dahermit said:
In the Sixties, I loaded some shot loads for my .44 Magnum using a gas check over the powder, shot over that and an inverted gas check to keep the shot in. I also used shot capsules that were sold for the same purpose. However, I never got any satisfactory results as I remember...extremely poor patterns even near point-blank. I subsequently abandoned the practice, deeming it impractical for any purpose which I could conceive. Conventional wisdom of that era was that the rifling disrupted the shot to the point where a useful pattern could be achieved. It begs the question: Does making shot loads for a .44 magnum result in any practical use like shooting a grouse off a tree limb? Or are the patterns so bad that it is not likely to work? It is one thing to make "cool" shot loads (oh boy!) , but do they actually work?
In my experience, gas checks were one of the major causes of the exceptional failure that you experienced. I've tried them, as well. They REALLY upset the pattern and cause even more unpredictability. Whether the problem is due to increased pressure, the gas checks compressing the shot charge, and/or the gas checks 'flipping' in the chamber, throat, or barrel.... I don't know.
But, I do know that gas checks rarely hit a target at just 5-7 feet, even if the shot charge patterns well on that target. They don't whistle. They don't hum. They don't give any indication of where they've gone. ...But they seem to vanish. They rarely show any evidence of even having been part of the load. (Out of probably 20-30 that I've fired, I think I only ever recovered ONE. And it was in the snow, about two feet shy of a target at just 10 feet.)
A softer over-powder wad really improves performance. Even better, is using a nitro card over the powder, and then a cushion wad (or two).
Unless you use a "Hot-Shots" type barrel with extremely shallow rifling, the rifling in the barrel will always be detrimental to accuracy and patterning. It can't be avoided.
However, with some fine-tuning, the loads can be quite useful. Mine were intended for, and have proven themselves at, bagging Forest Grouse during deer and elk season(s).
My use of the extended/necked shells, is because I have to cram 1/2 ounce of #4 to #8 shot in there to be legal (grouse can only be taken with a "shotgun" in Utah, so the centerfire rifle used for deer/elk is a no-go). If I didn't have that requirement, I'd just use shot capsules. And in Idaho, I just use whatever is in my hands (no shotgun requirement).
I have taken multiple birds with my .44 Shot loads, as well as multiple birds with my .444-410 loads (.444 Marlin loaded with .410-equivalent loads, and even using a .410 plastic wad).
By anticipating how large the "donut" of shot will be at the target distance, I have been able to make them all head shots, as well. Of the birds bagged with my "specialty" shot loads, only one ended up with a couple pellets in the breast.
If you take the time to try to fine-tune the load a bit, and then stay within the limitations of that load, the shot shells can be quite useful.
Pogybait said:
Are you using hot pink or hooker red nail polish? Just a little humor, you understand.
Nah. I started with 'hunter orange', but ran out a few years ago. Then came the pink, green, and red.
But, in all seriousness...
Most of the pink, red, and purple colors have some type of abrasive in them to make them "shimmer", "shine", or "sparkle." So, I have to read the labels carefully, if I'm looking for some girly colors. I don't want crushed granite or glass in my cylinder and barrel.
Right now, it looks like I'm using blue with ground mylar (different bottle, but probably the same brand as the previous photo). And there's a red dot to signify that this was a different load than the plain blue that preceded it in the same box. --There's load data and performance notes dating to 2009 on the box, so each load has been marked a little differently. ....But there's nothing in my notes about why the shell in the center is more compressed and has a huge glob of red...
