Down Range DRF3-12 / Claybuster CB3118-12AR

OK,
Federal Grand White Plastic Hulls, 21.0 grains of Green Dot 1-1/8 oz shot (10 Shot Averages)

I know that the bottom diameter of the DRF3 is smaller than the CB3118-12AR, but here are the chronograph results:
Clay Buster Down Range

1267 Average FPS 1241 Average FPS
44 Variable FPS 22 Variable FPS
18 Deviation 9 Deviation

Perhaps the Clay Buster has a tighter seal, but for sure is not as consistent and that could be due to the wad seating within the hull.

When I patterned the same load using a factory Federal 12S3 wad, the Clay Buster provided a tighter pattern, but the 12S3 was more uniform.

The Down Ranges is very smooth on recoil and not a "kick" sensation as from the Clay Buster.

Just something to think about.

 

There is less recoil since the wads don't seal. Downrange wads suck. jmho

There was a whole thread about them earlier.

 

since downrange wads don't seal, then you are saying factory wads don't seal especially since they are exactly the same
diameter as the factory wads. I use both the claybusters are free and I still prefer the downrange. I haven't been loading
long only about 60 years and have used all types the D/R sure is easier loading and I have never had a misfire or cocked wad with them.

Mac

 

Mac, I did not mike the two wads, shot the last ones (12S3) before I could measure them. I have a 736 bore and never ever sounded funny, so I assume they are sealing as the velocity is very consistent.

Funny you mention that, somewhere along the road someone else said the same. Guess I will just keep shooting the D/R and enjoy the "smoked targets" from handicap...Thanks, Mark

 

Downrange wads are the bottom feeder of the wads. Plastic is too hard. If you look at the used DR wads you will see how they did not seal. And the patterns are inconsistent. I prefer the Claybuster or anything but downrange.