I have been thinking about single pellet clay breaks as discussed by Dr. Andrew Jones in his new patterning book. Having looked at his photos and his data, I have become much more observant of target breaks. I have noted that some targets break pretty much in half and believe this is a pretty sure sign of a single pellet break. Couple of weeks ago I did some crusing of a skeet field "landing zone." Following are photos of some of what I found.


A single pellet hit that "almost but not quite" broke.


Inside of the previous clay. Note the lack of penetration by the pellet, yet the extent of the "reverse" damage due to the brittle material getting hit with a shock load force.


Looks like a one pellet break, although I don't have the other half to prove it. Note the break goes across the pellet hit and the extent of fracture.


Inside of previous clay. Note the reverse side damageand the fracture lines.


A case of a pellet skipping off the edge of the rim, yet fracturing the clay.


Extensive inside damage.

I think a test desinged to maximize single pellet hits is in order. A large sheet of plastic in the major landing zone should aid recovery of targets and fragments. As noted in a previous thread, we need field data that indicates the % of single pellet hits that result in a scorable target.

This is why I use 7.5's for all my Sporting Clay Shooting. Anyplace where there is a relatively "soft" landing zone for clays, you'll see dozens of clays like that, including some with 3 or more hits. Some batches of clays really are harder than others.

Why?

Possibly a related story? Some years back I was shooting a terrible round of trap when the scorer mentioned he could see the dust flying of my targets but they weren't breaking. I think I was trying 7/8oz of 9s with IMod. I was trying to get rid of a bag of 9 shot I still have.

I think the clay manufacturers are making the clays more resilient. I just know I'm hitting the targets but they won't do their part and break. :-)

What Joe Wood said. The best shooter still wins the money in a clay target event. In any shooting of live birds, we aren't the least bit interested in one pellet hits.

I'll take the magic BB anytime.....

Some shooters suggest that the biodegradeable targets are harder to break than the older ones.

If you watch good skeet or trap shooters, especially if the skeet guys are shooting 12's or 20's, you will not see very many breaks where there are just--as a shooting friend says--"the minimum number of pieces". You'll see a lot more if someone's shooting a .410--which makes sense because of the reduced # of pellets in the pattern.

I understand that mass marketers (Walmart) order a tougher bird to reduce handleing losses. It also seeems that the bio-degradeable birds are tougher.
bill

Again, what difference does it make, if everyone is shooting the same batch of clays. First, you guys changed the rules to allow the gun to be pre-mounted so it'd be easier to have higher scores. Now you want clays that break easier....to have higher scores. What next? Slower clays? Bigger clays? Hey, that's an idea!

Dr.Jones showed that striking energy is factor in breaking targets. So, there will be cross-over points where the reduced pellet count of larger size shot is off-set by the higher energy. To statistically figure out these points, we need to understand single pellet breaks. That said, I think you have a legit point, Mike, that needs further research.

I think the diminishing returns business was figured out years ago when skeet shooters went universally to #9 shot instead of #10.

I know this is a rabbit clay and they are a bit tougher - but this guy was a bit unlucky!!



JC

There are cross-over points for choke and for pellet energy (size and velocity). That is to say, there are distances at which the next up or down choke size will yield more broken targets. Likewise, there are distances at which higher (more energy) velocity or lower (less recoil fatigue) velocity and/or a next up or down pellet size will yield more broken targets. These points are not well documented nor are they well understood. It is commonly accepted that itis #9 and open choke for skeet, #8 and Modish for 16 yd trap, and #7 1/2 and full for way back handicap. Now, try to get a consensus for sporting clays/5-stand/FITASIC/etc. Hunting? Good luck!!

There was a similar argument in the 1870's. Some asked "Why?" use/allow choke bore guns - didn't need 'em!!

For me, very simply, because I want to know.

Yes, but what about trap?

An interesting target, OF. I wonder what would have broken that one? Note the relatively clean holes with little fracture.

I find that on hot days - yes we do get a few each year in England - when the clays are softer there appear to be more unbroken clays with holes in them - not too sure what the best stratagy is to break these softer clays - more smaller pellets or fewer higher energy jobbies - thoughts??
JC

Since a rabbit target does not rely on rotation to create a fractured target, it would be very easy to set rabbits in a rack and shoot at them with different size shot and concentration of pattern to determine the breaking characteristics of this target. Did the fellow with the book address this situation?

