I patterned a gun yesterday using RST's "2 1/2" loads (20 ga. 7/8oz 7.5s @ 1150 fps; despite the name, the case is 2.75"). They patterned significantly more open (65%) than I expected (80%). I obviously need to pattern some other loads for comparison to see if it is the load or the gun, but in the meantime I would be curious to hear if anyone has had a similar experience with this load.

Thanks in advance, Doverham

lower velocity loads with smaller shot, often pattern more open than do higher velocity loads with larger shot, regardless of the brand of the shell...

Not even close.

Shot size and velocity are TWO different variables.

In general, large shot shoots tighter than small shot.

In general, low velocity = tighter patterns. It's a shot deformation issue.

The biggest single variable is shot hardness, followed by shotcup effectiveness, followed by velocity. You need to investigate this for each shot size to have any meaningful data.

The single tightest shooting 20 gauge load I've seen was Federal 'Field and Range' circa late 90's in shot size #8. It turned any open choke gun into at least 70%, and maybe more. It was a fast load of #8, but the shot was exceedingly hard - harder than bagged STS shot or bagged West Coast shot. Man, it was hard.

Anybody have thoughts on RST shot hardness? I recall reading (Tom Roster in SSM, maybe) that B&P and Fiocchi VIP shot were harder than most commercial loads.

I remember talking to them at the vintagers one year, I believe they said they use Lawrence magnum shot. I remember reading an article somewhere that has lawrence rated towards the top in hardness.

I'm guessing this is going to be a gun issue, I've shot a lot of RST and found it to be top notch. The gun you patterned is probably more open than you think.

Or possibly more open than what I asked for when the fixed chokes were set. Obviously, some more patterning is in order before I reach that conclusion.

65% is awfully close to full choke.

That's tighter than I personally want a 20, but if you really want it to shoot even tighter you might try hand loads with some of that Italian nickel plated shot that BPI sells.

I'd try something like Herco, and a wad like the SP-20 that has a long shot cup.

Some guys say that the base pellet hardness is more important than the plating, but like most of this it's subject to debate.

Good luck.

What is the choke constriction measured with a bore micrometer?

Actually, I had specified 80% at 30 yards which is more like Mod. 65% at 30 yards would be closer to IC.

I understand that the issue with nickel plating is whether it is actually plated, or just washed - the latter apparently does not add much to the hardness. Thanks for the reloading tips, I may have to go down that path.

I have not had an opportunity to have the bore constriction measured, as I don't have a micrometer.

Ah, the old 30 yard trick.

I can vouch for the BPI nickel.

A one ounce load at 1125 fps I've worked up for a 12 gauge Parker with #5 BPI nickel turns the .008" choked right barrel into something north of a solid modified.

It's pricey, but I don't shoot much of it. Nice option though.

One other interesting side note. I did a pellet count of the RST shell and counted 326 pellets, which is a bit above the nominal 307 count for 7/8 oz of 7.5s. Interestingly, the shot weighed .875 oz. This would seem to suggest high-antimony shot, presumably?

I just picked up a pair of used Brown & Sharpe dial calipers on FleaBay, and should have an answer to that question soon.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Doverham, et al, you need to read Dr. Andrew Jones's book on shotgun patterning before "investing" heavily in a patterning experiment or getting too attached to some of the ideas that have long floated as truth.

Basically, if you aren't willing to shoot 10 patterns and do a statistically valid analysis on the set, you all be whistlin' Dixie. The #1 take-away from the foregoing is that shotgun patterns are really, really variable. #2 take-away is that eyeball integration of patterns is a non-starter. And that for sure means that pellet count within a circle is such a crude analysis as to be mostly worthless.

I already know there will be shouts of "foul," but above is the modern truth. Sorry patterning is complicated, but better to know than go banging away and develop "facts" from flawed data.

DDA

Yeah, I forgot

Since that Dr. guy wrote a book, none of this traditional stuff is valid any more.

Hard shot and shot wrappers have all been a waste of time.

Never mind buffering and staying subsonic.

The size of a pattern on a splash board is all an illusion.

'Tis better to have patterned, than to not have patterned at all. The patterning board taught me that shooting #4s out of my Hasting's barrel, on my A5, with the IC tube in, was pretty much a waste of time. There were holes in the pattern my dog could run through. It taught me that my first year Ruger Red Label didn't shoot to POA with either barrel. We also discovered another A5 that had a pattern about 10 feet right of center at 40 yards, very handy on right hand crossing shots, but, not for much else. We also discovered that my Brother's Savage Fox, with modified and full 30" barrels, would consistantly put a Federal slug through the center of a pop can at 40 yards with the modified choke barrel-the full choke barrel put the slug somewhere else. We never did find out where. My brother shot a LOT of deer with that gun, always aware it was a single shot for that use.
These were all good things to know. The pattern board is an excellent place to start, but, the answers aren't always simple or predictable.
Few people take enough time to find out where their guns are shooting, in my experience.

Best,
Ted

Doverham. Is the rst shell fibre wad or plastic? This alone will make a significant differance. The fibre wad won't protect the outer pellets from flattening out against the barrels this causing them not to fly true to the target. ( like throwing a flat stone into the wind).

