Do Chokes really matter with todays Modern Ammo....with the shot still in the cup when exiting the barrel, how much will that constriction at the end the tubes affect the pattern? Legit question to those that know more than me.

I suspect someone has done pattern testing using modern loads with cupped wads which are identical to the old loads. What are the results?

Ive tested sg16 wads agains fiber wads with all other variables the same. i didnt note much difference in paper patterns, velocity and pressure may differ, I dont know. i did accidentally stumble on a notable difference between hard and chilled shot. Since i believe Parker was using chilled to develop their patterns, maybe this has some bearing on the difference people describe with modern ammo?

Great exchanges here, thanks to all who've contributed. I hope to read more thoughts and opinions.

I do want to be clear on a couple of points:

1. Gun fit is especially essential when shooting calls for quick shots (actually, it's important all the time, but, for example, on a dove field where I have time to adjust myself to a gun, I can get away with one that's not a perfect fit). As Chris already posted, I, too, can get away with shorter LOP when shooting with heavy clothing (ducks -- I rarely wear more than a shirt and vest while upland bird hunting). Remember, most of us are shooting guns not special ordered by us, but by folks from another era.

2. My choice of chokes is not to compensate for my shooting (Chris, you and I would get along well in the field), but rather is what I think is best suited to the conditions. When close shots are expected, no need to blow a bird up with a full choke pattern...when they get up at distances, I feel the need for the greater reach of a tighter choke.

My choice of choke is not based on my shooting prowess (or lack thereof:))

As for the issue of modern v. old shell "technology," I do believe that the improvements in contemporary shotshells make a difference in what chokes are best for a specific gun (just as some shot sizes pattern better with certain guns/chokes), although I admit I don't have first hand, authoritative knowledge of this. The paper tells the tale. Aaron may find other results in his tests, and I hope he'll continue to add to the discussion, but I recall a pretty persuasive essay by McIntosh that advocated for cylinder chokes.

At the distances I generally shoot, open chokes make clean kills and seldom ruin the meat.

I don't take long shots as a rule. I'm not sure if it's a matter of my misjudging the distances and thinking birds are farther than they are, or circumstance, but most of my shots are 30 yards and under (and often much under). So when I choose a tighter choke, it's more a matter of either wanting the extra shot to bring down a late season pheasant and/or needing a tighter pattern to reach out.

Again, I'm appreciative of the comments here and hope we'll get more folks to chime in.

I have read of instances, either here or in other publications/boards, about the surprising distances hunters/shooters have hit their targets with cylinder choked shotguns. It would be interesting to give an open choked, long barreled 12 to a shooter who prefers tight chokes, let them shoot a round of sporting clays with the gun and see what kind of results they might have without them knowing how the gun was choked. I would speculate that a very good shooter would have a very good round, despite how the gun was choked.

Distance is only one factor in choke selection. Speed, angle, and face are the others. A chandelle presentation (lots of face) at a basis L to R angle with a lot of spring can be broken at amazing distances with a Cyl or IC. As the target slows, the face diminishes, and or the angle increases the effectiveness of the Cyl and IC will decrease. Folks get focused on distance and that's only part of the equation.

Reggie I won't comment on how I would do with that long barreled open choked gun you referenced but I promise you I would know something was up with me or the chokes in short order, it's usually me :)

Good points all.

To clarify my point, hard shot will tighten a pattern and allegedly increase penetration both good things for longer range shooting with whatever choke you got left.

I guess my question is "If everything is equal - velocity, pressure, shot hardness, choke and any other variable you can think about, how does a cup affect the pattern". I would guess patterns will be tighter

Chokes
 

I was shooting in a sporting clays tournament and there were a group of us discussing chokes for particular stations that were challenging a lot of us shooters. And as were theorizing about choke selection and their effectiveness Andy Duffy walked up and began listening to the conversation. Maybe some of you have heard of Andy Duffy, he has won the NSCA national championship 3 times and the national FITASC championship 4 times. Andy probably knows a little about chokes and shotgun shooting. Well after a while Andy chimed in and said, you guys are talking about things that matter within inches and you're missing these targets by feet. Put the chokes in the gun that pattern well with the loads you're shooting and shoot them.
Of course, none of us really knew which loads patterned well with which chokes. And then he said the key was to shoot where the target (bird or clay) was going to be.
I've never forgot that; worried about inches and missing by feet.
To Reggie's point...

This topic can get quite cerebral. Non-enthusiast outsiders might consider it the stuff of an Aquinian colloquy, but it all adds to the joys and intrigue of shooting and gun ownership.

Aaron's post, as I understand it, is that after some experimentation he observed that chokes will alter a pattern as expected, and not render them modulated to the point of irrelevancy, when loading his shells using modern shot cups.

And do you remember the counter-intuitive arguments made about choke midway into the following thread -- one I am still transfixed by -- that choke OPENS a pattern?

https://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=33795

Here is as I understand it a distillation of the audaciously unconventional points that were advanced by two of our members whose prodigious Parker gun erudition is regularly shared on this Forum:

***************
Dean R.: I had a 16 ga. Lifter that had been cut back from 28” to 24” so it effectively had no choke. But that little gun could really account for itself on 35, 40 and longer yardage clay targets. I was always amazed by how this gun would smash targets waay out there.

***********
Edgar S.: "……An object at rest remains at rest, and an object in motion remains in motion at constant speed and in a straight line unless acted on by an unbalanced force."

Newton's First Law says to me that a cylinder bore will alter the direction and spread less than a choked bore. I have patterned a couple guns that have had their barrels cut to an extent that NO choke exists. I was amazed to see that the pattern is very much tighter than a lightly choked bore, up to a point where air resistance also begins to affect it.”

****************
Got that: “…a cylinder bore will alter the direction and spread less than a choked bore.”