You guys need to do a full cast of that barrel and find out what kind of old timey magic is making that trench gun pattern so well with buckshot. It handled both new and old style ammo better than a modern tactical gun with a fancy tacticool choke.
@@Juntasification could just be worn smoother from years of shooting. Or the shorter forcing cone from the old days of fiber wads might just like flite control as well
I grew up in the 1970s shooting a lot of old cardboard/paper shotgun shells. Then, as now, there were different grades of shells. The good hunting/field loads were made of a stout grade of paper that obviously had some sort of laquer type coating on them to make the shells stiffer and more weather resistant. The shells for target shooting were made with a thinner grade of paper and weren't nearly as heavy duty. I have to imagine it was the field grade hunting ammo that the military was selecting in the World Wars for these shotguns.
I remember reading somewhere the pros in WW1 wielding shotguns would seal their shells in hot beeswax then let it dry to prevent it from being a problem during wet conditions and that a lot of GIs preferred the reliability of the beeswaxed paper shells in wet conditions to the modern brass ones developed at that time. Might be worth testing to see how it works out!
@@Sciurus I imagine the wax lubricates the magazine and chamber, which probably helps. Especially if it is very humid or even wet. Keeps the rust away as well.
There is a saying about fishing tackle, that it doesn't have to appeal to fish, it has to appeal to anglers. I'm sure something similar applies here as well!
@@edm192 I have a fairly powerful laptop and everything with a good graphics card has RGB keyboards. It's the worst. Mine keeps defaulting to Christmas mode every time it updates. It's the worst. Great laptop though.
There's something to be said for that, yes. but let's keep in mind they didn't use the modern gun or the modern ammo at 25 yards, which would have demonstrated the use of such things. It's not particularly shocking to find out that trench guns are quite effective at trench ranges, and modern guns don't make targets any deader. It is surprising that this particular gun works little black miracles with modern ammo, though.
My "great" uncle took my great grand-dads trench gun and ALL of his full brass, as well as his Garand and 1911 to the police station when he passed, I was literally in tears when I found out
That story is all too common. If one is up in years and doesn’t want that to happen, one would be wise to find someone one feels is worthy to donate to before the choice is no longer theirs.
Most people just leave guns in their will to next of kin, whenever it really should go to whoever in the close family or friends will most value, appreciate, and cherish them to prevent situations like that. My friend had an uncle who owned a gun shop and died with dozens of guns, the family fought over them so hard it caused a rift, yet none of them actually knew or cared about guns, rather just saw them as valuables. Many of them are already sold off for pennies of their actual price. My friend is a gun nut like me, and 95% of the guns are owned by family members who hate his dad and thus by proxy distrust him. They’ll hold onto a massive collection of guns until they need money or are dead, and he will see none of them even though he would be the only one to actually clean, shoot, and appreciate them instead of leaving them forgotten in closets. At least though, they didn’t hand them over to the police to be destroyed.
a 'Nam' vet I knew who has since passed on ran a riverboat in his service.He told me that when they would take contact through the elephant grass returning fire with M16's meant a protracted firefight,several rounds of buckshot and the enemy would settle down fast! He had an 870.Norm was a good guy,glad to have known him!
Well what this shows is Winchester knew how to make a better barrel then SymTac today. Another thing, in WW1 the paper hulls were smooth sided waxed, and the WW2 hulls were corrugated waxed. The corrugated surface allowed slightly swollen shells to chamber somewhat easier then the slightly swollen smooth shells.
@@dismemberedlamb9104 yes and no. They have Norinco (chinese manufacturer) copies around, and they used to be fairly plentiful IIRC, but there was some sort of legislation passed that prevented the import of chinese firearms. So you can't buy a new repro, but you can get one used for a pretty penny (but still cheaper than a real 1897)
In regards to your remarks about the ammunition being worn out before use, I can attest to that. I used to be the department’s armorer for the PD that I worked for, and after a while, the shells loaded into the magazines would start to swell (even though they had mostly plastic hulls)and make it so that they couldn’t be loaded into the weapon’s chambers. I found that the hulls would spread from the pressure of the magazine springs constantly bearing on them over time. We began inspecting the ammo more frequently and replacing it after about 9months to a year. That ammo was relegated to use for dispatching crippled animals after collisions with vehicles. We used Winchester Ranger high brass only after it was found that the “Low Recoil” ammunition was crap, and wouldn’t penetrate a large deer enough to kill it with one shot. I actually had some pellets from a low recoil round ricochet off of the skull of a large buck at handshake distance without penetrating. That for me was the final straw, and I got the department to quit using those shells. We later switched over to utilizing the shotguns only with less lethal ammunition, with buckshot being issued only to the supervisor to dole out as needed for dispatching injured animals. That kept the ammunition in great shape, as it was never loaded into the guns until needed and no stress was placed on the ammunition.
I had an Army issued watch that was stamped "waterproof - shock resistant" and learned that was waterproof until you got it wet, and shock resistant until you dropped it. It seems the watch company could have learned something from cartridge manufacturers.
My brother in law had a case of paper shells he hunted birds with, that must have been at least 50 years old. They were stored in his humid basement. He would get a bad one once in a while, but they held up surprisingly well for bird hunting in the rain and snow. He was just a cheapskate when it came to shells. 😆
Dudes in my grandfather's mountain village would reload old paper shells with black-powder propellant, match-head primers and homemade lead balls. They mostly shot deer and pheasants.
Unlike most of bulk chemical explosives used in explosive weaponry, gunpowder has always been fairly inert in dry and stable condition, but it quickly degrades if it comes into contact with something moist.
I’m not shocked that shotgun performed so well. The same could be said about a Medieval sword vs a sword made today. Point is the people making these weapons were not clueless at all and cared about what they made as if it was one of their children.
That's actually an inverted example. A sword made today would be dwarfed by a proper sword made in the Medieval period. Not because it's out of our technical capacity, but that it's such a niche market nobody is advancing and practicing the art of true battle-ready swords. Same thing for longbows. You're never going to find a modern longbow without a very, very expensive individual recreation of a classic English Longbow, which dwarf modern bows.
@@BlazingOwnageri wouldn't say that's true. Just look at the old vs new shell design. Steel we have today is leagues ahead of medieval in purity, and our forging proces is far more precise. It being a niche market has nothing to do with it, people just don't need innovation in swords because you get them for the historical appeal.
@@BlazingOwnagerI'm going to have to disagree. Metallurgy has come a long way since the Middle Ages. Smithing techniques have advanced somewhat, but metallurgy is lightyears ahead. Things like canister damascus (yes, I know it's not "real" damascus) were entirely unknown. Steel with carefully chosen percentages of carbon, vanadium, etc is also a fairly recent development. They didn't even know what vanadium was until 1830. Heat treatment was virtually a crapshoot prior to modern metallurgy. Oh, and you are unbelievably wrong about bows. Compound bows put any classic English longbow to shame. I can't even get into arrow design because you could write a book about the modern improvements.
I think some of you are missing the point here. While the materials used today are indeed far better, how we put things together back in the day, we took more pride in the build. These days, it's more about making a quick buck and to hell if there's any craftsmanship.
@@PropsandWings that's not necessarily true. Both historically and in a modern setting there are cheap, mass produced weapons of poor quality, and more expensive top quality weapons, as well as everything in between. You can get a sword of equal or better build quality and significantly better steel quality for a relatively cheaper price today as compared to historically.
Normally I am not a fan of shotguns, but I am really impressed with this one. And that pattern was definitely not what I was expecting. Really cool gun.
I used to keep an Ithaca 37 in my barn. It was loaded with paper hull shells. I remember it was spring time, I grabbed it to shoot a skunk, thank God it had 1 in the chamber, it fired, but I could not shuck the empty out, it had swelled inside the chamber. I remember having to take the barrel off to extract it, and the 4 shells in the mag tube were swelled up, as well.
I did testing at my Department at least 15 years ago with flite-control through 3 different shotguns; a 18” Rem 870 patrol shotgun, a 14” Rem 870 Scattergun Technologies and my SWAT 14” Benelli M1 Super 90. Tests were done at 10 and 25 yards. I took pictures of every test but at this point, I can’t remember the pattern sizes. All were significantly smaller using flight control, compared to normal Federal 00 buckshot, most pronouncedly with my Benelli which kept all 9 pellets on the silhouette at 25. Before you would only see 4-5. Needless to say they are still carrying it. From my understanding it was developed for turkey hunters.
The other thing with those paper shells, is a pump shotgun is going to be far harder on them than say an over and under. loading the tube and cycling them is more likly to damage them, than say gently pulling one out of double barrel.
The shells bounce back and forth in the mag tube during recoil. They are also subject to "axial" compression from the mag spring. This is not a problem with paper cased shells when they are dry. If they are s bit "scruffed" up and wet, your mileage may vary. In "civilian" applications, RELOADS on those paper hulls will introduce a whole new bunch of "interesting" factors. How many times can a paper case be "roll-crimped" before it becomes too shabby to close properly or feed and chamber? Then, there is the practice of "star-crimping" paper shell on domestic presses! Plastic "mono-wads" and star-crimped shells have changed the game somewhat. As for "high or low" brass? On a modern plastic case, it is all a bit academic. There have been several commercial ammo makers selling "brass-less" shot=-shells. And the "brass is usually a couple of microns of plating on thin steel, anyway. They RUST if left abandoned on the range. Tradition dies hard, sometimes. On a trap range, with a good gun, the extraction / ejection resistance is minimal. Note how big the extractors are on double-barreled guns, vs the dinky claws on most pumps and autos. Shot-shells, being "rimmed", notionally headspace on that rim. Thus, the body of the case can be a "racing fit" in the chamber. We are also NOT working with the sorts of chamber pressures encountered in serious centre-fire rifle rounds. So the "wad / shot-cup" device essentially seals the bore as it shoves the shot along the barrel.. Also bear in mind that the propellant is ALL consumed in 18 inches (or less) of the barrel. The rest of the barrel is there to lengthen the sighting plane, provide a weight distribution for "target following" and allow for all manner of creative choke options.. In an entirely different vein: Have you taken a close look at the French DEFA aircraft gun and is derivation? Our old and long-retired Mirage 111C fighters came equipped with them. Interesting bit of machinery.
@@bruceinoz8002the DEFA is, like it's British cousin the ADEN, based on the developmental German MK 213 cannon from the end of WWII. Both excellent, very capable guns that were in service for decades.
Paul Harrel also did a good demonstration on paper hulled ammo and water, and found much of the water hullabaloo to be a little unfounded, though that's not to say that its COMPLETELY false, as discussed in this video. One set of shells were even soaked for 30 minutes I believe, and was still fine.
@@Bourikii2992 Yes it is. The paper hull almost certainly has a water resistant coating and that can reasonably be expected to protect the shells for a couple of hours. 48 hours or more in damp conditions with the shells getting their finish abraded away by rubbing together or being loaded and unloaded is a very different kettle of fish. Any test that simply immerses the shells in water for a modest period of time is not at all representative of what the troops were actually dealing with on extended deployment in wet or excessively humid conditions.
@@Bourikii2992There's a significant difference between somewhat short term water exposure, and constant exposure to humidity and light moisture for days or weeks or months. Humidity in the air will work it's way through lacquering on the shells eventually, as well splashing from water and rain over months on end. It's definitely true that they're going to be vastly better than someone would expect when hearing about paper shells, and in most cases they'll be fine. As was the case in history, given the issues weren't so severe as to inspire immediate replacement. But at the same time, they clearly didn't hold up over the course of entire wars, otherwise no replacement attempts would have been made at all.
Even better, he went up to a full hour in salt water. He did mention that they would eventually swell and become unuseable, but in the short term before the water had fully penetrated and deformed the paper, they were fine. Makes the stories I hear about how some troops got around the water logged ammo issue by running each one through the action first and getting rid of the ones that didn’t cycle properly before doing a raid more plausible. While the shells may eventually go bad, it’s not gonna go bad in an hour, so as long as you know the shells work now, they’ll be sufficient for immediate use. Rest in peace, Paul. He was the best Guntuber.
Regarding the immersion test Paul Harrel got a couple boxes of old paper shells and soaked them in salt water for an hour and they worked fine in his double barrel. It sounds like your hypothesis about loading and unloading rubbing off an outer waterproof layer has some merit. As does the idea that it takes quite a while for the problem to manifest.
The shotgun in military service has always been a historical curiosity of mine, thanks for doing this test. When it comes to war shotgun models, 1897 is a favorite of mine for sure..
It's nice to hear two learned people discussing the differences between similar weapons and ammo loads. The modern standard of predictable buckshot loads is exemplary of the thought that goes into development that often gets overlooked. The haphazard WW1 buckshot loads made for more eccentric patterns, as would each individual barrel.
I have a box of 25 brass cased Remington UMC 00 buckshot . On the box it says #5 primers & they are much smaller than a 209 primer. I always thought that one of the reasons why the military went with all brass cases was because they loaded & unloaded the rounds so often that the paper hulls didn’t hold up well.
I would like to see more collaborations with Matt Haught. He is someone with great knowledge and he has the ability to transfer it in a calm and friendly way to us viewers.
I remember having some of those paper shells, when I was young. They did okay ejecting from my older brothers pump, but I had some problems with my old single shot. Looking back, down memory lane, my brothers old second hand pump, looked an awful lot like that Winchester. One of those I wish I knew then, what I know now moments.
I shot off a bunch of 16 gauge paper shells back in the very early 2000s and those shells were probably 50 plus years old at the time and they worked flawlessly and smelt so good nothing else smelled like they did.
Had grabbed a bag of loose shells from the local gun store (stuff given up with old trades or surrendered). Those old paper cartridges had a definitely different kick and the smell was so much better.
In Unrepentant Sinner, Charles Askins said he had ww1 buckshot for his remington 11 and he would cycle all the ammo through the gun before going on duty. The shells were swollen and bumpy and he wanted to make sure they would function.
