3.5 inch shells for further shots?
12-09-2012, 05:39 PM
#21
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
That's true if the speed and weight of the pellets is the same, but wouldn't you say the longer shell is more effective at the same range, no matter what distance we're talking about, because of more pellets in the pattern? I think that's what Sheridan is trying to say in his posts.
12-09-2012, 05:44 PM
#22
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,834
I don't care how much they cost. Do you think the dollar amount makes them go farther? The killing range is not more. For the life of me, I can't believe you are not smart enough to get that. I'm laughing my arse off!
I'm going to say it one more time and I'm going to type it as slow as I can. It does not matter how long the shell is. The speed amd the weight of the pellet is what matters for distance. JEEEEESH! Holy not very smart Batman!!
I'm going to say it one more time and I'm going to type it as slow as I can. It does not matter how long the shell is. The speed amd the weight of the pellet is what matters for distance. JEEEEESH! Holy not very smart Batman!!
You shoot what you want and at what distance you want. I will do the same. I feel that with over 40yrs of waterfowling, from Canada to Texas and Argentina to boot. I will do what I know and what works for me and my clients and go with that. I will shoot 3" shells as my mainstay and back-up with 3-1/2" shells. Period. I know what works for me and I have enough people every year to back it up to prove it to no one but us there at that time. Out.
12-09-2012, 06:46 PM
#23
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huntin' In Colorado
Posts: 2,910
Figure what you want. Laugh off what ever you want. I will end my part of this by saying this and this is all I will say about it. Yes, I don't care how fast or slow you can or not type.
You shoot what you want and at what distance you want. I will do the same. I feel that with over 40yrs of waterfowling, from Canada to Texas and Argentina to boot. I will do what I know and what works for me and my clients and go with that. I will shoot 3" shells as my mainstay and back-up with 3-1/2" shells. Period. I know what works for me and I have enough people every year to back it up to prove it to no one but us there at that time. Out.
You shoot what you want and at what distance you want. I will do the same. I feel that with over 40yrs of waterfowling, from Canada to Texas and Argentina to boot. I will do what I know and what works for me and my clients and go with that. I will shoot 3" shells as my mainstay and back-up with 3-1/2" shells. Period. I know what works for me and I have enough people every year to back it up to prove it to no one but us there at that time. Out.
You can have all the years you want of waterfowl experience and it won't change physics. WTF?
12-09-2012, 06:52 PM
#24
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huntin' In Colorado
Posts: 2,910
That's true if the speed and weight of the pellets is the same, but wouldn't you say the longer shell is more effective at the same range, no matter what distance we're talking about, because of more pellets in the pattern? I think that's what Sheridan is trying to say in his posts.
There is nothing wrong with 3 1/2 inch shells. More BB's is good. Knowing how to call and decoy is better.
12-10-2012, 02:56 AM
#26
Spike
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Troy, MI
Posts: 36
Just have to add my 2 cents to this one:
I hunt a heavily hunted waterfowl management area in S.E. Michigan....every year I see birds shot at ranges of 50+ yards with the latest 3.5" 12 gauges and latest "wondershot".....and every year I see more and more birds get crippled and land in the refuge where they are unrecoverable, or sale off to other parts of the marsh to go unrecovered.
The idea behind the 3.5 in shell was originally to put more pellets on target for cleaner kills.....PERIOD! it had nothing to do with increasing range. Steel looses it's velocity much, much faster than lead, even when fired at super sonic speeds (I read in some technical publication that you gained, at best, another 3 or 4 FEET...not YARDS.....but FEET....by going to a faster shell). Early steel was abysmal in it's ability to kill, so they decided to put more pellets in the load to compensate for that.
Then the idiots in marketing decided to put out ads (maybe some of you older gents remember the one where the guy was standing on a cherry picker with the dog and the print said "increase your range".......
IMHO, the 3.5 in shotgun has crippled more birds than it has killed..........
I hunt a heavily hunted waterfowl management area in S.E. Michigan....every year I see birds shot at ranges of 50+ yards with the latest 3.5" 12 gauges and latest "wondershot".....and every year I see more and more birds get crippled and land in the refuge where they are unrecoverable, or sale off to other parts of the marsh to go unrecovered.
The idea behind the 3.5 in shell was originally to put more pellets on target for cleaner kills.....PERIOD! it had nothing to do with increasing range. Steel looses it's velocity much, much faster than lead, even when fired at super sonic speeds (I read in some technical publication that you gained, at best, another 3 or 4 FEET...not YARDS.....but FEET....by going to a faster shell). Early steel was abysmal in it's ability to kill, so they decided to put more pellets in the load to compensate for that.
