What shells?

Interact with others on shot gun shells, reloading, ballistics, chokes, or anything that has to do with your shooting.

Moderators: donell67, NV Guide, pennsyltucky, Ohio Wildfowler

Re: What shells?

Postby Mugzwump » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:19 am

On the X wrote:Just for the record I shot Winchester Drylocks in 2 3/4, 1 1/4 oz. #3's at 1275 slow fps for several years back in the 90's. Why? because the only gun I had at the time was a wore out Rem 1100 with 2 3/4 chamber. I killed ducks out as far as I ever needed to and held my own with anyone and everyone I hunted with.


I use 2 3/4 #2 or BB for most of my duck hunting. Creek hunts I'll use #4's. If its a big hunt or something I'll use 3"... especially if there are a lot of geese around. The 3 1/2" is a fine shell too...dont own a gun to shoot em though. I just never saw the need to buy a new gun just to shoot 1/8 oz more steel at 200 fps more.

Mugz.
Mugzwump
hunter
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:42 pm
Location: CANADA


Re: What shells?

Postby KRB » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:23 am

Drylock's are a quality shell. Got a deal from MPW last year, good price free shipping. Kent's work to. If your shooting well that's the load you love.
KRB
hunter
 
Posts: 1552
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:12 pm
Location: South Shore LI

Re: What shells?

Postby Nelliboy2 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:27 am

I've always really like Kent's, tried some other but I have always come back to them.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
If money talks; then I got a lot to say i'm on the grind trying to make a hundred thousand dollars a day! We play with big cash and we blowin money fast. I need a G for every light bulb on the Vegas strip!!!
User avatar
Nelliboy2
hunter
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Brink of hell

Re: What shells?

Postby Frank Lopez » Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:26 am

SCdcomnder wrote:I need to know what you all have had succese with and what you opions are on Kent Fast-steel, Blind-side, Black cloud, HeviMetal or Experts


Here's a look at the loads you listed.

Kent Fasteel: Good quality standard round shot. Should be relatively easy to get decent patterns with most chokes. In my experience, the pattern from loads like this tend to last a bit longer than some of the other loads (remain effective over a greater distance). Personally, I've had good success with all the Fasteel loads, but prefer the 1 1/4oz offerings, particularly in #2s for ducks and BBs for geese. The one down side to these loads is their sensitivity to moisture. I've never had any issues, but a friend had four failure to fires in one box.

Blind Side: This one has to be the greatest marketing hoax ever perpetrated on the hunting public. Cube shot? Really? The idea for cube or misshaped shot was developed well over a century ago by the British. At the time, choke was all the rage and most guns were pretty tightly bored. This was fine for the driven pheasants and ducks at the manor, but when hitting the swamps and the bocage for woodcock, more open patterns were needed. Rather than spend a good bit of money on another gun, the solution was a load that would open very quickly. And so cube shot was born. This stuff (cube shot) is so ineffective that Winchester needed to develop a special wad just to hold the pattern together for a semi practical distance. Basically it's a 35 yard load. Test it yourself. Take a golf ball and throw it and study the flight. Then take a child's block and do the same. Besides being erratic, it looses velocity, and therefore penetration, much more quickly.

Black Cloud: This one basically falls into the same category as the Blind Side loads, though not as bad. The load is comprised partly of standard round shot and partly of the "FliteStopper" pellets. Federal hailed these pellets as a great innovation that improved trauma. As far as being an innovation, those pellets are the result of the early phases of the creation of standard round steel pellets. In other words, they're not finished. Like the Blind Side pellets, their aerodynamics is pretty pathetic. Same issues as the cube shot, rapid velocity loss and a resulting loss in penetration. And again, a special wad was needed to lend some level of control to these loads.

