doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Two (2) Shotgun Formulas

Wonder how they could all be in a duck sized pattern at 45 yd. if they were that deformed in the barrel.

Maybe non-deformed is over-rated

#4 Hevi-Shot

I'll take that bet. How could impact with a duck flatten six sides of a no. 4 pellet upon impact? Look at the center pellet at the bottom of the pic of the no. 4 lead. Is it not hexagon shaped? Is that more likely to have happened because there were 6 other pellets in contact with it in the load upon ignition and setback, or because it somehow impacted the duck 6 different ways?

In fact, I'll take your bet and give you 6 to 1 odds.

SRH

May be - I suspect it is. But that seems to be the driving force behind the discussion of inertia, force and deformation.

Doc Concur with your interpretation of the pellets.


On the question of large vs small bore and ballistic formulae

The advantage of the bigger bore is the bigger payload.

Often times I think we are in quest of an ideal or perfection, when all we are achieving is a small percentage improvement. Many times those marginal returns are illusory or simple opinion.

The differences between extremely soft (pure lead) and high quality lubuloy is significant, but the difference between good high antimony magnum shot and lubuloy not so much.

After chasing for the very best, I came to the conclusion very good to good is good enough and resources are better spent on shooting more.

I agree in part wiith initial point of this thread that smaller bore given same load, velocity, and I assume choking as compared to a large bore the larger bore will perform better. But I do agree it is very much so, so little in fact that the most important thing is still getting the pattern on the target.

The ballistic challenge of computing exactly what is going on internally and externally is complex and difficult to crunch prefectly, though it can be done.

I hate to bloviate, even as I do it, that said the advantage of big bores is the ability to push larger loads than the smaller bores.

+1

"After chasing for the very best, I came to the conclusion very good to good is good enough and resources are better spent on shooting more."

Very well said, and I agree completely. If that were not the case I could never kill a limit of doves with something as "inefficient" as a .410.

That said, I really think that the initial purpose of this post was to provide proof that setback of pellets in a shot shell does occur, and the percentage of pellets in the load that are deformed increase as the bore diameter decreases, naysayers notwithstanding .......... and not that it necessarily makes huge differences at the target.

SRH

This looks good enough

Sept. 7 1895 Sporting Life
http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/SportingLife/1895/VOL_25_NO_24/SL2524016.pdf
Ed Taylor, of Cincinnati, for curiosity's sake, gave his light 12-gauge Yankee Smith gun a pattern trial at various distances the past week, his target being a 30-inch circle, his load 3 1/4 drams Troisdorf smokeless powder and 1 1/8 ounce No. 7 1/2 shot.
Here are the patterns made with the left barrel:
30 yards 395/400 pellets (388 U.S. 7 1/2 pellets in 1 1/8 oz., 400 English 7 1/2)
40 yards 333 = 83%
40 yards 325 = 82%
50 yards 230 = 57.5%
50 yards 230 = 57.5%

Stan you are correct

I agree set back and deformation does occur, I also agree that small bores experience it more than larger bores. I agree it does not necessarily make a huge difference.

Don, doesn't one cause the other? Without acceleration, from standstill to max velocity, you would not have the pellet to pellet deformation, right? Well ..... maybe a tiny bit from passing through choke constriction.

SRH [/quote]


Stan, you are correct that both types of deformation are related to acceleration. In one case, there are multiple pellets in intimate contact. In the other, there is only one pellet being accelerated. A high enough force could cause the pellet to deform just due to the force.

Note that uniform circles (round or spherical things) naturally "clump" into hexagons (six sided). So, upset pellets are likely to have six dimples in one plane. Surprise, surprise.

Jones is quite clear that hard shot will pattern more tightly that soft shot. Likewise, he is clear that bigger bore patterns more tightly than smaller bore. Well proven based on statistically significant data.

DDA