Are kent fast-steel as good as I have heard? I have heard they are excellent. Give me some opions
Thanks :smile:
Thanks :smile:
I would agree, with some caveats. First, those Kent's use B&P wads, which, typically, will produce pattern averages across a variety of guns that are better than any other wad I use. That DOESN'T mean that they'll produce better patterns with any specific gun than another wad brand, but overall, they're the most consistently good patterning wad I use. If I had to load a round that I could not pattern before using it in a gun that I hadn't seen, I'd definitely use the wads kent uses. In over-bored guns, my pattern tests indicate that the old-school, thicker wads used in Winchester, Federal, and Remington factory ammo tend to excel lover the B&P, wads. To that end, for a guy that doesn't have time to spend at the patterning board, Kent's would probably be my choice, BUT FOR the fact that they don't seal up very well at the primer.grnhd said:In my testing of factory loads they are hands down the most consistent patterning, getting advertised speeds with good polished round shot.
Now for the bad, the 3 1/2 loads don't have the advertised shot weights but they do get the advertised speed. And maybe once or twice in a case I've seen the primer just ping and the shell not go off. That's the only bad. With that said,if I was shooting factory loads that's all I would shoot because the good far out weighs the bad.
cannon said:I would agree, with some caveats. First, those Kent's use B&P wads, which, typically, will produce pattern averages across a variety of guns that are better than any other wad I use. That DOESN'T mean that they'll produce better patterns with any specific gun than another wad brand, but overall, they're the most consistently good patterning wad I use. If I had to load a round that I could not pattern before using it in a gun that I hadn't seen, I'd definitely use the wads kent uses. In over-bored guns, my pattern tests indicate that the old-school, thicker wads used in Winchester, Federal, and Remington factory ammo tend to excel lover the B&P, wads. To that end, for a guy that doesn't have time to spend at the patterning board, Kent's would probably be my choice, BUT FOR the fact that they don't seal up very well at the primer.grnhd said:In my testing of factory loads they are hands down the most consistent patterning, getting advertised speeds with good polished round shot.
Now for the bad, the 3 1/2 loads don't have the advertised shot weights but they do get the advertised speed. And maybe once or twice in a case I've seen the primer just ping and the shell not go off. That's the only bad. With that said,if I was shooting factory loads that's all I would shoot because the good far out weighs the bad.
Because I tend to be sloppy about how I transport and handle my shells, they tend to get wet. Moreover, I live in a high-humidity climate, and sometimes store shells in the garage, which means that they're exposed to moisture. When that happens, Kent's tend to leak over time, and sometimes the powder is damaged by exposure to moisture. About 12 years ago, I saw 1 barrel damaged and one barrel destroyed in the same season by guys who had stored their shells in the garage over a summer. (unless, in a dry box with silica gel) Powder got wet, wads got stuck, and both of em we're using pump guns. One guy split a choke, the other split the barrel. That said, if you use em, don't let em get exposed to moisture for extended periods. Other than that one thing that is, in my opinion, a weakness, they're great shells.
Your observations are interesting. While it has been at least 10 years since I shot Kents, poor patterns was the reason I quite using them.cannon said:I would agree, with some caveats. First, those Kent's use B&P wads, which, typically, will produce pattern averages across a variety of guns that are better than any other wad I use. That DOESN'T mean that they'll produce better patterns with any specific gun than another wad brand, but overall, they're the most consistently good patterning wad I use. If I had to load a round that I could not pattern before using it in a gun that I hadn't seen, I'd definitely use the wads kent uses. In over-bored guns, my pattern tests indicate that the old-school, thicker wads used in Winchester, Federal, and Remington factory ammo tend to excel lover the B&P, wads. To that end, for a guy that doesn't have time to spend at the patterning board, Kent's would probably be my choice, BUT FOR the fact that they don't seal up very well at the primer.grnhd said:In my testing of factory loads they are hands down the most consistent patterning, getting advertised speeds with good polished round shot.
Now for the bad, the 3 1/2 loads don't have the advertised shot weights but they do get the advertised speed. And maybe once or twice in a case I've seen the primer just ping and the shell not go off. That's the only bad. With that said,if I was shooting factory loads that's all I would shoot because the good far out weighs the bad.
Because I tend to be sloppy about how I transport and handle my shells, they tend to get wet. Moreover, I live in a high-humidity climate, and sometimes store shells in the garage, which means that they're exposed to moisture. When that happens, Kent's tend to leak over time, and sometimes the powder is damaged by exposure to moisture. About 12 years ago, I saw 1 barrel damaged and one barrel destroyed in the same season by guys who had stored their shells in the garage over a summer. Powder got wet, wads got stuck, and both of em we're using pump guns. One guy split a choke, the other split the barrel. That said, if you use em, don't let em get exposed to moisture for extended periods. Other than that one thing that is, in my opinion, a weakness, they're great shells.
Yes and no. The shot in Remington nitros and dryloks are fine. "Experts" is another story altogether. Thing is, Remington's are water sealed from the factory and Dryloks are welded at the crimp. If one of your criteria is keeping em absolutely dry, I'd go with either the wins or the rems. If you're shooting an invector plus barrel or a mossy 935, I'd say either of those would stand a significant likelihood of out-patterning the kent load. If I were shooting a Mobil-choke gun (benelli/beretta), I'd lean towards the Kent's. It all comes down to your specific needs and preferences.buckmeister said:I was just at Bass Pro and almost bought a box of Kents Fast Steel 3" 1 3/8oz. #2 @1300fps but passed up on it. May have to go back and try a box after all this praise. I was going to try and focus on Remington Nitro Steel and Winchester Drylok. Are the components in Kents as good as NItro Steel and Dryloks?
I have 2 regulars in my blind that feel exactly the same way. I'd be willing to bet that the case you got was exposed to moisture at some point before or after you got em. Like I said, a couple of months in a garage in high-humidity climates was enough to cause problems in their case.Jake S said:I bought a case of kent fast steel for this season. approximately 3 to 5 shells out of every box where miss fires. I shot and 870, the gun was not the problem, and there where nice dents into the primers but for what ever reason the loads where not going off. I realize it was probably a bad batch, but i will never buy from kent again.