While not old enough to have been in WWI or II, I am old enough to have used paper Super X. Never had any issues with the stuff and in fact the stuff was magic. I remember getting 24 game birds out of one box including 10 doves, 6 pheasants and 8 ducks! Wish I had 10 more cases of it! lol
The old Winchester Super-X was great stuff. I loved it. I used to live near the city in Illinois that Winchester made most of their ammunition at, and it was the most common ammunition in the local stores. I still have a stash of .22lr Super-X hollowpoint ammunition for squirrel hunting as it is extremely accurate and expands just right, not too much or too little. I haven’t seen any Winchester Super-X ammunition in years. After the manufacturing of it was moved to Mississippi, it all went away from my area. 😢
We used low-brass Winchester AA #9s for woodcock and quail. They were finicky in comparison to high brass Super X, or Remington Express. Regarding this video, I suspect the swelling is due to the formation of lead oxide on the buckshot, and not the paper shell at all.
@@Horseshoecrabwarrior I didn't either until I noticed how well the old guns were shooting compared to guys with new guns and super rad turkey chokes. A whole lot of high dollar trap guns are 2.75" only, too.
The lesson here is how good modern ammo is, and how not so bad low tech old fashioned shotshells can be. Modern economy buckshot is not really any different than the stuff made 80 years ago except for the plastic components used in the wadding and shell. Patterns are much wider but still very useable for close range applications.
9 pellet 00 buck sits very uniformly when stacked in a 3x3 configuration within a 12 gauge hull even in the absence of modern flight controlled wads and buffer material. Though these innovations have significantly improved the performance of this loading I believe the process of loading buckshot in this way pre-dates cartridges and had origins in muzzle loading. Similarly 9 pellet 0000 in a 10ga, 9 pellet 0 in 16ga, and 9 pellet #1 buck in a 20ga offer similar long range buck shot performance when spiral stacked in a 3x3 configuration.
In WW2 the Marines in the Pacific used shotguns for sniper suppression. They'd used shotguns or submachine guns to blast the middle out of any tree suspected of housing a Japanese sniper.
I remember trying one of the Hornady loads, back before anyone called that type flight control. I was amazed by the pattern. I thought it was a fluke at first. It easily doubled the range of our 870s.
That shotty was pretty damn impressive. It would have been nice to see what the modern shotgun would have patterned at 25 yards. Great video by the way
I'll be honest - I expected the 10 yard pattern to be about twice as large with the 1918 shell & shotgun. That gun patterned tighter than my Mossberg 500 cylinder bore with modern (but dirt cheap) S&B #4 buck.
I’ve got some of the S&B buck, both 00 and 1. Like you said, felt wad and cardboard. More importantly, no shot cup. Bare lead shot gets deformed a lot more going down the barrel, which opens up the pattern. I have a Vang Comp SBS and I think the vents shear off some lead as well. My light was positioned close to the ports and wound up with a layer of lead on it. Used the case mouth of a spent .223 round as a scraper to remove it. You get what you pay for - but try to get at least a shot cup.
I've always had very difficult extraction using S&B as well as Rio buckshot of the same construction. It didn't matter which shotgun I tried: Mossberg 590 or Rem Police Magnum 870, both 3" chambers. I even tried some in my 870 Super Mag with 3.5" chambers and it still required tapping the buttstock on the ground to get the shell to extract. Never had the problem with Federal, Remington, Winchester, Fiocchi, or Wolf buckshot.
A little known fact about the 1897 is that it has a automatic safty to keep the action locked closed on a misfire, so if its a hangfire it goes off in the chamber, not in the open air. In those days hangfires did occur, particularly in slightly dampened ammunition.
Yeah the gun needs to move backwards a little (which pushes the pump forward slightly since it’s gripped by your hand) to unlock. I remember being unable to open the action when dry firing an 1897 first time I handled one and thinking it was broken, but turns out I needed to push ahead a little and after some research, turned out it was a safety design. Pretty clever.
France definitely had some rain, but tropical wet season is a whole other level when it just buckets down for 2-3months straight. We have a saying 'going troppo' for the special kind of madness of being stuck in it!
Back in the 60s I did some trap shooting with paper hulled shot cartridges. My recollection is they all had a very thin coating of wax on them to aid in water rejection. I wasn't the one cleaning those shotguns, but I suspect that after 20 or 30 rounds those chamber areas would need a lot of scrubbing. I don't know in which year the ammo makers began wax papering the shells, but I suspect if not done before WWI, it certainly began shortly afterwards.
I started out with paper shells as a kid. I had a little lee hand loader. The original shot was very water resistant. They are impregnated with some kind of wax. Now I did use a bit of wax to seal the ends of the round after reloading. I never had a first shot round not load or eject from a single barrel 12. My reloads? A few swelled.. Now I loaded and unloaded everyday with a duty gun. Every six months I changed the rounds out. Chamber wear is a thing even with modern ammo. Same with a pistol.. 4 to 6 month and all ammo was changed that I carried…
I read the title, thought about it, asked myself "would that be a good use of my time?". Then I thought, "Yes, I do want to know how a trench gun patterns" A strange subject, but I do like shotguns and the trench gun is a pretty good one with a rich and hard won history.
Paul Harrell actually did a pretty interesting video with paper vs plastic vintage shotshells immersed in water. I wish he had gone a little more in depth with it (longer soak, soaked and dried, etc) but it was cool nonetheless.
When I first start shooting shotguns as a lad there were still paper cartridges. Hunting all day in British drizzle you could see where wet was seeping back front the front of the shell- never had one cause problems though.
Question: How does ammo age if stored in a dry condition? Are there any types of propellants or primers that deteriorate with age or are you okay with firing any vintage ammo?
Anything corrosive is risky with age. Mostly thats old russian ammo these days. Otherwise generally youre gonna be fine as long as there are no obvious issues such as corrosion or swelling. Be aware that powder does or at least can degrade over time and nearly always this means less energy. However there are rare cases where it can mean spikes in chamber pressures and bad endings. Generally its better to avoid the really old stuff unless you at least have experience reloading as that gives you a deeper insight into what to look for in chancy ammo. The thought is that one of those rare cases of spiking chamber pressures is what happened with kentucky ballistics when his 50cal exploded on him. He was using very old slap ammo which on its own was higher pressure to begin with. The gun itself was supposed rated for like 100000psi and the standard 50cal is rated at 65000psi average. So there should have been a pretty substantial safety factor but it still exploded violently almost killing kentucky ballistics. Basically if you buy old surplus make sure its still sealed, and when you get it take the time to look over every round. Toss any obviously iffy stuff and if there is more than a few in the bunch be careful with the rest of it too.
@mackenzieclancy959 im not sure on that. I know civilian ammo switched in the 1920s at some point but even the us military used corrosive until the early 1950s. Youd have to do some research but china probably used corrosive primers and powder until at least the early 50s. And its not that corrosive powder wont work after years in storage its just more susceptible to issues. Corrosive powders and primers also mean you really should clean the gun any time its used. Non corrosive stuff its not as important as it wont pit and eat at the barrel.
For shotgun tests like this, i would recommend putting up multiple cardboard sheets at various distances one behind the other, so you can see how the shot spreads over distance.
I found a bunch of paper-hulled shells in our barn. They'd been there for quite a few years, and they had swollen from humidity. They did not want to cycle.
Its funny how at least this video shows a tighter spread on the shorter 1897 then the modern gun that was supposed to be “now look at this modern example, we have truly come a long way and have better guns today”.
I managed to score an Ithica Mod 37 Military trench gun in Vietnam. It handled the Plastic shells we got issued like a champ. And in the bush it was perfect.
