# Argument dispute



## shorebound (Apr 26, 2008)

My buddy and I are not seeing eye to eye on a shooting topic.

The topic being shot patterns and chokes.
My argument is that a tighter pattern contains more kinetic energy then an open patters. He agrees with that...

However we're looking at penetration power. His argument is even though the pattern is tighter each pellet holds the same kinetic energy as that to a more open choke. My argument is the tighter patten holds more kinetic energy due to less gas escaping I.e. more force acting behind each shot. 

The scenario is using smaller shot with a tighter pattern for home defense as opposed to larger shot with a more open pattern for home defense. 

His thought is if one were to use smaller shot like 6,7 or 8 with a tighter pattern it would not hold enough energy to put an intruder down. You would have to use larger shot 2,4 or 6 buck with a more open pattern to efficiently put someone down. 
I think a xfull choke with smaller shot would punch right through he does not. Anyone what to chime in?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Agitation Free (Jul 11, 2010)

I think you and your buddy should have a couple of beers and agree that either load will put an intruder down in a home defense situation.  :Banane35:


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

Sounds like a good episode for Mythbusters.........


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I agree with your buddy

The penetration will equal the retained energy of each individual pellet, not a combined total of all pellets

A individual #8 shot just doesn't have enough mass for penetration. 

I don't want to be shot with either but give me a bunch of small shot versus a few heavy projectiles if I have to choose one


----------



## Fish_Heads (Jun 2, 2008)

Lundy said:


> I agree with your buddy
> 
> The penetration will equal the retained energy of each individual pellet, not a combined total of all pellets
> 
> ...


I have your answer for you!

Just last Tuesday my son & a friend were out behind my shop shooting clay pigeons.

When they were finished, I told them that I had several old style televisions that needed put down & they jumped at the chance.

They both shot them first with 20 ga # 7 1/2 low brass field loads from 25 feet away (one full choke & the other gun a modified) & both old tv's survived without breaking the glass, but both looked like they had been sprayed with a shower-head & had marks across the screens.

The next couple shots (same distance) were hi brass, one being #4 & the other being #6 shot & both tv's were taken down with big holes in the middle of the screen.

They were both surprised  that the 7 1/2's didn't break the glass, and were in awe what the difference that shot size made.

In conclusion, if you still want to watch an intruder, go with 7 1/2's, or shut them off for good with 6's or 4's !

Disclaimer: No current model tv's were harmed during the testing.

The old style tv's were given last rites & carried off in my bobcat to the dumpster.

Fish


----------



## viper1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Well i have been shot with rabbit loads at least twice. At 20-30 yds i had no penitration to my clothes. A couple struck my wrist and kind of clung but no blood. And no i dont hunt with either guy any more. I have shot geese even with the heavier loads and not knocked them down sometimes. But the heavy load actually will shove one in the air. Me id use 2-4 shot for that.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2


----------



## jonnythfisherteen2 (Mar 5, 2011)

viper1 said:


> Well i have been shot with rabbit loads at least twice. At 20-30 yds i had no penitration to my clothes. A couple struck my wrist and kind of clung but no blood. And no i dont hunt with either guy any more. I have shot geese even with the heavier loads and not knocked them down sometimes. But the heavy load actually will shove one in the air. Me id use 2-4 shot for that.
> 
> Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2


What?? your very lucky they werent any closer. what kind of hunters were these guys anyway?


----------



## Fish_Heads (Jun 2, 2008)

jonnythfisherteen2 said:


> What?? your very lucky they werent any closer. what kind of hunters were these guys anyway?


Prolly politicians...........Dick Cheney comes to mind..........

http://tinyurl.com/Cheney-hunting-incedent


----------



## viper1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Well both older guys about 40-50. One leading a running rabbit said he didnt see me. It happens! The other new rabbit hunter shotting at a rabbit and i was behind some high grass. He didnt know where i was because he was moving around instead of staying put. Both were we were hunting with beagles.


----------



## M.Magis (Apr 5, 2004)

It's important to note that the pattern and choke make no difference what so ever. It's the kinetic energy carried by the greater mass of the large pellets that makes the difference.


