|
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
Topics38,574
Posts546,487
Members14,424
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12 |
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. 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. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12 |
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12 |
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 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12 |
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. Ho ho! Wank!! I still have your personal inertia that was stolen by my machine whilst in Vegas. Mess with me and we will see how you shoot from the pretzel configuration.
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. Pardone', but I must disagree!
"For me, very simply, because I want to know."
So, Rocketman, just what is it that you will know? I will know if Dr. Jones' pattern probabilities are realistic. If it can be shown to work like the real world, we can run a lot of simulated patterns and predict cross-over points for choke, pellet size, pellet count, and MV. The hard data to do this would be very burdensome.
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 - See Stan above unless you are interested in shotgun technology.
and learn how to shoot
how all y'all doing these days? Mostly finer 'n frog haar; although I can claim only moderate success at being retired. How'z about youse? I sure miss Bill!!
Dr.WtS
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,278 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,278 Likes: 11 |
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
Dr.WtS
Mysteries of the Cosmos Unlocked
available by subscription
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,688 Likes: 31
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,688 Likes: 31 |
Wonko,
Please do NOT mention Yardley in the same context as Churchill or Brister.
Unless of course you are talking about cosmetics.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,198 Likes: 1171
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,198 Likes: 1171 |
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. 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
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,390 Likes: 107
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,390 Likes: 107 |
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 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 285
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 285 |
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
Last edited by Oldfarmer; 03/16/11 02:28 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 12 |
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. 1/2% didn't.
3. Around 1/6th (17%) of the unbroken targets were hit by 1 pellet and did not break. Check your numbers, please. I see 3 1/2% (7/200) didn't break.
John
|
|
|
|
|
