Sorry not trying to belabor the discussion but I have been following this thread with great interest as well as the one with Jerry Harlowe and his #9 turkey tungsten shot reloads on a different thread (still blown away that size #9 anything could kill a turkey at 50+ yards from a shotgun). Have also yet to see first hand an atom split in a fission process but understand it can make a hell of an explosion and willing to take someones first hand experience word on it. Hats off to Todd Allen and his partner to tinker with it and tell us what they find. Its like that old show Mythbusters that I enjoyed.
I almost mentioned this the other day. Technically speaking person can probably throw a 1 ounce hunk of lead and hit a bird and kill it at about 10 to 15 feet away, maybe further. Apply that same logic to a single grain of sand and at same distance and that projectile would need to probably go 10,000 mph(pure guess) to kill the same bird. With that being said there are obvious limits on what smaller shot can do given the velocities and the mass of it fired from a shotgun. Also amazed table salt can kill flies using a table salt gun.
Obviously there are things that work well and don't work well depending on the specific performance and intended uses and given circumstances. Like Dean mentioned and maybe paraphrasing, but sometimes just because they did certain things back then doesn't mean it was the best practice but through trial and error found it worked for them in a limited capacity and they regularly employed it. Dare say it would even be hard to argue with them. However history is fraught with good thoughts, bad ideas and learned this one from a man with a PHD in Medieval Literature from Edinburgh and his hometown is Tullahoma Tennessee. Go figure.
Tom's old timer market hunters as described used small shot for close birds in dense cover, as gathered, so that shot would not tear up the game for sale as opposed to larger shot. They were hunting for a different pot. They also weren't gambling but were probably reasonably minded and confident in looking to get best result given parameters they had to work with. Is it the best practice today, maybe and maybe not but it met their needs and demands back then, right, wrong or indifferent. Does it make sense now, keeping an open mind, but probably not, unless they also used tungsten filings.
Sure I am probably getting this wrong but recall a handgun shooting instructor telling me years ago it takes about 600 to 800 foot pounds of energy in center mass to stop an average built man. Most handguns produce about between 200 to 500 feet pounds of energy per round, excluding 44 magnum that produces 850 lbs per round. Thinking is that unless your really good at shooting that 44 and handle recoil and are accurate, then its better to shoot a smaller caliber weapon accurately with less recoil with ability to place rounds close to same spot for more devastating impact. Getting two to three rounds in close proximity at 300 ft pounds of energy combined is proven to be more devastating an injury than say just one round from 44 magnum. Would hate to try an live on the difference but that is according to experts.
I think shotgun pellets work the same except your just need a lot more of their combined energy released. Again how many foot pounds of energy in one or more pellets does it take to harvest a bird and what is the energy difference per se between a #10 shot and #7.5 shot and at what distance does typical game load lead shot per size start losing effectiveness. Guessing but think Todd Allen maybe telling us, or not.
|