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

Which affects pattern more........

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by biff, Jun 4, 2008.

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

    biff Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,140
    Which factors affect shotgun patterns more;;choke constriction, wad, velocity,speed(fps), air density, or what? PPB says "Speed Kills" and I have been shooting faster and faster loads for 16's(1200+fps) and like the way it breaks targets. On handicap I am using the same powder and bushing but a stiffer wad(blue duster) than the wad I use on 16's(8 petal windjammer) and like the results it gives much better. Not sure what factors are causing better breaks. Biff
     
  2. Chango2

    Chango2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,518
    How about choke and its quality an quality of the shot...like antimony content and initial roundness of pellets.
     
  3. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Choke first, air density a lot, then maybe shot hardness at long distance, speed not much in my testing (over supersonic at least; subsonic quite a bit); I really can't see how wad stiffness can play much of a role in light of the forces involved.

    Neil
     
  4. shot410ga

    shot410ga Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,770
    Which shell you us in your gun.........has more effect than anything else. Pattern, pattern, patteren!
     
  5. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Among premium shells, shot410, I need 10 patterns to tell any difference, and most often there isn't any anyway. Most premium shells shoot about the same, as do most barrels, though many times intermediate chokes in measurement shoot tighter than one would expect.

    Neil
     
  6. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    Here's a example - above_ of a typical difference in pattern over a big difference, light to handicap.

    If I might make an editorial comment here, I've noticed a trend here to answer "pattern" threads with "targets smoked" results. They are not the same, primarily because "targets smoked" are impressions; patterns are facts.

    While it may be true that a targets smoked tell you something I wonder what it is. And how the data are collected is another problem. Is ten smoked targets different from 12? 15? If not, what are we to make of it?

    People praise "even patterns" but that's the last thing you want and there aren't any anyway. Then they want smoke but isn't that the opposite?

    Before I'd accept a word about "pattern testing" by shooting I'd at least demand scores as back for these impressions. Not "better" or "more solid" or "chippy" or worst of all "If I did my part."

    If the score went from 97 over a number of events to 98 over a number of events I'd call that an interesting finding, worth at least listening to. If it went from 90 to 93 it doesn't mean a thing. That also means, to me at least, if the score isn't posted, _and_ cover a number of events, it similarly doesn't mean a thing. I'll say it again:"doesn't mean a thing."

    Neil
     
  7. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    The thing that affects patterns the most is where the barrel is pointed. Just in front and above the target they work about 100% of the time, Just below and behind the target they don't 100% of the time.
     
  8. REDD04

    REDD04 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    51
    Neil,

    Curious as to why one would not want an "even pattern". Please explain.

    Thanks,
    REDD04
     
  9. Mr Newbius©

    Mr Newbius© TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,463
    The sweet spot of the barrel make a difference and affect your pattern.
     
  10. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    REDD04, it's because there aren't enough pellets. To get -say - a 99% probability of getting a single pellet hit in some part of the pattern you need statistical "overkill," that is an average of many more per targets. Let's say you need five most of the time to be assured of one.

    Even just the 20 inch circle everyone cites has about 300 square inches and that's about 1 1/3 pellets per square inch or about the number needed per target with 7 1/2's _if_ you don't have any farther out. If you do have some farther out, you are lucky that patterns aren't even, that is, they are hot in the center, because that means you can cut that 20 inches to say 15 and still have an area you can count on a break (almost) all the time. If you had an "ideally" even pattern you couldn't do that.

    These are the facts that also face the light-load proponents here and surely recommend 8 1/2 shot if you want to go under an ounce.

    JS, referred to in another thread, used a circle of 33.5 inches and calculated that you could get a pellet into every target by ensuring equal pellet spacing you could have the perfect trap gun. I even saw one such pattern he delivered to a shooter, but I'm not sure whether it was a skeet gun or a trap gun. The pattern was perfect and I always suspected it was made with the 18+ inch side-by-side with no choke he claimed shot full choke patterns.

    However, the trap guns he delivered to two gentlemen I met were just exactly the opposite of what was promised. Full full, and completely uneven with almost all the pellets in a two-foot circle at 34 yards (the owners shot singles and short yardage.) They looked like great patterns to me, but the gun owners were both shocked and disappointed since they had been told of dead-even 33.5 inch patterns.

    My bet was they then went out and "had them opened up a bit" and ended up worse off than they would have been if they had never tested their patterns.

    Neil
     
  11. fearlessfain

    fearlessfain TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Messages:
    520
    trap shooters don't like guns right out of the box. they have to do something to them, as the factories don't know what they are doing. beware the used trap gun as it probably has been altered.
     
  12. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    In spades, flf. in fact, except for testing, I _never_ buy an altered gun.

    Neil
     
  13. biff

    biff Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,140
    Neil, On the graph above, what was the distance those loads were patterned?

    I have seen guns with the most uneven worst looking pattern just totally destroy targets. It had places in the circle as big as your head with not one shot there.

    I looked up Don Zutzs book and he said the full choke caused the shot string to lengthen by squeezing the shot into a string. The full choke shot got away from the wad quicker than did more open chokes which were pushed more by it and therfore spread more. Biff
     
  14. timb99

    timb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,331
    Location:
    Shawnee, Kansas, USA
    "full choke caused the shot string to lengthen"

    Two things.

