Trapshooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,895 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Friday I went to the range and did some MORE pattern testing.

This one was just to satisfy my own curiosity. Neil has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that hard pellets pattern better than soft pellets. Most of you have bought into this and so have I. Neil did enough testing of this, that it now goes without saying.

But I wanted to do a controlled test to see “just how much?”

So I found a box of STS Light 7-1/2’s and a box of Gun Club Light 7-1/2’s and decided to see what I could see.

First order of business is to cut several of each type of cartridge apart and count pellets, and do the crush test to see what the hardness of the pellets happens to be.

Cutting apart 3 of each type, I found the following:

Gun Club Lot Number Z06PB510
  • Three cartridges weighed in at 474.9, 479.3, and 480.1 grains of shot, or about 1.093 ounces, or about 3% underweight, which is within SAAMI limits.
  • 359, 362, and 361 pellets. So, for these cartridges I will use 360 as the pellet count
  • 15 pellets (5 from each cartridge) average crush of 0.029” which is well into the range of “SOFT”
STS Lot Number Y17XC510
  • Three cartridges weighed in at 499.7, 502.1, and 502.2 grains of shot, or about 1.146 ounces or about 2% overweight, which is within SAAMI and ATA limits.
  • Pellet count was 398, 401, and 398 pellets. So, for these cartridges I will use 400 as the pellet count
  • 15 pellets (5 from each cartridge) average crush of 0.021” which is “HARD”


Now…anticipating what the naysayers will say….but, but, but Tim, it’s not a fair comparison because there is such a large disparity between the pellet counts of the two sets of cartridges!!! The STS cartridges have over 10% more pellets

I anticipated this.

So I created a second set of cartridges.

Reloads, assembled identically, using the same primers from the same lot number (Winchester 209’s), the same wads (Downrange DRF8’s), the same powder (16.5 grains of Hodgdon Clays, trickled using my RCBS Chargemaster 1500) but using salvaged shot from the two different cartridge types. Yes, I cut open enough of the two batches of shells to make reloads.

To make it a fair fight, I loaded the two reload batches with exactly the same number of pellets, painstakingly counted out. Every reloaded cartridge had exactly 400 pellets in it. Exactly.

The reloads were once fired Remington hulls (I used STS hulls for the reloads with the STS pellets, and Nitro 27 hulls for the reloads with the Gun Club pellets, so I could tell them apart. Why Nitro 27 and not Gun Club hulls? Dunno. I suppose I could have just as easily gone another way with that if I had wanted to.)

The gun used was my trusty old Zoli Ritmo with its unsingle barrel with a very tight 0.042” fixed full choke, which is a known good patterning gun.

All testing was done on the same afternoon. Conditions didn’t change much, but to be safe, I shot a Gun Club pattern, then an STS pattern, then a Reload with STS shot pattern, then a Reload with Gun Club shot pattern, called them all shot number 1, then started over with the next Gun Club pattern, that way ambient condition changes wouldn’t affect the results.

The results are not shocking.

What is, is that “eyeballing” the patterns as you look at them, you can’t tell any difference, best to worst.

All of the individual pattern efficiency graphs have been ordered lowest to highest according to that pattern’s PE (Pattern Efficiency) and they all have the same scale.

The pattern testing was performed at 40 yards, shot onto 48" x 48" paper.

Photographs were taken of the paper and analyzed using Shotgun Insight.

So, what is the result?

There is a huge difference. More than 50 more pellets in the 30 inch circle with the harder shot, in both cases.

You don’t even have to run “Student’s T-Test” to see if there is a statistically significant difference between the hard shot of the STS cartridges and reloads, and the Gun Club cartridges and reloads.

So this reinforces what Neil always told us, plus it reinforces the fact that we CAN make generalizations about how cartridges will pattern based on the hardness of the shot.

