doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Shot Column Heighth And Crossing Shots

Good job for those who did the math.

Cutts, not any other choke, throws even patterns. All patterns I've done analysis on are Gausian distributions, Rayleighs, to be exact. The only issue I can find is how much constriction is there to delay pattern bloom - full is the same as cyl, it just blooms slower (hence at longer distance).

Shotgunjones wrote:
Batha (IF QUOTED CORRECTLY) is full of crap.

Earlier in this thread I attributed a statement regarding the effects of the Cutts Compenstor on shotgun patterns to a passage in a book by Chris Batha. Shotgunjones' words here prompted me to reconsider what I had said and to make it a point to stop by Barnes & Nobles on the way home today in order to verify by locating the statement in Mr. Batha's book. As it turns out I was wrong; Batha was NOT the author of that statement. The mistake was entirely my fault.

Obviously this sort of irresponsible posting on an internet forum, especially one of this caliber, can impact the reputation and credibility of an acknowledged authority and expert of Chris Batha's station. For that reason it was important that the correction be posted as soon as possible. I certainly owe him an apology for any harm this stupidity has caused and will be sending him a personal statement saying so immediately. Also, for the sake of clarification here, I will post the correct attribution as soon as I'm absolutely certain of it.

My post was submitted some time after 10 pm last night. A very long day and three glasses of wine apparently were enough to fog both memory and perception as evidenced by syntax, grammar and rather fuzzy logic re: angles and shot strings.

Truth is, if you can put the load in the right place, you'll most likely always have a dead bird. Whether a 1 oz. load is coming out of a 28, 20, 12 or 16, it probably won't matter so much in results even though you might see some differences on a patterning board, most likely due to some added deformation of pellets in those smaller gauges.

The problem with all this is that there are no good, rock solid definitive tests that prove anything for sure concerning shot string. You would need 3-D imaging to project the effective "shot cloud," etc. I would agree that a 1 oz. 28 load isn't optimal, but it still probably would be sufficient in that it still throws enough lead pellets out there to do the job.

I tend to think that the worst shell in the world still outperforms 99 percent of all shooters.

With all of that said, I still like shorter shot strings, especially on longer range targets. Think of the buffered shot examples......

Bob, I have Brister's book but don't have access to it at the moment. I'll try to remember to check and post better answers when I can.

I read it years ago, here's what I remember. I could well be wrong on some of this. First, shot strings were increased with fuller chokes (no surprise but exactly when you don't want longer strings). Some were longer than most in this discussion -- I'm stretching but I think some were up to around 12 feet. Soft shot is definitely a handicap, and was a prevalent problem when Brister wrote the book, in the late '70s.

Incidentally his greatest interest / concern was (appropriately) waterfowl loads, so he worked at some ranges beyond 40. Also, most ducks fly at speeds closer to 50 to 60 mph, rather than 30.

If you do the math again, and then look at Brister's pix, it's easy to see that a 12 foot long shotstring fired at a 50 yard 50MPH crossing duck takes about .02 second to pass the target - and the target moves a foot and a half in this time. Your neat little 30 inch 70% circle on the pattern board turns into a four foot long patchy swath from the frame of reference of the target.

There isn't anything near a 70% pattern presented to a long distance fast crossing target. Half the pattern will pass ahead or behind.

Can a good shooter hit it? Sure, he can hit it. I've shot with plenty of guys who I wouldn't bet against hitting a 50 yard 90 degree deflection target. But... can you KILL it? Different story.

The shotguns that I prefer to use when shooting 50 yard ducks at 90 degree deflection would make hamburger out of the duck if the duck took the whole pattern. I will be very happy with the amount of shot that will intersect with the duck. My little 3 1/4 inch chamber 30" Sterlingworth shoots a pattern that seems absolutely destructive until about 60 yards. At that point the pattern is just kind of "pretty".

Burrard gave the results of tests performed by Mr R W S Griffith in 1887, fired on a 12ft dia wheel running with a rim velocity of 200fps (approx 136mph). Immediately in front of the wheel was a steel plate having a 4' aperture with a thin paper pattern sheet across the opening. Mr Griffith was able to "Laboriously" ascertain the position of each pellet on the wheel in relation to the fixed pattern. Many years later P P Quayle fired shot charges down a darkened passage & recorded spark photographs of them against the wall behind. "Amazingly" they were in extremely close agreement, but after all they measured the same thing. Mr Griffith fired loads from a 2½" game gun of 42gr Schultz powder & 1 1/8oz of #6 shot as well as 2 3/4" loads of 1¼oz, powder charge not given. Loads were fired through cyl as well as various choke bored bbls. Mr Quayle's loads were not given. At 40yds result showed an average shot string of 3.6 ft for 50% of the shot, 5.2 ft for 75% & 12ft for 100%. Virtually all of this first 50% will be in the central core of the pattern, as well as most of the 75%. The remaining 25% will be composed of primarily the fringes & a few "Tailings". It was further found that guns bored to I/C or less choke loast had about twice the percentage loss in the 30" circle as compared to guns having ¼ choke or more. At yardages of 40 or less, with target moving at no more than 40mph, "FORGET" shot stringing. Beyond that range shot sizes must be increased to give adequate penertration, loads must be increased to give adequate pattern density, Tight chokes are required, giving a strong central thickening to maintain that density as range increases & then 10/20% pattern allowance must me made to compensate for stringing loss. Next you better judge your ability honestly, for you are going to have a small core of pattern capable of giving a killing pattern, surronded by a "Large" crippling area. A lot of things have changed, but these facts have not much changed since Burrard's day. If you want to study the best book ever written on shotgun ballistics, get a copy. You will likely find you won't have much use for any other. Firing on a fixed plate, careful study of the pattern, those which give the best most uniform distribution, within the central core will be likely to produce the shortest shotstring. One does not have to be able to reproduce every test ever made, but understand what those before have recorded, & apply their. Most always just buying one particular brand is not the answer, but finding the load which performs best in a particular bbl.
That's the conclusion I have drawn.
Miller

Miller, as usual, summed up the facts. I'd rather read 2-Piper's stuff than any commercial author now in print. Seriously...

By the way, I doubt very much that Chris Batha will object to being misquoted on Cutts Compensator technology. I don't think that is too close to number one on his "expert" list. Who are these guys that are shooting crossing geese at 60 yards with 12 gauges? What is Burrard selling for these days. I have an extra set if anyone wants to pay close to the going price. I will pay Dave his $10.00.

Bladesmith's input about a test which showed that shot at the shot column's bottom did not reach the pattern circle (which I assume to be our standard 30" circle at 40 yards) shows that my question was ill-reasoned. What I was theorizing was that shot from a 20 gauge - one with a comparatively longer shot column to its diameter than that of a 12 gauge - would encounter more barrel scrub and more compression to its bottom shot - - sufficient enough to slow a higher proportion of them down even though they'd still strike within the 30" circle. My little mental model, then, had them arriving late, but still at the right station. In the tests that Paul notes, however, they miss the station entirely.

The other part of the matter deals with the possible negative consequences of late arrival. Would shot be strung out enough so that there would be a practical lessening of hits to a "big fat duck" at 30 mph/40 yards? Its clear the concensus here is that it wouldn't. In fact, what lateral spreading that does go on is better expressed in inches, rather than feet.

This post reflects higher quality responses than the quality of my original question. I really appreciate the good thought put forward in the former.