Buckshot effectiveness study...

[Flyboytim]

In case you haven’t seen this:

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

[DDTSGM]

Very interesting, good summary:

If your duties or circumstances lead you to carry a shotgun for self-defense when outdoors, we encourage you to make use of shotshells utilizing a pattern-controlled shotcup and copper-plated shot pellets.

As tested, pattern-controlled #1 buckshot presents an interesting alternative to the more traditional 00 buckshot (also pattern-controlled) in that the maximum effective range is the same but the felt recoil is reduced by 23% over the 00 buckshot load.

Since there is no difference in the long range performance of the two shells, we recommend the Federal LE132 1B load to maximize range and minimize recoil for the defensive shotgun.

For self-defense indoors or in environments that ]physically cannot exceed 10 yards distance[/U], we recommend #4 plated buckshot at 1250 ft/sec or higher muzzle velocity.

You can maximize your shotguns effectiveness by selecting buckshot that is effective out to your maximum planned engagement distance and no further.

[DDTSGM]

Very interesting, good summary:

If your duties or circumstances lead you to carry a shotgun for self-defense when outdoors, we encourage you to make use of shotshells utilizing a pattern-controlled shotcup and copper-plated shot pellets.

As tested, pattern-controlled #1 buckshot presents an interesting alternative to the more traditional 00 buckshot (also pattern-controlled) in that the maximum effective range is the same but the felt recoil is reduced by 23% over the 00 buckshot load.

Since there is no difference in the long range performance of the two shells, we recommend the Federal LE132 1B load to maximize range and minimize recoil for the defensive shotgun.

For self-defense indoors or in environments that ]physically cannot exceed 10 yards distance[/U], we recommend #4 plated buckshot at 1250 ft/sec or higher muzzle velocity.

You can maximize your shotguns effectiveness by selecting buckshot that is effective out to your maximum planned engagement distance and no further.

I'll check, but, have they examined slugs to the same degree?

[Coal Train]

While he was more worried about 4 legged critters than two legged critters, below are Peter Hathaway Capstick’s thoughts on proper gauge loadings for Uncle Buck in Death in the Dark Continent.

"I would like to mention one very important factor in choosing a buckshot load for dangerous game, and that concerns shot size selection. Most people would automatically pick 00 buck simply becuause it's so well know through TV westerns. In fact, the 12-pellet 12-gauge "baby magnum" load of 00 is considerably inferior to the same maximum powder loading of small NO. 1 buckshot in the same shell. The difference lies in the simple and astonishingly obvious fact that at .33 caliber, 00 buck is so large in the shell that there is much wasted space that could otherwise be filled with lead if the bearing surfaces of the big, round pellets didn't have to come into contact with each other. But they must. No. 1 buck is .30 caliber, only ten percent less in diameter than 00 buck and but thirteen grains per pellet lighter. However, because of the way the pellet mass fits into the shotshell, the same shell can fire an incredible seventy-five percent more pellets than the Magnum 00 load! What this means is that when you need help in a big way, you're launching eight hundred grains of lead at better than three thousand foot-pounds at the muzzle with No. 1 buck compared with a bit over six hundred grains and not quite twenty-four hundred foot-pounds with the 00 buck. If you don't reckon that can make a significant difference, you've never had something try to eat you.

One might also bear in mind that eight hundred grains of lead in a swarm has the individual pellet impact area of an umbrella, for even though still in a solid mass at more or less ten yards, it covers a circular saturation point of about a 7-inch circle. Eight hundred grains, remember, equals a .458 PLUS a .375 at point blank, and you've got two barrels of the stuff, minimum."

[03RN]

Ive used the #4 hornady varmit hunter ammo to hammer 2 deer at almost 50 yards. Very impressive.

But ive been so impressed with federal full power 00 flight control im not switching. #1 would be interesting but id prefer the little extra penatration of 00 anyways.

[OlongJohnson]

While he was more worried about 4 legged critters than two legged critters, below are Peter Hathaway Capstick’s thoughts on proper gauge loadings for Uncle Buck in Death in the Dark Continent.

Classic ft-lb fallacy at work in that quote. It's not the ft-lbs that kills things, it's the tissue damage. It depends what he means about dangerous game, to a degree. Taking frontal shots (lengthwise) on a charging animal, you need penetration. The smaller, very fast-moving cats and similar-sized stuff may be relatively man-sized, and lots of #1 could be effective.

Even a heart shot may not stop a wild animal that's intent on killing something with its last breath soon enough to prevent it getting to you and doing some damage. With bigger animals, you've got to get through the skull and hit the central processor. Hence the "USP .45 Super" thread as P-F's official "bear thread." Frankly, I've never seen anyone else writing of dangerous game hunting/backup with a shotgun, even with a tube full of Brennekes.

[Warped Mindless]

Whats the general feeling about using slugs for two legged critters?

[Toonces]

Classic ft-lb fallacy at work in that quote. It's not the ft-lbs that kills things, it's the tissue damage. It depends what he means about dangerous game, to a degree. Taking frontal shots (lengthwise) on a charging animal, you need penetration. The smaller, very fast-moving cats and similar-sized stuff may be relatively man-sized, and lots of #1 could be effective.

