Look back at this excerpt from a 2016 thread, Miller. Some people still think it's a theory, even tho' Roster has demonstrated, and proven, it beyond any doubt.
Originally Posted By: 2-piper
Well all I was really saying was that for a given amount of shot the shorter & fatter the column the shot will be much more prone to exit the barrel "ROUND" rather than "Squashed". Still don't see what's so hard to understand abut that.
Best Shotgun advice I ever read was to decide how much shot you wanted to throw, how heavy a gun you were willing to carry & how much recoil you could tolerate.
Once you reached a reasonable compromise on those three point, select a gun with the biggest hole down the barrel which met those criteria.
Reply by cpa .......
What squashes it and where is it squashed? On the top of the shot, on the bottom or both? It seems to me that, if this is the case, the top layer of shot would be squashed on the bottom, the bottom layer would be squashed on the top and the intermediate layers would be squashed on both top and bottom. Yet, I have seen perfectly round unsquashed shot in birds. I really don't understand your theory and question its validity, but I could be wrong. I can see that the shot in contact with the bore could be misshapen altho shot cups should limit that. Anyone else have any thoughts on the squash theory?
Edited by cpa (04/06/16 09:41 PM)
I think he only did that demonstration with 12 ga. loads, Miller.
SRH
Last edited by Stan; 06/16/19 07:28 AM.