I had the idea for flight control shells and about 2 years later they came out. It makes me wonder if i could have gotten in on the idea but it was likely already in the works
Generally modern paper ammo like Federal Skeet/Trap loads are heavily waxed. Perhaps the old ammo wasn’t or more likely it melted off in a particularly hot year.
I would absolutely love to win that shotgun but unfortunately I'm not spending $50 for a coffee cup for a slim chance to win. Love the content and information you provide on your this channel
Same here. I went and looked and I'm not about to pay $50 for a $5 cup I with a lame inscription. I was expecting maybe a $5 keychain or something, not sure what to expect but it wasn't that
its called a raffle... this isnt some new fangled scheme, charities have been doing this for years. everyone knows they're making money off the thing. @@NittyGritty420
I started shooting ducks with paper 12ga shells.They worked better then the All HARD PLASTIC shells ,except primers, as the hard plastic shells of the 70s would blow apart when fired ,then you'd have to use a ramrod to clear the obstruction before shooting again. It was a good thing I had a long Tom 36 inch full choke single shot Ithaca shot gun. The paper shells worked great even on the Gulf coast of Texas ,and Eagle Lake ,goose hunting... The hard plastic not so much..
High humidity combined with constant changes in atmospheric pressure from weather fronts would eventually infiltrate anything that wasn't sealed to resist not only exposure to water, but to withstand pressure.
I've got a millitary Rem M11, its got the ord bomb on the bbl, prop of US Navy on rcvr, SR PD also on rcvr & civil defence sticker on the side of the stock. Aparently Its been around. It was only $135. In the 80s
"If you treat this old ammo like trash and stomp on it and kick it thru mud and soak it in water... well it might not run good later." Oh. Thanks. Lol. Just messin around. Excellent video as always 👌
Very interesting video! Regarding "grex buffering", my question is, is there a situation similar to the first versions of Claymore mines? These initially had a bad dispersion pattern, but after embedding the pellets in resin the dispersion became very uniform. Greetings from Argentine Patagonia.
Hey Ian, general wisdom these days is that brass hulls can only be reliably loaded with blackpowder (or substitute). Were the brass shotshells they issued back then loaded with blackpowder?
This was interesting and sort of funny. My Norinco 87 trench gun shots tighter than my trooper bud firearm instructors Remington 870! Almost mirrors what happened here!
I inherited my Grandpa's 1897 Winchester. I'm not sure if it was a trench gun that was 'sporterized' after WW1 or whether it's a police riot version as it has the shortened barrel with an adjustable vent and screw in choke added. Grandpa shot lots of quail with it during the Depression and I currently have it loaded with 00 buckshot for home defense. The sound of the action alone should be enough of a deterrent as it sounds like a bank vault slamming shut. The 1897's were great because they were specifically designed for smokeless powder and the first successful pump action shotgun via John Moses Browning's genius.
Matt said pellets that are not perfect spheres tend to "go wonky places." Has anyone ever tried using dimpled pellets, similar to tiny golf balls? If the aerodynamics work similarly, dimples *should* decrease air resistance and decrease shot spread.
It wouldn't surprise me if that were the case, although the effect would likely be reduced by deformation during firing. Be neat to see how it worked out in practice, though!
Supposedly the " rule of thumb " for riot shotties is 1" spread per yard . Winnie is a tight old gal ! Good luck to everyone who enters ! Has there been any more news on the 97 trench gun re-issue that was supposed to come out this year ?
Would be nice if Winchester brought these back, though they would still be inferior to the original models due to the removal of slam fire. A man can dream though
You guys need to do a full cast of that barrel and find out what kind of old timey magic is making that trench gun pattern so well with buckshot. It handled both new and old style ammo better than a modern tactical gun with a fancy tacticool choke.
The Answer is St. John Moses Browning, peace be upon him.
Probably just tighter choking all through the barrel vs modern barrels with changeable chokes.
@@Juntasification could just be worn smoother from years of shooting. Or the shorter forcing cone from the old days of fiber wads might just like flite control as well
Paul Harrell already did a video about using paper shotgun wet ammo.
@@monotech20.14 that's got nothing to do with what op said
The only moral to this story is that Winchester built really good shotguns.
Tis a good moral.
And we didn't need "modern" shotguns to prove it. I'm always amused when people immediately believe modern engineering is better.
Love the old Winchester shotguns
Excepto the m1901 lever action shotgun
@@TheoldSRADModern engineering is better.
I grew up in the 1970s shooting a lot of old cardboard/paper shotgun shells. Then, as now, there were different grades of shells. The good hunting/field loads were made of a stout grade of paper that obviously had some sort of laquer type coating on them to make the shells stiffer and more weather resistant. The shells for target shooting were made with a thinner grade of paper and weren't nearly as heavy duty. I have to imagine it was the field grade hunting ammo that the military was selecting in the World Wars for these shotguns.
Paul Harrell already did a video about using paper shotgun wet ammo.
I remember reading somewhere the pros in WW1 wielding shotguns would seal their shells in hot beeswax then let it dry to prevent it from being a problem during wet conditions and that a lot of GIs preferred the reliability of the beeswaxed paper shells in wet conditions to the modern brass ones developed at that time.
Might be worth testing to see how it works out!
@@tomhenry897lowest bidder that meets minimum requirements most efficiently*
@@teejin669 This - they don't just take anything that has lowest price lol
@@Sciurus I imagine the wax lubricates the magazine and chamber, which probably helps. Especially if it is very humid or even wet. Keeps the rust away as well.
There's an interesting conversation to be had about how much of the modern tacticool gear exists purely to separate people from their money.
There is a saying about fishing tackle, that it doesn't have to appeal to fish, it has to appeal to anglers. I'm sure something similar applies here as well!
@@edm192 I have a fairly powerful laptop and everything with a good graphics card has RGB keyboards. It's the worst. Mine keeps defaulting to Christmas mode every time it updates. It's the worst. Great laptop though.
Basically all of it, I assume. There are great modern improvements to firearms, but tacticool essentially means that it looks good and does nothing.
There's something to be said for that, yes. but let's keep in mind they didn't use the modern gun or the modern ammo at 25 yards, which would have demonstrated the use of such things.
It's not particularly shocking to find out that trench guns are quite effective at trench ranges, and modern guns don't make targets any deader. It is surprising that this particular gun works little black miracles with modern ammo, though.
@@Yvolvei have a 6 year old gigabyte that doesnt have that problem. maybe a software issue
My "great" uncle took my great grand-dads trench gun and ALL of his full brass, as well as his Garand and 1911 to the police station when he passed, I was literally in tears when I found out
What a communist!!!
That story is all too common. If one is up in years and doesn’t want that to happen, one would be wise to find someone one feels is worthy to donate to before the choice is no longer theirs.
.......I'm speechless.
It really upsets me they'd destroy such historical weapons.
Most people just leave guns in their will to next of kin, whenever it really should go to whoever in the close family or friends will most value, appreciate, and cherish them to prevent situations like that.
