The idea of over-boring has come to us from the USA, where it was designed to reduce recoil. It has subsequently become a feature of production line guns and is used as a sales ploy."
This statement is either an incredible simplification or outright falsehood of what actually occured here in the US. The concept of backboring and it's use in American produced shotguns roughly coincides with the successful recovery of two species, the giant Canada goose and the American wild turkey. During testing, it was discovered that backboring would actually put more of the larger pellets used for hunting either bird on target at longer ranges. At no time in the past 50 years did American ammunition producers use fiber wads for loads intended for waterfowl or turkey, and, to a very large degreee, few, or no guns produced in England would have been suitable for the loads that were produced here for those pursuits.
The arguments over reduced recoil from backboring seem specious at best to me when the conversation is about American 12 gauge 3" loads of 1 1/2 ozs of number 1 shot. Or, any other heavy American load intended for turkeys or waterfowl.
My own, limited experience has shown that fiber wads perform admirably in a slightly over bored American 16 gauge, when used for smaller size shot (English 7s) at the range one typically encounters ruffed grouse, woodcock and pheasants here in the US. I speculate the fiber wad is capable of a bit of expansion, as it only has two ways it can move, outward, to fill the bore, the shortest direction, and down and out the barrel, decidedly further.
I am not a huge proponent of backboring, or big loads, or even of goose or turkey hunting, but, it seems to me there is much more to the notion of backboring than a wish for the reduction of recoil.
Best,
Ted
