Folks at the skeet range have indicated that “ported” extended chokes are better than the “non-ported” extended chokes. They say that the ported chokes strip the wad and open up the pattern quicker. Sounds plausible; anything to it?
Sounds plausible? So does that fact that the moon is made of cheese. No one has been able to measure the ported choke effect yet. Ask one of the shops that sell the ported chokes to send you witnessed test results. Don’t wait by the mailbox for a reply unless you bring a supply of food and water.
Nothing new about the wad stripping theory and it does sound good. Your skeet friends say that stripping the wad opens the pattern more quickly. They ought to call up Ljutic, the guy who makes the anvil-like trap guns. He scribes a couple of circles inside the chokes of his guns so that the wad is stripped to provide a tighter pattern. Uh huh.
I was even sent a Dayson choke to test. This is the one that Outers sells now and has the longitudinal slots around the barrel of the extended choke. Looks neat. It is supposed to not only strip the wad, but also stop it from spinning. No one has yet told me what makes the wad spin in the first place. Whatever, nothing wonderful showed up on the pattern board. The patterns were unchanged from the factory Beretta choke of the same constriction. You don’t see any of this stuff in top international competition, unless the guy works for the particular vendor.
Windjammer wads are build light weight and with extra slots in the fingers so that they are pulled away from the shot cloud sooner than standard wads- sort of a wad stripper effect outside the barrel. Remington, Federal and Winchester use standard wads. Who wins big shoots? Uh huh.
I am not against ported chokes at all any more than I am against those glow worm laser beads that are currently in fashion. It all keeps the economy going and keeps money churning in the sport. It also gives me something to write about.
Shotgun Report’s Technoid
(Often in error, never in doubt.)
Sir Technoid blows up another heavily discussed and promoted product that has zero substantiation for its claims. I say, just because there is no witnessed data to support the product claims does not mean they don’t work.
Because so much of shooting well is based on confidence in technique and equipment; if the shooter BELIEVES that the ported CT will strip the wad sooner and it will help him- it will. However, the shooter should proceed with their beliefs blissfully in place and NOT ask for corroboration from The Technoid. He seems intractable in holding to an evidence based standard for facts. How narrow minded. LOL