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

100fps Difference Big Deal or Not?

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by Rich219, Jun 24, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rich219

    Rich219 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    2,125
    No big deal. I went from shooting a load of 1250fps to 1150 fps and noticed to chance at all.
     
  2. Pull & Mark

    Pull & Mark Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    5,410
    Richard, I read somewhere that 100 fps difference in speed is about a 3 l/2 inch lead difference on station 4. I can't shoot that close, can you. Forgetaboutit and just shoot. Break-em all. Jeff
     
  3. Smok'n Joe

    Smok'n Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,730
    Gentlemen,

    It's not just the LEAD...higher velocity increases the shots breaking power.
    I like to shoot a light #8 for singles. Objective is reduced recoil. Using a 1 ounce shot load brings shot velocity back up and a noticeable improvement in scores and performance...so yes SPEED is a BIG DEAL.

    For handicap it's 7 1/2s @ 1250 fps.

    Smok'n Joe
     
  4. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Smok'n Joe - The energy in the shot is not the key, it is the energy that is transfered from the shot to the target. If you push a sharp nail through a piece of paper first with 1 pound of force and then a second hole with 20 pounds of force, the same amount of energy is transfered to the paper before the nail passes through. If a force of 10 pounds is required to break a sheet of glass, will putting 30 pounds of force on the glass will mean that 10 pounds is lost breaking the glass and 20 pounds of force remains after the glass is broken.

    If you hit a target with two #8 shot, one traveling at 1000 ft/sec and another traveling at 1200 ft/sec, both will impart the same energy to the target as they pass through the target. The faster shot will travel further after it has passed through the target.

    Pat Ireland
     
  5. wayneo

    wayneo Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,002
    Click on link, some good info from last May.

    Wayne
     
  6. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    While I certainly agree in principal, Pat, some of your views do, I admit, raise questions in my mind.

    Take, for example, "If a force of 10 pounds is required to break a sheet of glass, will putting 30 pounds of force on the glass will mean that 10 pounds is lost breaking the glass and 20 pounds of force remains after the glass is broken."

    Think about Newton's Third Law - the one both magazine writers and shooters get wrong so much of the time. The heart of it is that forces come in pairs. And the corollary to the first part, that without an opposing "Force B" there can't be a "Force A."

    So you can't apply 30 pounds of force to this glass - it shatters when the force rises to 10. There can be no "lost force" since no force in that apparently "lost" range, 11 to 30, ever existed.

    Let's instead think about it in a different way; call it a "threshold" situation. As long as the available force exceeds that threshold, the clay breaks. Conversely, a sub-threshold force, while it may leave a black mark on the bird, generally won't knock off a bit large enough to be scored "a piece." I think that the place the force is applied must make a difference, thus this threshold depends on what part of the rock we are talking about.

    There a Tim Woodhouse article about this sort of thing in the current Trapshooting USA. It has the usual mathematical impossibilities, graphs of unknown provenance, and recycled graphics, but this one actually has photos of targets which were apparently hit but remain unbroken. "Because the shot was too hard" is the clear implication, but not actually the claim, because, I suppose, that that would be a bridge too far even for Tim.

    Neil
     
  7. Smok'n Joe

    Smok'n Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,730
    Pat,

    I understand what you're saying. In theory you have a point, however, when it comes to #8 shot at 16 yards, with "normal" conditions, I get better results using the higher velocity 1 oz load...simple as that.

    Is it a matter of better timing or is it more breaking power? Maybe it's a combination of both...I don't know. But as Neil pointed out, I do notice fewer "dusted" or "pushed" targets with more and better quality breaks.

    I spent some time collecting and inspecting thrown targets after a league shoot at our club a couple weeks ago. We were shooting into a 25 to 30 mph head wind and our scores were pretty poor. I noticed a lot of targets seemed to JUMP but not break. Most of us were using #7 1/2 HDCP loads that day. I was amazed at how many targets of the targets I examined were PIERCED or DUSTED but otherwise unscathed and most likely ruled LOST.

    I have no empirical data to support my conclusion, but it seems to me that higher velocity shot is more likely to break/shatter the target versus push, dust or pierce the target. Interesting...

    Smok'n Joe
     
  8. Bob M

    Bob M Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    235
    From running the math, 'no' or at the most conservative 'probably not'.

    However, remember that the 'Red Boxer Shorts Corollary' trumps all science and reasoning.

    This is the rule that states: 'If YOU believe something matters, then it matters to YOU.'

    If you believe that wearing your favorite pair of red boxer shorts makes you a better handicap shooter, then not having them on will affect your shooting.
     
  9. Dr A C Jones

    Dr A C Jones Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    367
    Pat, In most trap scenarios there is never an excess of pellet energy. How much gets transferred to the target depends on the impact angle of the pellet. That's what the above link was driving at.


    Pellets with more energy are more effective.


    There is a very simple "think" experiment to get 90% of the way to understanding this. 100fps extra at the muzzle may only be 35fps extra retained energy, but 35fps extra on ~700fps retained energy is 5% extra speed, which gives 10% extra pellet energy. This allows you to downsize pellets by 10% and so have 10% more in the packet. 10% extra pellets is almost like the hike from 1oz to 1-1/8oz.


    The more complex way of understanding downrange energy and pellet count is in the link above.


