Replicating old west shot shell loads

[9245]

I have noticed in seeing some outlaw death photos that old west era shot shells seamed very different than modern ones in terms of the pattern dispersion.  Modern shells attempt to keep all the shot together to give better range, resulting in a fist like pattern, but it seems like old west shells covered the whole torso, see the photo of Bill Doolin to see what I’m talking about.

 

I would like to replicate that in modern shells, am I correct in assuming that it would be as simple as using cast lead shot, and only an over powder wad, cushion wad, and an over shot card with no shot cup or buffer? What about crimp style?

 

What style hull would be authentic?  Brass, paper, or plastic?  Is it even possible to get paper hulls anymore?

[Kid Rich]

Depends on the distance of the shot and the tightness of the choke.

kR

[Warden Callaway]

6 hours ago, 9245 said:

What style hull would be authentic?  Brass, paper, or plastic?  Is it even possible to get paper hulls anymore?

 

 

Brass or paper.   Plastic hulls hadn't been in invented until about 1960.  

 

Federal still loads paper hulls. Some ranges require the use of paper.  

 

https://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/76594

 

Traditional load is a "square load"  same volume (not weight) of powder as shot. 

[Tequila Shooter]

As @Warden Callaway said a square load using black powder in a paper or brass hull.  A nitro card is needed over the powder, fiber wads to fill the case, shot, and an overshot card.  If using paper hulls then you roll crimp, if you’re using brass hulls then you glue the overshot card in.  Pattern will be effected by distance and barrel choke. 

[Prairie Dawg, SASS #50329]

Check out this webpage:

http://www.tbullock.com/bpsg.html

--Dawg

[Frybread Fred]

Remington has also recently started making paper shells again.  I ordered some direct from them a couple few months ago.  Have not had a chance to shoot any of them yet so can't say how they work, but would assume they are fine.

[Bailey Creek,5759]

After you put your Powder, wads, put shot on top of fiber wad. 

They didn't have shot cups back then.

I shoot Black Powder. Haven't used a shot cup for 25 years.

[Diamond Jake]

I load my BP shells with square load of 1 OZ Shot and the equivalent VOLUME of BP.  Nitro wad over powder, fiber cushion wad, and over shot wad in plastic hulls.  Roll crimp.  Sometimes I use star crimp with no overshot wad.

 

Patterning on paper doesn't look significantly different than similar distance in same gun with modern factory loads.  A bit less dense.  Choke on one gun is cylinder bore both barrels; other gun is Improved and Modified.

[9245]

5 hours ago, Diamond Jake said:

I load my BP shells with square load of 1 OZ Shot and the equivalent VOLUME of BP.  Nitro wad over powder, fiber cushion wad, and over shot wad in plastic hulls.  Roll crimp.  Sometimes I use star crimp with no overshot wad.

 

Patterning on paper doesn't look significantly different than similar distance in same gun with modern factory loads.  A bit less dense.  Choke on one gun is cylinder bore both barrels; other gun is Improved and Modified.

How many grains of powder would be the same volume as 1 oz of shot?  I would imagine that it would very by shot type right?

 

About what was the powder charge in period, on average?  I have heard 60, 80, and 100 mentioned a lot.  There is a chance I may be using some in an antique Damascus shotgun as well and I would rather not blow it up.

 

Or to put it another way, how much powder for 9 pellets of 00 Buck vs 1 oz of 7.5?  I would imagine volumetrically there would be some difference there, or would it be about the same?

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

It may just be me, but I would not be loading any full power buck shot loads for an antique Damascus barrel shotgun.

[Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428]

In general, when people talk about a square load, that means they use the same scoop for both the shot and the powder.   

[Diamond Jake]

2 hours ago, 9245 said:

How many grains of powder would be the same volume as 1 oz of shot?  I would imagine that it would very by shot type right?

 

 

A Square Load means you use the same size scoop for both powder and shot.  The larger the shot size, the more air space you have in that scoop.  The scoop that gives me roughly 1 oz of 7.5 shot is about 55 grains of BP, give or take.  BP doesn't allow for air space, so if you use a star crimp on the shell, you'll need to adjust the thickness of the cushion wad, depending on the amount of powder and shot, to allow a good crimp.  When roll crimping, I decide on a load, use one wad, and cut the hull to the length required for a good roll crimp.  SXS guns don't care about shell length, as long as it's not too long.

