Stacker, just spent some hours last night looking at exactly this. Wanted 2092 but sold out. I have 2090 and csd20. Just got latest status of steel and advantages.
Sorry but the loads over 3/4 oz all use 2092 wad with lilgun. The ones just over use 2091. I just got 2 lbs of lilgun after reading bpi load of week on 20ga lilgun loads. Check that out too.

 

stacker, turns out I'm away from home... but I brought my Status of Steel book with me!
So just looked it up for you:
newest SOS has just one load for LilGun really, with 4 levels of powder use.
cheddite hull, ch209 wad, lilgun 34-38gr, pt2092 wad, 420gr #4 steel, pressure 10000-11,300; 1355-1500fps.

That's a LOT of powder. It's the heaviest load BPI publishes for 20ga, which really surprises me-- I don't know how Kent and Rem are putting out these 1oz loads, Rem has one going 1600fps! The 20ga handload data for steel is really anemic by comparison.

 

I've just gone through this exercise and I'm happy with LilGun and High-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads. Hope this helps.
Reloading Modern 20 gauge

 

dla, that's a great article and as chance would have it, someone else PMed it to me earlier in the week and I read it!
The one load he's talking about in there is the same one I mentioned just up above, the 38ga lilgun with PT2092. Problem me and the OP are both having is that wad isn't in stock right now... I just searched all over and ended up ordering CSD20 and PT2090 myself.

That article or blogpost is the single best 20ga steel reloading thing I've seen, and I've read several thousand posts here by now. And all the standard reloading books. REALLY a great article--wish I knew who wrote it, I'd be in touch to help out with sending in test loads in the SAM1. I was all over that blog, watched all his other videos too lol.

Let me throw out another potential load for your consideration. In BPI status of steel, 20ga loads, there are VERY FEW loads heavier than 3/4oz! In fact, there are few enough I can list them:
3" 20ga:
400gr: (all use PT2092 wad): 3 loads using SR4756; 3 loads using A-steel (really just a powder tweak in one and primer swap)
420gr: (all use PT2092 wad): 4 loads using LilGun, all the same just 34/36/37/38gr powder
THAT'S IT for 3" hulls with loads heavier than 3/4oz!!

2-3/4" 20ga
Only a few loads > 3/4oz (328gr):
2 @ 334gr... that's 2 #3 pellets more is all! One with SR4756 (unavail), and one with asteel and PT2090 going 1415fps.
4 @ 344gr... that's 5 #3 pellets more than 3/4oz. All with LilGun and PT2091 wad in a RIO hull. Best is going 1490fps

17 @355gr, that's just 3 more #3 pellets than above, all only fit with #7shot, using 2091 wad, and only ONE is faster than 1340fps, a single load at 1380, using the unavial SR4756.

So, my point in all the above is this: if you can't get the 2092 wad, the next best thing with LilGun is the 2-3/4" RIO, PT2091, 35gr LilGun, 344gr #3shot, 10,400psi, 1490fps. Seriously, I probably wouldn't even consider going to the 3" shell. That's 120 #3 pellets vs 146 #3's in the heavier 420gr 3" load, 86% of the pellets.

 

dla, that's a great article and as chance would have it, someone else PMed it to me earlier in the week and I read it!
The one load he's talking about in there is the same one I mentioned just up above, the 38ga lilgun with PT2092. Problem me and the OP are both having is that wad isn't in stock right now... I just searched all over and ended up ordering CSD20 and PT2090 myself.

That article or blogpost is the single best 20ga steel reloading thing I've seen, and I've read several thousand posts here by now. And all the standard reloading books. REALLY a great article--wish I knew who wrote it, I'd be in touch to help out with sending in test loads in the SAM1. I was all over that blog, watched all his other videos too lol.

Let me throw out another potential load for your consideration. In BPI status of steel, 20ga loads, there are VERY FEW loads heavier than 3/4oz! In fact, there are few enough I can list them:
3" 20ga:
400gr: (all use PT2092 wad): 3 loads using SR4756; 3 loads using A-steel (really just a powder tweak in one and primer swap)
420gr: (all use PT2092 wad): 4 loads using LilGun, all the same just 34/36/37/38gr powder
THAT'S IT for 3" hulls with loads heavier than 3/4oz!!

2-3/4" 20ga
Only a few loads > 3/4oz (328gr):
2 @ 334gr... that's 2 #3 pellets more is all! One with SR4756 (unavail), and one with asteel and PT2090 going 1415fps.
4 @ 344gr... that's 5 #3 pellets more than 3/4oz. All with LilGun and PT2091 wad in a RIO hull. Best is going 1490fps

17 @355gr, that's just 3 more #3 pellets than above, all only fit with #7shot, using 2091 wad, and only ONE is faster than 1340fps, a single load at 1380, using the unavial SR4756.

So, my point in all the above is this: if you can't get the 2092 wad, the next best thing with LilGun is the 2-3/4" RIO, PT2091, 35gr LilGun, 344gr #3shot, 10,400psi, 1490fps. Seriously, I probably wouldn't even consider going to the 3" shell. That's 120 #3 pellets vs 146 #3's in the heavier 420gr 3" load, 86% of the pellets.

Yea, the guy who wrote that is a real ******

Anyways, just to make something clear: the Cheddite and Fiocchi hulls that BPI so often uses for their high-performance 3" 20 gauge loads will just barely make it under the 2.8" COL (SAAMI Max) when roll crimped, packing in a full ounce with the SAM1 wad. When I say "barely", I mean you have to tamp the load down, (after charging the shot), a lot. I've been using a rubber mallet and a 45-70 casing to do it. If I were fancy I'd get me a nice 1/2" diameter brass punch. Once tamped, I put an overshot card on it and roll crimp it with the Precision Reloading roll crimp tool. 2.8" COL is a hard limit for some shotgun actions. Chamber-wise the 2.8" COL is meaningless - just can't have a hull longer than 3.010".