Rocketman, it's easy to get a consensus for skeet or 16 yard trap because all the targets are broken at more or less the same distances. Obviously harder for SC/5 stand, because you have to hit targets at varying distances. Often significantly varying.

Re the rabbit target shown above . . . it's my understanding that rabbit targets only have a tougher rim, not a tougher middle. (Think I saw that in a Gil Ash video.) I'd say that shooter was very unlucky.

No, Dr. Jones did not address rabbits and a lot of other clay issues. But, his work gives both insight into basic issues and set a testing model for future work. It is not an end-all work, but it is a whale of a begining. I'm looking at extending his work with the live-fire one pellet strike test.

More power to ya Don.

Quite a project.

Targets are a variable, which makes the task more daunting.

White Flyer are the absolute best. They are the trap shooters choice.

Lawry are harder, but they pay off for the SC clubs. Champions are variable... they are often broken by the trap, but dusted by the shooter (!).

Your research has the chance of being valuable, but the target variability issue is going to be a problem.

One thing I've wondered all along is whether Dr. Jones' research, conducted in England I believe, might not have been done on clay birds that are different enough from ours to make that a variable one would have to eliminate.

Don, it's been a while since I glanced over "the book" and I assume other readers here may not have even glanced. How about explaining how you or the author do testing to determine the effectiveness of one pellet hits.

Dr. Jones set up a test rig with a variable speed hand drill spinning the plastic lid off a "pot of Christmas nuts." The lid, by happen stance, was sized for a clay to "snap on" with little influence on the results. Dr. J usedanairpistolfor his velocity generator - - - about 450fps with a single pellet (in this case, size didn't matter) and based breaks on pellet energy. Clay pieces were captured in a box lined with insulation. The analysis of breaks vs non-breaks is the first attempt at defining lethal dose for a clay. Testing by Dr. J is not the end all, rather a pointer of direction. I'm planning a live firing test to extend Dr. J's currently published work. Jones' work focused on statistical analysis of the energy necessary to break a target with zone of the clay and angle of strike as variables.

As noted above, the brand/lot/design of the clay is a variable worthy of testing for understanding of lethal dose (how many pellets of what energy at what spots on the target).

The good news is that both of us are doing testing that can be repeated by others and extended as time/money/interest/usefulness indicate.

450 fps is the velocity for a no. 8, or 7 1/2 at what distance, when launched at 1250 fps?


And, was that air pistol firing no. 7 1/2, or no. 8, shot? Or was it firing steel BB's?

Stan

Stan, good question. It was firing various larger sizes of lead shot so as to generate energies typical of smaller shot as used on clay targets. Data showed that the target was broken by impact energy via shock propagation within the brittle material, not by pellet diameter aspenetrationofthe clay was unusual. The shock wave would result in fractures at discontinuities and/or the side opposite the impact. The rotational force actually pulled the pieces apart. No steel BB's. A cleaning wad was used as the barrel sealer. The next logical step in this line of experimentation is to use an air rifle, perhaps a pump-up version than can achieve various velocities.

Doesn't seem relevant to me if the tests are not utilizing the exact type shot at the same velocity ranges that would be present when actually shooting clays with a shotgun. "Close to the same" just isn't good enough, if you're going to all this trouble to try and get useful data.

Stan

A #8 with a muzzle velocity of 1200 fps has a retained velocity of about 840 fps at 20 yards; just over 700 fps at 30 yards.

"Empirical" is looking better all the time.

I'm sorry if this is not quite as technical as some of the experiments but it might cause more questions than answers.
Again this is a photo of a rabbit clay I picked up this morning - so not hot weather. Shot at around 20yards. The pellet measures 2.5mm but of coarse it could have been distorted by the impact.



Now this first photo shows the pellet from the side of the impact - surprising to me it is flat.