HeviMetal: This load is comprised of two different pellet materials in two different sizes that are said to be the ballistic equal of each other. The advantage to these loads is the increase in pellets per load. But, it isn't necessarily what you start with that matters, it's what you put on the target that counts. EMI has a superior product in HeviShot. They even had a good product in HeviSteel. But as the price of tungsten went through the roof, they were basically priced out of the market. Since then, they've tried to sell several different versions of snake oil while remaining in the marketable price range. Going by my own pattern testing, these loads tend to open quickly and the pattern life isn't as long as standard round steel. Since the pellets are "ballistically matched", the governing factor is the weakest link in the chain. In other words, it's really no better than plain round steel at a considerably higher price tag. One of the things that was noticed was that since the HeviShot portion of the load is loaded on top of the shot column, those pellets migrate out of the pattern very quickly. In one pattern I shot, every single HeviShot pellet was in the 20 to 30 ring by 35 yards.

Xperts: Of the loads you listed, these are the least expensive. The pellets are less than uniform, and the shells are not waterproof. Because of the inferiority of the pellets and lack of a "special" wad, the pattern is a little difficult to control, especially in the higher velocity offerings. But they do kill ducks if you keep your shots within their limitations.

All of the loads will work if you keep the range inside of 35 yards. And you can probably stretch that to 40 in most cases. This is important, because the ammo manufacturers know this. They also know that 95% of the waterfowlers out there cannot hit anything with any kind of consistency much beyond 35 yards and that they mostly don't know exactly what 35 yards looks like anyway. They use this information, coupled with sexy packaging and sensationalized advertising to charge more money for these loads.

I would recommend that you stick with standard round steel loads at modest velocities. the Kents are a good start, but also have a look at the Winchester Dryloks and the Remington NitroSteel loads. The Federal Speed Shoks are also a good load, but be advised, they are dirty. The offseason is a great time to get a box of each and do some patterning through your guns and chokes.

Frank
I feel slightly sorry for a man who has never patterned his gun, who has no idea how far his chosen load will retain killing penetration. But I'm extremely sorry for the ducks he shoots at beyond the killing range of his gun and load - Bob Brister
User avatar
Frank Lopez
hunter
 
Posts: 2898
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:34 pm
Location: Long Island New York

Re: What shells?

Postby Mugzwump » Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:13 pm

I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz
Mugzwump
hunter
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:42 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: What shells?

Postby 3200 man » Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:26 pm

With a recommendation like Franks you can't go wrong , you asked for experience ? you got It ! :thumbsup:


You Gold hull shooters , stay away......... :lol:......but maybe that's the reason he made a understatement ? :hammer:
3200 man
hunter
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:30 am

Re: What shells?

Postby Mugzwump » Tue Feb 18, 2014 2:21 pm

Yep... but just 'cuz you can hit 'em past 40 doesn't mean you should... I know I can hit 'em that far but what I don't know is if that bird is gonna come down or fly away after taking the hit. After many years of trying all kinds of tactics and ammo, that rule of thumb just makes more sense every year.

I sure as hell wont be caught buying a bunch of hevi's at 40-50 bucks a box and then pissing them away at geese out that far...not again anyways lol... :fingerhead: Might as well shoot the cheap stuff if that's your plan.

Mugz.
Mugzwump
hunter
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:42 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: What shells?

Postby z51 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 4:19 pm

Mugzwump wrote:I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz


Nope, no argument, it just took him hundreds of words to say what myself and others said in fifty words or less on page 1. :lol3:
z51
hunter
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:02 am
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: What shells?

Postby Theduckguru » Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:20 pm

On the X wrote:Just for the record I shot Winchester Drylocks in 2 3/4, 1 1/4 oz. #3's at 1275 slow fps for several years back in the 90's. Why? because the only gun I had at the time was a wore out Rem 1100 with 2 3/4 chamber. I killed ducks out as far as I ever needed to and held my own with anyone and everyone I hunted with.


Except everyone else's ducks were much more dead than yours. Fast steel does that. :no:
Banded Birds - Mallard / Black Ducks, 3 Jack Miners and 25 AVISE. BW Teal - 2, Wood Ducks - 1, Morning Doves - 1, Snow/Ross - 2 (both reward bands), Canada Geese - 11 (2 neck collars)
Theduckguru
hunter
 
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:54 am

Re: What shells?