Supposedly, Remington also offers a true 1 ounce load at 1350fps, but I haven't seen it on the shelves at Cabelas or Sportsmans. This Remington shell uses a custom Remington wad along with a Remington hull that will close a fold-crimp. Now I discovered that Hevi-Steel only does 15/16oz in their "1oz" load, and I suspect that Remington is playing a similar game. Remington has long used a tapered hull, which is less capacity than the Cheddite and Fiocchi straight-walled hulls. Won't know for sure until somebody autopsies one.

Too bad you can't get the PT2092 - it is the only wad I know of, (other than the RSI SAM1), that will hold an honest 420gr of steel shot. It isn't a perfect wad, (cause it can blow-through), but it is a workable wad. Both Hevi-Steel and Remington use a wad not available to the average schmuck and claim "1oz".

I've not tried this, but you might be able to tamp down/squash 15/16 ounce of steel shot into a CDS20 wad and make it work without scoring your bore/choke. I've got a bunch of them but I haven't used them yet.

So here's the scoop: If you want a shell that has a chance of folding a crimp - don't go above 420gr of shot. If you are willing to roll crimp, you can get some SAM1 wads, and you're not afraid of CIP HP pressures (assuming your pop-gun is rated for it) then LilGun will get you almost to 1500fps with a full ounce.

I've got a couple pounds of Alliant Steel and I'd really like to try it this application. I feel pretty safe with LilGun because it is soooooo sloooooow burning in this application. Alliant Steel not so much.

When I bought the latest (9th edition) of BPI's "Advantages" manual, I was hoping for some more load work in the 20 gauge 3" steel shot loads. But instead they got rid of a bunch of loads - most which were with powders no longer manufactured. I was kind of bummed because I had hoped the old codger would've come up with a decent Alliant Steel load as well.

I'm about ready to send off some of the 1oz loads (cheddite hull/primer, SAM1 wad, 38gr LilGun) to be tested. My guess is that they are in the 14kpsi range, but I'll find out in a couple weeks.

Have fun!

 

I've just gone through this exercise and I'm happy with LilGun and High-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads. Hope this helps.
Reloading Modern 20 gauge

So Whomever wrote the Blog ,which I'm assuming was you, went around leeching information from website to website then made up a compilation of your results with the information you gleaned from others and the author again whom I am assuming is you, is now taking credit for most of it calling others that tried to help you while you were leeching information from them ignorant. Again if your the author your a real piece of work IMHO.
In all your creative writing about how much you knew about CIP and SAAMI pressures and how so many people were using such weak loads you showed how ignorant and how very little a leech like you does know. You knew nothing about the powders you were looking at and gave your "Expert" opinion on, even after you were told on the several websites you leeched information from that the powders used in the factory loads cannot be had by hand loaders because we can't get them, do you even know how many ball powders are offered for factory loads, you can go back on the some of the sites and read up on that also.
You also in all you wondrous knowledge about how pressures don't mean squat failed to mention or perhaps didn't ask somebody else so you could put that down in your blog also is shotguns hulls also have burst pressures and limitations, which if your saying some of your loads come back at 14,000 psi plus your getting dangerously close to burst pressure in some of the weaker designed hulls, Oh geez there's more information you can put in your blog and take credit for...

VERY IMPRESIVE and another reason many of us don't give out load information anymore.

 

I've just gone through this exercise and I'm happy with LilGun and High-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads. Hope this helps.
Reloading Modern 20 gauge

So Whomever wrote the Blog ,which I'm assuming was you, went around leeching information from website to website then made up a compilation of your results with the information you gleaned from others and the author again whom I am assuming is you, is now taking credit for most of it calling others that tried to help you while you were leeching information from them ignorant. Again if your the author your a real piece of work IMHO.
In all your creative writing about how much you knew about CIP and SAAMI pressures and how so many people were using such weak loads you showed how ignorant and how very little a leech like you does know. You knew nothing about the powders you were looking at and gave your "Expert" opinion on, even after you were told on the several websites you leeched information from that the powders used in the factory loads cannot be had by hand loaders because we can't get them, do you even know how many ball powders are offered for factory loads, you can go back on the some of the sites and read up on that also.
You also in all you wondrous knowledge about how pressures don't mean squat failed to mention or perhaps didn't ask somebody else so you could put that down in your blog also is shotguns hulls also have burst pressures and limitations, which if your saying some of your loads come back at 14,000 psi plus your getting dangerously close to burst pressure in some of the weaker designed hulls, Oh geez there's more information you can put in your blog and take credit for...

VERY IMPRESIVE and another reason many of us don't give out load information anymore.

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

 

I've just gone through this exercise and I'm happy with LilGun and High-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads. Hope this helps.
Reloading Modern 20 gauge

So Whomever wrote the Blog ,which I'm assuming was you, went around leeching information from website to website then made up a compilation of your results with the information you gleaned from others and the author again whom I am assuming is you, is now taking credit for most of it calling others that tried to help you while you were leeching information from them ignorant. Again if your the author your a real piece of work IMHO.
In all your creative writing about how much you knew about CIP and SAAMI pressures and how so many people were using such weak loads you showed how ignorant and how very little a leech like you does know. You knew nothing about the powders you were looking at and gave your "Expert" opinion on, even after you were told on the several websites you leeched information from that the powders used in the factory loads cannot be had by hand loaders because we can't get them, do you even know how many ball powders are offered for factory loads, you can go back on the some of the sites and read up on that also.
You also in all you wondrous knowledge about how pressures don't mean squat failed to mention or perhaps didn't ask somebody else so you could put that down in your blog also is shotguns hulls also have burst pressures and limitations, which if your saying some of your loads come back at 14,000 psi plus your getting dangerously close to burst pressure in some of the weaker designed hulls, Oh geez there's more information you can put in your blog and take credit for...

VERY IMPRESIVE and another reason many of us don't give out load information anymore.

