New hulls are 2 piece and old hulls are 1 piece. New hulls have lip inside where the 2 pieces are joined. This lip can catch the edge of the wad when reloading and screw things up. Other wise they load the same. HMB
While reloading data for the 2 hulls is the same, the Hs has a smaller internal capacity necessitating the use of a shorter wad. 2 solutions. One, use a wad with 1/8 more capacity than you need (i.e., if you are loading 1 oz loads, use a 1 1/18 oz wad). Second, use a DRA12 wad, they are a tad shorter and provide plenty of room. Failure to shorten the wad column will cause the hull to buckle at the crimp station, or you will get a hole in the crimp.
scoutman06, I could not find the thread that you referred to, (most likely due to my computer illiteracy), but thank you to those that have replied, I think I still have some confusion based on what I have heard from people in the recent months. Thank you, Joe
I have had good luck using the old Pattern Control red 1 1/8oz. wad in the HS hulls rather than the AA wads or copies.
The PC wads are shorter and do not leave the hole in the middle of the crimp.
I think that someone makes a copy of this old wad but do not know who it is.
It's not clear what your question is. Do you want to know how to tell one from the other? Or do you want to know differences from a reloading standpoint.
There are a number of ways to tall one from the other. If the AA printed on the side has no box around it and has a line under it, it is a AAHS. However, just because the AA has a box around it does not necessarily mean it's not an HS. Early HS had a box around the AA.
Color is another way to differentiate. On the gray ones, the old style will look almost silver while the HS will look charcoal-colored almost black by comparison. On the red ones, the old style will have a dull. matte finish while the HS will look shiny with an almost wet, greasy look to them.
Last, shine a flashlight down the tube and look to see if the hull has a separate plastic base inside. If it does, it's an HS.
To see for your self what the structural differences are, cut a section out of one of each. The HS has a plastic insert with a bit of a ridge at the top of it. That ridge will prevent the wad from seating as low as the CF without the insert. Because the wad seat higher in the hull, you need to use a wad with a shorter column. I know this from experience; I tried to commingle CF and HS hulls and the HS hulls would buckle with the Blue Duster wads I was using. I separated them and got a shorter was for the HS and the problem of buckling went away. DRA 12 did the trick.
The original AA hull is one piece. The HS is two. The success of the original AA was from the fact you no longer needed to check your cases for a loose base wad before reloading. Which was necessary when using the shells available before Win AA's.
I know the smaller gauge HS are classified as a tapered shell and you have to use the HS style wad or will get the ridge when you crimp the shell. I am told from the 12 ga. HS are the same. The type of wad you use will affect chamber pressures and if the right one is available why you wouldn't use it.
Just another opinion.
Like posted above, the HS hull is a two piece hull while the "old style" is a formed one piece construction. You will find the newer ones have slightly less capacity. I have found that it is important to use only taper wads in them. I some cases the wad can catch on the insert lip. The old AA hulls were much better hulls and not as brittle. That is why once fired Remington STS hulls bring more money.
Nebs, the Blue Duster is a Win clone and they don't seat higher. The new AA's have weaker walls and the press requires a different adjustment. I found I had to back off applying any taper to the nose of the hull to prevent buckling.
slide action, if you are using a straight walled wad in any AA you are making a mistake. A straight walled wad might catch on a AA basewad, I don't know, I have never tried that. It has never happened to me.
"You will find the newer ones have slightly less capacity."
I have never found that, where do you get that idea?
Where do you find a HS style wad? Has Winchester finally come up with a wad that works with these "new" HS shells. I've been using the DRA 12 with great success in the new HS hulls. I still use the WT12 in the older CF's. I've probably got 6-7000 of the older CF's but I'm collecting the new AAHS hulls for the day my cherished CF's give out. I have a theory that Winchester must have quite a stockpile of the WAA 12 wads and are using them up in the new hulls. A friend of mine bought 40 flats of AA this spring. Every now and then (sometimes more frequently) you hear an off sounding report. The bird still breaks but it doesn't sound right. My theory is a cocked wad hanging up on that basewad is not allowing the pressure curve to reach where it should be by using the old style wads. Again, JMHO.
The capacity is "ever so slightly less",but, it does make a difference in some wads The difference is the thickness of the insert. Not a very substantial amount,but, there just the same They will still crimp,but, the crimps take more pressure to crimp well . Not all AA 1 oz. clones are the same hight, some are a small fraction shorter. Those are the ones I use in the HS hulls. As I stated above I do not use straight wall wads in the HS hull( only tapered ones). I tried that before and found they caught on the insert lip and sometimes did not seat down on the powder