|
05-24-2018, 08:32 AM | #43 | ||||||
|
There is no foliage between that clay pigeon and the shot like there is with a grouse. I have had dense foliage prevent the shot from ever reaching the bird.
__________________
There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter...Earnest Hemingway |
||||||
05-24-2018, 08:52 AM | #44 | ||||||
|
Me too Rich..... or at least that's an excuse I use when the opportunity presents itself...
.
__________________
"I'm a Setter man. Not because I think they're better than the other breeds, but because I'm a romantic - stuck on tradition - and to me, a Setter just "belongs" in the grouse picture." George King, "That's Ruff", 2010 - a timeless classic. |
||||||
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dean Romig For Your Post: |
05-24-2018, 12:03 PM | #45 | ||||||
|
So true....that's one more reason to use fine shot. You have a much better chance of some getting through the thick stuff and finding its mark. This is one of the reasons that I always thought that 7 1/2 shot is a handicap. With 9's you have over 200 more shot working for you. Believe me, those extra pellets make a big difference in tight cover.
In my mind, the perfect grouse gun would be a 16 bore throwing and ounce of 9's or 10's. I haven't yet loaded 10's but I am going to get a bag for the fall. I used a 16 bore with both barrels cylinder for years. I considered it the perfect grouse gun but unfortunately is was a Specialty grade Smith. I sold it when I decided to use Parkers exclusively for all my hunting, But I do regret selling that gun. I wish I had it back. |
||||||
05-24-2018, 03:39 PM | #46 | ||||||
|
Hence the need for a higher energy pellet..... like a 7 1/2.
__________________
Wag more- Bark less. |
||||||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Daryl Corona For Your Post: |
05-24-2018, 04:50 PM | #47 | ||||||
|
The problem with grouse is they are grouse. I am certain the perfect grouse gun is in fact the next one.
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Brett Hoop For Your Post: |
05-24-2018, 05:26 PM | #48 | ||||||
|
I always thought my Smith lightweight 16 bore was the perfect grouse gun. I killed a lot of birds with that gun and even used it from time to time on early wild pheasants. But it wasn't a Parker so it had to go. I never found an appropriate Parker with cut barrels. I could have opened my chokes on the IC guns, but I would never do that.
With respect to larger pellets being better for shooting through brush, it just isn't so. No pellet can hit brush and stay on point of aim. I used to laugh when people talked about using brush buster calibers for deer. The theory was that a larger bore with a heavier slower bullet could shoot through brush while a smaller higher speed bullet couldn't. The pseudo experts long ago said that calibers like the .35 Remington were good in the east and calibers like the .243 for the west. They were full of applesauce. The .243 is a great deer caliber east or west. I have taken deer with the .243 while shooting many crop damage permit deer. We'd shoot them and then call the warden to come pick them up in the barn. I used many calibers from the .243 through .300 Winchester magnum, just to see how the different calibers stacked up. None of those calibers, including the .35 Remington, would shoot to point of aim if any obstruction whatsoever was hit. And so it is with shotgun pellets. A larger pellet, whatever the size, will never continue to point of aim if it hits an obstruction. What you need is a large number of fine shot. The more shot you put in the air, the better chance you have of some not being obstructed and shooting to the point of aim. |
||||||
05-24-2018, 06:05 PM | #49 | ||||||
|
Will let me tell you about a true story of a 2 woodcock hunters. these guys have been hunting together for years and shoot lot of skeet birds. one guy used a 28 ga 3/4 oz 7 1/2's he is the shooter in this story. they only shot at "high birds" as most seasoned woodcock hunters do. 1st hunters dog on point ,goes in for the flush , bird goes up high to get out of the foliage, takes his "safe" shot. At the shot hunter 2 gets knock off his feet 70yds away high up on a hill . Yes he was shot, after the fish and game did their investigation they could not believe that that shot happed," freak accident". the guy the got hit in the thick poplar thicket and dense foliage was hit with 52 7 1/2's. most from lower arm pits to belt line. F and G said shot must have been closer but they did the hole reenactment over found the proof that they were telling the truth. After that I always believed if you can see a bird in the woods you can hit that bird if you are on it. This story was not meant to pick on the shooter, just shows what shot can do in the woods. I just don't see trees eating all the shot.
scott
__________________
No man laid on his death bed and said,"I wished I would have worked more" |
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to scott kittredge For Your Post: |
05-24-2018, 06:24 PM | #50 | ||||||
|
Good story. But what I am dealing with in thick grouse cover is the law of averages. This tells me that the more shot you get in the air, the better the chance of some getting through to point of aim. That was an unfortunate incident, but I highly doubt any of those pellets hit any obstruction. They pellets that hit the hunter obviously found a hole in the cover to travel that far.
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Tom Flanigan For Your Post: |
|
|