouch)

Estate 3 1/4 drm, 1 oz 8's:

avg 1205 fps

except for the Slugger, maine are really, really close. i hope they drop it...i'm too close for comfort.

[George]

I have been pondering this whole issue and finally came up with what I feel is the real "crux of the biscuit" here (look up the lyrics for a Zappa song called Apostrophe for that one).

As Mr. Beverley states, what we are doing by enforcing a minimum PF is trying to ensure that the competitors can actually take down the "calibrated" steel we provide for them in a match and avoid the hassles involved otherwise. In other words "a level playing field" on the steel. Similar thing with pistol so all is the same, right? Wrong! The application of that measured power to the steel in question is the real issue here, as it is with singular discrete projectiles used in pistol steel calibration.

Let's forget slugs for the moment and look at shot on steel. It is not a discrete projectile and not only does the energy of the shot column fall off as it slews velocity, but as it spreads, it also sheds effectiveness, or application of it's real PF to the steel. In other words, we have to calibrate the choke too, or we cannot just measure PF by math after checking the V.

If we allow the competitors to vary their choke selection, then the only valid way we can calibrate steel and measure/ensure the competitors ability to deal with that steel is to set the required PF from a "Standard Commercial Shotshell" (say 3 Dram 1.125) shot through a "Standard Test Shotgun" (say a 21" box stock shotgun with an IC choke). Check it over the chrono to see if it is close, but just over the required 520 floor, if not, adjust the shot and gun choice until it does, or adjust the PF to that systems output. Now mandate that as the gear/ammo needed to calibrate/test at a match. Then at the match you have to set a popper at the farthest distance a competitor will engage poppers in that match and set it so it just goes over at that distance from a solid hit from the "Standard Commercial Ammunition" shot through the "Standard Test Shotgun". Once that is done, you check the competitors to see if their gun and ammo takes that popper down at that distance. If so, they make PF, end of story. Heck, just set one popper within a stage that way. If it doesn't go down, the competitor does not get a reshoot.

I have thought this through a bit now and recognize that nothing less that this will actually ensure that anything is level for the competitors. Either calibrate correctly, or rework the system until a method of fairly comparing power "on the target" is devised. Done right, shotshell power can actually be properly tested without a chrono.

As my buddy Buff87 so elequently put with way fewer words earlier in this thread, "What about the choke factor?".

Love to hear any other ideas on this.

--

Regards,

Edited September 26, 2005 by George

[Trail3]

Remington Managed-Recoil Slugger,

RL12RS 1 oz.

Shot out of Remington Stock 1100 CM

1198 FPS

1197 FPS

[ErikW]

Just because I want to see George sweat some more, did you weigh the shot charges or blindly trust the payload specs? Maybe 1.125 oz. is really 1.006 oz. Bwahahaha!

[George]

Weighed all but the Tac Buck because I only had ten of them. Shot and slugs were at, or over the published by a grain or two so I used the hard math conversions to have a little room to grow later ;-)

Sweatins done, time for beer ;-)

[George]

Remington Managed-Recoil Slugger,

RL12RS 1 oz.

Shot out of Remington Stock 1100 CM

1198 FPS

1197 FPS

Man, that's just cuttin' it!

There sure is a pattern developing here (pun intended) and it's that the Remmy lite slugs don't make the cut ;-/

--

Regards,

Edited September 26, 2005 by George

[MattBurkett]

I really don't understand the vehemence against a rule that has been on the books for over a year regardless of whether or not it was enforced. No matter how silly it is, it is not like it is being sprung on us the day before the match.

Benny, don't group me with all you light weight shot/slug shootin wusses. The lightest shot I use is a 3 1/4 dram 1 1/8ths oz and I use full house slugs. I use up to 3 3/4 dram 1 1/4 oz shot for some targets especially at matches like the MGM IronMan. I don't remember the last time I shot that light stuff except when I was at a trap range!

[Neil Beverley]

George

I've avoided posting the changes for 2006 in this thread because I didn't want to distract from the subject in hand which is the 2004 rules in association with the forthcoming match. The US adopted the SG rules much earlier than the HG rules and I think they came into force, along with the rifle rules, in May 2004 with minimal changes.

We could discuss the nuances until the cows come home but it doesn't change what we have to work with right now. I don't want to bore anyone with evolvement of the rules but evolved they did and evolved futher they have.

You have started to touch upon the the issues and the solution (going forward) in your post 3 or 4 back. I've been living and breathing these problems more than you can imagine, looking for a solution that works internationally. You can only begin to imagine how many hours I've spent considering this subject and I've researched the subject extensively. The terminal ballistics (on the targets) is significant for birdshot and buckshot. However, please bear in mind that some countries don't offer low recoil slugs or low recoil buckshot and the rules have to work for them as well.

I'm confident I've found a good solution now and I've already posted a link to a thread on the IPSC Global Village with a summary of the changes. This link appeared in one of my earlier posts. The new rules have been approved at the IPSC General Assembly and will come in to force on 1 January 2006. Please bear in mind that John Amidon is a voting member if the IPSC Rules Committee and Mike Voigt is overall chairman of the IPSC rules committee. I think I can safely say that Mike is pleased with the changes.

