Patterning

[enfieldspares]

1 minute ago, Gas seal said:

l was always told English guns shoot high so you will buy more cartridges ,and that’s why you can’t have one.

British guns are no different I'd have thought to any make of shotgun that they put 60% of the charge above the "mark" and 40% below. On the basis I was told that most birds are rising and that...even then old axiom...you can never shoot too far over a rising bird and can never shoot too far under going away bird.

[London Best]

19 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

What do you understand patterning to be?

The reason I say that is that I have tried two 'patterning' techniques, one of which I believe to be proper patterning - and the other a simple 'quick and dirty' assessment of pattern/point of aim.  Let me explain;

1. For proper patterning (as I understand it), I prepared a target at 40 yards (measured) and the target 'sheets' were about 6 ft square paper sheets.  These were then fired at from the 40 yard point from an already dirtied barrel - one cartridge to each sheet.  A 30 inch circle was then drawn around the 'perceived pattern centre' and the pellets counted.  The percentage inside the 30" circle was then calculated.  The 'distribution of the pellet impacts was assessed visually for gaps using a circular 'disc' (like a beer mat).  It was a long time consuming procedure - and with large brown paper sheets, needs a dead still day.
2. For a 'quick and dirty' assessment, I have fired at a sheet of target (whitewashed metal), photographed the result and examined the photos for both point of impact and evenness of distribution.  It was done with a approx 1m target sheet at 16 yards.  (I can't remember why, but I believe 16 yards is a 'standard' distance, possible with 1 foot at 16 yards being similar to 30" at 40 yards?

I can understand that it might be very satisfying to shoot a caravan .............

1. This is correct.

Reading some (most) of the other posts on this thread it is clear that a lot of people think that patterning a shotgun is something to do with WHERE the gun is printing the pattern. That is a completely different issue to do with correct gun fit, not pattern.

[JohnfromUK]

5 minutes ago, London Best said:

This is correct.

That is also my view - and it is time consuming and very easy to go wrong.  The slightest breath of wind on big paper sheets and they are all over the place!

I did (if I remember right as it is a long time ago) 3 shots from each barrel with 2 different cartridges.  12 sheets in total.  The exercise including counting etc. took several hours.

[London Best]

1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said:

That is also my view - and it is time consuming and very easy to go wrong.  The slightest breath of wind on big paper sheets and they are all over the place!

I did (if I remember right as it is a long time ago) 3 shots from each barrel with 2 different cartridges.  12 sheets in total.  The exercise including counting etc. took several hours.

During a gun fitting session a Holland and Holland’s shooting school the gunfitter had me fire several shots at a pattern plate to check point of impact was correct. We were NOT patterning the gun. We were checking point of impact. Two different things.

[JohnfromUK]

7 minutes ago, London Best said:

During a gun fitting session a Holland and Holland’s shooting school the gunfitter had me fire several shots at a pattern plate to check point of impact was correct. We were NOT patterning the gun. We were checking point of impact. Two different things.

I have had 2 guns fitted (different places and both have done just that; whitewashed steel plate, just fresh upm the whitewash and .... bang  - job done.  Paper and counting percentages is MUCH more onerous.

Edited October 8, 2020 by JohnfromUK

[old'un]

51 minutes ago, London Best said:

1. This is correct.

Reading some (most) of the other posts on this thread it is clear that a lot of people think that patterning a shotgun is something to do with WHERE the gun is printing the pattern. That is a completely different issue to do with correct gun fit, not pattern.

As you say two totally different things, the other thing that affects POI at a given range is how the barrels are set, converging or parallel.

[wymberley]

2 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

That is also my view - and it is time consuming and very easy to go wrong.  The slightest breath of wind on big paper sheets and they are all over the place!

I did (if I remember right as it is a long time ago) 3 shots from each barrel with 2 different cartridges.  12 sheets in total.  The exercise including counting etc. took several hours.

For research/design work 10 shots are deemed to be satisfactory;while for field applications 6 will suffice. Just 3 shots will give nothing of real value. The one mistake is to ignore any one pattern because one didn't like the look of it.

[JohnfromUK]

37 minutes ago, wymberley said:

For research/design work 10 shots are deemed to be satisfactory;while for field applications 6 will suffice. Just 3 shots will give nothing of real value. The one mistake is to ignore any one pattern because one didn't like the look of it.

