Ive used 1100s all my life so the natural upgrade to get 3.5" shells was was the 1187. So far i like it alot, im using a modified choke, with Fiochhi BBs in it until the geese quit flying then i will use 2s for ducks. I missed a couple shots i know i would of had had i not upgraded, but i feel that is because im just getting used to the slight differences in the guns

cool. ive had gopod luck on ducks w/ kent #3's in both my 12 and my 20 however i prefer my 20 way over my 12 even w/ only 7/8 oz of #3's.

Well i am mainly out there for the geese, so BBs is perfect because it is perfect for both ducks and geese

if you say so. i aint gonna get into a ballistics discussion w/ ya but i prefer smaller dia. pellets. they penitrate deeper which is what it takes to get through tough feathers/down. bigger pellets dont peitrate deep enough to suit me. but glad your havin a good time. kill em all!

I'm wondering why we don't use buckshot on doves and 9 shot on geese if this is true :s9:

so far this year ive shot a nice double bearded tom and a coyote within two days of each other... here they are

the differance you pointed out is a little further exadgerated. do some research on internal balistics and terminal balistics then get back to me. you still ahve to have sectional density. also i never said anything about using larger shot on smaller birds homeslice. ive been reloading my whole life and have shot enough stuff w/ about every thing to draw my copnclusions. the wound channels are always deeper w/ the slightly smaller shot sizes then the larger T's F's BBB and BB. think about it, why do you supose the super slim arrow is so popular.........

Amen, I will take my 2 3/4" #3 steel loads going at 1700fps over any large shot any day. They well penetrate to kill at 50-60 yards.

It always makes things easier for me to think about when they're exaggerated. The same concepts should apply to relatively similar objects. As shot size increases, so does sectional density (yes, even in spherical shot). Individual pellet energy increases as pellet size increases, assuming that velocity is held constant [and generally, roughly is in comparable shotshells at the muzzle (however, when we bring arrows into this, we note that carbon arrows are lighter than aluminums, and undergoing the same force from the limbs through the string have a higher velocity. As in physics, you will note that kinetic energy is much more dependent upon speed than mass--.5m{v squared}. All of this is off subject though, because lead and razors are meant to kill differently)]. Basically, sectional density is understood as the ability to overcome resistance (i.e. flesh. Oddly enough a change in SD doesn't seem to have an effect on exterior ballistics in my calculator, yet is hyped for it's importance on terminal ballistics).

So, I've done my "research on ballistics 101."

And in my experience, small shot is easier to hit your target with, but will not cause as much damage as larger shot. This is simply my argument and point of view.

hahaha whered you copy and paste that from. and as for my point w/ arrows, take the broad head out of the equation. the smaller dia. arow will penitrate much deeper when all things are equal.

and as far as carboin being lighter then aluminum, a easton 400 weighs the same as a 2216 easton aluminum shaft so ide say that blows that theory.