Postby Mugzwump » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:19 pm

z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz


Nope, no argument, it just took him hundreds of words to say what myself and others said in fifty words or less on page 1. :lol3:


Hmmm... you're right.. he used more words. His post was also more informative than everyone else's put together too... probably the best info this thread will see.

Mugz.
Mugzwump
hunter
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:42 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: What shells?

Postby On the X » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:35 pm

3200 man wrote:With a recommendation like Franks you can't go wrong , you asked for experience ? you got It ! :thumbsup:


You Gold hull shooters , stay away......... :lol:......but maybe that's the reason he made a understatement ? :hammer:

A recommendation like Franks above is just an extra long version of his opinion. Which he does have the right to have no matter how long and boring it may be.
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: What shells?

Postby On the X » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:40 pm

Theduckguru wrote:
On the X wrote:Just for the record I shot Winchester Drylocks in 2 3/4, 1 1/4 oz. #3's at 1275 slow fps for several years back in the 90's. Why? because the only gun I had at the time was a wore out Rem 1100 with 2 3/4 chamber. I killed ducks out as far as I ever needed to and held my own with anyone and everyone I hunted with.


Except everyone else's ducks were much more dead than yours. Fast steel does that. :no:

Not sure if you're from the HV camp and you really believe this or you're not from that camp and are being very sarcastic.
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: What shells?

Postby z51 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:46 pm

Mugzwump wrote:
z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz


Nope, no argument, it just took him hundreds of words to say what myself and others said in fifty words or less on page 1. :lol3:


Hmmm... you're right.. he used more words. His post was also more informative than everyone else's put together too... probably the best info this thread will see.

Mugz.


Mostly a regurgitation of what was discussed all last year. If it's new to you maybe you should drop by more often. :thumbsup:

I'll bet the OP is long gone by now and never saw page two.
Last edited by z51 on Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
z51
hunter
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:02 am
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: What shells?

Postby Frank Lopez » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:48 pm

On the X wrote:
3200 man wrote:With a recommendation like Franks you can't go wrong , you asked for experience ? you got It ! :thumbsup:


You Gold hull shooters , stay away......... :lol:......but maybe that's the reason he made a understatement ? :hammer:

A recommendation like Franks above is just an extra long version of his opinion. Which he does have the right to have no matter how long and boring it may be.


Over the last 60 years, I've found that most times people consider something boring it's because they don't understand the subject matter.

By the way, those are my words, but the content is far from opinion. Simply facts.

Frank
I feel slightly sorry for a man who has never patterned his gun, who has no idea how far his chosen load will retain killing penetration. But I'm extremely sorry for the ducks he shoots at beyond the killing range of his gun and load - Bob Brister
User avatar
Frank Lopez
hunter
 
Posts: 2898
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:34 pm
Location: Long Island New York

Re: What shells?

Postby Frank Lopez » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:50 pm

z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:
z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz


Nope, no argument, it just took him hundreds of words to say what myself and others said in fifty words or less on page 1. :lol3:


Hmmm... you're right.. he used more words. His post was also more informative than everyone else's put together too... probably the best info this thread will see.

Mugz.


Mostly a regurgitation of what was discussed all last year. If it's new to you maybe you should drop by more often. :thumbsup:


Well, maybe you could have been more helpful in your original posts and pointed the OP to those discussions. Evidently he wasn't here last year either.

Frank
I feel slightly sorry for a man who has never patterned his gun, who has no idea how far his chosen load will retain killing penetration. But I'm extremely sorry for the ducks he shoots at beyond the killing range of his gun and load - Bob Brister
User avatar
Frank Lopez
hunter
 
Posts: 2898
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:34 pm
Location: Long Island New York

Re: What shells?

Postby 3200 man » Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:54 pm

But , when someone specks with experience in Ballistics , don't be foolish and throw your money away , is my thinking !

Show us some evidence why you think HM is better than good steel shot ? Pic's of birds don't count , give us some

patterns at 45 to 50 yds with your HM 2's , if you have some 6 ft square paper ? :lol3: :thumbsup:
3200 man
hunter
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:30 am

Re: What shells?

