slugs or buckshot?
01-08-2005, 08:15 PM
#11
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 226
RE: slugs or buckshot?
First of all, Buckshot does NOT have more "knockdown power" than a slug - unless the quantity of pellets that actually strike the target approx. equals the mass of a slug. A 1 oz. slug weighs 437.5 grain. 00 buck pellets weigh approx. 50 grains each. So, it can easily be seen that it would require 9 pellets - striking the target - to roughly equal the impact energy of a single 1 oz. slug. This, of course, assumes that the slug and the buckshot are fired at the same velocity. In fact, many slug loads have muzzle velocities HIGHER than (most) buckshot loads. A standard 00 buck, 2.75" shell has about 9 pellets total - so ALL of them must strike the target in this example. This will NOT happen, except at point blank range, perhaps. There is an argument, advanced by some, that buckshot has more impact energy because it does not tend to penetrate as deeply (or exit the animal).... therefore it must lmpart more energy than a slug - which, in some cases, passes through. This is mathematically impossible, for the same reasons as above. If the buckshot load (which actually strikes the target) does not possess as much energy in flight as the slug - then there is NO way that it can impart more energy than the slug when it strikes the target.
Second, as to range..... Foster slugs, through a smoothbore barrel, are generally (reasonably) accurate to about 70 - 75 yds. Much past that distance, the Foster slug has lost so much velocity that it becomes somewhat unstable in flight. Further, Foster slugs retain insufficient energy to insure a clean kill (as a general rule, about 900 ft-lbs minimum), beyond about 100 yds.
The numbers for buckshot are even worse. Even considered collectively, the pellets in a buckshot load lose velocity and energy even faster than a slug. Even under the best conditions, it is seldom possible to get good patterns of buckshot much beyond 45 yds. Beyond 50 yds, buckshot tends to be so inaccurate that, most often, no more than 1/3 of the pellets will strike a 10" dia. target. So, it is hardly likely that buckshot will deliver enough energy and penetration at 75 - 100 yds to be able to do more than wound a deer.
There ARE exceptions to this - some guns will pattern buckshot better than others (just as some guns will shoot slugs better than others). It is HIGHLY UNLIKELY, as I have just explained, though, that buckshot could be as effective as a slug - much beyond 40 yds. So, from 0 to about 40 yds, use whichever you prefer - buckshot or slugs (slugs DO have an advantage, though). Beyond about 40 yds, slugs have a HUGE advantage. The numbers do not lie. The choice is yours.
I am sure that someone on this board, when they read this, will SWEAR that they routinely kill deer at 350 yds,or some such ridiculous range, with a smoothbore gun with Foster slugs.... (or buckshot, for that matter). All I can say is what I've said - the numbers (meaning the rules of PHYSICS) don't lie.
Second, as to range..... Foster slugs, through a smoothbore barrel, are generally (reasonably) accurate to about 70 - 75 yds. Much past that distance, the Foster slug has lost so much velocity that it becomes somewhat unstable in flight. Further, Foster slugs retain insufficient energy to insure a clean kill (as a general rule, about 900 ft-lbs minimum), beyond about 100 yds.
The numbers for buckshot are even worse. Even considered collectively, the pellets in a buckshot load lose velocity and energy even faster than a slug. Even under the best conditions, it is seldom possible to get good patterns of buckshot much beyond 45 yds. Beyond 50 yds, buckshot tends to be so inaccurate that, most often, no more than 1/3 of the pellets will strike a 10" dia. target. So, it is hardly likely that buckshot will deliver enough energy and penetration at 75 - 100 yds to be able to do more than wound a deer.
There ARE exceptions to this - some guns will pattern buckshot better than others (just as some guns will shoot slugs better than others). It is HIGHLY UNLIKELY, as I have just explained, though, that buckshot could be as effective as a slug - much beyond 40 yds. So, from 0 to about 40 yds, use whichever you prefer - buckshot or slugs (slugs DO have an advantage, though). Beyond about 40 yds, slugs have a HUGE advantage. The numbers do not lie. The choice is yours.
