[JusStu13]

I feel I should know the answer to this but I don't and well when it comes to firearms I need to be a 100%. I have a single shot .410 gauge and on the side it says 3" chamber. Now can i shoot 2&1/2's out of it? You guys will probably laugh but I'll feel better about it. LOL

 

[30-30remchester]

There are no dumb questions just dumb answers. Since the 410 and other common guages are staight wall cases then it is safe to shoot any shorter ammo in each guage. As I understand it, the 410 isnt actually a guage but instead actually a caliber for what its worth. There was also an old 410 loading that was a 2" shell, long extint now.

 

[zb338]

Yes, you can shoot the shorter shells out of a long chamber.
You can't shoot longer shells out of a shorter chamber. There
is no such thing as a dumb question. So don't feel bad.

Zeke

 

[O'Connersun]

Ditto on what they said but I'll just add this; I use 2 1/2" shells in a 3" chambered .410 for rabbit hunting because it patterns the short shells better.

 

[Davers]

If the .410 is in good working order and it has 3" written on the barrel then 3" shells are fine & you can use 2 1/2" shells also. BTW the .410 is actually a 67 gauge.

 

[Durangogun]

Longer shells, too?

Shooting shorter shells than the marked chambering is something almost everyone agrees can be done--the manufacturers write about it in their literature. Guns are most often chambered for 3" shells these days, but the majority of shells fired are likely 2 3/4" shells unless the gun is reserved for waterfowl or turkeys.

A couple of years ago there was a very long article in Double Gun Journal about firing shells longer than what was marked on the barrel.

The author concluded that it was not a problem.

What made the article necessary, I suspect, was the fact that a lot of Americans were getting their hands on British sporting guns that were chambered for 2 1/2" shells, and they wanted to shoot American 2 3/4" shells in them.

The author's conclusion was that it was fine. The only likely problem, he felt, was that the hull lip would quickly become ragged and reloads would not maintain sufficient crimp pressure, but the actual firing and patterning would be just fine until the hulls became damaged.

I never tried it, probably won't, but wonder if anyone out there has?

 

[O'Connersun]

Well, I don't know who that author was but I don't think I will trust his opinion.

Granted they were not well built English guns but I have seen bulged barrels from shooting 3" shells in older 2 3/4" single barrelled guns. I'm fairly certain these barrels were weaker than modern day barrels but the stress was obvious to the naked eye and the bulge could be felt with the hand on some.

Some folks claim its OK to shoot modern shells in damascus barrels too but I've seen high $ Spanish guns unfold like a papertowell roll too!

Like jumping off the Golden Gate bridge with a big rubber band around my ankle, there are just some things I don't do with guns. The above are just 2 of them.

 

[Durangogun]

It seemed like a very irresponsible article to me . . .
but Double Gun Journal, a very highly regarded magazine, ran it and I suspect more than a few believed it.

I don't think I still have it, but if I can find it, I'll post the issue date.

 

[Gil Martin]

I agree with these folks

I would not shoot longer shells in any chamber. All the best...
Gil

 

[Durangogun]

O'Connersun,

Found it.

The article ran in Vol. 12, Issue 4--Winter 2001 of The Double Gun Journal
title: "Finding Out For Myself, Part V: Long Shells in Short chambers" by Sherman Bell

It's a long article but I think this is a fair summary:

He measured pressures in a set of test chambers/barrels with different sizes of chamber and lengths of forcing cones, and concluded that using standard SAAMI factory ammo from 2 1/2 " to even 3" in a gun machined with chambers and cones designed for 2 1/2" ammunition would not cause failure or damage in an otherwise sound weapon. The small measured pressure increases, he concluded, were nothing to worry about--beyond the fraying of the crimped portion of the hull.

In my experience, no manufacturer agrees with this conclusion

(I've also read articles by gunsmiths about the damage caused to older guns by using plastic hulled shells in guns designed for paper hulls, because the forcing cones were not cut to accommodate the thicker hull material).

The question that started this thread asked about using shotshells shorter than the markings on the barrel--I remembered this article and thought I'd ask if anyone had experience with the consequences of using longer shells than those marked on the barrel.

Thanks for posting your experience.

I'd love to know if anyone else saw the article--and what they thought about it, or this matter of using longer shells than recommended.

Me--I'm with you, about not violating manufacturer's recommendations, and jumping off bridges.

 

[miestro_jerry]

There are no dumb questions and safety is first and for most when dealing with weapons. Generally the chambering that shell length are stamped on the barrel.

Jerry

 

[Ralph McLaney]

3" shell patterns.

The real problem with 3" shells in the .410 is that manufacturers use the same shotcup wads for 3" shells as they do in the 2.5 inch. That means a majority of the additional shot is rendered flat sided by bore scrub.