Are these 12 gauge hulls sutiable for reloading?

[clytle374]

I'm new to shotguns and reloading them, been shooting and reloading rifles and handguns for years. I just ordered shells for my new Mossenburg 835 and found something that concerned me that these are not reloadable.

The shells I ordered are Winchester SuperX 12Ga 3.5" magnum 00 buckshot Winchester # XB12L00. In my search for reloading data, I tried to identify what hulls these are, then I became totaly confused on what is what. What hulls are these and can I reload them?

Thanks
Cory

 

[blarby]

First off, welcome to posting !

Suitable and possible are two different creatures.

These are a cheapy hulls.


Just about any hull can be reloaded.......once. If you have the right crimp tool and the recipe.

Will these inferior hulls last you long ? No. Especially not in 3.5 mag. You might get a little more use if you cut them to 2.75 or even 2.5's if you have a weapon that can take them.

If you are serious into reloading, 3.5 is a rough way to go. 2.75 and 3.00 offer the longest life, and the most suitable hulls for reloading such as STS, Nitro, Win AA, and a few others.

Some easy to read info :

http://www.ballisticproducts.com/bp...rmudgeon_articles/060124_hulls_in_general.htm

 

[Steve C]

Super X hulls are a one piece compression formed hull just like the trap AA hulls and can be reloaded many times and is one if not the best type case to use in reloading. Height of the brass (low or high) is irrelevant as the composition of the plastic and how the case was formed is the important factors in the shell reloadability. The length of the shell will require proper setup on your loader as well as selection of wads, etc. The Super X hunting shell likely has a 5 star crimp rather than the 7 star found on trap and target shells so select the appropriate crimping star insert to match what the factory put on the shell originally. If you purchased new unused cases without a crimp pattern your choice of crimp is open.

 

[clytle374]

Thanks for the welcome, looks like I got off to a slow start here Thanks for the link. I've been reading for a few hours and am still confused. So compression formed hulls are the good ones? Or is that a point of disagreement? I also read somewhere that compression formed hulls are smooth, but I can feel slight ridges in the Super-x hulls.

I've also noticed that the 5 Super-x shells I already have are crimped with 6 creases and 6 folds.. That would be a 6 star, right?

Trying to figure this out before Monday morning since they halted my order due to separate shipping and billing address, I might just cancel the order since I want to be sure I can reload them before spending the money. I bought quantity for the purpose getting hulls out of them.

I've always used Hodgdon powder and was looking though the book. I can find "Winchester compression formed Super-X type shells" in 3" but not 3.5", so that seems like a strike against them. Then I see 3.5" "Winchester steel shotshells" listed and wonder what they are.

So should I cancel order, order a press and just start with components? That brings me to my next confusion, does the RCBS Mini-Grand Reloader load 3.5"?

Sorry for the long confusing post, and thanks for the help, Cory

 

[Steve C]

There are 2 types of hulls, compression formed and polly formed cases. The polly formed cases are usually found in the cheaper game loads and are a 2 piece case with a seperate base that's often paper. The plastic will not take being refolded more than one or tow times without cracking at the folds so the shell is only good for one or 2 reloads.

Compression formed cases have a integral base moulded in. The plastic is often thicker at the base and tapered to the mouth. The plastic is more malleable and capable of being folded and unfolded many times before cracking or splitting. I usually get 12 or more reloads from a Win. or Rem. compression formed case.

3.5" shells are usually steel shot used for waterfowl hunting. The extra length shell was developed tp provide more payload for steel shot which is needed to overcome its lower mass and velocity retention at range.

 

[clytle374]

Thanks, i was just trying to figure out why the discrepancy in opinion. Thought maybe blarby thought they were a different type of hull.

I had done some looking, would these be better Remington Buckshot SP1235B 00, 12 Gauge, 3-1/2", 18 Pellets, 1125 fps, #00 Lead Buckshot?

Does anyone want to offer up a good recipe for a 3.5" 00 load? I asked about the RCBS press above because it states it will take a 3.5" long hull, but that wouldn't make a 3.5" shell would it? Thanks for helping out a noob.

Thanks again, Cory

 

[Uniquedot]

Steve C, All Winchester hulls are now 2 piece hulls...well three piece counting the head, but they are all Reifenhauser tubes now and have been for some time now. The only way to get the compression formed hulls is to find someone willing to sell their old stock.

 

[drsfmd]

Steve C, All Winchester hulls are now 2 piece hulls...well three piece counting the head, but they are all Reifenhauser tubes now and have been for some time now. The only way to get the compression formed hulls is to find someone willing to sell their old stock.

Correct. It's probably been that way for 10 years. Moreover, the SuperX hulls are ribbed... they don't reload well. 3.5 inch shells are hard to reload anyway... most presses can't accommodate them.

