Trapshooters Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

I cut open a Herters shell from Cabelas and found....

Jump to Latest
33K views 33 replies 17 participants last post by  FN Guy  
T
#1 ·
Shot was shiny, round, and uniform size.

Wad that looked like a NobelSport AQT2. When in Rome, do as the Romans.

Powder that was square pink flakes.

I didn't weigh powder or shot, and didn't count pellets.
 
#2 ·
I did the same with a Clever Mirage 1oz 1220 fps, RIO 1oz 1280fps, and Estate 1oz 1235fps. I did this mainly because the Clever shells shoot so soft, so I wanted to see why


The Clever has 427.8 gr #8 shot, wad was 42.4 gr, and it had 16.9 gr of a square cut powder. The RIO had 428.2 gr of #8 shot, wad was 40.2 gr, and the powder was 20.6 gr. The Estate had 433.4 gr of shot, wad was 37.2 gr, and the powder was 16.2 gr.

I expected the wad in the Clever to weigh the least, yet it was the heaviest. Look at how much larger the Estate shot is! All are suppose to be #8's. I should have measured it but didn't. The Clever are soft shooting, and well known among Sporting clays shooters. Trap, not so much. The wad design of the clever, and the combination of the powder make for a very soft shooting shell. Their T2 1280fps load is a pleasure to shoot too.
 
#7 ·
I find it interesting that none of them hold the 1 ounce of shot they claim to sell

If the Estate shot is largest, it's likely nearest to nominal #8.

If the given velocities were actually measured, not just advertised, then the Clever should recoil less because it pushes the lightest payload at the lowest velocity.

No free lunches.
 
P
#8 ·
The Clever's and the Rio's are both European made shells, and they are on the metric system. While the Estate's are American made and are US sized, that is not metric. All metric sized shells #8 shot runs about the same size as OUR #8 1/2 shot. Metric #7 1/2 size shot is only slightly larger than our #8 size. Just a FYI as it were. There is always a slight variation of shot in most brands, but this is the general rule of thumb as it were. break em all Jeff
 
B
#9 ·
The wad in the Clever looks exactly like a wad known as PTxx series, which was available from Ballistic Products up until a few years ago. Also used to be mfgr'd under the Helarco name, I believe. Wish they were still available. The PT15 size wad makes an awesome 1-1/8 load in the blue RIO hull. My favorite reload by far. Thanks for posting. Based on what I see, I would be looking to get my hands on the Clever Mirage shells, estates - not so much.
 
#11 ·
Mike, I wasn't comparing the Clever 1220 fps load to the other 2 regarding recoil. I cut one open cause that was the only Clever shell I saved, and it was softer than my Red Dot 1oz reload at 1200fps. At a recent SC shoot I shot the Clever T3 1280 fps round. I couldn't believe how soft it was compared to other 1280 - 1300fps rounds I shot earlier in the week. The RIO 1oz 1280's aren't bad either.
 
#14 ·
OK. But, again, recoil calculation is pretty straight forward if you have the true ejecta weight...as you did...and the actual muzzle velocity....not what the box or the manual says. Of course, we all know that felt recoil is subjective, but anytime I hear of a "surprisingly softer recoiling" shell, my first inclination is to question the numbers. Only when the ejecta weight and velocity are known to be identical can the softer recoil be due to some magical combination of wad and powder. Can't say I've encountered such a case.

I don't doubt you when you say the Clever was softer than your reload, but if your Red Dot reload holds a few grains more shot and/or is a bit faster than the Clever shell, then it should recoil more.
 
J
#12 ·
When checking shot, I suggest you use a micrometer on at least 10 randomly chosen pieces and log the results. I do this for every large lot I buy and some individual boxes. I find the shot from most everyone varies ±one size from smallest to largest with the occasional odd ball - like a size six among that's supposed to be 8's. Then I do a crush test on each of the pieces I've chosen and compare the results to one of the good shells like AA or STS. Doing this every time with purchases of at least a flat will open your eyes as to who makes what more consistent in size or is harder. My last purchase was 25 flats and these tests were done in comparing shells on sale in large box stores before the purchase.