Postby On the X » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:02 pm

Ain't it funny that the starter of this thread hasn't responded since post #12 and the rest of the 38 have been from the same ole' posters who's filled up the last 100 or so pages on the subject. So......I'm pulling out ,but with this last piece of advise. "Take the recommendations from this thread that you find useful, then find a load you like and are satisfied with and use it."
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: What shells?

Postby Mugzwump » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:06 pm

z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:
z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz


Nope, no argument, it just took him hundreds of words to say what myself and others said in fifty words or less on page 1. :lol3:


Hmmm... you're right.. he used more words. His post was also more informative than everyone else's put together too... probably the best info this thread will see.

Mugz.


Mostly a regurgitation of what was discussed all last year. If it's new to you maybe you should drop by more often. :thumbsup:

I'll bet the OP is long gone by now and never saw page two.


With that logic no one should be on this forum at all anymore. Just because it was discussed in the past does not mean it should be left there. This place would be pretty dull if that were the case. Forums are for active discussions not archiving them into pigeon hole viewpoints.

Mugz.
Mugzwump
hunter
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:42 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: What shells?

Postby z51 » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:33 pm

Mugzwump wrote:
z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:
z51 wrote:
Mugzwump wrote:I can't see anyone arguing with what Frank just wrote, and that about the 95% of us who can't hit anything past 40 yards is probably an understatement.

Mugz


Nope, no argument, it just took him hundreds of words to say what myself and others said in fifty words or less on page 1. :lol3:


Hmmm... you're right.. he used more words. His post was also more informative than everyone else's put together too... probably the best info this thread will see.

Mugz.


Mostly a regurgitation of what was discussed all last year. If it's new to you maybe you should drop by more often. :thumbsup:

I'll bet the OP is long gone by now and never saw page two.


With that logic no one should be on this forum at all anymore. Just because it was discussed in the past does not mean it should be left there. This place would be pretty dull if that were the case. Forums are for active discussions not archiving them into pigeon hole viewpoints.

Mugz.


Like I said the OP is likely long gone. At this point this thread is about .mental masturbation and old men arguing about nothing.
z51
hunter
 
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:02 am
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: What shells?

Postby On the X » Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:39 pm

3200 man wrote:But , when someone specks with experience in Ballistics , don't be foolish and throw your money away , is my thinking !

Show us some evidence why you think HM is better than good steel shot ? Pic's of birds don't count , give us some

patterns at 45 to 50 yds with your HM 2's , if you have some 6 ft square paper ? :lol3: :thumbsup:

If this is addressed to me......I have never said Hevi-Metal is better than good steel shot, I've said I like to use it and the results I've had with it, so why should I have any desire to put pics up of ANY load I'm NOT trying to convince anyone to use?
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: What shells?

Postby 3200 man » Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:59 am

Hey , I think you shoot what you like and if HM is your choice , so be it ! No matter what you shoot for ammo if you
can shoot straight , it will work at reasonable distances for the pellet size . I do know , with some fellas on this forum that
( really know ) their Ballistics , can help all of us understand what is needed or better than other shells on the market !
Talking about the different loads on the market is FUN and who am I to say , what you want to pay for your ammo ! :lol3:

At lease , we all have a choice ! Which is Good ! :thumbsup: ( in colors of hulls ) :lol3:
3200 man
hunter
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:30 am

Re: What shells?

Postby On the X » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:10 am

My question to 3200, frank and anyone else is.....how many ducks have you all crippled and lost using hevi-Metal? This would be the ONLY true measure to base your opinions on. So until you can post proof of the countless cripples I and I'm sure the other Hevi-Metal users are going to continue using this load based on our own results. In other words, picture after picture after picture of dead ducks speaks more for the product than a minor few pictures of some patterns posted from NON users along with countless opinions. For example, Joe Hunter posted results of only ONE gun/choke combination which he posts continuously, not picking a fight with Joe but hard to conclude his findings as hard evidence.
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: What shells?

Postby mudpack » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:29 am

On the X wrote:, picture after picture after picture of dead ducks speaks more for the product than a minor few pictures of some patterns.

I wasn't going to post on this thread, simply because this subject has been well covered every month for the last 5 years, and there's little I can add that is new. However, I must respond to "X's" statement above; pictures of dead ducks on the internet prove exactly nothing.

On the X wrote: Joe Hunter posted results of only ONE gun/choke combination which he posts continuously, not picking a fight with Joe but hard to conclude his findings as hard evidence.
Have to agree with X on this one, though; there's a very good chance that your results will not be the same as Joe's.
mudpack
hunter
 
Posts: 5391
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:40 am
Location: Central Kansas

Re: What shells?

Postby 3200 man » Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:59 am

Well I like your style as I wish I had money to spend for something that's just not as good or better than what I load .
We have harvested birds too , maybe with less shells shot ! and as far as cripples , my dog recovered every bird I put on
the ground or water and that was from shooting good ammo . And as far as what you asked , I guess I'll never find-out
because , I know what works best for me......and,,,,,cost less ! :yes:

Pretty gold shells don't kill birds any deader than Silver ones or premium Red ones !

It's not the Bow or the Arrow , thing , But components in a shell tell the story of what it's capable of ! :thumbsup:
3200 man
hunter
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:30 am

Re: What shells?

Postby Frank Lopez » Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:02 am

On the X wrote:My question to 3200, frank and anyone else is.....how many ducks have you all crippled and lost using hevi-Metal? This would be the ONLY true measure to base your opinions on. So until you can post proof of the countless cripples I and I'm sure the other Hevi-Metal users are going to continue using this load based on our own results. In other words, picture after picture after picture of dead ducks speaks more for the product than a minor few pictures of some patterns posted from NON users along with countless opinions. For example, Joe Hunter posted results of only ONE gun/choke combination which he posts continuously, not picking a fight with Joe but hard to conclude his findings as hard evidence.


Like I said earlier, it's a case of not understanding the subject matter. But, to your question, your supposition is not valid because you've introduced additional variables, i.e. shot placement and individual shooter skills. Cripples and lost birds are not necessarily an indication of shotshell performance. ANY load, when taken to the extreme, is capable of crippling birds perfectly centered in the pattern. Typically, this happens when the pattern's effectiveness wanes to the point of ineffectiveness. In Winchester's Nilo studies, even the Super X Double X 3 inch #4s (possibly the best duck load ever developed) was capable of a clean kill only 69% of the time at 60 yards!

As I stated originally, any of the loads the OP listed are capable of killing ducks inside of 35 yards. And most folks would do well to keep their shots to that range. But, if you really want to determine the level of effectiveness of a load, pattern it from 25 to 60 yards in 5 yard increments. Divide the pattern into 20 and 30 inch concentric circles and count the pellet strikes. Then determine how many holes (4 inches for duck, 5 for geese) there are in the pattern. Compare the patterns. You'll get a good feel of the effective range of the load/gun/choke. I've done this. The worst performer was Blind Side. No surprise there, really. The surprise came in that the next worst performance was HeviMetal. Given the performance of pure HeviShot, and the construction of the HeviMetal loads (HeviShot on top) I would have thought that the Hevi pellets would tend to keep the core tighter and thus increase the effective range. It didn't. These tests were performed with three different guns (Mossberg 835, Remington 870 and Beretta 390) all with factory chokes. Not surprisingly, the Kents performed best of this lot (though not quite as well as Winchester Dryloks.)

Frank
I feel slightly sorry for a man who has never patterned his gun, who has no idea how far his chosen load will retain killing penetration. But I'm extremely sorry for the ducks he shoots at beyond the killing range of his gun and load - Bob Brister
User avatar
Frank Lopez
hunter
 
Posts: 2898
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:34 pm
Location: Long Island New York

PreviousNext

Return to Shotshell, Reloading, Ballistics, & Chokes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cjg, krazybronco2, Rebel and 8 guests