Jump to content
marsh man

What Do You Prefer,Plastic Or Fibre Wads Cartridges?

    Recommended Posts

    16 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

    Not really, I do not post responses decrying anyones contribution as "drivel"....nor that anyone with whom I don't agree, is a liar!

    I didn't call anyone I didn't agree with a liar, try reading posts properly.

    I read yours and it was drivel, sorry about that. But you know what they say? The truth hurts

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Drivel eh? Given the ability to read and mental capacity to understand it? I'm sure the library has plenty of books on physics anyone can borrow? lol!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I am well aware of physics. However shooting, and certainly shooting at any kind of distance requires a little more than physics. It requires the ability to centre the pattern in the correct place. Something very few people can do consistently.

    When you start splitting hairs over a couple of inches difference in lead at 40 yards between cartridges it is beyond physics. Unless of course you know every variable before pulling the trigger. And you cannot possibly know that, you are only going on what is says on the box for a speed reference. How about wind speed?, atmospheric pressure?, air temperature?, etc etc etc. The list of variables is endless, 

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    The thing is, I am not so sure if speed comes into play when you are decoying from a hide , very rare will you get two identical shots on the trot , range will vary a lot along with head on and crossing shots .

    As a previous poster said , you get used to a certain cartridge and thinking about what cartridge you are using never comes into play when you are about to pull the trigger , all you are thinking about is weather you have put the shot in the right place and not weather the cartridge should shoot fast or a bit slower .

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    54 minutes ago, Diss4111 said:

    I am well aware of physics. However shooting, and certainly shooting at any kind of distance requires a little more than physics. It requires the ability to centre the pattern in the correct place. Something very few people can do consistently.

    When you start splitting hairs over a couple of inches difference in lead at 40 yards between cartridges it is beyond physics. Unless of course you know every variable before pulling the trigger. And you cannot possibly know that, you are only going on what is says on the box for a speed reference. How about wind speed?, atmospheric pressure?, air temperature?, etc etc etc. The list of variables is endless, 

     

    I didn't claim a shooter needed to know every variable before he pulled the trigger! And that the shooter needed firstly, to be able to hit what they are aiming at! That is not in dispute! What I did say was "accurate shooting is about making minor subconscious adjustments to suit differing influences"....Are you saying that is wrong?........And a couple of inches difference in lead (your suggestion) at 40yds adjusts the point of impact, and in a slower load can be the difference between a dead bird and one shot up the *****!...........You are claiming that is "beyond" physics?

     

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I've been fiddling about with cartridges for more years than i can remember. I'd like to think that i'm far from a know all or a smart *** BUT the plastic wad cartridge comes out on top in terms of performance versus fibre for ME !

    Eley VIP went through a period of loading plastic(?) in what they called a PDP wad which was described as " biodegradable ".  They were a mighty fine option but are now sadly unavailable.  

    JDog's earlier post sums it up perfectly IMHO and Ditch is right about plastic that degrades and becomes powder over time.

    How many of you environmentalists who praise fibre wads and yet send a truck load of plastic **** in to our seas and the planet via your waste bins without so much as a second thought?         

    Edited by Whitebridges

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    some of my perms have said they don't care what I use  as long as I sort the  problem out . but I have used fibre for the last ten years including my homeloads, plus a fibre breakfast to start the day off, everybody to there own.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, wymberley said:

    The flight time for one is c0.15272 seconds and the other, c0.13815 which means that for the 1150 target you'll need an extra 10.25" of lead.

    Now, that's drivel.

    Quite. And with a pattern at that range that could be well over 30" in diameter, it is not so consequential.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    3 minutes ago, motty said:

    Quite. And with a pattern at that range that could be well over 30" in diameter, it is not so consequential.

    Although what I said is true, it was, however, said in jest. However, just another thought, if you go along with BASC and we'll assume a pigeon and 28g of No 7, then with 1/2 choke you're reasonably sure of a clean kill but only within the central 20" of the pattern - plus a tad on a lucky day - so it's odds on at best you have a miss or at worst, a runner with a warm back-side. As always, no matter how much choke you pile on whereas you'll increase the pattern density in the central c20", the outer ring to the 30" will never reach the required density.

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    But, it is so much better to actually get out and shoot something rather than spend copious amounts of time repeating theories!:rolleyes:

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    3 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

    But, it is so much better to actually get out and shoot something rather than spend copious amounts of time repeating theories!:rolleyes:

    :good:

    Absolutely, which is why it is better to leave the theories and the not so bon mots alone and just stick to the facts.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    5 hours ago, panoma1 said:

    Yes I agree consistently missing is down to the shooter, but accurate shooting is about making minor sub conscious adjustments to suit differing influences.......range of target, speed of shot load and speed of target are three such adjustments!

     

    I can agree with that;  I would and do adjust my speed of swing accordingly to range and speed of target, but the speed of the cartridge genuinely isn't anything I've ever considered, hence the using up of odds and ends. Far too many more important variables at play to consider, rather than the relative speed of one cartridge over another, in my opinion.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    9 minutes ago, motty said:

    Quite. And with a pattern at that range that could be well over 30" in diameter, it is not so consequential.

    I always thought the centre of the pattern was the optimum for a clean kill, and what we all aim to achieve? Conversly the edge of the pattern gets thinner (we lose the pattern) with distance, and consequently more likely to wound? 

    That's why, when testing a cartridge on the pattern plate, a 30" circle is drawn around the centre (densest part) of the pattern printed, after the shot is taken!....not before, central to the point of aim!

    8 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

    But, it is so much better to actually get out and shoot something rather than spend copious amounts of time repeating theories!:rolleyes:

    I agree but this is what PW is, an information and debating forum!

     

    3 minutes ago, Scully said:

    I can agree with that;  I would and do adjust my speed of swing accordingly to range and speed of target, but the speed of the cartridge genuinely isn't anything I've ever considered, hence the using up of odds and ends. Far too many more important variables at play to consider, rather than the relative speed of one cartridge over another, in my opinion.

     Scully, I was merely floating a theory that the reason some do not rate steel, is that steel shot being lighter needs a higher velocity than lead (being heavier) in order to carry and kill at range! At a similar range that extra velocity (of an HP steel shell) will alter the point of impact over lead, because it will reach the target sooner.......the pattern especially at distance with larger steel shot, would also be a factor? I wasn't comparing one lead cartridge with another lead cartridge!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

    I agree but this is what PW is, an information and debating forum!

    Good, but I get the distinct impression that some posters only spout theories rather than actually get out on the pattern plate, the clays or the live quarry!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    17 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

    Good, but I get the distinct impression that some posters only spout theories rather than actually get out on the pattern plate, the clays or the live quarry!

    Theories are born out of experience! 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    38 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

     

     

     Scully, I was merely floating a theory that the reason some do not rate steel, is that steel shot being lighter needs a higher velocity than lead (being heavier) in order to carry and kill at range! At a similar range that extra velocity (of an HP steel shell) will alter the point of impact over lead, because it will reach the target sooner.......the pattern especially at distance with larger steel shot, would also be a factor? I wasn't comparing one lead cartridge with another lead cartridge!

    Fair enough. 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    On 05/02/2019 at 19:52, JDog said:

    I believe I posted about my experience (singular) with fibre wads a couple of years ago.

    Pigeons were returning to a wood having been feeding on beans. My hide was on a point outside the wood and the return line came close to my position, close enough to get plenty of shooting. A grateful farmer had given me a slab of Gamebore fibre wads and 30 grams in no. 6 shot. I just couldn’t believe how many birds were not killed cleanly first shot. Virtually every bird needed two shots. When those cartridges ran out I went back to the car for my usual Hull Superfasts in plastic. The difference was instantaneous.

    I've had a similar experience with rabbits, same brand/shot size/weight cartridge, the only difference being plasic or fibre wads. I definately had more runners with the fibre, plastic seemed to hit harder and stop more the first time. I assume the plastic holds a slightly tighter pattern giving the impression of more choke. I use fibre exclusively for game and I believe slightly more choke helps with fibre. 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, shalfordninja33 said:

    I've had a similar experience with rabbits, same brand/shot size/weight cartridge, the only difference being plasic or fibre wads. I definately had more runners with the fibre, plastic seemed to hit harder and stop more the first time. I assume the plastic holds a slightly tighter pattern giving the impression of more choke. I use fibre exclusively for game and I believe slightly more choke helps with fibre. 

