Will my gun take steel shot?
The most common query remains: “Can I use steel shot in my gun?” The answer, so far as typical 12-bore game guns are concerned, is straightforward. If your gun carries the steel proof tested fleur-de-lys proof mark it is suited for use with High Performance as well as Standard Steel cartridges.
Note that stating ‘Standard Steel’ on the cartridge cartons is not a CIP requirement (although some makers do so) but High Performance cartridges MUST state that clearly on the packaging. So, if you have some steel shot cartridges that do not state Standard or High performance then they are Standard steel.
Older guns may have unseen weaknesses between their barrels, which steel could reveal. This is another reason the Proof Authorities limit their recommendations to post 1954 proof-marked guns.
If submitting for reproof, even to standard proof, it may be advisable to lengthen very short forcing cones on some older guns with very short, steep, cones a modest amount with a slight taper.
Chokes might be similarly treated if short and steep; very tight chokes might be best opened up a little at the same time.
Work is ongoing on these topics as well as studying the performance, strengths and weaknesses, of emerging biodegradable wads. Some interesting and very valuable information has been collated in Denmark where steel shot has been in use for game shooting for over 10 years.
Gunsmiths and shooters there have obviously gained knowledge through experience along the way.
I was interested to receive mention of a potential issue with some wad types where the shot cup petals are moulded in and wider than the norm with steel shot wads. Some biopolymers do not mould so readily as HDPE plastics and can result in a wider gap between shot cup petals than HDPE wads.
This is a complex issue and, to present it fully would require more research and, probably, an article of its own.
Caution
I feel I must raise a point of caution for shooters to note because I have received mention from Denmark of a potential issue that may affect some guns and cartridges and which I raised as a possibility back in 2019. It concerns those wads where the gaps between petals are sufficiently wide that the steel pellets in the load can be easily seen when cutting the case to reveal the gaps in a loaded cartridge.
With the pellets already having access to the gap, the powerful vector forces that were detailed in an earlier SG article, can force the pellets through the gap such that they touch the barrel bore wall.
One contact in Denmark has confirmed that this issue has now actually arisen there. As I had also mentioned in a 2019 article, the issue is exacerbated with guns having much extended forcing cones usually accompanied by larger ‘over- bored’ barrel bores.
Until more research is completed it would be prudent for those who own such guns to be aware of this potential and perhaps choose to use steel shot cartridges where the shot cups have very small gaps between the petals and, preferably, as minimal as HDPE steel shot wad cups are. NB: most HDPE steel shot wads, even though this material can be moulded into very fine shapes, mostly have their shot cup petals knife cut. This is often done as part of the loading sequence for exactly the reason that although petals are desirable GAPS ARE NOT - particularly with steel shot.
Some biopolymers used for wads are more difficult to mould quite so precisely as HDPE; some are much softer too. Being soft can make them more difficult to cut slits to form petals and presumably significant in using the moulded petals.
The best advice at this time is to be aware of which wads are in the cartridges you purchase and especially such that, if your gun is other than standard, shorter forcing cones, and standard bore size, to exercise caution. There will be much more to learn about this topic in future I am sure. That something flagged as a potential issue, over two years ago, is now reported as having happened is another reason why the inclusion of a move away from oil-based plastics at the same time as moving away from lead shot is, in fact, a much more difficult task than appears to have been recognised by those calling for it.
Referencing this early remark, made in the recent Moving Away from Lead booklet: “For the first time, biodegradable shot cups for steel shot, with the necessary ballistics to ensure lethality, are available.” At the time the joint statement of intent was made, work on such wads and materials was in its infancy. It is still very much a work in progress. As with most new developments, when new products are urgently required to fulfil new roles under new conditions, some missteps are all but inevitable. We have seen examples already and it is conceivable more will yet arise.
‘Proceed with caution’ is something shooters, cartridge companies - and shooting associations - should pay close heed to. The potential for problems involving risk and potential harm – hopefully confined to guns only – evidently exists.
With timescales on one hand, product development and potential pitfalls on the other, this is, indeed, probably the most difficult time most cartridge companies have ever faced.
Small gauges
The number of queries regarding smaller bores than 12 and 20 – the two best catered for at present – arises surprisingly often too. Though a smaller proportion in their numbers cannot be dismissed.
Cartridge makers are having to find solutions for their biggest markets to survive and so, unfortunately, smaller gauges will lag behind, as will the well respected 16-bore. Owners of 16, 28 and 0.410 guns will likely have to wait a while for more options.
Steel shot with its lighter weight and volume requirements clearly poses even greater challenges for all smaller gauges with some, quite possibly, becoming considerably restricted with steel shot.
Options could then include the much more expensive Bismuth shot option or, the astronomically expensive (but incredibly effective) Tungsten Super Shot (TSS). Plenty of hand loaders are currently experimenting with TSS but commercial loads are likely to be some way off yet.
BASC’s latest booklet
A good deal of useful information is contained within the BASC booklet Moving Away from Lead Shot recently sent to members. However, some of the information supplied is, in my view, not beyond critical comment. For example the reference to wildfowlers ‘using non-toxic shot for over 20 years’ is not comparing like with like.
Wildfowlers have been able to use HDPE oil based plastics for their wads, a material which has proven itself ideal for this purpose; most still are. HDPE is extremely strong, readily moulds to very precise dimensions and performs from below freezing to high temperatures produced by propellant powders: it is also available in various grades, in large commercial quantities and at very competitive prices.
Unfortunately there are currently few
(if any) biodegradable polymers able to replicate all HDPE’s properties. I am in touch with specialists in this sphere so that aspects can be discussed more fully in the future.
However, as we have already seen, the path to replacing HDPE wads with biopolymers is complex and in a short time frame is also fraught with risk.
Note that at least two ‘bio’ wads that have reached the market since the proposed transition have, unfortunately, already exhibited failures.
I won’t name brands here, but plenty has been said and photographs shown on internet forums. One tended to crack in the gas seal but remain reasonably viable; the other failed completely – leaving wads stuck up barrels and in chokes.
It would appear that, very fortunately, no one suffered anything too major as a result. However, given the relatively small number of wads having so far reached the market, two failures represents an exceptionally high failure rate.
This must be an added concern for cartridge loaders as they tussle with materials and designs that will fulfil their loading needs while also being able to be precision moulded and cope with the pressures, temperatures and climatic conditions that cartridges must cope with.
Trying to meet these demands in an artificially short time frame, especially imposed by those not directly involved in the intricacies of wad making and cartridge loading is, in my view, creating the conditions for more failures to arise: I do hope I am proved wrong.
Wildfowlers also tend to use heavier and often very robust and less expensive guns than game shooters do; along with longer chambers for heavier charges which increase their ammunition options.
I was particularly interested to see mention of the CIP Working Group, with UK representation: “Studying the possibility of raising velocity and shot weight limits to those set by SAAMI (the US equivalent to CIP) to increase performance.”
This is good news: it did however leave me intrigued as to how this need for “collective lobbying to ensure priority for such changes” sits with assurances elsewhere in the booklet that the effectiveness of steel is proving excellent: “Indeed, in many cases steel shot has been found to pattern more successfully than lead and to have superior penetration.”
My request for an update from the Proof Authorities is still awaiting a response. But I am quite sure that we will have more to discuss in the future.