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

I understand and I got bit wound on it, but I've actually had people I knew get bolts blown out of rifles and shrapnel in them from people who thought they knew what they were talking about, why I get so bent about it.
The main difference is SAAMI and CIP use different measuring standards for the same round, Frank or some of the guys from over on the Euro side can probably chime in here as they know more about it then I do. However what it all boils down to is CIP pressure test standards are really no more than SAAMI pressure test standards in many instances just measured differently using different methods, the CIP numbers look higher but in reality SAAMI uses higher proof load requirements than CIP does.
Read on
http://kwk.us/pressures.html

 

I've just gone through this exercise and I'm happy with LilGun and High-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads. Hope this helps.
Reloading Modern 20 gauge

So Whomever wrote the Blog ,which I'm assuming was you, went around leeching information from website to website then made up a compilation of your results with the information you gleaned from others and the author again whom I am assuming is you, is now taking credit for most of it calling others that tried to help you while you were leeching information from them ignorant. Again if your the author your a real piece of work IMHO.
In all your creative writing about how much you knew about CIP and SAAMI pressures and how so many people were using such weak loads you showed how ignorant and how very little a leech like you does know. You knew nothing about the powders you were looking at and gave your "Expert" opinion on, even after you were told on the several websites you leeched information from that the powders used in the factory loads cannot be had by hand loaders because we can't get them, do you even know how many ball powders are offered for factory loads, you can go back on the some of the sites and read up on that also.
You also in all you wondrous knowledge about how pressures don't mean squat failed to mention or perhaps didn't ask somebody else so you could put that down in your blog also is shotguns hulls also have burst pressures and limitations, which if your saying some of your loads come back at 14,000 psi plus your getting dangerously close to burst pressure in some of the weaker designed hulls, Oh geez there's more information you can put in your blog and take credit for...

VERY IMPRESIVE and another reason many of us don't give out load information anymore.

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

I understand and I got bit wound on it, but I've actually had people I knew get bolts blown out of rifles and shrapnel in them from people who thought they knew what they were talking about, why I get so bent about it.
The main difference is SAAMI and CIP use different measuring standards for the same round, Frank or some of the guys from over on the Euro side can probably chime in here as they know more about it then I do. However what it all boils down to is CIP pressure test standards are really no more than SAAMI pressure test standards in many instances just measured differently using different methods, the CIP numbers look higher but in reality SAAMI uses higher proof load requirements than CIP does.
Read on
http://kwk.us/pressures.html

Sounds like you need to read up on CIP a bit before using the acronym in a sentence.

 

I've just gone through this exercise and I'm happy with LilGun and High-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads. Hope this helps.
Reloading Modern 20 gauge

So Whomever wrote the Blog ,which I'm assuming was you, went around leeching information from website to website then made up a compilation of your results with the information you gleaned from others and the author again whom I am assuming is you, is now taking credit for most of it calling others that tried to help you while you were leeching information from them ignorant. Again if your the author your a real piece of work IMHO.
In all your creative writing about how much you knew about CIP and SAAMI pressures and how so many people were using such weak loads you showed how ignorant and how very little a leech like you does know. You knew nothing about the powders you were looking at and gave your "Expert" opinion on, even after you were told on the several websites you leeched information from that the powders used in the factory loads cannot be had by hand loaders because we can't get them, do you even know how many ball powders are offered for factory loads, you can go back on the some of the sites and read up on that also.
You also in all you wondrous knowledge about how pressures don't mean squat failed to mention or perhaps didn't ask somebody else so you could put that down in your blog also is shotguns hulls also have burst pressures and limitations, which if your saying some of your loads come back at 14,000 psi plus your getting dangerously close to burst pressure in some of the weaker designed hulls, Oh geez there's more information you can put in your blog and take credit for...

VERY IMPRESIVE and another reason many of us don't give out load information anymore.

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

I understand and I got bit wound on it, but I've actually had people I knew get bolts blown out of rifles and shrapnel in them from people who thought they knew what they were talking about, why I get so bent about it.
The main difference is SAAMI and CIP use different measuring standards for the same round, Frank or some of the guys from over on the Euro side can probably chime in here as they know more about it then I do. However what it all boils down to is CIP pressure test standards are really no more than SAAMI pressure test standards in many instances just measured differently using different methods, the CIP numbers look higher but in reality SAAMI uses higher proof load requirements than CIP does.
Read on
http://kwk.us/pressures.html

Sounds like you need to read up on CIP a bit before using the acronym in a sentence.

Maybe
But I know one thing I DON'T DO is go running round to every internet website there is asking people for help, asking them all kinds of questions then purposely stab them in the backs on a web blog stating their ignorant and don't know what their talking about.
That's all you buddy boy!!!!!!!!!!

 

Well, THAT went south fast!
Putting aside any discussion of SAAMI vs CIP (which always results in a locked thread it seems), and also the hurt feelings, those are some really good pictures and nice effort on looking at shell temp and the wad blow-through. I rarely see folks analyzing the used wad, and it's clear from that burn-through and higher ES on the shot string that it may be a factor. It's certainly more testing and result posting than most users here generate.

It's easy in the blog world to type a "first draft" of something where you're really just talking to yourself on your own private blog no one knows about, and have it become the "final draft" instantly... you're not thinking while you type it how someone who you don't expect will ever read it might react, and you have no editor or publisher to tone down your turn of phrase. I hear that in private Ed Lowry and Tom Roster said stuff that didnt endear them to each other; had they started out while learning their craft being able to instantly post their thoughts as they learned to a blog, without an editor, I reckon things would have gotten hot there. I can't count the number of times I've totally saved myself by just not sending some email or post I typed, and the number of times I've edited my initial posts and removed inflammatory words and toned down phrases approaches unity. In this world of instant foot-in-mouth facebooking-twitter-blog permanent internet mistakes, I try to grant the other guy a 50% flame-retardant because he didn't have an editor.

 

You can't compare Ed Lowrey to Roster, that'd be like comparing an apple to a tomato. Having talked with Ed several times he "knew" what he was talking about.

 

Here is good artical on cip and saami pressure rules ect

http://www.gma.vic.gov.au/hunting/duck/ ... d-proofing

 

Well, THAT went south fast!
Putting aside any discussion of SAAMI vs CIP (which always results in a locked thread it seems), and also the hurt feelings, those are some really good pictures and nice effort on looking at shell temp and the wad blow-through. I rarely see folks analyzing the used wad, and it's clear from that burn-through and higher ES on the shot string that it may be a factor. It's certainly more testing and result posting than most users here generate.

