doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Pattern density between gauges

Shooting birds at 100 yards has more to do with someone being an idiot than it does with ethics....

Simply looking at two dimensional patterns ignores the three dimensional aspects of a shot string. Greener's book has a wonderful section on dragging a long paper target on a rolling trolley to estimate the length of the shot string in 1910 technology. I've since since other writers use modern photography to illustrate it. While a gap or hole in the 2-d pattern is certainly proof of an identical hole in the 3-d pattern, the converse is not true, i.e. a "no hole" in 2-d cannot be assumed to be proof of "no hole" in 3-d--the pellets may have arrived at completely different times. Somebody probably has more current info on this factor than I do. Just food for thought.

Nope.

SRH

Sounds like a subject for an different thread rather than hi-jack this technical discussion with a morality discussion. Dave has allocated plenty of server space for another thread.

100 yards, think I'd want a feather-seeking Stinger missile.

I think I have "seen the light", concerning this. The chart I want really cannot be valid without lots of replicated patterns. I can build my pattern plate and shoot all the patterns I want, and arrive at my own conclusions.

Thanks to several of you who pointed that out. It really sunk in for me when I used the corn yield example. Replicated tests are absolutely necessary to have any useful data there, too. Once a farmer, always a farmer, I guess.

Thanks all, SRH

"##@%&$%@#&^" Imagine me red in the face pounding my desk!!

Guys, A very bright guy gave us, I repear, GAVE US, the tool to do exactly what Stan seeks to do. All we have to do is use it; For FREE!! Stan, youse is plenty schmart to do it, too. It does require some effort. But, I repeat, BUT, it will answer above patterning questions without systematic error. Yes, I speak of Insight; very appropriately named, it is, too. If I didn't have too many projects on my plate, I'd do it. I do, so I can't. However, I will most gladly coach anyone willig to work on this project. Stan??

Ok, pardon the rant. Before Insight, such a question would have required an unrewarding amount of work - I know because I started with a hand done analysis system; it worked, but was too labor intensive.

The ethic of shooting (at) any bird at any distance is not based on the distance alone. The ethic is knowing you have sufficient pattern density of shot with sufficient retained energy and sufficient aiming error allowance to humanely harvest said bird. That is to say, put a lethal dose of shot in the same airspace as said bird. The actual yardage is not significant if you know your gun/load's real world performance and your real world aiming performance. Some people are bad enough shots that there is no ethical distance for them on live birds.

IMO, the better question is, "Does anyone know a choke/load that might be useful at 100 yards?" I don't, but would not rule out the possibility.

DDA

Bob Brister's more modern version of this involved his wife towing a target sled behind the family station wagon while he shot various loads at it from various distances, and compared to stationary patterns shot with the same loads at the same distances. String isn't a huge factor at skeet distances, nor at the distances most upland birds are shot. Much bigger factor for the really long range stuff. However, if you're talking waterfowling, that's a different story entirely because while a lot of waterfowlers would rather shoot lead than steel, one advantage steel does have is that it reduces string significantly.

Don,

Please PM me with a phone number and we will talk about this some. I'm interested.

Thanks, SRH

Stan,
Being of the same caliber interest as you, let me know if I can help.