Johnpe
 
#13 ·
The lead shot is the most expensive component of the load. While a sample size of 1 shell is not representative of the whole, it is of notice that your measured loads were short of 1 ounce by:
Clever: 9.2 grains; 2.1%
Rio: 8.8 grains; 2.0%
Estate: 3.6 grains; 0.8%

If you find this is consistent over a larger number of shells, one can then determine why these shells are "cheaper". If you paid $5.99, you should have only paid $5.87. Factory margins are very thin to non-existent in target loads (also dove loads) so one can see why they might be loaded "light". Does it matter? Only the buyer can determine that.

Scott Hanes
 
#15 ·
After shooting 3 flats of Clever T3's at a big sporting shoot in Texas we were ready to buy a couple of pallets because of the soft shooting shells. Butttttttttttttt. When we got back home, before ordering we ran a few thru a chronograph. Not even close to the advertised velocity. More like 1050 to 1100 fps when they were advertised at 1280. Now before anyone blames the chrono, we ran AA's and Nitro's too. Close enough to the advertised speed. Informed the supplier why we were not buying and he actually ended dropping the Clever brand.
 
#20 ·
Thanks for the info. A little confused though. You shot the 3 flats and were ready to buy. They must have performed for you to initially make that decision to buy. Your chronograph results are different than Euro chrono results probably due to the distance fired. At any rate if the shells performed in actual field shooting regardless of advertised speed, why not use them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Donm
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#19 ·
GOOD TOPIC

I think the real message is," you don't need high speed ammo to break clays birds". If the ammo has quality components
speeds of 1100 fps with 1 1/8 ounce or 1200 with 1 ounce of shot are quite adequate . Finding ammo that is comfortable
to shoot all day has real value once you dial into the leads needed when shooting angles. Another virtue of softer/slower
quality ammo is they pattern a little better. Switching back and forth between 2 3/4 & 3 dram loads doesn't help.

My problem and I suspect others also is switching ammo brands because of specials buys offered by the large sporting goods
chains, Finding enough ammo that suits your needs and is comfortable to shoot is problematic when you try to replenish
you supply.

Of course if I were a rich man I would have a skid of soft shooting Federal Papers in the back of the garage and pay no attention
to the look what's on sale chatter.

Eddie



 
#22 · (Edited)
Thanks for the explanation. But it did in fact perform well on targets?
I just used some Herters 1 oz 1060 fps 7-1/2's at an event and they easily smash targets at 40 yards. They will get tested on some 60 yard plus targets soon. That mental block of high FPS equals better scores is somewhat of a myth.
I usually shoot 1 oz 1160's and could see no difference in performance. I use them for everything including FITASC and never feel undergunned.
 
#28 ·
Remdog1187 said:
Thanks for the explanation. But it did in fact perform well on targets?
I just used some Herters 1 oz 1060 fps 7-1/2's at an event and they easily smash targets at 40 yards. They will get tested on some 60 yard plus targets soon. That mental block of high FPS equals better scores is somewhat of a myth.
I usually shoot 1 oz 1160's and could see no difference in performance. I use them for everything including FITASC and never feel undergunned.
Click to expand...
This is a good post that gets to the heart of the matter of ammo selection.

Clearly an 1100 fps load of #7.5 doesn't give up "target-smashing ability" to one that one that starts at 1300 fps. While the slower load starts out with 30% less energy, when it gets to 60 yds the difference is half that.....still plenty to "smash" targets.

My "mental block" with high fps is about confidence. In competition, if I think it matters, it matters. Nothing affects my scores in competition like the slightest loss of confidence. In trap, I start with equipment I have the utmost confidence in and it never waivers. I've shot enough sporting clays and FITASC to know what gives me 100% confidence. It's a minimum of 1250 fps. At 1200 fps or less, I can smash targets.....but I can see the delay at about the 50 yd mark. If I'm pulling the trigger and have time to register "crap, I missed.... " and then the target breaks, that doesn't build confidence.