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

M.Magis said:


> It's important to note that the pattern and choke make no difference what so ever. It's the kinetic energy carried by the greater mass of the large pellets that makes the difference.


ditto.look at it this way,try throwing a piece of crumpled up paper in the shape of a ball.now try to throw a baseball with the same force.which goes farther,hits harder? that said though,unless you live in a bowling alley,7s or 8s is going to put somone down in close quarters,and may even be better then 00 because it has less chance of going through the wall and hitting your loved one sleeping a few rooms down.


----------



## Mr. A (Apr 23, 2012)

tadluvadd said:


> ditto.look at it this way,try throwing a piece of crumpled up paper in the shape of a ball.now try to throw a baseball with the same force.which goes farther,hits harder? that said though,unless you live in a bowling alley,7s or 8s is going to put somone down in close quarters,and may even be better then 00 because it has less chance of going through the wall and hitting your loved one sleeping a few rooms down.


I completely agree with Tadluvadd! Likkely distance for self defense is 21' or less. While rock salt within that distance, from a shot gun will pick a grown man up off his feet and deposit him on his arse, I would I would go with 7s or 8s as well as stated above for the same reasons!

Mr. A

(2013)
SMB: 0 LMB: 0 
Catfish: 0 Bluegill: 0 
Other: 0


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

I've shot squirrels with 7 1/2 before and had several pellets just below the skin, I've also shot several squirrels with 4's and they blew right thru the tree rats... Conclusion.. You owe your buddy a beer


----------



## Lewzer (Apr 5, 2004)

KE=½ mv² where m =mass and speed =v.

The question is what is the speed of a 2 shot vs an 8 shot? Does an 8 shot travel that much faster than a 2 shot to compensate for the greater mass of a 2 shot? Obviously it doesn't.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Mr. A said:


> . While rock salt within that distance, from a shot gun will pick a grown man up off his feet and deposit him on his arse,
> 
> Mr. A


Only in the movies, not in real life.


----------



## firstflight111 (May 22, 2008)

shorebound said:


> My buddy and I are not seeing eye to eye on a shooting topic.
> 
> The topic being shot patterns and chokes.
> My argument is that a tighter pattern contains more kinetic energy then an open patters. He agrees with that...
> ...


I have a loaded 12 ga with 3.5 in 2s . i will split someone in half for sure [email protected] And if that does not stop them i got some 00 buck behind that them BBB's behind that .and if they still come after that well out come's the 45 ..


----------



## shorebound (Apr 26, 2008)

Well thanks for all the input. I got some 3" high brass bb load that will be going in the 5 round mag for the bed side. Thanks again for helping settle it


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Workdog (Jan 10, 2007)

Fish_Heads said:


> Prolly politicians...........Dick Cheney comes to mind..........


And, not to forget Joe _Bite-me, shoot thru the door, shoot off the balcony, women pee in your pants in case of rape_ Biden... 

http://freebeacon.com/biden-just-fire-the-shotgun-through-the-door/

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/38482-humorous-women-take-joe-bidens-buy-a-shotgun-advice/


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Workdog said:


> And, not to forget Joe _Bite-me, shoot thru the door, shoot off the balcony, women pee in your pants in case of rape_ Biden...
> 
> http://freebeacon.com/biden-just-fire-the-shotgun-through-the-door/
> 
> http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/38482-humorous-women-take-joe-bidens-buy-a-shotgun-advice/


Yeah, just like Oscar Pistorius!


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

montagc said:


> The gas doesn't push the shot, it pushes the wad, so that argument is flawed. Unless the tighter pattern is moving faster, both shots have the same KE. On an open pattern the shot is spread out, so the damage at impact is spread across a wide area, making it appear to be less powerful. A tighter choked shot will put more pellets on the same area causing a much smaller but more heavily damaged area, which would make the tighter choked shot appear more powerful.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


nope.
the gases pushes the wad-----which is loaded with shot.so it is still pushing a heavier load after it leaves the wad. it would be like saying the charge doesent push a deer slug,it pushes the wad behind it.this is why tungsten shot extends range,and has more knockdown power then lead.[its heavier then lead]this is also why lead shoots farther,penetrates better then steel and so forth.the total wieght of the shot load is the same.but each pellet in that load is like a mini deer slug.and the wieght of each little pellet DOES AFFECT KE on each bb soon after it leaves the barrel.your explanation is correct but only a few yds after it leaves the muzzle while the shot still in the wad.if i had more time,id post graphs on how shot type and SIZE affects speed,KE,and distance along with penetration.i studied this for a while,because i load my own shells plus i have a black powder shotgun.and shot loads,make all the difference.


