|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 members (Jtplumb),
456
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,939
Posts550,918
Members14,460
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
AhHa the old Square load rears its ugly head again. I have also read that the 3/4 oz load in a 28ga was the Perfect Square Load. He based this by saying (incorrectly) a square load was equal in weight to the round ball which fit the bore. He then correctly stated this could be found by dividing 16 by the gauge number. Thus 16/28 = .57, Thus the 3/4 oz load is "Perfectly Square" i the 28 gauge. This hogwash was written by a highly published & well known writer of things relating to shotguns in particular. Even an ole Redneck Hillbilly like my self knows that even though they contain the same two digits .57 & .75 "Ain't The Same".
In reality the old accepted square load is one in which the shot column in the bore is equal to the bore diameter. Thus in 12 ga with a .729 bore & column length of .729 the load will be approximately 1 1/16oz, heavier than the 2" 12 is normally loaded to.
For the 28 gauge with a .550 bore stacked .550 high the load will be just a bit over 7/16 oz, 29/64 if you want to split hairs.
The only gauges which in the past have been traditionally loaded close to a square load was the 1 1/16oz British game load & this came about as an act of parliament I believe for the purpose of saving lead during WWI. The other was 1� oz in the 10 gauge which for many years as a very popular load. Most other gauges were traditionally loaded "Heavier than Square".
The square load Theory truly needs to be buried deeply in a hole (Octagon Perhaps) & be sealed over so securely it can never again escape. It is absolutely of no benefit.
Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,383 Likes: 2
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,383 Likes: 2 |
AhHa the old Square load rears its ugly head again. I have also read that the 3/4 oz load in a 28ga was the Perfect Square Load. He based this by saying (incorrectly) a square load was equal in weight to the round ball which fit the bore. He then correctly stated this could be found by dividing 16 by the gauge number. Thus 16/28 = .57, Thus the 3/4 oz load is "Perfectly Square" i the 28 gauge. This hogwash was written by a highly published & well known writer of things relating to shotguns in particular. Even an ole Redneck Hillbilly like my self knows that even though they contain the same two digits .57 & .75 "Ain't The Same".
In reality the old accepted square load is one in which the shot column in the bore is equal to the bore diameter. Thus in 12 ga with a .729 bore & column length of .729 the load will be approximately 1 1/16oz, heavier than the 2" 12 is normally loaded to.
For the 28 gauge with a .550 bore stacked .550 high the load will be just a bit over 7/16 oz, 29/64 if you want to split hairs.
The only gauges which in the past have been traditionally loaded close to a square load was the 1 1/16oz British game load & this came about as an act of parliament I believe for the purpose of saving lead during WWI. The other was 1� oz in the 10 gauge which for many years as a very popular load. Most other gauges were traditionally loaded "Heavier than Square".
The square load Theory truly needs to be buried deeply in a hole (Octagon Perhaps) & be sealed over so securely it can never again escape. It is absolutely of no benefit. It suffices to say that original loads were loaded with same shot charge as 20ga, but were later increased to mimic 16ga game gun loads because cartridge pressure of former was not sufficient to give good results. I would think while not as common 12ga 2.5" guns vintage 16ga gun when found would be less costly to buy therefore preferable to paying premium for 2" version.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,464 Likes: 133
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 11,464 Likes: 133 |
The longer the shot string, the less dense the center of the pattern because more of it is strung out.
Just a few pellets in a bird can result from various factors. Aiming error is probably the main one. You're a bit off, either L or R, or high or low. And about the only case in which a long string might help you is if you overlead a crossing bird and hit it with the trailing pellets.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 580 Likes: 61
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 580 Likes: 61 |
As others have stated, the 2" guns became popular in the 1930s. They were built for a niche market to compete with other lightweight 12s (e.g., the Churchill XXV). The proof load for these guns changed with ammunition. The manufacturers and proof houses argued back and forth on the proof. Some guns are proved at 7/8 oz and others for a 1oz proof. It may have been a solution looking for the problem, but I won't sell mine.
RST makes different 2" loads for them. A gun that weighs less than a 20 and hits like a 12. What else could you want? :-)
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 364
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 364 |
"What else could you want?" Well I want one that carries like a hand gun and hits like a punt gun. One that never misses would be nice too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,561 Likes: 249
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,561 Likes: 249 |
"What else could you want?".... How about looks, feels and carries like a dream, doesn't matter what the definition of dream is. And, when it's time, it shoots like it's supposed to, after that, no guarantees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