    In general, most "advice" suggests that the extra velocity isn't worth it. I disagree; the extra downrange energy definitely helps. I even think the analysis of relative leads is debatable, but that's another story.


    Regarding "advice", the all pervasive Mr W made a bit of a cock-up in the current CPSA magazine. The article was about steel versus lead and hence retained energy. He suggested that going away targets were much harder to break because the going away speed of the target had to be subtracted from the speed of the pellet. This is wrong. One should calculate the energy of the pellet before impact and the energy after (assuming the new speed of the pellet matched that of the target). This gives about a 1% change in net impact energy and hence the conclusion that the direction of the target can be disregarded. TW's conclusion was that the going away target robbed the pellet of 20% of its energy (as I recall) with the conclusion that going away targets are harder to break.


    Example figures: Velocity of pellet = 700 fps, target = 70 fps. With the TW method, the net velocity is 630fps and the energy reduced by ~20%. Remember, energy is proportional to velocity-squared so a 10% reduction in velocity gives a 20% reduction in energy. With the correct method, the velocity of the pellet after impact is assumed to be 70fps, which is 10% is only 10% of the original speed and only 1% of the original energy. That means the pellet transferred 99% of its energy.


    On the bright side, one of TW's graphs didn't have any axis labels so at least it didn't misinform.


    I was going to write a correction to the CPSA, but let's face it, who cares? The authors, editors, and publisher certainly don't. If I had the choice I'd take a lower subsription rate and lose the magazine.
     
  10. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Smok'n Joe - Your post raised two thoughts in my restricted mind. First, you observation that you do better with higher velocity shells really cannot be directly supported. If you break one target well with a higher velocity load, there is no way to tell how you would have broken the same target with a lower velocity load.

    But, in a more practical sense, you will certainly shoot better with high velocity loads because you believe that you will shoot better with these loads. If you lack confidence in your loads, no matter how good the loads are, they will not preform well for you.

    I can show mathematically that there is at best very little advantage in shooting AA Super Handicap shells from the 27 yard line. The AA 3 dram shells will work s well with less recoil. But, I shoot a lot of AA Super Handicap shells. I have no logical explanation for why I do that except mental confidence.

    Neil- I was actually thinking about Mr. Newton, thresholds and time the force/time ratios, but I elected to try to explain my point in the simplest way I could. Sometimes simplicity does include technical errors.

    I also read the same article you mentioned above. I get frustrated when I read a technical article written by someone who lacks technical expertise.

    Pat Ireland
     
  11. Shooting Jack

    Shooting Jack Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    3,523
    Location:
    Blackshear, Georgia
    I have to agree with SmokinJoe!! It does make a difference to me but primarily on handicap/scrap loads. Light/slower loads work fine from the sixteen or when shooting skeet. As for having confidence in a load, I feel that if anyone can hit a bird with any load then I can too. I'm not trying to be smart but I can definitely show a difference in my scores. An example is an average of 17 out of 25 with my skeet/16 yd loads and 21 average with my faster loads when shooting scrap. Jackie B.
     
  12. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    Will not a 1250 shot from the 27 mimic an 1150 shot from the 16?
     
  13. Jim Porter

    Jim Porter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,313
    Now I know for sure---I'm too damn dumb to be a good shot!!!
     
  14. JACK

    JACK Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    14,697
    Location:
    NW Wisconsin
    We had my ProChrono out yesterday and ran some loads across it. All pretty normal stuff till we walked away and the one of our best club dhooters in trap and SC decided to run another 5 shells and did so on his own. He did that as we put away our guns and he got done and commented that he had a FPS range that surprised him. Tha As I packed the unit back up I looked at the string and the range indeed was over 200 FPS difference and that was not the product of an anomaly. They all ranged from 980 fps to 1216 fps without a pattern.(as I recall). Couple low, couple high, etc. The interesting thing (s) about this is that he uses these shells to be one of the best (if not the best) shooters at the club. SC and Trap. And too, he produces those on a Spolar gold.
     
  15. Smok'n Joe

    Smok'n Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,730
    Jack,

    That's no surprise...TommyG did the same testing on FACTORY LOADS last year and results were all over the board. Surprisingly...KEMEN 7 1/2 HDCP shells
    were the most consistent and outperformed AA & STS.


    Smok'n Joe
     
  16. scooterbum

    scooterbum Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    MIA,

    I would say that there is either a problem with his loads, or a problem with the chrono, or technique used with the chrono.
     
  17. yansica1

    yansica1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    163
    Time after time people mention that you shoot better with what you have confidence in regardless of any theoretical or mathematical reasoning of such loads. Where does confidence emanate from initially?

    To know whether 100 fps makes a difference, look at what the vast majority of the top 2% use. None that I know prefer slow shells.
     
  18. Smok'n Joe

    Smok'n Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,730
    Right on, Yanny


    RESULTS INSPIRE CONFIDENCE...not the other way around !!!

    Smok'n Joe
     
  19. JACK

    JACK Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    14,697
    Location:
    NW Wisconsin
    I checked the memory on the chrono. It was 982 and 1176 as low and hi.

    The chrono is OK. I was just tweakin my Spolar buddy.
     
  20. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Bill- One cannot compare a thick gel to a thin brittle object. Shooting fast and slow rifle bullets at paper would be a better comparison of the amount of energy transfered to the target.

    Pat Ireland
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.