It was a long time ago (maybe 35 or 40 years ago).  What I do remember is that what seemed a good idea at the time proved MUCH more time consuming than expected.  Main reasons were;

• the handling of the big sheets of paper was difficult on what I had thought to be a still day
• the change of paper between every shot and carefully rolling up/folding the 'shot' paper (support was fabricated from cardboard sheet between fence posts)
• Counting maybe 150/200 pellet holes in each sheet (each one marked with a felt marker to avoid double counting - all done on my parents dining table!)
• Inevitably there were a few where the 30" circle (drawn afterwards) escaped the edge of the paper and the shot had to be redone

From memory, the results were very clear on the percentages and with a felt 'William Powell Super Velocity' their equivalent of Eley Impax (made by Hull then) the gun patterned much as expected from measured choke constrictions.  With SMI Mini (plastic wad) it patterned a little tighter, but I don't have the full count results now.

What I learned was that for practical purposes, my gun (nominal 1/4 and slightly more open than 1/2) patterned fairly closely as the barrel measurements would have predicted with both types of cartridge, a little tighter with plastic - again as expected ...... and that it had been a lot of work and time and effort to learn what I had been told from measurements!  But you live and learn.

My initial plan had been to pattern all the guns I had then (I think I had two or three), but it soon became clear that was a LOT of work, and I only did one gun in any detail - in fact my Darne I still have.

[wymberley]

15 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

It was a long time ago (maybe 35 or 40 years ago).  What I do remember is that what seemed a good idea at the time proved MUCH more time consuming than expected.  Main reasons were;

• the handling of the big sheets of paper was difficult on what I had thought to be a still day
• the change of paper between every shot and carefully rolling up/folding the 'shot' paper (support was fabricated from cardboard sheet between fence posts)
• Counting maybe 150/200 pellet holes in each sheet (each one marked with a felt marker to avoid double counting - all done on my parents dining table!)
• Inevitably there were a few where the 30" circle (drawn afterwards) escaped the edge of the paper and the shot had to be redone

From memory, the results were very clear on the percentages and with a felt 'William Powell Super Velocity' their equivalent of Eley Impax (made by Hull then) the gun patterned much as expected from measured choke constrictions.  With SMI Mini (plastic wad) it patterned a little tighter, but I don't have the full count results now.

What I learned was that for practical purposes, my gun (nominal 1/4 and slightly more open than 1/2) patterned fairly closely as the barrel measurements would have predicted with both types of cartridge, a little tighter with plastic - again as expected ...... and that it had been a lot of work and time and effort to learn what I had been told from measurements!  But you live and learn.

My initial plan had been to pattern all the guns I had then (I think I had two or three), but it soon became clear that was a LOT of work, and I only did one gun in any detail - in fact my Darne I still have.

We must have been mad. Trouble is, success with a shotgun has a lot to do with confidence and being able to rely upon the performance of your cartridge choice goes a long way towards achieving that.

Fortunately, my guns coincide with the known central thickening figures so eventually I just had to check the central 20" and could know the pattern percentages from that. Now, I'm all done which is handy as I'm too old and knadgered to be chasing sheets of paper all over the farm.

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, wymberley said:

We must have been mad.

That's true!

6 minutes ago, wymberley said:

to be chasing sheets of paper all over the farm.

The whole exercise was much harder than I expected, but it did confirm in my mind that with those (pretty standard 1 oz loads for the times) cartridges and my (again very typical fairly open chokes) barrels - everything was behaving by the rules (apart from the paper in the wind!)

Edited October 8, 2020 by JohnfromUK

[wymberley]

I wasn't quite so lucky. 90% of my shooting was in a pigeon hide and I preferred shorter barrels and 2 triggers. I found that 25/26" barrels seemed to need more nominal choke that that normally specified to achieve the actual patterns that I preferred.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

I wasn't quite so lucky. 90% of my shooting was in a pigeon hide and I preferred shorter barrels and 2 triggers. I found that 25/26" barrels seemed to need more nominal choke that that normally specified to achieve the actual patterns that I preferred.

But that can only be in your mind!

[London Best]

2 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

That's true!

