megasupermagnum
45 Cal.
The weather was nicer than was forecasted, and I got to shoot as I pleased. My last outing had my chrony giving me fits. A new 9V battery, cleaning of the sensors, and a nice cloudy day all made up to a day with little frustration. Personally I think the cloudy day did the most, as last time was clear blue skies and very sunny. There was a little BP gunk on the sensors, but not that much.
Last time I compared powder grades, which showed that the same brand of powder, with different grades shows higher velocity the finer the grade. After that I noticed that Goex now makes Olde Eynsford in Fg, so I bought a case for a very reasonable price from Powder Inc for anyone looking. I don't know what they have for caps. Speaking of which, my last test, as well as this one was all fired with CCI #11 magnum caps. At this point I have Goex red Fg, Goex OE Fg, and Swiss Fg, however, they were all purchased at different times. The Swiss has a date of 2017 on it. I believe I bought the Goex red in 2018 or 2019. This Goex OE is new this month. It should come as no surprise that different lots of the exact same powder will produce different results. I again used my 10 gauge SXS for this test, with a standard equal volume load of 100 gr (volume) powder, and 100 gr (volume) of Lawrence #5 shot. Wadding was my .050" card wads, three over the powder, and one over the shot. The results are below.
Goex red can Fg : 879 fps
Goex Olde E Fg : 950 fps
Swiss Fg : 1180 fps
The first thing you will notice is that the same load with Goex red Fg was only 16 fps faster than last time. I consider that a consistent result from last time, indicating everything is working. I only took 4 shots for each this time to save powder and lead. Olde Eynsford was a little faster, although it appears very similar to red can powder. As far as I know, Goex uses the same wood for both powders, so I can only assume the quality of OE results in the increase. Swiss powder on the other hand looked nothing like the Goex's. Swiss Fg looks similar in size to Goex FFg, maybe even finer. This finer grade resulted in a significantly higher velocity, however, past testing has found inferior patterns to Goex Fg. It is worth noting that this Swiss Fg does pattern on par with Goex FFg, yet provides about 200 more fps. It was even faster than Goex FFFg, which produces horrible patterns in my gun. Moral of the story; Fg is not Fg is not Fg. Every powder is unique.
I also tested my turkey load, which was 100gr (volume) Goex red Fg, four card wads, 120 gr (volume) shot, one card wad over the shot. This produced 884 fps, pretty much the same as the 100/100 load. I don't know what this means, but it is interesting.
Now the big test was the wad testing. Instead of the 10 gauge, I went with my 12 gauge. This allowed me to test a common plastic wad. I only took 3 shots with each of these to save time and ammunition, so keep that in mind on results that are similar in speed. Every single wad was tested with the same exact load. 100gr (volume) of Goex FFg, 100gr (volume) Lawrence #5 shot, and a store bought 12 gauge overshot card. The only variable is the over powder wadding.
.050" thick paper card wad
1 card : 898 fps
2 card : 940 fps
3 card : 1110 fps
4 card : 1118 fps
6 card : 1130 fps
1/8" thick hard felt
2 wads : 893 fps
4 wads : 1044 fps
Cow leather
2 wads : 1091 fps
3 wads : 1090 fps
Federal 12S4 plastic wad : 1001 fps
Toilet paper 2 squares : 710 fps
1/8" 12ga nitro card (store bought)
1 card : 1090 fps
2 card : 1124 fps
I wouldn't say I'm all that surprised by any of the results here. I am impressed by leather, which I only had enough to try 2 and 3 layers. It loads easy, and I'm most impressed that only 2 layers gave as high a velocity as it did. If I had more, I would have tested 1 layer just to see what happened. I put the smooth side down in both tests. The only problem I see with leather, is I don't trust it to fit tight enough to serve as an overshot wad. This would require you to carry two different wads to use them, which is not the end of the world. You could also try punching them from a larger size. I used 3/4" for all my wads. I was a bit surprised by the plastic wad. That is not a typo, I actually shot that one 6 times to make sure. It is true, the 12S4 plastic wad was one of the slowest wads. I have no explanation on why. Powder fouling was not better or worse than anything else, and I experienced no plastic fouling. Toilet paper was more of a gag than anything, and no surprise it is not a good wad at all. I don't remember the brand, it is multilayered. I just took two squares and balled them up. Fouling was horrible, worse by far than any other wad. Velocity was very slow. The scary part is that it shoots out a bunch of smoldering confetti. It had just snowed here, but on a dry day I would seriously be concerned about shooting this in grass.
I really like how consistent the paper card wads were. They are .050 thick, so three of them makes .150" thick, and produces most of the velocity you will get from any wad. A nitro card is made of nearly the same material, except glued into an 1/8" (.125") thick puck. One nitro card produced velocity right between two and three .050" card wads. Two nitro cards, .250" thick produced nearly identical velocity to six card wads, .300" thick. Seeing this reassures my previous recommendation of a minimum of 1/8" of card wads, either one nitro card or three card wads, or whatever combination of whatever thickness card you have. V. M Starr recommended two of his "3/32" thick poster board", which is about .188" thick. I'm guessing somebody many decades ago already figured this out, which is why a nitro card is as thick as it is. Do not skimp. I sometimes see where somebody only uses a couple overshot cards as over powder wads. You are leaving a lot of speed, and likely pattern on the table by doing such a thing.
