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.
|
Threaded Mode