[hamernhonkers]

Look up one of the old forums on shooting and see how many events hammer has won and we cant forget he is shooting the almighty 28 GA :thumbsup:

That was a few years back man. I think my shooting skills have slipped a little since then man. :crying:

 

[hamernhonkers]

I'll try to give you an idea of what I am hunting. This a crappy cell phone pic but should give you some idea. The decoy's are about 20 yards from the blind to the west. The willow/trees to my hard left (very left corner of the pic) are 50ish yards.



And here is just how mixed the bags can be and are most day's.

I think you guys know that not many would put this kind of effort into so many loads, chokes and patterning unless they intended to insure clean kills of the birds they are hunting. I can tell you that I really have no reason or desire to stretch the steel past its range. That is why I already have 200 rounds of HW13 6 shot loaded up along with 100 rounds of HW15 6 shot for geese. If the birds are just not working well one day and I feel I have to take longer shots, I will have it covered :beer:

 

[3200 man]

Jesse

I know what you're saying , the object of putting lethal holes in a bird comes with shooting experience and understanding
what you have loaded in your ammo . That's one of the reasons I shoot pigeons around my area at dairies , not only checking
loads on my F1 along with patterning them but , actual putting them on birds . On a normal morning I usually shoot between
80 and 120 pigeons , this gives me a darn good idea of the loads ability along with choke selection for the load .
I still haven't loaded the recipes you were so kind sharing with me but , I will be loading them before this season starts .
I don't have any HW13 6's , I'll have to order some just to see what all the crowing is about . I have a case or 2 of nickel 7's
1 1/4 oz pigeon loads I'll cut and use the shot in the 28 ga , that should give me an idea of its range on pigeons versus steel
shot ?

Thanks
Larry

 

[mudpack]

.. hope is it will kill up to mallard sized birds out to 30 yards max!

If your gun/choke gives good patterns with this load, and you can center the bird in that pattern, it will kill mallards out to 30 yards. NO MORE THAN THAT...no matter what you "elevation" might be.

 

[Jon Bergren]

Kpy sasy 40 yds at 600 flps. Ned S

 

[goosepit2007]

.. hope is it will kill up to mallard sized birds out to 30 yards max!

If your gun/choke gives good patterns with this load, and you can center the bird in that pattern, it will kill mallards out to 30 yards. NO MORE THAN THAT...no matter what you "elevation" might be.

mudpack...5's work great for mallards out to the same 38 yards as snows that i have tested with ranged birds...but i will say that when the birds get to 4o yard mark they come down but are still alive but sicker then heck... it is surprising on how well the smaller shot works ...both wings are broke neck folds under some but not all times the cart will over and over tell they hit the ground...

5's work best at 1500 to 1550 fps...but even at 1450 fps they get to true 33 yards with drt results with body hits...no head neck strikes...

my buddies shoot 6 shot of steel all the time when they hunt with us with good results too...but i set my lowest size shot to be 5's. heck i have killed ducks with 7 steel at out to 25 yards....and they are only going 1300 fps...cripple loads that i forgot to take out after going after honkers that swam away and got out to far in the lakes/reservoirs for the dogs...

4's at 1275 fps is the same for yardages as the 1450 fps of 5's....which we have found to be 33 yards for body hits only with actual ranged birds(no guessing) for drt results...alot of people shoot those remington 11/4 loads in 23/4inch hulls in nitro mag whihc they are right at the 1275 fps average...

here is a pattern of one of the loads that i use with 5's which is 7/8 oz load going 1550 fps at 40 yards:

 

[3200 man]

Shotshell Ballistics Software tells us at 1550 fps 5 shot is good to 35 yds with 1.28" of penetration !
It would be nice if someone could tell us what each pellets energy would be a 575 fps ? with steel shot !
It also would be interesting to know how many body hits it would take to knock a bird down at this distance ?

3200 man

 

[mudpack]

4's at 1275 fps is the same for yardages as the 1450 fps of 5's....which we have found to be 33 yards for body hits only with actual ranged birds(no guessing) for drt results...alot of people shoot those remington 11/4 loads in 23/4inch hulls in nitro mag whihc they are right at the 1275 fps average...

Your max range for this load is 33 yards, mine is 30 yards. I'd say we're not so far apart on that aspect.

BTW, my favorite teal load is that NitroMag 2 3/4" by 1 1/4oz of #4 steel you speak of. It's killer on the little ducks, out to about 35 yards. Who knows, it may kill further than that, I just don't take teal shots further than 35 yards.....

