Square Loads = Better Performance?

[Todd Poer]

Just wondering what the consensus thought was regarding square loads and pattern performance. Factory loads are one thing buy years ago when I was reloading I had read that the British were a firm believer of square loads to try and eliminate stringing issues. This was when lead shot was used for everything and before steel shot was mandated for waterfowl.

I thought there is something to it and always tried to square the loads when reloading but was not thoroughly convinced. I figured rightly or wrongly more shot in pattern was good no matter if it was a stationary target or moving target. Giving it some thought more shot in pattern for a turkey is probably a great thing. I also think that it is not too bad an issue on shot stringing for targets going away like trap or flushing game. Shot stringing is maybe a real issue for moving crossing targets but I have yet to see a modern study relating to squaring the loads as a partial cure for shot stringing. This article makes sense but as it states it still is against mainstream factory load thinking.

http://www.sidebysideshotgun.com/articles/balance_loads_article.html

Here is also a video of shot stringing by gun nuts.

https://www2.bing.com/videos/search?q=field+and+stream+shotgun+string+video&view=detail&mid=E59129CEFD4E81A4F71DE59129CEFD4E81A4F71D&FORM=VIRE

[Kirk Mckinney]

I like the concept....I watched the video and read the article. Wow... I had no ideal that some pellets went faster than others in the same shot...well maybe a little but 13 ft....thats a lot isnt it ??

[Bruce Day]

Bob Brister The Art and Science of Shotgun shooting remains the premier work on the subject.

Several things I have concluded with much shooting.
1. The best performing loads for each gauge are the nominal ones; 1 1/8 for 12, 1 for 16, 7/8 for 20, etc.

2. The concept of a true square load is that the height of the shot column equals its diameter. I know of no real evidence that this concept means a better load nor does it make sense to me that it would. It just sounds nice.

3. The best velocities are from about 1150 to 1200 for the nicest pattern.

4. Overloading shot beyond optimum for the gauge results in stringing, which may be beneficial in a crossing target. For a straight away target I don’t think it makes any difference.

5. Underloading shot results in holes in the pattern.

6. Too much velocity , much above 1200, can result in a hole in the center of the pattern.


You asked about a square load. I said what is really meant by that term, and to reiterate, I think it’s something the writers in the shooting magazines talk about without showing test results and that is without basis.

[Todd Poer]

I guess its a chicken and egg discussion.

Found this article that backs up some of what you are saying Bruce. However it talks about stringing caused by choke patterns, shot deformation due to charges and soft material. I find it hard to correlate that load shape like the British discuss in squaring the loads. Would object of squaring the load suffice regardless of choke patterns, charges and material in itself make things pattern better, or does addressing the those issues just get close to a square load. Btw Bruce does Brister mention square loads.

https://shotgunreport.com/2014/04/29/shot-string-2/

[Chuck Bishop]

What Bruce said!

[Todd Poer]

Oh Lawdy. Did a little more perusing and came across this thread in shotgunworld forum from about 10 years ago talking about square loads. Lots of good debate and them boys played rough with one another.

Again nothing definitive but I did like the discussion about how well 16 ga and 28 ga perform at 1 oz and respective 3/4 oz loads as these two gauges seem pattern well and have less shot string. Anyway. Sounds like it is a healthy debate and you can read their discussion if so inclined. I swear if some of those guys would have been in same room it would have come to fisticuffs if they talked that way in person.
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=108317&sid=4ad76a5560972f3e98ed2688ede03c80&start=20

[Pete Lester]

Whether they are square or not I really like light loads. In 12ga I like to shoot clays with 7/8 ounce of shot at about 1200. At the 16 yard line in trap I have not seen a change in my score but there is a big change in felt recoil and a bag of shot goes a lot further. For crow shooting 1 ounce in 12ga and 1 1/8 in 10ga will knock the tall ones down nicely with a tight choke. A 1 1/4 ounce load of bismuth in a short ten will flatten any duck to 40 yards and little more. I have been sold on light loads for quite awhile.

[William Davis]

Agree with Pete, advantages of light shot loads loads are significant and easily demonstrated, “square” am not so sure.

