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

Dr. A.C. Jones has rocked my trap world

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by GrandpasArms, Oct 28, 2011.

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

    GrandpasArms Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2010
    Messages:
    872
    Location:
    About 40 miles west of Chicago, IL
    I have read Dr. Jones' book, "Sporting Shotgun Performance" completely through twice. Yes, I'm a geek at heart. I've also referred to specific sections more than once. I must warn people to NOT read this work if they are inclined to believe all of the mythology that surrounds sporting shotgun performance.

    Whether myth or theory, the beliefs I've been exposed to could fill another book. But, there are only two kinds of theories; those that have been proved wrong and those that have YET to be proved wrong. Dr. Jones uses actual measurements to prove many of my shotgun myths wrong - and call the rest into question.

    One small comment on page 49 is the reason why I'm writing this morning. Dr. Jones writes, "...no matter how carefully the pellets are selected and packed into the shot-cup...when they are blasted out into the air they follow an unpredictable path. Collectively they form the random patterns as captured on the pattern plate."

    Dr. Jones' experiments are clear and shockingly in step with works in the world of quantum physics. I've learned that the probability of truth increases as the number of examples cohere with each other. Jones is presenting truths that are hard to refute. Maybe even impossible.

    I've often been accused of thinking too much. Thinking about Dr. Jones' work prior to arriving at the range calms my mind and allows me to think of almost nothing when its time to shoot.

    Larry Frieders
     
  2. smsnyder

    smsnyder Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,830
    One small comment on page 49 is the reason why I'm writing this morning. Dr. Jones writes, "...no matter how carefully the pellets are selected and packed into the shot-cup...when they are blasted out into the air they follow an unpredictable path. Collectively they form the random patterns as captured on the pattern plate."



    SO much for usefullness of custom barrel work?
     
  3. davidjayuden

    davidjayuden Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,016
    They may follow a random path, but only to a degree. Custom work, chokes and barrels in general attempt to limit the randomness of their flight. So don't go too overboard on the notion that "it doesn't matter because nothing will make a difference". We can, to some degree, control the path of those pellets.
    dju
     
  4. smsnyder

    smsnyder Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,830
    Wonder how you control pellets when they never touch the barrel due to the wad?
    Love to see Neil Winston due a test on before and after barrel work. Custom barrel work to improve patterns not proven.
     
  5. bigben

    bigben Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    559
    Larry, let's regress to the real world, Dr.Jones may have the opinions, stats to justify his findings, but in all reality, if a barrel is optimized to specific performance, it will shoot better, this is with specific before and after pattens with pellets counted on a 20 shot string same ammo, same gun, same evening! Tom Wilkinson has done wonders with some of my barrels, What so may people forget is every barrel is a law unto itself, and to optimize each takes time, which is MONEY, the original MX-8 combo took in excess of 80 hours to complete with the final patterns included in the combo set, now the same gun is pushed the door in about 16 hours! nuff said! incinerate em!
     
  6. OldGoat

    OldGoat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Overland Park KS
    Great Questions! However, consider: porting, long or short forcing cones; backboring; low (light) or high (heavy) velocity loads; more and more sleepless nights pondering the "right" way to shoot trap! Do people that have bowling as a hobby have these "issues"? I know golfers do...never heard skeet shooters with them. Best Regards, Ed
     
  7. John Galt

    John Galt TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,788
    Perhaps people forget that "every barrel is a law onto itself" because it's just hokum that people use to justify wasting money.
     
  8. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,482
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    Phil Kiner once told me that he had his new guns' barrels rebored, rechoked and ported before he took delivery of them not so much because he feels that it makes his guns shoot better but just in case it might make a target's difference in his score sometime.

    I had a gun rebored and choked a few years ago. I saw no difference in the patterns, my breaks or my scores. And I honestly didn't expect to - I'm pretty sure that gunmakers like Krieghoff, Perazzi, Kolar and the like make sure their barrels shoot pretty well to start with. After all, their reputation and future sales depend upon that.

    Ed
     
  9. bigben

    bigben Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    559
    Eddy, the wold of bowling is done 66 feet away, the game of skeet is done at around 20 yds, the game of trap is done from the 16 yd. line, if you are a good shooter, you will dispatch the target about 20 yds out of the house, 16 plus 20 is about 36, move to the 27 yd. line , 20 yds plus 27 yd handicap is real close to 47 yds! nuff said! incinerate em!
     
  10. Gapper

    Gapper TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    823
    The pellets do indeed follow a predictable path, and are only viewed as locally random, to the extent of the interior and exterior ballistics that effect them.

    Everybody and his brother knows what a full choke pattern looks like overall at 30 yards. A circular representation on a flat suface, heavier at the center, thinner at the edges. And it is easily repeated shot after shot. Open the choke up a little. Viola! Bigger pattern. Totally predictable. Unless one changes part of the ballistic equation the result will be the same. Identical.

    The only thing random is the inability to accurately account for all the variables involved.

    Many theories are, in fact, correct from the conception.
     
