Again, velocity at the mussle creates its own wind resistance that works to slow down the pellets at a distance. Velocity works to increase the cost of shells by having to use new, and more expensive powders, and velocity works to create excessive recoil that is a major cause of missed targets. Some, high velocity loads have more lbs of recoil than an elephant rifle. Velocity has caused steel pellets to blow patterns at distance as well. If you want good performance on waterfowl loads especially cough up the dough, and go to tungstun.

Mark-I...You got it. The problem is inefficient steel shot that more states are going to for everything! The environmental left is pushing for it every chance they can with phony studies against lead. The consumer won't purchase the high price alternative, Bismith, or tungstun. So they try to make steel perform better with more expensive powders producing higher chamber pressures, and more muzzle velocity, but performance diminishes greatly past that point...but they keep trying. Everytime you create something in a new box you pay for the new packaging/marketing. And the problem with lead? It is supplied from old batteries, and lead use in batteries is becoming obsolete...so the price of lead goes up, and possibly making it prohibitive here shortly. It may not be the left then that bands lead...it will be market forces.

Here's an interesting point regarding speed of pellets. We know that a shotstring has some length, smaller gauges having slightly longer shot strings if I am not mistaken. IF you are out in front too far with the front end of the shotstring regardless of how close it was out front, you will miss with the entire shotstring...I think that is true. NOw extreme distances would definitely cause that to be not true..wonder what the numbers are on that premise.

You guys need to read: "Shotgunning The Art and the Science, Winchester Press, 1976, by Bob Brister. 50 years ago he put most of this type of evaluation to bed. Phil, your future Olympian 'trappers' should probably read it too.

I'm curious, why not simply take a 3 in or 3 1/2 in magnum shell and load it full of lighter shot (i.e. #8 for clays) and load down on the powder to get a velocity similar to typical clay loads? You would have a denser pattern that would give you a better chance of breaking the pigeon. I'm sure recoil would be noticeably heavier, but I think shooters more used to recoil could make it work.

If you do a lot of target shooting NO SHOOTER gess use to recoil. At some point they all flinch. And that is a major cause of missed targets.

ideamanct -- the shells you are imagining do exist. Card shooters, who compete in a game where they to try to hit tiny dots on paper at 25 yards by swarming them with shot, use a shell called a 2-2-10 - that's two drams of powder and 2 ounces of 10 shot.
I have never seen any, but if I had some, I would shoot skeet with them just to watch the targets blow up!

I don't really think that speed is of critical issue. the right ammo for any given gun is (in my opion) is. I have spent numerous hours on the pattern range to find the best ammo for each of my shotguns. Therefore the ammo I use is the one that gives me the best performance at distances that I will be shooting. By the way, I have been using the same ammo for a lot of years and see no reason to change for faster or slower ammo

hutter -- yes and no. Shot strings do exist, but they cannot be slung for the reason you note.

The only thing you could definitively conclude from your story would be that, in said circumstance, the person hit with the errant shot would experience a broken buttstock of his own shotgun...from repeatedly bashing it against the shooter's backside, if it were me in his position.

Actually, I think he meant that there was not a shot string-slinging effect possible. Sounds to me like your acquaintance got hit from a few yards away, and the aerodynamic differences in the shapes of the shot slowed some down a bit more than others. Whether or not his perception that the difference was seconds long is probably not verifiable.

At 16 yards on the trap range it probably doesn't make much difference ballistically what the speed is. Comfort would seem to be the more important factor for increasing accuracy.

In the field it's a different matter. Trap loads may work fine for birds that aren't very tough and hold well for a pointing dog. Those are setups similar to the trap range. But throw in wind factors, flushing dogs, and tough birds like pheasants that don't hold well after the first week of hunting season, and the trap loads aren't going to do much good. I have found the thing that makes shooting high speed loads more effective is my ability to wait for a flushed bird to "straighten out" especially if the wind is blowing. A straight away shot at 35 yards is a cinch with those hot loads. It's a waste of money with slow loads. Or worse, it's a bird crippler. A bird that jumps up, especially in the wind, can be tricky to hit right away. Unlike a clay pigeon, they don't sail straight away right away. Even on windless days I find the roosters get up and then go away. Wait for them to hit that peak and start away and it's a much more predictable shot. But if they get up unexpectedly 20 to 25 yards out, that "sweet spot" situation is not going to present itself till they are maybe 30 yards or more away. At that distance you need something that still has some oomph left in it.

Hey to Sayfu: In reference to your slow the gun down perspective there is a good 90 % plus chance you will shoot behind the bird. The goal here is to match the speed of the target with the proper forward allowance. Faster loads just reduce the distance of the forward allowance.
hutter: Basic physics says there has to be shot string :)
deadeyedick: you are unaware that your patterning shells is only a two dimensional picture of a 3 dimensional world ?
Ontario Honker: Of course we are not going to shoot trap laods at pheasants but the only real adjustment here would be shot size ( larger ) and choke ( not as important ) as most good trap shooters use lite mod or tighter. For way too many years I have hunted on windy days, using my springers and killed phesants at 30 plus yards using 7/8 or 1 oz loads of # 6 ( lead shot )with IC choke. For me a fast field load is 1225 fps ( WOW )
I am taking a CONSEP class this weekend and hope to learn more about all the misinformation that is so prominent on these blogs !
Have a great day !!

You do understand what I mean do you not. Let's say with a slower load on a crossing bird you move the barrel just ahead of the bird to kill it...BUT, you move the barrel very fast when you shoot. This gives you little margin of error as to when to pull the trigger...trigger pull as to be precise because the barrel is moving very fast. Now let's say you go to a very fast load, and can you now slow down the speed you move the barrel, and move the barrel the same perceived distance in front of the target, BUT you now have more time to judge when to pull the trigger. That can be a huge difference in scoring hits if that can be the case.

So what happened to Phil's post where he responded to my thought regarding the speed of barrel movement contributing to length of perceived lead? If that is the case, and it is, then can the velocity of shot also contribute to length of perceived lead? I responded, and that is gone as well.

Hey I bought my wife a case of those PINK shells and she loves them. They were for breast cancer and if I remember right they donated $2.00 for each box you bought for research. So now when we go to the range she grabs her titty shells and all the girls love them.