Skychief said:
It begs the question (again, to me), why the old boys would tackle the question of patterns in this way, versus, patterning at usable ranges as we do today :hmm:
i see references which would seem to indicate that what they considered useable ranges are quite a bit further than we do.
From Markland, 1727:
"THERE SPRUNG a single Partridge_ha! she's gone!
Oh! Sir, you'd Time enough, you shot too soon;
Scarce twenty Yards in open Sight!_for Shame!
Y'had shatter'd her to Pieces with right Aim!
Full forty Yards permit the Bird to go,
The spreading Gun will surer Mischief sow;
But when too near the flying Object is,
You certainly will mangle it, or miss;"
From The Perfect Gun, Portugal, 1718:
“Good adjustment of the barrel consists of firing far with the hail-shot close together and this length that gives it esteem, until now the ultimate point to which art can cause a shot to go with undispersed ammunition, is
fifty paces, a well considered barrel being one which can fire the lead to this distance, for only to that point can the charge impel it with legitimate exactness,”
Why this might be so is puzzle I can't answer, but might be related to a couple of things. First, they were better shots, because they shot so much, and were trained to it all their lives. Second, they loaded much heavier than we do. Thomas Page in 1767:
"To a barrel of a middle-sized bore, whose diameter is about five-eighths of an inch (which I look upon to be the best size for shooting flying) [.625", a modern 20 ga.] I put in two ounces of shot, No. 4, [equivalent to #5 1/2 modern American shot] which are about 200 in an ounce, and an equal measure of powder. [4 1/2 dram/123 gr.] This is the charge I use in the field."
Sir Thomas Frankland, 1801:
"That you may not suppose I recommend high loading, I must explain myself more fully, by observing that if a man expects to get fifteen or twenty shots in a day, it will be of no advantage to him to use such a charge as would be more agreeable to his shoulder in case he should get two hundred ; and that an ounce and three quarters, or seven eights, of shot will tell better in the field than the Frenchman's charge-meagre of one ounce. Two ounces of shot is the charge proposed in Page's ingenious treatise on “Shooting Flying;” you will therefore hardly think that my using one ounce and three quarters can class me with those shooters against whom the following severe restriction was levelled, at the foot of an advertisement for pigeon shooting, at Billingbear Warren-house,---
N. B. No person to be allowed to load with more than four ounces of shot!--- A gamekeeper, to whom I mentioned this, laughed, and said he thought it a
pretty fair allowance. On my asking him what weight of shot he himself used he answered that he
divided one pound into five charges.
"A friend of mine seeing his keeper equipping himself for a pigeon match, was curious to examine the terrors of the prepared charge, and trying it with the rammer, expressed his surprize at finding it rather less than usual,
Oh! Sir, replied the keeper, I have only put in the powder yet.
"Of this school are the wild fowl shooters ; in one of whose guns of six feet barrel, I lately measured a charge to the height of eleven fingers,---
Sir, I likes to give my Gun a belly-ful".
You may have seen Mike Beliveau's demonstration of shooting 100 grains of 2F and 2 ounces of shot with good success at 35 yards. I've had results similar to his in my testing. Maybe that's what they were up to.
Spence