This second photo shows what would have been the exit side. I can confirm this by the direction the trap was throwing and the rib. As you can see the pellet is still rounded if just a little flattened. Now I am no scientist but this does not look like normal ballistics to me. The chances of a second pellet impacting squarly on the reverse if this pellet seems very remote as it was the only strike on the target. I would not have thought there was enough energy to 'upset' the pellet through the hole to form a dome on the reverse and flatten the tail but perhaps I am wrong. Having seen what air gun pellets, .22 bullets and larger rifles do when they hit fairly solid objects this does not look the same in any way.
If the pellet is trying to ‘ooze’ or 'upset' its way through the clay target then there will be considerable lateral forces as the clay will be acting like a die stretching wire for example. I'm afraid I have no answers - just an unusual observation as you don't get stuck pellets very often - and more questions.John

Something that has not been mentioned is the effect of the different types of traps throwing the targets. The old White Flyer machines imparted a good bit of spin to the target, while most if not all of the more modern machines give less spin. This will give a lot of difference in the effects of centrifugal force on the one pellet hits. I knew that the spin differences were manifested in the flight of targets in the wind, but had not considered the difference in marginal hit breaks.
Another big factor is the make and in some cases the style of the target. For about 20 years I did the set up and maintenance on the skeet machines at the club I belonged to. All our machines were Westerns. The best targets for shooters were Remingtons, and the next best were the White Flyers. For a while, Federal made a target that was as good as the White Flyer, but later discontinued it. The easily broken targets were the best for the shooters, but bad for the club because of the percentage broken in the machines. The White Flyers were the best compromise, providing the machines were properly maintained and adjusted. Federal made some targets that were so hard that a 200 lb man could stand on one without breaking it.The top shooters still shoot the highest scores and still win, regardless of the targets used, but their scores are lower than with the more easily broken targets.

At Sea Level, Temp=59F - Bar-29.54" - 12ga 2 3/4" - Full Choke - 1 3/4 - unbuffered #8 shot (0.090")
1250 fps 3 feet from the muzzle

10yds 1057fps 2.66ft/lbs
20yds _863fps 1.77ft/lbs
30yds _724fps 1.25ft/lbs
40yds _618fps 0.91ft/lbs
50yds _533fps 0.68ft/lbs
60yds _461fps 0.51ft/lbs
62yds _448fps 0.48ft/lbs
70yds _400fps 0.38ft/lbs
80yds _347fps 0.29ft/lbs

With a Skeet choke it will be doing 454fps, 0.49ft/lbs at 59 yards

Pete

Stan, duplication of the event of interest with measurement equipment that doesn't influence outcome is, of course, the most desirable test. However, an appropriate model that accounts for the influencing factors is oftenvery useful. We have "pointer" work from Dr.jones and I'm moving to some live testing. We shall see if Dr. J's model is reasonable. If it is, we will be able to gather data much faster.

Tom, do you know why the difference in spin speed of the traps? As I see it, the circumferential speed of the clay has to equal the forward velocity of the clay, unless the clay slips relative to the rail. Considering that there are a lot of g's acceleration, the force of the rail against the target must be high. It would, therefore, take a very low coefficient of friction between the target and the rail to allow slippage. Has the rail material changed dramatically over time? I expected it would be some form of rubber and have a relatively high coefficient of friction with the clay.

Emperical, experience, and hoss sense all have a valuable place. Unfortunately, some parts of life don't work according to the above. Considering that we have had little advancement since the 1870's, '80's, I suspect there are some choke technology that doesn't fit to the above. Patience and stay tuned. We shall see.

Makes me want to add 25% to my scores from now on.

the range i belong to up in poolville, when the grass is taller or it's been raining and the ground is soft lots of missed targets don't break when hitting the ground. i can usually pick up a couple dozen out in front of the individual traps and use them again. lots of these show one or more pellet strikes. i picked up one that had 3 solid hits and not only didn't break in the air or when hitting the ground, it didn't even come apart when thrown.

was shooting with my stepson once and he busted a target twice as he thought he'd missed but his first shot actually hit it. i saw a geyser of black dust erupt and spray about a foot in the air above the target. it kept on going without so much as a change in direction i could detect. i assume that's why at any sort of clays competition they have spotters to do nothing but keep their eyes on the target and watch for any indication of strikes.

i will say it's been my observation that 7.5's are more reliable at breaking targets than 8's and i really prefer 6's but we're not allowed to use them up there as there is concern that they'd travel further and fall on the cattle in the pasture beyond the range.. i had handloaded some 1-3/8oz of #6's once, after reading burrard (heavier payload/larger shot/lower velocity) and they didn't leave any doubt at all when a target was hit.

