doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com English game loads data 2 1/2" shells.

Have look at the Hull Cartridge site. It provides useful and interesting performance and specifications for the Game Shooting loads they make. The highlighted page is for their 'High Pheasant' - a performance load for 2 1/2" chambered guns.

It may be a useful comparison with the available SAAMI american loads you guys (I got told off for calling you 'chaps') have available and with the home loads you put together.

http://www.hullcartridge.co.uk/highpheas.htm

OUCH!!
Heavy recoil for the light gun
Mike

I can't figure out why someone would tell you off for calling us "chaps", no negative connotation in our vernacular that I'm aware.

Looks like some hot loads. I don't suppose these are available anywhere in the USA?

Getting that kind of velocity while staying within CIP standards would seem to be quite an accomplishment.

On the other hand, 3% Sb shot would not be a bragging point here.

It looks like some British shooters have fallen into the Bubba Magnunitis school of shotshell selection that is so prevalent here.

That's a shame as I always thought the British used a lot of common sense in the selection of both shotguns & shotshells.

Is the velocity difference & decrease in required lead between 1 1/16 oz loads starting at approx 1200 fps vs approx. 1400 fps @ 40 to 50 yards where high pheasants are shot really worth the extra recoil?

I've never shot high driven pheasants but I have shot some walked up & going away pheasants @ 40yds or a little more & I seemed to kill them OK with 1 1/16 oz of #5 @ around 1200 fps @ the muzzle when I pointed the gun correctly.

I would like to see the actual difference in required lead & the retained velocity difference out @ 40 & 50 yds. that the extra initial velocity provides.

I'm thinking the velocities listed are muzzle velocities, not the 3 foot instrumental velocities used here in the U.S. That would ( I think ) bring them back to 1300 fps or a little less.

Maximum pressure should not be that hard to keep within limits with a powder like Longshot. The problem with those loads I am told is that the pressure curve is elongated, meaning that the pressure down the bore is higher than other loads. So if load one produces 8K psi with pressure dropping to 2K by 9" and load two produces only 7.5K psi with pressure dropping to 4K at 9" you get in effect a 100% increase of pressure at 9". Pressure and distance are for example purposes, only so you get the point.

We have been told repeatedly that the pressure drops rapidly away from the chamber but what if it does not? Or not fast enough? You want to shoot a gun with marginal barrels that are .020 or so thick? I would not. Just another case of buyer beware.

This, of course is the strength of having a proof house and proof laws (though I am critical of some proof practises). We don't have to guess it a gun can take a load. If it is in proof, it will cope with these loads perfectly well, the manufacturers load them knowing to what standard they need to work. Choice then comes down to what is comfortable to shoot in the gun you have - much will be determined by weight.

I'm pretty sure you're correct, btdtst. Velocity is yet another area where we and our cousins across the Pond speak a different language. They sometimes speak in true muzzle velocity rather than our 3 foot measurement, which likely explains the difference here. You'll also see reference to "observed" velocity, which I believe is the average velocity over 20 yards (or meters). Most recently, in a British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC) information sheet on steel shot loads, they refer to "mean velocity measured at a point 2.50 meters from the muzzle".
I wish they'd just settle on ONE of those!

Having shot driven pheasants a few times, we usually use 1 oz loads of British 6 shot. Kent Gamebore Pure Gold this year. Brit 6's are slightly smaller than American 6's (and slightly larger than our 7's). But that load has a higher pellet count (270 vs 253) than 1 1/8 oz American 6's. And with the birds being shot as incomers or crossers, where their vitals are more exposed, it seems to be more than adequate.

But I think the "high pheasant" label is a bit of a misnomer when applied to 2 1/2" cartridges. While they likely perform quite well on birds up to 40 yards or so, what many would think of these days as really "tall" birds are much higher than that--50-60 yards--and require heavy, target-like guns chambered 2 3/4" with loads of from 36-46 grams (1 1/4- 1 5/8 oz) of British 5 (like American 6) or, beyond 50 yards, British 4 shot (American 5). There are a couple of good articles on the subject of guns, loads, and technique for shooting the really high birds in the current issue of Shooting Sportsman, by Chris Batha and Vic Venters.

And for those who have not tried them, as both authors emphasize, just plain old "average" driven birds will provide more than enough of a challenge. The first time I shot them, Roger Mitchell--then managing director of H&H, and a pretty experienced driven shooter--was in our line of guns. I asked him what was a good average on driven birds. He said 1 for 3 on good, "sporting" birds. Sounded low to me before I tried it. Not so much afterwards.

Back when many of our 12ga guns were still chambered 2 5/8", the maximum load looks to be 3 1/4 drams equivalent, 1 1/8 oz--which would be about a 1300 fps load, as we measure velocity.

The Hull High Pheasant loads that Small Bore referenced are advertised as 1450 fps & I would assume that this is by CIP standard.

There is an interesting thread on the Shotgun World forum
"Difference between SAMMI & UK velocities" that lists velocities of various ELEY, RIO & some Australian loads that were tested under SAMMI standards.

The Eley & RIO shells velocities when tested by SAAMI standards were 35 fps to 123 fps less than the manufacturers published velocities so it is likely that the 2 1/2" Hull High pheasant load would be more than 1325 fps. under SAMMI testing procedures.

I'm not questioning the safety of the higher velocity shells, just the need & the desirability of their use in guns of game gun weight.