Yes I'm going to bring up the old story. Shooting at a pattern board is great for shooting at a stationary target but not wing shooting. Good shot string is what kills birds! Low power light loads tend to have the best shot string so I'm sure you will be very happy with the rst shells. Note all guns shoot all shells different so hitting the skeet club or sporting clays is the best test.

As far as where a gun shoots for you, the low #7 on a skeet field is handy for that.

Watch where that target just starts to drop, which with no wind is usually just past mid-field, point and shoot just before it starts dropping. That's as near an aiming point as a flying target can be. It will give good feedback on point of impact (if there is one!).

Pattern size is easily seen on a splash board. We use a steel plate covered with white grease that's renewed with a paint roller.

Pattern quality is another matter. I've always shaken my head at the notion of 'holes' in a pattern. Sure, if you're shooting a stationary target like a turkey or the one in a hundred birds that truly have no relative motion, then an observed 'patchy' pattern is a problem. But... the target sees a cloud of shot, and a moving target experiences the cloud in 3 dimensions.

Brister came as close as anybody to demonstrating that with his towed targets.

What shows up on a pattern board isn't what a bird experiences.

Pattern size and point of impact are the variables we can control. We do that with choke, load selection, and a gun we can shoot well.

We're better at it than the rocket science boys have been lately.

Shot string can be a hard thing to explain. The easy way to think of it is that you want the majority of your shot to show up at the target at the same time. Remember this is at a moving target.

and if you miss or only hit with the fringe of the shot string- how would you know where the center is/was? I have found the 16 yard mount and shoot method a good start.

I can agree on the two dimensional aspect of a pattern sheet Vs something a least approaching 3D like Brister's towed target ( i have been unable to talk any 18 wheeler drivers into letting me use the sides of their trailers)

All the shot on the plane of the target instantaneously would be the ideal. It can't be done. The target moves as the shot cloud passes. This results in a loss of effective pattern density for anything that has any relative motion to the axial direction of the shot. What shows as a hole on a stationary board would present to a moving target as a tilted cylinder in the cloud, and be essentially meaningless for predicting the chances of a target being hit or escaping.

For all but high deflection shots at long range, the % loss isn't that dramatic but for any moving target what you see on paper isn't what you get at the plane of the target.

Doverham I was just on rst web site what shell did you get? In 20 gauge 2 1\2 1150fps they have a paper lite, paper fibre wad and a spreader lite. If you got a spreader load your mystery is solved.

The "three dimensional cloud" in a 1 1/4 load of #4 shot (that is 169 pellets) is getting pretty thin at 35 yards or so out of an improved cylinder choke. I had lots of old timers around who were of the opinion of 1 1/4 oz of 4s being the end all load for pheasant and duck hunting. I was playing a game where a load of 6s (281 pellets in a 1 1/4oz load, quite impressive on paper at 30 yards) was the first one in the pipe of the A5, was followed by a number 4 load, thinking the 4 would hit harder down range than the 6s.

That is what the old timers thought would work best. They were full of poo. The time spent patterning, in a single dimension, proved it. I don't worship in the house of the golden pellet.

Maybe you don't like the thought of it being a "hole" in the pattern, but, that is just what it is, semantics aside, at the end of the day, after that shot was missed. Sorry.

Best,
Ted

Remington solved that very problem for us a few years back with their 'duplex' load.

Remember that farce?

Never mind the time of flight difference between the 4's and 6's.

After watching the video of George Digweed breaking clays at more than 100 yds I came to the personal decision that patterning was mostly irrelevant waste of ammo and time. I have never seen a pattern which would indicated such shots were regularly possible with lead shot. I have also experienced shots from skeet choked barrels which broke clays at 50 plus yards which reflects the central core of the patterns are pretty thick even with open chokes. So my theory is to see if the combination of gun and shell works and don't buy anymore of those which don't. I will shoot at a patterning plate for point of aim verification.

Thanks for all the comments and suggestions.

The RST shells are their "2 1/2" load, 20 ga. 7/8 oz 7.5s at 1150fps with a plastic wad. I finally had a chance to pattern some of my reloads as a comparison. They threw 74% patterns (68-76% variation), which is significantly tighter than the RST shells. (The reloads were WinAA+Win209+15gr. Unique+CB1078+.875oz of Magnum 8s). I guess this is just another example of different guns liking different loads.

Patterning may not be a perfect science, but I would prefer to have some imperfect information than none, as long as you understand its limitations. I use the method that Oberfell&Thompson set out in their Mysteries of Shotgun Patterns (efficiency, distribution and "patchiness" based on the number of 5" gaps). In this case, I used 5 patterns because this gun is an upland game gun and I didn't need 10 patterns to figure out if the gun was close to what I had specified.

I played around with the Optimizer program Dr. A.C. Jones has on his website to determine the best pattern efficiency for what I wanted to do - in this case, the program determined that to get a 90% probability of at least 2 pellet strikes, the density had to be at least 80%. So I asked to have the chokes set at 80% for 20 and 30 yards, which should equate to something close to Cyl and Mod. Interestingly, the bottom barrel patterned at 74% with the RSTs at 20 yards, which is a bit more open than Cyl (?).

I also shot 5 POA patterns which were right on the money. I learned the hard way to NEVER shoot POI patterns if your gun shoots good POA patterns.