I very well could be wrong, but based on my previous experience with Federal turkey loads the cause for the poor TSS performance I experienced could be as simple as Federal simply doesn't produce as good of turkey ammunition as they do rifle. And based on my witnessing my friends rifles shooting Federal rifle ammo IMO no one makes better mass produced rifle ammo than Federal, as good? yes but not better.
I really got the turkey hunting bug bad in the late 80's and by 1991-92 was are still are a full on turkey hunting addict. I forget what hunting magazine I read this in, most likely was Turkey & Turkey Hunting but might have been another hunting magazine about the importance of taking apart, inspecting and evaluating your turkey shells of choice. It listed the specifications that you should inspect for. To do all my patterning tests I used a 12ga 3" Remington Express with both a 21" Rem-choke factory barrel and two different Remington factory XF turkey chokes, and a 24" 870 12ga 3" Hasting's AM turkey barrel with straight rifling and a Hasting's XF turkey choke. I did all patterning at 40 yards using 40"x40" sheets of cardboard I got from work.
I went out and bought one box each of 12ga 3" of Winchester Supreme XX Turkey shells, Federal, Remington, and Active turkey shells. During the same time frame I did at one point try Turkey shells made by Hornady but I do not remember doing all these tests only patterning them and they didn't pattern as well as the Winchesters so I never used them to hunt with.
If memory serves me these are the tests and evaluations I performed and I'm sure I'm forgetting one or two:
>Inspect all shell's crimp for tightness, quality and overall consistency note any imperfections or if the shell allowed any shot or buffering to leak out or if I using minimal pressure could get the crimp to fail.
>One at a time, take apart a minimum of 5 shells from each ammo manufacturer & record all the fallowing data:
>Count each pellet for a total number of pellets get an average for the 5 shells note in %'s any variances in pellet numbers from shell to shell
>Inspect pellets for uniformity of roundness record # of misshaped and or malformed pellets I found record how many found and what % they represented of the total # of pellets of each individual shell
>Inspect buffering compound (if any was used) for condition and as I pored out the shot noting if buffering had settled away from the shoot leaving any shot un-buffered
>This next step wasn't recommended and I thought it up and did on my own: As I was (and still are), a diehard reloader by then and owned a RCBS 1010 BB scale I separated all of the buffering compound from the shot and weighed both the buffering compound and shot and record those two number to be used to note if any, the inconsistencies in the amount/weight of buffering compound or shot used in the shells.
Unfortunately I long ago lost all the date from that experiment, but I do recall some of what I found.
I did the Federal shells first
First thing I found with the Federal turkey shells that shocked and astonished me was the Federal shells had by a significant margin the largest number/percentage of malformed out of round and misshaped pellets of all the five ammunition manufactures I tested. What I do distinctly recall was how many of the pellets were of a tear drop in shape and missing most if not all their copper plating on the tail of the tear drop. Also the Federals had the second worse percentage of inconsistent pellet numbers and accordingly second most inconsistent weight in pellets. I distinctly remember finding numerous what can only be described as "shot clusters" or 3-5 pellets stuck together in clumps or clusters. I also noticed the buffering compound had settled away from the pellets to a slight degree in 2 of the five shells inspected but I couldn't determine if it was a factor as none of the the Federal shells fired ever produced an acceptable pattern.
The Federal turkey shells patterned second worse right behind the Actives and I wouldn't ever hunt with them.
I did the Active shells next.
The Active shells were at that time IIRC the only 12ga 3" shells that advertised 2oz (might have even been 2.25oz but I just don't remember) of shot and I found out how they accomplished this as they had no buffering compound and were a close second to the Federals in the amount of deformed pellets. The Actives were made using plane lead and not copper plated shot.
It was no surprise the Actives produced the worst and most and inconsistent patterns and could not be used IMO to make shots past 40 yards and even 40 was stretching it also like the Federals, I wouldn't hunt with the Actives. Actives also had shot clusters like the Federal's but not as many.
Remington's were 3rd
Overall the Remington shells were 90%+ as good in all respects as the Winchesters and patterned almost as good as the Winchesters but the Winchesters were just that much better at 40 yards out of MY guns I chose to hunt with them for obvious reasons. Having said that in the advent I couldn't get Winchester shells I would have hunted with the Remingtons, and unlike the Federals and Actives IMHO due to their high quality and consistency had the potential to shoot very well out of a different gun and or choke combination.
I did the Winchesters last. The Winchesters were undoubtedly the best in all best in all aspects. Had the highest percentages of well formed pellets, VERY few deformed pellets most consistent weight and number of pellets, most consistent weight of buffering compound, found no shells where the buffering compound had settled away from the shot and no surprise produced the best and most consistent 40 yard patterns.
Once I determined the Winchester shells were best I tested them and their closest runner up the Remington's at 45 and 50 yards and even though the Remington's did well and produced acceptable patterns, the Winchester Supremes' were always just that much better.
I hunted with the 12ga 3" 1.75oz #5 shot Winchester Supremes for years even after I bought my 12ga 3.5" 870 ESM and still used the same Winchester copper plated turkey shells but in 3.5" 2oz #5 shot version with great results. Then Winchester came out with ( I hope I'm describing them correctly) their polymer coated tungsten heavier than lead shells and tried them. All I can say is these new 12ga 3.5" 2oz of #5 shot HTL Winchester shells were the best patterning and performing turkey shells I ever shot. And yes I did take several apart and do the same tests and evaluations as described above and again these HTL Winchester shells proved to be just as well put together as their standard copper plated lead Supreme turkey shells.
I found out to late to buy any more that Winchester had discontinued production of their HTL turkey shells after they came out with WLBXR shells because if I had known I would've bought at least three cases of them for my sons and I to use I liked then so much. And I still like them better than my current favorite WLBXR shells.
So the only conclusion I can come up with based more on experience and not mostly guessing as to why Federal TSS performs not as well VS other TSS shells from companied like Apex, Foxtrot or Hevi-18 etc is they just aren't using the correct components in their turkey shells.
Yes I've done a lot more testing than most turkey hunters and I've shot over 100 WLBXR shells in patter testing but that all combined most certainly an expert doesn't make me to any measurable degree. But it does prove what works best from my now three dedicated turkey guns, one 870's one Benneli SN and one 835 and that shell is the WLBXR and not Federal TSS which shot unacceptably poor patterns from all three guns and the WLBXR shot significantly better than TSS.
If I ever choose to again give TSS a try it just wont be Federal TSS. I've seen videos dozens of videos where Federal TSS lives up to all the hype so I know Federal TSS can produce great patterns, just not in my guns and choke combinations and at $12-$14 a shot I'm unwilling to invest that much money in TSS shells and AM chokes to maybe find a combination that works.
