Sabot Identification

[edge]

mountainman said:

The MMP standard .50/.452 sabot (the "short black") is the short one with a concave, domed skirt. I can't see any need to ever trim it under normal circumstances.

The MMP HPH-12 is also a .50/.452 sabot, but is supposed to be somewhat stronger than the MMP short black. I think that is mainly supposed to be a result of the skirt shape, which (while cupped) does not have a domed bottom, but rather a stair-stepped concave design. I think it is the same polymer and petal thickness as the MMP short black. The petals are significantly longer the the short black, though.

The MMP HPH-24 is the HPH-12's twin. The difference is that with a .452 diameter bullet, the HPH-12 is .507" in diameter, while the HPH-24 is .505"-.506" in diameter. This .001" to .002" difference in overall diameter makes a big difference in how hard it is to push the load down the barrel. Some bores are larger in diameter and do best with the thicker HPH-12 sabot; others have a slightly smaller bore diameter (a "tight" barrel) and shoot better with the thinner HPH-24 sabot.

The HPH-24 looks almost identical to the HPH-12, with the following distinguishing characteristics:

(1) HPH-24: While both the HPH-12 and -24 have a number molded into the bottom of the skirt, the number on the HPH-24 is very distinct, well-defined, and looks as like it was made in about 10-point Arial font. HPH-12In contrast, the number on the bottom of the HPH-12 skirt looks like it was handwritten or hand-ground into the mold and is rougher, more "bubble" shaped, and much larger than the clear, type-set number on the HPH-24. On many of the HPH-12 sabots, you can see a clear, type-set style number sitting on top of the larger, rougher, handwritten-style number.

(2) The petals on the HPH-24 are slightly more flexible than the petals on the HPH-12. It is such a small amount of difference, though, that I don't think this alone is a reliable method of identification. Moreover, you DEFINITELY would have to have a sample of both in your hands at the same time directly comparing them to be able to feel a difference, if at all.

(3) HPH-12: The slots or slices in the petals of the HPH-12 (the ones that split the cylinder of the upper part of the sabot into four petals, instead of just one unbroken cup) look like they are just that: slices. While there is a small gap between the petals, the plane of the lengthwise edge of each petal is pretty much directly on a radial axis extending from the center of the sabot. In other words, the planes of the edges between petals are pretty close to directly perpendicular to the inner and outer walls of the petals. HPH-24: In contrast, the edges of the petals along the slots of the HPH-24 sabots are tangentially aligned with the bullet axis. That is, these edges form an acute angle with the outer wall of the petals, and an obtuse angle with the inner wall of the petals. My hypotheses is that, like the cross-piece on an I-beam, a radially-aligned edge on the petals makes them stiffer. Since the HPH-24 petals are thinner (and thus lighter), there may be more resistance (from adhesion to the bullet) to the countervailing centrifugal forces. So, in order to help the HPH-24 sabots separate more cleanly from the bullet, the radial edge was largely eliminated by making the edges of the HPH-24 petals pretty much parallel to the axis of the intended creases/folds of the opened petals.

The Hornady sabots look almost identical to the HPH-12 and HPH-24 sabots, but the Hornady sabots don't have a number molded into the inside bottom of the skirt.

In terms of length, the Harvestor sabots are in between the MMP short black and the MMP HPH-series sabots. They appear more precisely molded, the petals don't tend to fold inward like MMP sabot petals tend to do, and unlike the MMPs, in which the skirt appears a little narrower than the petals, the Harvestors have straight outside lines. The inside of the skirt is not stair-stepped, but also is not as curved as the MMP short black, either. It is more angular that the skirt on the short black MMP. Perhaps most significantly, the Harvestor mold injection mark is on the center of the inside bottom of the skirt, whereas the MMP injection marks are on the side of the sabot at the height of the sabot floor.

Somebody at the range also gave me a sample of another brand of sabot that they think is probably a Knight. It looks very similar to a short black MMP, but the plastic used to make it is much harder and is less flexible and maleable than the MMP polymer. Most significantly, all the walls, both inside and outside, of the skirt and cup (petals) have circumferal marks on them that make it look like the sabot was turned on a lathe out of a single block of plastic, then slots cut into the petals. Very odd looking.

Based on the indisputable suggetions of others here, and in my own quest for repeatability, I discard all the sabots that come with muzzleloader bullets (actually, I give them to my friend that shoots Pyrodex) and buy MMPs straight from the manufacturer's websight. I've got a box of Harvestors, as well, but have not yet decided how they compare to MMPs in my gun.

So far, I have been using a pair of fingernail clippers to trim about an eight of an inch (one clip) off of the end of each petal on the HPH-series sabots. This helps prevent my loading jag from pinching the petals. Others don't clip them, since the extra weight/wind resistance may aid in rapid separation from the bullet. I'm going to experiment with trimmed versus untrimmed in the future, but for now, trimming is working and I'll wait to tweak that variable.

I hope that gives you some starting information on sabots. Don't hesitate to ask if you have any more questions--but I think that pretty much exhausts my knowledge on the subject.