 

[clytle374]

What about the remington shells in post 6? they sell them and i think i can still change my order. The price is only tolerable if i can reload them. thanks, cory

 

[blarby]

Correct. It's probably been that way for 10 years. Moreover, the SuperX hulls are ribbed... they don't reload well. 3.5 inch shells are hard to reload anyway... most presses can't accommodate them.

^^^^ this ^^^^

Clytle, are you wanting to reload buckshot, birdshot, slugs. ???

Just trying to help shape a few better responses in the future.

3.5" shells, IMHO, aren't really much other than a marketing hitch.

Yes, you can get more Lead, steel, nails, etc in them.... but 2.5 and 2.75 shells did mighty fine for a real long time. Birds and deer and 2 legged varmints haven't evolved all that much since the invention of the shotgun...but the marketing sure has.

I can't think of anything a 3.5 shell can do that a 2.75 cant. About the only reason I even see for 3.00 is a few more pellets of 00 buck if thats your persuasion.

3.5 is a pain to reload, a bigger pain to shoot, and a component hog.

Very high quality 2.75 hulls and recipes abound. There are some good 3.00 ones out there, but they are getting pricier by the day.... and so are the wads.

 

[clytle374]

I'm sure I load some target loads since the neighbors like to shoot trap. But I mainly got the gun for 00 for defense around the home... Lets just say I have a less than optimistic view of the future.

I have looked into the stopping power of 2 3/4 vs 3.5 and seems like around 50 yards is where 3.5" becomes useful. If anyone has other data, I love to see it.

I'm not expecting to go though 3.5" ammo, but would like to be able to load it. I'm not planning to shoot little clay frisbies with it.

Cory

 

[blarby]

Given the cost advantages, you might be better suited to a well choked 2.75 for 00 buck.

If you want great groupings, look at some of the Hornady lines using the flyte-control wads. I was very impressed by the results, to say the least.

50+ yards from 00 buck is asking, to be honest, quite a lot. Sure the pellets will get there. Where they will be at that distance from you is the important question. They might have more force out of a 3.5 at that range, but where are those little round balls ?

If that is the actual intent, multiple shots with less recoil allowing you to re-establish your sight picture faster are going to serve you far better than 4-6 more pellets.

Do yourself a favor before you buy cases, buy a few boxes. buy a few of the 3.5's, and get at least 5 rounds of 2.75 using flyte-control or similar tech.

Take them out, and set a man sized paper target at 50 yards.

Blast away.

I'd imagine you might have a different choice after that field test.

Sad part is, flyte wads aren't available to reloaders >.<

 

[clytle374]

That sounds like a good idea, I have a few of 3.5 and 2 3/4. I bought a Mossberg 835 due to not being able to pass up the deal on it. I really know nothing about shotguns, but when looking at the load info it seemed that twice as much lead at close to the same velocity was a great idea. I ordered a modified and skeet choke for it since all it came with was a turkey choke. Found some posts saying I shouldn't shoot buckshot through the turkey choke.

I kinda hate to cancel my order, are these http://www.ableammo.com/catalog/rem...-pellets-1125-lead-buckshot-rdbx-p-72948.html reloadable?

Thanks, Cory

 

[blarby]

As I said, if you have the recipe and the components, almost anything is reloadable....once.

What you really want in a reloadable hull choice is something that can be loaded again and again.

Remington ribbed hulls are not known for their durability or friendliness in this department.

My shotgun, a mossberg 500, absolutely loves the cheapy Remington 1 oz slugs. I can buy them cheaper new than I can reload them...so when I can find them priced just right, I stock up. I've fired about 24 or 25 different types of slugs to come to that conclusion though.... I was just lucky it really likes what is frequently the cheapest of the lot better than everything else. I was not satisfied in picking "x" brand slug because it came recommended well, or had "y" price point... I did a lot of testing. I recently found a great deal on "q" brand slugs, but still bought 2 boxes at wally world to test them out.... they worked reasonably well, so I bought the lot of "q" shells because the price was too good to pass up.

Their premium shells such as anything in the Nitro and STS lines are a great choice. They Generally (Nitro) come with birdshot, but can be reloaded with Shot, Slugs, or Buckshot very easily and repeatedly....which is the key.

Generally speaking quality hulls are difficult to come by in Buckshot and Slugs. Manufacturers do what they can to keep the cost per shot down. Lead, Powder, Primer, and Wads are pretty much standard for costs.....where does that leave room for cutting cost ? You got it, the Hull.

I would seriously consider buying a few boxes of various types of shot, slugs, etc and testing to see what works best in your gun. Not all Buckshot, slugs, and especially Birdshot shells are created equal. Mix in choke types, and you have a lot of experimenting to do.

You would be very angry to purchase a case of "X" brand Buckshot at say, 75 cents per round, only to find out it functions horribly in your shotgun, wouldn't you ? The pattern could be bad, they might not feed correctly...... you might luck out, but odds are more in favor of you crapping out.

