Since Spring has finally arrived in my neck of the woods, I've been doing some pattern testing while waiting for my Turkey season to open on April 18. It's been a long process and I've aquired multiple chokes and even more turkey loads of various manufacture, size and weight payloads. I recently came across a box of Kent Diamond Ultimate turkey shells which are 3.5"-2.25 oz and are marked #6 on both the shells and the box.
I've pattern tested these shells through multiple chokes ranging from my SSX .643", Indian Creek BDS .660" and Undertaker .665". While shooting these shells, the best pattern I ever got at 32.5 yards (my usual distance) has been 180 hits in a 10" circle. I never really gave the poor patterns much thought because I had other shells that were capable of putting 250+ pellets in a 10" circle at the same distance.
It wasn't until I started comparing my pattern boards that I noticed the pellet holes from the Kent Ultimate shells were significantly larger than the holes left by the Federal Mag-Shok 3.5"-2oz-#6 shells that I've been shooting. The Mag-Shok #6 pellet holes were the normal size for #6 shot while the Kent Ultimate pellet holes appeared at least 1, possibly 2 sizes larger.
Instead of debating the issue any further, I decided to dissect a Kent Ultimate shell, and document the process through photos to show what I found.
The shell was factory loaded and was purchased in a box of 10 rounds from Bass Pro Shops in Auburn Hills, Michigan around December 2009. The product code is K1235TK63-6 and the lot number is BLC005-03.
Upon cutting open the shell, I found a normal looking shotcup, filled right to the top with some very nice looking silver colored shot. It's initial appearance was very shiny. I rolled a few of the pellets between my thumb and index finger and noted a grayish, metallic coating was left on my skin. The coating was slightly slippery, and was likely a lubricant or used to prevent the pellets from oxidizing. I noticed the shot was not buffered at all. I dumped the shot from the shell and placed the payload on my digital scale. It weighed 2.248 ounces which is close enough to the 2.25 ounce advertised weight to satisfy me.
I used my digital calipers to measure several of the pellets one at a time and found the average to be .117" which is larger than the normally accepted diameter for #6 lead shot. Typically, #6 shot has a diameter of .110" which puts this lead shot somewhere in between #5 and #6 shot which explains why the pellet holes appeared larger.
Finally, I removed the powder charge from the shell and placed it on the scale for weighing. Approximately 2/3 of the powder volume was flat, disc shaped grains. The remaining 1/3 of the volume was clumped together in a mass about the size of a 20 gauge shotgun slug and approximately 1/4" thick. I'm not sure if the powder was loaded into the shotshell while it was wet, or if the powder merely stuck together after being compressed by the shot column and wad pressure. The powder charge weighed 33.8 grains on my digital scale.
I apologize for the long post, but thought it might give some folks a good look "behind the scenes". I was at a loss trying to explain how a shotshell carrying an extra 1/4 ounce payload was under performing when compared to a 2 ounce shell from a different manufacturer. It wasn't until I put both pattern boards side by side that I realized the actual shot pellets appeared physically larger despite both being advertised as #6 lead. The larger physical size will translate into less pellets per ounce, and therefore shotshell which will result in patterns with a lower count.
I've read that Kent shotshells aren't known for patterning especially well, and this could be a contributing factor. #1. Their shot is non-buffered. #2. Their shot runs large for it's advertised size. (#6 shot is actually closer to #5) which means roughly 170 per ounce instead of 225 with #6.
I have contacted Kent USA to advised them of my findings. While these shells are safe to shoot, and not a reason for a product recall. They are however an example of poor quality control, and certainly won't pass muster for avid Turkey hunters who take pattern testing seriously. I await their response, but I'm not going to hold my breath for a positive interaction with the company.
