doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com A5 Felt Recoil Tester

an ah ax again:

- how else would one practially test the potential affect of factory loads on old gons...if not by shooting?

- tell us what factory loads any of you have found suitable for use in old gons?

it is unfortunate tthat none here seem to have an interest in discovering factury loads that may be suitable for use in old double gons...

ed,
Define “suitable”.

Best,
Ted

Ed, B&P F1 loads have been repeatedly shown to be suitable factory prepared loads for old side-by-side’s.

But it is not by design. More by accident.

Shotgun shells are manufactured to meet industry std specifications.

Not old shotgun specifications.

I’m guessing your Alzheimer’s is in full blaze these days.

I used to think you were perseverating on this stuff because you were being purposefully stupid

It looks more to me like some sort of organic brain disease now.

ted, in this context, suitable is a result of:

"then test fire in your strongest old double gon with good fluid steel barrels and see how that feels"...

do you got ah nudder metho dology?

clap, thru out this thread, you continue to issue personal insults, to what end i do not know nor care...in previous communications between us here, i do not recall you acting so juvenile...which is disappointing...

anyway, your reference to b&p shells is known to me...and appreciated...

wonder what other factory loads there are out there, in addition to rst of course, that have received wide acceptance for use in ole gons...

betcha, other manufacturers 12 gauge loads, with 7/8 ounce of shot might pass the "feels good" test , as well...thus making them "suitable" for use in ole gons..

course, some kind of mechanical test plarform could first be utilized to weed out those loads that produce to much felt recoil to be acceptable for test fireing...

I am trying to figure the sales angle edd is trying to establish.what is he trying to get some one to say ,to be used to hawk his guns?

this sounds interesting...

https://www.shenkshotshellco.com/shophome

and suggests there is a direct relationship of pressure to felt recoil...

Ed, the only relation that pressure has to recoil is the fact that without any chamber pressure, there will be no velocity of the ejecta. Recoil is the result of Kinetic energy produced by the load we fire in our guns.. Google the formula for calculating Kinetic energy, and you will see that pressure is not any part of that calculation.

In the calculation for recoil energy, the only variable components are mass and velocity. (I am neglecting the slight rearward jet effect of expelled gasses at the muzzle) The mass and velocity of the gun moving in the opposite direction of the shot, wad, and burned powder is what we call recoil, and that force, measured in ft./lbs. is kinetic energy. Other factors enter into "felt" or "perceived" recoil, such as stock design, buttplate area, etc. But chamber pressure is never a part of these calculations.

In other words, it does not matter if the peak chamber pressure that propels say a 1 1/4 ounce load to 1200 ft. per sec. was 5000, 10,000, or 15,000 psi. The recoil of that identical shot charge at that identical velocity in the same gun will be essentially equal. Of course, there will be a greater mass of the total ejecta if you propel that shot load with 3 1/2 drams of 2Fg black powder versus a much lighter charge of modern smokeless shotgun powder. Different powders and different components will produce different pressure curves, which explains why very different peak chamber pressures may produce the same velocity with the same shot charge. It isn't peak chamber pressure that determines muzzle velocity. It is the overall average pressure produced by the entire duration of the powder burning within the barrel.

And this is why certain powders with different burning rates are known to be best for creating loads that provide useful velocities at lower peak pressures. This is why we complain when powders like PB are discontinued. These are less likely to create excessive strain on Damascus barrels, or other mechanical components that may not withstand the pounding created by modern factory loads. Old stock wood tends to become more brittle or subject to damage with time and degradation from things like oil soaking, or becoming loose due to shrinkage of the bedding contact surfaces, etc. Using loads which produce lower velocity and contain lighter shot charges reduces the recoil which might otherwise damage old stocks.

You are not the only one who has confusion and misconceptions about this subject. It has been discussed literally thousands of times here and on other firearms forums. I hope this helps to explain why peak chamber pressure has virtually nothing to do with recoil energy calculations, and is not the sole reason we seek out lower pressure loads and lower velocity loads for our vintage doubles.

Some here will complain and insult you over your notions about pressure versus recoil. But those common misconceptions are not nearly as stupid as those of any gun owner who supports anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats. Some people need to learn to prioritize about who is more of a threat to the future of our gun rights.

shucks, an here ah thought the guys at shenk were on to sum thin...

course then...with none of the commercial ammo manufacturers publishing pressure data for their loads...

how else does one determine that a factory load is suitable for their old gon an old shoulder, except for making a judgement as to how it feels...

Well Ed, you could always send some rounds to Tom Armbrust for pressure testing. But the factory loads you buy today may have different components or different powders the next time you buy them. So if you find some factory load that is low enough pressure, it might be a good idea to stock up before they change. The major ammo makers do not tell us pressures, or notify us that they are switching powder, primers, etc. They just sell shells that are within SAAMI specs.

The only other options are to purchase ammo from suppliers like RST or B&P who specialize in low pressure ammo for vintage guns, or to resort to known low pressure handloads. It's a cost of enjoying the old stuff. No different than understanding that use of a modern multi-viscosity high detergent synthetic oil might not be good to use in a vintage car engine. If you use a vintage collector car as a 15k mile per year daily driver, it will soon wear out and have problems. Old guns are no different. So I also own some modern doubles, pumps, and semi-autos that can digest about anything I want to feed them without any worries.

Lots of guys assume that they can judge a load to be low pressure going by the velocity, the level of recoil, the sound of the report, or whether it is low or high brass. Unfortunately, it isn't that easy. So a lot of shooters are simply operating on blissful ignorance, and using loads that might not be the best choice for their vintage doubles. Most get away with it because they just don't shoot enough to notice any damage. It may take years before they finally notice their gun is a bit loose, or the top lever has moved left of center, or the stock has developed a split. Then they come here wondering what went wrong, and asking who can repair the damage.