Rocketman / Don,
You know that I have expressed my opinions.
But I would never stand in the way of progress.
As you rightly said CoF is very important and to this end we need to consider that early traps both manual and automatic used rubber buffers on the throwing arm.
Modern machines now use polyfluoro or polyvinyl material as blade buffers so I would think the CoF is considerably reduced.
Also in the single pellet airgun tests are we using 0.177", 0.22" or 0.09" pellets?

Finally is it so important to concentrate on single pellet breaks?
Should we not be spending research time on improving effective patterns.
Granted I will always accept 100 chips against 99 balls of dust but where is this one pellet break theory leading?

At any major sporting clay event the trapper has the final say on whether a shot gets marked as an "X" or as a "0". The other members of the squad are also watching for breaks. However, just an indication of a hit is not justification for an "X", or "dead bird". The NSCA regulations say that there must be a visible chip, however small. Dust doesn't count, nor does the bird showing an obvious change in direction from being struck. There must be a visible chip. When I'm shooting I do not second guess the scorer, or members of my squad. Many times I have had a bird scored dead that several others saw a tiny chip come off of, but I didn't.

Yesterday while shooting in a registered event I saw a squad member's shot take the center out of the clay, without the rest of it breaking! Over untold thousands of targets I've seen shot at I've never seen that. The target had the face toward us and we all saw a big black hole appear in the orange target at the shot. Chips went out the back and were visible, but only if you were watching very closely.

Stan

The coefficient of friction on the trap's arm is the primary influence on rotation imparted to the clay target. Machines that have thrown excessive numbers of targets with the same friction material on their arms will NOT impart the same spin as when they were new. I would posit that is irrespective of the friction material used. Some are better than others, may last longer, &c, but all deteriorate eventually as a product of exposure, age, oxidation and use. Single pellet breaks are, IMHO, highly dependant on sufficient spin. The target's composition also affects thier 'breakability' as does their moisture content which can be affected by weather conditions such as temperatures and humidity levels where & how they are stored. I can side easily with Murphy on his remarks; they bear the weight of only a few tens of millions of clay targets thrown and shot at by individuals who were attempting to break them all.

On breaking a higher percentage of 'rabbits' of the sporting clays variety: Do what Churchill advocated when shooting hares from a butt; shoot the ground about 8" to a foot directly below the 'bunny', do not shoot directly at it. Obviously, that technique can only be applied when they are on the ground. Also, use #7.5 shot exclusively for rabbits only because they do not allow #6's. Many of those targets are 1/2" thick.

As an aside, purpose loaded helice ammunition before the rules were changed to 28gram loads differed from the 36gram flyer loads in that they had lower antimony content so the shot was somewhat softer and would expand on the targets [deliver more energy]and NOT penetrate as much of the flyer shot had been observed to do on some targets. I cannot speak on the newer 28gram purpose loaded ammunition.

Interesting thread & discussion, for sure!

I am not too sure where it came from but at the back of my mind I have the guidance figure of 3 - 4 pellets of sufficient energy as a guide to reliable breaks.
When I am assessing a pattern quality this is the pattern density I look for - but this is purely anecdotal. The dome of an edge on target is obviously a tougher structure to break than the thin underbelly of an overhead target as any trap shooter will testify - hence the need for bigger - higher energy pellets. So what is the relevance of single pellet strike performance – unless it is to test batch to batch consistency of the clay targets. I know we are always grateful for the odd single pellet break but I don't think we should be using this as the standard. How you set up a test rig for a 3 or 4 pellet strike at 30 yards I am not to sure - it would need a bit of thinking about!!
John

Don, I'd say the failure rate is considerably lower hitting anything with a single .22 than a single shotgun pellet. Significant difference in energy.

I'm still not clear on the purpose of the research. Surely, no hunter or top classed competition shooter is interested in one pellet hits. Don does bring up an interesting point, though, if I read him correctly. Does a competition shooter on a long run of hundreds of targets have to worry about factors other than not being "on the target"? I think that may be exactly the case. A skeet shooter who has broken 1242 straight is just as likely to have that run broken by a slightly defective load than by "missing the bird". At least that is my opinion.

