Trapshooters Forum banner

141 - 160 of 186 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,897 Posts
Tim, you keep referring to one book, one set of data, set with an internal bias by the author. I'm not discounting it, but I've read a lot of stuff on this and am not an idiot. It's not non-sense. What is is a target not slowing down it's rate of spin - that would only be true in a vacuum. They slow down - physics says so. It's an exponential function where the rate of spin drops rapidly at first and tapers to zero spin. Happens with ALL spinning projectiles and I have 30+ years testing military artillery to back up my non-sense. The reason long range projectiles are accurate is because they are fin-stabilized, not rifled (M1A1 is a smooth bore 125-mm). ALL flying, spinning projectiles slow their rate of rotation, and once they do they being to tumble end over end. Throw a target far enough and it will become unstable and act like a feather in the wind once centripetal force is overcome by other forces such as drag. And yes, a fast spinning target is easier to break than a slow spinning target along a fracture line - again, physics says so.

And I never said pattern testing is non sense. I said the impact of pellets on a static target at a fixed range can be misleading as to holes in the pattern. How about actually reading what I wrote.
Actually he refers to one book, plus two other sets of data. (Neil's and his own) And there is a lot of actual real-world testing in all that data. Not theoretical physics. Actual testing, done as scientifically as possible as one can with such a imperfect projectile delivery system as shotgunning.

The amount of spin lost by targets over their flight is inconsequential. Your Artillery reference falls short because the flight of clay pigeons is dominated by aerodynamics, not ballistics, like a tank shell. They fly more like a Frisbee, though launched at much higher velocity, and are much more dense.

Patterns are three-dimensional, and patterning on paper does not show this, true. My suggestion for testing in all three dimensions is below.

Don't understand any of that but I guess my response is I always thought the mixed shot stuff ( they called them Duplex loads I think )was just a gimmick to sell something .
Cut open one each of your 7 1/2 and 8 loads and mic all the shot. You may be surprised at what you find.

Explain how it is misleading? And what kind of test would be better? And what kind of testing you've done to show this.

I told you the test - spinning pattern boards. They have been done. Look them up. Read what I wrote. I don't care what Neil said, physics says air drag slows rotation of ANY flying, spinning object. Take a physics class.

Screw your precious book - write your own. Mine was called a dissertation.
I think Tim knows a bit about physics also. I don't think anyone is saying a target doesn't slow down spinning at all. But Neil's actual research showed no more than 3%, which for the short flight time and distance is inconsequential. 3% of 2000 rpm would slow the spin rate to a lackadasical 1940 rpm. This changes nothing, especially since the only birds shot just before touching the ground at the max range of 51 yards are during Annie Oakleys and other such games.

I think the best testing would be high-speed photography of a shot column fired at and hitting, and of a near miss, (pushing a bird) from several angles, studied frame for frame.

Googling spinning pattern boards got me nothing about spinning pattern boards. Just regular patterning. Care to provide a link? If they really worked (or exsisted) , don't you think most of us, and Tim in particular, would have heard of them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,669 Posts
Get the popcorn......
I have been playing with chokes. That is unusual for me. My long time shooting buds know that I rarely if ever change anything on my gun. BUT just for giggles, I screwed a .30 out and put a .20 in and shot practice from my assigned 26 yard line.I shoot 7.5's at about 1225 for handicap. Breaks, when I pointed the gun in the right direction, were just as strong, and MY AVERAGES WENT UP!
I have long held that most shooters tend to "over choke". We hold to tradition in hunting and shooting. What ever grand pa said hangs on----no matter what. I feel that our belief in full chokes constrictions came from a time of limited powder choices, (probably) inferior shot quality, paper hulls, and LOUSY (by our standards) wad and shot cup selections. Tight chokes made sense then....But now with our better engineered and machined guns and more efficient ammo, I'm not so sure.
We see sporting shooters demolish targets 60 and even 80 yards! (Wish I could do that!). And If you believe Mr Winston's findings, ultra tight chokes DO NOT give clear evidence that breaks with tight chokes indicate where the gun is actually shooting, is there a need for ultra tight chokes even from the 27?
For sure I would rather have 100 chips than 90 "ink balls" and I do believe that anything a #8 will do, a #7.5 will do better!
I also believe that if you really believe in something, it does work for you. So, if you just have to have a choke that "let's them out one at a time" go for it! I'm just not sure the proof is there.
Now....Let'er rip!
My Best
Jim
Jim
This would make Ernest Hemingway set up and take notice. You definately have a way with words.
Do you have any new dissertations coming out?
Henry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,312 Posts
Googling spinning pattern boards got me nothing about spinning pattern boards.
Most of this work was done LONG ago. Burrard, Quayle, and Griffith.