 

The left shell has 1 1/2 fiber cushion wads.  The one in the middle has one wad and a larger powder charge.  The one on the right has more shot but less powder and a thinner wad.  They all go bang and all shoot smoke.

[watab kid]

if you look at that body again i think you will note that the shot they were using was considerably larger than our target shot - but then i think the responses were intended to keep you within the regs of our game and that larger shot would not be acceptable , ive not shot buck shot so i dont know what that patterns like let alone what it patterns like from a cylinder bore coach/trench-riot gun , perhaps someone that has and does could add to this post , 

 

i believe there was a good reason not to want to be on the receiving end of the round , 

[Warden Callaway]

This guy's making "square loads".  

 

 

 

[irish ike, SASS #43615]

My personal experience is that the lack of a shot cup in brass shells is a big determination of pattern. I shoot both brass and plastic. Same load but no cup. The brass always spreads out much faster than my plastic loads.

[Gunner, SASS #1940]

Brass shotshells can take a gentle roll crimp to hold on the overshot card, with the right tools....

["Big Boston"]

Doolan was shot and killed in 1896, and as smokeless shells would have been relatively new, I think one can safely assume that they were loaded with black powder. 

 

One account states: "When the posse finally caught up with him at Lawson, Oklahoma, Doolin apparently decided he was not going to be captured alive. Badly outnumbered, Doolin drew his gun. A rain of shotgun and rifle fire instantly killed him. He was 38 years old. Doolin was buried in Guthrie, Oklahoma." Being as rifles were used as well as shotguns, the distance was probably beyond 20 yards

 

The standard of the day was 00 buck, and I did manage to find some data: "12 gauge, 2-1/2 inch length shell with 3 drams of " Swiss " 2F black powder and 9 pellets of OO ought buckshot using fiber cards and wad (no modern plastic shot cups).  10 gauge, 2-7/8 inch length shell with 4-1/4 drams of "Swiss" 2F black powder and 12 pellets of OO ought buckshot using fiber cards and wad (no modern plastic shot cups)."

 

To be authentic, the load would have to be in a paper or all brass shell. In a paper hull the crimp would have been of a rolled crimp. In a brass hull, the over shot wad would have been crimped, and may have been glued as well. 

 

Sources: http://thetombstoneclub.com/randylish/shotgun/ and https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/outlaw-bill-doolin-is-killed

 

Sounds like a fun project. 

 

BB

 

 

 

 

 

[Rip Snorter]

Sometimes the old cast iron roll crimpers come up FS online.  Tempting!

[9245]

On 2/22/2022 at 9:14 PM, watab kid said:

if you look at that body again i think you will note that the shot they were using was considerably larger than our target shot - but then i think the responses were intended to keep you within the regs of our game and that larger shot would not be acceptable , ive not shot buck shot so i dont know what that patterns like let alone what it patterns like from a cylinder bore coach/trench-riot gun , perhaps someone that has and does could add to this post , 

 

i believe there was a good reason not to want to be on the receiving end of the round , 

The question was mostly academic, I’m aware buckshot is not allowed in competition, but I would imagine that period birdshot would have a similar construction.  It just seemed a notable difference between that and modern shells.  Also, if one were to use a shotgun defensively, a pattern like that would be advantageous over a modern one, I would much rather have a wide pattern at short range over the badguy to maximize hit potential/spread out the damage to multiple organs than keep a tight pattern designed for deer 100 yards away.  Not that a shotgun would be my first choice, but I like the idea that I could press it in to service if I had to.

 

It just seems modern shells have gone in the wrong direction, if you want long range use a slug, or better yet a rifle, buckshot was designed for short range, it’s kind of a shotgun’s “thing” if not why have one?  Just my thought process.

[Cusz M. Dutch SASS Life 55326]

A plastic shotcup will tighten your pattern up almost one degree with BP vs. a fiber wad. 

I think the key on the photo as already allude to, he may have been hit by multiple shot guns and different angles.  Without an actual report, it would be hard to tell.  