It's easy in the blog world to type a "first draft" of something where you're really just talking to yourself on your own private blog no one knows about, and have it become the "final draft" instantly... you're not thinking while you type it how someone who you don't expect will ever read it might react, and you have no editor or publisher to tone down your turn of phrase. I hear that in private Ed Lowry and Tom Roster said stuff that didnt endear them to each other; had they started out while learning their craft being able to instantly post their thoughts as they learned to a blog, without an editor, I reckon things would have gotten hot there. I can't count the number of times I've totally saved myself by just not sending some email or post I typed, and the number of times I've edited my initial posts and removed inflammatory words and toned down phrases approaches unity. In this world of instant foot-in-mouth facebooking-twitter-blog permanent internet mistakes, I try to grant the other guy a 50% flame-retardant because he didn't have an editor.

Very true.
What burned me up and a lot of us on many of the forums do give credit when we get help on something, is no credit was given for the many people that did try and help this guy out. He was on few forums some of us were on asking every kind of question he could, didn't even know how to adjust this Sizemaster Press, which people also tried to help him with, plus other things.
So as we all saw in his blog he was so proud of, he turns around and instead of doing the Right Thing and thanking all the people that tried to help him even in a General Thanks to all the Folks that gave me Assistance in making this, he call's them Ignorant and Misinformed.
First thing that comes to my mind at least, somebody that supposedly KNOWS what their talking about and has the Gaul to make statements like he did, why would he ask so many questions when he already had all the answers??????????

The effort he tried to put into yes anybody could appreciate that, but if your going to insult people that tried to help you by giving the hyperlink out so everybody can see it, that's just low class and wrong. Insult people if your going to do it in private or in your own thoughts.

 

Well, THAT went south fast!
Putting aside any discussion of SAAMI vs CIP (which always results in a locked thread it seems), and also the hurt feelings, those are some really good pictures and nice effort on looking at shell temp and the wad blow-through. I rarely see folks analyzing the used wad, and it's clear from that burn-through and higher ES on the shot string that it may be a factor. It's certainly more testing and result posting than most users here generate.

It's easy in the blog world to type a "first draft" of something where you're really just talking to yourself on your own private blog no one knows about, and have it become the "final draft" instantly... you're not thinking while you type it how someone who you don't expect will ever read it might react, and you have no editor or publisher to tone down your turn of phrase. I hear that in private Ed Lowry and Tom Roster said stuff that didnt endear them to each other; had they started out while learning their craft being able to instantly post their thoughts as they learned to a blog, without an editor, I reckon things would have gotten hot there. I can't count the number of times I've totally saved myself by just not sending some email or post I typed, and the number of times I've edited my initial posts and removed inflammatory words and toned down phrases approaches unity. In this world of instant foot-in-mouth facebooking-twitter-blog permanent internet mistakes, I try to grant the other guy a 50% flame-retardant because he didn't have an editor.

Very true.
What burned me up and a lot of us on many of the forums do give credit when we get help on something, is no credit was given for the many people that did try and help this guy out. He was on few forums some of us were on asking every kind of question he could, didn't even know how to adjust this Sizemaster Press, which people also tried to help him with, plus other things.
So as we all saw in his blog he was so proud of, he turns around and instead of doing the Right Thing and thanking all the people that tried to help him even in a General Thanks to all the Folks that gave me Assistance in making this, he call's them Ignorant and Misinformed.
First thing that comes to my mind at least, somebody that supposedly KNOWS what their talking about and has the Gaul to make statements like he did, why would he ask so many questions when he already had all the answers??????????

The effort he tried to put into yes anybody could appreciate that, but if your going to insult people that tried to help you by giving the hyperlink out so everybody can see it, that's just low class and wrong. Insult people if your going to do it in private or in your own thoughts.

Lets see, I'm guessing I made a serious breach of etiquette, a royal faux pas by not bestowing honor upon your grace when posting on this forum of yours. I will rectify that immediately:

"All hail His Grace, BTJustice of the Houses Duckhunting and Chat, the First of his Name, King of the 12 bore, the Ponsness Warren, and the Spolar, Lord of all things reloading and Protector of the Realm."

Your Grace, please forgive me if I have slighted you in anyway for I acknowledge before this court that any credit for all my hard work belongs to you and you alone. I have edited my blog and removed all inflammatory statements, so that my Lord might not cast his eyes upon any disagreeable thing.

And now my Lord, since proper honor has been given, might we take this thread back to discussing reloading high-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads?

 

Well, THAT went south fast!
Putting aside any discussion of SAAMI vs CIP (which always results in a locked thread it seems), and also the hurt feelings, those are some really good pictures and nice effort on looking at shell temp and the wad blow-through. I rarely see folks analyzing the used wad, and it's clear from that burn-through and higher ES on the shot string that it may be a factor. It's certainly more testing and result posting than most users here generate.

It's easy in the blog world to type a "first draft" of something where you're really just talking to yourself on your own private blog no one knows about, and have it become the "final draft" instantly... you're not thinking while you type it how someone who you don't expect will ever read it might react, and you have no editor or publisher to tone down your turn of phrase. I hear that in private Ed Lowry and Tom Roster said stuff that didnt endear them to each other; had they started out while learning their craft being able to instantly post their thoughts as they learned to a blog, without an editor, I reckon things would have gotten hot there. I can't count the number of times I've totally saved myself by just not sending some email or post I typed, and the number of times I've edited my initial posts and removed inflammatory words and toned down phrases approaches unity. In this world of instant foot-in-mouth facebooking-twitter-blog permanent internet mistakes, I try to grant the other guy a 50% flame-retardant because he didn't have an editor.

Thanks for your post. It jogged me into re-reading my blog and realizing that there was some unnecessary vitriol in there. I removed it.

