I know that Burrard, Francis Sell and others have gotten into this and that I have dutifully read their goings-on, but time blurs recall. The basic thesis I remember is that a comparatively long shot column in a loaded shell tends to elongate more quickly than a shorter one and that performance price is paid by the former on a longer crossing target. My question is how great is that price?
Let me give a simple scenario here and see what can be learned: Both guns average 70% patterns at 40 yards. The target is moving at 90-degrees to the shooter at 30 miles per hour. Gun #1 is a 20 gauge firing a 1 1/8 oz. magnum load of 6s at a muzzle velocity of 1200 fps. Gun #2 is a 12 gauge firing a similar weight shot charge at the same velocity with an identical number of #6s. Further assume target size is the equivalent of a 9" circle. Questions are:
-What are the comparable pellet hits on the target? ( assume uniform 30" patterns as to shot dispersal )
-Assume the target is a big fat duck - - does one lose sufficent killing power in the 20 gauge to make taking that shot less prudent, or is the difference ( and I am assuming there is one ) inconsequential? I recognize there are various pellet energy factors that are sometimes used to make a killing prediction here, but they are blurred to memory, as well.
Last, and by all means, change the value of factors given here if they make answering easier - - perhaps using #5s instead of #6s. - - Just keep them the same, other than gauge.
Who said posts have to pose easy problems? Actually, all input is appreciated - including opinions, too.