[El CupAJoe]

17 hours ago, 9245 said:

The question was mostly academic, I’m aware buckshot is not allowed in competition, but I would imagine that period birdshot would have a similar construction.  It just seemed a notable difference between that and modern shells.  Also, if one were to use a shotgun defensively, a pattern like that would be advantageous over a modern one, I would much rather have a wide pattern at short range over the badguy to maximize hit potential/spread out the damage to multiple organs than keep a tight pattern designed for deer 100 yards away.  Not that a shotgun would be my first choice, but I like the idea that I could press it in to service if I had to.

 

It just seems modern shells have gone in the wrong direction, if you want long range use a slug, or better yet a rifle, buckshot was designed for short range, it’s kind of a shotgun’s “thing” if not why have one?  Just my thought process.

as an academic, who doesn't have enough experience to back up what I'm about to say, I think the following things may or may not make a difference.  1st, as others have said, using a load that doesn't have a plastic shot cup should increase the pattern size, second, use soft buckshot, it will deform more and spread out faster, 3rd, use a powder heavy load, in black powder terms, use a larger volume of BP than shot, the increase in velocity should increase the deformation of the shot resulting in a wider pattern, 4th use a smaller buckshot size, #4 instead of 00 etc, the lighter projectiles will more easily be pushed around by wind causing a greater dispersion when they are deformed by firing.  additionally, an over powder wad failure could blow your pattern out even more, but that is highly undesirable for other reasons.

 

Modern buckshot loads are driven by PD lawyers who are concerned with pellets missing and hitting something unintended.  A tight pattern ensures all pellets stay on target even if your aim is not perfect and a large quantity of BS hitting in close proximity is highly effective at stopping threats and at close range, potentially more effective than a slug that is likely to pass through with extra lethal energy to spare.  look up the Lucky Gunner Buckshot videos for an explanation on the SD use of buckshot.  For hunting running coyotes, the faster spreading BS is probably more desirable.  

[Tequila Shooter]

Don’t forget if you go with a plastic wad with BP you’re going to have the “snake” in the barrel(s).  Fiber wad clean up with hot soapy water, plastic wad (what works for me) Windex with vinegar to get the snake out. 

[El CupAJoe]

One more thing to add, use a 3F instead of a 2F to additionally increase shot deformation perhaps...

[Driftwood Johnson, SASS #38283]

Howdy

 

Here are the components for my Black Powder shotgun shells.

 

No, I am not going to bother with paper hulls, I use 12 gauge Remington STS hulls because they have the slickest plastic and eject the most easily from my SXS shotgun. Winchester 209 primers (it really does not matter what primer, I usually have Winchesters on hand), 4.3CC of Schuetzen FFg (approximately 68 grains), Circle Fly 1/8" Over Powder Card, Circle Fly 1/2" Fiber Compression Wad, 1 1/8 ounces of #8 Shot, and 1/16" over shot card. This is 'less than' a square load, meaning there is not enough powder to ruin the pattern.

 

 

 

 

 

I load them on my old MEC Jr single stage shotgun press. I do not put the powder in a plastic bottle, I dip it separately into each hull

 

 

 

 

 

I can load about three, maybe four boxes in an hour. Yes, it is a lot more work than using modern plastic shot cups, but I don't have any melted plastic to clean out of the barrels when I am done shooting.

 

I shoot Trap every week with my Winchester Model 12 pump and modern shells, so I am a fairly good shotgunner. Been getting worse as I get older. A bunch of years ago I took my old Stevens hammer gun to the trap range just to see if I could hit anything with my Black Powder shells. Everybody came out of the trap building to see what all the noise was, but I think with its two cylinder bores I was only able to hit a couple of targets. I only fired about 5 shells as I remember.

 

 

 

 

 

I have never patterned these loads, but at typical CAS distances they usually pattern about the size of a dinner plate on CAS shotgun targets. I have loaded shells with spreader wads in the past for fliers. These are stuffed into the top of the shot charge and open up the pattern a bit. I don't bother with spreader loads any more, I just follow the flier up, wait until it stops moving, and fire below it. The target usually falls into my pattern.

[Garrison Joe, SASS #60708]

On 2/23/2022 at 9:01 PM, 9245 said:

 seems modern shells have gone in the wrong direction......Just my thought process.

 

AND just exceptionally wrong, compared to what the shotgun industry has learned from hundreds of years of evolution and improvements. 