Then the idiots in marketing decided to put out ads (maybe some of you older gents remember the one where the guy was standing on a cherry picker with the dog and the print said "increase your range".......
IMHO, the 3.5 in shotgun has crippled more birds than it has killed..........
12-10-2012, 06:24 AM
#27
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Allegan, MI
Posts: 8,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topgun 3006
That's true if the speed and weight of the pellets is the same, but wouldn't you say the longer shell is more effective at the same range, no matter what distance we're talking about, because of more pellets in the pattern? I think that's what Sheridan is trying to say in his posts.
I like more pellets. It helps but it won't increase the distance. The more pellets the better but it won't increase your range.
There is nothing wrong with 3 1/2 inch shells. More BB's is good. Knowing how to call and decoy is better.
***I just agreed with you in my post and said that more pellets at the SAME distance should equate to a better chance at killing your target. I did not say that the longer shell increases distance, but that all things being equal at the SAME distance the longer shell with more pellets should be better if the pattern is also similar to the shorter shell. 16gauge is also agreeing with us in his post. It might pay for those who are diagreeing with us regarding simple physics, which is basically what we are talking about, to read up on this!
Originally Posted by Topgun 3006
That's true if the speed and weight of the pellets is the same, but wouldn't you say the longer shell is more effective at the same range, no matter what distance we're talking about, because of more pellets in the pattern? I think that's what Sheridan is trying to say in his posts.
I like more pellets. It helps but it won't increase the distance. The more pellets the better but it won't increase your range.
There is nothing wrong with 3 1/2 inch shells. More BB's is good. Knowing how to call and decoy is better.
***I just agreed with you in my post and said that more pellets at the SAME distance should equate to a better chance at killing your target. I did not say that the longer shell increases distance, but that all things being equal at the SAME distance the longer shell with more pellets should be better if the pattern is also similar to the shorter shell. 16gauge is also agreeing with us in his post. It might pay for those who are diagreeing with us regarding simple physics, which is basically what we are talking about, to read up on this!
12-10-2012, 07:00 AM
#28
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huntin' In Colorado
Posts: 2,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topgun 3006
That's true if the speed and weight of the pellets is the same, but wouldn't you say the longer shell is more effective at the same range, no matter what distance we're talking about, because of more pellets in the pattern? I think that's what Sheridan is trying to say in his posts.
I like more pellets. It helps but it won't increase the distance. The more pellets the better but it won't increase your range.
There is nothing wrong with 3 1/2 inch shells. More BB's is good. Knowing how to call and decoy is better.
***I just agreed with you in my post and said that more pellets at the SAME distance should equate to a better chance at killing your target. I did not say that the longer shell increases distance, but that all things being equal at the SAME distance the longer shell with more pellets should be better if the pattern is also similar to the shorter shell. 16gauge is also agreeing with us in his post. It might pay for those who are diagreeing with us regarding simple physics, which is basically what we are talking about, to read up on this!
Originally Posted by Topgun 3006
That's true if the speed and weight of the pellets is the same, but wouldn't you say the longer shell is more effective at the same range, no matter what distance we're talking about, because of more pellets in the pattern? I think that's what Sheridan is trying to say in his posts.
I like more pellets. It helps but it won't increase the distance. The more pellets the better but it won't increase your range.
There is nothing wrong with 3 1/2 inch shells. More BB's is good. Knowing how to call and decoy is better.
***I just agreed with you in my post and said that more pellets at the SAME distance should equate to a better chance at killing your target. I did not say that the longer shell increases distance, but that all things being equal at the SAME distance the longer shell with more pellets should be better if the pattern is also similar to the shorter shell. 16gauge is also agreeing with us in his post. It might pay for those who are diagreeing with us regarding simple physics, which is basically what we are talking about, to read up on this!
12-15-2012, 05:09 PM
#29
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,834
And I feel this is what I was thinking but not able to print it for what I was thinking. I just know that with the extra pellets increase my odds for putting the bird down for I have more pellets going in their direction to allow me to do this. And from what I am seeing, thats more distance for more pellets in target area.
12-27-2012, 03:19 AM
#30
Spike
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 10
If you can't get the birds in close for one reason or another, you need a shell that has greater energy at further distances. Try using HeviShot for the longer yardages. It is more dense and therefore, carries more energy than steel to greater lengths. Using 3.5 inch shells doesn't increase yardage, it just puts more pellets out there. Also, use a tight patterning choke tube such as the HeviShot extreme range tube, it will hold the shot tighter at further distances.