Results:
  • Remington Factory STS Cartridges = 79.0% pattern efficiency
  • Reloads with Salvaged Remington STS pellets from the STS Cartridges = 79.0% pattern efficiency
  • Remington Factory Gun Club Cartridges = 70.7% pattern efficiency
  • Reloads with Salvaged Remington Gun Club pellets from the STS Cartridges = 65.8% pattern efficiency
We can cuss and discuss why the numbers are the way they are, but it is obvious to even the casual observer, that hard pellets pattern tighter than soft pellets.

Surprises? The near identical results with the factory STS shells and the Reloads with STS shot.

Other surprises? The big difference between the pattern percentages between the factory Gun Club shells and the Reloads with Gun Club shot.

And...only 6% difference between the highest and lowest PE's for the reloads with STS shot. Not sure I know why.

For the good of the sport!!!!

1714677


1714678


1714679


1714680
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
454 Posts
Good one Tim. Just goes to show you . Harder pellets are better. Thanks
Friday I went to the range and did some MORE pattern testing.

This one was just to satisfy my own curiosity. Neil has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that hard pellets pattern better than soft pellets. Most of you have bought into this and so have I. Neil did enough testing of this, that it now goes without saying.

But I wanted to do a controlled test to see “just how much?”

So I found a box of STS Light 7-1/2’s and a box of Gun Club Light 7-1/2’s and decided to see what I could see.

First order of business is to cut several of each type of cartridge apart and count pellets, and do the crush test to see what the hardness of the pellets happens to be.

Cutting apart 3 of each type, I found the following:

Gun Club Lot Number Z06PB510
  • Three cartridges weighed in at 474.9, 479.3, and 480.1 grains of shot, or about 1.093 ounces, or about 3% underweight, which is within SAAMI limits.
  • 359, 362, and 361 pellets. So, for these cartridges I will use 360 as the pellet count
  • 15 pellets (5 from each cartridge) average crush of 0.029” which is well into the range of “SOFT”
STS Lot Number Y17XC510
  • Three cartridges weighed in at 499.7, 502.1, and 502.2 grains of shot, or about 1.146 ounces or about 2% overweight, which is within SAAMI and ATA limits.
  • Pellet count was 398, 401, and 398 pellets. So, for these cartridges I will use 400 as the pellet count
  • 15 pellets (5 from each cartridge) average crush of 0.021” which is “HARD”

Now…anticipating what the naysayers will say….but, but, but Tim, it’s not a fair comparison because there is such a large disparity between the pellet counts of the two sets of cartridges!!! The STS cartridges have over 10% more pellets

I anticipated this.

So I created a second set of cartridges.

Reloads, assembled identically, using the same primers from the same lot number (Winchester 209’s), the same wads (Downrange DRF8’s), the same powder (16.5 grains of Hodgdon Clays, trickled using my RCBS Chargemaster 1500) but using salvaged shot from the two different cartridge types. Yes, I cut open enough of the two batches of shells to make reloads.

To make it a fair fight, I loaded the two reload batches with exactly the same number of pellets, painstakingly counted out. Every reloaded cartridge had exactly 400 pellets in it. Exactly.

The reloads were once fired Remington hulls (I used STS hulls for the reloads with the STS pellets, and Nitro 27 hulls for the reloads with the Gun Club pellets, so I could tell them apart. Why Nitro 27 and not Gun Club hulls? Dunno. I suppose I could have just as easily gone another way with that if I had wanted to.)

The gun used was my trusty old Zoli Ritmo with its unsingle barrel with a very tight 0.042” fixed full choke, which is a known good patterning gun.

All testing was done on the same afternoon. Conditions didn’t change much, but to be safe, I shot a Gun Club pattern, then an STS pattern, then a Reload with STS shot pattern, then a Reload with Gun Club shot pattern, called them all shot number 1, then started over with the next Gun Club pattern, that way ambient condition changes wouldn’t affect the results.

The results are not shocking.

What is, is that “eyeballing” the patterns as you look at them, you can’t tell any difference, best to worst.