Anyone who has patterned a shotgun will know that the distribution is not perfectly even. Murphy’s law states that if it can happen it eventually will happed - or something like that - so if a hole in the pattern can happen it eventually will. Well it happens to me all the time!!!

Me too! Alas, I am sure my patterns are full of very big holes!

(But when I get them with the "hole-less" part of the pattern, they go down like the proverbial rock). (Talking about birds here, not clays).

JC

Old Farmer, thank you for clarifying what I was trying to say. 1242 straight skeet birds is not only good shooting, it is beating the law of averages for defective ammunition or defective patterns. Of course, a guy who can shoot like that will not bring up that possibility when discussing his miss. He will take it like a man.

Exactly my point, Larry. If guys can run multi-thousand wooden blocks with a .22 (I recall a run of 17K-19K or something like that), I'd think we would see the same type of runs with a 12 gauge shotgun on clay targets.

Joking aside, that is exactly right. You don't have to be off dead center much to stand a fair probability of a single pellet hit. As noted above, it will happen. The lower the probability, the rarer the event. But, shoot enough targets and you will get a one pellet hit or eve a zero pellet hit!!

[quote=eightbore]I'm still not clear on the purpose of the research. Surely, no hunter or top classed competition shooter is interested in one pellet hits. Not to make them intentionally, for sure. But they are likely to be interested in what choke, shot size, and MV will give the highest probability of a hit.

Don does bring up an interesting point, though, if I read him correctly. Does a competition shooter on a long run of hundreds of targets have to worry about factors other than not being "on the target"? Yes, indeed. Dr. J's pattern research shows that a long run is probably getting quite a few single pellet breaks. I think that may be exactly the case. A skeet shooter who has broken 1242 straight is just as likely to have that run broken by a slightly defective load than by "missing the bird". At least that is my opinion. The statistics of the pattern will catch up with him sooner or later. The more he keeps the target in the center of the pattern the lower the probability of a miss via hole (or low pellet count hit). So, good shooting is a factor, but can't totally conquor the statistics.[/quote]

We do seem to be posing many more questions than answers. I suppose the idea that 3 – 4 pellet strikes – of sufficient energy – will reliably break a target may have come from the fact that you rarely pick up an unbroken clay with evidence of more than 4 strikes. However you do pick up loads with evidence of 1 or 2 strike, particularly on trap disciplines. I did once pick up a clay with 7 strikes, but I guess someone was probably using 9’s on an edge on distant target.
Just to add another – not too scientific – experiment to the melting pot. I had 3 very good shots at he ground a few years back and they took on a walk back challenge. They started on a high crossing target with 28g/9’s and walked back. It was amazing that they got back to a point where you could hear the clay being hit without it breaking, yet 1 yard closer it broke consistently. They then changed to 7 ½ shot which gave them another 5 yards or so – and the same thing happened. The result of the contest was a break at 82 yards using a 36g/4 !!
The point of this observation is not the extreme range you can break a clay at but the narrow margin at which the energy of a pellet runs out. Now I can’t tell you how many 9’s were hitting the target when it stopped breaking but there was sufficient to hear it tinkle on the clay. The point I am trying to make is that if there is insufficient energy in the individual pellets to do damage it doesn’t really matter how many hit the target – it will not break.
John

I'd disagree, Don . . . assuming Dr. Jones is correct about the % of single pellet hits, seeing that we know many of them do not result in broken targets. A "single pellet" hit with a .22, on the other hand, ALWAYS scores as a break.

All this discussion only serves (me) to reinforce my using modified chokes for sporting clay competition. It certainly may be interesting, and I would very much like to see indisputable evidence come out of it, but until it does it will all be totally out of my mind when I compete with my 1 1/8 oz. loads of 7 1/2s and 8s, and tight chokes. I can overcome a whole lot of the "if's" with that combination.

I'd rather miss and learn to make the proper correction, which turns the target to dust, than get chipped targets all day. Until that hard data is forthcoming I'll sure take those chips when they occur, tho' .

