Extrapolating the math, since "gauge" represents a sphere of lead weighing "one over gauge" (1/g) pound, would ".12 gauge" not indicate that the one pound of lead is 0.12 the weight of a lead sphere that would match that barrel?
In effect, a ".12 gauge" should be the diameter of a ~8.33-pound sphere of lead, should it not? I may be doing the math wrong, but I come up with a barrel diameter of ~3.37 inches.
I'm reasonably sure some old artillery pieces might fit that bill, but those are not usually measured by "gauge", but simply by inches in diameter.
Either way, definitely not one I would want to fire from the shoulder. No siree.
Older artillery pieces would have been measured in the weight of round shot they threw, usually an iron ball. Like a 4, 6, 9, 12 pounder or larger in the time of sail. The bore diameters would have been sized to a round ball of their named weight. Later Artillery pieces were measured by their bore diameter in inches or millimeters. Like a 3"/50, 5"/38 or a 76mm Oto Melara or 155mm howitzer.
I believe, but am not sure, that there used to be (may still be, in tiny numbers) slug-throwers, rifled and smooth ore, that used something similar to the ‘gauge’ measure but called ‘bore’. I THINK this referred to a barrel diameter that would accommodate a ball of the ‘gauge’ measurement, but used a bullet in a cartridge. But I’m unclear on the details.
Ah, the great expert problem.
The writer is vastly outnumbered by readers, all of whom are experts in different fields.
OTOH, ammunition tends to be crucial to the plot, so it's something you should pay particular attention to.
I have fun with this stuff when I'm doing 17th century, and talking about musket bores.
Let's not forget the 9mm shotgun (Winchester Mdl. 36 and various garden/rook guns) and the ever popular 12/14 ga. round for the Greener Police Gun.
There were 44-40, 410-44 and 45-70 shotguns too.
Differing wound effects for each gauge/type of ammo, please. And why turkeys need magnum loads.
I've seen demonstrations of recoil control where a 12 gauge was held without being braced against a shoulder and the gun barely moved.
There's secrets of recoil control long forgotten/barely known to man nowadays.
You can be funny when you wanna be. More important, you can be helpful too.
Extrapolating the math, since "gauge" represents a sphere of lead weighing "one over gauge" (1/g) pound, would ".12 gauge" not indicate that the one pound of lead is 0.12 the weight of a lead sphere that would match that barrel?
In effect, a ".12 gauge" should be the diameter of a ~8.33-pound sphere of lead, should it not? I may be doing the math wrong, but I come up with a barrel diameter of ~3.37 inches.
I'm reasonably sure some old artillery pieces might fit that bill, but those are not usually measured by "gauge", but simply by inches in diameter.
Either way, definitely not one I would want to fire from the shoulder. No siree.
Older artillery pieces would have been measured in the weight of round shot they threw, usually an iron ball. Like a 4, 6, 9, 12 pounder or larger in the time of sail. The bore diameters would have been sized to a round ball of their named weight. Later Artillery pieces were measured by their bore diameter in inches or millimeters. Like a 3"/50, 5"/38 or a 76mm Oto Melara or 155mm howitzer.
I believe, but am not sure, that there used to be (may still be, in tiny numbers) slug-throwers, rifled and smooth ore, that used something similar to the ‘gauge’ measure but called ‘bore’. I THINK this referred to a barrel diameter that would accommodate a ball of the ‘gauge’ measurement, but used a bullet in a cartridge. But I’m unclear on the details.
I've used .775 to describe slugs doing nasty things to people/therianthropes.
Big F'n hole.
I thought this was a reference to the dinosaur cartridge, but I had my numbers flipped.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.577_Tyrannosaur?wprov=sfti1