Even a heart shot may not stop a wild animal that's intent on killing something with its last breath soon enough to prevent it getting to you and doing some damage. With bigger animals, you've got to get through the skull and hit the central processor. Hence the "USP .45 Super" thread as P-F's official "bear thread." Frankly, I've never seen anyone else writing of dangerous game hunting/backup with a shotgun, even with a tube full of Brennekes.

Sure, he's wrong about the why. But as far as hunting goes, he had been there, done that. If he thought 1970's #1 was more effective than 00, I'd be inclined to think he'd seen something to make him believe that. Of course, I don't have that book in my collection, but I do have six other Capstick books. The most memorable mention (to me) of using a shotgun was chasing a wounded leopard thick cover. Dangerous game: yes. Heavy game: no. Since he's done that more than most, I'll take his word for it (if 50% of the books are true, it was a hell of a life). Or it could simply be that any well placed, decently sized buckshot is really effective against non-heavy game. And he was very acquainted with heavy rifles, having been a ranger on elephant culls. I would guess that he's assuming his audience is more savvy about firearms and hunting than is the norm today, and would know the proper time to grab a Model 12 with buckshot vs a .458 Winchester.

[OlongJohnson]

Yeah, as I said, mid-size and down cats, I'm all in on the #1. I think I've even run the hypothetical of if I had to deal up close with the mountain lion(s?) that lives on the same island as my parents, the best possible thing to have in my hands would be the 1301 with #1 FC.

[JTMcC]

Classic ft-lb fallacy at work in that quote. It's not the ft-lbs that kills things, it's the tissue damage. It depends what he means about dangerous game, to a degree. Taking frontal shots (lengthwise) on a charging animal, you need penetration. The smaller, very fast-moving cats and similar-sized stuff may be relatively man-sized, and lots of #1 could be effective.

Even a heart shot may not stop a wild animal that's intent on killing something with its last breath soon enough to prevent it getting to you and doing some damage. With bigger animals, you've got to get through the skull and hit the central processor. Hence the "USP .45 Super" thread as P-F's official "bear thread." Frankly, I've never seen anyone else writing of dangerous game hunting/backup with a shotgun, even with a tube full of Brennekes.

As to the bold sentence, There was a professional hunter killed in Africa a few years ago, following up a wounded lion, when his apprentice fired over the lion and hit him in the chest using a SXS shotgun. The lion had the clients leg in it's mouth as I recall. I don't know if the ammo type was mentioned.

[okie john]

As to the bold sentence, There was a professional hunter killed in Africa a few years ago, following up a wounded lion, when his apprentice fired over the lion and hit him in the chest using a SXS shotgun. The lion had the clients leg in it's mouth as I recall. I don't know if the ammo type was mentioned.

In that case, the load didn't matter.


Okie John

[DocGKR]

Uh...I am a bit confused.

All of this was figured out and published about during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Gus Coty and others wrote about the superiority of #1 buckshot in the IWBA Journal. This topic was again reviewed right here at PF when Federal brought out the #1 Tactical load a few years ago.

Why is information from 30-40 years ago a surprise???

[JTMcC]

In that case, the load didn't matter.


Okie John

No, I guess it didn't.

[MVS]

Uh...I am a bit confused.

All of this was figured out and published about during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Gus Coty and others wrote about the superiority of #1 buckshot in the IWBA Journal. This topic was again reviewed right here at PF when Federal brought out the #1 Tactical load a few years ago.

Why is information from 30-40 years ago a surprise???

Because people are always rediscovering these things. Everyone starts somewhere.

[Lester Polfus]

Uh...I am a bit confused.

All of this was figured out and published about during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Gus Coty and others wrote about the superiority of #1 buckshot in the IWBA Journal. This topic was again reviewed right here at PF when Federal brought out the #1 Tactical load a few years ago.

Why is information from 30-40 years ago a surprise???

Not too long ago we had a thread about the 9x25 Dillion and 90 grain bullets going stupid fast speeds. I was like "Didn't we already do this about 2005?"

[DocGKR]

"Didn't we already do this about 2005?"

And 1995, 1985, not to mention 2015.....

[Lost River]

While many of us many have miles of trails on our boot leather and animal skins hanging over our rails, pretty much every month there are those who ask questions along the lines of "what kind of handgun for mom, wife, dad. I need low recoil. I have arthritis, I am new to pistols. I have owned handguns, but this is my first AR/lever action, etc."

Plus in spite of more crap in my reloading room than I know what to do with at times, (none of which is organized) I still continue to learn, and rediscover as I read, and re-read some of the older articles from years back. I am a life long student of such things, so I do not mind when an older topic pops up. Heck I "44 associates" articles from when E. Keith, L. Newton, LaChuk (who may or may not have been an "official" member) and others were experimenting trying to push the envelope of the .44 Special

Besides, it beats hearing about how Ft. Scott Munitions is scamming gullible people into buying FMJ ammo at over a buck a round.:cool:

[Wayne Dobbs]

Whats the general feeling about using slugs for two legged critters?