 

No gun is useful if it can't hit the target with enough power to take it down/knock it over/break it, etc.   Shotgun works exactly like other guns in that regard.  Intentionally spreading pattern of shot OR buckshot just makes it LESS useful for most situations.    A wide spread pattern means you are counting on random luck to hit target well.   A tight pattern means if you get the gun on the target, you will put hits on the target.  The shooter is now in control of success.    One exception to that would be shooting birds/game at close range and wanting to avoid excessive meat damage.  For that, the industry makes spreader loads.

 

Shotguns are generally used when you have moving targets.  A moderate pattern spread means you can have your lead (timing) slightly off and still get enough of the pattern on the target to be effective.   But the consistent demand among shotgun shooters is to allow the use of the shotgun at longer range.   Thus the need for tighter patterns.

 

So the evolution of shotguns and ammo design has been to produce tighter and more consistent patterns.   Which follows from the great decrease in game and hunting success per shot from the 19th century through current times.   Waterfowl used to be shot at 25 yards.   Now it's common for many hunters to make 60 yards shots if they want to be successful.   Turkey much the same.  Deer with buckshot - when deer used to be hunted in 1900, 25 yard running shots were common.  Now it's 75 yard running shots. 

 

Our current situation with tighter patterns and shooting at longer ranges means you need more skill at estimating range and target speed and direction to be able to get the correct lead.  Just part of the reality of  hunting and target shooting.  

 

Bottom line for defensive situations - if you can't hit a target at 5 yards with your shotgun (pattern within 4 of inches of where you aimed), it won't matter HOW wide your pattern is.   You can't count on one buckshot pellet on target being effective in a defensive situation.  You need to have 10 of the 12 or 6 of the 9 pellets you launched to hit critical parts of the target.  Tight patterns give you the ability to do that.   Loose patterns really do not help you.  And in defensive situations, you rarely will get the luxury of choosing how far away you will need to engage your target.  So, being ready for the most difficult shot is more important than being ready for the easiest shot.

 

good luck, GJ  

[9245]

On 2/25/2022 at 11:35 AM, Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 said:

 

AND just exceptionally wrong, compared to what the shotgun industry has learned from hundreds of years of evolution and improvements. 

 

No gun is useful if it can't hit the target with enough power to take it down/knock it over/break it, etc.   Shotgun works exactly like other guns in that regard.  Intentionally spreading pattern of shot OR buckshot just makes it LESS useful for most situations.    A wide spread pattern means you are counting on random luck to hit target well.   A tight pattern means if you get the gun on the target, you will put hits on the target.  The shooter is now in control of success.    One exception to that would be shooting birds/game at close range and wanting to avoid excessive meat damage.  For that, the industry makes spreader loads.

 

Shotguns are generally used when you have moving targets.  A moderate pattern spread means you can have your lead (timing) slightly off and still get enough of the pattern on the target to be effective.   But the consistent demand among shotgun shooters is to allow the use of the shotgun at longer range.   Thus the need for tighter patterns.

 

So the evolution of shotguns and ammo design has been to produce tighter and more consistent patterns.   Which follows from the great decrease in game and hunting success per shot from the 19th century through current times.   Waterfowl used to be shot at 25 yards.   Now it's common for many hunters to make 60 yards shots if they want to be successful.   Turkey much the same.  Deer with buckshot - when deer used to be hunted in 1900, 25 yard running shots were common.  Now it's 75 yard running shots. 

 

Our current situation with tighter patterns and shooting at longer ranges means you need more skill at estimating range and target speed and direction to be able to get the correct lead.  Just part of the reality of  hunting and target shooting.  

 

Bottom line for defensive situations - if you can't hit a target at 5 yards with your shotgun (pattern within 4 of inches of where you aimed), it won't matter HOW wide your pattern is.   You can't count on one buckshot pellet on target being effective in a defensive situation.  You need to have 10 of the 12 or 6 of the 9 pellets you launched to hit critical parts of the target.  Tight patterns give you the ability to do that.   Loose patterns really do not help you.  And in defensive situations, you rarely will get the luxury of choosing how far away you will need to engage your target.  So, being ready for the most difficult shot is more important than being ready for the easiest shot.

 

good luck, GJ  

That’s the thing though, if you want a tight pattern at long range maybe shot isn’t what you should be using, unless the target is arial a slug would be the way to go, but if you are using a slug gun why not just use a rifle, then you can hit the target from hundreds of yards away if you want to.  It just seems counter productive, a shotgun is a shotgun, a rifle is a rifle, don’t try to get a shotgun to act like a rifle, get a rifle if that’s what you want.  To my thinking a shotgun excels at CLOSE range, it is not meant for long range work.

