Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Talk about 20, 16, & 28 gauge and .410 bore shotguns here.
Post Reply
User avatar
el diablo
Gobbler Nation
Gobbler Nation
Posts: 1138
Joined: June 27th, 2012, 11:37 pm

Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by el diablo » November 16th, 2017, 6:50 pm

Sent a couple of Hal’s new 2 3/4” loads downrange. Shot thru Sa20 and Carlson’s .565
Not too shabby!
ImageImage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BumbleFoot
Posts: 157
Joined: February 14th, 2017, 9:28 pm

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by BumbleFoot » November 16th, 2017, 8:37 pm

:salute: Not shabby at all. 9’s I take it???

Both shots with same set up? If so, what do you attribute the big diff in the 10/20 ratio to???

User avatar
el diablo
Gobbler Nation
Gobbler Nation
Posts: 1138
Joined: June 27th, 2012, 11:37 pm

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by el diablo » November 16th, 2017, 10:07 pm

Same gun and choke. I think each shell was slightly different. Have to wait for Hal to chime in. If ya look at overall 20" numbers they are very close.

User avatar
hawglips
Gobbler Nation
Gobbler Nation
Posts: 3739
Joined: July 7th, 2011, 8:58 pm

Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by hawglips » November 16th, 2017, 10:26 pm

Not a significant difference in the 20”. I pay more attention to the 20” numbers than the 10” when looking for consistency. There was a small alteration between the two that so far hasn’t seemed to make much difference.

357 count 9s for these.

2Shooter
Posts: 938
Joined: January 6th, 2016, 9:18 pm
Location: North Georgia

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by 2Shooter » November 17th, 2017, 6:25 am

That's zippy fast!!! :thumbup:

User avatar
paboxcall
Posts: 204
Joined: February 16th, 2013, 7:16 pm

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by paboxcall » November 17th, 2017, 3:20 pm

I'm not a TSS guy, but I watch these posts because I appreciate the dedication in time, research and testing to achieve these results. Wow - Well done! That is an awesome load.
"Sit down wrong, and you're beat."
Jim Spencer

User avatar
BeardBuster
Posts: 113
Joined: January 3rd, 2016, 10:19 pm

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by BeardBuster » November 19th, 2017, 8:59 pm

That’s awesome. Looking forward to learning how you get 2 1/8 oz in a 20 ga load. Thanks for sharing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BumbleFoot
Posts: 157
Joined: February 14th, 2017, 9:28 pm

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by BumbleFoot » December 15th, 2017, 8:43 pm

Alright...so 1260 fps > 1100-ish fps

Can someone who paid attention in physics class tell me “what do it mean” in practical terms? A little more energy, less drop, greater lethal range, more thump fore and aft...

User avatar
Spuriosity
Gobbler Nation
Gobbler Nation
Posts: 2439
Joined: April 23rd, 2012, 9:12 pm
Location: Western North Carolina

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by Spuriosity » December 16th, 2017, 8:36 am

BumbleFoot wrote:
December 15th, 2017, 8:43 pm
Alright...so 1260 fps > 1100-ish fps

Can someone who paid attention in physics class tell me “what do it mean” in practical terms? A little more energy, less drop, greater lethal range, more thump fore and aft...
Yes, all of those things. The "zippier" load has the same penetration at 81 yds that the slower load has at 74, but that is gilding the lily IMO. TSS lethality is more dependent upon pattern density than starting velocity IMO. To me, the most significant difference between those two loads is recoil. With all else being equal, increasing speed from 1100 fps to 1260 fps in a 6.5 lb gun would increase recoil from 48 ft-lbs to 62 ft-lbs (assuming a 2 gr increase in powder). But those numbers are approximate because I don't know if they use the same powder, wad column, etc.

BumbleFoot
Posts: 157
Joined: February 14th, 2017, 9:28 pm

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by BumbleFoot » December 16th, 2017, 10:37 am

Spuriosity wrote:
December 16th, 2017, 8:36 am
BumbleFoot wrote:
December 15th, 2017, 8:43 pm
Alright...so 1260 fps > 1100-ish fps

Can someone who paid attention in physics class tell me “what do it mean” in practical terms? A little more energy, less drop, greater lethal range, more thump fore and aft...
Yes, all of those things. The "zippier" load has the same penetration at 81 yds that the slower load has at 74, but that is gilding the lily IMO. TSS lethality is more dependent upon pattern density than starting velocity IMO. To me, the most significant difference between those two loads is recoil. With all else being equal, increasing speed from 1100 fps to 1260 fps in a 6.5 lb gun would increase recoil from 48 ft-lbs to 62 ft-lbs (assuming a 2 gr increase in powder). But those numbers are approximate because I don't know if they use the same powder, wad column, etc.
Spur not only knows physics, he knows Shakespearean literature too. Just goes to prove that I’ll be paying for my education from an SEC school for the rest of my life...

Even a theoretical increase of 14 ft-lbs when already flirting with dangerous game level recoils is enough to make me flinch just walking by the gun safe. Lots of variables and assumptions when comparing loads I’m sure. I think we’re dealing with different components, including propellants, and even lower pressures in the speedier load. But, I’ll let Hal weigh in on proprietary info...

User avatar
Reloader
Gobbler Nation
Gobbler Nation
Posts: 1356
Joined: April 19th, 2012, 11:55 am

Re: Hal’s new Lil Zip 1260fps 1 5/8oz load

Post by Reloader » January 2nd, 2018, 3:31 pm

I can tell you that when working up my own 1-5/8oz loads in 20ga that when I got in the 1200-1260fps range, the recoil was obnoxious. I honestly felt like something was going to break on the various light weight guns I was testing, they just aren't designed for that type of punishment in my opinion(I'm not speaking in terms of damage from pressure, but in terms of failure of internal parts such as lugs, bolts, and gas system parts). I ended up settling on 1175fps for hunting and it's more than enough to get the job done at ridiculous range.

Post Reply

Return to “Small Bore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests