Trapshooters.com Home Page

Back to the Trap Discussion Web

Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot

Most Recent Posts First

Jump to First Post

Display Deleted Messages

Posted By Posted Date/Time
gjmen 30-Apr-09 - 07:21 PM ET
Quack Shot 30-Apr-09 - 07:33 PM ET
smifshot 30-Apr-09 - 07:56 PM ET
DC 30-Apr-09 - 10:12 PM ET
Bernie K 30-Apr-09 - 10:14 PM ET
Quack Shot 01-May-09 - 12:23 AM ET
Pat Ireland 01-May-09 - 06:47 AM ET
shoehorn324 01-May-09 - 08:10 AM ET
shot410ga 01-May-09 - 09:39 AM ET
Hap MecTweaks 01-May-09 - 10:24 AM ET
Neil Winston 01-May-09 - 10:33 AM ET
Hap MecTweaks 01-May-09 - 11:26 AM ET
zzt 01-May-09 - 05:04 PM ET
gjmen 01-May-09 - 08:43 PM ET


Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: gjmen
Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2009 - 07:21 PM ET
Website Address:

Are there any or has anyone discovered any real differences between Eagle and Lawerence brand hard shot? Thanks, gjmen

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Quack Shot
Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2009 - 07:33 PM ET
Website Address:

Eagle appears softer by my crude measurment strategies and it usually costs a dollar less per bag. I've seen some differences in patterns, mostly at longer yardages. I'm assuming that you are referring to Lawrence "Magnum" shot and not the Chilled version.

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: smifshot
Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2009 - 07:56 PM ET
Website Address:

quack...what is your crude method? thanks...stroker

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: DC
Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2009 - 10:12 PM ET
Website Address:

Search: (Anyone done hardness tests on Eagle shot?) interesting comments by many!

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Bernie K
Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2009 - 10:14 PM ET
Website Address:

I have been shoothing for the past 20 years and find NO differance in the two for 16yd. shooting. Caps are another thing, Lawrence Mag.

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Quack Shot
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 12:23 AM ET
Website Address:

smifshot

Take about a half dozen pieces of shot from each brand that are the same size( measure them), drop a weight on them from a foot or so, up from a hard flat surface and then measure them to see how much they flattened. The flatter they get, the softer they are. You can also use a set of flat parallel jaw pliers and a scale. Put the shot in the jaws and apply the same pressure to a bunch and then measure them to see how flat they get. Not very scientific, but it tends to be repeatable.

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Pat Ireland
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 06:47 AM ET
Website Address:

Eagle magnum shot contains around 2-3% antimony. Lawrence magnum shot contains about 6% antimony. Lawrence chilled shot contains around 3% antimony (from a representative of Lawrence shot and I have no reason to believe it is incorrect).

My crush tests are done with an apparatus that any engineer would criticize. I simply have a threaded blind 1/4 hole in a small block of steel. I drop in one shot, screw a bolt into the hole until it touches the shot and then put the thing in a vice. I put a wrench on the bolt head and attach a five pound block of lead with a cord exactly two feet long to the end of the wrench. I drop the lead, and this turns the wrench that turns the bolt and crushes the shot. I measure the shot deformation.

My system is far from quantitative but does give a reasonable relative hardness of the shot. Neil has developed a better system than I use, but both Neil have come to the same conclusion. Eagle shot is soft.

I would not be concerned with Eagle shot for the first doubles target but would not use it for anything else. Keeping a brand of shot for one specific shell is not worth the small savings I would gain.

Pat Ireland

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: shoehorn324
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 08:10 AM ET
Website Address:

anyone ever test remington sts shot???

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: shot410ga
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 09:39 AM ET
Website Address:

The only differance is the price. Which ever is cheaper is the one I buy. I've never seen any differance in performance, at any yardage.

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Hap MecTweaks
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 10:24 AM ET
Website Address:

Before the improved hard shot came along, were any 100s-200s shot with chilled shot in singles? If you want real hard shot, why not steel, now that's hard stuff! I feel buying into the (nothing but the best) syndrome in shot choices takes away from the ultimate goal in singles and the first shot on doubles! I've never used Eagle brand shot for handicap loads so I can't speak on that.

I'd love to use Eagle shot for all my singles shooting and not miss a clay till it was the fault of my shot choice!

Hap

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Neil Winston
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 10:33 AM ET
Website Address:

Cowboy John's post a long time ago led me to do this test, which confirmed his findings.

(a few years old)

Last spring a poster shot some patterns with hard and soft shot and said he couldn’t tell the difference by looking at them.

I noted that in order to test hard vs. soft you need test that part – how “soft” or “hard” the pellets actually are - of the experiment first. I also predicted that once that is done, you will be able to tell by looking most of the time.

This experiment tests soft and hard shot and compared their patterns.

The Shot:

Lawrence chilled 8’s crushed an average of 0.29 inches using my drop-test apparatus. This is about as soft as you can buy.

Remington magnum 8’s crushed an average of 0.22 inches using my drop-test apparatus. This is about as hard as you can buy.

Two other brands of magnum-labeled shot crushed 0.025 and 0.024 respectively, which is why you have to test it.

The Test:

Eleven-hundred-fifty foot per second shells were loaded with the two kinds of shot, using Red Dot and changing only the shot. Since the use of soft shot is commonly singles, 10 patterns were shot using each through the bottom barrel of a Perazzi O/U with a “factory” 0.028” choke. The distance was 34 yards, again to simulate singles. Patterns were photographed and analyzed with Shotgun-insight software.

Results:

The first question was whether you can see a difference. An uninvolved observer who didn’t know the theory compared 7 pairs of patterns, one hard, one soft. In 4 cases he said the hard-shot patterns were more dense, in three he saw no difference. As I compare them after computer analysis, the first pattern with the first of the other group, the second with the second and so on, I see six where the hard-shot patterns are more dense, three with no difference, and one where the soft-shot pattern looks denser.

Conclusion: I wouldn’t count on telling them apart by eye alone, but if I had to make a guess, I’d be right more often than wrong most of the time. This is not a strong advocacy for either a big difference between them or the ability of the eye to tell you much. All in all, I’d say my claim that I could tell them apart was said with more certainly last spring than I feel now.

Detailed Analysis:

As the title of the graph says, hard-shot patterns are more concentrated in the center and have higher total percentages as well. Soft shot puts 24% of its pellets in the 20- to 30-inch ring, compared to 20+% for the other type. Though the difference is not statistically significant I think the picture shows it happens more often than not, roughly speaking.

Looking at it using a different metric, the diameter which would hold 75% of the shot is 24+ inches with soft shot, 21+ inches with the hard. This number is not entirely valid when some shot “lost,” that is, doesn’t appear anywhere on the paper but the difference here is big enough to pay attention to.

In summary, both taken together, it’s apparent that the theory that using soft shot will “open patterns” is supported by this experiment.

Discussion and conclusion: All these patterns looked pretty good; I wouldn’t worry about any of the 20 of them. Are they as good as they look?

There is another statistic in the Shotgun Insight program, the probability of a pellet hit in various areas of the patterns. In the inner 10 inches, they are all either 100% or close enough to not make any difference. Looking at other areas they are all practically identical as well.

Trusting the probability data, and I do, I think that though the hard shot would give “more smoke,” the scores shot by these two shells would be the same.

Yours in Sport,

Neil

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: Hap MecTweaks
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 11:26 AM ET
Website Address:

For whatever the reason, some types of targets are harder to break than others. Putting more shot on a clay in order to break it up is important, however, soft shot expends it's energy and expands when plowing through a hard clay target too. In rifles, a steel jacketed bullet will zip through a target without transferring it's energy. A soft tipped hunting bullet will transfer more energy when expansion begins after striking the target! Can the same trend be said of soft shot on hard clays? I believe it does and have shot Bios with both types of shot and saw different looking breaks on the targets. Hap

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: zzt
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 05:04 PM ET
Website Address:

gjmen, around my neck of the woods I can get Star magnum (chilled rarely), Eagle Magnum, Lawrence chilled and magnum and West Coast magnum.

My favorite of the bunch is West Coast Magnum. It is always round. It has consistent hardness, and most often contains the size marked on the bag.

I am not a big fan of Lawrence magnum, because of roundness issues, and because it often has a coating of lead oxide on it. I do like Lawrence chilled shot. I find it to be soft, uniform and round.

I began buying Star shot when my semi-local dealer stopped carrying Lawrence chilled. I liked it a lot. The original stuff (made in Argentina) was very round and uniform, but ran larger than marked for big shot, and smaller than marked for small shot. One lot of Star Argentina #7 1/2 (actually measured at almost #7 size) was the roundest, hardest hitting shot I ever used. Patterns were among the best. It was $2 less than WCM. It absolutely destroyed targets in the winter.

Eagle shot was originally called Star Peru. I bought some on the recommendation of a friend. He said it was the roundest shot you could buy. I found it very variable, and mostly not round. It was extremely soft.

Here is my take on shot. If you are using #7 1/2, buy whatever you can get that is full sized and round. If that is Star or Eagle or Lawrence chilled, so be it. Full sized 7 1/2s don't deform as much as smaller shot, so you don't have to worry as much. The benefits of the softer shot offset the slightly wider pattern you get. If you are long yardage, consider good magnum.

Star and Eagle 8 shot tend to be smaller than they should be. For that reason, i won't use them. For 8 1/2 shot, patterns are going to be more open no matter what. So use magnum and your favorite choke. If you use soft, tighten one choke restriction to compensate.

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

Subject: Eagle vs. Lawrence Brand Shot
From: gjmen
Date: Fri, May 01, 2009 - 08:43 PM ET
Website Address:

Thanks everyone for their input. I think I will stick with the Lawrence Magnum since it is cheaper in my area. gjmen

Email a link to this post - Email a link to this thread

The owners, administrators and moderators of the Trapshooters.com have no obligation to keep objectionable messages off this forum. It is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners, administrators or moderators of Trapshooters.com Discussion Forum will be held responsible for the content of any message. The owners, administrators and moderators of the Trapshooters.com Discussion Forum reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason at our sole discretion. However, the owners, administrators and moderators are not monitoring or editing the site and are under no obligation to police it for items that some persons may find objectionable.

[ Back ]

To Register for full access to reply and create threads Click Here!
To Login to the discussion web Click Here!
To report problems with this site email email us