I have won my class in several large tournaments over the years by one bird. One bird, out of two hundred. One way you keep your head right is by reminding yourself that if you had not stayed focused on every presentation, and not used the right equipment, you might have been in first or second place loser position. You don't EVER allow yourself to think, "Man, I sure am thankful for all those one pellet breaks." Confidence is everything. Thinking about one pellet breaks is counterproductive, for me. I'm glad Don is willing to do it, because I can't afford to.

Stan

Well said and thought out, Stan. I don't know about trap shooters, but skeet and sporting clays shooters in the highest classes are known to use chokes tighter than used by their more mediocre bretheren. This is especially true in the small gauge events. A .410 with .007 or .008 constriction will reduce a skeet target to dust if well centered. Twelve gauge NSSA competitors often use no constriction to .003 with good results, but some use more for more satisfying breaks.

I am not too sure your theory on shooting clay targets with a .22 will result in 100% breaks holds water. OK - edge on perhaps - but i used to organised competitions at 25m with clay targets hung face forward on wire brackets and a large proportion of the time we just punched hole through them from memory perhaps 15 - 25% of the targets. We ended up with spotters with scopes to record hits. Using battue clays was better as they are more fragile - but still not 100% reliable.
JOhn

I always find discussions of this sort immensely tedious. And I have enjoyed engaging Rocketman a number of times in regard to the silliness of his inertia machine - and more importantly the entire basis of its operation, the assumptions that drive it.

So, anyway, here is the single pellet BS once again. And again the basic assumptions are unsubstantiable and questionable at best for a single (pellet of) reason. And there is no, absolutely NO standardized real world situation that we all shoot in, to which any acquired data, questionable as it would be in each and every way, could be applied in any remotely meaningful way.

"For me, very simply, because I want to know."

So, Rocketman, just what is it that you will know?

The obvious solution to the quandary of rationalizing target losses is easy. Use Brister's (I think it was) idea of full choke - fills a 30" circle at the distance the target is usually taken -

and learn how to shoot


how all y'all doing these days?

Dr.WtS

We seem to agree, Larry, except we don't actually know what % of single pellet hits do result in a break. That is the focus of my next test.

You have a good plan, Stan!!

But, you may still benefit from one pellet breaks. I'm currently shooting skeet with 7/8 oz #9 at 1125 fps in Mod/Mod from a Holloway and Naughton BLE with good (for me) results. However, I do get a few breaks that are obviously one pellet (I don't claim any unusually good aiming accuracy). Tighter choke will result in higher pellet count hits if aiming accuracy is tighter. Increased pellet count will do the same with no increase in aiming accuracy required.

I spoke of shooting hand thrown wooden blocks (per the turn of the century rage) with a .22. Not a big question over hits and misses. You need to read Dr. J's work on breaking targets; he has worked out probabilities of a break for various zones of the clay and various impact energies. Yes, the rim, with enough energy, is a higher % than the dome.

I have found that retirement is the easiest thing to succeed at that I have tried hahaha.

I sure miss Bill too. Think of the guy every day at least. Sure wish now I could have recorded those hundreds of hrs we spent talking, well mostly me listening hahaha- Bill was a good talker, and save those untold emails that seemed so transient at the time.

Oh, as far as useful and applicable shotgun technology goes, Churchill/Yardley/Brister pretty much cover everything. Past that you're wasting time you could use to learn how to shoot.

Dr.WtS

Wonko,
Please do NOT mention Yardley in the same context as Churchill or Brister.
Unless of course you are talking about cosmetics.

Better "accuracy" (I really don't like the use of that word when describing shotgunning) is exactly what occurs, over time, when you move to tighter chokes. It is a phenomenon that I can't quite explain. Part of it is that, subconsciously, you know you have be more "right" with your line and lead, just more precise. But, part of it has more to do with something less quantifiable, a freedom from concern with whether or not you have enough choke in the barrel, or if you left your box of chokes at the last station, etc. You watch the bird closer, and the right things just happen more often.

Increased pellet count is exactly why I use 1 1/8 oz. loads in competition.

Stan

John, in the case of the .22, we're talking wood blocks, not clays. And it's not really a "break", although I used that terminology. Just a hit. And that's pretty easy to tell. If there's any doubt, I expect someone could pick up the block in question.