 

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

azdukhuntr,
It would take some graphs and paper, and an understanding of statistics to explain the answer to this. Essentially BT is correct up above where he says it's really about what they are measuring and how. I'll give it a quick try. I've got a degree in probability and statistics, at one time I could have whipped off the gaussian distributions and formula for you, but that was many years ago.
First, you have to realize that in reality there IS NO ONE NUMBER. That is, NO phenomena ever precisely replicates itself--maybe things happen close enough that you and I looking at it say it was the "same", but it really wasn't. For example, the commercial shotgun shells (and from your experience loading even) may be SUPPOSED to have 30 grains of powder in them... but they REALLY have between 20 and 40 grains, say, distributed along a "bell" or Gaussian curve with a very high spike around 30, dropping off on either side steeply. We have ways and terms to measure how strong that spike is, how steep the drop off is, etc, and we usually place (arbitrarily but because it's measurable) emphasis at the spots on the curve away from the center at one, two, and three "standard deviations" away from the center spike. We TEND to say in day to day talk that the chances of a powder drop > 3 standard devs from the center is zero, and generalize it like "They drop between 29.8 and 30.2 grains", but that's just hopeful thinking that the universe will follow it's normal statistics.

Second is the idea that when setting RISK AVOIDANCE NUMBERS, what we REALLY must set is a number whose "curve" is offset enough from the CURVE of the "bad things happen" number that they don't intersect in any appreciable chance amount. If we were SURE that we could load a shotgun shell whose pressure was ALWAYS 18,000psi or less, then we could of course load right up against the proof tested limit for the guns... but we can't be sure of a "pressure number", we can only predict it's gaussian curve based on enough samples of those shells.

We THEN actually have to guess at and predict those curves by a random sampling of shells, because we can't really fire them all, so we calculate the "probable error" in our curve predictions based on the sample size and how wide the curve is from -3 to +3 (sometimes 2) standard devs, and THEN we realize that calculation has inherent error guesswork too, and we calculate how sure we are of IT! We call those error guesses "alpha" and "beta", and they shape our thinking for every gaussian distribution which represents some "repeatable physical occurrence" for it's repeatability.

Anyways, here's what combines to dictate that there is a LARGE SPACE between SAAMI pressure limits and the Proof-test limit for our guns:
1. Proof loads are "random" shells too! We only HOPE they tested the gun out around 20,000psi, they MAY have only tested it to 16,000psi!
2. Shells are random, some may spike high
3. Pressure inside shells is not a linear phenomena, it follows PV=nrT BUT the P is changing by a chemical process which varies (how much volume of gas is produced by what is in the powder as it reacts) AND the T isn't linear either... So it's not a fault-tolerant system! Any high-end error may create MUCH higher pressure spikes than expected from merely a linear distribution.
4. The pressure at which the guns explode is gaussian, some may break early
5. The quality of the metals and how they take repeated stress is gaussian, some may fail to deform elastically earlier than others
6. Pressures inside all those shells rely on the interactions of numerous gaussian distributions: hull size, primer hotness, crimp depth, powder components, powder drop, powder burn rate. None of which can be directly controlled by the testing guys.

Anyways, it all dictates that if we set 11,500 for 12ga ammo, and we know how inexact our proof loads are, we need to proof "at 19-20k ish" to be able to HOPE/GUESS/PREDICT that we'll be ACTUALLY proofing sufficiently to say the gun is safe. SAAMIs math is good and correct for their spread between the two--and this is why SAAMI says that for the CIP hi-pressure loads, they would actually require a higher proofing than what CIP does for it.

Dave

 

stacker, turns out I'm away from home... but I brought my Status of Steel book with me!
So just looked it up for you:
newest SOS has just one load for LilGun really, with 4 levels of powder use.
cheddite hull, ch209 wad, lilgun 34-38gr, pt2092 wad, 420gr #4 steel, pressure 10000-11,300; 1355-1500fps.

That's a LOT of powder. It's the heaviest load BPI publishes for 20ga, which really surprises me-- I don't know how Kent and Rem are putting out these 1oz loads, Rem has one going 1600fps! The 20ga handload data for steel is really anemic by comparison.

I know Remington has their Hypersonic 20 gauge - 1oz of #3 at 1600fps (according to the Cabelas advertisement). But I have not found that ammo on the shelf anywhere. I have seen pictures of the wad they use in their 12 gauge version (with it's narrow tube over the primer). Do you know if that is the wad design used in the 20 gauge offering? By the way, the 12 gauge offering was $23 a box on the shelf.

You're right, their factory load sure puts a damper on any hopes of beating it hand-loading. Aside from cost of course. But it does raise a question - just how much velocity do you need to poke holes in a duck at 40yds? 40yds isn't a magic distance of course, but it is far enough that my shooting is iffy.

20 gauge isn't very popular up here in NW Oregon, so I can't just grab a box and head off to the patterning board. Wish I could because it would be interesting to see if I could keep enough of that shot in a 30" circle @40-50yds to make the extra velocity worth it.

 

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

azdukhuntr,
It would take some graphs and paper, and an understanding of statistics to explain the answer to this. Essentially BT is correct up above where he says it's really about what they are measuring and how. I'll give it a quick try. I've got a degree in probability and statistics, at one time I could have whipped off the gaussian distributions and formula for you, but that was many years ago.
First, you have to realize that in reality there IS NO ONE NUMBER. That is, NO phenomena ever precisely replicates itself--maybe things happen close enough that you and I looking at it say it was the "same", but it really wasn't. For example, the commercial shotgun shells (and from your experience loading even) may be SUPPOSED to have 30 grains of powder in them... but they REALLY have between 20 and 40 grains, say, distributed along a "bell" or Gaussian curve with a very high spike around 30, dropping off on either side steeply. We have ways and terms to measure how strong that spike is, how steep the drop off is, etc, and we usually place (arbitrarily but because it's measurable) emphasis at the spots on the curve away from the center at one, two, and three "standard deviations" away from the center spike. We TEND to say in day to day talk that the chances of a powder drop > 3 standard devs from the center is zero, and generalize it like "They drop between 29.8 and 30.2 grains", but that's just hopeful thinking that the universe will follow it's normal statistics.

Second is the idea that when setting RISK AVOIDANCE NUMBERS, what we REALLY must set is a number whose "curve" is offset enough from the CURVE of the "bad things happen" number that they don't intersect in any appreciable chance amount. If we were SURE that we could load a shotgun shell whose pressure was ALWAYS 18,000psi or less, then we could of course load right up against the proof tested limit for the guns... but we can't be sure of a "pressure number", we can only predict it's gaussian curve based on enough samples of those shells.