  11. OldGoat

    OldGoat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,571
    Location:
    Overland Park KS
    bigben, good points! I keep trying and trying and trying...and having fun. Yep, I like to see smoked targets. Best Regards, Ed
     
  12. YODA100

    YODA100 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    134
    I seem to remember maybe a year ago, Neil doing an actual pattern testing on a Perazzi barrel before and after "custom" work. As I remember there was nothing gained for the money spent.
     
  13. Habib

    Habib Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    95
    Gapper , I don't disagree with you premise but to say the results are always "identical" is not really true. Back off to 40yds and things start to get ugly. There will be clusters and holes that move around from shot to shot. It is the idea that this can be controlled that bugs me. Then to say

    "optimized to specific performance", well, that is just way over my head.
     
  14. Habib

    Habib Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    95
    YODA100 , I think Neil did an "after" test but it was compared to the "average" unaltered Perazzi barrel. He hasn't published a direct before and after test and don't expect it for obvious reasons.
     
  15. JACK

    JACK Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    14,742
    Location:
    NW Wisconsin
    Ah, but both Neil and I are shooting Wilkinson tuned Perazzi bbls now.
     
  16. Habib

    Habib Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    95
    MIA, you know how sometimes those pizzas are not cooked properly.
     
  17. gun fitter

    gun fitter TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,959
    I'm waiting for Neil to shoot holes in the ("unpredictable path. Collectively they form the random patterns as captured on the pattern plate." ) Theory; before I post my observations.
    Joe
     
  18. MKillian

    MKillian TS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    260
  19. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,865
    Joe, I can't shoot holes in it. It's true according to everything I've ever seen in patterns. Do you have a different idea?

    What I'm trying to figure out is Gapper's post

    "The pellets do indeed follow a predictable path, and are only viewed as locally random, to the extent of the interior and exterior ballistics that effect them."

    . . . which looks to me as if it were the product of one of those "random buzzword generators" on the net which come in so handy when you haven't had time to prepare anything for a Power Point presentation. They have saved my life a few times, that's for sure!

    I'm busy now looking for some 30-yard patterns (as suggested by Gapper) because, if I recall them correctly, "everybody and his brother" will probably find that he _doesn't_ know what a full choke pattern looks like overall at 30 yards in comparison to a more open one. They are, in fact, a perfect example of fact meeting theory and will lead to a lot of head-scratching by darn near everyone.

    Neil
     
  20. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,865
    This is the first half of a two-part post. The second will follow tomorrow; Game 7 takes precedence over typing any day.

    I doubt many of us thought that Gapper's post, above, was the least bit controversial. It's what we have all heard forever, after all, and were it not true we would have heard about it, though we, ourselves, don't actually do any patterning since the results are so predictable. He's what Gapper wrote

    "Everybody and his brother knows what a full choke pattern looks like overall at 30 yards. A circular representation on a flat suface, heavier at the center, thinner at the edges. And it is easily repeated shot after shot. Open the choke up a little. Viola! Bigger pattern. Totally predictable. Unless one changes part of the ballistic equation the result will be the same. Identical."

    . . . and who can argue with that? Still, you know, even when stuff is obvious, it can't hurt just to check, now and then, if only so we can repeat this ourselves and not worry.

    I have some patterns shot at 32 yards and Shotgun-insight scales them to 30 yards very accurately.

    Here's a nice, extra-full choke pattern at 30 yards. It happens to be shot 7 (of ten) in this series.

    [​IMG]

    It is as Gapper describes, hot in the center, thinner at the edges.

    So let's look at the matching shot seven, but this time change the choke from extra-full to modified.
    OK, this is opening the choke more than "a little," going from 0.040 restriction to 0.020, but we do want a big effect, don't we?

    Here's the same shot, shot 7, but this time with a modified choke:

    [​IMG]

    Hmm. The extra-full is hotter in the center, with the inner 10-inch circle getting 141 pellets and the modified only 122. And t _is_ more open, the 75% diameter going up about an inch and a half, but still that "outer ring" I hoped would be "filled out," while better (144 pellets vs 95) , is still very thin. But still, let's agree that changing the choke, while maybe not as dramatic as we had hoped,produced patterns which varied in the predicted direction.

    Does that settle it? Let's just take one more look, Dr. Jones does sound pretty confident, after all.

    OK, we will dial back to shot 3 in each series, and here's the extra-full example:

    [​IMG]

    and once again, we will contrast that with a similarly-numberd pattern produced by a modified choke.

    [​IMG]


    Now wait a minute! In this case, the modified choke is hotter in the center (174 pellets vs 150) than the extra-full, and the 75% diameter is about an inch smaller too. All in all, the modified choke has produced a "tighter " pattern than the extra-full.

    Remember this?

    "Everybody and his brother knows what a full choke pattern looks like overall at 30 yards. A circular representation on a flat suface, heavier at the center, thinner at the edges. And it is easily repeated shot after shot. Open the choke up a little. Viola! Bigger pattern. Totally predictable. Unless one changes part of the ballistic equation the result will be the same. Identical."

    Clearly, it's totally wrong. Sometimes the pattern is bigger, sometimes smaller. Totally unpredictable. When one does not change part of the ballistic equation, the results can not only differ, they can reverse. Not just not identical, but opposite.

    More tomorrow, game 7 calls.

    Neil

    ©2011 NMW
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

dr ac jones