 

[kenner]

But in the article Frank posted, Brezney talked 'bout 18 pellets in the mallard... That's a lotta shot pickin'!! I'd rather have something with the pattern density to kill the little ones and mostly pass through the big ones.

 

[goosepit2007]

4's at 1275 fps is the same for yardages as the 1450 fps of 5's....which we have found to be 33 yards for body hits only with actual ranged birds(no guessing) for drt results...alot of people shoot those remington 11/4 loads in 23/4inch hulls in nitro mag whihc they are right at the 1275 fps average...

Your max range for this load is 33 yards, mine is 30 yards. I'd say we're not so far apart on that aspect.

BTW, my favorite teal load is that NitroMag 2 3/4" by 1 1/4oz of #4 steel you speak of. It's killer on the little ducks, out to about 35 yards. Who knows, it may kill further than that, I just don't take teal shots further than 35 yards.....

4's going 1275 fps we found that load to give drt kills for snows with body hits to the 33 yard range after that they were crippled still alive but hurting bad(just few yards further than 33 yard ranged) . shots was straight over head shots...all birds was checked for head and neck hits while cleaning.

so for smaller ducks it would be tad futher for drt kills...the field testing that we did included 4's going 1275 fps and found 5's going 1450 fps to have the same results ...i just threw that factory load out there for an example so fellow hunters that have used that load by chance or still does would have something to compare 5 steel shot going 1450 fps...

goose

 

[hamernhonkers]

Well my shot should be here tomorrow and I hope to have patterns tomorrow night posted up.

 

[goosepit2007]

Shotshell Ballistics Software tells us at 1550 fps 5 shot is good to 35 yds with 1.28" of penetration !
It would be nice if someone could tell us what each pellets energy would be a 575 fps ? with steel shot !
It also would be interesting to know how many body hits it would take to knock a bird down at this distance ?

3200 man

3200 man,

rsi has data for 5 steel going 1375 fps ....at 25 yards has 755 fps.....30 yards 692 fps...35 yards 636 fps ....40 yards 587 fps...not sure if that is correct or not...

i do not go by any programs to come up with loads i get good pattern loads take to field and see what it can do...that is why i do alot of testing in the spring going after snows when get in hot field there is alot of singles and doubles that a guy can range very easy and shoot and mark the bird angle ,load, size shot on duct tape wraped around leg ect..

38 yards is for snow geese that is actually range with lazer range finder then shot right after the yardage is called.
that range when called is right on because they just hang there straight over head above the flyers....right were we put are layouts...

at the 38 yard range they averaged right at 7 ...highest count was right at 10 hits with the load that i posted the pattern of 5's shot at 40 yards with light mod choke..

even at 40 yards they still had right at 3 to 4 hits some up to 5 hits ..they still came straight down with little sailing but once on the ground they were not going any were blood was leaking out bad enough to turn them red were pellets hit even at 40 yard range...that just told me that the energy/penetration was getting on weak side..that was with 1500 to 1550 fps loads of 5's.

hope that this helps

goose

 

[goosepit2007]

But in the article Frank posted, Brezney talked 'bout 18 pellets in the mallard... That's a lotta shot pickin'!! I'd rather have something with the pattern density to kill the little ones and mostly pass through the big ones.

debone the breast meat and soak in water( blood shock/clots soak out) use the cow gut magnets and yu are set... skin and the bones removed ....takes alot of the game taste away from the meat makes for good table fare even none hunters that have not gotten used to wild game...we have people over all the time

 

[3200 man]

Goose

With #5 steel having 1.28 inches of penetration at 35 yds , if , it's traveling at 700 fps on impact ( with your field testing )
how many of those 3 to 7 pellets go through the breast bone where they live ?

I'm not sure but I'm thinking with less than 7 pellets hitting a large duck or medium goose at this distance , there
would not be enough energy with these 7 pellets ( combined ) to give you more than a 50 % kill rate ? If you're Lucky !
I have shot Teal with 1 oz of 6's ( factory ) with a IM choke and it does a fair job but when the bird gets past 35 yds ,
the cripple rate goes way-up , if the bird is going away !
I do see a benefit ( for some use ) on Teal or Doves , though ! :thumbsup:

3200 man

 

[Frank Lopez]

But in the article Frank posted, Brezney talked 'bout 18 pellets in the mallard...

While I'd expect a higher pellet count with smaller shot, I wouldn't get too wrapped up in that aspect of the article. Like most Brezny articles, the data supplied is relatively incomplete. What we know is that it was shot at 35 yards at a pinned (stationary) duck. We don't know the velocity of the load or the choke used. Still, if you can get 18 pellets on the bird, you're doing something right.