The whole exercise was much harder than I expected, but it did confirm in my mind that with those (pretty standard 1 oz loads for the times) cartridges and my (again very typical fairly open chokes) barrels - everything was behaving by the rules (apart from the paper in the wind!)

I think the secret is to use an iron pattern plate and whitewash, mark the circle with a bit of wood with two nails fifteen inches apart, shoot one, draw circle and count, then write score down in a note pad. Whitewash and go again.

2 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

But that can only be in your mind!

Yep!

[Old farrier]

6 minutes ago, London Best said:

I think the secret is to use an iron pattern plate and whitewash, mark the circle with a bit of wood with two nails fifteen inches apart, shoot one, draw circle and count, then write score down in a note pad. Whitewash and go again.

Yep!

That’s fine for lead 

however we’re moving on and I’m not convinced it’s going to be the best or safest policy for some of the non toxic loads 

 

anyone know what the pellet counts are for steel shot? 
40 yards 30 inch circle 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

How long till someone is seriously injured by the bounce back of a soft iron load fired at a steel pattern plate?

[London Best]

5 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

That’s fine for lead 

however we’re moving on and I’m not convinced it’s going to be the best or safest policy for some of the non toxic loads 

 

anyone know what the pellet counts are for steel shot? 
40 yards 30 inch circle 

More than lead, that’s all that matters.

[wymberley]

23 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

But that can only be in your mind!

I would suggest that it is printed in lead and white on several hundred pattern sheets over the years.

[Old farrier]

13 minutes ago, London Best said:

More than lead, that’s all that matters.

Not really I’m sure there’s a mathematical equation to calculate the amount of strikes required to give a humane kill 

anyone know 

number of strikes needed at 40 yards 

number 5 steel shot 

28 grams 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

3 minutes ago, wymberley said:

I would suggest that it is printed in lead and white on several hundred pattern sheets over the years.

If a pair of barrels with the same internal dimensions as another pair of barrels are shot with the same cartridges through the same degree of choking then the only difference can be the couple of inches difference from the muzzle to the pattern plate.

The powder has done its work over the first 9 or 10 inches of the barrel, the propelled load goes through parallel walled barrels and then the choke does its job.

 

I can't see why a shorter pair of barrels would throw a noticeably different pattern.

[Shotkam]

I only ever look at:

1 - Point of impact - to give rough indication of gun fit.

2 - Pattern density to determine if there are gaps that a  a) belly up or b) edge on clay to pass through or c) live quarry of whatever species is pursued.

I then have a schedule of suitable cartridges that suit a particular discipline for each shotgun.

I have used steel plate white and paper secured with 4 x 4" nails pushed through predrilled holes in the steel plate.

Now have some great data on a spreadsheet, which is easily accessible.

 

[Smokersmith]

35 minutes ago, London Best said:

More than lead, that’s all that matters.

How so?

[wymberley]

16 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

If a pair of barrels with the same internal dimensions as another pair of barrels are shot with the same cartridges through the same degree of choking then the only difference can be the couple of inches difference from the muzzle to the pattern plate.

The powder has done its work over the first 9 or 10 inches of the barrel, the propelled load goes through parallel walled barrels and then the choke does its job.

 

I can't see why a shorter pair of barrels would throw a noticeably different pattern.

That's your problem not mine.

[Scully]

41 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

How long till someone is seriously injured by the bounce back of a soft iron load fired at a steel pattern plate?

Why does it have to be a steel pattern plate? I’m assuming folk will just make the transition to cardboard or wood. 

[Old farrier]

2 minutes ago, Scully said:

Why does it have to be a steel pattern plate? I’m assuming folk will just make the transition to cardboard or wood. 

It’ll be full of holes 

so you’re back to a sheet of paper 🙄

[Scully]

17 minutes ago, Shotkam said:

I only ever look at:

1 - Point of impact 

2 - Pattern density 

 

 

This is all I’m interested in. Primarily where the shot pattern prints in relation to my muzzle, and how tight that pattern is. 

Just now, Old farrier said:

It’ll be full of holes 

so you’re back to a sheet of paper 🙄

Exactly. I can’t see the issue. 
When target shooting all we ever did was staple another target atop the previous one. 🤷‍♂️