Pellet lethality comparison question

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

Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby On the X » Sat Mar 01, 2014 5:57 pm

#1 at 1300fps compared to #2 at 1500fps
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm


Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby J J Mac » Sat Mar 01, 2014 9:17 pm

On the X wrote:#1 at 1300fps compared to #2 at 1500fps

There are two components to lethality: pattern and penetration. For these velocities and pellet sizes, if the patterns are adequate and exactly the same, the two pellets will have a high probability of killing anything up to and including giant Canada geese out to about 30 yd or a little more. After that, the #1 pellet has a slight advantage in penetration out to about 55 yd but only by a couple of yd. With the proper pattern, either load should kill big ducks out to 50-55 yd (32 F and sea level). Since the penetration is about the same after 30 yd, the lethality will be primarily controlled by the number of pellets in a 30" circle and their distribution. To determine the maximum range for killing waterfowl at say 95% probability if the bird is centered in the pattern, other things must be specified: size of bird (really vital area), bird orientation relative to the pellet flight path, # of pellets in load, pattern distribution, etc.
User avatar
J J Mac
hunter
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby 3200 man » Sat Mar 01, 2014 9:40 pm

JJ Mack

So , you're saying only choke constriction determines ether shot sizes ability , not velocity ? :huh:
3200 man
hunter
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:30 am

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby J J Mac » Sat Mar 01, 2014 10:34 pm

3200 man wrote:JJ Mack

So , you're saying only choke constriction determines ether shot sizes ability , not velocity ? :huh:

Not in the general case, of course. However, for this specific case the penetration of the two pellet sizes with the given initial velocities have nearly the same penetration for 30-55 yd so the pattern (not necessarily constriction) will be the primary determining factor for killing waterfowl.
User avatar
J J Mac
hunter
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby lostknife4 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 5:31 am

Image

First two are for a given velocity of 600 fps, the last two have gel penetration given at 2"

For your perusal,
Lost
"It's not the game but the chase ~ not the trophy but the race !" from my Dad, many years ago.
User avatar
lostknife4
hunter
 
Posts: 4259
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 4:32 pm
Location: Eastern Canada

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby On the X » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:41 am

lostknife4 wrote:Image

First two are for a given velocity of 600 fps, the last two have gel penetration given at 2"

For your perusal,
Lost

I understand the 600fps guideline but is the 2" penetration a minimal? If so then is your chart showing 30.8 as a max?
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby lostknife4 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:35 pm

Both the 600 "rule" and the 2" "rule" are suggested by a few members here as the minimum requirements for large Ducks and Geese. I chose those two "rules" to make the chart which shows the other calculated values when using both with the fixed given "rule" criteria.
If you wish to follow the "rules" then these figures will give you a somewhat guideline.
Lost
"It's not the game but the chase ~ not the trophy but the race !" from my Dad, many years ago.
User avatar
lostknife4
hunter
 
Posts: 4259
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 4:32 pm
Location: Eastern Canada

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby eastcoastsoxfan » Sun Mar 02, 2014 12:47 pm

Apparently we can forget all the rules, steel 2s at 1400fps will kill to 65 yards because Frank said so! lol
"The old school hunters shoot what they shoot and kill as many as they always have, the newbies have their 3.5."
User avatar
eastcoastsoxfan
hunter
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 4:17 pm
Location: Nova Scotia

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby J J Mac » Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:07 pm

On the X wrote:
lostknife4 wrote:Image

First two are for a given velocity of 600 fps, the last two have gel penetration given at 2"

For your perusal,
Lost

I understand the 600fps guideline but is the 2" penetration a minimal? If so then is your chart showing 30.8 as a max?

Here are the facts as I see them on the 600 fps "rule" for killing waterfowl.

http://www.duckhuntingchat.com/shotgun-shell-ballistics.php#comments

I like penetration in ballistic gelatin to predict penetration ability in waterfowl - 1.5" for big ducks, 2.25" for giant Canadas, and in between numbers for small geese. You can get by with smaller penetration numbers if the birds are oriented in optimum fashion for hitting the vitals but the 1.5" for big ducks and 2.25" for big Canadas will almost always penetrate adequately no matter the orientation of the bird relative to the shot path.
User avatar
J J Mac
hunter
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Frank Lopez » Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:20 pm

eastcoastsoxfan wrote:Apparently we can forget all the rules, steel 2s at 1400fps will kill to 65 yards because Frank said so! lol


Actually, I said 60. But, don't knock it until you've tried it. :lol3:

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: 2904
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 4:34 pm
Location: Long Island New York

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Yuchi1 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:25 pm

This is probably why my FSH of 1 3/16 in #1's at 1619FPS/MV have emerged as the best all-around load for the widest variety of situations/birds. What I like about the #1's is that (with appropriate pattern density) they will kill (head/neck shot) large race canada geese to 60 yards as the penetration requirements (for those target spots) are considerably less than for body shots. Same logic is applied in using #4's for birds in over the decoys in light (<12KTS) wind conditions.
Sent from my Sumerian tablets

Does the number of bands claimed simply mean you have an Ebay account?

FSH Pro Staffer

High Potentate, NSSB (no spinning shotcup brotherhood)
Yuchi1
hunter
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Creek Nation of Oklahoma

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby UmatillaJeff » Sun Mar 02, 2014 1:52 pm

What is the best number of decoys to use when shooting ballistic gel? We have had real trouble getting gel to finish here in Oregon. as well as number two steel to kill geese over the decoys! Jeff
Count all the times you shoot a bird on the water. This will teach you about how effective the shells you think are so great are.
UmatillaJeff
hunter
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:12 pm

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Theduckguru » Sun Mar 02, 2014 2:11 pm

J J Mac wrote:
On the X wrote:
lostknife4 wrote:Image

First two are for a given velocity of 600 fps, the last two have gel penetration given at 2"

For your perusal,
Lost

I understand the 600fps guideline but is the 2" penetration a minimal? If so then is your chart showing 30.8 as a max?

Here are the facts as I see them on the 600 fps "rule" for killing waterfowl.

http://www.duckhuntingchat.com/shotgun-shell-ballistics.php#comments

I like penetration in ballistic gelatin to predict penetration ability in waterfowl - 1.5" for big ducks, 2.25" for giant Canadas, and in between numbers for small geese. You can get by with smaller penetration numbers if the birds are oriented in optimum fashion for hitting the vitals but the 1.5" for big ducks and 2.25" for big Canadas will almost always penetrate adequately no matter the orientation of the bird relative to the shot path.


The problem - gelatin prediction assumes that on every shot the hunter will have sufficient pellet energy to take the bird. That's all well and good, but if I am pass shooting, why I am going to be shooting birds going away from me? That is not how any one who knows how it is done pass shoots and why you can get substantially more range out of steel shot than gelatin proponents publish.
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: 329
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:54 am

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby J J Mac » Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:46 pm

Theduckguru wrote:
J J Mac wrote:Here are the facts as I see them on the 600 fps "rule" for killing waterfowl.

http://www.duckhuntingchat.com/shotgun-shell-ballistics.php#comments

I like penetration in ballistic gelatin to predict penetration ability in waterfowl - 1.5" for big ducks, 2.25" for giant Canadas, and in between numbers for small geese. You can get by with smaller penetration numbers if the birds are oriented in optimum fashion for hitting the vitals but the 1.5" for big ducks and 2.25" for big Canadas will almost always penetrate adequately no matter the orientation of the bird relative to the shot path.


The problem - gelatin prediction assumes that on every shot the hunter will have sufficient pellet energy to take the bird. That's all well and good, but if I am pass shooting, why I am going to be shooting birds going away from me? That is not how any one who knows how it is done pass shoots and why you can get substantially more range out of steel shot than gelatin proponents publish.

As indicated in my posting, you can get by with smaller ballistic gelatin numbers if birds are oriented in optimum fashion for hitting the vitals. So, for example, if you can kill giant Canadas at a distance corresponding to 1.8" or 2" gelatin penetration then that number is what you should use. This ballistic gelatin number, using the appropriate software, will give you the distance at which some other pellet size will penetrate the same amount thus letting you screen different pellets' performance. Of course, to get the same performance from the two shells, the patterns must be the same.
Last edited by J J Mac on Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
J J Mac
hunter
 
Posts: 771
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Yuchi1 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 3:56 pm

UmatillaJeff wrote:What is the best number of decoys to use when shooting ballistic gel? We have had real trouble getting gel to finish here in Oregon. as well as number two steel to kill geese over the decoys! Jeff


Don't fret as EMI is coming out with a new load specifically designed to plaster any gel that moves as well as decoys to match, known as DIRT (disposable income removal tools).
Sent from my Sumerian tablets

Does the number of bands claimed simply mean you have an Ebay account?

FSH Pro Staffer

High Potentate, NSSB (no spinning shotcup brotherhood)
Yuchi1
hunter
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Creek Nation of Oklahoma

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Theduckguru » Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:14 pm

J J Mac wrote:
Theduckguru wrote:
J J Mac wrote:Here are the facts as I see them on the 600 fps "rule" for killing waterfowl.

http://www.duckhuntingchat.com/shotgun-shell-ballistics.php#comments

I like penetration in ballistic gelatin to predict penetration ability in waterfowl - 1.5" for big ducks, 2.25" for giant Canadas, and in between numbers for small geese. You can get by with smaller penetration numbers if the birds are oriented in optimum fashion for hitting the vitals but the 1.5" for big ducks and 2.25" for big Canadas will almost always penetrate adequately no matter the orientation of the bird relative to the shot path.


The problem - gelatin prediction assumes that on every shot the hunter will have sufficient pellet energy to take the bird. That's all well and good, but if I am pass shooting, why I am going to be shooting birds going away from me? That is not how any one who knows how it is done pass shoots and why you can get substantially more range out of steel shot than gelatin proponents publish.

As indicated in my posting, you can get by with smaller ballistic gelatin numbers if birds are oriented in optimum fashion for hitting the vitals. So, for example, if you can kill giant Canadas at a distance corresponding to 1.8" or 2" gelatin penetration then that number is what you should use. This ballistic gelatin number, using the appropriate software, will give you the distance at which some other pellet size ill penetrate the same distance thus letting you screen different pellets' performance. Of course, to get the same performance from the two shells, the patterns must be the same.


That sounds good, then temperature, altitude and baro pressure can change your physics a yard or two.
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: 329
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:54 am

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby lostknife4 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 6:34 pm

Just in case you didn't notice I did not include any TSS information in these charts.....................
Just for you Larry
Lost
"It's not the game but the chase ~ not the trophy but the race !" from my Dad, many years ago.
User avatar
lostknife4
hunter
 
Posts: 4259
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 4:32 pm
Location: Eastern Canada

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Yuchi1 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:38 pm

lostknife4 wrote:Just in case you didn't notice I did not include any TSS information in these charts.....................
Just for you Larry
Lost


We figured you were just under the weather or otherwise delirious! :tongue:
Sent from my Sumerian tablets

Does the number of bands claimed simply mean you have an Ebay account?

FSH Pro Staffer

High Potentate, NSSB (no spinning shotcup brotherhood)
Yuchi1
hunter
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Creek Nation of Oklahoma

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby 3200 man » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:08 am

I do appreciate that Bill ,but wondered ! I would shoot TSS but , I have no experience at 82 yds... :lol3:

I do know we all split hairs as to shot sizes ability to kill but , pattern density at any given range seems to be more
important with steel shot ?
3200 man
hunter
 
Posts: 2587
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:30 am

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby mudpack » Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:15 am

On the X wrote:#1 at 1300fps compared to #2 at 1500fps

From Lost's excellent chart, you can see that individual pellet energy out where birds are normally killed is all but equal.
Assuming that the 1500fps load gets its extra MV from a drop in payload weight, the number of pellets in those payloads should be pretty close, too.
Bottom line: which ever of these two loads patterns best in your gun/choke would be the most efficient (lethal) at bring down waterfowl. On paper, they'd be too close to call.
mudpack
hunter
 
Posts: 5424
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:40 am
Location: Central Kansas

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby lostknife4 » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:20 pm

I'm wondering about the ability of all shot sizes to penetrate feather cover, I find that the T and BBB were hauling a lot of feathers into the meat whereas the smaller sizes like 3, 2, and 1 and even B didn't seem to carry those feathers with them or push them in in front of them and of course I have to mention that the 7,8 and 9 TSS seem not the least affected by feathers on their journey right thru the birds , having sufficient mass density, commonly called sectional density in pistol and rifle bullets, to penetrate deeply and most cases pass thru. I've read some guys accounts of holding birds up and have shot pellets drop out of the feathers but has anyone any data about the feather penetrability of shot in different sizes and differing mass densities? Steel vs Lead vs TSS?
Lost
"It's not the game but the chase ~ not the trophy but the race !" from my Dad, many years ago.
User avatar
lostknife4
hunter
 
Posts: 4259
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 4:32 pm
Location: Eastern Canada

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby baltz526 » Tue Mar 04, 2014 4:01 pm

I started shooting Copper plated B last year for western Canada. Killed several. Inside about 45yrds most pellets where complete pass through at 1450fps + muzzle velocity. Most where hit from the side with pellets in the ribs, under wings, back area, neck, head. I did find a few pellets under the skin on the opposite side from entry. I did not drop any geese beyond about 45yrds with the load. When multiple pellets hit all breast meat they passed completely through. The few pellets I found, hit on more of a rear impact angle. Traveled through goose to lodge in the opposite side after about 4-5" of meat, breastbone, chest cavity travel. One duck I hit on the 3rd shot, so it was outside 45yrds. Probably in the 55yrd area. It had several complete pass through hits and was dead in the air. Same with the closer ducks. While after the larger steel pellets slow down, They do seem to pull more feathers inside the wound channels.
OHA life member Lapine oregon
User avatar
baltz526
hunter
 
Posts: 924
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:29 pm
Location: Lapine Oregon

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby Jon Bergren » Tue Mar 04, 2014 5:58 pm

Steel 3's at 1650 fps goes clear thru drake mallards at 40 yds and steel BB's at 1550 fps clear thru Lesser geese at 40 yds. They are the only loads that I have checked since steel shot. Ned S
Jon Bergren
hunter
 
Posts: 1356
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2013 7:07 pm

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby On the X » Tue Mar 04, 2014 6:22 pm

Even an argumentative butthole such as myself can learn a lot around here. thanks guys,
On the X
hunter
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

Re: Pellet lethality comparison question

Postby 10gaOkie » Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:06 pm

In the early days of steel shot, I did my own penetration testing. I was using Fed factory shells at 1260fps. I tested both #2s and #1s. At 40 yards, the #2s gave the same amount of penetration that the #1s did at 52 yards.

Chris
10gaOkie
hunter
 
Posts: 2902
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:38 pm
Location: OKC

Next

Return to Shotshell, Reloading, Ballistics, & Chokes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: On the X and 16 guests