Game Shooting - Does cartridge velocity have a significant effect over 40 yards on the effectiveness of a 20 gauge cartridge ?

[wymberley]

45 minutes ago, Scully said:

Talking of ‘gel’, an article in ST states that BASC claims steel shot works just as well as lead when you move down a couple of sizes, and that the head of lethality studies ( who’d have thought ?) at Cranfield University stated that up to 50 yds, lethality of ( steel I’m assuming ) shot has more to do with pattern than it’s capacity to penetrate! 

It is, yes. 👍

The clue is Shrivenham

Edited November 15, 2021 by wymberley

[Scully]

56 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Sadly it wasn’t fired out of a traditional English game gun weighing 6.1/2 pounds 

or he would have had a different view on the cartridges tested and loose fillings in his teeth 

personally don’t wish to shoot pheasants with a Wildfowling gun 

on the plus side at least they are doing some testing 

Ah, I see. The article didn’t mention that. 🙂

[TIGHTCHOKE]

49 minutes ago, wymberley said:

The clue is Shrivenham

Yes indeed!  

[wymberley]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Talking of ‘gel’, an article in ST states that BASC claims steel shot works just as well as lead when you move down a couple of sizes, and that the head of lethality studies ( who’d have thought ?) at Cranfield University stated that up to 50 yds, lethality of ( steel I’m assuming ) shot has more to do with pattern than it’s capacity to penetrate! 

 

1. Energy plays no part in the formula for the calculation of shot penetration into ballistic gel.

2. It seems that BASC has finally adopted the tricks from the opposition; it is sad that they've turned them on us:

"Table 2 shows that at 40 yards the steel pellets penetrated on average 4mm further than the lead equivalents. At 50 yards, the lead pellets penetrated on average a little further than the steel pellets. In the opinion of Stephen Champion from Cranfield University, both pellet types still had the penetrative energy to consistently kill pheasant-sized quarry at both these ranges if there was a sufficient pattern."

It's not 4mm, but 3.6 and the "little further" at 50 yards is actually 4.9mm. Have they been taking lessons from WJ?

3. If two pellets deposited the same amount of lethal energy, the smaller one's energy is more lethally effective.

4. It would seem that the "Key findings from the Cranfield University study" have been translated into BASCese. 

[Shotkam]

7 hours ago, wymberley said:

Don't let me put you off from what you're doing. After all, I have always done the same with a change in gun or cartridge but at a more limited level and have enjoyed doing so - it's all part of shooting for me - but I prefer to accept the more normally tried and accepted limits. 

The reason that you see those failings is simply because you are approaching the limit of a shotgun's capability. Yes, 50, 55 and even 60 yards is feasible but not perhaps with the load or calibre that you are suggesting. You will have to revert to the gel to get an accurate penetration/energy assessment. Whose figures have you chosen to use, which gel mix percentage -  and have you taken the boundary layer into account? With regard to pattern, the plate will give you the answers that you need. You even have a choice. You can either pattern at your chosen maximum range or at, say, 40 yards. At one time, some 10% was always added to cater for shot string, but modern technology reflects that this is not necessary unless you're looking at, or in excess of, some 50 yards. Consequently, the maximum range option would save a load of additional work. You're just going to need a bigger plate. As you're now at a range where every little helps - especially as fibre wads have been mentioned - why a 12 bore load in a 20 bore? The one big element for pattern quality/degree is the damage suffered by those pellets in contact with the wall as they travel down the barrel. Of the two calibres mentioned, which bore will suffer the most given the same load? Yep, nit picking now, but when pushing to the absolute limits everything needs to be taken into account. Some figures still in current use are somewhat dated. The Eley diary has been mentioned. See if you can find out why the "Effective Range of Game cartridges" table was removed some years back.

Less is sometimes more in the bag.

2 0r 3 posters on here including yourself I recall have more data collated than my self and I have cherry picked slightly initially.

Folkstone and Clay and Game have been very helpfull..

10% gelatine recipe and for the boundary layer using skinned pheasant with the feathers intact.

No 6 theoretically have sufficient energy to 50 yards, maybe even 55 even using 3% antimony.

Only time will tell which load / choke combination gives the best pattern. 

I am 100% convinced I can load a more effective cartridge than anything I could source in the regular top end brands.

[Stonepark]

23 minutes ago, Shotkam said:

I am 100% convinced I can load a more effective cartridge than anything I could source in the regular top end brands.

That's why I reload with my 410, 21g no7 over a OPC and fibre wad with roll turnover.

 

Patterns 169 pellets in 30 inch circle at 35 yards with a light mod choke, compared to 136 pellets with Eley no 7 18g.

[8 shot]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

both pellet types still had the penetrative energy to consistently kill pheasant-sized quarry at both these ranges if there was a sufficient pattern."

Here endeth the debate. I've patterned 32g 3s at 50yds and your 15yds out of range 40yds is absolute max. in steel

Edited November 15, 2021 by 8 shot

[Shotkam]

8 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

That's why I reload with my 410, 21g no7 over a OPC and fibre wad with roll turnover.

 

Patterns 169 pellets in 30 inch circle at 35 yards with a light mod choke, compared to 136 pellets with Eley no 7 18g.

Perfect and impressive - Yes, you were one of the main contributors to my ambition of creating the perfect load.

[wymberley]

38 minutes ago, 8 shot said:

Here endeth the debate. I've patterned 32g 3s at 50yds and your 15yds out of range 40yds is absolute max. in steel

Your punctuation makes it a little difficult to be certain, but I think I may well agree with you although I know not for definite. You will have noted that the words that you quoted were not mine but those which I had also quoted. I remain unsure whether BASC has taken a bit of a liberty with the University report and whether they are as the University intended or are the BASC interpretation.

[MARSH GUN]

On 14/11/2021 at 16:15, motty said:

Yep. The ones that "consistently" kill 80 yard pheasants have a different definition of the word "consistently" to me! Ie, they are talking a load if old balls!

Perhaps They "consistently"  overestimate the  80 yard they kill pheasants at.?🤣

[wymberley]

10 hours ago, Shotkam said:

2 0r 3 posters on here including yourself I recall have more data collated than my self and I have cherry picked slightly initially.

Folkstone and Clay and Game have been very helpfull..

10% gelatine recipe and for the boundary layer using skinned pheasant with the feathers intact.

No 6 theoretically have sufficient energy to 50 yards, maybe even 55 even using 3% antimony.

Only time will tell which load / choke combination gives the best pattern. 

I am 100% convinced I can load a more effective cartridge than anything I could source in the regular top end brands.

Yep, and good luck.  Using quality components it is perfectly feasible. No one knows more about loading cartridges than the makers' ballisticians. It is unfortunate that they do not load their products - the accountants do. If by "effective" you mean a bag filler, I'm pretty sure you'll find that the fastest and the heaviest do not always, if ever, qualify and also that your preferred choice  may well just only apply to the gun that you used for the trials. 

[London Best]

11 hours ago, Shotkam said:

 

Only time will tell which load / choke combination gives the best pattern. 

 

Time has already reached a conclusion, but you seem to think that the last 150 years since choke was invented and countless millions of birds being shot count for nothing.

[wymberley]

11 minutes ago, London Best said:

Time has already reached a conclusion, but you seem to think that the last 150 years since choke was invented and countless millions of birds being shot count for nothing.

If old Father Time has, I wish he'd share it with us as we still can't manage to agree.  

[Scully]

6 hours ago, London Best said:

Time has already reached a conclusion, but you seem to think that the last 150 years since choke was invented and countless millions of birds being shot count for nothing.

🙂 Careful, you’re starting to think like me. 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Scully