doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Spreader Shells

Larry, I have tried many different recipes for home grown spreaders, but I've never patterned one that had an insufficient density in the center, or core. I'd like to know exactly which load(s) you found that were not filled sufficiently in the core, or center, so that I can not waste my time on them.

SRH

I've heard about 'donut' patterns for years.

Has anyone actually seen such a thing on a pattern sheet or pattern plate?

Lead pellets have tremendous inertia compared to the card or plastic X wads or dividers that we use to spread the shot a little.

I have a real hard time believing there is any way to throw a pattern without a center or a center weak enough to not be sufficient.

And if you think about it, even if you could engineer such a thing the edges would immediately start to spread to fill the center.

Show me a donut, and I'll show you a cop on a break.

I have seen a donut pattern ......... several them, all shot from a Browning B2000 that my cousin's husband bought new in the mid-70s. Tried several different factory loads in it, and every one would shoot a donut pattern. He had the choke slightly reamed and it fixed it perfectly.

Strangest patterns I've ever witnessed.

SRH

My very limited experience is that I picked up a flat of 12-gauge #7 1/2 SpredR shells when the assets of the old Potomac River Gun club were auctioned off. I shot a few patterns with my Father's Parker Bros. duck gun, .035" right and .037" left, and while they opened the patterns to about modified, they were very patchy.

And thereby destroyed the rarest, most valuable shotgun ever produced.

Think of the bets you could have won...

As I said, it wasn't my gun. And, we were more concerned with killing doves And quail than we were oddities.

SRH

This rationale makes a lot of sense, particularly with a more square load. I could see a loss of SOME pattern density in the center, but not really a hole. To that end, someone on the SSM Board posted the following which I thought was interesting . . .


This question comes up from time to time, so I wanted to share some pattern results from three different spreader loads. The three shells I patterned were RST Spreaders (1 oz of 8s), Polywad Spred-Rs (1 1/8 oz 8s), and Fiocchi Interceptors (1 oz 8s). The RSTs and Polywads met the nominal pellet counts of 410 and 461 respectively, but the Fiocchis had 423 pellets.

I shot these patterns to see if using these loads would allow my "pheasant" gun to work for grouse and woodcock. I used a Verney-Carron 12 ga. sxs with 28" barrels stamped 18.4mm and choked R 0.008 and L 0.023. For an indirect comparison, this gun shot 70% and 65% patterns at 25 and 35 yards using Federal Top Gun loads (1 oz. of 8s).

I shot five patterns for each load at 15 and 25 yards (reflecting typical grouse and woodcock shots).

15 yards:
RST - 92% (range 90-93%)
Fiocchi - 86% (range 84-88%)
Polywad - 77% (range 69-81%)

25 yards:
RST - 71% (range 57-80%)
Fiocchi - 64% (58-74%)
Polywad - 41% (range 36-55%)

So, based on these patterns, the Polywads open faster, but lose pattern efficiency quickly. The Fiocchis offered some improvement for the IC choke in the right barrel, but the RSTs did not fare as well in that regard. Both the RSTs and Fiocchis had less variability in their patterns than the Polywads.

I used HunterJohn pattern sheets that have a life-sized duck outline in the center, and counted pellet strikes on the duck to measure density at the center of the pattern (maybe not statistically accurate but seems to make field sense). I came up with the following percentages of pellet strikes:

15 yards:
RST - 27% (range 24-31%)
Fiocchi - 24% (range 20-33)
Polywad - 10% (range 5-20%)

25 yards:
RST - 13% (range 10-14%)
Fiocchi - 12% (range 11-14%)
Polywad - 5% (range 4-8%)

Based on these patterns, the RSTs and Fiocchis had significantly more pellet strikes on the pattern "center" compared to the Polywads.

My take-away was that, at least out of this gun, the Polywads will provide a more open pattern, but the trade-off is less density in the center and a pattern that will not be effective much past 20 yards, even out of a tight Mod. choke. Overall, the Fiocchis offered the best performance for opening the IC choke while maintaining good performance at 25 yards out of the second barrel - both in terms of overall pattern efficiency and pellet strikes at the center. YMMV of course depending on the gun and load used.

So he's saying 5% of 400 pellets with the Polywad on a duck at 25 yards? That's 20 pellets. Dead duck.

Thanks for the test.

As far as the control load being Top Gun they have been tested at less than 2% Antimony content, so they use fairly soft shot, although harder than true chilled shot.

A good quality field load will print a higher percentage than a Top Gun.

How soon our memories fade.

Mike Campbell, a fox aficionado, posted many of his patterns on this site concocted of the various spreader inserts.

The post or X style wide insert definitely deflects pallets away from the center of the pattern. Creating holes.

His solution was to cut them off a little shorter, and then put 1/8 of an ounce of shot above themPrior to crimping.

That resulted in a wider and evenly filled out pattern.

It was all documented here. I�m a bit surprised that no one even mentioned his work. The same for Dr. Andrew Jones� work on patterns.

CZ, I just measured a BPI X-Stream insert and it's 5/8" of an inch tall.

Even one ounce of shot covers it deeply in a 12 gauge shotcup. There's no need to cut it.

The Polywad insert can be loaded as you describe with some shot on top if you find it worth the effort. I don't. I'm not a believer in holes in patterns 'patchiness or voids' as O&T called them making any difference in the actual 3D world of shooting moving targets.

I knew a class AA trap shooter who used the PC post wad for 16 yard trap in a full choke 1100 for many years. If it caused holes, he wouldn't have been class AA.