I just picked up a new (to me, and perhaps to Lord Newport in 1903) Henry Atkin SLE in 12. The barrels are choked .708 and .720, so I am calling that essentially Improved/Modified. Most of my hunting is grouse and woodcock, with preserve pheasants thrown in maybe once a year or once every year and a half. That being said, I would like to do some wild pheasants and even travel for driven birds in the future. I assumed that I was going to open the chokes up a bit, but now I'm wondering if simply using spreader RST and Polywad cartridges for my hunting doesn't get me to a similar result without having to tinker with the gun, and preserving tighter chokes for farther shots.

The problem is, I have no concept of what the spread is on the spreader loads, having never used them before. Any advice, warnings disagreement, or agreement is appreciated.

I USE SPREADERS OCCASONALLY IN SPORTINC CLAYS THEY SEEM TO ABOUT DOUBLE THE PATTERN I USE FIOCCHI,BUT RST WOULD BE THE ONES OF CHOICE

I've had limited experience in using spreader loads in a variety of guns, but I do use them exclusively in one of my guns.

I have a 16 gauge BLE, which is choked improved cylinder and full. It is my fulltime woodcock and grouse gun. I use 2 1/2" RST spreader loads in 7/8 ounce.

What I have found in my gun, is that they don't substantially open the pattern. In my IC barrel, they open it to about C, and in my Full barrel they open it to about IM. The increased spread was marginal.

However, what I did find is that by using the spreader loads it substantially improved the uniformness of my pattern. When I use a standard RST load (and shotcup) the pattern is more center dense with more open voids as it filled out the cylinder pattern circle. With the spreader the pattern is much more uniform out to the pattern circle with fewer voids.

Your gun may vary.

Thanks, this is helpful, and candidly if I could open my I/M to something approaching SKeet and C, I would be thrilled.

I have used the RST spreader loads in both 12 & 16 ga for both hunting & (a very limited amount) sporting clays & pattern results are similar to what Flintfan reports w/ opening the choke by about one step & a very even distribution of shot with reduced center density. This is what Alex who used to work for RST told me to expect.

PolyWad spreaders open much more dramatically but in the patterns I've shot you can have very uneven coverage w/some big holes. I wouldn't want to use them @ more than 15/20 yards on any type of game bird.

I've also shot a few of 12 ga 1 oz Fiocchi Interceptors @ sporting clays but have never patterned them. They are 1300 FPS & I did not like the recoil.

I have used a few 16 ga RST spreaders on woodcock and they seemed to work fine. Just wondering if you know for sure what the bore diameters are? The only way to know for sure is pattern it. Rule of thumb seems the spreaders open 1 choke size.

Close up the RST spreader loads make quail guns out of my M&F choked shotguns. As Brittany Man said and my experience dictates, they fail beyond twenty yards. I can't kill a dove with spreaders to save my life...Geo

If you're willing to tool up to load 2 1/2" shells (which I assume your gun is chambered for),IC and MOD can be opened up a bit by just using chilled shot. Skipping the shotcup or shot wrapper and loading with soft shot is easy and worth a try.

Spreaders do work, and I use the BPI X wad to good effect in 12 and the Polywad insert in 20. Many caution against using spreaders over dogs. I'm now in that camp.

Save the factory shells for pheasants and try soft shot and no shotcup to open things up when needed.

Lots of satisfaction from rolling your own shells to solve a problem.

Like Leighton, I use Fiocchi Interceptors in my modern guns. They make my modified choked MX8 shoot IC patterns. Some people say that's one choke constriction. I say it's two. IC is .010" and LM is .015", with the M being .020".

My only experience with other makes of spreaders are with the Polywad SpredR, in 16 ga. I bought a few boxes one year at the Southern Side by Side Fall Classic, and used them to qualify and shoot in the LC Smith/Parker Challenge. I was using my 32" barreled FWE Smith which is choked very tight in both barrels. They broke every bird and rabbit presentation on the five-stand where we competed. Think I shot a 23/25 with them in the actual competition round. For some reason I've never patterned them, so I can't speak to the patchiness mentioned earlier, but they gave very reliable breaks on that five-stand.

SRH

Jay Menefee identified the Polywad spreader issue. There are a couple different ways to deal with it. One is a layer of shot on top of the disc. Another is to modify the disc, which is what Jay did. I tried a modification by punching 3 semicircles around the edge of the disc with a one hole paper punch. Seemed to produce very good spread while doing a better job of filling in the center.

The Polywads definitely spread more than the RST's. But I don't use them any more (although I still have some loaded up in 20ga) and I'm not certain about Polywad's current status. Are they still in business?

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.

I've opened about four of my Sxss to LM/LM. One hammergun to SK/SK. You should be able to find someone to do the work for you.

Believe what you want.

The man posted the pictures here, circled the holes in the pattern, and counted the strikes. Over and over again to eliminate statistical error.

A sample size big enough to satisfy the brilliant Dr. Jones?

That would seem a tall order.

We've discussed this quite a bit here and opinions vary widely, but I'll amplify briefly and then stand aside for the inevitable hailstorm.

