16ga.com ~ View topic - Shot Stringing -- BS or Not?

Joined: 20 Mar 2009 Posts: 428

That's why I shoot a 16 Ga. "SQUARE" load Laughing

Boy, can I stir sh----t or what Question

No pun intended guys Exclamation

Just having a little fun on Friday Wink

All right, enough of this bs. Why are we talking about string? What are you guys trying to shoot, cats? YOU CAN'T SHOOT BIRDS WITH STRING!! Good grief, what's next, trying to shoot them with feathers? Man, I thought you guys were smarte. Rolling Eyes

*Last edited by 16gaugeguy on Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:34 am; edited 2 times in total*

The recorded score averages of the intenational shooting crowd has already answered this question. The proof is there for anyone to see. The 12 ga 24 gram load was made manditory over a decade ago to lower scores and eliminate ties and long shoot offs at the big international events. The scores and averages went up instead. 24 gram loads tend to have shorter shot columns and, overall, they string out less as well.

A lower pellet count both shortens the shot column and thins it out a bit. Two of the results are less shot stringing in the inner core, and less shot stringing overall. To understand why, we must be able to realize that a shot pattern travels simultaneously through both time and space. It also helps to envision the shot pattern as being comprised of an inner core made up of rounder pellets that are travelling at a slightly higher velocity and in a straighter line within the overall pattern.

The inner core pellets will get to the target sooner than the slower, more strung out, more divergent outer core pellets. Less pellets in the internal shot column (inside the barrel) tend to distort or flatten each other less. Fewer and rounder pellets in an external shot column (outside the barrel) in a given space also collide less with each other. Since they are flying straighter (more parallel to each other) and at a more uniform speed, the pellets in a dense inner core pattern will not disturb each other as much, and the inner core of the pattern will hold together longer and will be more effective at a longer range. Think of the pellets in the denser inner core as flying in a uniform, compact formation.

Lowered velocities and pressures also tend to lessen shot stringing. Many a target shell reloader has found this out by increasing the velocity of his load design and getting less effective patterns and more missed targets at the longer ranges as a result. The increased velocity and higher pressures tend to flatten and distrort more pellets before they leave the barrel. Once the shot column is outside the barrel, the flattened pellets do not fly as straight as rounder pellets, and they lose velocity faster as well. The overall effect is a lengthened shot string. More pellets in a given space also collide with and upset each other more frequently. This tends to happen before more of the rounder, faster, straighter flying pellets can range ahead and arrive on target undisturbed. Holes in the pattern open sooner and it falls apart before it can arrive on target.

More choke lengthens external shot columns while less choke tends to shorten the external shot column. This is why the shot patterns of a certain load are often more effective at moderate ranges from an IC choke than a full choke but also fall apart faster and are less effective at the longer ranges.

The best we can hope for from a full choke is for an already compact central core pattern to remain undisturbed and hold together long enough to reach the target and be effective out at a longer range. The full choke allows the outer shot column to seperate faster from the inner core by stringing the entire column out more. The outer part soon falls behind the inner core. The slower travelling and more divergant pellets in the outer core will not be able to collide with and upset the inner core pellets, so the inner core pattern which is comprised of a shorter and slightly thinner shot column will maintain its integrity longer in both time and distance.

I think most of us realize that the modern one piece plastic wad has helped advance shotgun ballistics quite a bit, not to mention how it has helped to simplify and popularize shotshell reloading. The plastic wad very effectively helps lower shot deformity. This helps eliminate shot stringing to some degree, and results in more effective patterns overall.

However, the one piece plastic wad has one consequence many folks do not allow for or perhaps even realize. The shot cup petals take up space. The petals effectively reduce the bore diameter and negatively change the bore expansion ratio a bit. Any given weight of shot will form up in a longer internal column inside a shot cup vs a load without the cup. Less shot will be bore scrubbed, but more shot on the bottom of the column will be flattened.

A less effective bore expansion ratio also lessens the advantage of heavier shot charges to some degree as well. Longer internal shot columns will deform more of the shot at the bottom or back of the column. However, since the deformed shot is already at the rear of the column, it is less apt to disturb the rounder shot at the front once the shot column leaves the bore.

So the trade off is worth it IMO. The main result and biggest advantage we get from the one piece plastic wad is being able to shoot more effectively at longer ranges with less shot. This also means we need to rethink the effects the plastic wad has on accepted shot load to gauge ratios and the results we can now achieve when using the smaller gauges.

I believe this aspect has a lot to do with why the 16 ga is now emerging as a better choice for subgauge gun hunting and shooting. We can do things at longer ranges with 1 to 1-1/4 ounce of bigger pellets in 16 ga loads that were not possible before the one piece wad was introduced. The same is true for lighter loads of smaller shot as well. The 3/4 and 7/8 ounce 16 ga loads of #6 or #7 shot are emerging as excellent and viable choices for short range hunting for birds as big as pheasants. Light loads of smaller shot are also more effective now on smaller birds and targets at longer ranges as well.

And it all comes down to the fact that the one piece plastic wad allows us to achieve shorter shot strings across the board with any decent load.