They work very well. If you have the ability, ask some ER/Trauma docs about handgun wounds they've seen/treated and they can give you dozens/hundreds of examples, with most of those interventions being successful at some level. Ask them about buckshot, slug or full power centerfire rifle wounds they've successfully treated and all of a sudden, they run out of stories.

[Wake27]

Uh...I am a bit confused.

All of this was figured out and published about during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Gus Coty and others wrote about the superiority of #1 buckshot in the IWBA Journal. This topic was again reviewed right here at PF when Federal brought out the #1 Tactical load a few years ago.

Why is information from 30-40 years ago a surprise???

I’ve never seen or heard any of that so this is all news to me. When it comes to shotguns, I definitely thought 00 was king. I’d only heard one guy say he’d prefer #1 but never heard or at least understood why.

Regardless of velocity, the increase in lead from 00 to #1 is impressive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lost River]

They work very well. If you have the ability, ask some ER/Trauma docs about handgun wounds they've seen/treated and they can give you dozens/hundreds of examples, with most of those interventions being successful at some level. Ask them about buckshot, slug or full power centerfire rifle wounds they've successfully treated and all of a sudden, they run out of stories.

One of the single most horrific scenes I worked (as a team, I was not primary)was a double murder, followed by a suicide where the BG used goose loads at a distance of a few feet. It looked like something out of a very bad movie and our V/W coordinator had a nervous breakdown on the scene for numerous reasons, as the 2 victims were a mom and daughter. There is no question that you could have had the worlds best trauma team on hand in the next room and it would have not done any good. The only saving grace was the asshole took his head off immediately following his ambush.

It is one of those cases that you wish you could erase from your memory.

Honestly, the only person who is going to be able to tell the difference between #1 buck and 00 buck at conversation difference on a BG is the Coroner.

[DocGKR]

"Regardless of velocity, the increase in lead from 00 to #1 is impressive."

Typically about 35% more tissue crush using #1 buck vs. 00

[GJM]

Classic ft-lb fallacy at work in that quote. It's not the ft-lbs that kills things, it's the tissue damage. It depends what he means about dangerous game, to a degree. Taking frontal shots (lengthwise) on a charging animal, you need penetration. The smaller, very fast-moving cats and similar-sized stuff may be relatively man-sized, and lots of #1 could be effective.

Even a heart shot may not stop a wild animal that's intent on killing something with its last breath soon enough to prevent it getting to you and doing some damage. With bigger animals, you've got to get through the skull and hit the central processor. Hence the "USP .45 Super" thread as P-F's official "bear thread." Frankly, I've never seen anyone else writing of dangerous game hunting/backup with a shotgun, even with a tube full of Brennekes.

I hunted lion in Zambia, and took a big male at first light. When we went to follow up, and fortunately the lion was deceased from a .375 H&H, 300 grain Trophy Bonded soft point, my PH had my Benelli Super 90 is his hands, filled with buckshot.

[ccmdfd]

Now if we could just get Federal to start producing #1B (https://pistol-forum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1B) flite control again.

cc

[WobblyPossum]

Now if we could just get Federal to start producing #1B (https://pistol-forum.com/usertag.php?do=list&action=hash&hash=1B) flite control again.

cc
That would be fantastic. Last I remember reading here was that Federal was tweaking the load to eliminate an issue with periodic fliers.

[OlongJohnson]

I hunted lion in Zambia, and took a big male at first light. When we went to follow up, and fortunately the lion was deceased from a .375 H&H, 300 grain Trophy Bonded soft point, my PH had my Benelli Super 90 is his hands, filled with buckshot.

Cool, learning is occurring. Thank you.

To explore this a bit more...

We all seem to be in agreement at this point that for deer-size animals, the penetration of #1 is at least sufficient and the greater volume of crushed flesh is an advantage over 00. Which as has been pointed out is not a new consensus by any means.

I recall that you generally keep handy a shotgun full of Brennekes in places where a large bear might appear. So somewhere between deer and bear, you go the other way and take greater penetration.

Similar in concept to a varmint bullet that will turn a prairie dog inside out likely not being the best for deer - it may make a big entrance wound and let the deer run a long way before it stops.

Since 00 penetrates deeper than #1 and 000 penetrates deeper than 00, is there any point in selecting buckshot size according to the size/toughness of the animal you're going after, trading total tissue crush volume for getting to the tissue that matters more? Or is that angels and pinheads...? In the real world of tooth and claw, do you just keep it simple and go with whatever Flite Control load patterns well in your gun and switch to slugs when you think you need to go deeper?

[GJM]

This was circa 1998, so the details may be fuzzy, and the technology has changed. Normally, in Zimbabwe, my PH had a full auto FN FAL, but we were in Zambia with just access to my guns, which were the Benelli, a .470 NE double and a pre 64 375 H&H. We mostly wanted something faster shooting than the bolt/double, and the Benelli was it. I may have slept with the Benelli close to me at night. Not sure we gave much thought to which size buck.