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

I did read your post thank you.I was referring to your comment on the wad. its not rocket science,even though some folks like to make everything out to be.lets keep it simple----a sheet of plywood at 30yds.shoot it with 4s. now take another sheet of wood and shoot it with 7s or even 6s. USING THE SAME GRAMS OF POWDER.measure avg.penetration of EACH PELLET.I could post some of the data I have made myself(,every combo you can imagine) but wont waste my time for sake of argument.folks that want to know can just google,and even most shot shell manufacturers list how shot size IN THE SAME POWDER CHARGE affects KE ,FPS, and even penetration.by the way,doesent mass = weight?


----------



## viper1 (Apr 13, 2004)

I would just look at law enforcement for the answer. Nothing but Buck shot in their guns. And that's after studies to determine what your arguing about. As long as I can remember buck shots been the choice. Simply because the most mass traveling takes the most to stop= more damage. Small shot wont do that no matter what your thoughts are. If it did pros would use it. Thats all the proof I need.


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

I give up.lol.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Nope.







Just wanted to say that.


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

Mass & velocity determine kinetic energy. A greater mass at the point of impact has the ability, or momentum...to continue doing work. 

An example everyone can probably relate to is a fast arrow vs. a heavy arrow....vs. the shoulder of a deer.

A light arrow delivered at high speed looks great on paper, until it hits a shoulder bone. A slower, heavier arrow has the ability to continue through the bone easier, thanks to its greater mass. Object in motion tends to stay in motion, or so I'm told. More mass in motion equals greater penetration once it meets resistance.

The ability for a projectile to move forward once meeting resistance is a function of mass.

At shotgun velocity, the heavier, i.e. larger projectile has the ability to penetrate further. 



If velocity exceeds a certain threshold, different characteristics come into play...but that's another discussion.


----------



## leupy (Feb 12, 2007)

I don't know how so many smart people can argue over this, I am not getting envolved, I will load with #4 buck (27 pellets) the shot ring at 21 ft. is still only about 6-8 inches and yes you can miss. I won't!


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

If the discussion is 27 pellets vs. 4, the difference is substantial.



What happened if Dick Cheney got hit with 00 in the face?


----------



## fallen513 (Jan 5, 2010)

To be fair, there are some interesting dynamics at play. At CQB range, the terminal ballistics are going to be similar on raw flesh. Rarely would an assailant be naked though.

Throw a fat jacket & sweater into the mix, and there is a clear winner. 

Indoors, frangible .223 is king in a long gun. Devastating cavitation due to velocity but limited secondary penetration due to mass. Without a doubt, shotguns represent the most commonly available implement that requires the least amount of skill to stop a threat. 


Unless you're using bird loads. 

(edit: plus ammo is cheaper, possible to find and easy to fill up yourself!)


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

Like i said,folks can keep it simple and try my test.that explains everything.[besides the rocket science] by the way,my nope comment wasent only directed to you,but other posts that was "flawed".and thanks for calling me a smart dude.my wife would start another argument with ya about that though though!lol


----------



## Muskarp (Feb 5, 2007)

tadluvadd said:


> nope.
> the gases pushes the wad-----which is loaded with shot.so it is still pushing a heavier load after it leaves the wad.


The propellant charge does not push the load after it leaves the barrel. The wad immediately begins to seperate from the charge upon exiting the barrel. If loads have equal total charge by weight (shot size and density have no bearing on this, only the number of pellets in the load) and equal propellant. They accelerate to the same speed after the charge is ignited. It's not a heavier load just because the shot size is larger or more dense. 

Greater shot size and higher density materials do RETAIN downrange energy at higher levels, but only because each individual started by carring more when exiting the barrel. Not because it somehow gained it.