My friend had an uncle who owned a gun shop and died with dozens of guns, the family fought over them so hard it caused a rift, yet none of them actually knew or cared about guns, rather just saw them as valuables. Many of them are already sold off for pennies of their actual price. My friend is a gun nut like me, and 95% of the guns are owned by family members who hate his dad and thus by proxy distrust him. They’ll hold onto a massive collection of guns until they need money or are dead, and he will see none of them even though he would be the only one to actually clean, shoot, and appreciate them instead of leaving them forgotten in closets. At least though, they didn’t hand them over to the police to be destroyed.
a 'Nam' vet I knew who has since passed on ran a riverboat in his service.He told me that when they would take contact through the elephant grass returning fire with M16's meant a protracted firefight,several rounds of buckshot and the enemy would settle down fast! He had an 870.Norm was a good guy,glad to have known him!
Well what this shows is Winchester knew how to make a better barrel then SymTac today. Another thing, in WW1 the paper hulls were smooth sided waxed, and the WW2 hulls were corrugated waxed. The corrugated surface allowed slightly swollen shells to chamber somewhat easier then the slightly swollen smooth shells.
I love the fact that the browning design seems to have a tighter spread despite it having a clearly shorter barrel
The 1911 of shotguns. Such an iconic gun, and really good looking too.
Owned
I’m 19 I’m literally gonna get one . Was gonna get a smle mk3 or a Ross mk3 but nah . Cod der reise and getting the trench it wa skis amazing
@@kwestionariusz1 1897
I want one. Do they do repros?
@@dismemberedlamb9104 yes and no. They have Norinco (chinese manufacturer) copies around, and they used to be fairly plentiful IIRC, but there was some sort of legislation passed that prevented the import of chinese firearms. So you can't buy a new repro, but you can get one used for a pretty penny (but still cheaper than a real 1897)
No surprise that a gun designed by John Moses Browning still dose well over 100 years later.
This is the greatest shotgun ever imo and JMB greatest designer of modern weapons ever imo
Does
In regards to your remarks about the ammunition being worn out before use, I can attest to that. I used to be the department’s armorer for the PD that I worked for, and after a while, the shells loaded into the magazines would start to swell (even though they had mostly plastic hulls)and make it so that they couldn’t be loaded into the weapon’s chambers. I found that the hulls would spread from the pressure of the magazine springs constantly bearing on them over time. We began inspecting the ammo more frequently and replacing it after about 9months to a year. That ammo was relegated to use for dispatching crippled animals after collisions with vehicles. We used Winchester Ranger high brass only after it was found that the “Low Recoil” ammunition was crap, and wouldn’t penetrate a large deer enough to kill it with one shot. I actually had some pellets from a low recoil round ricochet off of the skull of a large buck at handshake distance without penetrating. That for me was the final straw, and I got the department to quit using those shells. We later switched over to utilizing the shotguns only with less lethal ammunition, with buckshot being issued only to the supervisor to dole out as needed for dispatching injured animals. That kept the ammunition in great shape, as it was never loaded into the guns until needed and no stress was placed on the ammunition.
I had an Army issued watch that was stamped "waterproof - shock resistant" and learned that was waterproof until you got it wet, and shock resistant until you dropped it. It seems the watch company could have learned something from cartridge manufacturers.
Got to love all the attention the trench sweeper has been getting lately.
My brother in law had a case of paper shells he hunted birds with, that must have been at least 50 years old. They were stored in his humid basement. He would get a bad one once in a while, but they held up surprisingly well for bird hunting in the rain and snow. He was just a cheapskate when it came to shells. 😆
I remember people complaining about "them goldarn new fangled plastic shells"
@@mpetersen6 "them tupperware shells ain't worth shit tell you hwat"
Growing up, I shot a lot of very old, paper shells. Usually left out in a garage. Always fired just fine.
Dudes in my grandfather's mountain village would reload old paper shells with black-powder propellant, match-head primers and homemade lead balls. They mostly shot deer and pheasants.
80 year old ammo still works if properly stored.
I've shot WW2 ammo through my K98 before.
I've shot 1890s 303 in the 1990s with no issues. Quality ammo can last a long time.
Unlike most of bulk chemical explosives used in explosive weaponry, gunpowder has always been fairly inert in dry and stable condition, but it quickly degrades if it comes into contact with something moist.
Using that style powder, stored as they stored it, etc.
Shot some 8mm mauser last weekend with 1938 head stamp. Worked flawlessly
I’m not shocked that shotgun performed so well. The same could be said about a Medieval sword vs a sword made today. Point is the people making these weapons were not clueless at all and cared about what they made as if it was one of their children.
That's actually an inverted example. A sword made today would be dwarfed by a proper sword made in the Medieval period. Not because it's out of our technical capacity, but that it's such a niche market nobody is advancing and practicing the art of true battle-ready swords.
Same thing for longbows. You're never going to find a modern longbow without a very, very expensive individual recreation of a classic English Longbow, which dwarf modern bows.
@@BlazingOwnageri wouldn't say that's true. Just look at the old vs new shell design. Steel we have today is leagues ahead of medieval in purity, and our forging proces is far more precise. It being a niche market has nothing to do with it, people just don't need innovation in swords because you get them for the historical appeal.
@@BlazingOwnagerI'm going to have to disagree. Metallurgy has come a long way since the Middle Ages. Smithing techniques have advanced somewhat, but metallurgy is lightyears ahead. Things like canister damascus (yes, I know it's not "real" damascus) were entirely unknown. Steel with carefully chosen percentages of carbon, vanadium, etc is also a fairly recent development. They didn't even know what vanadium was until 1830. Heat treatment was virtually a crapshoot prior to modern metallurgy.
Oh, and you are unbelievably wrong about bows. Compound bows put any classic English longbow to shame. I can't even get into arrow design because you could write a book about the modern improvements.
I think some of you are missing the point here. While the materials used today are indeed far better, how we put things together back in the day, we took more pride in the build. These days, it's more about making a quick buck and to hell if there's any craftsmanship.
@@PropsandWings that's not necessarily true. Both historically and in a modern setting there are cheap, mass produced weapons of poor quality, and more expensive top quality weapons, as well as everything in between. You can get a sword of equal or better build quality and significantly better steel quality for a relatively cheaper price today as compared to historically.
I really like federal flite control buckshot. They deserve to be talked about. I've taken quite a few deer with the 3" 12 pellet load.
Normally I am not a fan of shotguns, but I am really impressed with this one. And that pattern was definitely not what I was expecting. Really cool gun.
I grew up in Ohio using a shotgun for everything. Mossberg 500 or 590 12ga is still my go to
I really enjoy these videos with Matt! Please bring him back in future videos.
I used to keep an Ithaca 37 in my barn. It was loaded with paper hull shells. I remember it was spring time, I grabbed it to shoot a skunk, thank God it had 1 in the chamber, it fired, but I could not shuck the empty out, it had swelled inside the chamber. I remember having to take the barrel off to extract it, and the 4 shells in the mag tube were swelled up, as well.
I did testing at my Department at least 15 years ago with flite-control through 3 different shotguns; a 18” Rem 870 patrol shotgun, a 14” Rem 870 Scattergun Technologies and my SWAT 14” Benelli M1 Super 90. Tests were done at 10 and 25 yards. I took pictures of every test but at this point, I can’t remember the pattern sizes. All were significantly smaller using flight control, compared to normal Federal 00 buckshot, most pronouncedly with my Benelli which kept all 9 pellets on the silhouette at 25. Before you would only see 4-5. Needless to say they are still carrying it. From my understanding it was developed for turkey hunters.