I discovered nearly a decade ago that I could shoot more effectively for longer periods with 24 gram 12 ga trap loads than heavier ones. I now shoot 24 gram loads exclusively for all singles and short handicap targets. I use 1 ounce load for back fence shooting. I'm also using less choke to effecticvely do this. I used to rely on imp mod for singles and full for h-cap and second doubles targets. I now use a skeet choke for singles and light mod for shorter h-cap and the second doubles targets. I can use a 1 ounce low velocity load and light imp. mod for the back fence and crush any well hit target as well.

Anyone is free to try it for themselves. I think a lot of folks will be amazed how effective the 24 gram load really is with less, not more choke. Why? Short shot strings and target crushing patterns with more open chokes. Try it and see.

Joined: 20 Mar 2009 Posts: 428

Give me my 16 Ga. "Square Load". It may not have any ballistic advantage over another Ga., but if I believe in my mind that it does, and I do, then it will shoot better. Laughing

SS,

You must believe in your own choices Exclamation

I choose the 16 Ga., because it has proven itself to me many times over as it apparently did for many of the old timers who swore by it. I do not shoot a few rounds during hunting season, but rather 20-25,000 rounds per year for the last 10 years or more so I feel qualified to make this judgement.

As I have stated before, I am not a ballistician and I don't claim to know everything. I haven't known everything since I was 16 years of age and everyone knows that, at this age, you are a genious --- you know everything----or think you do.

But one thing I do know; I've shot one hell of a lot of shotgun shells in many different gauges over the span of my lifetime. Of all these different gauges, I'd have to say that the 16 has been the most reliable and most accurate gun FOR ME! So why shouldn't I believe in it Question

Besides, it was the first shotgun gauge to get it's own website Cool

You would be correct SS except for one important detail you've overlooked and failed to mention. Airborne birds and clays never present a stationary single plane target like a patterning board. The targets are also moving through time and space.

The target and the shot column must intersect at some point in both time and space or they will miss each other. The front running inner core of a shorter less strung out shot column gets to the target the bestest with the mostest. More of the pellets in the formation of an accurately placed shorter column will travel through the target as it is moving through the breadth of the more compact shot column. The trailing part of the string will never get there in time nor are the out of formation, divergently flying pellets in it traveling to the same spot. Those pellets will be more likely to miss the time and place of the intersection.

The only other factor at work here is plain old random chance or luck if you will. The less accurately the shot column is placed in both time and space, the less likely the pellets in it will meet up with the the target. In those cases, the divergent and slower flying pellets of a longer string might intersect the target. However, those pellets are more likely to be fewer and further apart, so the target might be dusted with one pellet but not broken or the bird fringed, but not hit cleanly and effectively killed dead in the air.

So it takes both accurate shooting and shorter, more compact shot formations or columns to do the job cleanly and with predictable certainty. In short, only a competant wingshooter can take advantage of good ammo. Everyone else is just shooting and hoping regardless of what's in the chamber.

The likelihood that trailing pellets might intersect with a target and break it is pretty slim. Most skeet instructors will keep telling you to increase your lead as it is very hard to miss a target in front.

Think back - how many targets have you broken on stations 3,4 and 5 by just chipping something off the front? If that happens where I shoot, there is a lot of raucous comment by your so-called friends about your shooting skill. Chips off the back? - comments about needing a good dog.

Tom

Joined: 06 Aug 2009 Posts: 960

Tony,

A serious observation here.

I think you need to establish, where the 6 foot plus shot strings start to show up.

When you get the guys shooting skeet talking about shot string, things are getting a bit out of hand.

Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 728

Shooting Sioux

I did not use the word "spray," you did, and the tests in the article clearly demonstrates that you cannot equate a slug to a load of shot that is 12 feet long in some cases. Sure it only takes .013 seconds for a 12' shot string to pass a target at 1050fps, but the article neglects to mention a 40mph target moves 9" in that period of time which is about the size of the vitals of an average game bird and slightly larger than a clay pigeon. When the difference between a cripple, missed target, bird in the bag or broken clay is often only 1 or 2 pellets and the accepted pattern size is a 30" circle at target range I'll take the extra 9" every time thank you.

The fact that when the pattern board moving 55mph was shot with a stationary gun the effective shot pattern was elongated by 20% in the direction of target travel ((36"-30")/30"=.2) also seems to have been neglected. Even if you use faster/lighter shot which strings out only 7 feet I consider a 10% effective pattern increase significant when you considering that it increases the odds of 16 more #5 pellets encountering your target and it usually only takes 5 to bring a game bird down for good.

I have never seen shot "curving" from the barrel as you seem to think I have and never stated that you could "spray" shot down range, nor do I claim to have the answer(s) about the significance of shot stirings, However, I do know from 45 years of shotgun shooting experience at all kinds of targets and game birds that 16 gauge guy is more correct when he says that shooting a shotgun is more about time (timing) and space (placement) than any of the tests or equations anyone has presented here.

Hello Spike :

Your right Ole GG is Correct more times than he is incorrect .

Smiling , Regards

Charles