But, to me, the most amazing part of the article is the gel penetration tests! Again, using the data he supplies in the article, he says that there was 3 inches of penetration at 35 yards! THREE INCHES! According to JJ Mac's article on penetration, the #5 steel pellet would have to be traveling at 700fps just to get the minimum penetration of about 1.28 inches!

I've seen other test results of penetration at range that also contradict what the programs predict. Some are really interesting. To the point that I'm beginning to think we need to rethink (or at least empirically revise) those ballistics programs with respect to shotgun loads.

Frank

 

[Jon Bergren]

But in the article Frank posted, Brezney talked 'bout 18 pellets in the mallard...

While I'd expect a higher pellet count with smaller shot, I wouldn't get too wrapped up in that aspect of the article. Like most Brezny articles, the data supplied is relatively incomplete. What we know is that it was shot at 35 yards at a pinned (stationary) duck. We don't know the velocity of the load or the choke used. Still, if you can get 18 pellets on the bird, you're doing something right.

But, to me, the most amazing part of the article is the gel penetration tests! Again, using the data he supplies in the article, he says that there was 3 inches of penetration at 35 yards! THREE INCHES! According to JJ Mac's article on penetration, the #5 steel pellet would have to be traveling at 700fps just to get the minimum penetration of about 1.28 inches!

I've seen other test results of penetration at range that also contradict what the programs predict. Some are really interesting. To the point that I'm beginning to think we need to rethink (or at least empirically revise) those ballistics programs with respect to shotgun loads.

Frank

Penetration in what? Also Brezny is making a good living doing my hobbies. Ned S

 

[lukepaige]

I bought a case of those rem 1 1/4 oz #4's in 2004 and used them with dismal results. I used to hunt very small potholes in the marsh of coastal louisiana. We're talking 25-35yd shots. Damn near every bird shot was a cripple and required water swatting. Never figured that one out, the shot just didn't penetrate. I shoot 4's now at 1600 fps and the ducks crumple out to about 35 yds although I prefer 3's as an all around load.

 

[zpstl321]

Frank,

I have done a little ballistic testing and I may be able to help with the penetration issue. There are two types of Gel used in testing, 20% and 10%. Many of the people testing use the 20% mix because it doesn't require refrigeration and monitoring temperatures to 35-38 degrees. The issue with this is that only replicates large human muscles, such as those found in the upper leg. You'llnot find tissue like that or of that size in a duck.

The 10% gel would be a better mix for testing as it replicates organ tissue, such as kidneys, or spleen tissue. It is so close your can see identical spiral fracturing, and splitting of the tissue and gel.

Next is the issue of lung tissue. If you have ever examined lungs that have been shot you know they offer up almost no resistance to projectiles and can be easily mashed between your fingers. You can pretty much thing of them as a stack of plastic bags filled with air. With this knowledge look at a duck and think about how think the meat is where your shot hit. With a wing up on a side view there is little offered up to stop the pellets. Once you break the skin and go through a very small muscle one would expect the pellet to lodge against the off side ribs.

There is another factor that offers up confusion in that skin stretches when unrestricted. This means when the projectile hits the on side you see very little stretch, but on the off side breaking thru it can equal many inches of penetration in muscle tissue. In some animals it can be as much as 12"-14" of penetration.

The above is only as few of the things that must be considered and analyzed.

 

[J J Mac]

J J Mac comments in red

But in the article Frank posted, Brezney talked 'bout 18 pellets in the mallard...

While I'd expect a higher pellet count with smaller shot, I wouldn't get too wrapped up in that aspect of the article. Like most Brezny articles, the data supplied is relatively incomplete. What we know is that it was shot at 35 yards at a pinned (stationary) duck. We don't know the velocity of the load or the choke used. Still, if you can get 18 What I read said 11 pellets on the bird, you're doing something right.

But, to me, the most amazing part of the article is the gel penetration tests! Again, using the data he supplies in the article, he says that there was 3 inches of penetration at 35 yards! THREE INCHES! According to JJ Mac's article on penetration, the #5 steel pellet would have to be traveling at 700fps just to get the minimum penetration of about 1.28 inches! I also noticed the 3 inches of penetration and googled the Perma Gel penetration test media. It is not gelatin. Of course, it is only one data point without any comparison to similar penetration data in that media with other shot sizes and was probably not calibrated with a BB using a gun with known and fixed muzzle velocity as specified for gelatin. Furthermore, I read on article which said that this gel simulated 10% gelatin vs the 20% gelatin data I think is used in Shotshell Ballistics. I don't know if this is true or not but if it is it would give much different results than 20% gelatin. Furthermore, Brezny did not give the velocity that the #5 pellet was traveling when it impacted the test medium and the distance was not specified for the gel penetration test even though Brezny said the pinned ducks were at 35 yd..

I've seen other test results of penetration at range that also contradict what the programs predict. Some are really interesting. I would like to read these results. Please list the references. To the point that I'm beginning to think we need to rethink (or at least empirically revise) those ballistics programs with respect to shotgun loads. I can't believe you are drawing this conclusion on this very incomplete and statistically invalid work by Brezny.

Frank

 

[Frank Lopez]

J J Mac comments in red

But in the article Frank posted, Brezney talked 'bout 18 pellets in the mallard...

While I'd expect a higher pellet count with smaller shot, I wouldn't get too wrapped up in that aspect of the article. Like most Brezny articles, the data supplied is relatively incomplete. What we know is that it was shot at 35 yards at a pinned (stationary) duck. We don't know the velocity of the load or the choke used. Still, if you can get 18 What I read said 11 pellets on the bird, you're doing something right.

I was quoting kenner.

J J Mac comments in redBut, to me, the most amazing part of the article is the gel penetration tests! Again, using the data he supplies in the article, he says that there was 3 inches of penetration at 35 yards! THREE INCHES! According to JJ Mac's article on penetration, the #5 steel pellet would have to be traveling at 700fps just to get the minimum penetration of about 1.28 inches! I also noticed the 3 inches of penetration and googled the Perma Gel penetration test media. It is not gelatin. Of course, it is only one data point without any comparison to similar penetration data in that media with other shot sizes and was probably not calibrated with a BB using a gun with known and fixed muzzle velocity as specified for gelatin. Furthermore, I read on article which said that this gel simulated 10% gelatin vs the 20% gelatin data I think is used in Shotshell Ballistics. I don't know if this is true or not but if it is it would give much different results than 20% gelatin. Furthermore, Brezny did not give the velocity that the #5 pellet was traveling when it impacted the test medium and the distance was not specified for the gel penetration test even though Brezny said the pinned ducks were at 35 yd..

Agreed. I believe that I even cautioned in my first post that since it was Brezny and was full of ambiguities it should be taken with a grain of salt.

J J Mac comments in redI've seen other test results of penetration at range that also contradict what the programs predict. Some are really interesting. I would like to read these results. Please list the references.

There's a recent Field and Stream article which claims testing by an independent lab (Nilo Farms, IIRC) that tested down range penetration on ballistic gel of two different Winchester BB loads. One load, Xperts (1550fps) and the other Dryloks (1300fps). The results showed penetration of 5 inches for the Dryloks and 5 1/8 inches for the Xperts. There may be a valid explaination here in that the Drylok pellets are much more uniform and spherical and would therefore retain velocity better and have better penetration. But, plugging the data into a program, such as Lowry's, would reveal some very different predictions than were actually observed. There was also another test, again by Brezny, so keep that in mind, with Winchester BlindSide Hex shot in #2, 1400fps MV. The finding was that "penetration was about the same as standard #2 steel". Again, given the ballistic coefficient of a hexagonal shaped projectile that tumbles randomly, not something you'd expect. In another F&S test, this one done at Federal Ammunition's high tech range, Black Cloud BBs in 3 and 3 1/2 inch loadings were pitted against one another. The long shell had a velocity of 1500fps and the 3 inch had a 1450fps MV. Granted, not much of a difference, both loads penetrated to the same depth! A little more searching will reveal other similar tests with similar results. Furthermore, high speed photography of shot patterns in flight are very interesting to observe.

J J Mac comments in redTo the point that I'm beginning to think we need to rethink (or at least empirically revise) those ballistics programs with respect to shotgun loads. I can't believe you are drawing this conclusion on this very incomplete and statistically invalid work by Brezny.

Again, I agree that the work is statistically invalid and that it is by Brezny, so it is somewhat questionable. However, I also believe that you are reading too much into thing to suggest that I'm basing things on a single article. Ballistics Coefficients are typically established computationally. That number is then revised after several test firings and observations to arrive at a reliable number. To my knowledge, ballistics programs use the same BC when dealing with shotgun pellets. This may be a big mistake. Lowry observed that things weren't happening exactly as predicted with steel shot, so he revised the tables basing his work on 7/8 inch steel balls (IIRC). Still, the data was based on single projectiles, not pellets flying in a swarm. That swarm and the way the pattern blooms may have some effect on the pressure wave in front of the shot swarm.

Frank