We THEN actually have to guess at and predict those curves by a random sampling of shells, because we can't really fire them all, so we calculate the "probable error" in our curve predictions based on the sample size and how wide the curve is from -3 to +3 (sometimes 2) standard devs, and THEN we realize that calculation has inherent error guesswork too, and we calculate how sure we are of IT! We call those error guesses "alpha" and "beta", and they shape our thinking for every gaussian distribution which represents some "repeatable physical occurrence" for it's repeatability.

Anyways, here's what combines to dictate that there is a LARGE SPACE between SAAMI pressure limits and the Proof-test limit for our guns:
1. Proof loads are "random" shells too! We only HOPE they tested the gun out around 20,000psi, they MAY have only tested it to 16,000psi!
2. Shells are random, some may spike high
3. Pressure inside shells is not a linear phenomena, it follows PV=nrT BUT the P is changing by a chemical process which varies (how much volume of gas is produced by what is in the powder as it reacts) AND the T isn't linear either... So it's not a fault-tolerant system! Any high-end error may create MUCH higher pressure spikes than expected from merely a linear distribution.
4. The pressure at which the guns explode is gaussian, some may break early
5. The quality of the metals and how they take repeated stress is gaussian, some may fail to deform elastically earlier than others
6. Pressures inside all those shells rely on the interactions of numerous gaussian distributions: hull size, primer hotness, crimp depth, powder components, powder drop, powder burn rate. None of which can be directly controlled by the testing guys.

Anyways, it all dictates that if we set 11,500 for 12ga ammo, and we know how inexact our proof loads are, we need to proof "at 19-20k ish" to be able to HOPE/GUESS/PREDICT that we'll be ACTUALLY proofing sufficiently to say the gun is safe. SAAMIs math is good and correct for their spread between the two--and this is why SAAMI says that for the CIP hi-pressure loads, they would actually require a higher proofing than what CIP does for it.

Dave

Very good explanation.
I am weak at Statistics and Probability and I have a question: since there are a large number of variables that must be "worst case" for a chamber to burst (assuming that is the baddest thing CIP and SAMMI are trying to avoid), isn't there an adjustment made in the calculations? Also, not only are there a large number of things that must line up to create the "perfect storm", but also manufacturers design in margins and the sum of margins is not considered.

My point is this: Since observation shows that our European friend's shotguns last just as long as ours, I think CIP and SAAMI each factored the "sea of variables" slightly different, but came up with valid results. Therefore critiquing CIP's proof pressure by SAAMI's analysis isn't very useful.

Anyways, like I said, I am weak at Statistics and Probability

 

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

azdukhuntr,
It would take some graphs and paper, and an understanding of statistics to explain the answer to this. Essentially BT is correct up above where he says it's really about what they are measuring and how. I'll give it a quick try. I've got a degree in probability and statistics, at one time I could have whipped off the gaussian distributions and formula for you, but that was many years ago.
First, you have to realize that in reality there IS NO ONE NUMBER. That is, NO phenomena ever precisely replicates itself--maybe things happen close enough that you and I looking at it say it was the "same", but it really wasn't. For example, the commercial shotgun shells (and from your experience loading even) may be SUPPOSED to have 30 grains of powder in them... but they REALLY have between 20 and 40 grains, say, distributed along a "bell" or Gaussian curve with a very high spike around 30, dropping off on either side steeply. We have ways and terms to measure how strong that spike is, how steep the drop off is, etc, and we usually place (arbitrarily but because it's measurable) emphasis at the spots on the curve away from the center at one, two, and three "standard deviations" away from the center spike. We TEND to say in day to day talk that the chances of a powder drop > 3 standard devs from the center is zero, and generalize it like "They drop between 29.8 and 30.2 grains", but that's just hopeful thinking that the universe will follow it's normal statistics.

Second is the idea that when setting RISK AVOIDANCE NUMBERS, what we REALLY must set is a number whose "curve" is offset enough from the CURVE of the "bad things happen" number that they don't intersect in any appreciable chance amount. If we were SURE that we could load a shotgun shell whose pressure was ALWAYS 18,000psi or less, then we could of course load right up against the proof tested limit for the guns... but we can't be sure of a "pressure number", we can only predict it's gaussian curve based on enough samples of those shells.

We THEN actually have to guess at and predict those curves by a random sampling of shells, because we can't really fire them all, so we calculate the "probable error" in our curve predictions based on the sample size and how wide the curve is from -3 to +3 (sometimes 2) standard devs, and THEN we realize that calculation has inherent error guesswork too, and we calculate how sure we are of IT! We call those error guesses "alpha" and "beta", and they shape our thinking for every gaussian distribution which represents some "repeatable physical occurrence" for it's repeatability.

Anyways, here's what combines to dictate that there is a LARGE SPACE between SAAMI pressure limits and the Proof-test limit for our guns:
1. Proof loads are "random" shells too! We only HOPE they tested the gun out around 20,000psi, they MAY have only tested it to 16,000psi!
2. Shells are random, some may spike high
3. Pressure inside shells is not a linear phenomena, it follows PV=nrT BUT the P is changing by a chemical process which varies (how much volume of gas is produced by what is in the powder as it reacts) AND the T isn't linear either... So it's not a fault-tolerant system! Any high-end error may create MUCH higher pressure spikes than expected from merely a linear distribution.
4. The pressure at which the guns explode is gaussian, some may break early
5. The quality of the metals and how they take repeated stress is gaussian, some may fail to deform elastically earlier than others
6. Pressures inside all those shells rely on the interactions of numerous gaussian distributions: hull size, primer hotness, crimp depth, powder components, powder drop, powder burn rate. None of which can be directly controlled by the testing guys.

Anyways, it all dictates that if we set 11,500 for 12ga ammo, and we know how inexact our proof loads are, we need to proof "at 19-20k ish" to be able to HOPE/GUESS/PREDICT that we'll be ACTUALLY proofing sufficiently to say the gun is safe. SAAMIs math is good and correct for their spread between the two--and this is why SAAMI says that for the CIP hi-pressure loads, they would actually require a higher proofing than what CIP does for it.