It finally occurred to me, after trying to reconcile the work of past authors and that of Jones The Great, that we are trying to analyze a 3D system with 2D snapshots.

And that's the key. Patterns are snapshots. It a 2D representation of one distance downrange.

The problem is that shotgun pellets do not fly straight. Nothing flies straight, even a sphere, unless in a vacuum and even then its path is bent by any gravity field.

Look through a bag of reclaimed shot sometime and try to imagine any of that flying even remotely straight through the atmosphere at a speed starting near sonic and then decreasing to half that at 40 yards.

The pellets once given an initial vector, do not stay on that path. They travel in a helix, do little whifferdills, arcs, and they slow at various rates. The pellets are moving around inside the shot cloud and the only thing that can be said for sure is that the average diameter of the cloud is expanding.

What you see at 25 yards as voids and patches may look entirely different 5 yards further downrange. The clumps are expanding into the voids, and in doing so likely make different sized voids which are then expanded into.

It defies analysis.

I've come to the conclusion that pattern analysis is limited to the size of the pattern at the measured distance, and any attempt at quantifying the 'quality' of the pattern is just a fools errand.

What you might see on a pattern plate is not what a moving target sees as the shot cloud passes.

My fine condition of copy of Oberfell and Thompson is for sale to the highest bidder. Small bills, in the dead of night, no record kept of the idiot previous owner.

I've been shooting the Fiocchi Interceptors for about three years now, regularly, at sporting. I typically use 8-12 spreader rounds on a round, when I'm shooting a course of moderate difficulty, more if it's a softer course with closer stuff. I have patterned them discriminately, because I didn't want to put my confidence in a load that wouldn't deliver. The patterns I have shot at various ranges, 20 yards and under, have not shown any obvious holes, nor detrimental patchiness. And (drum roll), they have the X post in the center.

SRH

I always felt Campbell’s work was definitive. He did enough patterns to show specifically that you will have holes in the pattern. Important enough that he developed the over the top pellet addition to eliminate the likelihood of the hole in the pattern.

I shoot over dogs.

I buried a dog that had pellets in her back.

I’m not shooting spreader shells around dogs.

Campbells determination to develop 99% confidence in a spreader loadWas quite rigorous. Hundreds of patterns. It was all posted here.

I have no idea why some of you wish to perseverate on the matter.

It's easy to tell where your pattern is when you shoot a rabbit target. I've never lost a target when the pellet strikes on the ground showed that my target was inside the pattern. That's good enough for me. As far as shooting 100 patterns per load for determination of value, I personally think that's a little anal.

SRH

I agree that high confidence interval pattern testing is the realm of certain personalities.

I'm glad that Mike did enough work to illustrate there will be holes in the pattern if there is an insert.
And doubly glad he devised a work around.

I'm still working on aiming error.

I remember Mike well. Enjoyed his postings. I don't have the recall about his posts that you do. Help me out with something .............. how did he explain holes in patterns that were from loads withOUT inserts.

SRH

Aren't we all.

I try to get my thinking done here, for better or worse, and not when I'm actually shooting.

The worst thing a shooter can do is think.

I enjoy all the discussions, even with buzz... (choke choke)

Do you shoot sporting clays, or just skeet? Just curious.

SRH

I shoot them all Stan.

Pretty evenly divided on an annual basis.

Not much 5-stand this year due to lack of people to shoot with.

I'm fortunate to have a couple very nice places to shoot clays where I can use the time delay or just lay the remote on the rail of the stand and shoot by myself.

If you're getting at the process of reading a target, it should be near autonomic.

You've seen them all, as have I. Just move, mount, shoot. Don't let your brain get in the way.

Fortunately, mine isn't big enough to cause much of an obstruction.

Not thinking at all doesn't work for me, SJ.

Is it automatic (I assume that's what you meant by autonomic) when you view a previously unseen, really technical true pair, to know immediately which to shoot first? Not for me. I have to think and second and decide. Don't, and a good target setter will eat my lunch. When I see a midi target thrown at distance do I automatically know it's a midi, or do I wonder for a second if it's a standard, but further out? (It's not always on the menu what size the target is).

I agree that the brain needs to be "calmed down" a few seconds before calling "Pull". That is a basic part of my pre-shot routine. But, to say that thinking is not required for creating a plan, as I look at the show pair, would be totally false. I decide on several things in a matter of seconds after seeing that show pair, and thinking is required to make those decisions. Once I have a plan for the pair I switch that level of brain function off, and just try to execute the plan. I haven't seen them all, SJ. Target setters are getting better and better. They will use the terrain to fool you into thinking a bird is rising when it's actually falling. They will use timing of the first shot o a true pair to beat you. Don't think about where that second bird is going to be, after you kill the first one, and they'll be marking a "0" on your card for that target. Shoot at that first report pair bird on edge at 45 yards, instead of waiting a couple of seconds for it to show you it's face, and see how well it works. All those things require thinking about in advance.