I'd shoot the maximum payload at the maximum velocity if I could get away with it. I don't because I know the recoil will effect my performance...through fatigue, flinching and eventually loss of confidence. With all the possible combinations I could use, I have un-wavering confidence in my ability to perform at my best with 1 ounce of #7.5 @1250 +/- 25 fps. YMMV.

That's pretty much what John Wilgus said..."Nitro 27 7 1/2's. No guesswork. One oz for Fitasc"
 
#23 ·
They performed ok. Was more interested in them to try to make some money. I remember clearly upon shooting the first shell, "this is the softest hdcp I have ever fired. Well, I personally know why. If anyone wants to shoot 1100 fps shells then go for it. But you will never see me or my brother Mike Wilgus(who has won the US Open sporting clays twice) shooting them in competition. Practice either for that matter. John Wilgus
 
#31 · (Edited)
Thanks John. Same as W. Cherry. For me they just seem to be counterproductive over the long term from a fixed breech gun. I rely on a diet of AA extra lite 1180's or B&P Comp One 1oz 1160's. No I am not in Mike's league.
He could probably shoot anything and the outcome would be the same.
Good shooting!
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#32 · (Edited)
QUOTE="mike campbell, post: 2459436, member: 29919"]This is a good post that gets to the heart of the matter of ammo selection.

Clearly an 1100 fps load of #7.5 doesn't give up "target-smashing ability" to one that one that starts at 1300 fps. While the slower load starts out with 30% less energy, when it gets to 60 yds the difference is half that.....still plenty to "smash" targets.

My "mental block" with high fps is about confidence. In competition, if I think it matters, it matters. Nothing affects my scores in competition like the slightest loss of confidence. In trap, I start with equipment I have the utmost confidence in and it never waivers. I've shot enough sporting clays and FITASC to know what gives me 100% confidence. It's a minimum of 1250 fps. At 1200 fps or less, I can smash targets.....but I can see the delay at about the 50 yd mark. If I'm pulling the trigger and have time to register "crap, I missed.... " and then the target breaks, that doesn't build confidence.

I'd shoot the maximum payload at the maximum velocity if I could get away with it. I don't because I know the recoil will effect my performance...through fatigue, flinching and eventually loss of confidence. With all the possible combinations I could use, I have un-wavering confidence in my ability to perform at my best with 1 ounce of #7.5 @1250 +/- 25 fps. YMMV.

That's pretty much what John Wilgus said..."Nitro 27 7 1/2's. No guesswork. One oz for Fitasc"[/QUOTE]


Mike,

Great comments too!

20 and some years ago we used the 1-1/4 pigeon loads for FITASC. To me it was a mental crutch I had to break. It seems like too many guys get caught up in the "Technical Edge". Actually experimented with the AA Int'l 7/8 oz 7-1/2 1325 fps load some time ago. Ran my first parcour ever in FITASC with it. Out of a semi auto it's so very sweet to shoot. However they are hard to find and eventually just went back to one ounce low velocity loads (I have confidence in them and my ability and switched to an O/U). A good friend that I have been shooting with for that entire time likes to favor the 1350 1oz loads. We shoot the bigger tournaments and will break the same targets at the same distances. I supect that if he were to reduce to a slower load he would still be as effective. That cumulative recoil ain't your friend.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#33 ·
That 36 gram load was my mental crutch for awhile, too. Believe it or not, I shot 1 ounce at the 50+yders and put the 1 & 1/4 in for close rabbits....I still missed rabbits, so it was easy to give up the big shell.

I have a friend who shot his first FITASC with us at Sandanona 15+ years ago. He heard you could use 1 & 1/4, so he shot em exclusively. I nick-named him "five - quarter"
 
Trapshooters Forum
posts
4.3M
members
93K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to Trap shooting enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about targets, clays, hunting, gunsmithing, gear reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Shooting Related Discussions For Sale Reloading Want to Buy/Trade Threads Gunsmithing