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

More about safety of Winchester separate base wads

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Holypatterns, Aug 24, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Holypatterns

    Holypatterns TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25
    I have some red and some gray WW hulls I would like to use up, but they have the separate basewads. There have been a bunch of incidents reported on TS.com
    to give me a little tinge of nervousness when firing reloads from these hulls.

    So- does anyone know whether Winchester has ever issued a recommendation that these hulls not be reloaded under any circumstances? Seems to me they are on thin ice if these hulls sometimes actually do come apart on firing and someone is hurt.

    Dammit.....WW had the best of all possible hull designs, it seems to me. The best of seals between wad and hull interior, with dimensional forgiveness
    so there could be slight differences in wad or hull dia. with no loss of seal.
    And then they hauled off and cheapened it, although I don't know how the
    two piece wad saves any manufacturing cost.
     
  2. Post  2

    Post 2 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    468
    I've loaded the hulls six times. Out of probably 5000 I've had two come apart. Not a big deal it reminds me of shooting Federal paper hulls and loading them one to many times. You just nock the seperated peice out and keep on shooting. I have never had a shell lodge in the barrel only the chamber where it is obviouse. Post-2
     
  3. Quack Shot

    Quack Shot Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,003
    holypatterns

    I have loaded many THOUSANDS of the new style hulls, many times over! I have never seen a basewad migration in one of these hulls. I inspect EVERY hull before loading, inside and out, with a strong light and have seen basewad migrations in other cheap hulls, but NEVER a Winchester AA. It's been reported and I can't say it won't/can't ever happen, but I have never seen it and nobody I know or shoot with has had one either. Some have claimed that the early two piece hulls with the box around the "AA" are the ones with the issue. I've never seen anything from Winchester either, in support or denial of the issue. I've NEVER seen a AA hull without a basewad either!
     
  4. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Post-2, what would have happened in that situation shooting doubles with a semi-auto shotgun?
     
  5. Quack Shot

    Quack Shot Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,003
    Brian,

    It should be "obviouse". :)
     
  6. Jollytrapshooter

    Jollytrapshooter Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    881
    I would think that having just one base wad dislodge from the hull, would be enough reason to stop shooting them. I don't have time (or the ambition) when I'm reloading to "inspect every hull inside and out", so I don't bother with the 2 piece hulls. I'll stick to my cheap one piece gun clubs...JMHO, Josh.
     
  7. hoggy

    hoggy TS Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,261
    I too have no clue why they changed or how 2 pc could be cheaper to make than 1 pc.
     
  8. Quack Shot

    Quack Shot Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,003
    Jollytrapshooter

    Have you had "even one basewad" dislodge from a AA hull, or have you, at least, actually seen it? Rumors and stories abound. I'm sure there would be some litigation if it were to cause damage or injury, but I've never heard of any of that going on either. Maybe you can enlighten us with some direct evidence and experience with the issue?

    As to not bothering to inspect hulls, that's your choice and Folly, Jolly! (SORRY, couldn't resist) I inspect every hull BEFORE and AFTER I load them. I've caught some potential problems by doing so. I've been reloading shotshells since the early 60's and have never had a mishap. Same goes for metallics. I just don't know what the effects on internal ballistics would be from a dead cricket in the hull, or even a live one for that matter. You simply would not believe what you might find when you look. Target chips, cigarette butts, spiders, mud daubers, gravel, wet sand, pennies, whatever! If you don't bother to inspect your hulls, then you should not bother to load any. Buy factory and let someone else take the blame.

    Just my "Not-So-Humble" opinion!
     
  9. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    When the two piece hull first came out, I did have a couple of shooters on this site send me a few hulls (3) that had loose base wads. The hulls had been loaded many more times than I would ever consider loading a hull. Winchester has since that time made a change in the design of the hull and the base wad problem seems to have disappeared.

    If a shell with a loose base wad were fired, the powder ignition would drive the base wad back to the head of the hull. If some powder got behind the loose base wad, a secondary ignition might move the base wad into the barrel.

    Brian asked what would happen if a gun were shot with a base wad from a previous shot in the barrel. Quack Shot told us the answer is obvious. I wish he would share the obvious answer with us. The limited testing by Bruce Bowen and the NRA, suggests that not much would happen.

    I shoot about 5,000 new AA hulls and about 10,000 reloaded AA hulls at registered birds each year. Many times the AA hulls have damaged my ego but never my gun.

    Pat Ireland
     
  10. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,642
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    The reason for the change was machine replacement. New machinery for 2 piece hulls was less costly than compression formed.

    I believe the original AA was out in the late 60's, so I can understand the mfg equipment's aging.

    Remington's RXP hull came out later, I don't know the situation there. At the time their target shell was the All American which had a nice little biscuit in the base that caused trouble sometimes.

