Two big problems with the "Square Load" theory.
1st about 99% of folks don't even know what a Sq load is & only quote some gun writer's definition which happened to suit their purpose at the time. The oft cited 1oz load in a 16ga is a round ball equivilent load, not a sq load. By definition a sq lod is one in which the length of the shot column in the bore equals the bore dia. This will of course vary somewhat dependant upon shot size & density of the shot but for a general rule of thumb will equal approximately 79% of the round ball weight, which can of course be found (in ozs) by the simple expedient of dividing the ga number by 16 (OOOPS, was thinking one thing & wrote in reverse, you of course divide 16 by the gauge no). Thus a 16ga Sq Load is about .790oz or between 3/4 & 13/16oz.
2nd; There is really & in actuality no know proof that a Sq load makes any discernable difference in the performance of a shotgun pattern. If however one feels they just have to have a Sq load for effectivness about the two squarest loads you can find are the British 12ga game load of 1 1/16oz in a 12 or 1Ľoz in a 10ga. I don't know how many times I have read that supposedly W W Greener was a big proponent of the SQ load. I only have a copy of his 9th edition of The Gun & its Developmaen, but the Sq load is conspicious in this book by its total abstinance, its just not mentioned. He did state in this book that the 10ga only offered advantage over the 12 with loads in "Excess" of 1Ľoz as the 12 would handle that amount of shot quite as effeicently as the 10. This of course was prior to the development of progressive burning powders.

Last edited by 2-piper; 07/04/12 11:21 AM. Reason: Mathamatical correction
Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra