[Skribs]

When selecting a load for HD distances (I'm assuming 10 yards or less for most people, for me it is 4 yards or less) do you want a load that is going to put everything as tight as possible to try and make a single ragged hole, or do you want something that will spread out some to increase the chance of hitting something important?

I see some of these tight-patterning loads and wonder why they don't just go with a slug at that point.

[TurtlePhish]

I prefer something in between both. Decent spread, but not a "rifled barrel" pattern.

I see some of these tight-patterning loads and wonder why they don't just go with a slug at that point.


They may make the same size hole, but the shot is a lot less likely to go through the neighbor's house than the slug.

[Dave McCracken]

Tight. It's MY job to put that tight pattern where it counts....

[jojo200517]

Tight, you are responsible for every pellet, even those that miss.

[oneounceload]

or do you want something that will spread out some to increase the chance of hitting something important?

Like your kid in the room behind the BG?

One ragged hole would be preferable

[C0untZer0]

When a load of #1 Buck hits a target, even if the shot has not patterned out yet, the pellets will quickly begin to travel along their own paths - creating 16 distinct wound channels (although some of these wound channels may intersect at some points). The pellets will also penetrate to about the same depth as they would if they were more spread out - which can be tested by firing something like Federal FLITECONTROL® versus something that has no cup or even a spreader wad.

Penetration is dependent on the mass of each pellet. A slug will penetrate the most deeply, #00 Buck will penetrate more deeply than #1 Buck which will penetrate more deeply that BB or any bird shot, and it's not dependent on the shot pattern.

This also gets confused with the argument that if you are firing a tight pattern and your shot placement is less than optimal - a tight pattern will be a non-debilitating miss, whereas a wide pattern gives you a better chance of at least one pellet disrupting vital tissue.

It's a bad trade-off if you work it down a decision tree

Bad shot placement with tight pattern - all pellets miss
Bad shot placement with wide patter - majority of pellets miss, may hit with one or two pellets

Good shot placement with a tight pattern - all pellets hit
Good shot placement with a wide pattern - many of the pellets still miss


You increase your chances to do a lot of missing with a wide shot pattern - good shot placement or bad.

[longstandingletdown]

The only excuse for a wide pattern is the "hollywood death ray" mentality, in reality you want as many pellets hitting in as a tight a pattern as possible.

In an apartment or close residential neighborhood, you want all pellets depositing as much energy as possible into the target, regardless of shot size.

[Youngster]

I'll take medium, for a controlled burst effect, as long as there is consistancy as far as distance between pellets and concentricity goes, if the gun won't do that then I'd throw in some Flitecontrol and go tight.

I don't think pattern size matters much at typical HD distances though unless you've got a huge property or you're running a gun that throws horrendously wide patterns.

[Mauser lover]

I would go for a modified choke, meaning a not so tight, not so loose pattern. I want one ragged hole, but as big of a ragged hole as I can get. At 4 yards a modified choke is good enough for me.

If I was going to need something for a larger space, up to 7 yds or just a little bit more, I would go with as tight a choke as possible, I am not sure, but I think that would be improved full...

Whatever you do, remember that "Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything" and that you need to account for EVERY PELLET that you launch, and wood and gypsum board walls will not stop a buckshot pellet.

[Skribs]

Well, in the direction I'd likely be firing, I have 3 walls until you get outside, and then a steep drop with thick woods, with a bare creek behind them. And I live alone. So I'm not too worried about that stray pellet going through the wall.

What I was thinking was along the lines of: if I'm aiming for a quick stop, I want to hit the heart. If my aim is slightly off-center with a tight pattern, I might hit the lung or something else. If my aim is slightly off-center with a wide pattern, then I may lose a few pellets, but it increases the chance of hitting the heart.

I still expect to aim, but I do not expect that I myself will hit dead center in a life-or-death situation on a moving target.

[T Bran]

If you are shooting only 4 yards we are talking 12 feet nothing is going to open up much at 12' not even a cylinder bore.
I would be using #2 or#4 Hevishot or Black cloud waterfowel loads they will still get great penetration but not as much as buckshot thru a wall or two.
Just my .02
T

[Warp]

I have gone with "tight".

Currently my HD shotgun's tube has 4 Federal LE132 followed by 2 Honady light mags. They pattern pretty darn tight

I do often wonder about going the other route, but the neighbors are't far away and if stuff really gets crazy it would be better outside of the house

[C0untZer0]

Informational article from Box O Truth:

http://theboxotruth.com/docs/bot43.htm

Normally a shot pattern for normal shells (not FliteControl type cups) opens up 1" per yard from the muzzle. So for typical HD distance - yes you're going to have to aim because you're going to be creating 3"-4" holes.

However... with a rifled barrel and a load like Wolf - which is known for opening up pretty early, you can get some pretty large shot patterns.

I calculated that the Wolf through rifled barrel spreads 3.6 times the "normal" rate.

Normal shot through a smoothbore would give roughly a 5" pattern at 5 yards. The Wolf through rifled opens up to 18"

So firing Wolf at 6 feet should create a 7.2" pattern, 10.8" pattern at 9 feet.

That might seem like it validates the myth that you don't have to aim.
But in order to get all the points in that ring to hit the assailant you still have to do a good job of aiming COM.

[foghornl]

Tight pattern. I don't want an errant pellet to take out Mrs. Foggy's prized antique "vauze" (vase).

[jmr40]

At 10 yards and under you aren't getting a very big pattern with any shotgun load or choke. At that range you are better off with a handgun or carbine. The whole point of a shotgun is to get some spread in the pattern making hits more likely on moving targets. If your goal is a small pattern a rifle is a much better chioce.

[Warp]

jmr40: What rifle do you propose would trump my 12 gauge for home defense?

[CharlieDeltaJuliet]

Tight with all the impact hitting the smallest spread pattern possible.

[Mamertine]

It's my understanding that police shotguns have cylinder chokes. I'm guessing they have that for a reason.

[snooperman]

A tight pattern would be best so that you could get one large hole.

[Mauser lover]

Modified choke will give you some tightness if you ever did need to shoot a little bit longer than 4 yards, just in case...

[snooperman]

Around the farm barnyard , I have killed hundreds of Varmints over the past 50 years. I keep shotguns and rifles loaded in the tack room and nothing stops them faster than the shotgun up close. So in the home, the shotgun is far superior in stopping power than a rifle or pistol. My 2 cents--Snoop

[jmr40]

jmr40: What rifle do you propose would trump my 12 gauge for home defense?


An AR-15 carbine any day of the week is better. It is 1/2 the size, has 1/4 the recoil, 6X as much ammo capacity and with softpoint ammo it is MORE effective when it hits human targets at close range and it penetrates building material LESS than buckshot rounds if you miss.

If you are talking about shotgun patterns of 4" or less then use a rifle, or even a handgun. A shotgun is a better tool outside the home where the patterns can open up to 10"-15" and improve your chances of hitting a moving attacker.

Almost every PD in the country as well as the military figured this out years ago and have been phasing out shotguns in favor or carbines. The shotguns only advantage is that it is cheaper, but with todays AR prices that gap is smaller than ever.

[Warp]

An AR-15 would certainly cost a bit more than my Remington 870.

Also, I don't buy an AR being more effective at close range than a 12 gauge. Or, more to the point, I don't see how the effectiveness, up close, of a 12 gauge could ever be anything other than a strength.

...or even a handgun, you say? No, I'd rather have something that isn't weak and ineffective.

LE still has far more shotguns on the road than rifles. And a lot of rifles/carbines are pistol caliber.

[C0untZer0]

At 10 yards and under you aren't getting a very big pattern with any shotgun load or choke.

Wolf #00 Buck produces an 18" pattern from a rifled barrel at 5 yards - I'd say that's big.

The whole point of a shotgun is to get some spread in the pattern making hits more likely on moving targets.

If you're trying to down a bird - yes. If you're trying to stop a human attacker - no.

If your goal is a small pattern a rifle is a much better chioce.

The goal isn't to create a small or large group. The goal is to stop an attack.

Sixteen 30 caliber projectiles penetrating 12 to 14 inches into an assailant's body is going to give you the best odds of stopping an attack.

[oneounceload]

I would go for a modified choke, meaning a not so tight, not so loose pattern. I want one ragged hole, but as big of a ragged hole as I can get. At 4 yards a modified choke is good enough for me.

At HD distances, the difference between a SK and M choke at 4 yards is about 1/2" - if you can make the difference count, good for you - I'll call BS

As to the comments about using a M4 - I would agree - the 223 is less penetrating through sheetrock yet can do te job nicely - its downside is cost compared to some used 12 gauge pump

[snooperman]

Have you ever shot animals up close with a shotgun? The military and police are still using shotguns today. They have their purpose, especially "AT NIGHT". Mossberg just completed a sale to the military for 25,000 guns. Also, the gun that was used to win the "west" was not the lever action rifle, as the average homesteader could not afford them at $25 to $30 , but they could afford the shotgun at just $4.00. And they could protect the farm and hunt a wider variety of game with the shotgun. Indians feared the homesteader shotgun more then they did the soldier with the trapdoor rifle for sure. One blast from buckshot will end a fight faster than one shot from a .223 rifle any day especially in the home....,My 2 cents. Snoop

[Warp]

My 870 HD, even with tritium ghost rings, a knoxx stock, mounted light and side saddle is still less $$$ than an AR-15. And that AR would lack sights/optics/lighting for the dark. AND I got to build the 870 slowly over, literally, a period of years because I couldn't afford that much at one time.

And 9 00 pellets ought to have puhlenty of stopping power.

[lemaymiami]

I thought about the original question a bit and still came up with..... hmmm.

Seems to me the real issue isn't the tightest pattern or the widest pattern from that defending shotgun - it's the shooters real knowledge of exactly how his/her weapon shoots and what the actual pattern will be at a given distance... with whatever ammo is in play. My early police shotgun training included some patterning drills where we set up paper targets in line at various distances (3yards all the way out to about 25yards...). Actually seeing how those nine pellets perform at diffferent distances was an eye opener and went a long way to forcing the shooter to really consider the distance factor in any shooting situation. Along with patterning, those in line targets clearly showed the rise or fall of the pattern as it left the muzzle (yes, all the police shotguns that I worked with dispersed a standard 2 3/4 00 buck round at one inch per meter from the barrel). At seven meters (almost 22 feet) the pattern was right at seven inches. That clearly means that if you're not aiming carefully you won't be hitting....

A 'gunner who really knows what that weapon is capable of at various distances is a deadly opponent (or a pretty skilled good guy...). After mastering patterning and how much a load of shot rises or drops at various distances from the point of aim... the next step is learning a bit about skip shooting and other dirty tricks that can win in an armed confrontation.... This kind of stuff is why I wish that police departments still trained with and used the shotgun more than they currently do. I'm also old and cranky so you'll know where I'm coming from.

[C0untZer0]

It seems to me that when the DE switched from their 9mm carbines to the .223 a lot of police departments did too, and maybe it wasn't such a great decision.

I don't know if departments dropped some of their shotguns in favor of the .223 or not

[Warp]

Not as many departments have picked up .223/5.56 patrol rifles as I believe should. Main reasons they have not, from what I can gather: Cost, public perception, additional training required.

But the main reasons officers ought to have patrol rifles, in my opinion, don't generally apply to a private citizen using the firearm for home defense. Longer range shots, multiple opponents, body armor, etc. Sure, you could face somebody with armor in or at your home, but it is much less likely than for a LEO on patrol. And as for longer range shots, obviously much much more likely for LE than for a home defense gun.

[C0untZer0]

As far as a .223 carbine being more effective than a shotgun - at home defense distances,

I don't see how one .223" hole 12 - 14" deep is going to be more effective than nine .33" holes 14-15" deep or more effective than sixteen .30" holes 12 - 14" deep.

[Captains1911]

At 10 yards and under you aren't getting a very big pattern with any shotgun load or choke. At that range you are better off with a handgun or carbine. The whole point of a shotgun is to get some spread in the pattern making hits more likely on moving targets. If your goal is a small pattern a rifle is a much better chioce.
This just is not true. You want as many pellets as possible on target when it comes to a shotgun for HD. There seems to be a misconception with people when it comes to shotguns and HD, they are preferred by many because of their power, not their ability to spread shot out. The shooter must still put rounds on target like with any other firearm.

[Inebriated]

Tight. I want maximum energy hitting the spot I aim at. I don't need a flier making its way through the neighbor's house.

[Skribs]

CountZero, have you seen what a .223 does when it hits the target? The hole is not .223. The hole looks like a baloon. It's why rifles are more powerful than pistols - the bullet is moving fast enough to actually cause permanent damage to the tissue with the shockwave created by the impact.

I do agree with jmr40 that a .223 would make a better HD weapon. However, there are two problems for me: 1) the cost of an AR, 2) there don't seem to be any rifle ranges nearby that I like. However, one poster before said it was half the size of a shotgun...not really. It'll be smaller, but not much smaller than my shotgun. I'm also not sure which is actually more devastating on a single hit, I still have a hard time believing that a 12 gauge is beaten on a per-hit basis. Now, 3 shots from a .223 (which you have 10 sets of, as opposed to usually 6-7 single shots in 12-gauge) would definitely take the cake.

The reason the military uses rifles is because they engage targets well beyond the effective range of a shotgun. I think that's less common for police, but the advantages of precision firing when there may be a target at a distance, or with scores of civilians nearby, is not one that really affects your standard HD situation.

Lemaymiami, I'm not discounting your input, but I love when someone asks "which hardware should I use?" the answer is "training."

Looking at it, I think 1-2" per yard is what I'm after, preferably about 1.5. Like I said above, fliers aren't really a concern for me, and I think that would get a nice even spread over the target.

[Inebriated]

Looking at it, I think 1-2" per yard is what I'm after, preferably about 1.5. Like I said above, fliers aren't really a concern for me, and I think that would get a nice even spread over the target.

Maybe I'm over-thinking it, and am all tuckered out right now, but why limit your effectiveness by wasting a portion of your energy (pellets) on non-vitals? Why wouldn't you want a concentrated mass hitting the target's chest, doing as much damage to vitals as possible?

[Steve C]

As others have said, at houshold distances any smooth bore shotgun is going to give yew a relatively small pattern regardless of choke so there really is no significant choice in pattern size. Your not going to throw a 25" pattern unless you live in a warehouse and can get 25 yds of distance between muzzle and target.

Cylinder bore with buck will usually expand the pattern at 1" per yard. Take a tape measure to your largetst room or longest hallway and see about what our pattern will be. By the time you subtract about 3yds for shotgun lenth and stand off from the wall your maximum distance will likely be under 12 yds so with the most open choke your pattern will be no greater than 12". At 4 yds it will be about 4" about the width of the palm or your hand.

Once outside the game changes as distances increase.

[Waywatcher]

I like a spread of about 0.5" per yard. I am satisfied with 10" pattern at 20 yards with 00 buck.

[C0untZer0]

I'm also not sure which is actually more devastating on a single hit, I still have a hard time believing that a 12 gauge is beaten on a per-hit basis.

I often refer to this as "per trigger pull" - assuming a hit on target. And I don't think a single hit with a .223 causes as much tissue damage as hit with a load of buckshot which equates to 9 to 16 "hits" or wounds being created.

I don't discount temporary cavity or hydrostatic shock, but IMO the jury is still out on the issue. I think the results of hydrostatic shock can be very unpredictable. I think the debate becomes a closer match if you're talking about the effects of a .308 or 7mm Mag versus 12ga, but IMO, a 2¾" load of #1,#0 or #00 Buck is more effective than a single .223 round.

I think the issue than becomes how quickly you can put rounds on target with the two weapon systems, and I give the nod to the AR / M4 even though I've seen some very good shotgunners do some really fast shootin :)

[mavracer]

I'd prefer the spread to be in the 2-6" range so that I can better keep all pellets COM. Inside the house regular OO buck gets the nod but I have some flight control avaliable if needed.
not gonna get into the carbine vs shotgun just hand me one it'll be on me to solve the problem;)

[C0untZer0]

If I could completely control the distance at which I would engage home invaders, ya I can see how it would be beneficial to hit an attacker COM with 9 pellets spread over 11" - I have chance of puncturing both lungs, damaging major pulmonary arteries in both lungs, damaging the heart, and misc and assorted other damage and that should stop an attack.

But still, I think thats only theoretically and only marginally more effective than a tight patterned hit with buckshot COM anyway. I mean dead is dead...

But anyway, I cannot completely control the distance at which I might need to engage a home invader and I might have a situation where, given the load I am using, if I take a shot at the attacker, I have a chance that some of the shot might hit but I'm almost assured - because of the distance and the shot pattern that a lot of projectiles are going to miss. Everyone's situation is different, but in my situation I don't feel I can take a shot where even if my aim is perfect - I know a bunch of projectiles are going to miss the intended target, and leave my home and keep going...

One thing that does give you a lot of control over the pattern size is Federal's FLITECONTROL.

Yes there is a small trade off in that you're not going to get that broad shot pattern that does multiple damage to different vital organs, but the increased control is worth it.

Whether I am having to shoot at the attacker from 10 feet or 10 yards, I know I have a tight pattern that is going to have a devastating effect on the assailant.

The OP is not worried about stray pellets, but the other issue is, using something that creates a large pattern limits the effective range of your shotgun. And I think the downside of using that wide pattern is you now have a weapon that you're not going to be able to hit with if the attacker engages you at a distance that your set up is created 30" patterns or something...

I know this is hypothetical, but what if you thwart an attack and one of the assialnats flees to their car in the street - the street is a good distance and they're just putting rounds into your house while they make "retreat".

Well, a rifle would have been the best weapon to respond with - but I'm using this example to argue that with something like FLITECONTROL you can still engage the target. With some wide patterning load / setup - you're counting on luck to hit the assailants at that point. You've made a trade off trading something that's only hypothetically more effective at a closer range for being ineffective at a greater range.

[CoRoMo]

Some people want the shot to spread. The argument goes, if the target is moving, especially if quickly, and the shot is spread out, you have a better chance to hit them with a wide pattern than tight. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrxkjRXk7m8&feature=player_detailpage#t=195s

[Mauser lover]

oneounceload, Thankfully, I have never needed to check my pattern at 4 yards, but if a coyote is marauding my chicken coop, I sure don't want a skeet choke, and I don't want to have to switch out choke tubes, since I can't change tubes faster than a coyote can devour chickens.

Now, substitute any other kind of varmint, two or four legs, for "coyote"; and substitute any other item of personal property for "chicken coop". Ie, an arsonist setting fire to your garage, or a thief smashing in your daughter's window. etc. Now, of all of those scenarios, the one that I am most concerned about is really the coyote and chicken one, but all of the other ones do have significance.

No, I am not saying that you should use your shotgun as the do/end all solution for all cases of domestic intrusion, and please don't shoot someone that is not actually threatening your or someone else's existence.

[Skribs]

I'm not looking for something like a 30" pattern. What I was referring to in the OP was the difference between a 1-2" hole and a 7-10" pattern that covers the chest.

I do agree Count, that if I wasn't sure, I'd want a smaller pattern. But my condo is small, and I don't expect to need more than 10 feet.

[Onward Allusion]

Shotguns indoors are usually not going to be 10 yards. Who has a 10 yard room? Not a lot of us. A 10 yard hall? Still not a lot of us. 5 yard - ok, but at those kind of ranges, a shotgun doesn't spread much, if at all, with buck shot. Not even going to discuss the bird -vs- buck for HD debate. Shotguns for the typical homeowner should be a barricade in your room kind of weapon or outdoors - not taking shots down the hall.

[DammitBoy]

Anybody here know what a "duckbill spreader" is?

[goon]

One blast from buckshot will end a fight faster than one shot from a .223 rifle any day especially in the home....

If your attacker stops attacking you, it doesn't matter whether it was from a COM hit with an AR-15 or with a Mossberg 12 gauge.

To answer the OP's question, tighter is better. I used to have this really nice 18" cylinder bore Mossberg that threw such an open pattern with almost everything that I lost a lot of confidence in it. I'll take a gun that's putting lead pretty much where I want it over one that throws it into the air and lets the element of chance decide for me.

[Dave McCracken]

A couple things....

Forensic folks tell me the most effective patterns run 5-8", all else equal. When big pellets intersect the CNS, turnoff is instantaneous.

My data is old, but shotguns have a stopping rate of 99% plus, with one COM hit. That's regardless of load,choke, gauge or politics.

5.56mm data from the same .gov source had maybe 95%. Still very good.IMO, not enough difference to matter when either platform is in trained hands.

Finally,here's the elephant in the room....

Training.

It's way more crucial than the name on the reciever, the load in the chamber, or the number of such loads on tap.

But, it just doesn't come up much in these threads, devoted as we are to technia.

It should. We should be training to put those patterns exactly where they need to go to STOP a threat.

descending from pulpit....

[Loosedhorse]

Tight pattern.

When I pattern my shotgun for HD/SD, I note at what range a given load's pattern fills the C-zone of an IPSC target, and that to me represents the max range of that load in my gun. As long as that range is smaller than the longest line-of-sight in my house, it's good.

[Skribs]

My data is old, but shotguns have a stopping rate of 99% plus, with one COM hit. That's regardless of load,choke, gauge or politics.

Really? So I should stop inscribing "Darth Vader for President" on my handloads? Kidding aside, training is important, but its beyond what I'm asking for. I work IT, and when customers ask whether they should use IE or Firefox, I don't tell them to practice typing. I may sound kind of like a naysayer, but every thread where someone asks a hardware question, several people answer "training." If training was the only method of improvement, we'd all still be swinging clubs and hurling rocks, albeit with expert precision ;).

5-8" actually seems to about equal what I was talking about. At 4 yards, that's 2" per yard for the wide side. At 3 yards, 2" per yard would be 6"...which fits 5-8.

[Onward Allusion]

^^^I can tell you emphatically that the average BDU (you're in IT - so you know what I'm talking about) don't know the first thing about the tools they have available yet want the latest greatest whiz-bang technology because they saw it on TV so it must work. Don't underestimate training. Someone trained with a club has a very good chance taking out the neophyte with a firearm in a one-on-one situation.

[Skribs]

I'm not underestimating it. I'm saying "training" isn't a relevant answer to most hardware questions. "My shooting isn't good with a Glock, what gun should I buy instead?" In this case training might be the answer. But if the question is "tight or wide pattern?" or "should I get a Mossberg or a Remington?"..."training" doesn't answer the question. In fact, that's part of what I'm doing...not specifically marksmanship practice, but rather trying to learn the best option for a defensive scenario.

[Onward Allusion]

I think the answer to your OP is that doesn't matter at that range because you're talking MIMINAL (~ 6" with bird shot A LOT less with buck)spread at 4yd (12ft). IMO, you're almost better off with an AR loaded with 30 frangible rounds.

[WardenWolf]

Given the low dispersal rate, again only around 1" per yard, you're probably going to want fully open or nearly so at normal home-defense ranges. A modified choke or similar is probably best. It's not going to be a large enough pattern to make a hit-or-miss difference if you hit anywhere close to center of mass, and you want the larger dispersal pattern in order to increase the chance of disrupting a vital organ or the nervous system.

[C0untZer0]

When you get a cool shotgun - you have it and having it is cool. You have it in your closet or mounted somehwere close and just looking at it gives you a warm satisfying feeling.

Training costs twice or four times as much as your cool shotgun and after one week it's over. :(

It's really tempting to just spend that money on more cool stuff.

^ I don't advocate these attitudes I just point them out. :D

[bubba in ca]

At 4 yards it doesn`t matter. If your buckshot goes bang when you pull the trigger that is all that is needed.

Pattern your gun/ammo combo at some longer distances just in case you would use it at other than room distances.

[T Bran]

Be sure to pattern your gun I have found that the modified or improved modified chokes actually give tighter patterns than a full choke does and with less fliers.
I think the reason for this is that when you over constrict large shot they dont compress as evenly as small shot this really messes up a pattern.
This experience at the cost of a pretty sore shoulder was at 25 yards or so the mod choke did well with the larger buck sizes. The impmod did the best with #4 buck and was my hog load for years.
Each bbl will be a bit different but hopefully this info will save you some wear and tear on your shoulder.
Have fun.
T

[C0untZer0]

^ Did you take the hogs down with head shots?

[DammitBoy]

Training costs twice or four times as much as your cool shotgun and after one week it's over.

I train with my shotgun every other week and it only costs the price of a box of shells and my yearly membership ($75) at the range.

I can't buy a shotgun for the cost of my training. Which is just fine, since I already own the best shotgun money can buy.

[MCgunner]

Tight. It's MY job to put that tight pattern where it counts....

Tight, you are responsible for every pellet, even those that miss.

What they said.

[Youngster]

I like a medium sized consistant pattern because that's what I normally prefer and practice with in a general purpose buckshot dispenser, not because I'd think it would make much difference in an indoor home defense context.

I just don't see the need for a really tight buck pattern outside of hunting, just about everything's tight up close anyway and I'd like something that starts opening up out at a distance where I might need it.

[Dave McCracken]

Skribs....

I posited that you had asked because you were concerned about effectiveness.

Training boosts effectiveness far more than spread can. Both count,though.