Jump to content

Plastic vs Fibre Wad


srspower
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest cookoff013

the big difference between plastic and fibre is....

 

plastic can give lower pressures and faster speeds (like for like powdercharges). this is due to the plastic wad flexing alittle upon firing of the main charge, and the cup/obturator section has less resistance going down the barrel. the plastic is quite smooth and offers little resistance going down the bore.

the fibre wad doesnt flex that much, but when squashes is alot more resistance, also it partially disintegrates by friction, so looses its driving power, bleeding propelling gas off.

 

as fotr the patterns, spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say I agree with BlaserF3. It gives an idea of plastic versus fibre, but more shots need to be fired with as near as identical loads as possible. The powder charges on those two loads will no doubt have been different, the shot sizes may have been different, too. It would also have been an idea to show comparisons with different chokes and different ranges. Not much can be gauged by simply firing two shots at boards from 20 yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its an interesting video and you should be commended for trying something different. :good:

However, it is not a true "scientific" comparison of any difference between plastic and fibre wads, for the reasons already given.

Nobody should rush out and swop their fibre wad shells for plastic wad shells.

 

This quote from the Shotgun Insight Comparison link sums up all the other ballistic evidence I have read over the years.

 

"Looking at the pattern data below, it can be seen that the patterns over the 9-shell average are almost identical. The distribution of pellets in the 10", 10-20" and 20-30" areas are almost identical. Similarly the probability if hitting the small area of an edge on clay is almost identical. What this means is that there is no evidence of the fibre wad shells having inferior patterns. This includes any effects of the wad affecting the centre of the pattern or shot deformation leading to more fliers."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't shoot clays these days but I used to work at a clay ground. I use fibre wads all the time.

As is mentioned in BlaserF3's link, I did see quite a variation in reliability of plastic wads that littered the ground. Some of the wads had not opened up at all and some of them had only opened on one side. Some had two petals and some had four and the pattern of the cushion pad varied significantly so different brands would behave differently.

I don't know if unreliable opening of the wad would significantly affect the repeatability of the pattern but I am of the opinion that a wad that opens on only one side would be unstable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use fibre clay cartridges, for my pigeon shooting and a heaver round for pheasants etc, why people want to use plastic rounds and potentially leave a product which will not degrade I have no idea....

Most of the problems lie in people not putting the shot in the right place at the right time at the right distance using the right choke.......

All the other tosh that crops up of " smooth or punchy rounds" is what it is...tosh...

 

TEH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use fibre clay cartridges, for my pigeon shooting and a heaver round for pheasants etc, why people want to use plastic rounds and potentially leave a product which will not degrade I have no idea....

Most of the problems lie in people not putting the shot in the right place at the right time at the right distance using the right choke.......

All the other tosh that crops up of " smooth or punchy rounds" is what it is...tosh...

 

TEH

Ok so your a fan of fibre wad, you say it's about putting it in the right place , right time etc etc but surely this is the same for a plas wad load?

I don't think the problem is people miss more with fibre wad than plas wad, I think it's more to do with cost.

Do you use them through choice or does where you shoot dictate that you must use them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use fibre clay cartridges, for my pigeon shooting and a heaver round for pheasants etc, why people want to use plastic rounds and potentially leave a product which will not degrade I have no idea....

Most of the problems lie in people not putting the shot in the right place at the right time at the right distance using the right choke.......

All the other tosh that crops up of " smooth or punchy rounds" is what it is...tosh...

 

TEH

 

Ok so your a fan of fibre wad, you say it's about putting it in the right place , right time etc etc but surely this is the same for a plas wad load?

I don't think the problem is people miss more with fibre wad than plas wad, I think it's more to do with cost.

Do you use them through choice or does where you shoot dictate that you must use them?

I use them through choice as one farm out of 8 asked for fibre, and when the cost is around £5.00 different on the cheaper rounds I much prefer the thought of fibre on the land than plastic...

 

TEH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the three farms I shoot on none of them were bothered what load I used. But I just can't justify in my mind using plastic wad rough/pigeon shooting it just doesn't seem right regardless of livestock etc it's just not right to throw something that won't degrade for hundreds of years in to the countryside.

 

However at my local clay ground they now allow plastic, but that means they will have a system to clear up the wadding periodically. And at my local club for practical shotgun they have a similar regime so why not? Its cheaper and patterns better.

 

In terms of the test yes it would of been better if the loads had been the same but bear in mind both rounds are advertised at 1400fps the same as nearly all shotgun rounds you commonly buy so differences in the amount/type of powder and load weight are pretty irrelevant. And lets be honest you could look at a load of graphs but what gives you a better indication in the real world than a real world test? Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the three farms I shoot on none of them were bothered what load I used. But I just can't justify in my mind using plastic wad rough/pigeon shooting it just doesn't seem right regardless of livestock etc it's just not right to throw something that won't degrade for hundreds of years in to the countryside.

 

However at my local clay ground they now allow plastic, but that means they will have a system to clear up the wadding periodically. And at my local club for practical shotgun they have a similar regime so why not? Its cheaper and patterns better.

 

In terms of the test yes it would of been better if the loads had been the same but bear in mind both rounds are advertised at 1400fps the same as nearly all shotgun rounds you commonly buy so differences in the amount/type of powder and load weight are pretty irrelevant. And lets be honest you could look at a load of graphs but what gives you a better indication in the real world than a real world test? Just my two cents.

It was a real world test, but it was too small to be of any real relevance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shot a lot of both over the years and always used plastic wads, but some clay grounds imply that you use fibre our syndicate shoot wants us to and we shoot on a few farms with livestock and have to, so settled on using fibre wads for last 5 years I find no difference at all in terms of clean kills, its about choke in your gun I like using 1/2 3/4 in the o/u. and 1/2 in the auto with those anything in range and hit square will be clean killed with fibre wads

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...