I am sure that someone on this board, when they read this, will SWEAR that they routinely kill deer at 350 yds,or some such ridiculous range, with a smoothbore gun with Foster slugs.... (or buckshot, for that matter). All I can say is what I've said - the numbers (meaning the rules of PHYSICS) don't lie.
01-09-2005, 05:54 AM
#12
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New Goucester Maine
Posts: 264
RE: slugs or buckshot?
ok. i think i will do with a slug to do my deer hunting. MY shotgun is a semi-suto charles daly. all i have on it is a bead site. i want to get a red dot site for about 50$. do i need to get a mount for my red dot site? if so can anyone give me a link so i can see what i need.
01-09-2005, 06:41 AM
#13
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 316
RE: slugs or buckshot?
Lifehog,
I use a rem 870 with an improved cyl. choke, and winchester 3" super x 00buck (33 cal pellet), or a Browning auto 5 with same choke and load.
I like to use this setup when hunting with dogs or on drives.
This load has 15 pellets, and it'll keep 2 on an 11" pie plate at 75 yds.
I really don't like shooting deer inside of 30 yds or so with it b/c it seems that the vast majority of the pellets strike at this area, leaving me a huge mess.
Give this a try sometime, and hopefully you'll get the same results. Good luck hunting!
And to address the "knockdown" questions: It is impossible to convince people who only look at numbers (physics) the effectiveness of buckshot. Yes a slug has more energy, but so what. It is only making one whole. In order to steer this conversation in the direction I was aiming for, I must say that buckshot, in general, does much more damage b/c it creates multiple wound channels. (Also, for eveyone who wonders, I did earn an A in 2 physics courses at NCSU. I understand the numbers arguments 100%.)
And DAMAGE is what kills, NOT ENERGY. Energy is a component of damage, but so are many, many other factors such as shot placement, wound channel diameter, velocity, sectional density, and bullet construction.
Saying that 900 lbs is the minimum for cleanly killing deer is absurd. A 357 magnum has about 500-600 ft lbs of energy at the barrel. According to the "900 lb" argument, hunters could not hold a 357 to a deers side and clealy/ethically kill them. A 357 will kill any deer on the planet under these circumstances...so will a 45acp for that matter and it only has about 300-350 lbs of energy. Oh, and an arrow won't have 900 lbs of energy either.
So, in lieu of all this, as long as you can get multiple pellets on target, whether it be 5 yards or 75 yards, buckshot is very effective.
Example: I shot a 140 lb doe running down the street at about 15 yards one morning. We were running dogs, and yes we had the road registered with the state, so it was safe and legal. The doe was on the near-side of this 2 lane road, and upon impact, the buckshot picked her up off her feet, and threw her in a head over tail flip all the way accross the road (about 20 feet). Now thats knockdown.
I've killed several deer slugs, and none made the deer do that.
I use a rem 870 with an improved cyl. choke, and winchester 3" super x 00buck (33 cal pellet), or a Browning auto 5 with same choke and load.
I like to use this setup when hunting with dogs or on drives.
This load has 15 pellets, and it'll keep 2 on an 11" pie plate at 75 yds.
I really don't like shooting deer inside of 30 yds or so with it b/c it seems that the vast majority of the pellets strike at this area, leaving me a huge mess.
Give this a try sometime, and hopefully you'll get the same results. Good luck hunting!
And to address the "knockdown" questions: It is impossible to convince people who only look at numbers (physics) the effectiveness of buckshot. Yes a slug has more energy, but so what. It is only making one whole. In order to steer this conversation in the direction I was aiming for, I must say that buckshot, in general, does much more damage b/c it creates multiple wound channels. (Also, for eveyone who wonders, I did earn an A in 2 physics courses at NCSU. I understand the numbers arguments 100%.)
And DAMAGE is what kills, NOT ENERGY. Energy is a component of damage, but so are many, many other factors such as shot placement, wound channel diameter, velocity, sectional density, and bullet construction.
Saying that 900 lbs is the minimum for cleanly killing deer is absurd. A 357 magnum has about 500-600 ft lbs of energy at the barrel. According to the "900 lb" argument, hunters could not hold a 357 to a deers side and clealy/ethically kill them. A 357 will kill any deer on the planet under these circumstances...so will a 45acp for that matter and it only has about 300-350 lbs of energy. Oh, and an arrow won't have 900 lbs of energy either.