William

[Daryl Corona]

Same here Pete. Being a handloader like you I've gone to 3/4oz. loads in 12, 16, 20 and of course 28 and have been very pleased at the performance on birds and clays. Are they for everyone? Probably not because of the mindset that exists in the American shooter; you know... bigger is better. I believe that the loads that Parker suggested for the various gauges were at a time when they needed more shot in a load to perform on the pattern plate. The components available to us now are far superior and lighter loads perform so efficiently especially with tight chokes.
A few years back at Hausmann's I was talking with Morris Baker of RST fame and we were talking light loads. He reached into his pocket and handed me a few of his newest loads, 3/4oz 12 ga. which were in the development stage at that time. I reached into my vest and handed him a couple of my 3/4oz. 12 ga. loads which were also in development. Coincidence I guess but his claim was that he has'nt found a target that he could'nt break with it. I agree.

[Todd Poer]

Lots of variables to consider or not at all. I think this issue I broached is almost like talking about caliber and load performances in rifles, which is a very circular discussion.

I think only reason Brister tried to understand it, as suggested by others, is he was seeking competitive greatness at the skeet range. I think that and a passing game shots, which the British predominately have, is the crux of the issue. I think before modern technology of slow mo photography trial and error was the only way and the Brits simplified it by saying square the load for better performance. Obviously other cause and effect issues at play.

What I gleaned from sources is that with lead shot, shot stringing can reduce pattern efficiency by 25 to 30 percent at normal ranges. That makes a difference at passing shots like at skeet range or dove and duck hunting to my thinking. Flushing game or maybe even trap shooting and having to manage shot stringing or net effect squaring the load is not a big deal, hence no one really cares. Shoot what you got.

What I did learn and suspect many here already knew is that even so called experts are left scratching their head why 16 gauge and 28 gauges perform better with patterns and less shot stringing. To them applying all the principles they learned they can't explain it, its like saying a bumble bee should not be able to fly, but yet it does and quite well.

Funny thing is I am sitting right next to a box of Winchester AA Supersport Sporting Clays loads 12 gauge, 1 oz 8 shot, 2 3/4 inch shells with a velocity of 1350 fps. I also have box of 16 gauge, 1 oz 8 shot, 2 3/4 inch shells with 2.5 dram equivalent so not certain on how many feet per second that equates to. Anyway, would love to see a slow motion camera of their performance through a modified choke. Obviously one is more square than the other.

[Todd Poer]

Same here Pete. Being a handloader like you I've gone to 3/4oz. loads in 12, 16, 20 and of course 28 and have been very pleased at the performance on birds and clays. Are they for everyone? Probably not because of the mindset that exists in the American shooter; you know... bigger is better. I believe that the loads that Parker suggested for the various gauges were at a time when they needed more shot in a load to perform on the pattern plate. The components available to us now are far superior and lighter loads perform so efficiently especially with tight chokes.
A few years back at Hausmann's I was talking with Morris Baker of RST fame and we were talking light loads. He reached into his pocket and handed me a few of his newest loads, 3/4oz 12 ga. which were in the development stage at that time. I reached into my vest and handed him a couple of my 3/4oz. 12 ga. loads which were also in development. Coincidence I guess but his claim was that he has'nt found a target that he could'nt break with it. I agree.

Very interesting. I read in some discussions regarding the physics of load columns. Seems it was understood that taller load shot columns on softer lead shot caused more shot deformity at hence more shot stringing. Which suggests it might not even be a square load issue but a mass issue, hence why 28 gauge even at 3/4 oz load is suppose to perform extremely well.

Agree with the US issue to solve certain problems, which obviously has mixed results. I love the old IBM commercial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZmHDEa0Y20

[Kirk Mckinney]

Newbie here. So I see according to the discussion and articles. It’s best to shoot magnum shot because it’s harder. Should one stay away from reclaimed shot ??? Since you really have no ideal what your getting and since it’s been shot once many pellets maybe already deformed before your shoot it ??? Thanks

[Todd Poer]

Kirk I am no expert but will share what I have learned. Depending on how you want to employ magnum shot in the field or at that range is the difference and how it is loaded n the shell. Cost/benefit variable beyond performance maybe a factor as well. Yes in theory and reality hard shot deforms less and is said to perform better with regards to pattern and shot string management. Same could be said for steel shot but I hate that crap and steer clear of it.

