Vintage shell pattern test
 

From Scott Kittredge:

"This pattern was shot with an old REM-UMC SHURSHOT paper 12 ga 3 drms 1oz #4, 132 pellets to an oz. This shell is about 40 to 50 years old. I shot it out of a 12 ga CHE acme barrels choked .022 at 40 yds rest shot. 115 out of 132 = 87%. So do the new shells shoot tighter or are the old ones just as good?"

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/j...r/DSCF0003.jpg

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/j...r/DSCF0002.jpg

Pete,looks like a pretty good pattern. Kinda shoots a hole in the old adage about those paper shells...:rolleyes:

Sept. 7 1895 Sporting Life http://www.la84foundation.org/Sports.../SL2524016.pdf

Ed Taylor, of Cincinnati, for curiosity's sake, gave his light 12-gauge Yankee Smith gun a pattern trial at various distances the past week, his target being a 30-inch circle, his load 3 1/4 drams Troisdorf smokeless powder and 1 1/8 ounce No. 7 1/2 shot.
Here are the patterns made with the left barrel:
30 yards 395 pellets
(There are 388 U.S. 7 1/2 pellets in 1 1/8 oz., 400 English 7 1/2 so probably English size)
40 yards 333/ 400 = 83%
40 yards 325 = 82%
50 yards 230 = 57.5%
50 yards 230 = 57.5%

One would expect Scott's 4s to pattern tighter than 7 1/2s

I much prefer the old paper shells when hunting with my Parkers, as much for nostalgia as anything else. They kill just fine and smell right. It's a no brainer for me. I buy all the vintage papers I can find if the price is reasonable.

There is nothing new under the sun. In 1961, I bought a W&C Scott 16 gauge with 26" barrels actually marked full and full. I did not own a choke micrometer when I was 15 years old. The cheapest shells were 2 9/16", one ounce, paper low brass roll crimp loads with a cardboard top wad. Remington and Winchester loaded them and the retail price was $2.50 a box. I assume Federal loaded them too. From that gun, any of these loads in #6 shot patterned 90% at 40 yards in a 30" circle. The percentage never varied all the times I patterned that load.

Pete, did they go off on the first trigger pull or did you have to re-cock the gun a few times?

I've shot quite a bit of game, even ducks and geese, with paper shells and always found them to be plenty deadly. I've had some squibs too, but that's usually on really old stuff from the 20's or 30's. Don't remember ever having much trouble with anything made after the war.

Bill Murphy, this is an open question. You know we hear that the plastic full coverage shot cups are much more effective that the old cardboard wads in holding the shot string together and that these shot cups add a full increment of choke. Is this an old wive's tale? That old paper shell and cardboard wad shot a nice pattern.

I doubt that a plastic shot cup would have caused my old 16 gauge Scott to shoot more than a 90% pattern. I guess shot deformation is not that big a deal at reasonable ranges. We can easily throw patterns with plastic wad shells and compare them to the patterns shot with the same shells and the wad petals cut off. I don't think we're going to see much difference.

I've been watching Tom's strutting around here for almost a month and having decided to try my luck this year with a tightly choked VH 20 I went thru some old 20 gage shells I had and this is what I found. Rather than using modern 7 1/2's or 6's I think the vintage 5's having less pellets would pattern better through the .025 chokes.