Failing to have a plan is the equivalent to planning to fail, IMO. I see new shooters all the time just look at a show pair and the only thing they remember is where they're coming from. They shoot in the 50s, if they're lucky. My last three rounds of 100 were scored at 96, 96 and 94. The first score was the morning of the day I accidentally drowned and was resuscitated. The last two are in the last two weeks after I regained enough muscle strength to hold my Perazzi up for a whole round. Thinking at the right time works for me. Now, if I'd just been thinking that afternoon before I tried to go down that steep waterslide upright, on my feet ..........

Best, SRH

Ever talk yourself out of a target?

I got really good at that.

You have elucidated your thought process well. There is also a certain amount of pure reaction involved in this and i find it helps to have a fairly blank mind when the targets appear.

I limit my analysis to a general 'window' for each target. It helps of course to watch the other targets and I do watch every bird even at trap, even if it's just to call a dead bird for a fellow shooter.

The more you repeat something, the more basic elements become nearly autonomic. I recall trying to learn instrument flying and then later teaching it. At first, it seems like a great deal of things need to be perceived at once and the information processed. It takes near all your conscious thought and is exhausting... until you've done it bit and then basic airplane control takes up less of your mental processor time and you can start to devote more of your attention to the host of other tasks that need to be done. It's a process, like learning to shoot.

Once you have sufficient experience at it, stuff just happens of it's own accord. I've flown with pilots so good that the airplane just starts responding to them as if the guy was part of the machine. It's fun to watch.

It becomes like that with a shotgun and i know you've experienced it. That's kind of why we persist isn't it?

I bought a flat of these a couple of years ago. my patterns of RST Spreaders opened about a quarter on test paper but were patchy. I do not like them. I would prefer to open the chokes

I prefer opening the choke(s) too, as a general rule. I only use spreaders on certain presentations that are very close and unpredictable, because I shoot two .020" fixed chokes, at sporting. I never have used them hunting.

I cannot handle switching chokes all the time like my buddies do. Too distracting for me.

SRH

Stan, you haven't seen Jay Menefee's solution to a weak center using his spreaders? Why would he have bothered if there were no issue with insufficient density? And depending on the purpose for which you intend the load in question, we could probably have a very long discussion over the definition of a core that's sufficiently filled. I'm not talking real "donut loads", but I saw centers that were weaker than the annular ring both with some factory spreaders and my own reloads using unmodified discs. Solved it to my satisfaction by modifying the discs. I did not see that problem with RST's spreaders, but they also spread less than the Polywads (factory or reloads).

But since I spend a fair amount of time chasing birds (primarily woodcock) that are often shot at close range, I've come to the conclusion that it's easier to use a double with little or no choke in the first barrel.

Sorry to be late answering, but you probably won't be back on until early tomorrow morning anyway.

Yes, I've even loaded some with the half moons cut out of the edges of the disc. But, I never patterned the solid disc in a spreader load. It looked like a recipe for disaster to me. It was no surprise when something else had to be done to it to use it.

I'll stick with loads with the X post center. They work great in the Fiocchis. Very consistent.

SRH

I bought a Beretta 425 to use as a dove gun and the full choke barrel shot such tight patterns that I considered it unusable. If I could hit a bird at 25 yards, there would have been nothing left to eat.

I made up some loads with 3 different type of spreaders, and found that the Polywads produced the best patterns for dove hunting. I read about the folks that were putting part of the shot over the wad and made my shells that way. It made the gun very usable, and the donut hole was eliminated.

I posted pattern pictures on here, but that was 7 or 8 years ago.

OK, I have some 12 gauge Polywad inserts coming.

I've cooked up a little ass-periment for springtime. It will take until then, I don't shoot in the winter at this time for a variety of reasons, the main one being I don't like to drive in the winter and besides I'll need some helpers.

I'll enlist a few of my shooting buddies for a short string of shoots at Low 7. They won't be aware of what I'm investigating. I'll load the Polywad insert with and without a layer of shot on top and mix them up. I plan a box of each.

They will be graded from 0-5 as far as break quality, and estimated by another team of eggsperts as to distance past the stake. I'm intending a 21-25 yard test.

I'll fire 10 control rounds with the same load built without the insert just to prove to my own secret self that I can center that target with the gun in use. I expect a grade of '5' for all those. My barrel will be a factory Browning Modified.

Comments, suggestions, predictions? I know what I expect to find, but I'll report honestly. I'll use an ounce of hard 8's. Any donut or holes big enough to allow an on edge clay target to get through should show up.

Sounds like fun, SJ. Just be aware that 21-25 yards is likely on the outer limit of the usefulness of any spreader.

SRH

Beyond 25 yds has seemed to be the land of diminishing returns for me as well.

I would add that I hand load for all my vintage 16’s both spreader discs and X spreaders. I also always use Jay’s over layer of shot on the discs. Consistently, I get a more open pattern with the discs than with the X’s which is nice for the guns that are choked F-F.
Disc in the RB, X in the left.

And no complaints about pattern uniformity with either.

Interesting that this comes up now. Just yesterday I was out chasing quail and had a funny sounding report. Picked up the hull and saw this. Spreader load in a Lefever 16. Never happened before and this was the fifth shell fired from the box: