I think sometimes I am too data oriented. As a bit of a lead in, in 2007 I counted 89 patterns of different chokes and distances, and concluded you only have a reliable 20” inner circle to work with. Now that’s all I count when patterning. With respect to choke designations and related constrictions and pattern %, I have always referenced Shotgun Sports “Shotgun Barrels, Chokes ‘n Ballistics” page. I also know that current choke designation/constriction pairings are not the same as those published in Shotgun Sports. But does this mean anything, i.e. do all Full chokes regardless of manufacturer perform the same?. Recently I have been shooting a bit of bunker with a Wrights Full (0.032 constriction) and Light full (0.028) in my O/U using 7/8 oz. of 7 1/2s at 1345 fps. First shot breaks are at 35-40 yds. and I get some impressive hits. I patterned these chokes at 40 yds. along with my Beretta Full (0.038), one shot each, and counted the inner 20” circle. I fully understand the limitation of my sample size...but! If you take the Wrights Light Full (WLF) as 100% , the Wrights Full (WF) pattern is 14% more dense and the Beretta Full is 36 % more dense. If you consider the WLF constriction as 100 % the constrictions of the other chokes increases at the rate of WF by 17%, and the Beretta F by 45% ; reasonably similar to the patterning data. My conclusion is that pattern density and constriction are closely related...so? you will say. I then plotted constriction over pattern density and discovered the 3 points were in a straight line and that an increase of 0.002 in constriction resulted in an interpreted 6%-9% increase in pattern density in the inner 20” from the most open constriction to the tightest tested. Given my data is thin and the 6%-9% perhaps iffy, I believe the trend is certainly real and meaningful. If you managed to stay with me this far, thanks.
I then looked up the constrictions published for Wrights, Briley, Beretta, Browning, Kriegoff, and Kolar chokes, and also listed the insert in November 2013 Trap and Field (page 22) which are the same as the Kriegoff numbers. Looking at the choke constrictions of these 6 suppliers, none compare in total. The range of the variations in constrictions within a single choke designation , most tight minus the most open, are: XF-0.021, F-0.006, IM-0.006, M-0.006, LM-0.002, IC-0,005, SK-0.031 (no mistake, Beretta European SK choke is more open than the bore, I have one), Cy-0.012 (Browning Cy is more open than their SK which is 0.000). Given we are mostly a F, IM, M sort of crowd (ignoring the occasional XF user), given two shooters of equal skill, if one shooter uses a WF (0.032) and the other a Beretta F(0.038), a difference in constriction of 0.006, the shooter with the tightest choke could have a 20” pattern density 23% greater than the person using the most open. This certainly muddies comparison the water. Perhaps that's why there is so much debate about what choke works best for singles or from a certain yardage. Since there is no industry standard for constrictions, or none that anyone follows, you really don’t know what the true comparisons are between closely related chokes. Throw in softer shot (less expensive ammo?) vs. magnum shot and you may have another glitch. In spite of this, if our two shooters haven’t noticed any comparative difference in their chokes’ performance, perhaps they are throwing too much shot at the target.
I believe in his book, Dr. Jones mentioned that chokes should be sold by constriction, not designation. I hope this is evidence to support this. Now with respect to what constriction you should use, my pattern testing tells me that for our game, the more pellets you can keep in the inner 20” circle from 30 yds. and beyond the better. For me that's the tightest choke I own, a Beretta Full at 0.038 constriction. I also seem to recall that Neil Winston had a thread a while ago and proved that 1 oz. loads, 7 1/2s used from 27 yds. would not result in 100 consecutively broken targets because of thin patterns even though perfectly pointed . I would really like to know what the results would have been with 0.040, 0.045, and 0.050 constrictions.
Am I on base here or out in left field on this stuff?
Cheers
Ron
I then looked up the constrictions published for Wrights, Briley, Beretta, Browning, Kriegoff, and Kolar chokes, and also listed the insert in November 2013 Trap and Field (page 22) which are the same as the Kriegoff numbers. Looking at the choke constrictions of these 6 suppliers, none compare in total. The range of the variations in constrictions within a single choke designation , most tight minus the most open, are: XF-0.021, F-0.006, IM-0.006, M-0.006, LM-0.002, IC-0,005, SK-0.031 (no mistake, Beretta European SK choke is more open than the bore, I have one), Cy-0.012 (Browning Cy is more open than their SK which is 0.000). Given we are mostly a F, IM, M sort of crowd (ignoring the occasional XF user), given two shooters of equal skill, if one shooter uses a WF (0.032) and the other a Beretta F(0.038), a difference in constriction of 0.006, the shooter with the tightest choke could have a 20” pattern density 23% greater than the person using the most open. This certainly muddies comparison the water. Perhaps that's why there is so much debate about what choke works best for singles or from a certain yardage. Since there is no industry standard for constrictions, or none that anyone follows, you really don’t know what the true comparisons are between closely related chokes. Throw in softer shot (less expensive ammo?) vs. magnum shot and you may have another glitch. In spite of this, if our two shooters haven’t noticed any comparative difference in their chokes’ performance, perhaps they are throwing too much shot at the target.
I believe in his book, Dr. Jones mentioned that chokes should be sold by constriction, not designation. I hope this is evidence to support this. Now with respect to what constriction you should use, my pattern testing tells me that for our game, the more pellets you can keep in the inner 20” circle from 30 yds. and beyond the better. For me that's the tightest choke I own, a Beretta Full at 0.038 constriction. I also seem to recall that Neil Winston had a thread a while ago and proved that 1 oz. loads, 7 1/2s used from 27 yds. would not result in 100 consecutively broken targets because of thin patterns even though perfectly pointed . I would really like to know what the results would have been with 0.040, 0.045, and 0.050 constrictions.
Am I on base here or out in left field on this stuff?
Cheers
Ron
