Max effective range for #4 Buck pellets is?

[314159]

The #4 Buck loads were a hot ticket a long while back, plenty of pellets and even patterns. However, they fell out of favor due to lack of penetration at a distance. They kicked like a mule, too.

I note that Federal is offering a reduced recoil plated #4 load these days. This might be a pretty good load for strictly indoors use. Lots of pellets and limited over penetration hazard perhaps. Does anyone have testing or data that reveals the maximum distance #4 Buck will meet the 4 layer denim penetration standard?

[warpedcamshaft]

Plated or high hardness shot in 4 buck might get adequate performance. If it deforms significantly, the results are sub-par.

This is based on past posts by DocGKR on another forum. A bit of google searching will find it, because I don't want to post a link.

I know this provides no answer for your max effective range question, but I figure it is a start...

[warpedcamshaft]

Federal PD156 is the 4 buck load you mentioned.

[Jeep]

Chuck Haggard had a post sometime ago about shootings with #4 he's seen. Short conclusion, IIRC, was that it appears extremely effective at close ranges, but even moderate cover (ie--a screen door) drastically reduced its effectiveness.

[witchking777]

Stick with #1.

[DocGKR]

With #1 buckshot available which penetrates to the same depth as common service caliber handgun loads, their is not any reason to consider #4 buckshot for defensive purposes.

[Jeep]

With #1 buckshot available which penetrates to the same depth as common service caliber handgun loads, their is not any reason to consider #4 buckshot for defensive purposes.

I just wish they made more of it to drive prices down. Plenty of reasonably priced OO shot (and of course it works too), but #1 can be pricey. I'm hoping that your work will increase demand for #1, which will in turn increase supply and make it less of a specialty item.

[xmanhockey7]

I'm surprised to see the increase in #4 and #1 buck availability. For a while it seemed like I could not find any #1 buck other than Federal Flight Control. I had an instructor say he was a fan of #4, but couldn't find much. Now I'm seeing quite a bit more. I think some people's attitude with #4 is they're just going to hit the bad guy with a giant wall of lead. That said I've been sticking with 00 Flight Control in my HD gun. At 10 yards I'm getting a 4" group which is about what I want.

[314159]

I've got a good bit of FC#1 and do prefer it. I recently moved to a much more suburban area and can't imagine a scenario that would require me to go out of doors here. Since any engagement I can imagine would be 7 yards, absolute max inside the house, I thought I could stack the deck a bit for over penetration issues.

[peterb]

With #1 buckshot available which penetrates to the same depth as common service caliber handgun loads, their is not any reason to consider #4 buckshot for defensive purposes.

If one is restricted to 20 gauge, #3 or 4 may be the best buckshot option available. That was the case a few years ago but I haven't checked recently.

[Jeep]

If one is restricted to 20 gauge, #3 or 4 may be the best buckshot option available. That was the case a few years ago but I haven't checked recently.


You can get Number 1 in 20 gauge and I figure that you might want that penetration even more given that there are less pellets.

[314159]

So, I'm gathering that nowadays #4 Buck (even plated and hardened) is considered inadequate at near point blank range. I completely agree that it is a lousy general purpose load. I thought it might be fine if used at indoor ranges with the added benefit of reduced ability to penetrate through a home's exterior wall however.

[Drang]

The #4 Buck loads were a hot ticket a long while back, plenty of pellets and even patterns. However, they fell out of favor due to lack of penetration at a distance. They kicked like a mule, too.

I note that Federal is offering a reduced recoil plated #4 load these days. This might be a pretty good load for strictly indoors use. Lots of pellets and limited over penetration hazard perhaps. Does anyone have testing or data that reveals the maximum distance #4 Buck will meet the 4 layer denim penetration standard?

Back in October I took the defensive shotgun class at Firearms Academy of Seattle. During our "learning lunch" we watched a video Marty Hayes made when FAS was still at an indoor range in the actual Seattle suburbs, in which the penetration of many different shotgun loads was demonstrated. The "target" he used for this was a wooden box with three layers of .75" sheetrock, and multiple (eight, I believe) layers of .75" plywood. (This was intended to simulate typical construction of a modern house, not a ballistics testing target.)
#4 Buckshot penetrated all three layers of sheetrock, and one layer of plywood.
EDIT: So did #4 Birdshot, although it did not have as much had some damage to, but no penetration of, the plywood. (Realized I had misinterpreted my notes.)
#1 Buckshot penetrated all three layers of sheetrock and 2 layers of plywood.

So if what you are looking for is simply less over-penetration #4 Buck penetrates less than any other buckshot, but even #7 1/2 and #8 birdshot had some penetration of all three layers of sheetrock.

[Jeep]

So, I'm gathering that nowadays #4 Buck (even plated and hardened) is considered inadequate at near point blank range. I completely agree that it is a lousy general purpose load. I thought it might be fine if used at indoor ranges with the added benefit of reduced ability to penetrate through a home's exterior wall however.

With no barriers, #4 buck at near point blank range will almost certainly be effective. You increase that near certainty with #1 and OO buck, and in addition they will deal with barriers better than #4. So going with #1 or OO makes sense, but if you find yourself with only #4 by all means use it.

[Chuck Haggard]

I one shooting I saw with #4 buck, in which the bad guy was hit with 25 out of the 27 pellets of full power Remington, left only about half of the pellets inside the bad guy. I've killed a number of coyotes with it as well, and while they aren't a thick target, it's rare to not have the pellets exit.
At closer range I'm not really worried about lack of penetration with 4 buck, I think it's enough. I do think it's a poor choice for police duty use, but in the house I wouldn't have a problem with using it.

[DocGKR]

#4 will work very well on an unobstructed frontal shooting; if that is the only shot one would ever have to take there is not much to worry about #4. But what if the suspect has an arm raised, or is a very large individual, or is at an oblique angle, or is behind some object? In those cases #1 has a lot more going for it. However, if all one has is #4, don't loose too much sleep over it--just keep making accurate hits until the threat is over....

[Chuck Haggard]

To be clear, I'd choose #1 or 00 over #4 buck any day given the choice unless something weird was going on. When I lived in an apartment, as an example, I had 4 buck in the Mossberg I kept at home, made me feel better about the risk of a shoot-through on a bad guy, and I knew the limitations of the loading.

[314159]

Thanks for the input DocGKR. My concerns of living in the 'burbs these days mirror yours Mr. Haggard. The extra chunky size baddie is a really valid point... Ok, first 1 or2 rounds #4 then #1.