max choke for hevi shot

[night owl]

could some one help im a little confussed and new to none toxic shot

 

I have 4 boxes of lyalvale express max game hevi shot 34 gram no 3 76mm cases

 

hopeing to use them this season

on the back of the box it states

barrels with a choke less then 0.5mm are to be used

what the hell is 0.5mm in old money 1/4 1/2 3/4 ??

have tried looking on the net but not having any luck can any one help pleeesae

[neutron619]

Assuming you're talking 12 gauge (you didn't say but it seems pretty clear) 0.5mm constriction is equal to approximately 0.2" constriction. In a 12 gauge barrel, that's a nominal modified choke or in plan English: ½ choke.

[night owl]

neutron619 thanks a lot mate 1/2 makes a lot of since to me lol

cheers for the help

[figgy]

As above half choke. Every .25 or quarter of a millimeter is ten thou roughly so a quarter of choke constriction

1 mm Is full choke at forty thousands of an inch.

 

Figgy

Edited August 28, 2014 by figgy

[motty]

You can go far tighter than 1/2 if you wish. Shot size 3 is fairly small.

[neutron619]

You can go far tighter than 1/2 if you wish. Shot size 3 is fairly small.

 

Well, you can but why would you when the box states specifically what sort of barrel the cartridges will be suitable for?

 

This isn't steel we're talking about and it's not the same question as "can I put standard / high performance steel through X or Y gun?".

 

The issue with hevi-shot is not only that it's (marginally) harder than lead, but also that it's denser. It's going to come out of the barrel at the same speed as lead, but with more momentum and less tendency to deform, which means if you put it down a barrel with a very tight choke, you'll probably send the choke along with the shot reasonably regularly, hence the prohibition on the box.

 

You can sometimes get away with tight chokes and large steel shot - it's 1/3 less dense than lead, ergo has 1/3 less momentum and this rescues "fine English guns" somewhat from the hardness issue. Doesn't completely prevent it, but reduces the effect. Put the density back up to 12g/cm³ and you're asking for trouble - ballooned muzzles, lost multichokes and the like.

 

I would strongly advise the OP to follow the advice on the box. If you don't like / don't agree with the technical argument, think about it this way: hevi-shot is a rare case of advertisers' claims that "this shot hits harder than lead" actually being true. It's going to hit the birds harder and it'll do the same with your chokes.

 

Edit - As most of us are aware, harder shot patterns better because of reduced pellet deformation. Hevi-shot is harder than lead and should pattern better, so the need for a tighter-than-½ choke is reduced.

Edited August 28, 2014 by neutron619

[panoma1]

The issue is further complicated by the fact that there seems to be two types of hevi-shot........the original irregularly shaped stuff is very hard and should, you are advised, be treated as steel.........the later, round shot (with a flat ring around the circumference) is sintered and can be used according to BASC...........through any choke constriction!?

 

er on the safe side! follow the instructions on the box!

[islandgun]

The issue is further complicated by the fact that there seems to be two types of hevi-shot........the original irregularly shaped stuff is very hard and should, you are advised, be treated as steel.........the later, round shot (with a flat ring around the circumference) is sintered and can be used according to BASC...........through any choke constriction!?

 

er on the safe side! follow the instructions on the box!

I have a quantity of said shot and found it to be (as said ) only very marginally heavier than lead, easily crushed with pliers and I just cut one in half with a knife ! it is the sintered variety.

I would like to load some and use it through 1/2 choke, given its weight does anyone have an opinion as to why I shouldn't treat it as lead and use lead recipes ? (sorry to high- jack thread)

[neutron619]

The issue is further complicated by the fact that there seems to be two types of hevi-shot........the original irregularly shaped stuff is very hard and should, you are advised, be treated as steel.........the later, round shot (with a flat ring around the circumference) is sintered and can be used according to BASC...........through any choke constriction!?

 

Very good point. The older Hevi-Shot should not only be treated as if it were steel - it's should be used more carefully than that because the old stuff was actually harder than steel (or so 5 mins quick googling has just told me) so I imagine it's worse for barrels and chokes than most steel shot.

