1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

DR vs CB Wads for Federal Hulls

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by JT 27, May 31, 2013.

  1. JT 27

    JT 27 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Messages:
    616
    Let me preface this, my experiences are about 8 years ago. I was having trouble with hulls collapsing in my PW, sometimes 1 in 10 then 6 of 10, it occurred sporatically. I was using CB clones of the Pink Fed. factory wads. I called PW and explained my problem. The tech said "I bet you are using Clay Busters wads". He suggested changing to DR. He stated that CB was using reclaimed plastic in there process and did not have control of the stiffness due to the reclaimed plastic being used. I made the change and never had the problem again.
     
  2. cubancigar2000

    cubancigar2000 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,521
    Location:
    Idaho
    I switched from CB to DR and will never ever go back. I load Fed Papers. I could write a book on why I do not like the CB's but just the plastic buildup is enough
     
  3. wlc

    wlc Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    534
    I asked for and received samples from both companies. I also noticed the smaller diameter over powder cup on the DR wads. Don't know if it affects the seal or not, both seemed to work well. I loaded 15000 DRXL1 in Remington hulls with good success. I tried using them in new AA hulls and they didn't stay seated because of trapped air. I switched to CB wads and have been very pleased. I did not see any difference in plastic build up. In Remington hulls, I'd use either with no concerns.
     
  4. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    The CB wads are made from prime resin. The S3 wad in my gold medal or top gun hull is an absolute hammer.
     
  5. Ross

    Ross Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,638
    OEMs or CBs for me. Tried DR XXL several years ago in STS hulls, got odd sounding--some very light recoil lot of trash (plastic residue) in the bbl. they did go through the loader OK. Called DR to see if they had any suggestions, & was basically told to use a different brand (bad hair day maybe) anyway I went back to CBs and\or OEMs, no problems since. Ross Puls
     
  6. BigDave1200

    BigDave1200 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    233
    I found donwrange undersized.
     
  7. Avaldes

    Avaldes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,876
    Location:
    Central Coast of California
    Same issue with the DR wads vs. Federal OEM wads. Nice material, but smaller diameter than OEM and I noticed lower recoil. That is consistent with slower speed due to more gas blow-by.
     
  8. Dr.Longshot

    Dr.Longshot Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,722
    I use Clay Buster Windjammer wads in Federal Hulls


    Gary Bryant
    Dr.longshot
     
  9. thomaslea1

    thomaslea1 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2008
    Messages:
    186
    Prolly depends on the Federal hull. I bought 5K CB-6100 to load 1oz in Top Gun hulls. Had a lifetime free supply of them. They WOULD NOT seal that hull. Lots of unburned powder left in the barrel and a lot of light sounding shots. Looking at the spent wad the sides of the powder cup and petals were black with soot. Loaded the same powder/primer in an STS hull and the right wad and cronographed them and they were 100 FPS faster. Called CB and they sent me a sample of another number and they didn't seal either/ Gave 6K or so once fired Top Guns to the trash collectors.
     
  10. slickhead

    slickhead Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    505
    Location:
    West Tenn.
    Check out the CB1118-12AR diameter and you will find Approx. .0730 Great wad no blowby and you can actually use less powder per load. Yes I said .0730 Same as 12 gauge bore.
     
  11. Bill Hom

    Bill Hom TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    962
    Location:
    Herriman, Utah
    I switched from CB to DR several years ago. In my fixed choke barrels, I didn't notice plastic buildup. In my choke tube guns the buildup was so bad that I was always soaking them in Briley's choke tube plastic remover. Switched to DR and problem ceased. I load Fed 209A primers, 18.5 gr. Red Dot, DRFO wad and 1 oz 7.5s in once fired Top Gun hulls and Federal papers. I do not have any off sounding shells even in my .780 bore barrel. I still prefer the Federal OEM wads but are not always easy to get and are quite a bit more expensive. Bill Hom
     
  12. Perazzi_MX8

    Perazzi_MX8 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Messages:
    1,696
    Location:
    Colorado
    I have experienced buckling of the Federal GM ribbed hulls when loading very old hulls that are 20 plus years old. I thought the hulls had deteriorated because of age. I was loading CB wads that are the Federal replacements and never suspected the wads being an issue. If I shoot a wrinkled one I usually get a case failure with the shell blowing off at the point of the wad and powder area. The whole thing goes out as a unit and clears the bore every time. I cut the shells open now and salvage the components out of buckled ones. I have almost all of them gone now.


    I wonder if Neil Winston has ever done compression testing of wads. That would be a great and interesting test to see. Neil is our source usually of the "Myth-Busters" style of scientific testing. Every-time a new wad is introduced they advertize them like new fishing lures or a break-thru in weight-loss pills. Wads have just a couple of key factors like sealing ability and cushioning the shot charge. I hope if Neil has info on wads he starts a thread revealing it to all on TS.