Thanks to Joshua who sent me two Hevi 7's from the 300488 lot. I shot the 2010 load against the 2011 load out of my Supernova with a IC .665. I didn't break the 300 mark with last years shell like I had hoped. The weather was a touch cooler and I had a small cross wind....although I don't believe that the cross wind was strong enough to make a huge difference. After recovering each wad from each individual shot I did notice right away that the wad is totally different (not a shocker). The 2011(lot 300488) still put up 240 in the 10"....which I can get those numbers out of Xtended 6's in my 835. HOWEVER, I only managed to get 257 out of lot 300325 which was doing 300+ for me last year....go figure ??? ....I have one more shell from the 300488 lot to dissect...so we'll see what that reveals later.
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t197/drum817/Patterns/Picture305.jpg)
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t197/drum817/Patterns/Picture306.jpg)
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t197/drum817/Patterns/Picture307.jpg)
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t197/drum817/Patterns/Picture308.jpg)
good report, nothing to fuss over there.
Quote from: gatrkyhntr70 on March 29, 2011, 06:53:30 PM
good report, nothing to fuss over there.
The ONLY thing that puzzled me was...Last year I never shot under 300 with lot 300325 and this year from the same box it shot 257. I checked the temps and humidity from last year and here is the only difference.
Last year.... 70 degrees and 30% humidity
This year.... 59 degrees and 53% humidity
The 11 degree temp difference had a lot to do with that.
I see the was is diffrent in the two shells. I think I saw some say that HV-13 told them they had not changed the shell.
Quote from: drum817 on March 29, 2011, 06:58:45 PM
Quote from: gatrkyhntr70 on March 29, 2011, 06:53:30 PM
good report, nothing to fuss over there.
The ONLY thing that puzzled me was...Last year I never shot under 300 with lot 300325 and this year from the same box it shot 257. I checked the temps and humidity from last year and here is the only difference.
Last year.... 70 degrees and 30% humidity
This year.... 59 degrees and 53% humidity
Drum ,
What good patterns you hav ethere. Nice, very nice.
Quote from: Spuriosity on March 29, 2011, 07:51:27 PM
Tough to read the lot# in the hull and wad pix, but the wad in the lower pic sure did hold up better than the one in the upper pic. As a handloader, there is no way I would use the wad from the upper pic without a mylar wrap to prevent those pellets from scrubbing through. That wad is not up to the task.
The top pic is lot # 300488 from 2011
The bottom pic is lot # 300325 from 2010
I know without putting a mic on it you can't "really" know....but the wad from #300325 (bottom pic) does feel thicker to the touch.
You looking over part of wad you want to look at. It not how thick it is ;). Look at the OD of both. Look at the gas seal on both.
Sumtoy....I've got a pic on the way.
Quote from: drum817 on March 29, 2011, 06:58:45 PM
Quote from: gatrkyhntr70 on March 29, 2011, 06:53:30 PM
good report, nothing to fuss over there.
The ONLY thing that puzzled me was...Last year I never shot under 300 with lot 300325 and this year from the same box it shot 257. I checked the temps and humidity from last year and here is the only difference.
Last year.... 70 degrees and 30% humidity
This year.... 59 degrees and 53% humidity
My guess would be the humidity had a larger past in it, from my patterning its always seemed to be more of a negative effect.
Quote from: drum817 on March 29, 2011, 08:00:49 PM
Quote from: Spuriosity on March 29, 2011, 07:51:27 PM
Tough to read the lot# in the hull and wad pix, but the wad in the lower pic sure did hold up better than the one in the upper pic. As a handloader, there is no way I would use the wad from the upper pic without a mylar wrap to prevent those pellets from scrubbing through. That wad is not up to the task.
The top pic is lot # 300488 from 2011
The bottom pic is lot # 300325 from 2010
I know without putting a mic on it you can't "really" know....but the wad from #300325 (bottom pic) does feel thicker to the touch.
I agree Im looking at 2 wads from each of these lot #'s.
Sumtoy....here ya go...the wad on the left is the #300325(2010)
(http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t197/drum817/Picture310.jpg)
Looks like we will need to rework the choke for this. Now with that said we have had good numbers with the new shell. Now with that said I did see low numbers this year when we started to test. I looked at the temp as the problem. I did not have a old wad and had not played with them enuff to remember what the old wad looked like. So I started over with the chokes.
Now the softer wad will rip more as we get more into the warmer days.
Good deal Drum. When I shoot the 7s the wad is ripped around the edges something fierce. I would think the choke is causing it but who knows. The wad you have from last years lot looks just like the wads I have from the 6s I've been shooting both new and old.
Good information, thanks for working on this.
Quote from: slickyboyboo on March 29, 2011, 10:09:59 PM
Quote from: Spuriosity on March 29, 2011, 07:51:27 PM
Tough to read the lot# in the hull and wad pix, but the wad in the lower pic sure did hold up better than the one in the upper pic. As a handloader, there is no way I would use the wad from the upper pic without a mylar wrap to prevent those pellets from scrubbing through. That wad is not up to the task.
I noticed that myself. No way I would shoot one of those.
They are safe. The thing about it is the choke that you shoot. You will need to change the choke lay out to shoot the softer wad. That like the FCW it is very hard and the OD of it is .730. They make it softer and the OD smaller it would wake up. Think about this HV-13 have a choke out now. They try to get them to work together to sale shell and choke. I have saw the choke they sale and it will need some work also. So they go back to the drawing board now or back to old wad.
Quote from: JohnDoe on March 29, 2011, 10:17:36 PM
Now we need a response from Hevi as to why the changed wads and why they said they did not change components.
John
It was a pretty safe bet all along that EM had changed the wad...BUT, now we know for sure. They will probably NEVER have the "kahuna's" to admit they lied.... EM has done this kind of thing several times in the past ::) ....Hopefully I'll be handloading my own #7 load next year & will not have to bother with EM AGAIN !!
Quote from: SumToy on March 29, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
Looks like we will need to rework the choke for this. Now with that said we have had good numbers with the new shell. Now with that said I did see low numbers this year when we started to test. I looked at the temp as the problem. I did not have a old wad and had not played with them enuff to remember what the old wad looked like. So I started over with the chokes.
Now the softer wad will rip more as we get more into the warmer days.
sumtoy dont change your choke. sounds like you have a good thing going. EM changes their crap every year anyway.
Quote from: Gobble! on March 29, 2011, 10:39:03 PM
Quote from: SumToy on March 29, 2011, 08:39:30 PM
Looks like we will need to rework the choke for this. Now with that said we have had good numbers with the new shell. Now with that said I did see low numbers this year when we started to test. I looked at the temp as the problem. I did not have a old wad and had not played with them enuff to remember what the old wad looked like. So I started over with the chokes.
Now the softer wad will rip more as we get more into the warmer days.
sumtoy dont change your choke. sounds like you have a good thing going. EM changes their crap every year anyway.
:agreed: :agreed: :agreed: If you want to design a choke for a factory load, then look at the Winchester Xtended #6's....They are much better about leaving stuff alone.