16ga.com ~ View topic

Joined: 06 Aug 2009 Posts: 960

You know, this whole thread is BS.

Let's call it like it is and stop trying to act like this is some sort of ballistic mystery.

We are talking about LIGHT LOADS period. THAT'S IT. The shorter the shot column the more effcient the load gets = Light Loads. WOW what a revelation!!! We must all have I.Q.'s well over 200.

Gimme a break!!!

We are just putting a new dress on an old prostitute and trying to pass her off as the new Sunday School teacher. Take the new dress off and you still have the old prostitute. Not much "new" is there??!!

You all need to come down off the shiny, BS, technical writing, tower you just built and plant your feet firmly on the ground.

Joined: 20 Mar 2009 Posts: 428

RR What time does class start Question

Now I'm not a physist,but i do believe I understand that the deformation of pellets cause (2) negative things to happen:

1. Even though a round pellet is not areodynamically perfect, it is still better than an egg-shaped, flattened-out or oblong trajectile in the sense that it will maintain it's intended flight path better.

2. Deformed or falttened-out pellets will incur more friction or resistance areodynamically than will the sphereical pellet or ball. Unlike a rifle bullet that is designed to be areodynamic, the flattened out pellet will slow down due to this increased resistance.

This type of resistance throws the pellet off of it's intended course or path et: "flyers" resulting in lead pellets not connecting with their intended target.

Joined: 06 Aug 2009 Posts: 960

And Yes, I do know that in my last post I was flame throwing.

But we are taking the very simple and proven concept of light loads, calling it "Square Load", and then embellishing it to the point of being confusing.

This kind of stuff doesn't HELP anyone and will confuse some folks.

All a guy has to do is look for the lighter load data in whatever gauge shotgun he is loading for, load up a few, pattern them to find what his particular shotgun likes. He will end up with the "Square Load". In the 16 Gauge this is probably in the 3/4 to 1 oz. range.

It isn't anymore complicated than that.

Recently, I posted a number of patterns of light to heavy loads. Clearly the light loads were more efficient percentage wise. Whether you like the patterns or not is for you to decide.

Like my Grandad told me when I went to an out of town tech. school at age 18. "Don't take any wooden nickels" Laughing

Joined: 06 Aug 2009 Posts: 960

Tony,

I answered the 4 questions you asked at the top of this post.

I have never given a thought to Square Loads. If you go back to the original thread that you started. I called the Square Load idea BS from the start, and I haven't and won't change my mind.

There is no such thing as a "Square Load". Have you ever seen one ballistician ever write an article on Square Loads? Nope neither have I. There have been some articles by "Ballistics Experts" (who appointed them as experts remains a mystery, maybe they are self proclaimed) on Square Loads but never to my knowledge any articles by ballisticians. There is a HUGE difference between the two. The ballistician knows what he is doing and that is his profession, the "Ballistics Experts" write fairy stories to keep us entertained.

I think that wraps up this thread for me. Laughing

Joined: 06 Aug 2009 Posts: 960

Tony

We do agree.

I don't think that just because you have a short shot column, it automatically makes a load efficient or effective.

As far as what Mr. Hammack does, that issue is between the two of you. I can be controversial enough all by myself. Laughing

Tony, nothing just happens as you know. I was just giving folks a starting point. The rest is up to the individual to figure out his needs.

Have a good one see you on the next Recoil thread Laughing

I think I will change my username Rolling Eyes

Joined: 20 Mar 2009 Posts: 428

SL,

Yeah, maybe you should because according to a lot of these guys, you don't exist. Laughing

Joined: 06 Jun 2008 Posts: 44

[quote="rerundogchaser37"]flopez

You have never patterned steel shot to any great extent, have you Frank?[\quote]

As a mater of fact, I have patterned a few steel loads. Enough to know that my comparison is valid. Sure, you will see variations between the various steel loads in any given barrel, sale as lead loads. But the point is that if you test two loads that are as similar as possible, the major difference being the lead vs steel pellets, you will find that not only does the steel pattern more efficiently (puts more of its shot into the 30 inch circle), but if you do the tests, as I have, you will also see that steel has a considerably shorter shot string. And the length of the shot string has as much to do with an efficient load as the number of pellets in the circle!

Joined: 12 Jul 2004 Posts: 118 Location: N.Y.

Joined: 06 Aug 2009 Posts: 960

flopez.

Square Loads or lack there of is subject of this thread.

I will debate with you when you start being straight up, as you are mixing and matching to prove your point, I think you have a point. Until then take up your debates about black powder and steel shot with someone else.

As far as research, I was doing that for a living while you were still reading about this stuff.

Shot string Frank, is pretty much a waste of time. You have no real control over it. On top of that, not too many of us have the time, the equipment or property to study shot string effects on external ballistics. Even if you do have the ability to study it, what do you plan on changing to alter the shot string length on a lead shot load? Start making the payload lighter and using harder, more uniform size and rounder lead shot. Hardly new ground.