So, in lieu of all this, as long as you can get multiple pellets on target, whether it be 5 yards or 75 yards, buckshot is very effective.
Example: I shot a 140 lb doe running down the street at about 15 yards one morning. We were running dogs, and yes we had the road registered with the state, so it was safe and legal. The doe was on the near-side of this 2 lane road, and upon impact, the buckshot picked her up off her feet, and threw her in a head over tail flip all the way accross the road (about 20 feet). Now thats knockdown.
I've killed several deer slugs, and none made the deer do that.
01-09-2005, 09:57 AM
#14
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 226
RE: slugs or buckshot?
"Damage" is created by imparting impact energy to the target. The less impact energy - the less damage (unless one is using explosive projectiles). "DAMAGE" is a component of "ENERGY", not the other way around. It's as simple as that. Yes, people do kill deer with .357 magnums, with well less than 900 ft-lbs..... and they are simply lucky. For one thing, they don't often do this beyond 50 yds. It is theoretically possible to kill a deer with a .22 LR - (and it has been done) - but that doesn't make it an ideal projectile for the purpose, does it ? 900 ft-lbs is a generally accepted number - if you don't believe it (which you obviously do not), then check other sources - they will agree. It is a GENERAL number, to ENSURE a clean kill - not the theoretical minimum. The point of it is, as I believe I stated before, if one chooses to use a load with much less than 900 ft-lbs at point of impact - one is RISKING only wounding the animal (rather than a clean kill). Does your pride really cause you to want to take this risk - with so little margin for error ? Mine doesn't - I prefer to be safely within a margin for error. As a result, I have never lost an animal, in 23 years.
Your example of the "140 lb. doe @ 15 yds" is not even pertinent to the argument. My argument (in my previous post) was that buckshot is markedly inferior BEYOND about 40 yds. This fact stands. The fact that you can only get 2 pellets of 00 buck into the target at 75 yds (approx. 100 grain) vs. 438 grain (a 1 oz. slug) PROVES my point. You say that you understand the physics 100%. Well, do you understand that 2 pellets, totaling about 100 grain, CANNOT exceed the energy of a 438 grain slug (unless, of course, they were traveling at a much greater velocity than the slug - which is never the case) ? I suppose we are all just to take this on faith, because you said so. Or, rather, we are to somehow believe that 2 pellets, .33 in. in dia., with LESS impact energy and little hope of creating an exit wound, will do more DAMAGE than 1 slug (with 4 times the mass). It just doesn't happen that way, sorry. You stated that there are lots of "other" factors involved - such as shot placement, wound channel diameter, velocity, sectional density and bullet construction. I fail to see how you can claim that buckshot (at ANY range) can be placed more accurately than a single projectile, a slug. Further, as to the other factors you mentioned - slugs win each of these comparisons, every time (with the possible exception of wound channel diameter - which will be greater with MANY pellets striking the target.... but then, in YOUR example, we only have TWO pellets doing this). So, how does that prove your point ?
By the way, ARROWS, which you mentioned, cause DAMAGE in a very different way than projectiles from firearms. They cause wounds by cutting into the flesh, not by impact penetration. An arrow needs only enough impact energy to cause the "broadhead" to cut into (penetrate) the target, as deeply as possible. They work only because of the sharp edges and point of the "broadhead". Without that, (such as a "field point" - used for target shooting), they would be almost useless on a deer-sized animal.
In conclusion, getting past the technical issues, the real intent of my argument, which I evidently did not make clear, was to help to prevent a NEW hunter from making mistakes - and losing animals, as a result. In my hunting "career", I have tried to be exceedingly careful to take the "numbers" into account - so as to NOT cruelly wound any animals - and lose them as a result. Do you not think this an important issue? Or, is the potential wastage of game animals not important to you ?
I am sure that you have great sucess in your hunting. I really have few doubts that you are a humane individual, as well. You need to understand that my purpose is NOT to somehow condemn those that choose to use buckshot (or the .357 magnum, for that matter). Nor did I desire to start an argument. My purpose is simply to point out some pertinent FACTS - so as to try to help someone new to the sport - and others, if they are not already aware of these things. I consider misinformation to be a very important issue, in general - it causes an enormous range of problems to our society - and makes lots of problems worse, needlessly. If I offended you, somehow... well, sorry. I won't, however, stand by and not do anything when I see people being misinformed.
Your example of the "140 lb. doe @ 15 yds" is not even pertinent to the argument. My argument (in my previous post) was that buckshot is markedly inferior BEYOND about 40 yds. This fact stands. The fact that you can only get 2 pellets of 00 buck into the target at 75 yds (approx. 100 grain) vs. 438 grain (a 1 oz. slug) PROVES my point. You say that you understand the physics 100%. Well, do you understand that 2 pellets, totaling about 100 grain, CANNOT exceed the energy of a 438 grain slug (unless, of course, they were traveling at a much greater velocity than the slug - which is never the case) ? I suppose we are all just to take this on faith, because you said so. Or, rather, we are to somehow believe that 2 pellets, .33 in. in dia., with LESS impact energy and little hope of creating an exit wound, will do more DAMAGE than 1 slug (with 4 times the mass). It just doesn't happen that way, sorry. You stated that there are lots of "other" factors involved - such as shot placement, wound channel diameter, velocity, sectional density and bullet construction. I fail to see how you can claim that buckshot (at ANY range) can be placed more accurately than a single projectile, a slug. Further, as to the other factors you mentioned - slugs win each of these comparisons, every time (with the possible exception of wound channel diameter - which will be greater with MANY pellets striking the target.... but then, in YOUR example, we only have TWO pellets doing this). So, how does that prove your point ?
By the way, ARROWS, which you mentioned, cause DAMAGE in a very different way than projectiles from firearms. They cause wounds by cutting into the flesh, not by impact penetration. An arrow needs only enough impact energy to cause the "broadhead" to cut into (penetrate) the target, as deeply as possible. They work only because of the sharp edges and point of the "broadhead". Without that, (such as a "field point" - used for target shooting), they would be almost useless on a deer-sized animal.
In conclusion, getting past the technical issues, the real intent of my argument, which I evidently did not make clear, was to help to prevent a NEW hunter from making mistakes - and losing animals, as a result. In my hunting "career", I have tried to be exceedingly careful to take the "numbers" into account - so as to NOT cruelly wound any animals - and lose them as a result. Do you not think this an important issue? Or, is the potential wastage of game animals not important to you ?
I am sure that you have great sucess in your hunting. I really have few doubts that you are a humane individual, as well. You need to understand that my purpose is NOT to somehow condemn those that choose to use buckshot (or the .357 magnum, for that matter). Nor did I desire to start an argument. My purpose is simply to point out some pertinent FACTS - so as to try to help someone new to the sport - and others, if they are not already aware of these things. I consider misinformation to be a very important issue, in general - it causes an enormous range of problems to our society - and makes lots of problems worse, needlessly. If I offended you, somehow... well, sorry. I won't, however, stand by and not do anything when I see people being misinformed.
01-09-2005, 12:08 PM
#15
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 316
RE: slugs or buckshot?
As i said earlier, some folks, such as "gorse", live in a numbers only world, and therefore cannot comprehend the entire picture.
I didn't misinform anyone, and I hope that you too have good results, whether you choose buckshot or slugs.
I didn't misinform anyone, and I hope that you too have good results, whether you choose buckshot or slugs.
01-09-2005, 04:12 PM
#16
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 226
RE: slugs or buckshot?
Oh, silly me. How could I possibly rely on the "numbers" - when we have those who see the "entire picture" - to lead us to salvation ? Thank you so much, sir, for giving us the "entire picture". I now feel so enlightened !
01-09-2005, 04:54 PM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: slugs or buckshot?
Ths, you need to call NCSU and ask for money back for 6 credit hours if you think you can kill a deer with the same more damage at 75 yards with 00. The bead alone would cover up the whole front of the deer.