Dave

Another thing I should point out - my reading of the CIP standard is that proof-testing is mandatory on 100% of the barrels. OTOH SAAMI compliance is voluntary.

 

BT, I'm not trying to light firestorm here or pop a cap on anybody but I'm extremely curious why there is a 3000+psi difference between what CIP feels is acceptable loading pressure and SAAMI does not. Purely speculation on my part but would it be possible that SAAMI is taking such a conservative approach to pressure maximums due to the fact that we exist in such a litigious society.In other words is SAAMI just covering their collective ass because stupid people do stupid things. I read that blog and then did my own research on CIP and SAAMI. CIP also puts a maximums momentum on their ammo although not sure what that has to do initial chamber pressures. I find it hard to believe that the Europeans produce such superior strength steel, over everyone else, that they can justify safely loading to chamber pressures in excess of 15,000psi where here SAAMI believes that anything over 12,000psi in a 20ga load is cause for grave concern. I'm not a metallurgist nor a mechanical engineer but I would like someone to logically explain why SAAMI believes that loading to CIP pressure would be considered so dangerous.

azdukhuntr,
It would take some graphs and paper, and an understanding of statistics to explain the answer to this. Essentially BT is correct up above where he says it's really about what they are measuring and how. I'll give it a quick try. I've got a degree in probability and statistics, at one time I could have whipped off the gaussian distributions and formula for you, but that was many years ago.
First, you have to realize that in reality there IS NO ONE NUMBER. That is, NO phenomena ever precisely replicates itself--maybe things happen close enough that you and I looking at it say it was the "same", but it really wasn't. For example, the commercial shotgun shells (and from your experience loading even) may be SUPPOSED to have 30 grains of powder in them... but they REALLY have between 20 and 40 grains, say, distributed along a "bell" or Gaussian curve with a very high spike around 30, dropping off on either side steeply. We have ways and terms to measure how strong that spike is, how steep the drop off is, etc, and we usually place (arbitrarily but because it's measurable) emphasis at the spots on the curve away from the center at one, two, and three "standard deviations" away from the center spike. We TEND to say in day to day talk that the chances of a powder drop > 3 standard devs from the center is zero, and generalize it like "They drop between 29.8 and 30.2 grains", but that's just hopeful thinking that the universe will follow it's normal statistics.

Second is the idea that when setting RISK AVOIDANCE NUMBERS, what we REALLY must set is a number whose "curve" is offset enough from the CURVE of the "bad things happen" number that they don't intersect in any appreciable chance amount. If we were SURE that we could load a shotgun shell whose pressure was ALWAYS 18,000psi or less, then we could of course load right up against the proof tested limit for the guns... but we can't be sure of a "pressure number", we can only predict it's gaussian curve based on enough samples of those shells.

We THEN actually have to guess at and predict those curves by a random sampling of shells, because we can't really fire them all, so we calculate the "probable error" in our curve predictions based on the sample size and how wide the curve is from -3 to +3 (sometimes 2) standard devs, and THEN we realize that calculation has inherent error guesswork too, and we calculate how sure we are of IT! We call those error guesses "alpha" and "beta", and they shape our thinking for every gaussian distribution which represents some "repeatable physical occurrence" for it's repeatability.

Anyways, here's what combines to dictate that there is a LARGE SPACE between SAAMI pressure limits and the Proof-test limit for our guns:
1. Proof loads are "random" shells too! We only HOPE they tested the gun out around 20,000psi, they MAY have only tested it to 16,000psi!
2. Shells are random, some may spike high
3. Pressure inside shells is not a linear phenomena, it follows PV=nrT BUT the P is changing by a chemical process which varies (how much volume of gas is produced by what is in the powder as it reacts) AND the T isn't linear either... So it's not a fault-tolerant system! Any high-end error may create MUCH higher pressure spikes than expected from merely a linear distribution.
4. The pressure at which the guns explode is gaussian, some may break early
5. The quality of the metals and how they take repeated stress is gaussian, some may fail to deform elastically earlier than others
6. Pressures inside all those shells rely on the interactions of numerous gaussian distributions: hull size, primer hotness, crimp depth, powder components, powder drop, powder burn rate. None of which can be directly controlled by the testing guys.

Anyways, it all dictates that if we set 11,500 for 12ga ammo, and we know how inexact our proof loads are, we need to proof "at 19-20k ish" to be able to HOPE/GUESS/PREDICT that we'll be ACTUALLY proofing sufficiently to say the gun is safe. SAAMIs math is good and correct for their spread between the two--and this is why SAAMI says that for the CIP hi-pressure loads, they would actually require a higher proofing than what CIP does for it.

Dave

Very good explanation.
I am weak at Statistics and Probability and I have a question: since there are a large number of variables that must be "worst case" for a chamber to burst (assuming that is the baddest thing CIP and SAMMI are trying to avoid), isn't there an adjustment made in the calculations? Also, not only are there a large number of things that must line up to create the "perfect storm", but also manufacturers design in margins and the sum of margins is not considered.

My point is this: Since observation shows that our European friend's shotguns last just as long as ours, I think CIP and SAAMI each factored the "sea of variables" slightly different, but came up with valid results. Therefore critiquing CIP's proof pressure by SAAMI's analysis isn't very useful.

Anyways, like I said, I am weak at Statistics and Probability

hello,
You might want to check into that about the guys on other side of pond, and there guns lasting just as long.

I now of quite few guys over there that they destroy alot of guns way early then they should be thrown to side as junk. Because of there cip standards on high side for pressure being in the 15000psi range.

Anyways i suggest that you try out the low profile twenty gauge gas seals like i suggested and told ya about in pm's. For pt wads for sure makes for better load overall. The rsi wads are not meant for higher pressure they all either split out or fold over like you showed. That js built in safety feature for those wads for over saami pressure loads.

Also I have been loading full oz loads in twenty gauge with rsi,pt92,csd 20(with home made wraps above wads height,to keep.scoring of bbl in check ) with my mec 600 jr press. Along with rto finish also more so in the last year. I can say with the other powders i have acheived good speeds within saami specs.