I have no experience at all with reclaimed shot so not much help there.

[Paul Harm]

At skeet ranges, 22yds or so, reclaimed shot doesn't hurt, for anything else I'd reload the magnum shot. I also shoot 3/4oz in the 12ga. The shorter the shot column with lead shot, the less deformation the back shot will have. There's less weight pushing against it. Also better patterns because more shot is staying round. I shot 1oz in the 10ga, and it smokes targets at any range. Well, at least out to 45yds or so, the farthest we throw birds. The shell manufactures for some reason boost the velocity when they go to lighter loads. Why they think most shooters can tell the difference in 1200 or 1300fps is be one me. A lot of guys on another reloading forum go to 1300fps when loading 3/4oz in the 12ga to reduce "hot core" type of patterns. I've found 3/4oz in a IC choked gun will break birds nice out to 40yds. A 12 bore is .729 and 1 1/8oz is .779 high, 1oz/.681, 7/8oz/.607, and 3/4oz/.52 high. So, 1oz and less is better than even the " sq. load ". Think how short the string and how less shot is deformed with a 3/4oz load in a 12ga. When FITASC went from 1 1/4oz to 1oz loads everyone thought scores would take a dive. They didn't, they stayed the same. People think 3/4oz in a 28ga gives such great patterns. Well, think how great they are in a 12 - much shorter shot column. JMHO's.

[Bruce Day]

Average skeet target scores decrease with decreasing bore diameter using standard loads. While my favorite gauge is the 16 it is an unsupported myth that there is something magical or unforeseen about the performance or the 16, 28 or any other gauge. It’s just more sporting magazine writer talk.

The subgauges may pattern good enough but they do not pattern as well or with the same density as a 12. The lesser carrying weight and lower moment of inertia of a subgauge gun may for many outweigh the small disadvantage of lesser pattern density. It does for me.

[Todd Poer]

Bruce there maybe something in what you say regarding discussions on 16 and 28 gauges. Sportswriters are like shock jocks on the radio creating controversy. I mean how much has been written about which is the best caliber and round. But it sells magazines and guns. There may or may not be anything to it, but maybe there is? I think Brister in his demonstrations alluded to it, but have not read his stuff thoroughly but will. Like any scientific experiment it needs to be corroborated by someone else to reproduce his findings and I have not seen something that clearly corroborates his work to date. Maybe because people think it has minimal impact to their shooting.

I think Daryl may have something though, with all things being relatively equal across all gauges, how does a 3/4 ounce load perform with pattern density and management of shot stringing. Obviously all those loads are going to have different shot column dimensions in the cartridges and hopefully have same style wads and shot cups. That might be an interesting test about shape or squaring of loads has a shred of correlation.

I think though most evidence indicates that patterns, shot stringing and shot columns (square load) are not clearly understood as to a correlation between the two or if it even exists. Bruce I think you alluded to this as well earlier.

Anyway not trying to create a debate, or promote one gauge or load over another, just pondering about it all. What I have learned is that it really is not that big a deal for stationary or linear moving targets, its the crossing targets or game that might have most regard to the issue.

[Kirk Mckinney]

Thanks Todd for the info. Seeing that you only save a couple dollars by buying reclaimed shot. I think I will just stick with new magnum shot. I have always liked light loads anyway so I should be set. Although when I play golf and the wind is blowing I have it to blame for my bad game. Lol. Reclaimed shot may give me a excuse for poor shooting but I guess I will just have to practice and practice. In golf they say practice doesn’t make you perfect it onlymakes permanent. Only perfect technique practiced makes perfect. Maybe I should get a lesson or two. Or get some tips from some accomplished shooters at the range. Paul I have 25 pounds of reclaimed now I will shoot it up and then the magnum and see. Have a good day.

