Multi-Shot 2"/3" 1.4G Cakes

[Dmkaz]

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but wanted to get thoughts on the 1.4G multi-shot cakes with 2"/3" bores.

Doing some math on the subject, here's calculations *if* they were max-load 1.75" aerial shells: 60g max/1.75" shell * 9 shots = 540g. This means if they were all max-load aerial shells, that cake would actually exceed the max-load for 1.4 cakes at 540g. So if these were all 2"/3" shells with a presumably higher powder weight, how could they possibly be real? :)

Every one of these I've seen dissected is an absolute scam. Inside is *actually* a 2"/3" shell, or so it appears. Cutting open the shell actually yields *another* shell inside which is a standard 1.75" ball along side a piece of cardboard to prevent it from rattling around.

So it seems that these guys are a complete scam. You're much better off buying quality canister shells and chaining them together.

[PyroJoeNEPA]

You are correct to a point--some of them are a 2 1/2" shell inside a 3" ball with some rice hulls to keep it from rolling. It still can not exceed the weight limits, but allows for a more symmetrical break than a canister shell does. Most cans break sort of "flat looking".
There are some very nice 1.75" ball shells that are not a lot of money and, in my opinion, you can get more for your money that way. Up side of NOAB's is you don't need tubes for them--but at the extra cost, for the money you spend for a couple NOAB's you can buy a rack of guns & have them to use over & over.

I have seen some very nice NOAB's ---but--since I have a "54" and can buy 1.3g---2 1/2" & 3" shells are less money & bigger breaks.

[Dmkaz]

You are correct to a point--some of them are a 2 1/2" shell inside a 3" ball with some rice hulls to keep it from rolling. It still can not exceed the weight limits, but allows for a more symmetrical break than a canister shell does. Most cans break sort of "flat looking".
There are some very nice 1.75" ball shells that are not a lot of money and, in my opinion, you can get more for your money that way. Up side of NOAB's is you don't need tubes for them--but at the extra cost, for the money you spend for a couple NOAB's you can buy a rack of guns & have them to use over & over.

I have seen some very nice NOAB's ---but--since I have a "54" and can buy 1.3g---2 1/2" & 3" shells are less money & bigger breaks.

I can agree that most canisters look 'flat' and to have a max-loaded shell with a symmetrical break is a great thing. I'm curious if the 2.5" 'inside' shells you mentioned are a dying breed due to the hard 1.75" constraint now. Either way, I have been impressed by some of those cakes, but even at wholesale cost the prices aren't quite worth it.

I do as well have a '54' and can agree just buying larger shells are far worth it. Just wanted to give a heads up to others who might not have seen this trickery before and aren't aware.

[djsmurf]

Might be time for someone to just get a few NOAB and some 3" shells. Fuse the NOAB to fire single shot against the true 3" stuff. It would be end of story then.

[nayslayer]

What is NOAB?

[PyroJoeNEPA]

What is NOAB?

NOAB is an acronym for "Nine On A Board"......your typical board with 9 tubes mounted on it whether 3" or 2 1/2" tubes.

[PyroJoeNEPA]

I can agree that most canisters look 'flat' and to have a max-loaded shell with a symmetrical break is a great thing. I'm curious if the 2.5" 'inside' shells you mentioned are a dying breed due to the hard 1.75" constraint now.
I haven't taken one apart for a while but the one thing I did notice was that the diameter of the stars in the 2 1/2" NOAB insert were slightly larger in diameter than what you would typically see in a 1.75" ball or canister shell. This would give a slightly longer "hang time" to the effect. Also, they had black powder coated rice hulls for the burst charge instead of the typical 4FA black powder in the 1.75" ball shell which would give it a better break. Either way, 60 grams is 60 grams. That is what the composition limit is "supposed" to be.