Reduced recoil vs low recoil

jcutonilli said:

I am not trying to argue we have a perfect way to simulate gunshot wounds. I am arguing that 12 inches of ballistic gel is not a reliable way to determine incapacitation from a gunshot.

If you are likely to need more than one shot how does a shooting that likely has one shot really prove anything?

While not missing is the best solution, it is not a realistic one for most people, which is why over penetration can be important.

Click to expand...

Ever wonder if there was a reason that the only people who recommend bird shot for SD are internet nobodies?

danb said:

Ever wonder if there was a reason that the only people who recommend bird shot for SD are internet nobodies?

Click to expand...

Ever wonder why you cant support your argument with facts?

jcutonilli said:

Ever wonder why you cant support your argument with facts?

Click to expand...

Get out in the field, shoot some mammals, then get back to me. Or birds. try that maybe for a start.

danb said:

Get out in the field, shoot some mammals, then get back to me. Or birds. try that maybe for a start.

Click to expand...

How does that demonstrate

danb said:

"that the only people who recommend bird shot for SD are internet nobodies?

Click to expand...

I am not sure anyone is suggesting bird shot would be effective at typical hunting range distances (except birds).

Paul Harrell has produced several videos on the subject. Clint Smith does not discount it either. Are they nobodies?

Muleskinner said:

When I was in the military we actually tested the spread and pattern of buckshot as it was important in a shipboard defensive issue. Shotguns were our primary weapon in case of boarding by terrorists or enemy combatants. Our shotguns were 18" 870s and Mossberg 500s. We used Remington standard velocity 2 3/4 00 buck. We studied the average distance that such a shooting would take place internal to the ship and found that it was about 7 yards (the average home defense shooting is 7 feet). The shotguns all had fixed cylinder bores. At 7 yards the average spread was around 6.5 inches. So at the average home defense range of seven feet the average spread would be well under that...probably less than 3 inches.

We also tested other types of shells to experiment with possible alternatives. The spread distance didn't change that much. Why would you discount a load of bird shot with a 3 inch spread at 7 feet as ineffective? Because it doesn't have enough velocity to penetrate?

Click to expand...

Larger diameter shot at the same velocity has more killing power because its heavier per pellet. Just like a bowling bowl will crush a limb while a golf ball will not when dropped from the same height.
I noticed your shipboard experiment to be nearly in direct alignment with published information from about three or more decades earlier thanks for posting that information. It seems as if the experiment you had done was previously studied with determinations supported with a basis and then by mathematics well before you tube. Turner Kirkland did the same thing but in a slightly different way for laymen. Fadala may have written on the same subject I dont have his book anymore with the subject matter.
One thing that is interesting is that with BP shotguns it is already known that an increase in velocity generally opens patterns up. Whelen did the same thing by adjusting patterns in smokeless shotguns for different diameter shot at different velocities by altering choke constrictions to have the same percentage of hits as longs as recoil could be managed and a sufficient hold maintained.
Modern designers such as Muller have reached conclusions through experimentation that diameter or choke constriction is not as important as finish and that its material structure that turn previous findings on their head. His chokes are known as close a little farther and the way out or something crazy like that. ( consequently Muller worked with my godfather on the Hubbell telescope and we all know how that went at least he wasnt responsible for it coming down just going into orbit lol)
Askins wrote in the mid to late 50's about what you guys were doing but at farther distances and the effect of buckshot on midsize beasts, pellet count and average of hits with varying velocities. He also did the same thing with pellet energy and number of hits to down winged critters such as geese, crows or magpies and turkeys that are backed by mathematical formula and in an environment of varying air density the biggest killer of velocity as well as actual field conditions with targets in flight.
Whelen's thesis delves into change in pattern with the spread of non buffered buck shot but neither his nor Askin's work are mentioned together for collaborative effort even though publication occurred nearly at the same time as far as that goes in terms of years.

I tested a number of OO buck loads at both speeds. The 1100 fps loads would shoot into about 12 inch patterns at 25 yards. The 1300 fps loads would be 25 inches wide. The faster loads deform the big shot more than the lighter loads. I did not test the Flite Control loads as 12 inches at 25 yards is OK with me.

Different shotguns gave slightly different patterns so test them in yours. All were tested with Cylinder chokes.

The #4 buck loads are OK for under 15 yards in home defense.