    HM
     
  11. hmb

    hmb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,411
    A AA base wad can not move forward when 8000 psi are pushing it to the rear. The plastic hull can separate from the brass and be left in the chamber. HMB
     
  12. balance365

    balance365 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    70
    Pat has it correct. There were a few isolated cases of base separation, just like there have been problems thru the ages with other designs, think Federal paper. In both cases, the flaws are not the fault of the manufacturer, but of the reloader who tries to get "just 1 more" reload out of a shell that obviously has lived past its time. The 2 piece design is actually cheaper since retooling costs, combined with uniform wall thicknesses allowing for faster cycle time make it so. This design has been thoroughly tested and is very robust, Winchester would never put a faulty product on the market without such testing. Once they came out, there was considerable backlash, and a couple of bases did indeed show migration, reportly only after multiple reloading cycles, and in hulls that showed consider degradation. Winchester made a little tweak to design and process to accomodate these type users, and now the base wad separation problem now lives on forums like this. For a hint that something has changed, look at the new hull markings. Some have the old AA boxed over logo, most don't. Some hulls had a potential problem, most don't. I have never had a problem with separation, and for those that are concerned, please feel free to forward your Winchester hulls to me, I will gladly take them dangerous hulls out of your inventory to protect you from the perils of such an irresponsible design.
     
  13. Tron

    Tron Supporting Vendor Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,654
    Several years back, I was shooting Sporting Clays with a buddy of mine who was using an O/U. He had a good habit of looking down the barrel before loading every shot and this one time he looked the barrel was blocked. We had to go back to the club house and use great force to unlodge the basewad!

    That was the very last time that I used AA's and being that I was shooting an auto, I couldn't check the barrel for obstructions between shots. I went home and dumped thousands of AA hulls in the trash. Nothing but Remington ammo for me these days....no need to take chances. I truly believe that the base wad design is potentially hazardous.
     
  14. recurvyarcher

    recurvyarcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,450
    I reload AA hulls all of the time. Look up my name and stats on the ATA website, and you will see that I shoot A LOT of shells. That doesn't include my practice shells. I never have a problem, and I reload them until I see pinholes in the hull.

    Also, I'm with Quackshot. I take a fistful of hulls, look down the inside with a pen flashlight, and then quickly turn them and check the outside before putting them away in the bin to be reloaded. Yesterday, I found a butterfly in one. I have found bugs, moths, sand, dirt, grass, and even shot in the bottom of them. It is a good idea to check first.

    Pheasant master told me yesterday that he found water inside a single hull. This was one out of a lot of others that were dry. Why would you not take the time to be safe?
     
  15. WNCRob

    WNCRob Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    594
    2 weeks ago I contacted Winchester about this matter. Their WRITTEN response was that they currently have no recorded incidents of the base wad separating from the current version of the AA hull, and, in fact, the new hull has significantly exceeded their expectations for (durability and performance). Pretty strong comment from the factory...

    WNRRob
     
  16. Jawhawker

    Jawhawker TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,734
    Iam surrounded by many people who reload these hulls and I have yet to see the so called evidence of the seperation/migration of the base wad. I have loaded many myself. All have been loaded on Mecs and that maybe the difference, I don't know.

    Jollytrapshooter, you seruously don't inspect your hulls before reloading???
     
  17. dverna

    dverna Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,717
    I use Remington hulls when loading for a semi-auto. It may be only a one in a million occurance to have a base wad separate, but it can/might happen.

    I use AA hulls (bought 10,000 last year for $15/1000) and peek down the barrel of break-open guns before loading another round. I load them until they pin hole at the crimp. I am relatively new and have not loaded enough (maybe 30,000 shells) to experience a base wad separation yet.

    This "worry" about AA hulls has a bright side. AA's will sell for about 50-65% the price of STS hulls.

    Don
     
  18. otnot

    otnot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,426
    I was shooting with a guy this weekend that had the complete hull above the basewad seperate and exit the barrel with the wad. I will stick to STS hulls.
     
  19. Andy44

    Andy44 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,262
    I once watched a program on TV, might have been MythBusters, where they dropped a live 20 ga shell into a 12 ga barrel and fired it. Guess what? NOTHING happened except a bang, with no sign of damage! And we're worried about a stinking base wad??????
     
  20. GRR

    GRR TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2007
    Messages:
    245
    I have had several problems with the old AA HS or should I say the first ones that came out. I had purchased over 10,000 of them and after 4-5 loading the base wad would either come loose or stick in the barrel. The ones I have left I load a light 1 oz load for first shot in doubles in an OU. I load them twice and toss. Soon to be rid of them and load all Rem. STS and Nitro's.
    As far as the Gentlemen with the pressure theory keeping the wad pushed back to the base, My theory would be like a tank cannon. A barrel that is ported would act like a bore evacuator and suck the loose base wad along with the gases out the front of the barrel. Just a theory mind you.

    My experience with AA HS and not sure what date of manufacture the hull really is, I'd toss.

    The red AA HS split at the crimp after 1-3 reloads, I toss after one reload. I don't know what the difference is but the red AA HS don't hold up at all.

    Gary
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

aa base wad seperation

,

have they changed winchester wads