Granted, any shell is better than no shell....... But I would never consider buying a substantial amount of anything based solely on conjecture, good faith, and hope. Test, test, test.....then buy in bulk.

 

[clytle374]

I canceled the order and went to town and got a collection of shells ranging form 2-3/4 to 3". I've already got a box of 3.5"s so I'll see if I can stand the recoil. My gut feeling at this point is get an idea of what I want then get set up for reloading and buy new hulls. Cory

 

[blarby]

Very good !

 

[oneounceload]

5 star crimp rather than the 7 star found on trap and target shells

Slight correction - they are 6 and 8 point crimps

As to whether 3.5" hulls are reloadable, they would be IF you have a press capable of handling the hulls, the correct wad, etc. Realize that no matter what, reloading buck or larger means placing the pellets in the wad by hand as they will not work through the drop tube

If you are really worried about the state of affairs upcoming, then for 50 yards, etc, you will be better served by a rifle - keep the shotgun for around the house, use the rifle for distances away from the house - besides .223 is a LOT cheaper than buckshot rounds

 

[Uniquedot]

Their premium shells such as anything in the Nitro and STS lines are a great choice.

When you're talking about shells made for reloading these are the only choice. I stopped loading the original compression formed AA the first time i loaded an sts...there has never been a better hull available in 12 ga. I still load thousands of reifenhauser (low disk BW) tubes though when i need the capacity, but i don't reload them.

As to whether 3.5" hulls are reloadable, they would be IF you have a press capable of handling the hulls

I loaded a handful of them on a lee load all because someone gave me several hundred and they looked so good that i couldn't tell the difference between them and a box of new ones my son had. I ended up cutting the others down to 2.75" and using them for one loading.

Lee say's it's not possible to load 3.5" on the load all, but if you have a deprime and reprime punch either from a lee loader or just a nail and dowel to de and re prime them and a supersizer or sizemaster to re size them the load all will crimp them nicely. It of course is only worth doing if someone only needed a few at a time as it was slow.

 

[clytle374]

thanks again for all the great advise. I agree 100% about rifles being the answer to my concerns. That part is covered. I honesty couldn't turn down the shotgun at that price. I kinda doubt I'd ever go for it first, but i've always though that living in an area where the cops might take half an hour, it could have it's place. Of course if i was really worried about it I'd went out of my way to get a shotgun. $200 and looks brand new, and i even know it isn't stolen.

I'm not concerned with loading speed, all my reloading os done on a single stage press now. What would be a good press that could handle 3.5" shells? Recoil might be abusive, but I don't plan on shooting them for fun much.

 

[Uniquedot]

The least expensive press for 3.5" is the RCBS mini grand and it's a simple press, but the press won't resize the last 1/8" or so of the brass (plated steel on all 3.5" as far as i know) head of the shell. The finest 3.5" loader is the PW magnomatic and then there is the 3.5" MEC steelmaster which will size your cases better than any of them including the PW and it's at least a hundred bucks cheaper than the PW. If you are serious about loading the 3.5" i would get the MEC or a MEC supersizer to resize them and the PW to load them on.

 

[blarby]

I'd still say do some serious play with 2.75 and 3.00 before you convince yourself enough that 3.5 is better, that your mind forces you to pull your 2.75 shots out of a desire to have UBERMAGNUM.

 

[clytle374]

As soon as I get a choke I can fire buckshot though, I'll test it some and if it's going to give me a flinch I'll skip the 3.5". Now I'm getting curious how bad it can be. More or less than a .300 Win Mag in a light weight rifle?

Does the RCBS mini grand only miss the last 1/8" on 3/5" shells? Or is that all shells? Seems like that area shouldn't expand much, but I've been wrong 5-6 times today.

EDIT: I just saw how the steelmaster sizes the case and now I get it. Now can the Steelmaster made for 3.5" also do 2-3/4" and 3"? But I'm getting ahead of myself again

 

[blarby]

Depends on how much your shotgun weighs.

MAke sure you have it shouldered and welded correctly. Try some lighter weight loads before the 3.5s. That is not a first time shock you want with a bad shooting position.

I can't speak for the RCBS press.......... don't own one.

 

[oneounceload]

Personally, I wouldn't even bother with 3.5 hulls; there really isn't much, if any, edge over 2.75 and 3 inch ammo

 

[cajun1948]

Cory I have been loading shells for 12 and 20 Ga for years I usually pick my hulls after dove season in the fields where the boys shoot 20 gauge shells and as long as the 209 primer fits and has a good solid plastic bottom of the hull I'll use them... Now the 12 gauge shells I even go to the duck blinds after the season is over or any old shooting range and pick them up just make sure they are in good shape not mashed or split . Gook luck