Firing 3" Shells from 2 3/4 barrel (Remington 1100)

Foxer2373 said:
I thought Monday was yesterday.....

I call TROLL!

Can you yes, should you... no you ####ing retard!

Go throw some 5.56 in a .223 while your at it!
Click to expand...

Hardly a fair comparison seeing as 5.56 and .223 are basically identical in every way, shape and form.

However firing a 3" shell in a 2-3/4" gun is a recipe for disaster. If the barrel is chambered for the 3" round, it is unlikely to be an unsafe action, however, using longer shells than the receiver is designed for will likely result in the shell not ejecting and you having to deal with a nasty double feed/jam scenario that also likely requires to gun to be disassebmled.
 
Foxer2373 said:
I thought Monday was yesterday.....

I call TROLL!

Can you yes, should you... no you ####ing retard!

Go throw some 5.56 in a .223 while your at it!
Click to expand...

Except 556/223 are so close to the same they are virtually identical. I've yet to see a documented case of a kaboom from 556 in a 223 chamber, and this topic has been addressed many times by people with multiple 223 cal rifles who have shot hundreds of surplus 556 in their 223 rifles without issue.

Manufacturers will tell you don't do it to cover their arse, not because it's actually dangerous. A 3" shell vs 2.75" is a big difference though. Not a fair comparison at all.
 
Blastattack said:
Hardly a fair comparison seeing as 5.56 and .223 are basically identical in every way, shape and form.

However firing a 3" shell in a 2-3/4" gun is a recipe for disaster. If the barrel is chambered for the 3" round, it is unlikely to be an unsafe action, however, using longer shells than the receiver is designed for will likely result in the shell not ejecting and you having to deal with a nasty double feed/jam scenario that also likely requires to gun to be disassebmled.
Click to expand...


No, the 5.56 has much higher pressure and firing 5.56 in a 223 chamber can result in failure. You can do 223 in a 5.56, but, not the other way around.
 
The initial question is confusing.

Can a 2 3/4" receiver TECHNICALLY handle the 3" shells. Yes - similar to 870s - but the ejector won't be in the right spot for 3" and it will jam on ejection. Not sure if the ejection port on the 1100 differs between the shell sizes. I only owned a 3" receiver in the past.

Can a 2 3/4" barrel handle 3" shells? NO NO NO NO NO.

A 3" barrel COULD shoot 3" shells with a 2 3/4" receiver - but again they won't eject properly, and you'll have a single shot 1100.
 
Curly1 said:
No, the 5.56 has much higher pressure and firing 5.56 in a 223 chamber can result in failure. You can do 223 in a 5.56, but, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

Poppycock. Show me ONE example of a 223 rifle going kaboom. Yes there are differences, and yes it can potentially lead to higher pressures, and yes the Internet says you'll die a fiery death... but don't trust everything you read on the internet.

OP if you want to use 3" shells, get a 3" barrel. If they won't eject with the 3" barrel I'd probably try to trade it for a 3" model in the EE. I'm just speculating here, but i bet someone out there wants a 2.75" gun for a dedicated clay buster.
 
Suther said:
Poppycock. Show me ONE example of a 223 rifle going kaboom. Yes there are differences, and yes it can potentially lead to higher pressures, and yes the Internet says you'll die a fiery death... but don't trust everything you read on the internet.

OP if you want to use 3" shells, get a 3" barrel. If they won't eject with the 3" barrel I'd probably try to trade it for a 3" model in the EE. I'm just speculating here, but i bet someone out there wants a 2.75" gun for a dedicated clay buster.
Click to expand...

So you are ok with 62,366 psi loads in a rifle designed for 55,000 psi? Like the 3" in a 2 3/4" barrel, it's another episode of a 1000 ways to die.
 
Curly1 said:
So you are ok with 62,366 psi loads in a rifle designed for 55,000 psi? Like the 3" in a 2 3/4" barrel, it's another episode of a 1000 ways to die.
Click to expand...

You can only compare two things when they are tested identically. SAAMI arrives at 55,000 psi very diferently than NATO, CIP or the US Military arrive at 62,500 psi. You cannot quote numbers and throw them around as facts unless you have something to back them up and a frame of refernce to put them in. It is true that there can be some pressure rise when firing a 5.56 in a .223, but the amount is neglibible, and certainly not 25% greater than the Maximum service pressure, which the gun should be able to handle anyways.