Burrard did his in the 1920's.

It was all to determine the length of shot stringing.

Lowry's 1979 article in The American Rifleman is pretty much the best work on it (if you look, Neil posted the entire article in the link below), though Dr. Jones also covers it with a lot of reference to Lowry.

 
  • Like
Reactions: entropy and mg1polo

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,031 Posts
Its pretty disconcerting when you're set up for the straight away and the second bird comes out first!!!
First off--The bird in question only comes first to bother you on 2 out of 5 stations. Since station 3 can flip back and forth as to which bird you want to shoot first.

Secondly-- If I bought any machine and it did not work properly after having there repair tech come out 3 times to try to repair it!!! It would be returned under the lemon law. Any machine can have problems. Even a Pat Trap. Sorry to hear of your problems with your LaPorte machine. I have no vested interest in Laporte. I only brought their companies machines here to TS.com, to bring up a point about the slower spinning Pat Traps, compared to the LaPorte. Buy whatever Clay Target machines you like. break em all Jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,019 Posts
First off--The bird in question only comes first to bother you on 2 out of 5 stations. Since station 3 can flip back and forth as to which bird you want to shoot first.

Secondly-- If I bought any machine and it did not work properly after having there repair tech come out 3 times to try to repair it!!! It would be returned under the lemon law. Any machine can have problems. Even a Pat Trap. Sorry to hear of your problems with your LaPorte machine. I have no vested interest in Laporte. I only brought their companies machines here to TS.com, to bring up a point about the slower spinning Pat Traps, compared to the LaPorte. Buy whatever Clay Target machines you like. break em all Jeff
Well, first of all it affects all posts. It really doesn't matter which bird you shoot first on three. Second of all I think I've heard it all now. A lemon law for trap machines! Try that and get back to us on how that works out for you. I'm sure I'll be amused at the off the wall example you throw at me on this one! I'll stand by my statement, the laports I've shot over have given about the poorest targets I've seen for trap. I get your a bit if a fanboy of of them. Maybe they are great, FOR SKEET! I don't know about that as its been many years since I've shot any skeet. I do know for a fact that both clubs mentioned did away with them and they sure didn't get new ones under a lemon law! Lol. As a side note how did you determine that a laport put more spin on a target other than the reps word or the scientific method of trying to catch a target.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I hate to add to the 147 posts but here goes. I get very good patterns from Stu Wright chokes in my DT-10. I have patterned both the #7 [.028] and #8 [.032] for long handicap. For winter jackpots here in Wisconsin I use the #7. Longest distance is 25 yards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
687 Posts
a famous trap shooter once told me when in doubt shoot full choke, he shot a Browning Broadway trap, full and full, no choke tubes used. won many shoots, close up and far back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
724 Posts
As to the Digweed statement and smoking target after target at 100 plus yards by Mr Ducks, that was done using live pigeon loads 1400+ fps and either the equivalent of #6 or #5 shot and weren't smoked but were broken with his hunting gun (full choke) and I believe he missed the first 4 or 5 then hit 4 in a row. Have seen video of someone else recently who broke 1 target after about a dozen tries at 135 yards, or so stated, with copper plated #5 shot. It was a 3 piece break as I recall, you can find it on youtube. All of it proves nothing for the average trapshooter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,019 Posts
As to the Digweed statement and smoking target after target at 100 plus yards by Mr Ducks, that was done using live pigeon loads 1400+ fps and either the equivalent of #6 or #5 shot and weren't smoked but were broken with his hunting gun (full choke) and I believe he missed the first 4 or 5 then hit 4 in a row. Have seen video of someone else recently who broke 1 target after about a dozen tries at 135 yards, or so stated, with copper plated #5 shot. It was a 3 piece break as I recall, you can find it on youtube. All of it proves nothing for the average trapshooter.
your right wizard. There's a video of digweed I saw a few years back on YouTube. He was shooting a full choke and hot loads. He commented on his holds to break em. The main take away was he wasn't using trap loads and improved cylinder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
Actually he refers to one book, plus two other sets of data. (Neil's and his own) And there is a lot of actual real-world testing in all that data. Not theoretical physics. Actual testing, done as scientifically as possible as one can with such a imperfect projectile delivery system as shotgunning.

The amount of spin lost by targets over their flight is inconsequential. Your Artillery reference falls short because the flight of clay pigeons is dominated by aerodynamics, not ballistics, like a tank shell. They fly more like a Frisbee, though launched at much higher velocity, and are much more dense.

Patterns are three-dimensional, and patterning on paper does not show this, true. My suggestion for testing in all three dimensions is below.



Cut open one each of your 7 1/2 and 8 loads and mic all the shot. You may be surprised at what you find.



I think Tim knows a bit about physics also. I don't think anyone is saying a target doesn't slow down spinning at all. But Neil's actual research showed no more than 3%, which for the short flight time and distance is inconsequential. 3% of 2000 rpm would slow the spin rate to a lackadasical 1940 rpm. This changes nothing, especially since the only birds shot just before touching the ground at the max range of 51 yards are during Annie Oakleys and other such games.

I think the best testing would be high-speed photography of a shot column fired at and hitting, and of a near miss, (pushing a bird) from several angles, studied frame for frame.

Googling spinning pattern boards got me nothing about spinning pattern boards. Just regular patterning. Care to provide a link? If they really worked (or exsisted) , don't you think most of us, and Tim in particular, would have heard of them?
If you are really interested in shot cloud dynamics, the most comprehensive work I have found is DJ Compton’s publication “An Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of Shot Cloud Ballistics“ published in 1996. Compton reviewed and referenced most of the significant work prior to 1996 including Lowry‘s work. In the latter part of his career, Lowry was an adjunct member of the faculty in the Mathematics Department at Western Washington University. Compton collaborated with Lowry and significantly expanded upon his work. Lowry was limited by the technology available at the time - spark shadowgraphs. Compton’s test facility was custom designed using the best technology available in the mid 90’s. His work is not for the faint hearted but will dispel many of the myths propagated over time about shot clouds and patterns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
The hardest I’ve ever been able to hit targets was with my Silver Seitz with a fixed full choke. That barrel would SMOKE a target with no visible pieces left and I also shot that gun better then any other gun I ever shot. So for me the tighter the better. I have more confidence in the idea of a possible hole being in the outer edge of my pattern then in the center of my pattern..
just my 2 cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
867 Posts
As to the Digweed statement and smoking target after target at 100 plus yards by Mr Ducks, that was done using live pigeon loads 1400+ fps and either the equivalent of #6 or #5 shot and weren't smoked but were broken with his hunting gun (full choke) and I believe he missed the first 4 or 5 then hit 4 in a row. Have seen video of someone else recently who broke 1 target after about a dozen tries at 135 yards, or so stated, with copper plated #5 shot. It was a 3 piece break as I recall, you can find it on youtube. All of it proves nothing for the average trapshooter.
The longest shot competition that was shot with legal sporting clays loads was won at 105 yards if I remember correctly. I probably don't. There was a competition at a world championship in Northbrook and a woman from Italy took first place. I cannot recall her name. I'm sure there is video somewhere and I will look for it if I have time

The specs were no more than 1 1/8oz shot and no larger than 7.5s. There is no limit on speed for sporting and I don't recall the speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Jim
I'm glad your scores improved.
Is this improvement for a shoot or two or longer and by how much did your scores go up.
My experience is the opposite. For 27 yd I stepped up to .040 XF and my yearly average moved up by 3 targets per 100.
Henry
Heck, Henry doesn't a 3 bird improvement get you over a 100 avg?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Get the popcorn......
I have been playing with chokes. That is unusual for me. My long time shooting buds know that I rarely if ever change anything on my gun. BUT just for giggles, I screwed a .30 out and put a .20 in and shot practice from my assigned 26 yard line.I shoot 7.5's at about 1225 for handicap. Breaks, when I pointed the gun in the right direction, were just as strong, and MY AVERAGES WENT UP!
I have long held that most shooters tend to "over choke". We hold to tradition in hunting and shooting. What ever grand pa said hangs on----no matter what. I feel that our belief in full chokes constrictions came from a time of limited powder choices, (probably) inferior shot quality, paper hulls, and LOUSY (by our standards) wad and shot cup selections. Tight chokes made sense then....But now with our better engineered and machined guns and more efficient ammo, I'm not so sure.
We see sporting shooters demolish targets 60 and even 80 yards! (Wish I could do that!). And If you believe Mr Winston's findings, ultra tight chokes DO NOT give clear evidence that breaks with tight chokes indicate where the gun is actually shooting, is there a need for ultra tight chokes even from the 27?
For sure I would rather have 100 chips than 90 "ink balls" and I do believe that anything a #8 will do, a #7.5 will do better!
I also believe that if you really believe in something, it does work for you. So, if you just have to have a choke that "let's them out one at a time" go for it! I'm just not sure the proof is there.
Now....Let'er rip!
My Best
Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I practice 16-yard and handicap with a Browning Midas extra full choke in my BPS for precise shot placement. I manage a good percentage of clean rounds with that combination. For competition however I'll go to an IM or a full depending on wind and weather conditions. My shot choice is 7-1/2 for cold weather, 8 for mild conditions, and 8-1/2 when the heat's on.
 
141 - 160 of 186 Posts
Top