[trap.skeet.sporting]

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.

 

[Setterman]

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.

 

[FN Guy]

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

 

[SCTrapShot]

I have shot Herters 16ga. for Vintage skeet for a couple of years now. They work quite well.

 

[buster45]

I have been using 1 oz 1150 feather lite Clever (Mirage) for years less recoil of any shell I have ever used. We shoot sporting clays and do have some extreme ranges. Never missed a shot because of ammo.

Buster

 

[Setterman]

The shot: Clever on the left, then Estate, then Rio. The Estate shot looks grey and

quite a big larger

 

[mike campbell]

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.

 

[Pull & Mark]

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

 

[bluskyshooter]

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.

 

[jhunts]

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

Shotgun Shells Explained - Types Of Ammo (Birdshot, Buckshot, Slugs) | Remington 870, Accessories, Upgrades, Tactical, Reviews, Forum

 

[Setterman]

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.

 

[johnpe]

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

 

[nitro27man]

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

 

[mike campbell]

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.

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.

 

[brdslayr]

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.

 

[blwillson]

Thanks -- I'll pass to our club -- they seem enamored or the cleavers

 

[Brady509]

Purchased the 1250 fps mirage 1-1/8

Less recoil than the 3 dram sts.

Topgun lite 1-1/8 1145 fps recoil= mirage 1250 recoil.

My trial didn't need a chronograph to feel that. Lol

 

[Setterman]

If they were 1100fps, I'm still ordering some cause they broke 50 yard crossers with authority. I was alternating the T2's with Rio 1280's.

 

[Eddiefromoverlook]

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

 

[Remdog1187]

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.

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?