Wikipedia said:
Pressure

C.I.P. defines the maximum service and proof test pressures of the .223 Remington cartridge equal to the 5.56mm NATO, at 430 MPa (62,366 psi). This differs from the SAAMI maximum pressure specification for .223 Remington of 380 MPa (55,114 psi), due to CIP test protocols measuring pressure using a drilled case, rather than an intact case with a conformal piston, along with other differences.[50] NATO uses NATO EPVAT pressure test protocols for their small arms ammunition specifications.

Because of these differences in methodology, the CIP pressure of 430 MPa (62,366 psi) is the same as a SAAMI pressure of 380 MPa (55,114 psi), which is reflected in US Military specifications for 5.56mm NATO, which call for a mean maximum pressure of 55,000 PSI (when measured using a protocol similar to SAAMI).[51]

These pressures are generated and measured using a chamber cut to 5.56 NATO specifications, including the longer leade. Firing 5.56mm NATO from a chamber with a shorter .223 Remington leade can generate pressures in excess of SAAMI maximums.
Click to expand...

Wikipedia said:
C.I.P. method[edit]
C.I.P. uses a drilled case to expose the pressure transducer directly to propellant gases. The piezo measuring device (transducer) is positioned at a distance of 25 millimetres (0.98 in) from the breech face when the length of the cartridge case permits that, including limits. When the length of the cartridge case is too short, pressure measurement will take place at a chambering specific defined shorter distance from the breech face depending on the dimensions of the case. The defined distance for a particular chambering is published in the TDCC data sheet of the chambering.
In a rifle cartridge case like the .308 Winchester, the TDCC M = 25.00 value denotes the transducer must be positioned at a distance of 25 millimetres (0.98 in) from the breech face.[2]
In a relatively short pistol cartridge case like the 9×19mm Parabellum (9mm Luger in C.I.P. nomenclature), the TDCC M = 12.50 value denotes the transducer must be positioned at a distance of 12.5 millimetres (0.49 in) from the breech face.[3]

Some have incorrectly concluded that C.I.P. measures pressure at the case mouth to account for the variations from SAAMI pressure.[1]

As transducer C.I.P. almost exclusively uses one type of Piezoelectric sensor (named "channel sensor") made by the Swiss company Kistler that requires drilling of the cartridge case before firing the proofing cartridge in a specially made test barrel.[4][5][6] The Kistler ballistic pressure measurement sensor 6215 has a maximum working pressure of 600 MPa (87,023 psi) and is mounted recessed inside the cartridge case (the face of high-pressure sensor does not contact the cartridge case) and requires that the test cartridge case have a hole drilled in it prior to testing. The test cartridge must be inserted into the chamber in such a way that the hole in the test cartridge case lines up with a gas port hole that channels the gas pressure from the cartridge case to the face of the sensor. The measurement accuracy of the pressure measurements with 21st century high-pressure sensors is expected to be ≤ 2%.[7]

SAAMI method[edit]
SAAMI pressure testing protocol uses a conformal Piezoelectric Quartz Transducer for pressure testing of centerfire pistol and revolver, centerfire rifle, and rimfire cartridges. The primary source of the conformal transducers is the US company PCB Piezotronics. The SAAMI pressure testing protocol uses test barrels that have a hole located in the chamber at a location specific to the cartridge. The SAAMI conformal transducer is fitted into a hole that penetrates the test barrel chamber in such a way that the transducer's face, precision machined to match curvature of the chamber wall at the mounting location a specific distance from the breech face, functions as part of the chamber wall. When the cartridge is fired the gas pressure causes the cartridge case to expand, contacting the chamber walls. The portion of the cartridge case in contact with the face of the conformal transducer exerts a pressure on the transducer which in turn generates a minute electronic impulse that is amplified and results in a reading in pounds per square inch (psi). The SAAMI conformal transducer has the benefit of not requiring a drilled cartridge case and the corresponding challenges of inserting and alignment required of drilled cartridge case. Instead it requires a simple pressure test of a sample case from the lot of cartridge cases being used in the test ammunition. This pressure test determines the gas pressure required to cause the case to expand and come in contact with the face of the conformal transducer upon firing. This measurement is referred to as the "offset" and makes allowance for the "loss" of that gas pressure prior to the cartridge case coming in contact with the transducer and generating the impulse. The offset is added to the pressure reading to arrive at the peak pressure reading. Other benefits of the SAAMI conformal transducer are: very adaptive to the high volume quality control testing demands of commercial and law enforcement ammunition production; protection of the transducer from direct exposure to the high temperature combustion gases and hence a comparatively long service life; 80,000 psi (551.6 MPa) maximum working pressure. Cartridges with the same chamber wall diameter at the mounting point of the transducer and which operate within specific chamber pressure limits may use the same transducer interchangeably reducing instrumentation costs.
Click to expand...