All of the individual pattern efficiency graphs have been ordered lowest to highest according to that pattern’s PE (Pattern Efficiency) and they all have the same scale.

The pattern testing was performed at 40 yards, shot onto 48" x 48" paper.

Photographs were taken of the paper and analyzed using Shotgun Insight.

So, what is the result?

There is a huge difference. More than 50 more pellets in the 30 inch circle with the harder shot, in both cases.

You don’t even have to run “Student’s T-Test” to see if there is a statistically significant difference between the hard shot of the STS cartridges and reloads, and the Gun Club cartridges and reloads.

So this reinforces what Neil always told us, plus it reinforces the fact that we CAN make generalizations about how cartridges will pattern based on the hardness of the shot.

Results:
  • Remington Factory STS Cartridges = 79.0% pattern efficiency
  • Reloads with Salvaged Remington STS pellets from the STS Cartridges = 79.0% pattern efficiency
  • Remington Factory Gun Club Cartridges = 70.7% pattern efficiency
  • Reloads with Salvaged Remington Gun Club pellets from the STS Cartridges = 65.8% pattern efficiency
We can cuss and discuss why the numbers are the way they are, but it is obvious to even the casual observer, that hard pellets pattern tighter than soft pellets.

Surprises? The near identical results with the factory STS shells and the Reloads with STS shot.

Other surprises? The big difference between the pattern percentages between the factory Gun Club shells and the Reloads with Gun Club shot.

And...only 6% difference between the highest and lowest PE's for the reloads with STS shot. Not sure I know why.

For the good of the sport!!!!

View attachment 1714677

View attachment 1714678

View attachment 1714679

View attachment 1714680
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,565 Posts
Thanks Tim,

This just confirms my decision to go to STS's when I run out of my stash of Federal Gold Medals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
You sir are a gentleman and a scholar. I’m down to my last 4 flats of GC shells. Though the way I shoot Jell-O shot wouldn’t make any difference.

one of these days I’m going to get my lazy butt out to the patterning board and try to replicate your methods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
477 Posts
Well done Tim!
I appreciate the hard work you do to collect emperical data in a supremely subjective sport.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,895 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
one of these days I’m going to get my lazy butt out to the patterning board and try to replicate your methods.
It's time consuming and tedious. Let me know before you get started and I'll put together a checklist for you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,895 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I’m down to my last 4 flats of GC shells.
BTW, those Gun Club shells are just fine for singles and doubles.

I just wouldn't use them for any handicap past about 20 yards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
703 Posts
Real good information, thanks. Confirms for me that when using harder shot those targets get slapped real good. I bought 50 lbs of chilled shot once from a club member, loaded it up and noticed the difference even from re-dropped shot with unknown antimony percentages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
596 Posts
Tim,

I like many others on this site "appreciate" your work.

Your analytical / engineering background and approach.

Much appreciated - thank you !!

Dennis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,583 Posts
I just shake my head when people say they won’t use soft shot any further back than 20-24 yards. Remember back in the early 70’s when we all we could shoot was 1200fps loaded with soft shot. Seems there were a lot of people on the 27 shooting great scores.

Now we buy Magnum shot and hope it really is hard shot. The tests show sometimes it is and sometimes it isn’t. This game is a giant crapshoot with piss poor quality control running rampant. Hard shot patterns tighter but most people have no idea if it actually is or not. No guarantees are in place but premium ammo is your safest bet usually, but not always.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,900 Posts
This brings up a question I have wondered OEM wad DRRF8 & CB8118-12 every one assumes there is not much difference but was it the wad that that lowered your reload with the Soft shot. Who knows ?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,895 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
This brings up a question I have wondered OEM wad DRRF8 & CB8118-12 every one assumes there is not much difference but was it the wad that that lowered your reload with the Soft shot. Who knows ?
The pattern percentages with the factory Figure 8 in the STS shell and the reloads with the STS shot and the DRRF8 wads were identical...

The wad from the Gun Club shells looks like an RXP.

Dunno.
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top