doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Soft recoiling loads

Doug,

I may have mislead you, unintentionally, but I haven't shot anything over 7/8 oz. at a dove since '03. i use a 20 on doves with the exception of a couple shoots early each season when i use a .410. In fact, last year I took 52 birds, (my buddy says 69) with a .410, and the last 10-12 was with 1/2 oz. loads.

I may be "overkilling" the clay birds in competition with the 1 1/8 oz. loads but, the recoil is not an issue with my big Perazzi, and the confidence level I have with them is worth a lot. I won the Sunday Make-A-Break at a major shoot a couple weeks ago using 1 1/8 oz. loads by breaking 4 out of 5 no. 7 birds, which were an estimated 90 yds. I just don't believe I could do that with lighter loads. The density of even 1 1/8 oz. loads at 90 yds. with a .020" choke is dubious, less than that even more so.

Totally agree with you on the doves. Anything over 7/8 oz. is a waste in 98% of the situations.

SRH

I'm with you guys on light dove loads. I usually load the "killer bees" as equipped by BPI. Man I love those things--too bad you can't get them in Argentina where you REALLY need a recoil break! Steve

BTW, what in a nutshell is the "Gordon Recoil Reduction system" and in particular, could it be reproduced by handloaders?

steve,

Read their explanation (pitch) at this link:

www.bandpusa.com/b-p-our-story

I'm not quite ready to endorse this as being gospel, the shock absorber thingy I mean, but there is no questioning they are some very mild recoiling loads, just as Federal paper loads are.

This is built into the head of the hull they produce, as I understand it, so reloading them might well very nearly reproduce the effect. However, I'm inclined to believe some of the felt reduction is due to the burning characteristics of the powder they use.

SRH

The B-P shells are really nice - I've been using their subsonics for a while and they are very gentle - good for introducing shooting to novices.

Their 16 ga #6 shells have convinced the crows that my orchard is a no-fly zone.

B-P shells are loaded to CIP standards which are a ib lower pressure than SAAMI.

I notice that some of the early posts mentioned pressure. Pressure should not be a factor in measureable recoil. The main culprits are velocity and ejecta (although we often state it as velocity and payload). But ejecta also includes powder and wad. Same shot charge, same velocity . . . a lighter powder charge SHOULD reduce recoil. But not likely as much as reducing the shot charge by 1/8 oz or the muzzle velocity by 50 fps.

I read back through the posts and there was mention made several times about pressures, but none of them said anything about pressure being related to recoil.

The only reason I mentioned pressure was because of how it pertains to using these shells in older doubles. Your post is the only one that I can find that made mention of anything relating pressure and recoil.

SRH

An obvious component of perceived recoil is the acceleration rate of the payload. The initial pressure spike, regardless of the final pressure determines the perception of that bump. Consider same V/payload and Bullseye or BlueDot. So you feel a bump or a push? Simple physics, folks - no mysteries there

HTH

have a day

Dr.WtS

Stan, the title of the thread is "Soft RECOILING Loads". Generally, what comes after relates to what's suggested in the title. Or at least that's what I've learned as a writer. If I wanted to relate pressure to older doubles, then I would have made that clear by saying: "For those of you shooting older guns requiring lower pressure loads . . . "
Otherwise, one is likely to conclude--as I did--that we're somehow mixing up the concepts of pressure and recoil.

Stan:

Not to worry, Brown has a problem with comprehending what he reads.....we've all seen this before over and over......he's full of himself......

He reads "what he wants to" into everything, then responds......not the sharpest knife on the shelf that's for sure......