The other thing with those paper shells, is a pump shotgun is going to be far harder on them than say an over and under. loading the tube and cycling them is more likly to damage them, than say gently pulling one out of double barrel.
The shells bounce back and forth in the mag tube during recoil. They are also subject to "axial" compression from the mag spring.
This is not a problem with paper cased shells when they are dry. If they are s bit "scruffed" up and wet, your mileage may vary.
In "civilian" applications, RELOADS on those paper hulls will introduce a whole new bunch of "interesting" factors. How many times can a paper case be "roll-crimped" before it becomes too shabby to close properly or feed and chamber? Then, there is the practice of "star-crimping" paper shell on domestic presses!
Plastic "mono-wads" and star-crimped shells have changed the game somewhat.
As for "high or low" brass?
On a modern plastic case, it is all a bit academic. There have been several commercial ammo makers selling "brass-less" shot=-shells. And the "brass is usually a couple of microns of plating on thin steel, anyway. They RUST if left abandoned on the range. Tradition dies hard, sometimes.
On a trap range, with a good gun, the extraction / ejection resistance is minimal. Note how big the extractors are on double-barreled guns, vs the dinky claws on most pumps and autos. Shot-shells, being "rimmed", notionally headspace on that rim. Thus, the body of the case can be a "racing fit" in the chamber. We are also NOT working with the sorts of chamber pressures encountered in serious centre-fire rifle rounds. So the "wad / shot-cup" device essentially seals the bore as it shoves the shot along the barrel.. Also bear in mind that the propellant is ALL consumed in 18 inches (or less) of the barrel. The rest of the barrel is there to lengthen the sighting plane, provide a weight distribution for "target following" and allow for all manner of creative choke options..
In an entirely different vein: Have you taken a close look at the French DEFA aircraft gun and is derivation? Our old and long-retired Mirage 111C fighters came equipped with them. Interesting bit of machinery.
@@bruceinoz8002the DEFA is, like it's British cousin the ADEN, based on the developmental German MK 213 cannon from the end of WWII. Both excellent, very capable guns that were in service for decades.
Paul Harrel also did a good demonstration on paper hulled ammo and water, and found much of the water hullabaloo to be a little unfounded, though that's not to say that its COMPLETELY false, as discussed in this video. One set of shells were even soaked for 30 minutes I believe, and was still fine.
Leaving it outside for days isn't going to be worse than being fully submerged for 30 minutes.
@@Bourikii2992you'd be surprised, being in a wet and swampy environment for days would allow a lot of the paper to become waterlogged due to time
@@Bourikii2992 Yes it is. The paper hull almost certainly has a water resistant coating and that can reasonably be expected to protect the shells for a couple of hours. 48 hours or more in damp conditions with the shells getting their finish abraded away by rubbing together or being loaded and unloaded is a very different kettle of fish. Any test that simply immerses the shells in water for a modest period of time is not at all representative of what the troops were actually dealing with on extended deployment in wet or excessively humid conditions.
@@Bourikii2992There's a significant difference between somewhat short term water exposure, and constant exposure to humidity and light moisture for days or weeks or months. Humidity in the air will work it's way through lacquering on the shells eventually, as well splashing from water and rain over months on end. It's definitely true that they're going to be vastly better than someone would expect when hearing about paper shells, and in most cases they'll be fine. As was the case in history, given the issues weren't so severe as to inspire immediate replacement. But at the same time, they clearly didn't hold up over the course of entire wars, otherwise no replacement attempts would have been made at all.
Even better, he went up to a full hour in salt water.
He did mention that they would eventually swell and become unuseable, but in the short term before the water had fully penetrated and deformed the paper, they were fine.
Makes the stories I hear about how some troops got around the water logged ammo issue by running each one through the action first and getting rid of the ones that didn’t cycle properly before doing a raid more plausible. While the shells may eventually go bad, it’s not gonna go bad in an hour, so as long as you know the shells work now, they’ll be sufficient for immediate use.
Rest in peace, Paul. He was the best Guntuber.
*Hyperventilates in German*
In Poland also
*ventilated in German
"...Scheiße..."
Erm, that's kaiserphobic!
Post Traumatic Reich over compensates with MG42.
In WWII, according to my Dad, a WWII front line mud marine, they would use the best water proofing method, store it in a condum.
Regarding the immersion test Paul Harrel got a couple boxes of old paper shells and soaked them in salt water for an hour and they worked fine in his double barrel. It sounds like your hypothesis about loading and unloading rubbing off an outer waterproof layer has some merit. As does the idea that it takes quite a while for the problem to manifest.
Thank you Ian for all the accurate trench gun videos lately
The shotgun in military service has always been a historical curiosity of mine, thanks for doing this test. When it comes to war shotgun models, 1897 is a favorite of mine for sure..
It's nice to hear two learned people discussing the differences between similar weapons and ammo loads.
The modern standard of predictable buckshot loads is exemplary of the thought that goes into development that often gets overlooked.
The haphazard WW1 buckshot loads made for more eccentric patterns, as would each individual barrel.
I have a box of 25 brass cased Remington UMC 00 buckshot . On the box it says #5 primers & they are much smaller than a 209 primer.
I always thought that one of the reasons why the military went with all brass cases was because they loaded & unloaded the rounds so often that the paper hulls didn’t hold up well.
Loving this mini series on the trench gun. Nice variation.
“Aaaeeehh it’s probably about five inches”, okay so a real world 3.8” 🤣🤣
I would like to see more collaborations with Matt Haught. He is someone with great knowledge and he has the ability to transfer it in a calm and friendly way to us viewers.
I remember having some of those paper shells, when I was young. They did okay ejecting from my older brothers pump, but I had some problems with my old single shot. Looking back, down memory lane, my brothers old second hand pump, looked an awful lot like that Winchester. One of those I wish I knew then, what I know now moments.
I shot off a bunch of 16 gauge paper shells back in the very early 2000s and those shells were probably 50 plus years old at the time and they worked flawlessly and smelt so good nothing else smelled like they did.
Had grabbed a bag of loose shells from the local gun store (stuff given up with old trades or surrendered). Those old paper cartridges had a definitely different kick and the smell was so much better.
In Unrepentant Sinner, Charles Askins said he had ww1 buckshot for his remington 11 and he would cycle all the ammo through the gun before going on duty. The shells were swollen and bumpy and he wanted to make sure they would function.
Man that is the most aptly titled book ever written.
While not old enough to have been in WWI or II, I am old enough to have used paper Super X. Never had any issues with the stuff and in fact the stuff was magic. I remember getting 24 game birds out of one box including 10 doves, 6 pheasants and 8 ducks! Wish I had 10 more cases of it! lol
The old Winchester Super-X was great stuff. I loved it. I used to live near the city in Illinois that Winchester made most of their ammunition at, and it was the most common ammunition in the local stores. I still have a stash of .22lr Super-X hollowpoint ammunition for squirrel hunting as it is extremely accurate and expands just right, not too much or too little. I haven’t seen any Winchester Super-X ammunition in years. After the manufacturing of it was moved to Mississippi, it all went away from my area. 😢
We used low-brass Winchester AA #9s for woodcock and quail. They were finicky in comparison to high brass Super X, or Remington Express.