    Strange. For many years my go to cartridge was Clear Pigeon 32grm 6’s and always in fibre as they were all we could get hold of. I found them extremely effective on anything I shot at through my old choked half and quarter 101 Winchester, and particularly on rabbits. Most of my shooting back then consisted of Shooting bolted bunnies, and I can recall very few which needed a second shot, and all those were at extreme range. 

    Admittedly most were shot at around the ten to twenty yard range ( you had to be fast to get on them 🙂 ) but those cartridges would perform even when only rears presented themselves. Put the shot up front even at extreme range and they would bowl them over dead. I then discovered SIPE 5’s, again in fibre; devastating is the only word for them, and through tight chokes on walked up rabbits ( alongside the combine ) nothing gets away. 

    Just to add; I’m not suggesting you’re wrong, like I’ve said in another thread, I wouldn’t be able to tell which was the better in the same cartridge...plastic or fibre, I just think we all prefer different types of both for various reasons which are usually personal to us. A good or bad day in the hide can make all the difference to how we perceive one or another. 

    A mate doesn’t like Cheddites, but he can’t hit much with anything else he chooses, so why he’s blaming them I have no idea! 😃

    Edited by Scully

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Was reading this today..Perhaps little relevance to plastic wads but made me think about our use of plastics and dutifully sending off plastic for re-cycling,.. I assumed that the plastic islands floating about in the Pacific/Indian ocean were down to the locals, seems we help, as well as shipping it across the world.. I will be looking into non-toxic and fibre re-loading this summer... What weight a wad compared to a plastic bag ?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46518747

    Edited by islandgun

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    9 hours ago, Scully said:

    Strange. For many years my go to cartridge was Clear Pigeon 32grm 6’s and always in fibre as they were all we could get hold of. I found them extremely effective on anything I shot at through my old choked half and quarter 101 Winchester, and particularly on rabbits. Most of my shooting back then consisted of Shooting bolted bunnies, and I can recall very few which needed a second shot, and all those were at extreme range. 

    Admittedly most were shot at around the ten to twenty yard range ( you had to be fast to get on them 🙂 ) but those cartridges would perform even when only rears presented themselves. Put the shot up front even at extreme range and they would bowl them over dead. I then discovered SIPE 5’s, again in fibre; devastating is the only word for them, and through tight chokes on walked up rabbits ( alongside the combine ) nothing gets away. 

    Just to add; I’m not suggesting you’re wrong, like I’ve said in another thread, I wouldn’t be able to tell which was the better in the same cartridge...plastic or fibre, I just think we all prefer different types of both for various reasons which are usually personal to us. A good or bad day in the hide can make all the difference to how we perceive one or another. 

    A mate doesn’t like Cheddites, but he can’t hit much with anything else he chooses, so why he’s blaming them I have no idea! 😃

    Thanks Scully, great to compare real world experiences. These were hull hp 32gm 5. I’ve used their 30gm 6s bird shooting as long as I can remember through 1/4 and 1/2 in my 686 and it kills as far out as I’m confident in shooting.

    . These rabbits were shot off the polaris at night between 20 and 30 yards using my al391 and my mates 1100. No real science just a general feeling after over a number of weeks that out of the slabs the farm were supplying for the job, sometimes plastic sometimes fibre, the better cartridge to kill ratio came on the nights we used plastic. 

    I borrowed a friends 20bore for roost shooting last Saturday and I used a box of 28gm RC T3 (plastic) followed by a box of 28gm HP Extreem (fibre) I felt the RCs hit harder than the hull regardless of the difference in felt recoil. Although I believe in that case the difference in brands accounted for much of it. Every RC cartridge I’ve tried has felt hard hitting in comparison to pretty much every other brand I’ve used. 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I (virtually) always use fibre.  Hull CompX 21g for clays and Hull Imperial game 26g or 28g for game.  My game shooting requires fibre and my normal clay ground 'prefers' fibre.  I have occasionally used plastic for clays (fibre being unavailable) and not noticed any difference in either performance or recoil.  I would not ever use plastic where animals graze.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×