For convenience I've again posted a link, direct to my exact post (which I wrote on 21 August) this time, CLICK HERE

Edited September 26, 2005 by Neil Beverley

[George]

Wow Neal! All I can say is "You are there already". Sorry about missing that thread over there and being late to the party ;-)

You indeed are looking at this the right way and I see what you mean about what it will take to find a satisfactory and uniformly available solution here ammowise. I applaud your efforts at this Aegean Stable sized task. The new 2006 rules are very equitable. I can live by something that lets me decide how to put lead on steel. I also hear ya' about the running one shotshell, one slug, one choke thing ;-)

I wonder if a major manufacturer would be interested in making something specific in a few different Dram equivalent choices and marketing it as an IPSC shot load. We do shoot in volume and this would break us out marketing-wise. Just a thought.

BTW, it's nice to know that I have been rule-abiding all along and making 533+ with my light shot :-)

Thanks,

Edited September 26, 2005 by George

[RiggerJJ]

Hey Lawman;

Well I just got done chronoing my loads and looks like I'll be buying some new slugs. Ran them out of my Remington 11-87 with 22" bbl. Remington Red Recoil Slugs were very close to factory specs, 1167-1189 fps. Still don't make it. The Winchester Red. Recoil slugs were even worse in the 1130 FPS range. The Federal Barnes Sabot Slugs and Winchester Std Slugs I don't think I got good results on but they are definitely over. The Barnes with a 5/8 oz slug were reading between 1500-2000 fps. The Winchester were in the 2000-2220 fps range. The Spreaders I tried next topped out at 2700 fps. I'm fairly certain my chrono is not giving good results since the birdshot is coming out at double the spec'd velocity. Should be very interesting to see how the chrono's hold up down there.

Thats EXACTLY what happens to me with my crono when there is DIRECT SUNLIGHT shining into the pickups. If I shade the pickups and not the skyscreens with a couple of targets I get more reliable results. You should not be getting anything over 1350 or so with a "normal" shotgun load, and Low recoil slugs should be about 1200. There are some hi power slugs that are up in the 1600 range thou, but they hurt! Try shading the pickups and you may get better results.

jj

[Carlos]

Something seems amiss here:

The Remington Tactical slug (sometimes called the "low recoil" load) is made for ONE purpose: Nuetralize assailants (the 2 legged kind). The fact that it is suitable for our game is a coincidence.

Our origins dictate that Major scoring should be accorded to the best rounds for" "nuetralizing assailants".

Why then, would we have a rule that is forcing some competitors to use slug ammo so powerful that it is designed to nuetralize the much-tougher-to-kill game animals than a 2 legged assailant?

It seems to me that if the best round that technology can deliver for police/defense work cannot meet our standards in an ordinary gun like a common police-issue 1187, then it is our standards that need an adjustment. Lower the power factor to a real world level. If you want a PF higher than the real world, fine. But do it by creating a seperate Division for shotgun "heavy metal".

Regards,

D.C. Johnson

[P.E. Kelley]

Something seems amiss here:

The Remington Tactical slug (sometimes called the "low recoil" load) is made for ONE purpose: Nuetralize assailants (the 2 legged kind). The fact that it is suitable for our game is a coincidence.

Our origins dictate that Major scoring should be accorded to the best rounds for" "nuetralizing assailants".

Regards,

D.C. Johnson

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not quite the case. Reduced recoil loads were designed to help law enforcement with shotgun qualifications. Less recoil = less problems with flinching = improved qualification scores. Similar to how the 10mm FBI lite load was born, hence the 40 S&W

I believe the founders of our sport used a "Ballistic pendulum" a Colt Commander and military specification 230 ball ammo to determine "major power” factor. We do not take into consideration the "magic bullets" or "blood and guts" tests of today.

It is really simple; major loads are generally more difficult to control than minor loads so better scoring opportunities are the reward.

PK

[Bob Hostetter]

Before retiring from law enforcement last year I spent a fair amount of time in our Depts training division.

Low recoil buckshot and low recoil slugs were not developed as superior loads for use of human targets. They were developed to reduce the felt recoil of the shotguns in the hope they would be used more often in shooting's and so more officers could actually qualify with them...........

Oop's Kelley already covered that, never mind.....

Edited September 27, 2005 by Bob Hostetter

[Religious Shooter]

Well like a good American I contacted my representative. Area 2 will be voting yes on the lower PF of 480(?) in the October meeting.

How about a roll call?

What did your area director say to:

Lower the power factor for shotguns to 480?

Area 1 - ?

Area 2 - YES

Area 3 - ?

Area 4 - ?

Area 5 - ?

Area 6 - ?

Area 7 - ?

Area 8 - ?

El Pres - YES

[kurtm]

Pat:

T.A.T.G.S.W. to the shoulder of a 300 lb. pig W/ Remington " wimpy " low recoil slugs. ( through and through gunshot wound ) Yea..... that ain't so tactical!! You make it sound like a friendly more gentle round, but we all pay homage to a 230 gr. bullet at 850. Now imagine a 432 grn bullet @ 1150 fps....wimpy for sure!! Who cares why they get out of the car with a " gage" long as they get out with a gage! Kurt Miller