Goose

 

Well, THAT went south fast!
Putting aside any discussion of SAAMI vs CIP (which always results in a locked thread it seems), and also the hurt feelings, those are some really good pictures and nice effort on looking at shell temp and the wad blow-through. I rarely see folks analyzing the used wad, and it's clear from that burn-through and higher ES on the shot string that it may be a factor. It's certainly more testing and result posting than most users here generate.

It's easy in the blog world to type a "first draft" of something where you're really just talking to yourself on your own private blog no one knows about, and have it become the "final draft" instantly... you're not thinking while you type it how someone who you don't expect will ever read it might react, and you have no editor or publisher to tone down your turn of phrase. I hear that in private Ed Lowry and Tom Roster said stuff that didnt endear them to each other; had they started out while learning their craft being able to instantly post their thoughts as they learned to a blog, without an editor, I reckon things would have gotten hot there. I can't count the number of times I've totally saved myself by just not sending some email or post I typed, and the number of times I've edited my initial posts and removed inflammatory words and toned down phrases approaches unity. In this world of instant foot-in-mouth facebooking-twitter-blog permanent internet mistakes, I try to grant the other guy a 50% flame-retardant because he didn't have an editor.

Very true.
What burned me up and a lot of us on many of the forums do give credit when we get help on something, is no credit was given for the many people that did try and help this guy out. He was on few forums some of us were on asking every kind of question he could, didn't even know how to adjust this Sizemaster Press, which people also tried to help him with, plus other things.
So as we all saw in his blog he was so proud of, he turns around and instead of doing the Right Thing and thanking all the people that tried to help him even in a General Thanks to all the Folks that gave me Assistance in making this, he call's them Ignorant and Misinformed.
First thing that comes to my mind at least, somebody that supposedly KNOWS what their talking about and has the Gaul to make statements like he did, why would he ask so many questions when he already had all the answers??????????

The effort he tried to put into yes anybody could appreciate that, but if your going to insult people that tried to help you by giving the hyperlink out so everybody can see it, that's just low class and wrong. Insult people if your going to do it in private or in your own thoughts.

Lets see, I'm guessing I made a serious breach of etiquette, a royal faux pas by not bestowing honor upon your grace when posting on this forum of yours. I will rectify that immediately:

"All hail His Grace, BTJustice of the Houses Duckhunting and Chat, the First of his Name, King of the 12 bore, the Ponsness Warren, and the Spolar, Lord of all things reloading and Protector of the Realm."

Your Grace, please forgive me if I have slighted you in anyway for I acknowledge before this court that any credit for all my hard work belongs to you and you alone. I have edited my blog and removed all inflammatory statements, so that my Lord might not cast his eyes upon any disagreeable thing.

And now my Lord, since proper honor has been given, might we take this thread back to discussing reloading high-performance 20 gauge steel shot loads?

Actually , I believe it's "Nut of the 10 Gauge.".

 

goose, I would be interested in those loads and the gas seal info, what will actually fit --I've just got SAM1 and CSD20, no PT2092 yet. Probably via PM would be the way to do it heh I'm about to go out to the garage and move my PW375C 20 ga into my office so I can load up some of these 20ga loads for next patterning session. I'd MUCH rather load up a 7/8oz or so load with the wads I have than a 3/4oz load, which is all I have data for now.

HEY YOU GUYS--- STOP multi-quoting hey? I really don't want my posts showing up in a multi-quote argument, someone will get the mistaken impression I'm part of it.

 

Dave thank you for the in depth explanation and after more reading on how CIP and SAAMI conduct their pressure and proof testing I now understand how their different methods produce different results.

Goose I too would like to know more about the loads you are producing. I have PT2092 and CSD20 wads on hand and hope to get some SAM1 wads soon. What wrap materials are you using?

Guys, I would like to take this opportunity to apologize for a poor choice of words in my original post on this thread. After reading it several times on quotes I realize how offensive they may have sounded. I'll proof read everything I type from now on.

BT I'm sorry I didn't want to stir a hornets nests, I should have done more research before asking for information that I should have found on my own. Thanks for taking the time to answer my question.

 

hello,
You might want to check into that about the guys on other side of pond, and there guns lasting just as long.

I now of quite few guys over there that they destroy alot of guns way early then they should be thrown to side as junk. Because of there cip standards on high side for pressure being in the 15000psi range.

Anyways i suggest that you try out the low profile twenty gauge gas seals like i suggested and told ya about in pm's. For pt wads for sure makes for better load overall. The rsi wads are not meant for higher pressure they all either split out or fold over like you showed. That js built in safety feature for those wads for over saami pressure loads.

Also I have been loading full oz loads in twenty gauge with rsi,pt92,csd 20(with home made wraps above wads height,to keep.scoring of bbl in check ) with my mec 600 jr press. Along with rto finish also more so in the last year. I can say with the other powders i have acheived good speeds within saami specs.

Goose

The only CIP-related failures I've ever heard of across the pond were with older thin-walled fixed choke SxS. And the failures were bulged/split barrels at the choke. I have not found an instance of a pressure-related wear out or premature failure. If you have some examples of that happening with shotguns manufactured since CIP HP was put in place, please share them.

I don't think I would've been able to get an extreme spread of 31fps if the SAM1 wad was folding over in the bore (and it is hard to picture how that could happen anyways). Here are couple YouTube videos showing the very high velocity rush of hot gas emerging behind the wad, and in one you can see the wad deformed.

I did buy some PT20GS and I did ponder chopping the gas check off of the PT2092 to make the stack height work with the gas seal. But then I started doubting that the gas checks were failing in the bore and I started looking for something to reinforce the PT2092 base. I went with the little blue disc. I'm sure the gas seals will come in handy some day.

If get around to playing with a powder that doesn't take up as much space as 38gr of LilGun, it won't be such a pain to fit 1oz in either the Cheddite or Fiocchi hull.

I also broke down and ordered some Remington Hypersonic #3 1oz 1600fps fodder to throw at the patterning board. I want to see if I should give up handloading since I only shoot half a case a year anyways.

Thank you for your input.