 

Interestingly, the first article that came up when I searched was Tom Roster's comparisons between steel and Hevi-shot which also suggests a full choke is fine (I disagree - follow the instructions on the box!) but it doesn't surprise me that BASC think full choke is fine, since they are basically the British publishing arm of the Tom Roster show (or want to be). I wonder how many of their guns barrels have ended up looking like a Cor Anglais....?

[casts_by_fly]

The issue with hevi-shot is not only that it's (marginally) harder than lead, but also that it's denser. It's going to come out of the barrel at the same speed as lead, but with more momentum and less tendency to deform, which means if you put it down a barrel with a very tight choke, you'll probably send the choke along with the shot reasonably regularly, hence the prohibition on the box.

 

You can sometimes get away with tight chokes and large steel shot - it's 1/3 less dense than lead, ergo has 1/3 less momentum and this rescues "fine English guns" somewhat from the hardness issue. Doesn't completely prevent it, but reduces the effect. Put the density back up to 12g/cm³ and you're asking for trouble - ballooned muzzles, lost multichokes and the like.

 

You didn't study physics in school did you? A load of 34g at (for arguments sake) 1400 fps will have the same momentum and energy regardless of the shot type. In fact we can calculate exactly how much momentum it is (87.5 ft*lb/s). The hardness of the shot can have a difference if it is large shot that can't shift in the wad and is choked too tight. To that end, steel is harder than hevi (last I checked) and will have a greater chance of deformation. However, if we're talking about 3's and a standard range of chokes (cyl to full) then we're not talking about extreme chokes like a 60 points turkey choke. Hevi is fine for full choke.

 

rick

[TIGHTCHOKE]

This is becomeing very interesting!

[figgy]

I have a quantity of said shot and found it to be (as said ) only very marginally heavier than lead, easily crushed with pliers and I just cut one in half with a knife ! it is the sintered variety.

I would like to load some and use it through 1/2 choke, given its weight does anyone have an opinion as to why I shouldn't treat it as lead and use lead recipes ? (sorry to high- jack thread)

There are recipies for hevi shot. I thought the same as you swap lead for your shot but the density can play havoc with pressures as the shot don't want to move and takes more force to do so, think you might get away with gram for gram as then your pushing the same force, but will have less pellets in each shot.

 

Best ask cook or sits.

 

Figgy

This is becomeing very interesting!

Want to share a bucket of popcorn

 

Where's Heinz Wolf when you need him.

 

Figgy

Edited August 28, 2014 by figgy

[neutron619]

 

You didn't study physics in school did you? A load of 34g at (for arguments sake) 1400 fps will have the same momentum and energy regardless of the shot type. In fact we can calculate exactly how much momentum it is (87.5 ft*lb/s). The hardness of the shot can have a difference if it is large shot that can't shift in the wad and is choked too tight. To that end, steel is harder than hevi (last I checked) and will have a greater chance of deformation. However, if we're talking about 3's and a standard range of chokes (cyl to full) then we're not talking about extreme chokes like a 60 points turkey choke. Hevi is fine for full choke.

 

rick

 

In fact I did, though I'm not claiming to be any good at it.

 

However, my interpretation is different to yours - you're making the assumption that all the pellets will impact with the choke and that therefore all momentum in the shot is relevant. I don't believe this is the case, unless your constriction is "total" - in which case you have bigger fish to fry.

 

For my part, I assume that the pellets in the centre of the pattern continue relatively unimpeded because the barrel is open, and that the only potentially choke-/barrel-damaging pellets are those in contact with the barrel at the front of the shot column.

 

If we assume that a #3 shot means what it says - i.e. shot of nominally 3.25mm diameter - irrespective of the material of construction, then individual pellets of hevi-shot of 3.25mm diameter will have greater momentum than pellets of lead of 3.25mm diameter. This is what I meant to indicate above.

 

To follow the argument to it's logical conclusion, lead is reasonably compressible which means that the resistance of a tight choke (let's say > ½) can be accommodated relatively easily by dispersal of energy through deformation of the pellets - both those in contact with the barrel wall and those in the middle of the shot column - allowing all the pellets to pass through without much trouble.

 

Much like steel, where the shot is hevi-shot (and particularly the harder-than-steel early kind), this compressibility isn't available to allow easy passage of the pellets through the choke, meaning that the energy which, in lead, would be used in compressing the pellets, is actually delivered by the forward motion into the choke and the barrel wall.

 

Adding in a higher momentum per pellet to what we already know (from using hard steel) is a pretty good way of damaging tight chokes and we're delivering even more energy to the choke tube and the barrel from the pellets at the edge of the column. We know that some guns can take this beating and that some can't - hence the introduction of steel proof. We also know that all guns will fail at some point when subjected to excessive pressure, forces. etc.

 

My argument is that using hevi-shot, through a tighter choke than is recommended is even more likely to result in barrel damage than, say, using steel through a tighter-than-recommended choking, and that since we know the potentially damaging effects of heavy steel loads through tight chokes, it ought to be avoided.

Edited August 28, 2014 by neutron619

[TIGHTCHOKE]

[motty]

It is widely recommended not to use steel shot of over 4mm through a full standard multi-choke. A 3.25mm (or thereabouts) load of pellets are fine through a full choke, hevi shot or steel. I use Huge hevi shot pellets through my tight aftermarket chokes with no worries.

[casts_by_fly]

 

In fact I did, though I'm not claiming to be any good at it.

 

However, my interpretation is different to yours - you're making the assumption that all the pellets will impact with the choke and that therefore all momentum in the shot is relevant. I don't believe this is the case, unless your constriction is "total" - in which case you have bigger fish to fry.

 

For my part, I assume that the pellets in the centre of the pattern continue relatively unimpeded because the barrel is open, and that the only potentially choke-/barrel-damaging pellets are those in contact with the barrel at the front of the shot column.

 

If we assume that a #3 shot means what it says - i.e. shot of nominally 3.25mm diameter - irrespective of the material of construction, then individual pellets of hevi-shot of 3.25mm diameter will have greater momentum than pellets of lead of 3.25mm diameter. This is what I meant to indicate above.

 

To follow the argument to it's logical conclusion, lead is reasonably compressible which means that the resistance of a tight choke (let's say > ½) can be accommodated relatively easily by dispersal of energy through deformation of the pellets - both those in contact with the barrel wall and those in the middle of the shot column - allowing all the pellets to pass through without much trouble.

 

Much like steel, where the shot is hevi-shot (and particularly the harder-than-steel early kind), this compressibility isn't available to allow easy passage of the pellets through the choke, meaning that the energy which, in lead, would be used in compressing the pellets, is actually delivered by the forward motion into the choke and the barrel wall.

 

Adding in a higher momentum per pellet to what we already know (from using hard steel) is a pretty good way of damaging tight chokes and we're delivering even more energy to the choke tube and the barrel from the pellets at the edge of the column. We know that some guns can take this beating and that some can't - hence the introduction of steel proof. We also know that all guns will fail at some point when subjected to excessive pressure, forces. etc.

 

My argument is that using hevi-shot, through a tighter choke than is recommended is even more likely to result in barrel damage than, say, using steel through a tighter-than-recommended choking, and that since we know the potentially damaging effects of heavy steel loads through tight chokes, it ought to be avoided.

 

I understand your logic on a per pellet basis and you are correct that each individual pellet will have more momentum (hevi vs steel). However the scenario we're talking about is that the constriction is tight enough that the column of shot is effectively incompressible, i.e. all pellets are touching with no gaps that allow individual pellet movement. If there is individual pellet movement, then we don't have a problem (similar to the lead case). So in the case that individual pellets can't move, we must treat the entire shot column as a single entity and thus the momentum is the momentum of the entire column.

 

There will be a few pellets in the front of the column that will not be restricted (the front most layer) but we're not talking about that many such that it will have a major impact until we're into such large shot sizes that we're counting the shot individually (i.e. buck shot sizes).

 

thanks

rick

[islandgun]

There are recipies for hevi shot. I thought the same as you swap lead for your shot but the density can play havoc with pressures as the shot don't want to move and takes more force to do so, think you might get away with gram for gram as then your pushing the same force, but will have less pellets in each shot.

 

Best ask cook or sits.

 

 

Thanks for your reply but the only recipes I can find for heavy weight shot are RSI vol 3 and ballistic products manuals but these refer to the old miss shaped heavy shot not the lighter softer hevi referred too by the OP. these recipes also use components un-available here, C&G do a version of sintered shot is that comparable to the express shot ?

[figgy]

So long as it's the same density I would think so.

 

Can you not get hold of a hevi shot cart and break it down to replicate it.

 

Figgy

[neutron619]

 

I understand your logic on a per pellet basis and you are correct that each individual pellet will have more momentum (hevi vs steel). However the scenario we're talking about is that the constriction is tight enough that the column of shot is effectively incompressible, i.e. all pellets are touching with no gaps that allow individual pellet movement. If there is individual pellet movement, then we don't have a problem (similar to the lead case). So in the case that individual pellets can't move, we must treat the entire shot column as a single entity and thus the momentum is the momentum of the entire column.

 

There will be a few pellets in the front of the column that will not be restricted (the front most layer) but we're not talking about that many such that it will have a major impact until we're into such large shot sizes that we're counting the shot individually (i.e. buck shot sizes).

 

thanks

rick

 

Ok - agreed - there are two different scenarios here and we've cleared up the confusion over the "whole column momentum" and "individual pellet momentum" well enough.

 

I'm confused though by your point over individual pellet movement however, since there will always be individual pellet movement in any cartridge, #9 or SG, because of the difference in masses, accelerations and velocities of each of the pellets in the shot column. The column is fluid, so I'm not sure that total momentum is ever entirely appropriate - relevant, yes and probably indicative too, but not enough to tell the whole story. Apart from anything else, as you say, some pellets at the front of the column never come into contact with the barrel. Many others only ever come into contact with other pellets and have no bearing on damage to the barrel wall or choke.

 

Let's say we're using our 34g of anything at 1400fps example from above. Whatever the material the shot is made of, the overall momentum will be the same.

 

However, the type of material will make a difference to how fluid (compressible) the shot column is, so even if the overall momentum is the same, the degree to which individual pellets can move or be deflected by barrel / choke / other pellets changes dependent on material. The alternative to deflection is that the pellets are deformed. The probability with which each of these effects occurs in a given number of collisions between pellet and pellet, or pellet and choke must be dependent on the shot material's properties. Of course, in the real world, most pellets will do both - deflect and deform - so the question becomes which is the most significant factor for a given shot material.

 

Ultimately, the shot column may behave largely as one "entity" but the damage done to chokes and barrels is usually by single pellet-on-barrel or pellet-on-choke collisions. That there are many pellets in contact with the barrel / choke only increases the likelihood of damage being immediately noticeable.

 

Steel pellets of a given size, being less dense than lead, will have less individual momentum and therefore deflect more easily than a lead pellet.

 

Lead pellets of a given size, being softer than steel, will be more compressible.

 

Both of these effects will reduce the likelihood of damage to barrels or chokes because they allow the shot column to more easily change shape as it passes through the choke - the column is more fluid. This isn't about there being no individual pellet movement - if there were ever a situation where there were no individual pellet movement, the shot would fail to exit the barrel on any gun not having a true cylinder (lack of) choke. That is the logical extreme.

 

Even if we can't agree about the degree to which it is or isn't sensible to put hevi-shot through a full choked gun, can we not agree that being harder than steel and denser than lead, the likelihood of damage with hevi-shot is higher (perhaps only marginally higher, but nonetheless higher) than that of either steel or lead for the reasons much discussed above?

 

If we can agree that it's more likely - even if the risk is not significant enough to be concerning to some people - then can we also agree that the stipulation that the cartridge manufacturer makes about chokes is a sensible one, since we would expect any "rules" for hevi-shot to be stricter than those for steel on the basis of the materials / forces involved? If anything, the rule - equivalent to that for steel #3 shot - is "under-applied" for hevi-shot cartridges, so it is arguable that exceeding it is potentially more damaging to our gun than using an equivalent steel load under the same conditions. If we wouldn't put steel through Full, we shouldn't put hevi-shot through Full.

 

If we can get that far, then the argument I'm trying to make (which, granted, probably isn't the same as everyone else's) is valid.

Edited August 28, 2014 by neutron619

[Guest stevo]

It is widely recommended not to use steel shot of over 4mm through a full standard multi-choke. A 3.25mm (or thereabouts) load of pellets are fine through a full choke, hevi shot or steel. I use Huge hevi shot pellets through my tight aftermarket chokes with no worries.

I agree . All this maximum half choke with steel is utter tosh . On an old gun then yes I would stick to ALL manufacturers recommendations . But on a modern gun no worries . As long as your gun is proofed . Chambered for the steel shell you intend to use . As for chokes be it the standard or aftermarket as long as there rated for steel . ....go for it . Use what you want .

[Dangerous Brian]

 

Ok - agreed - there are two different scenarios here and we've cleared up the confusion over the "whole column momentum" and "individual pellet momentum" well enough.

 

I'm confused though by your point over individual pellet movement however, since there will always be individual pellet movement in any cartridge, #9 or SG, because of the difference in masses, accelerations and velocities of each of the pellets in the shot column. The column is fluid, so I'm not sure that total momentum is ever entirely appropriate - relevant, yes and probably indicative too, but not enough to tell the whole story. Apart from anything else, as you say, some pellets at the front of the column never come into contact with the barrel. Many others only ever come into contact with other pellets and have no bearing on damage to the barrel wall or choke.

 

Let's say we're using our 34g of anything at 1400fps example from above. Whatever the material the shot is made of, the overall momentum will be the same.

 

However, the type of material will make a difference to how fluid (compressible) the shot column is, so even if the overall momentum is the same, the degree to which individual pellets can move or be deflected by barrel / choke / other pellets changes dependent on material. The alternative to deflection is that the pellets are deformed. The probability with which each of these effects occurs in a given number of collisions between pellet and pellet, or pellet and choke must be dependent on the shot material's properties. Of course, in the real world, most pellets will do both - deflect and deform - so the question becomes which is the most significant factor for a given shot material.

 

Ultimately, the shot column may behave largely as one "entity" but the damage done to chokes and barrels is usually by single pellet-on-barrel or pellet-on-choke collisions. That there are many pellets in contact with the barrel / choke only increases the likelihood of damage being immediately noticeable.

 

Steel pellets of a given size, being less dense than lead, will have less individual momentum and therefore deflect more easily than a lead pellet.

 

Lead pellets of a given size, being softer than steel, will be more compressible.

 

Both of these effects will reduce the likelihood of damage to barrels or chokes because they allow the shot column to more easily change shape as it passes through the choke - the column is more fluid. This isn't about there being no individual pellet movement - if there were ever a situation where there were no individual pellet movement, the shot would fail to exit the barrel on any gun not having a true cylinder (lack of) choke. That is the logical extreme.

 

Even if we can't agree about the degree to which it is or isn't sensible to put hevi-shot through a full choked gun, can we not agree that being harder than steel and denser than lead, the likelihood of damage with hevi-shot is higher (perhaps only marginally higher, but nonetheless higher) than that of either steel or lead for the reasons much discussed above?

 

If we can agree that it's more likely - even if the risk is not significant enough to be concerning to some people - then can we also agree that the stipulation that the cartridge manufacturer makes about chokes is a sensible one, since we would expect any "rules" for hevi-shot to be stricter than those for steel on the basis of the materials / forces involved? If anything, the rule - equivalent to that for steel #3 shot - is "under-applied" for hevi-shot cartridges, so it is arguable that exceeding it is potentially more damaging to our gun than using an equivalent steel load under the same conditions. If we wouldn't put steel through Full, we shouldn't put hevi-shot through Full.

 

If we can get that far, then the argument I'm trying to make (which, granted, probably isn't the same as everyone else's) is valid.

If you want to go into a full physics lesson you try resolving the the forces on the pellets into vectors and components to get an idea of what happens when the pellet contacts the barrel (force applied by the driving wad moving the column up the barrel then the force outward onto the barrel and choke caused by pellets pushing against one another etc etc). Enough to give anyone a headache but if there are any volunteers......

 

As regards hevishot potentially causing more damage than steel; as stated it is a bit harder than lead and more dense than steel. I don't think that is quite enough information to say what will happen definitively. All three materials will have different characteristics, especialy when moving at 1400fps, making extrapolation of results a bit sketchy. The cartridge manufacturer then has a choice- they can either play safe and treat hevi shot in a similar way to steel or they can pay a lot of money to someone to spend a while testing it to the nth degree.

 

Just my thoughts. Bottom line is I don't know for sure what would happen.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Dangerous Brian

[casts_by_fly]

 

Ok - agreed - there are two different scenarios here and we've cleared up the confusion over the "whole column momentum" and "individual pellet momentum" well enough.

 

I'm confused though by your point over individual pellet movement however, since there will always be individual pellet movement in any cartridge, #9 or SG, because of the difference in masses, accelerations and velocities of each of the pellets in the shot column. The column is fluid, so I'm not sure that total momentum is ever entirely appropriate - relevant, yes and probably indicative too, but not enough to tell the whole story. Apart from anything else, as you say, some pellets at the front of the column never come into contact with the barrel. Many others only ever come into contact with other pellets and have no bearing on damage to the barrel wall or choke.

 

Let's say we're using our 34g of anything at 1400fps example from above. Whatever the material the shot is made of, the overall momentum will be the same.

 

However, the type of material will make a difference to how fluid (compressible) the shot column is, so even if the overall momentum is the same, the degree to which individual pellets can move or be deflected by barrel / choke / other pellets changes dependent on material. The alternative to deflection is that the pellets are deformed. The probability with which each of these effects occurs in a given number of collisions between pellet and pellet, or pellet and choke must be dependent on the shot material's properties. Of course, in the real world, most pellets will do both - deflect and deform - so the question becomes which is the most significant factor for a given shot material.

 

Ultimately, the shot column may behave largely as one "entity" but the damage done to chokes and barrels is usually by single pellet-on-barrel or pellet-on-choke collisions. That there are many pellets in contact with the barrel / choke only increases the likelihood of damage being immediately noticeable.

 

Steel pellets of a given size, being less dense than lead, will have less individual momentum and therefore deflect more easily than a lead pellet.

 

Lead pellets of a given size, being softer than steel, will be more compressible.

 

Both of these effects will reduce the likelihood of damage to barrels or chokes because they allow the shot column to more easily change shape as it passes through the choke - the column is more fluid. This isn't about there being no individual pellet movement - if there were ever a situation where there were no individual pellet movement, the shot would fail to exit the barrel on any gun not having a true cylinder (lack of) choke. That is the logical extreme.

 

Even if we can't agree about the degree to which it is or isn't sensible to put hevi-shot through a full choked gun, can we not agree that being harder than steel and denser than lead, the likelihood of damage with hevi-shot is higher (perhaps only marginally higher, but nonetheless higher) than that of either steel or lead for the reasons much discussed above?

 

If we can agree that it's more likely - even if the risk is not significant enough to be concerning to some people - then can we also agree that the stipulation that the cartridge manufacturer makes about chokes is a sensible one, since we would expect any "rules" for hevi-shot to be stricter than those for steel on the basis of the materials / forces involved? If anything, the rule - equivalent to that for steel #3 shot - is "under-applied" for hevi-shot cartridges, so it is arguable that exceeding it is potentially more damaging to our gun than using an equivalent steel load under the same conditions. If we wouldn't put steel through Full, we shouldn't put hevi-shot through Full.

 

If we can get that far, then the argument I'm trying to make (which, granted, probably isn't the same as everyone else's) is valid.

 

A wadded column of pellets that has been fired will experience its accelerating force from the powder/gas, i.e. from the back of the column. The continually expanding gas is causing the column to accelerate as it goes down the barrel. That means that the rear pellets are constantly pushing the front pellets forward. The implication is that the front pellets are not going to be moving faster than the rear ones while in the barrel and thus forward movement of the front shot relative to the rear shot isn't going to happen (i.e. the front shot aren't going to outrun the rest of the column). While the rear/center pellets won't actually touch the barrel, their momentum is still acting on the pellets in front and to the sides. If the front layer of pellets hits an obstruction (let's say there was a small metal fin on the inside of the barrel) the rear pellets are already pushing against the front pellets and their momentum is acting on the obstruction. If the pellets were stacked in perfect lines parallel to the barrel then the outer 'lines' would never experience any force from the rear center pellets. That isn't the case though because the pellets are packed in an approximately random packing orientation which means the forces are imparted from more central pellets to less central pellets (and vice versa). That's why the total momentum matters.

