So, most of what I read says Cheddite primers are similar to Win 209 and most say they sub the Cheddite in when the load calls for Winchester and they can’t get the Win. Also, there are Cheddite 1000 and 2000 and most seem to be 2000- that’s all my LGS has. Even the Win. 209 “for muzzleloaders” are gone and Cheddite is all that remains.

Why? Why can I buy 1,000 Cheddite CX2000, type 209 primers but no Fed, Win, Rem, CCI… What’s so special about Cheddite that they can put product on the shelf when nobody else can?

We just got home from shopping. We’d only been home about 15 minutes when we heard a loud bang from the garage. This is what we found:
















It’s electric so it appears to be a pressure build up. Our home warranty, American Home Shield has arranged for the plumbers to call in the next 24 business hours to schedule the appointment. Which means they won’t even call until Monday or Tuesday. No telling when they will actually show up.

Terry

… for your load data

The thing is, I have some very well preserved Win. 571 that I’d like to use. I also have a bunch of 12 ga Federal Gold Medal hulls. (I don’t want to throw my AA tubes out in the field, since my daughter-in-law shoots an auto.)

Does anyone have a 1 1/4  or  1 3/8  or even 1 1/2 oz load?

[FPC News] FPC and FPCAF File Appellate Response Brief Defending Win in Lawsuit Chal

<p><strong>NEW ORLEANS, LA</strong><span style="font-weight: 400;"> (</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">August 24, 2023) – </span><span style="font-weight: 400;">Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF)</span><span style="font-weight: 400;"> announced the filing of their response brief with t</span><span style="font-weight: 400;">he Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in </span><a href="https://www.firearmspolicy.org/vanderstok"><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">VanDerStok v. Garland</span></em></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">, defending their </span><a href="https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc_and_fpcaf_win_federal_judge_vacates_atf_s_unlawful_frame_or_receiver_rule"><span style="font-weight: 400;">win</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> at the district court in their lawsuit challenging the ATF’s “Frame or Receiver” Rule. The brief can be viewed at </span><a href="http://fpclegal.org"><span style="font-weight: 400;">FPCLaw.org</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p>


http://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-and-fp...eiver-rule

Ok, here’s what I know: dram equivalent gives you an idea of the muzzle velocity of a shot charge. It compares smokeless powder to the performance of black powder. A 3 3/4  1 1/4 denotes a shot charge of one and one quarter ounces exiting the muzzle at 1,330 fps. It’s the old “high velocity field load”. Therefore a 3   1 1/8 is one and one eighth ounces of shot moving at approx 1,200 fps. A 2 3/4   1 1/8, then, is the same one and one eighth moving at approx 1,145 fps.

What I don’t know is how to back calculate a load, say 1 1/8 ounce load at 1,000 fps. Is that a 2 1/4  1 1/8 (approximately)? Anybody got dope on how to do this?

[GOA News] Stop Biden’s Attack on Hunting and Shooting Safety Programs in Schools

Biden’s Escalating War on Hunters: Blocking Funds for School Safety Programs Fresh off his efforts to ban lead ammunition on public lands, Joe Biden is once again escalating his war on hunters, this time by withholding routine funds provided to our children’s schools that are used for hunter education, firearms safety classes, shooting teams, and even archery programs. This key federal …<br/> <a class="postReadMore" href="https://www.gunowners.org/na08232023/">Read more<i class="fa fa-angle-double-right"></i></a>


https://www.gunowners.org/na08232023/

Ruger American .308..Magpul furniture..Vortex Strike Eagle..