Regarding this video, I suspect the swelling is due to the formation of lead oxide on the buckshot, and not the paper shell at all.
Funny how much better a chamber made for 2.75" shells group than the ones cut for 3".... I've run across that at meat shoots in my area.
I never think about it, but it makes sense that matching shell length to the chamber makes a difference
Forcing cone length can also make a difference. A lot of (not all) 3 inch chambers have a very short forcing cone.
@@Horseshoecrabwarrior I didn't either until I noticed how well the old guns were shooting compared to guys with new guns and super rad turkey chokes. A whole lot of high dollar trap guns are 2.75" only, too.
@@tangydiesel1886 a quarter inch of free bore can't help
My old boss when he was young (1950s Australia) use to pull he's shotshells in the oven early in the morning to dry them out and give them more pep
@rdrrr if you are going to be dumb you better be tough
The lesson here is how good modern ammo is, and how not so bad low tech old fashioned shotshells can be. Modern economy buckshot is not really any different than the stuff made 80 years ago except for the plastic components used in the wadding and shell. Patterns are much wider but still very useable for close range applications.
9 pellet 00 buck sits very uniformly when stacked in a 3x3 configuration within a 12 gauge hull even in the absence of modern flight controlled wads and buffer material. Though these innovations have significantly improved the performance of this loading I believe the process of loading buckshot in this way pre-dates cartridges and had origins in muzzle loading. Similarly 9 pellet 0000 in a 10ga, 9 pellet 0 in 16ga, and 9 pellet #1 buck in a 20ga offer similar long range buck shot performance when spiral stacked in a 3x3 configuration.
8:50 6 pellets hitting the heart, aorta and ava cava would result in rapid deathiosis.
In WW2 the Marines in the Pacific used shotguns for sniper suppression. They'd used shotguns or submachine guns to blast the middle out of any tree suspected of housing a Japanese sniper.
I remember trying one of the Hornady loads, back before anyone called that type flight control. I was amazed by the pattern. I thought it was a fluke at first. It easily doubled the range of our 870s.
Paul Harrell has a great video on paper shotgun hulls and how they perform after being submerged in water.
Phbbbt !! What a wonderfully descriptive technical term.
That shotty was pretty damn impressive. It would have been nice to see what the modern shotgun would have patterned at 25 yards.
Great video by the way
Very educational video about one of my favorite guns and the ammo it fired. Thanks for the info.
0:12 When you Whisper to a shotgun, what does it say?
BANG!!! 🤣
LOL awesome statement
I'll be honest - I expected the 10 yard pattern to be about twice as large with the 1918 shell & shotgun.
That gun patterned tighter than my Mossberg 500 cylinder bore with modern (but dirt cheap) S&B #4 buck.
@@loquat44-40 it's a felt and cardboard wad - at least the ones I have from 15 years ago or so. The hulls are translucent, so it's easy to see.
I’ve got some of the S&B buck, both 00 and 1. Like you said, felt wad and cardboard. More importantly, no shot cup. Bare lead shot gets deformed a lot more going down the barrel, which opens up the pattern. I have a Vang Comp SBS and I think the vents shear off some lead as well. My light was positioned close to the ports and wound up with a layer of lead on it. Used the case mouth of a spent .223 round as a scraper to remove it. You get what you pay for - but try to get at least a shot cup.
S&B is pretty darn close to what the shells were of ww1 and 2. 4b does tend to pattern wider than 00b, generally speaking
I've always had very difficult extraction using S&B as well as Rio buckshot of the same construction. It didn't matter which shotgun I tried: Mossberg 590 or Rem Police Magnum 870, both 3" chambers. I even tried some in my 870 Super Mag with 3.5" chambers and it still required tapping the buttstock on the ground to get the shell to extract. Never had the problem with Federal, Remington, Winchester, Fiocchi, or Wolf buckshot.
There's just something about the bayonet adaptor that makes the business end of a trench gun look far more fearsome!
Mossberg 590-A1 has a bayonet lug😳
Wish I had one
A little known fact about the 1897 is that it has a automatic safty to keep the action locked closed on a misfire, so if its a hangfire it goes off in the chamber, not in the open air. In those days hangfires did occur, particularly in slightly dampened ammunition.
Yeah the gun needs to move backwards a little (which pushes the pump forward slightly since it’s gripped by your hand) to unlock. I remember being unable to open the action when dry firing an 1897 first time I handled one and thinking it was broken, but turns out I needed to push ahead a little and after some research, turned out it was a safety design. Pretty clever.
Paul Harrel did an episode on the water resistance of paper shells, very interesting watch
I saw that. I can't recall just what they sealed the hulls with. Dipped wax? Shellac?
France definitely had some rain, but tropical wet season is a whole other level when it just buckets down for 2-3months straight. We have a saying 'going troppo' for the special kind of madness of being stuck in it!
exactly, combine it with nearly 100% humidity at all times, and everything will start swelling up
Fair to assume you serve/served in the Australian armed forces?
Back in the 60s I did some trap shooting with paper hulled shot cartridges. My recollection is they all had a very thin coating of wax on them to aid in water rejection. I wasn't the one cleaning those shotguns, but I suspect that after 20 or 30 rounds those chamber areas would need a lot of scrubbing. I don't know in which year the ammo makers began wax papering the shells, but I suspect if not done before WWI, it certainly began shortly afterwards.
Works great! Half the shot goes on the left side of the bayonet, and half goes on the right side!
I started out with paper shells as a kid. I had a little lee hand loader.
The original shot was very water resistant. They are impregnated with some kind of wax. Now I did use a bit of wax to seal the ends of the round after reloading. I never had a first shot round not load or eject from a single barrel 12. My reloads? A few swelled..
Now I loaded and unloaded everyday with a duty gun.
Every six months I changed the rounds out. Chamber wear is a thing even with modern ammo.
Same with a pistol.. 4 to 6 month and all ammo was changed that I carried…
I read the title, thought about it, asked myself "would that be a good use of my time?".
Then I thought, "Yes, I do want to know how a trench gun patterns"
A strange subject, but I do like shotguns and the trench gun is a pretty good one with a rich and hard won history.
Paul Harrell actually did a pretty interesting video with paper vs plastic vintage shotshells immersed in water. I wish he had gone a little more in depth with it (longer soak, soaked and dried, etc) but it was cool nonetheless.
The old trench gun with old ammo would be great inside a building in close shots as it expands but not overly expanding.
When I first start shooting shotguns as a lad there were still paper cartridges. Hunting all day in British drizzle you could see where wet was seeping back front the front of the shell- never had one cause problems though.
it was really interesting to see how the ammo performed and what it looked like inside. I always wondered what those paper shells looked like
Imagine the dread a WW1 German soldier would have seeing a USMC coming down his trench with one of these.
The metal heat shroud is unmistakable.
Question: How does ammo age if stored in a dry condition? Are there any types of propellants or primers that deteriorate with age or are you okay with firing any vintage ammo?
Anything corrosive is risky with age. Mostly thats old russian ammo these days.
Otherwise generally youre gonna be fine as long as there are no obvious issues such as corrosion or swelling.