[Todd Poer]

Only perfect technique practiced makes perfect. Maybe I should get a lesson or two. Or get some tips from some accomplished shooters at the range.

Kirk I got a PHD in the school of hard knocks when it comes to shooting at targets and missing game. But I got better with trial and error without much coaching. I posted about my experience before on forum but a few years back sort of lucked into a weekend of hunting and shooting with an Orvis shooting instructor by the name of Todd Rogers. He was part of a group that with Orvis they put out a book Guide to Gunfitting. Their premise though before even attempting a gunfit you should have proper fundamentals in shooting so first half of that book was dedicated to proper shotgun shooting technique. It mostly teaches and preaches on instinctual shooting methods. Here is a link.
https://www.amazon.com/Orvis-Guide-Gunfitting-Wingshooting-Fundamentals/dp/1592282164

I am firm believer in self help on this and if you want to shoot better you should read at least first part of book and then practice on the footwork, gunmount and so forth. Anyway I had Todd Rogers standing behind me a watched me shoot and bust 25 straightaway targets and he said good job but your doing it wrong. He broke it down for over two days and then when I went and read the book light really came on. I taught my two boys how to shoot off my experience and used that book as basis and they are pretty good shots. There are a few other good books on it but this one is fairly short and to the point and throws a lot out. Maybe even good to go back and read some sections to remind yourself when you start doing things wrong.

[Kirk Mckinney]

Great. I certainly will read it several times probably. Nothing like starting off on the right foot. Thanks you very much. It won’t go to waste. Have a great week.

[Kirk Mckinney]

Todd
I ordered that book. found a copy on amazon from a libary $7.95....but I also saw one Orvis guide to beginners to wing shooting...do you know anything about that one....I was wondering if it covered the same info? It appears to be from the same guy Tom Deck Thanks

[Todd Poer]

Kirk, I am not certain but it may, but maybe in not as much detail. I do remember they did try and create just a guide to wingshooting without the gunfit part but if this book is for beginners it might be a little too rudimentary. I like the one I referenced for you for a lot of different reasons because as I recall it talks about sight pictures and how to prepare and read shots at a range and in the field. There was a book that did have a picture of the guy taught me in it.

Gunfit part is not too important for me but it could be for others but I did enjoy reading about the process and how a gun should fit. I am about an average build guy so most guns fit me allright and/or I can figure how to adjust and account for slight variations, like Parker's as compared to modern guns.

Again there are good many books and articles on shotgun shooting but if you can learn and effectively employ the stuff in that book then you'll be way ahead of a lot shooters. I will say this, once you get yourself dialed in and programmed with process and muscle memory it will become second nature and you won't even think about shooting you will just do it and learn to focus on target and move body in concert. It is hard to explain but one of the greatest satisfactions I think in upland hunting or even at a range, is when it all comes together in an unconscious/conscious reflex and you just smoke the target cleanly in circumstances that sometimes that will just surprise you. Prime example is golf, and I am much better at shooting at the birdies than trying hit birdies, but if I don't think and just relax and swing the club, and do it right, its a similar feeling of everything coming together for that split moment.

Besides if not of that works then the video below will help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx0zC22C4RM

[Kirk Mckinney]

Thanks Todd.... well they are putting my book on a slow boat. But I certainly will read it when I get it....Thanks for the info.

See you in the field

[Kirk Mckinney]

Hilarious video....I think I have it down now !!!!!! lol

[Todd Poer]

Yeah man, if in doubt snake eye concentration and busting the target before shouldering the gun is the way. Believe it or not there is part of that clip thats partly true, I think imagining and breaking a shot down into components, especially in a controlled environment like skeet, trap or sporting clays helps. For crossing targets,sSet your stance on where you feel comfortable to hit target or when you want to pull the trigger, slightly turn body toward where target comes from and watch the target as it it comes out and mount the gun while watching the target and swinging your body. As soon as you mount the gun to right spot on shoulder and cheek and watching target just pull the trigger and keep the gun moving. Simple concept but results vary.

That was a funny movie.