Interesting article on buckshot effective range

[Norville]

Ran across this today, it seems well done, although I’m not sure how he concludes that #1 FC recoils 23% less than 00, unless he is comparing to full power 00.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/Shotguns/Maximum%20Effective%20Range/Buckshot.html

[Doc_Glock]

That was interesting.

[jellydonut]

In my opinion this validates the #1 buckshot as the 'goldilocks' choice.

Yes, the bigger BBs of the 00 buck still retain penetration capability for 100 yards.. but that's way past the point where you even know where your pattern is hitting, which was found here to be 52 yards, about the same as the #1 shell.

So is that an added capability, or is it just a liability? To me it seems like a liability. To me, it would seem the #1 size pellet is more adapted to the actual aimed effective range of the cartridge.

[RevolverRob]

Recoil reduction calculation against the full power 00 buckshot they used.

I wish they had included pattern controlled, plated, low velocity 00 in this study.

While recoil reduction is a fine goal, I do find the rather severe penetration drop off as velocity drops in the #1 shells to be a cause for pause. The variation shell-to-shell on accuracy for all shells is also disturbing. It’s data like those that make me firmly believe that shot shells, regardless of type, really should be thought of as 30-yards and closer tools. There is variation from ~56% to 100% of pellets hitting the target at 40-yards, between the same brand of shell and the same shotgun fired from rest. If there was a consistent linear pattern of shot spread between distances, I might find 40-50 compelling distances to shoot at, but there simply isn’t.

[Balisong]

Recoil reduction calculation against the full power 00 buckshot they used.

I wish they had included pattern controlled, plated, low velocity 00 in this study.



I agree with this, would be cool to see an add on of that data. But I would also prefer to see them testing out of 18" barrels.
Fascinating stuff though, thanks for posting. I want to learn more about buckshot and slug terminal ballistics.

[BehindBlueI's]

A question that always needs asked when selecting ammunition for self-defense is "how does it do against bone?"

How does #1 compare in that category? How likely it is to break a femur, penetrate a forearm and continue into the chest behind it, etc.

I don't know the answer, but would be interested.

[RevolverRob]

A question that always needs asked when selecting ammunition for self-defense is "how does it do against bone?"

How does #1 compare in that category? How likely it is to break a femur, penetrate a forearm and continue into the chest behind it, etc.

I don't know the answer, but would be interested.

I don't know the precise answer to this, but I can't imagine that #1 is significantly worse than 00 in this regard, the diameter is only .03" different, and weight is ~13 grains less for #1 over 00. Firing 15-16 pellets of #1 vs. 8-9 pellets of 00, you should get nearly equivalent terminal effect given the same initial velocity and that both forms of shot are plated (or not plated, either).

But to be honest, I remain unconvinced that the juice is worth the squeeze in this scenario. Given the reduction in velocity between reduced recoil and full power loads. I've never had a problem managing full power buckshot. Full power 8-pellet 00 in a versatite/flite control wad (Hornady Crit Defense) remains my choice, because it's basically like firing 8 rounds of 55-grain 5.56 from an AR15 simultaneously instead of 15 or 16 40-grain 22LRs from a handgun. The Versatite delivers patterns like FC, and the 8-pellet doesn't suffer from 'flier' pellets like 9-pellet does.

If Federal or Hornady came out with a full power #1 buck load with a VT/FC wad, I'd have to look hard at it. In that scenario, I think you'd be looking at a much better load as long as accuracy was there.