Be aware that powder does or at least can degrade over time and nearly always this means less energy. However there are rare cases where it can mean spikes in chamber pressures and bad endings. Generally its better to avoid the really old stuff unless you at least have experience reloading as that gives you a deeper insight into what to look for in chancy ammo.
The thought is that one of those rare cases of spiking chamber pressures is what happened with kentucky ballistics when his 50cal exploded on him. He was using very old slap ammo which on its own was higher pressure to begin with. The gun itself was supposed rated for like 100000psi and the standard 50cal is rated at 65000psi average. So there should have been a pretty substantial safety factor but it still exploded violently almost killing kentucky ballistics.
Basically if you buy old surplus make sure its still sealed, and when you get it take the time to look over every round. Toss any obviously iffy stuff and if there is more than a few in the bunch be careful with the rest of it too.
@@trailblazer632 Thanks, I feel a little more knowledgeable now. 😁👍
@@trailblazer632did the Chinese use the same corrosive powder as the Russians? I've got some old 54r from China dated 1958
@mackenzieclancy959 im not sure on that. I know civilian ammo switched in the 1920s at some point but even the us military used corrosive until the early 1950s. Youd have to do some research but china probably used corrosive primers and powder until at least the early 50s.
And its not that corrosive powder wont work after years in storage its just more susceptible to issues.
Corrosive powders and primers also mean you really should clean the gun any time its used. Non corrosive stuff its not as important as it wont pit and eat at the barrel.
@@mackenzieclancy959 The corrosive part of the cartridge was the primer, using chlorate rather than lead azide.
My dad brought home several of the brass cased 00 buck cartridges he was issued in Korea. I still have most of them.
I like these comparison/testing videos.
For shotgun tests like this, i would recommend putting up multiple cardboard sheets at various distances one behind the other, so you can see how the shot spreads over distance.
Paul harrel had a pretty good video over paper shells getting wet, they ran fine from a break action
I found a bunch of paper-hulled shells in our barn. They'd been there for quite a few years, and they had swollen from humidity. They did not want to cycle.
Its funny how at least this video shows a tighter spread on the shorter 1897 then the modern gun that was supposed to be “now look at this modern example, we have truly come a long way and have better guns today”.
I managed to score an Ithica Mod 37 Military trench gun in Vietnam. It handled the Plastic shells we got issued like a champ. And in the bush it was perfect.
I had the idea for flight control shells and about 2 years later they came out. It makes me wonder if i could have gotten in on the idea but it was likely already in the works
Years ago I got a hold of my fathers 1940s shells, they had sawdust packed with the buckshot
Generally modern paper ammo like Federal Skeet/Trap loads are heavily waxed. Perhaps the old ammo wasn’t or more likely it melted off in a particularly hot year.
Try "jug choking" a Chinese '97 a few thousanths. Impressed with the flight control tho. Plated & buffered shot always helps too.
I would absolutely love to win that shotgun but unfortunately I'm not spending $50 for a coffee cup for a slim chance to win. Love the content and information you provide on your this channel
Same here. I went and looked and I'm not about to pay $50 for a $5 cup I with a lame inscription. I was expecting maybe a $5 keychain or something, not sure what to expect but it wasn't that
its called a raffle... this isnt some new fangled scheme, charities have been doing this for years. everyone knows they're making money off the thing. @@NittyGritty420
Usually there's some fine print/snail mail way around purchasing stuff, to avoid gambling charges.
I started shooting ducks with paper 12ga shells.They worked better then the All HARD PLASTIC shells ,except primers, as the hard plastic shells of the 70s would blow apart when fired ,then you'd have to use a ramrod to clear the obstruction before shooting again.
It was a good thing I had a long Tom 36 inch full choke single shot Ithaca shot gun.
The paper shells worked great even on the Gulf coast of Texas ,and Eagle Lake ,goose hunting...
The hard plastic not so much..
High humidity combined with constant changes in atmospheric pressure from weather fronts would eventually infiltrate anything that wasn't sealed to resist not only exposure to water, but to withstand pressure.
I've got a millitary Rem M11, its got the ord bomb on the bbl, prop of US Navy on rcvr, SR PD also on rcvr & civil defence sticker on the side of the stock. Aparently Its been around. It was only $135. In the 80s
I never doubted that beauty
I shot several hundred 1940’s paper shells back in 2010. Best patterning, best smelling shells I’ve ever fired.
"If you treat this old ammo like trash and stomp on it and kick it thru mud and soak it in water... well it might not run good later."
Oh. Thanks.
Lol. Just messin around. Excellent video as always 👌
Fantastic content ! I envy your job Ian.
Very interesting video! Regarding "grex buffering", my question is, is there a situation similar to the first versions of Claymore mines? These initially had a bad dispersion pattern, but after embedding the pellets in resin the dispersion became very uniform. Greetings from Argentine Patagonia.
I have seen old paper hull shells swelling to the point of splitting the brass
I told you all on the "sneaky" 1897 video prior to this one 12 days back, the '97 holds a good grouping. Next up , try 1400fps slugs!
I'm curious as to whether or not the patterning changes with the bayonet fixed on there?
Hey Ian, general wisdom these days is that brass hulls can only be reliably loaded with blackpowder (or substitute). Were the brass shotshells they issued back then loaded with blackpowder?
No, they used smokeless powder
This was interesting and sort of funny. My Norinco 87 trench gun shots tighter than my trooper bud firearm instructors Remington 870! Almost mirrors what happened here!
I inherited my Grandpa's 1897 Winchester. I'm not sure if it was a trench gun that was 'sporterized' after WW1 or whether it's a police riot version as it has the shortened barrel with an adjustable vent and screw in choke added. Grandpa shot lots of quail with it during the Depression and I currently have it loaded with 00 buckshot for home defense. The sound of the action alone should be enough of a deterrent as it sounds like a bank vault slamming shut.
The 1897's were great because they were specifically designed for smokeless powder and the first successful pump action shotgun via John Moses Browning's genius.
I would have really liked to have seen how that trench gun patterned the Flite Control at 25m, considering how tight the group was that was shown.
A great very interesting video and shotgun Mr.GJ.Have a good one.
Very interesting. Even with old ammunition.
Matt said pellets that are not perfect spheres tend to "go wonky places." Has anyone ever tried using dimpled pellets, similar to tiny golf balls? If the aerodynamics work similarly, dimples *should* decrease air resistance and decrease shot spread.
That would make a great Taofledermaus video
US 4173930A patented a dimpled shot shot shell. The patent claims they patterned tighter and flew farther. You be the judge.
It wouldn't surprise me if that were the case, although the effect would likely be reduced by deformation during firing. Be neat to see how it worked out in practice, though!
Supposedly the " rule of thumb " for riot shotties is 1" spread per yard . Winnie is a tight old gal ! Good luck to everyone who enters ! Has there been any more news on the 97 trench gun re-issue that was supposed to come out this year ?
15:44 See! He can hold a gun properly when he wants to!! 😁
Glad y’all tried the flight control cause I’ve been thinking about using it in my trench gun for dog hunting
Always wondered about the old dram buckshot
Congrats to the winner!
Would be nice if Winchester brought these back, though they would still be inferior to the original models due to the removal of slam fire. A man can dream though
Norinco…. If you are in Canada. Otherwise look on the used market