Jon,
With all due respect I am curious regarding your statement that “you are not going to kill birds at extended ranges using slow loads”
I’m sure you are aware that “fast” loads lose velocity more rapidly than “slow” loads.
My testing at 40-60 yards with a chronograph showed that at 40 yards and beyond a 1220 fps 1 1/4 oz load was so near the velocity of the 1 1/4 1330 fps load that the variations in individual shells more than covered the difference. Statistically the same velocity.
Testing was done with a chronograph set behind a metal plate with a hole cut to let shot pass.
Since most would agree that the more round pellets of the slower loads pattern more uniformly at distance, shorten shot string due to more consistent velocity achieved due to more uniform ballistic shape than deformed pellets of the high velocity loads it would seem that the slower loads would kill better at longer ranges. The only negative would be slightly longer time of flight. Iirc my math indicated that the difference in lead on a crossing bird at 50 yards and would have been in the range of 4-5”. This was not statistically significant considering the pattern spread at these ranges.
The only way a shotshell delivers energy is through uniform patterns and impact speed. Since speed is essentially identical and patterns of slower loads are superior it would seem that the modest loads would kill better.
In a practical application back in the ‘80’s I shot ducks in Argentina. The load was 11/4 oz #5 hard shot at a modest 1200 fps iirc. I shot 250 ducks per day for days. The killing effect of these modest loads at ranges far beyond 60 yards was stunning once you got dialed in.
Shooting so many ducks in a relatively short time span was possibly a better chance to evaluate effectiveness than to shoot hundreds of ducks at a rate of 5-10 per day for years.
Again, with all due respect you might reconsider your thoughts on this. No offense intended.
Last edited by Richard Hale; 08/21/26 02:44 PM.