Last time I compared powder grades, which showed that the same brand of powder, with different grades shows higher velocity the finer the grade. After that I noticed that Goex now makes Olde Eynsford in Fg, so I bought a case for a very reasonable price from Powder Inc for anyone looking. I don't know what they have for caps. Speaking of which, my last test, as well as this one was all fired with CCI #11 magnum caps. At this point I have Goex red Fg, Goex OE Fg, and Swiss Fg, however, they were all purchased at different times. The Swiss has a date of 2017 on it. I believe I bought the Goex red in 2018 or 2019. This Goex OE is new this month. It should come as no surprise that different lots of the exact same powder will produce different results. I again used my 10 gauge SXS for this test, with a standard equal volume load of 100 gr (volume) powder, and 100 gr (volume) of Lawrence #5 shot. Wadding was my .050" card wads, three over the powder, and one over the shot. The results are below.
Goex red can Fg : 879 fps
Goex Olde E Fg : 950 fps
Swiss Fg : 1180 fps
The first thing you will notice is that the same load with Goex red Fg was only 16 fps faster than last time. I consider that a consistent result from last time, indicating everything is working. I only took 4 shots for each this time to save powder and lead. Olde Eynsford was a little faster, although it appears very similar to red can powder. As far as I know, Goex uses the same wood for both powders, so I can only assume the quality of OE results in the increase. Swiss powder on the other hand looked nothing like the Goex's. Swiss Fg looks similar in size to Goex FFg, maybe even finer. This finer grade resulted in a significantly higher velocity, however, past testing has found inferior patterns to Goex Fg. It is worth noting that this Swiss Fg does pattern on par with Goex FFg, yet provides about 200 more fps. It was even faster than Goex FFFg, which produces horrible patterns in my gun. Moral of the story; Fg is not Fg is not Fg. Every powder is unique.
I also tested my turkey load, which was 100gr (volume) Goex red Fg, four card wads, 120 gr (volume) shot, one card wad over the shot. This produced 884 fps, pretty much the same as the 100/100 load. I don't know what this means, but it is interesting.
Now the big test was the wad testing. Instead of the 10 gauge, I went with my 12 gauge. This allowed me to test a common plastic wad. I only took 3 shots with each of these to save time and ammunition, so keep that in mind on results that are similar in speed. Every single wad was tested with the same exact load. 100gr (volume) of Goex FFg, 100gr (volume) Lawrence #5 shot, and a store bought 12 gauge overshot card. The only variable is the over powder wadding.
.050" thick paper card wad
1 card : 898 fps
2 card : 940 fps
3 card : 1110 fps
4 card : 1118 fps
6 card : 1130 fps
1/8" thick hard felt
2 wads : 893 fps
4 wads : 1044 fps
Cow leather
2 wads : 1091 fps
3 wads : 1090 fps
Federal 12S4 plastic wad : 1001 fps
Toilet paper 2 squares : 710 fps
1/8" 12ga nitro card (store bought)
1 card : 1090 fps
2 card : 1124 fps
I wouldn't say I'm all that surprised by any of the results here. I am impressed by leather, which I only had enough to try 2 and 3 layers. It loads easy, and I'm most impressed that only 2 layers gave as high a velocity as it did. If I had more, I would have tested 1 layer just to see what happened. I put the smooth side down in both tests. The only problem I see with leather, is I don't trust it to fit tight enough to serve as an overshot wad. This would require you to carry two different wads to use them, which is not the end of the world. You could also try punching them from a larger size. I used 3/4" for all my wads. I was a bit surprised by the plastic wad. That is not a typo, I actually shot that one 6 times to make sure. It is true, the 12S4 plastic wad was one of the slowest wads. I have no explanation on why. Powder fouling was not better or worse than anything else, and I experienced no plastic fouling. Toilet paper was more of a gag than anything, and no surprise it is not a good wad at all. I don't remember the brand, it is multilayered. I just took two squares and balled them up. Fouling was horrible, worse by far than any other wad. Velocity was very slow. The scary part is that it shoots out a bunch of smoldering confetti. It had just snowed here, but on a dry day I would seriously be concerned about shooting this in grass.
I really like how consistent the paper card wads were. They are .050 thick, so three of them makes .150" thick, and produces most of the velocity you will get from any wad. A nitro card is made of nearly the same material, except glued into an 1/8" (.125") thick puck. One nitro card produced velocity right between two and three .050" card wads. Two nitro cards, .250" thick produced nearly identical velocity to six card wads, .300" thick. Seeing this reassures my previous recommendation of a minimum of 1/8" of card wads, either one nitro card or three card wads, or whatever combination of whatever thickness card you have. V. M Starr recommended two of his "3/32" thick poster board", which is about .188" thick. I'm guessing somebody many decades ago already figured this out, which is why a nitro card is as thick as it is. Do not skimp. I sometimes see where somebody only uses a couple overshot cards as over powder wads. You are leaving a lot of speed, and likely pattern on the table by doing such a thing.
