Is UT ready for 24g loads

Well is it time to come into line with ISSF cartridge loads for FITASC disciplines ?

For UT yes.

The way I see it if OT is shot with 24g then why not UT it is a slower moving target in general so scores should not be affected too much. Purely theoretical but cartridges should be cheaper too.. if a hike in lead price causes an increase in cartridge price then conversely a reduction in the mass of lead used per cartridge should bring prices down.. wow did you see that low flying pig  :lol:  

Been having this very conversation with members of the UT tech comm this week. Don't expect any change soon 

DT

jwpzx9r said:

if a hike in lead price causes an increase in cartridge price then conversely a reduction in the mass of lead used per cartridge should bring prices down..

WOW did you see that low flying pig  :lol:  

Click to expand...

Well, I can tell you I saw it with no trouble!  Are you raising that breed of pig on your farm or did it fly in?

Seems like the ISSF saw the reduction as a path to fewer shootoffs and we all saw how well that worked.  So what is the rational for FIITASC?  It does make for marginally lighter recoil and may attract more shooters on that basis I suppose.  Scores would not suffer if ISSF is a guide and the same show-offs that win now would likely continue to do so.

Things should really pick up when the pig lands with the cheap ammo   arty:

I do think it may be good for us all to shoot 7/8oz or 24gram , less lead being spread back around the Earth although being as it comes out of the ground it as never troubled me to put it back there  .

But as for it being cheaper ? Forget it , do you know how much technology and experimental propellants cost ? An absolute fortune if you believe the manufacturers , who obviously want to sell us their product at the cheapest possible cost to the consumer.

We all whined like hell when they reduced the load from 32gram to 28gram , did it effect our scores ? Not a bit.

There are many reasons for using lower shot loading, in my opinion, less pollution has to be a major consideration though. Like it or lump it some the lead that shooter fire into the sky in hope of breaking the target will inevitably find its way into water courses and from there into the water people drink and the food we eat. I take as an example of just how much actually gets shot into the countryside a recent competition I shot in. It was over four days but if you take into account practice you can make that six days during which and I erred well on the side of caution 7.5 metric tonnes of the stuff. Reducing to 24g would save about a tonne of that. I have to say though that raising the reduction of pollution in respect to target shooting is perhaps a bad idea because it actually highlights the amount of the stuff that finds its way into the under growth, maybe better to stick with the benefits to the shooter.

Salopian I agree we get shafted by cartridge manufacturers because by their own costing's if you can raise the price of something due to commodity prices if you use less of it in the first place ... but you are right the shooter will always come off on the wrong side of a manufacturing reason for pricing. 

The whole lead  pollution thing is BS.  The very essence of Goebbels' statement.  Of course it applies totally to the US as well so don't feel like you all are something special   :wink:

Later, Joseph Goebbels put forth a slightly different theory which has come to be more commonly associated with the expression "big lie". Goebbels wrote the following paragraph in an article dated 12 January 1941, 16 years after Hitler's first use of the phrase. The article, titled Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik(English: "From Churchill's Lie Factory") was published in Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.


The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.[2]

I'm no hot shot, but I have tested a few cartridges and the best pattern I observed (most uniform had consistent) was from 24g cartridges (albeit in plastic which I now avoid) I struggle to believe that 28g give any more advantage other than having more fliers and so gaining a 'lucky' clay.  Friends of mine who obsess over sheet shoot only fibre cartridges as they believe this picks up the odd lucky clay as the pattern is less regular.

there is no reason why all clay disciplines cannot be shot with 24g. Apart from possibly helice and some stupid esp presentations. Trap in all its forms most certainly can. I also agree with pp 24g patterns better than 28g I haven't shot 32g for over twenty years but I don't recall anyone's score being better with 32g.

as for cartridges in general its about time the manufacturers came up with a usable alternative to lead, preferably cheaper.

ips said:

there is no reason why all clay disciplines cannot be shot with 24g. Apart from possibly helice and some stupid esp presentations. Trap in all its forms most certainly can. I also agree with pp 24g patterns better than 28g I haven't shot 32g for over twenty years but I don't recall anyone's score being better with 32g.

as for cartridges in general its about time the manufacturers came up with a usable alternative to lead, preferably cheaper.

Click to expand...

It's certainly getting noticeably more expensive with some game loads touching £100 a slab from expensive retailers..

I find on long range esp that 24g are more effective, I assume as the pattern holds together better??  I only see the need for heavy loads for helicopters due to the shot size required..