 

My thinking for a broad pattern for defensive use is what if you are just off of a vital structure?  With a tight pattern designed for deer at 100 yards I might conceivably miss the bad guys heart by just a couple inches and he lives to fight on, sure he has a punctured lung and a sucking chest wound, but he could conceivably still fight, but with a broad pattern a shot placed at the exact same place will place pellets in the lung, but also the heart, and maybe hit the other lung and the spine too, it corrects for less than perfect aim and increases hit probability against vital structures, it spreads out the damage and hits multiple things at once.  What good does it do to put all 9 pellets through the same hole in the same lung?  At that range I may as well not use buckshot at all and just use a slug because the pattern at that range with modern hunting shells will just be too tight to matter, but if I’m using a slug why not just use a rifle and get 30 shots, an easier reload, low recoil, and a handier package instead of a heavy, hard recoiling, cumbersome, awkward reloading, 8 shot (at best) shotgun?  A single projectile is a single projectile, plus 5.56 will go through 3a armor, and level 3 plates at close range, a slug will not, plus should I need to I could still hit at 500+ yards away.  The shotgun’s defensive saving grace is spread, without that why bother?  That’s my thinking with buckshot, I’m not concerned with making a shotgun act like a rifle and trying to get hits beyond traditional shotgun range, if I’m using buckshot it is against a 2 legged target at across the room or down the hall distances, not a 4 legged one 100 yards away, so I don’t require a 100 yard pattern, I require a 21 foot pattern.

[Garrison Joe, SASS #60708]

Wrong forum to debate this.  Here, we use shotguns to knock down 40 pound steel.  

 

good luck with your quest to change the firearms industry,  GJ

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

All I will say is that I use brass shells, loaded with smokeless, no shot cup, and my preferred gun has a 30" full choke barrel.

I hardly ever miss. 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

PLUS ONE for Garrison Joe.

 

For the stated purpose of the exercise, THIS is exactly the WRONG forum.  Then becoming argumentative because you're not getting the answer you wanted is sometimes called TROLLING.  If your intent is just to TROLL, why not try Ann Landers.  Mostly, we don't hunt people here.

 

Oh, and historically, shotguns were for putting food on the table.  Buckshot, in that time period was no more common than today.

[9245]

On 3/1/2022 at 2:03 PM, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

PLUS ONE for Garrison Joe.

 

For the stated purpose of the exercise, THIS is exactly the WRONG forum.  Then becoming argumentative because you're not getting the answer you wanted is sometimes called TROLLING.  If your intent is just to TROLL, why not try Ann Landers.  Mostly, we don't hunt people here.

 

Oh, and historically, shotguns were for putting food on the table.  Buckshot, in that time period was no more common than today.

No, I’m not, I’m just directly responding to people and explaining my thoughts on this.

 

Also, with respect, these competitions are not built around hunting scenarios are they?  They are built around Westerns/period gun fighting, not simulating bird hunting, that sport is called trap and skeet.  So I think discussing what DEFENSIVE loads might have been used in the 19th century is relevant.  Granted buck is not what is used in competition but as I have said I should imagine the shell construction was likely similar and this is mostly academic anyway.  On the separate practical side I’ve also stated that such wide dispersion shells might be just as useful in modern defense, and another poster also mentioned possibly in predator hunting.

 

I believe I have gotten my answer though; use soft lead shot, no shot cup, just nitro card, fiber wadding, and cardboard overshot card, and a slightly heavier than square powder load using 3F instead of 2F in a paper or brass shell (I lean brass) using either glue or a roll crimp or both.

[Jabez Cowboy,SASS # 50129]

I use 4.3 CC of Goex 3F ( by weight it averages 66 gr. ) and the same 4.3 CC of Shot ( which Weighs 1 3/16 oz. )

With a wad column to fill the Case in question. 

It takes Down any target hit.

In Sweet 16 I Use  3.4 CCs. of Goex 3F under 1 oz of Shot ....

20ga I use 2.9 CC of Goex 3F under 7/8 oz of Shot ...

 

Jabez Cowboy