Also, NATO EPVAT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_EPVAT_testing
 
Either put a warning on the thread title for gore or remove that picture please. I did not appreciate that image just before I leave for lunch.
 
So this thread just ruined my lunch hour. Thanks for the NSFW NSFL tags you ######.

Is that really necessary Ganderite?
 
Blastattack said:
You can only compare two things when they are tested identically. SAAMI arrives at 55,000 psi very diferently than NATO, CIP or the US Military arrive at 62,500 psi. You cannot quote numbers and throw them around as facts unless you have something to back them up and a frame of refernce to put them in. It is true that there can be some pressure rise when firing a 5.56 in a .223, but the amount is neglibible, and certainly not 25% greater than the Maximum service pressure, which the gun should be able to handle anyways.





Also, NATO EPVAT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_EPVAT_testing
Click to expand...

PSI is PSI and I will never understand those who want to exceed the maximum or ignore warnings.
 
Curly1 said:
PSI is PSI and I will never understand those who want to exceed the maximum or ignore warnings.
Click to expand...

PSI is PSI, sure. But when different methods are used to measure that psi you can't expect them to be equal.

Of course, you could provide one real world example of when a 556 caused a problem in a 223 rifle...

These warnings you speak of are from the lawyers. Companies covering their own asses. That's it. No different than companies saying don't use reloads in their gun - lawyers covering their arses not a warning against potentially deadly consequences.
 
It's like the first thing they say in the safety course... DON'T put 3 '' in a 2 ¾ etc...

thinking about it.. I'm pretty sure it's the only thing they say... don't put wrong ammo in chamber and fire it.
 
Ceska said:
Is that really necessary Ganderite?
Click to expand...

Yes. It is graphic and memorable. It will be a longtime before anyone who saw that picture will forget.

The poor guy did something stupid and paid for it. It would be tragic if we did not learn from it.

The lesson - BE CAREFUL WHEN SETTING OFF HIGH PRESSURE EVENTS NEXT TO YOUR FACE."
 
Ganderite said:
Yes. It is graphic and memorable. It will be a longtime before anyone who saw that picture will forget.

The poor guy did something stupid and paid for it. It would be tragic if we did not learn from it.

The lesson - BE CAREFUL WHEN SETTING OFF HIGH PRESSURE EVENTS NEXT TO YOUR FACE."
Click to expand...

Yes, graphic, but, some need to see the outcome of failing to follow warning instructions. It could have been worse, he survived, some may not.
 
canucklehead said:
The initial question is confusing.

Can a 2 3/4" receiver TECHNICALLY handle the 3" shells. Yes - similar to 870s - but the ejector won't be in the right spot for 3" and it will jam on ejection. Not sure if the ejection port on the 1100 differs between the shell sizes. I only owned a 3" receiver in the past.

Can a 2 3/4" barrel handle 3" shells? NO NO NO NO NO.

A 3" barrel COULD shoot 3" shells with a 2 3/4" receiver - but again they won't eject properly, and you'll have a single shot 1100.
Click to expand...

The ejector is attached to the barrel extension on an 1100, rather than being riveted into the receiver like an 870. 1100 receivers are identical for either shell length.

Remington has actually offered 3" choke-tubed conversion barrels for the 1100 that are recommended for 2-3/4" magnum lead or steel shot or 3" steel shot only when used on guns that were originally 2-3/4". The only other difference besides the barrel is a heavier action bar sleeve on 3" guns. This may be a difficult part to find, but swapping it along with the barrel will get you the functional equivalent of a factory 3" gun.
 
Woh woh. I think everyone is taking this out of context! I was just genuinely curious if it was possible. I never said or would never attempt to do this on my own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom