1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

1 oz vs 1 1/8oz

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by 635 G, Sep 30, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 635 G

    635 G Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    6,229
    I know this has been discussed as much as 71/2 vs #8. But for older shooters the less pounding might make the difference after 4 days of shooting, such as at the Grand, Cardinal Classic or your state shoot. I looked at DeVault Industries web & in the August newsletter, there was the first definitive article of why 1 oz may be better---look at the article & see if you concur.

    Lou
     
  2. wolfram

    wolfram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,266
    This is a forbidden topic here. Causes Big DONkey to start twitching and slinging profanities. Bad ju-ju.

    Please stick to approved topics like 'how queer is Barney Frank' or Obama Vs Brooks.
     
  3. BRGII

    BRGII TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    740
    Please post the url for the web site, I would be interested in reading about it. BRGII
     
  4. 635 G

    635 G Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    6,229
    BRGII-all you have to do is google--DeVault Industries, on their site key on Newsletters, key on the August one , & look at the section-the world according to me

    Lou
     
  5. Quack Shot

    Quack Shot Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,003
    There's the link. I saw the same reasoning in an older article in what I believe to be an older Lyman Shotshell Handbook. I like 1oz loads and shoot them for everything except handicaps. I have noticed no difference in scores at the 16 yard line. My preference is 1oz of 8's, even if I'm shooting them back at the 27, unless the weather is cold, weet, or windy. Then I'll go to 7 1/2s at the longer yardages.

    I get some spectacular breaks with my 1oz loads. Try 8 1/2's and you'll see lots of smoke with a tight choke from the 16. I'll also shoot 7/8 oz for practice. I load them up a little higher, over 1250 fps. I'll use 8 or 8 1/2 shot for the closer stuff and kick the velocity up a little with 7 1/2s for longer yardages or poor weather.

    I'm not usually recoil sensitive, but I could tell the difference at he end of a 500 target day. I load them up to about 1235 fps or a touch higher. The exception to that is the Significant Other's preference. I load her's right to around 1200.
     
  6. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    You see, Lou, MAC users can't read the article - Dennis must be keeping to the intimate circle of IE surfers. My PC shows it, but neither Safari nor Firefox show anything but a blank page, which is why I asked.

    Before you call it "definitive" you ought to read it and see how much you think it "defines." To start with, do you really think we should accept

    "I had the opportunity to pattern 1 pz shells and found in my testing that the faster 1 oz was pushed, the tighter it patterned, this was the exact opposite of the 1 1/8 oz shell."

    without at least asking how that can be? This is not so say Dennis is making it up, but rather he hasn't told us enough for us to tell the magnitude of the effect. Look at this table from my post on the other thread:

    [​IMG]

    I could say that slower shells were patterned tighter, but the numbers are so close it would be misleading. There's no difference. I've done a number of this speed tests, and there's never been a difference you could make use of, except that 1030 FPS loads were significantly tighter that any of the faster stuff:

    [​IMG]

    So why, we must ask ourselves, did Dennis get this result? Can you think of a reason why 1 oz should act so differently from 1 1/8?

    Also, Lou, do a bit of math on the shotstring information and see how powerful the effect can possibly be. After all, we can't guess at its significance without knowing its magnitude, can we?

    Neil
     
  7. poacherjoe

    poacherjoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,072
    Location:
    Central Kommiefornia
    Good one Wolfram!!!!!!!You may have opened the door again!PJ:)
     
  8. timb99

    timb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,331
    Location:
    Shawnee, Kansas, USA
    Come on Neil.

    You know that opinion and conjecture always outweigh testing and results when it comes to trap shooting!
     
  9. Quack Shot

    Quack Shot Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,003
    Neil,

    Here is the text from the newsletter from DeVault Industries.

    "I have received a lot of e-mail concerning 1-1/8oz. Verses 1oz loads. It has been argued that the 1-1/8 oz load breaks more targets and is a better choice. Let’s look at this. In 1959 I read a gun smithing article written about the bore of a 12 ga. shotgun. At the old spec. the internal size of a 12 ga shotgun measured .729diameter. the most optimum load according to the article was 1 oz. The article stated that the 1oz in that bore was the most efficient for the amount of pellets available. All the shot was not jammed in the forcing cone and it cut down on pellet deformation with 1oz. Less deformation decreases flyers in the pattern. I had the opportunity to pattern 1oz shells and found in my testing that the faster a 1oz load was pushed the tighter it patterned, this was the exact opposite in the 1-1/8oz shell. In 1995 I had the opportunity to view and experiment with high-speed photography and was fortunate enough to see the shot string in a 3-dimensional view. All of us are normally able to see a pattern in a flat piece of paper that is a 2-dimensional view. The 1oz shell has a greatly reduced length of shot string. This allows more pellets to arrive at the point of impact than in a shell with a longer shot string. The pattern may not look as dense on a pattern sheet but this is very misleading information. The other item that I hear is “I want the longer shot string so when I shoot in front of a target the shot string will break the target. That is a good one, considering that 99% of all targets missed are low and behind. Winchester had published data years ago that took a shotgun and electronically tested the shot string theory. According to the data a target moving at 45 MPH and a shell with a 12ft. long shot string traveling at 1200 FPS. From the time the first pellets arrive at the impact point until the last pellet in the string gets to the target the object will have moved 18 inches in flight. It only takes 3 one hundreds of a second for a target to pass through a 30” circle. If the shot is in a string the 30” area is not available. This is why viewing a pattern on a flat 2-D paper does not give the entire picture. If I were given a choice between a short shot string with 40 or more pellets arriving at the point of impact or a long shot string with 10 to 15 pellets arriving at the same time my choice will be for the more pellets at the time of impact. In a 1-1/8 oz load of 7-1/2 size shot, there are 394 pellets; in a 1 oz load there are 350 pellets. Not a great difference and no matter how much shot you have if the target is not pointed correctly it is still a missed target and the zero on the score pad still remains the same size."

    Not ONE Chart, Graph, or Equation! :) Neil, you should know better than to bring facts into these discussions! More shot = more potential for a broken target.
     
  10. Didreckson

    Didreckson Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    886
    Location:
    Central California
    Simply math would dictate that 1-1/8 oz would have more pellets than 1 oz. That is the reason for loading 1 oz, cost savings....or is it?

    I shoot a PFS, and Nitro 27's don't kick any more/less felt to me than a super light 7/8's.

    Without any testing or scientific data, I feel my barrel patterns fast 1 oz of 8's better than other loads. Absolutely nothing to support this other than I shoot this load best and my scores are that proof.

    I have the privilege of shooting in an area where Ron Alcoriza lives and shoots. He uses 1 oz. of light 8's for everything from 16 to the next county. I don't know how many of you know him, but he is a pretty fair shot.

    It really boils down to personal preferece, what you do best.
     
  11. Sky Buster

    Sky Buster Sky Buster TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,980
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I've been loading 1 oz. exclusively for the past 15 years or so.
    I swear I get harder breaks on the target with 1 oz. than I do
    with 1 1/8 oz. They also work just as good from the 25 yard line.
    Less recoil and better economics is a bonus.
     
  12. hoggy

    hoggy TS Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,261
    When you run 100 straight with 1 oz loads and ask yourself maybe I should have used 1 1/8 loads because one of the birds broke a little weak. I personally love 1 oz loads compared to the 1 1/8 I used to use. Seems to me I get better breaks with my 1oz loads too. I'm with sky buster on this one.
     
  13. maclellan1911

    maclellan1911 TS Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2006
    Messages:
    4,226
    I reload 1oz loads to shoot fun and practice, dropped down to 7/8 to conserve lead. I still like to shoot 1 1/8 7.5s @ 1145 fps back to my current 22y. I will take advantage of more pellets. although I load 7.5s for everything just do. No reason
     
  14. Little Dog

    Little Dog TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    531
    I just love it when some bozo says that 1 oz of smaller shot has more pellets than 1 1/8 oz of larger size shot. Boy, is that meaningful.
     
  15. BIGDON

    BIGDON Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,625
    Location:
    Michigan
    If you 1oz hotdogs are so great why don't you post your ATA averages, trufully. I see nothing on here to get anyone to switch other than a lot of opinions. You are so worried about the other guy, why don't you just shoot your load and worry about yourself.

    Of course you can wait one month and start the 1 oz thread again.

    Don

    Wolf you are showing your stupidity again along with your DA friend.
     
  16. wolfram

    wolfram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,266
    Fish ON!

    Just knew I could get him to bite! Think I'll cut the line though, don't have a big enough boat to land it.

    FWIW, the 1 Oz loads are my favorite and whether it is a mental thing or a technical reason, I just plain shoot them better. Many other shooters feel the same but many don't agree. One of the neat things about this game of target shooting is that you can experiment and use what you like as long as it is within the rules .... it's just a fun hobby.
     
  17. BIGDON

    BIGDON Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    6,625
    Location:
    Michigan
    Wolf you couldn't catch a cold standing naked in a draft.
     
  18. hoggy

    hoggy TS Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,261
    Seems to me someone ASKED for our opinions. No need to be an ass when we answer them. Yes, you know who you are.
     
  19. Quack Shot

    Quack Shot Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,003
    The original question was pertaining the reduced recoil that a one ounce load could provide for an aging shooter. He asked for an opinion regarding a recent newlestter article on one ounce loads. The originator of the thread posed a very valid question and has as much right to expect respect from anyone participating in the thread. I think some comments here are out of line and show undue disrespect to many posters. If you have a problem with the question posed, don't bother to open the thread. Now go back and crawl back under your rock.
     
  20. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Dennis made a fundamental error in his note. He based much of his conclusion on an old Winchester report that used a 45 MPH target and a 12 foot shot string traveling at 1200 ft/sec. The supposed target would be traveling at a 90 degree angle to the shooter.

    In trap shooting, the target that started at 43 MPH has slowed down to around 35 MPH by the time the shot hit it. The shot has slowed down to nearly 1000 ft/sec. The angle of the target to the shooter varies, but 15 degrees is not a bad angle for rough calculations. Also, for simplification, a 10 foot shot string is easier to use.

    Using realistic trap data, the 18 inches of target travels as the shot string passes used by Dennis, is reduced to less than two inches.

    This means that the difference between a shot string that is 0.1 ft. or 10 feet makes no difference in breaking the target. A shot with no shot string that hits the front edge of an angles target would also hit the center of the target if it had a 10 foot shot string.

    The mistake Dennis made was using others data to reach a conclusion without checking the accuracy and applicability of the original data. The Winchester calculations do apply to a Dove flying at a right angle to a shooter, but not to a trap field.

    Pat Ireland
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.