Today at the ground I put on a going away orange target - trap just to the right and slightly in front of the cage, throwing a slightly quartering bird towards the left. We fire around 200 targets. I picked up 40 unbroken, 7 had one strike hits, two had 2 strike hits and one had three strikes. A few would have broken when they hit the ground, probably a higher proportion of the struck targets than the undamaged ones, but it was not designed as a scientific experiment.
I guess one could draw conclusions from this small sample.
1. All 4 pellet strikes broke the clays.
2. Almost all the 3 strike broke the clays.
3. Around 1/6th (17%) of the unbroken targets were hit by 1 pellet and did not break.
John

John, good job running this test. The information is interesting. We do not know how many broke with one, two, or three hits. Therefore, we can't make any estimate of probability of a break from one, two, or three hits. For example, if we have 14 one pellet hits, ofwhich 7 didn't break,we can estimate the probability of a one pellet hit breaking at 50%. If we also know the aiming error and the pattern distribution, we can estimate the likely score. With this working reliably, we can estimate scores where we change one variable at a time. Thus, we can see when to change choke, shot size, shot charge, or MV.

Don,
Do not want to pour water on your fire but........
Shooting Trap we do have basic standards that are well documented here in the UK.
Normally shoot IM or Full, use English size 7 or 7-1/2, if you get onto the target early you can and (they do) use M & IM choke.
It is my belief that if you as the shooter do your bit your pattern WILL have sufficient density to break the clay without having to worry about one pellet breaks.
I really cannot get my head around the reasoning behind this research unless of course due to the cost of cartridges & Lead we are going to load one pellet cartridges of a size decreed by research as having sufficient energy to break all clays likely to be thrown in competition.
Good luck in your research.

Rocketman
The observation of the number of 1 pellet strikes surviving was really just in support of the anacdotal claim that you really need 3 - 4 strikes to be fairly sure of a kill - which the observation appears to support. We have all seen clays just break in half, probably as a rsult of a 1 pellet strike - and very grateful we are for them - but we have also seen puffs of dust come off clays - also probably as a result of 1 pellet strikes.
I will still advise on shot size and choke choice that will give a 3 - 4 pellet strike on a particulare target, with sufficient energy to cause significant damage and hopefully a very good chance of a 'kill'.
You may have missed the point slightly on the three pellet strikes. I think we can safely assume that there were at least - and probably many more - 3 pellet strikes than one pellet strikes - and only 1 survived!
Maths was never my best subject!
All I can say from this very limited and very unscientific observation is that there were no 4 pellet strike survivors but a significant number of 1 pellet survivors so it would be sensible to direct any energy towards ensuring 3+ pellet strikes by whatever means.
I have actualy seen clays broken by the wad! now what is the probability of that - they still go down as a 'kill'!!!
John

Don, I think you and John are speaking different languages as far as math goes. There were 40 UNBROKEN targets, 7 of which were hit by one pellet. His 16% is a percentage of the UNBROKEN targets hit by one pellet, not a percentage of all those thrown. No way to tell how many of the 160 that did break were struck by only one pellet. You can only compute how many did NOT break from a single pellet strike. And you do not know what % of 3 strike hits failed to break a target, because--once again--you don't know how many 3 strike hits resulted in a break. All you know is that one target, out of 40 unbroken ones, had 3 pellet strikes. That would be 2 1/2% of all the unbroken targets, or 10% of all the unbroken targets which showed pellet strikes.

Thanks, Larry, for that point of view. I hadn't looked at it that way. I'm currently doing test development to see if I can generate a significant number of single pellet hits; provable by recovering broken targets. Then, we can really look at broken to unbroken ratios. Right now,it looks like I'll be getting two pellet strikes as a by-product. However, I think three and up will be sketchy due to the extent of target damage.

yeah....thats whats happening to me too!

This may give food for thought on future experiments.



Looks like 15 - 18 strikes to me - and they arn't the very hard clays!!
I'm afraid I have no info on shot size etc but the guy was certainly using plenty of choke. It was a going away target just below the shooters feet, shot from a 6' high platform - so slightly down in the target. As I run a sporting layout most people use 8 & 7.5 shot. The distance would have been 25yards - possibly 30 for us slow old folk!!.
The clay had one hole and a significant crack in it and a chip out of the rim.
Bit unlucky I guess!!
John