buckshot/birdshot hybrid reload

[pirkfan]

I have a Do-It molds slingshot pellet mold which casts 1/10 (approx #1 buckshot) and 1/6 oz (approx 000 buckshot) pellets. I've read conflicting information about reloading buckshot by weight. Here's my question, what do you folks think of the following load

9 stacked pellets of the 1/10 oz pellet (3/layer) for an approx 9/10 weight
#8 shot used as filler to make a weighed total load of 1 1/8 oz
WAA hull (12 guage)
Win 209 primer
WAA12 wad
18.0 gr Red Dot

The loading sequence is to place the 9 (1/10 oz) pellets on a lyman scale set at 1 1/8 oz and then add birdshot to a total of 1 1/8 oz. Primer and charge the WAA shell with 18.0 gr red dot powder and insert a WAA wad. Then layer 3 pellets, add birdshot to fill in around pellets, layer another three pellets, more birdshot, final 3 pellets and the remaining birdshot, then crimp. This makes a nicely filled cartridge. If the shell were loaded with only birdshot, the final published velocity/pressure would be 1200 fps at 1040 psi. Does this sound like a safe and reasonable way to make a "homebrew" light buckshot load for target and home defense use?

 

[oneounceload]

There are a billion threads about NOT using reloads for defense - I'll let you search and read the pros and cons

Don't know what type of targets you are shooting or what you are trying to accomplish with buck and #8 in the same loading

Some years ago, Remington brought out their "Duplex" loads which had #4 and #6 together as some form of super hunting load - it failed miserably because of the two sizes - and those were close to each other in size.

You'll have such a weird conglomeration of patterns, that if could film it in 3D, you'd see how the larger pellets are flying so far in front of the smaller ones.

Go ahead and have some fun with it - it's always fun to try something within safety rules, but I would be very surprised if it worked well, especially on anything moving

 

[SHR970]

I just load 12 pellets of #1 buck in the shotcup and skip the birdshot. It's effectively a 1 1/8 oz load as there are 11 pellets to the oz. If your pellets are truly 10 to the oz. they are smack dab between #1 (.30" & 40 gr.) and 0Buck (.32" & 48 gr.) according to BPI. You might also run into a slight fit issue....#1 Buck is a good fit.

 

[pirkfan]

These pellets do seem to fall around 1/10 oz each by weight. The reason for using the birdshot is primarily as weight filler to bring the load up to 1 1/8 oz, because 12 of the larger pellets won't fit in this cartridge/powder/wad configuration (they do fit in layers of 3 very well however). Another concern I've read is that large pellets put uneven pressure on the wad, filling in the spaces with *8 would tend to alleviate that to a certain extent. The #8s are not meant to significantly contribute to the performance of the load, merely to "fill out" the load and perhaps to a certain extent, buffer the larger pellets. I fired two of these loads through a cylinder bore 18 1/2 inch shotgun at about 10 yards at a brown paper grocery sack with a couple of rocks in the bottom of it. All 18 of the 1/10 oz pellets patterned on the sack, with a spread of 8 inches, surrounded by a cloud of the finer #8's in a much larger pattern.

 

[oneounceload]

If you want filler for protecting the pellets, you can always use barley or something similar in size that will fill the voids

 

[pirkfan]

Using lightweight fillers would then alter the proportions of this load, which is (If you only consider the weight of the shot charge), a pretty standard skeet/trap reload. What I'm looking for is opinions as to whether the use of the birdshot/buckshot combination in this load alters in an unsafe way the loading data. My feeling is that since the buckshot is imbedded in a buffer of birdshot, the load is basically safe. I'd like to hear other opinions. It's basically a way to have some fun with buckshot loads on the cheap, as opposed to $1 per shell factory loads.

 

[mgregg85]

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish but it's always been true in my experience that anytime you try to make something do two different things it will do both things poorly.

 

[pirkfan]

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish but it's always been true in my experience that anytime you try to make something do two different things it will do both things poorly.

What I'm trying to do is to reload a light recoil buckshot round for around 16 cents apiece that's just to experiment with (as opposed to the $1 per round for factory loads that are relatively heavy recoil). The bird shot is only for volume and weight and not performance. The question I'm concerned with is "is this a safe alteration of a published target load?". My opinion is that it isn't really an alteration of the loading data, since it's really just a 1 1/8 oz mixture of 2 dissimilar shot sizes. Whether it performs in a useful way, I can decide by shooting it once I'm comfortable with it's safety. This is not meant to be a hunting load....hunting is certainly worthy of $1 per round factory ammo

 

[leadcounsel]

I've thought about this as just filling the wasted space in 00 buckshot with birdshot. Why not, is the question...

Could "more" lead be less effective? Even if it only causes superficial wounds, in addition to the wounds by the 00 buck, it still is more hits and wounds and trauma and could cause the aggressor to bleed out faster.

Would the birdshot alter the flight path of the buckshot? Or velocity?

 

[GRIZ22]

First, I can't see the purpose of such a load for SD. The buckshot to really hurt them and the birdshot just to hurt them a little? Without going into a discussion of what's better one generally uses buckshot for maximum effect on target and birdshot to limit penetration. I can't see what your hybrid load is designed to do.