    1. This is a commonly heard thing around the trap field, but there's a lot of evidence, some presented by our esteemed colleague Mr. Winston, that would tend to indicate it just isn't so, and that a more open (skeet or cylinder) choke actually results in a longer shot string than a tight choke.

    2. A long shot string on a trap gun is a bad thing. It means less pellet to pellet density at any given point in the shot string.

    I'd sure like to see a direct comparison of a series of full choke shot strings at target breaking distances, compared to a skeet or cylinder choke.

    But alas, that's hard to do and requires a lot of specialized equipment, just to settle an age-old argument, the answer to which ultimately doesn't amount to a hill of beans.
     
  15. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    biff, 40 yards, Federal papers, 7 1/2 shot. All real patterns have holes, just as you say. But think of this. Yes, bad patterns can smoke targets like crazy but that's not the question. The question is "Can they break _all_ of the targets?" If not, they are pretty worthless for our sport.

    Don Zutz was dead wrong - full chokes have shorter shot strings. I'd not take what he wrote about ballistics seriously; little made any sense, much was worse.

    Neil
     
  16. Hap MecTweaks

    Hap MecTweaks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,226
    Location:
    Mesquite, Nevada
    Biff, it's the degree of choke that determines when a wad turns loose of the payload in my opinion. Wide open chokes allow the shot to begin spreading faster. I can't see any differences in the pressure behind either the open or full choke.

    <a href="http://s142.photobucket.com/albums/r104/HapMecTweaks/?action=view&current=shotgun-shot-seq-1g.jpg" target="_blank">[​IMG]</a>

    Hap
     
  17. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    But Mark, if there aren't enough pellets, perfect pointing won't help at all. You need good pellet density of assure a single pellet hit. There's no way around it.

    [​IMG]

    These were shot at 900 ft above sea level. In SLC you wouldn't have anything like the same problems since patterns are so much tighter at high altitude.

    Neil
     
  18. 100straight

    100straight Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    584
    I'm pretty simple minded, but I'll take a lousy pattern that smokes targets over a great pattern that doesn't, any day. As important as everyone seems to agree that shot string is, you can't see it on paper. That's why some of the best barrelsmiths shoot their work into water instead of paper when it comes to perfecting the pattern. When shot into water at an angle you can see the shot string. To me shooting a shotgun into a flat piece of paper without regard to whether the shot string is six feet long or sixty feet long doesn't mean much.

    I found a load years ago that smoked targets, and I ran several strings of 98, 99 and even a couple of 100 straights with it one summer (16 yards). That summer was very busy and I didn't get the time to pattern that load until summer was almost gone. The first set of patterns I shot about knocked me over. A mistake I concluded! So I shot several more sets. I probably didn't do them right according to TS.com rules, but they were done at a friend's farm at about 30-32 yards onto 48" square paper. The patterns looked horrible. Like biff said, there were holes like watermelons. We messed with that gun (a Belgian Browning O/U) and load for three days and never got a single pattern that I would call "good." Some were "fair" but most were just plain "bad" looking (very subjective, I know).

    A few days later I was back at the club, and the patterning had me so messed up I had lost confidence and missed 3 of the first 5 targets out. Then I started getting my inkballs again and ran the next 70 and dropped 1 in the last 25 (I'll blame that on wind or something? It couldn't have been me, right? :>) ). It became evident that the gun and load were still OK, and I then lost confidence in the results of the patterning I had done. I've shot a few patterns since just to see what I would get, but I have no confidence in what a pattern tells me now, except to establish point of impact.

    I do not write any of this to detract from Mr. Winston and his research. I have great respect for his work and I read his findings with great enthusiasm. I just disagree about the reliability of data gathered from a flat piece of paper which is then used to interpret the functionality of a moving swarm of shot of undetermined length.

    As usual, I don't have time for much elaboration, so I hope I presented this in an understandable manner.

    Shoot well and often,

    Mark.
     
  19. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,848
    While the "shooting over water test" is a popular way to track shotstring, Mark, it's a total illusion. It's all about pattern width, zero about shotstring. It just looks that way.

    1) Imagine a shot string so long, so perfect, that every pellet lined up exactly behind the one in front. Now shoot it at water. Do you see a string? No, you see a single hole.

    2) Take a pencil and hold it up against the edge of a desk. See that when the pencil is vertical, the intersection is round. Now tip the pencil as see that the intersection is oval, the "shotstring" you see on water. Note that the image you see on the desk does not depend on the length of the pencil.

    Yes, Mark, most patterns look pretty bad but most break targets. All you need, after all, is a hot enough center and the ability to put that part of the pattern on the bird almost all the time. What happens at the edges is of little consequence; if you use the edge of the pattern much you aren't going to score well anyway.

    The only way to evaluate patterns is to count pellets. If you don't do that, you are better off not getting into it at all, just as you found. But I don't think you were misled. You just didn't know what to look for - numbers, not "holes" or evenness or whatall.

    Neil
     
  20. Mr Newbius©

    Mr Newbius© TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,463
    Mark never and I repeat NEVER disagree with any findings of Neil "Cliffy" Winston. He will always be right and even when it looks like he might be wrong just remember never and I repeat NEVER disagree with him.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.