Back to the original question. Will a tighter choke increase kinetic energy? A thighter choke will produce a tighter impact area which would have it appear "stronger". But each pellet is still hitting with the same force it would have out of a more open choke. In fact, too much constriction deforms soft pellets, which would lower aerodynamics of the effected pellets allowing for more drag and a faster decelaration and less kinetic energy in those pellets. Albeit minute and not really pertinant for home defense applications.

In your case however, I would want to use a round specifically designed for larger animals, not birds. Home defense chokes are better when they allow for dispersion of the shot. This allows the user to have a greater margin of error in a stressful situation. At 10' with a turkey choke your margin of error is what 6", with an open choke you'd have more like 12-18" to play with. Much better odds of good contact with your target in a fast developing, possibly poorly lite, close quarters situation.


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

Muskarp said:


> The propellant charge does not push the load after it leaves the barrel. The wad immediately begins to seperate from the charge upon exiting the barrel. If loads have equal total charge by weight (shot size and density have no bearing on this, only the number of pellets in the load) and equal propellant. They accelerate to the same speed after the charge is ignited. It's not a heavier load just because the shot size is larger or more dense.
> 
> Greater shot size and higher density materials do RETAIN downrange energy at higher levels, but only because each individual started by carring more when exiting the barrel. Not because it somehow gained it.
> 
> ...


pretty much what i said in earlier posts,but thanks for repeating it in different term.


----------



## Muskarp (Feb 5, 2007)

tadluvadd said:


> pretty much what i said in earlier posts,but thanks for repeating it in different term.



NOPE!

Just like everybody that you claimed were "flawed". While you went off on your explanation of material density, which BTW, is not what the OP asked about.


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

Muskarp said:


> NOPE!
> 
> Just like everybody that you claimed were "flawed". While you went off on your explanation of material density, which BTW, is not what the OP asked about.


Easy there killer. take some extra time and read all the quotes so you know what your talking about before you dish someone. the flawed comment wasent started by me.this is a friendly site.its time more people act like it.


----------



## viper1 (Apr 13, 2004)

tadluvadd said:


> Easy there killer. take some extra time and read all the quotes so you know what your talking about before you dish someone. the flawed comment wasent started by me.this is a friendly site.its time more people act like it.


Well yes it should be a friendly site! But at times not so much! But honestly there can never be much of an argument unless at least two are fueling the fire. LOL!
But no worry spring is close. This site is know for the arguments every winter. And nothing has changed.


----------



## Mr. A (Apr 23, 2012)

viper1 said:


> Well yes it should be a friendly site! But at times not so much! But honestly there can never be much of an argument unless at least two are fueling the fire. LOL!
> But no worry spring is close. This site is know for the arguments every winter. And nothing has changed.


I've seen the arguements. I think its cabin fever and boredom that causes it. I've gotten into my own as well. Then I remembered something my Dad used to tell me. He'd say:

"Boy, never argue with a fool. Cause from 10 feet away no one else can tell who is who."

I gotta keep that in mind more! 

Mr. A

My name is Mr. A. I haven't had a bite in 3.5 months or a fishing thought in 3.5 seconds. I'm having withdrawls and it ain't pretty.


----------



## Muskarp (Feb 5, 2007)

tadluvadd said:


> Easy there killer. take some extra time and read all the quotes so you know what your talking about before you dish someone. the flawed comment wasent started by me.this is a friendly site.its time more people act like it.


I give up. 

#27


----------



## tadluvadd (Feb 19, 2012)

montagc said:


> Yeah, I was the one who went on about material density and said "flawed." Oh well. I caught fish yesterday, lol.
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


better then me,i havent even been out,or even got my license yet.work sucks!


----------



## Muskarp (Feb 5, 2007)

tadluvadd said:


> better then me,i havent even been out,or even got my license yet.work sucks!


Your not missing anything. I hit AC today. Pulled 1 13" crappie. Never caught another. Wind was a bear for boat control when finesse fishing. Ended up riding her back to the spot I caught her and releasing her. Just cause she was busting with eggs.


----------