Secondly, I can't see why you feel hunting justifies the $1 a round cost as related in post #8 and you don't feel your life justifies the cost of $1 a round. Or did I miss something?

 

[Carl N. Brown]

A lighter load than 1 1/8 oz of buckshot with the same powder charge would mean a higher velocity. Most commercial hunting loads for buckshot (actually intended to be used big game hunting) are higher velocity than skeet loads. If you want lower velocity with buckshot, you are describing the "reduced recoil" law enforcement buckshot loads which are less intense that hunting loads of buckshot. There have been commercial buffered buckshot loads, but they did not to my memory use birdshot, but granulated plastic (which in an indoors HD situation would cloud the air).

As someone who has experimented with mixed shot loads (decades ago), I don't recall any great advantage. However, I have encountered combos of shot cup and buckshot, where a smaller size of buckshot was needed to fill the last layer.

 

[kozak6]

It's generally not recommended to use handloads for self defense and there are indeed a billion threads about it.

Tinkering with shotgun loads is generally considered risky and it's recommended to stick with published loads.

It's just not about payload mass. Shot does weird things when accelerated to high velocities. For example, shot loads generate higher pressure than slug loads even if every factor (including mass) is held constant. Why? Shot squishes outwards in the wad and generates more friction against the barrel walls.

If you are concerned with buffering, there is dedicated plastic buffering powder you can obtain.

Could "more" lead be less effective?

Sure. You are using energy to accelerate birdshot, which basically delivers shallow pinpricks on impact.

Would the birdshot alter the flight path of the buckshot? Or velocity?

The buckshot could rob some degree of energy that might otherwise be imparted to the buckshot. The buckshot would disrupt the pattern of shot more so than vice versa.

 

[Fred Fuller]

The British issued a 'jungle load' in Malaya (Malaysia) that consisted of multiple shot sizes in the same shell. The idea was that any wound in the tropical jungle would be a major medical problem to the guerrillas they were fighting. That was in the 1950s though...

In shotgun shells with different weight projectiles, experience indicates the heavier projectiles need to be in front, with the lighter ones behind. Otherwise the heavier projectiles seem to 'push through' the lighter ones at the muzzle and disrupt the pattern. "Duplex" loads of similar size shot seem to perform reasonably well as far as patterns are concerned.

Just some historical notes of potential interest, mucking about with published shotgun reloading data is not something I personally would suggest doing.

 

[pirkfan]

Everyone seems to be focused on the "why would you want to do this?" The answer to that is "If it's safe, why not?" If you look at published buckshot loads, they seem to run to arcane components which tend to be difficult to obtain, especially locally. I don't believe there is a local source for the buckshot itself. This load uses the commonest of components...WAA hulls of which I have a number (and there are very similar recipes for Remington hulls), WAA12 wads, Red Dot powder and Winchester 209 primers.....all available at the local "big box store", and I have the mold for the sling shot pellets, which I actually bought to make pellets for a sling shot. The entire load fits very nicely into the shell without any modifications such as cutting the petals off the wad, and the 3 pellets in each layer don't require any force to layer, unlike 00 buck which is a tight fit. The two cartridges that I made up before raising the subject on here were comfortable to shoot, didn't blow up my shotgun, and gave an interesting pattern (8 inch grouping at 10 yards, surrounded by a much larger "cloud" of #8 pellets). It's not a hunting load, I'm not even sure of the legality of putting birdshot in a cartridge and then hunting deer with it in my state, and who'd want to be picking birdshot out of their venison. I wouldn't hunt with buckshot in any case, rifled foster slugs would be my choice for those areas of Oregon where a shotgun is mandatory. My self defense shotgun is loaded with commercial loads of buckshot. This is more in the nature of an experiment....end of the world/world war III scenario.....could I cobble together a buckshot load which was safe and effective from relatively common components. So my question remains....do you folks think that this represents an unsafe modification of a published (and common) target load. I'm getting the impression that at least some of you do...but I'm not sure why. It is a fully filled shot column of correct weight which fits the components perfectly....does the presence of the larger buckshot pellets REALLY represent a significant alteration of the "recipe"

 

[Skribs]

Adding weight in the form of birdshot increases the recoil you will feel without providing any extra benefit. Add the weight in the form of the same size buckshot.

If you think #8 will do the trick, go with a full #8 load to keep the pattern density.
If you think 00B will do the trick, go with a full 00B load, so all of the lead that's giving you recoil is also giving you decent penetration performance. Mix them and you sacrifice on both counts without gaining much of anything.

 

[pirkfan]

Adding weight in the form of birdshot increases the recoil you will feel without providing any extra benefit. Add the weight in the form of the same size buckshot.

If you think #8 will do the trick, go with a full #8 load to keep the pattern density.
If you think 00B will do the trick, go with a full 00B load, so all of the lead that's giving you recoil is also giving you decent penetration performance. Mix them and you sacrifice on both counts without gaining much of anything.

Full load of the 1/10 oz pellets (12 pellets or 1.2 oz) won't fit in this component configuration and would be slightly overweight for the reloading data.

All I've done is replaced SOME of the birdshot in a basic target load recipe with 1/10 oz pellets. Y'all seem to be missing the basic question which is....do you consider this a safe load with the components as listed. If you don't consider it safe, what is your reasoning?