I used 00 for one trip and never again. It was when I first moved to a shotgun state, and was sika deer hunting on the eastern shore of MD. I hit a sika broadsided at 40 yards, and it kept trucking until I finally hit it again with a slugger on the second shot. Later while butchering, those 00 didn't penetrate well at all. Only a few made it to the lungs and none damaged the heart. The slug of course penetrated both lungs and clipped the top of the heart. After talking to several other butchers over there, they concurred that it was a poor choice past 35 yards. Thank goodness I had a slug for a second shot or I would have had to get the canoe out when that deer made it to the swamp. And past 30 yards, you are taking a heck of a chance of messing up the oh precious tendeloins.
I used 00 for one trip and never again. It was when I first moved to a shotgun state, and was sika deer hunting on the eastern shore of MD. I hit a sika broadsided at 40 yards, and it kept trucking until I finally hit it again with a slugger on the second shot. Later while butchering, those 00 didn't penetrate well at all. Only a few made it to the lungs and none damaged the heart. The slug of course penetrated both lungs and clipped the top of the heart. After talking to several other butchers over there, they concurred that it was a poor choice past 35 yards. Thank goodness I had a slug for a second shot or I would have had to get the canoe out when that deer made it to the swamp. And past 30 yards, you are taking a heck of a chance of messing up the oh precious tendeloins.
01-09-2005, 06:31 PM
#18
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 316
RE: slugs or buckshot?
You are most certainly welcome gorse. I'll be glad to educate you anytime, free of charge. Here's some more info, that I'm sure you'll doubt, but is true: 41 & 44 magnum pistols both have less than 900 lbs of muzzle energy (with non +P loads), and rumor has it that they each have killed a deer or two.
Also, bigcountry, you forgot about the lab hours...it would be 8 hrs and not 6 hrs.
Also, bigcountry, you forgot about the lab hours...it would be 8 hrs and not 6 hrs.
01-09-2005, 06:56 PM
#19
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 65
RE: slugs or buckshot?
I see both sides of the arguement and agree on the factrs..in my personal oipinion i use buckshot...3" copperplated 00...i went through 6 guns until i found 1 that aptterns very well...at 50 yards i had 9 pellets out of 15 hit in a 13" spread...that ios plenty of knockdown for a deer...however i will not argue past that...yes i have shot deer at 60-70 yards with buckshot running...are you always going to knock down a deer that far with it..no chances are you are not...sdo far i have not lost a deer with buckshot..(knock on wood)...i refuse to shoot a slug only because alot of deer i shoot are pushed from bordering properties are are flat out running after being shot at...most shot are under 50 yards and i think that most people will agree that you can pick up a deer with an open sight running much better than through a scope..i have not used a red dot so i cant speak for that...if your gun doesnt pttern well with buckshopt then there is no sense in using it...as for 25-35 yard maximum shot with buckshot..thats not true...if you take your time and pattern your gun it can be deadly out to 50 yards and mayeb a little furhter..but there is no way it will kill a deer at 100..jus wound it thats just my 2 cents i dont want to stir the pot jus sayin what i have experienced...
01-10-2005, 08:23 AM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: slugs or buckshot?
Well, ths78, I highly doubt most people on here are going by the number games only. If you live in a sluggun state/county, where 00 are legal, most people are temped to try shooting a deer with them. I would say I have talked to 30 or more hunters since moving to MD that has tried them, and they all get burnt sooner or later, and go back to slugs. I haven't seen any of them including myself stick with them unless a specific type of hunting like jump hunting or driving. I have a feeling you are the one living by the numbers game. Talking about understanding damage of two .33" balls and all at 75 yards. I know at that distance, 00 would not go past one lung. And lucky if that happens. I am surprised all the ethics nazis on here ain't jumping up and down on this as they did .223 stuff.
I think it would benefit you to as you say be educated. And read 90% of the post here. And I mean that in a good way. And if you stick with the 00, I hope you are ethical enough to keep the shots under 35yards.
I think it would benefit you to as you say be educated. And read 90% of the post here. And I mean that in a good way. And if you stick with the 00, I hope you are ethical enough to keep the shots under 35yards.