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

Titegroup help, Please

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by lancelot, Feb 11, 2010.

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

    lancelot Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    147
    I have been trying to come up with a 1 1/8 oz., 1 powder, 1 wad, 1 primer, 1 hull, combination for all my trap shooting. It seems to me that titegroup might fill the powder part of the equation.

    I know that I'll use STS cases, and Win 209 primers. Some of my questions are:
    What wad would you titegroup shooters favor? I keep hearing that Remington uses the 1 oz., target-12, wad for their Nitro 27 and not the 1 1/8 oz. Fig 8.

    I plan to load shells that wil range in velocities from 1125 fps to 1235 fps. Do you experts think I should lay an a supply of 1 oz or 1 1/8 oz wads? Also, how do you find the recoil with this powder?

    Thanks, Ron Ireland
     
  2. timb99

    timb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,331
    Location:
    Shawnee, Kansas, USA
    I load this exact combination for 1-1/8 ounce handicap loads.

    I use the Downrange DRRT-12 which is a clone of the Remington TGT-12S

    Great powder.

    Any relation to Pat?
     
  3. lancelot

    lancelot Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    147
    No timb99, no relation, but we've both been around a long time. Maybe I'll run into him at the So. Grand.

    How do you find the recoil with titegroup, and do you load any lighter loads with it?

    Ron
     
  4. short shucker

    short shucker TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,939
    16.4 grains for singles and 18.0 grains for 25yrd+ caps shells. If shooting midrange caps I'd suggest 17.4 grains.

    Titegroup is as soft shooting as any of the other powders. It's not very temperature sensative. It seems to shoot the same year round.

    The TGT-12 wad or its clone from Downrange work exceedingly well all the loads mentioned.

    ss
     
  5. mx2005

    mx2005 TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    430
    Ron I been using Titegroup for a couple years now and I load.
    REM HULL , 16.3GR TITEGROUP , Rem primer , TGT-12 Rem wad or DRRT-12 Down Range,
    you can load 1 oz in either wad and you don't have to change powder bushing the difference between the loads are only 2 tenths of a grain not enough to worry about it I use that all the way back and even for some annie and meat shoots.
     
  6. timb99

    timb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,331
    Location:
    Shawnee, Kansas, USA
    Ron,

    I am a firm believer that recoil is a function of physics, and all else equal, the ejecta weight and muzzle velocity determine recoil, and using one powder versus a different powder is largely irrelevant.

    Neil Winston did a test recently that supports this contention.

    That said, the Titegroup loads I use for handicap work well for me.

    I do not use Titegroup for lighter loads.

    For my singles loads, I use Clays powder.
     
  7. EuroJoe

    EuroJoe TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Messages:
    3,359
    Location:
    Rockford,IL
    It's not about calculated energy, it's about PERCEIVED recoil.
     
  8. timb99

    timb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,331
    Location:
    Shawnee, Kansas, USA
    EuroJoe

    If you look at the thread and Neil's results, you'll find that with two sets of shells, with approximately the same ejecta weight and approximately the same muzzle velocity, using two completely different powders with different burn rates, nobody could reliably "PERCEIVE" any difference in recoil at all.

    Not even the people who believed they would be able to "PERCEIVE" the difference.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.