S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,579
Posts546,635
Members14,425
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 610
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 610 |
I think it has to do with configuration of the choke; conical with straight wall before the muzzle; short conical; long conical;swaghed etc.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
Those do look a bit dense but I can't make anything of it. Not to say they aren't too tight for your intended purposes, just not sure that that full&full is a valid description. I'm sure you know that choke descriptions are defined as certain percentages in a 30" circle @ 40 yds. That has limited utility (unless your typical shot is at 40 yds) and even less once you deviate from those parameters. I've never tried to translate that into percentages at 30yds, nor would I want to. Knowing that my bonafide modified choke delivers 60% at 40 yds and my full delivers 75% at 40 yds is no more useful to me than knowing that both will put 100% in a 30" circle at 15 yds. For my purposes, I expect each barrel to deliver an adequate pattern with a specific load at a specific yardage, +/- a bit, for the intended game. What those percentages are at any other distance is secondary. I long ago gave up counting holes and figuring percentages and rely instead on shooting at lifesize images at the desired yardage. Coincidentally, .006/.014 is virtually identical to what I arrived at for my 20ga grouse/WC gun. A few paper patterns suggest my preferred load would work OK at my average first and second shot distances and field use has proven it so.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,758 Likes: 99
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,758 Likes: 99 |
duh proof is in duh shootin...duh!
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,392 Likes: 107
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,392 Likes: 107 |
Couple points here:
1. When figuring percentages, it's not wise to go by the "book" numbers for how many pellets of a given shot size and given shot charge you'll find in a load. I've counted pellets in shells marked 1 oz 6 that have ranged from under 200 up to 250. The "book" number of 225 is right in the middle, but that doesn't help you much when you're at one extreme or the other.
2. If you shoot at 40 yards, you need a bigger piece of paper than used in the first pattern photos above. Otherwise, a small aiming error will move part of your 30" circle off the sheet.
3. If you shoot at closer range (like 30 yards or less, which I usually do), I have not observed that there's extreme variation from shot to shot. That may occur as a result of aiming error and a pattern sheet that's too small at 40 yards, however.
4. I pretty much gave up on Dr. Jones when I read about how many broken clay targets he attributes to a single pellet strike. That contention alone told me that he needs to get away from his computer and spend some time picking up unbroken clay targets with a hole or holes. I don't know how many clay targets break as a result of a single pellet strike, but I do know I've found plenty that don't, some that don't break from 2 pellet strikes, and the occasional target that doesn't break from 3 hits.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,202 Likes: 1176
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,202 Likes: 1176 |
4. I pretty much gave up on Dr. Jones when I read about how many broken clay targets he attributes to a single pellet strike. That contention alone told me that he needs to get away from his computer and spend some time picking up unbroken clay targets with a hole or holes. I don't know how many clay targets break as a result of a single pellet strike, but I do know I've found plenty that don't, some that don't break from 2 pellet strikes, and the occasional target that doesn't break from 3 hits.
Haven't read Jones, but totally agree about single ( and 2 or 3) pellet strikes failing to break targets. I, too, have picked up many unbroken with 3 pellet holes. That is precisely why I use nothing but two fixed chokes in competition, both .020". I strongly believe that I lose less targets because of an overly tight pattern than I would from light hits. SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
Haven't read Jones, but totally agree about single ( and 2 or 3) pellet strikes failing to break targets. I, too, have picked up many unbroken with 3 pellet holes. That is precisely why I use nothing but two fixed chokes in competition, both .020". I strongly believe that I lose less targets because of an overly tight pattern than I would from light hits.
SRH
Me, too, Stan and I also use #7.5 exclusively (we still can't use #6, can we?). There have always been those who advocate small shot for rabbits. It's not too difficult to find those with 6 or more holes in them. Couple that with the difficulty of scoring them when they run through broken target debris and...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 245
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 245 |
Devrep,
From a conceptual perspective, Jones book is the way to go in having a broad picture regarding to what we are dealing with as to chokes and patterns.
Then I would figure what I am trying to obtain with my gun(s) on the selected targets, i.e. clays or feather.
What I did was to figure out at what distance I wanted to shoot my quails, partridges or pheasants, etc. with both barrels from my different shotguns. I also allowed for bore, charge and pellet size appropiate for each quarry. I checked the pellet count for every charge and shell make. Then I tried at the steel shooting board at selected distances the charges that I thought were the most adequated. Then marking a 30" circle at the obtained patterns and COUNTED OUTLYING STRIKES (corrected by Jones formula of error). Counting pellet holes out of the circle is easier and straightforward. Repeated ten times the process and, depending much on the quarry-charge, I felt satisfied when a 75 to 85% pattern efficiency (PE) was obtained. Selected firing distances where 20/25 yards(meters) for the open barrel and 30/35 yards(meters) for the close barrel for upland guns, closer for quails/partridge and farther for pheasant. Pigeon guns were required to yield a little higher, 80/85% PE at 25/30 yards and 35/40 yards respectively. I haven't done it for duck-goose shooting. If I have to, I would perhaps go for more patterning distance, due to usual field conditions of this game. (Shotgun-Insight did not work for me because it marked each hole twice or trice and I did not know how to make corrections to this problem.)
With fixed choke guns, I prefer to slightly alter distance for the first and second shot if it prints too open or too close, or simply to change shotgun if it does pattern too far from expected at the selected distance. Needless to say that pattern results were quite different many times from observed chokes, either measured or marked in the barrels.
EJSXS
Last edited by ejsxs; 11/30/12 04:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 371
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 371 |
thanks. perhaps I didn't make myself clear. each of my guns is what it is. I use whichever one I feel like using, with the knowledge of how it actually shoots, not what is marked on it or what it reads on the bore gauge.
I was just curious why the choke markings and choke charts are so often way off the mark from the way guns actually pattern. From some of your responses I guess the way the choke is cut, the angle and length of taper can make a difference. I have to think that way back with black powder and using wads instead of shot cups it was also very different. I would guess the patterns were some what wider.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,392 Likes: 107
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,392 Likes: 107 |
I recently shot some 25 yard patterns with my Lancaster SLE, which is choked .007 in both barrels. Mid-80% patterns with both a Kent Gamebore Pure Gold (paper case, fiber wad) and a particularly tight-patterning reload in a once-fired Gold Medal hull, plastic wad.
What I've also found is that different shells can result in a significant variation in pattern %--and I'm talking all modern shells with plastic wads. Generally speaking, when I've patterned top of the line target loads (STS, AA, etc), I get higher % results than with less expensive loads, even if they have plastic wads. Difference in shot hardness, maybe? Not sure, but something's going on there.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12 |
If you will have a look at Jones's research, you will be able to easily identify many single pellet breaks. A target that has only two or three pieces is almost for sure a single pellet break. The pellet strike starts a fracture line crack (clays are very strong, but brittle). The fracture quickly crosses the target and the two or three pieces separate.
You can pick up all the unscorable targets with however many pellet strikes you care to and you still will never know how many singularly struck targets were scored. (No, not ever singlularly struck target breaks; Jones is not saying that. Yes, two strikes are more likely to a break target than is one.) Therefore, you have no idea as to the probability of a single strike resulting in a scored target. Anybody else out there able to present research data on the subject of pellet strikes vs probability of a scorable traget? BTW, the other side of number of pellet strikes is aiming error; anyone have any research on probability of scorable target vs aiming error? Jones started his single pellet strike research because his patterning results showed a requirement for aiming error so small that it seemed unlikely.
DDA
|
|
|
|
|