OldGobbler

OG Gear Store
Sum Toy
Dave Smith
Wood Haven
North Mountain Gear
North Mountain Gear
turkeys for tomorrow

News:

only use regular PayPal to provide purchase protection

Main Menu

MAGNUM BLEND 3 INCH SHELL USERS--- LOT NUMBERS???

Started by SKFOOTER, February 12, 2013, 02:38:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SKFOOTER

For those of you who are shooting this 3" shell, have you noticed a particular Lot # that seems to pattern better for you??

SKFOOTER


WildSpur

Sorry.  Last year I was wondering the same thing with the 3.5" shells because I had a drop from the year before.  I did not compare lot numbers though.  Something I will start doing.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk 2



Cluck more, yelp less

01Foreman400

I just bought 15 boxes of 3" blend.  All the same lot number.
Huntin Fool From Georgia!

SKFOOTER

Quote from: 01Foreman400 on February 13, 2013, 10:45:22 AM
I just bought 15 boxes of 3" blend.  All the same lot number.
Lot #201209 from Rogers??

01Foreman400

Huntin Fool From Georgia!

SKFOOTER

Lot # 201209 are the ones that are nort patterning as well for me as the smaller Lot #'s.

WildSpur

Is that this years lot #?  Could there be a magnum blend-gate this year?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk 2



Cluck more, yelp less

gatrkyhntr70

Quote from: SKFOOTER on February 13, 2013, 03:39:42 PM
Lot # 201209 are the ones that are nort patterning as well for me as the smaller Lot #'s.
What results did you see vs. the other lot #s; what gun, choke were you shooting them in?
<- <- <= <- <- <- <-

SKFOOTER

My Remington 1187's with the Hevi Shot .662 and Indian Creek .665 patterned Lot #201103 an average of 35-40 pellets better than Lot # :hb2:201209.

reynolds243

Ive shot 4 different lot numbers from mine in 3" and have not seen a noticeable difference.

gatrkyhntr70

Quote from: SKFOOTER on February 13, 2013, 10:04:18 PM
My Remington 1187's with the Hevi Shot .662 and Indian Creek .665 patterned Lot #201103 an average of 35-40 pellets better than Lot # :hb2:201209.
What kind of numbers where you originlly getting with that setup?
<- <- <= <- <- <- <-