 

Under the conditions that hevi-shot is more dense than lead (we know to be true for certain) and harder than steel (conditional on the type of hevi-shot) I agree with you that hevi-shot would pose a worse scenario than steel with the same diameter of shot. The only way out of it that I can see is if hevi shot is able to repack itself easier (i.e. the pellets slide across each other more easily than steel). That's the idea behind buffered loads, but I have no idea whether steel or hevi shot is better in that regard.

 

thanks

rick

[neutron619]

 

A wadded column of pellets that has been fired will experience its accelerating force from the powder/gas, i.e. from the back of the column. The continually expanding gas is causing the column to accelerate as it goes down the barrel. That means that the rear pellets are constantly pushing the front pellets forward. The implication is that the front pellets are not going to be moving faster than the rear ones while in the barrel and thus forward movement of the front shot relative to the rear shot isn't going to happen (i.e. the front shot aren't going to outrun the rest of the column). While the rear/center pellets won't actually touch the barrel, their momentum is still acting on the pellets in front and to the sides. If the front layer of pellets hits an obstruction (let's say there was a small metal fin on the inside of the barrel) the rear pellets are already pushing against the front pellets and their momentum is acting on the obstruction. If the pellets were stacked in perfect lines parallel to the barrel then the outer 'lines' would never experience any force from the rear center pellets. That isn't the case though because the pellets are packed in an approximately random packing orientation which means the forces are imparted from more central pellets to less central pellets (and vice versa). That's why the total momentum matters.

 

Under the conditions that hevi-shot is more dense than lead (we know to be true for certain) and harder than steel (conditional on the type of hevi-shot) I agree with you that hevi-shot would pose a worse scenario than steel with the same diameter of shot. The only way out of it that I can see is if hevi shot is able to repack itself easier (i.e. the pellets slide across each other more easily than steel). That's the idea behind buffered loads, but I have no idea whether steel or hevi shot is better in that regard.

 

thanks

rick

 

Ok, I'm basically with you on all that.

 

I have one minor objection in the form of questioning what happens if all of the powder is burnt prior to anything exiting the barrel. This is to ask / say: if the force is removed, the wad could (and will) decelerate under friction meaning that the shot column could begin to extend within the length of the barrel. This extension would negate the "force-from-behind-squashes-rear-pellets-into-front-pellets" argument.

 

Otherwise, I think we have common ground, so I'll propose leaving it there.

[casts_by_fly]

 

Ok, I'm basically with you on all that.

 

I have one minor objection in the form of questioning what happens if all of the powder is burnt prior to anything exiting the barrel. This is to ask / say: if the force is removed, the wad could (and will) decelerate under friction meaning that the shot column could begin to extend within the length of the barrel. This extension would negate the "force-from-behind-squashes-rear-pellets-into-front-pellets" argument.

 

Otherwise, I think we have common ground, so I'll propose leaving it there.

 

I agree that if the powder stops burning/expanding then it is a different scenario. When I initially typed it I also included 'absent another force' in that sentence but removed it for simplicity sake since for any normal load that we'd be talking about here the powder will still be burning and driving the shot. It might be an interesting thought experiment to figure out what load would still be relevant. A subsonic load in a long barrel with BBB steel choked extra full? The ultimate in stealthy, long range pigeon shooting. ;o)

 

thanks,

rick

[neutron619]

 

I agree that if the powder stops burning/expanding then it is a different scenario. When I initially typed it I also included 'absent another force' in that sentence but removed it for simplicity sake since for any normal load that we'd be talking about here the powder will still be burning and driving the shot. It might be an interesting thought experiment to figure out what load would still be relevant. A subsonic load in a long barrel with BBB steel choked extra full? The ultimate in stealthy, long range pigeon shooting. ;o)

 

thanks,

rick

 

Something like that, hehe.

 

That conjures up all sorts of images lol. I used to be pretty good with a pea-shooter is one. For another, any pellets that actually hit the bird would probably still be lethal at about 150 yards(!), but I wouldn't like to rely on the pattern.... Maybe shooting sitting flocks with such a cartridge would take down a few birds - I expect the pellets would bounce all over the place and it would be less "pattern" and more "random" - a bit like an on-land version of a punt gun.

 

If we did find the combination that worked for my argument, we'd probably then have to examine the ballistic properties of choke tubes and their lethality on pigeons at various ranges also. "Yes guv - the shot missed but I hit him on the head with my Improved Modified choke and he's stone dead now...."