Gamebore super steel

[motty]

Your

1 hour ago, Continental Shooter said:

I don't think is any different; physics is not racist

there is absolutely no difference between a bullet transferring energy through a bulletproof vest to a body causing damages or a pellet transferring energy through feathers layers  causing damages to a bird

Again, this is textbook physics, not some theory made out of thin air; you can argue on the amount of energy required, not if there is any energy transfers...

 

However, since this is causing so much anger, i'd not bother you anymore with facts and science and live you in peace

Your argument is so flawed it is unreal! I can't believe you think that quarry is killed by external strikes to its body! I also find it hard to believe that you think you're right and everyone else is wrong!

[Smokersmith]

I’ve not been reading this thread as I don’t use Gamebore Suer Steel, but into its 4th page curiosity got the better of me.

Is CS really saying that lead travelling with not enough energy to puncture the skin is killing game?????

[TIGHTCHOKE]

He does appear to be saying exactly that!

[Smokersmith]

Oh!

 

[Lloyd90]

3 hours ago, Smokersmith said:

I’ve not been reading this thread as I don’t use Gamebore Suer Steel, but into its 4th page curiosity got the better of me.

Is CS really saying that lead travelling with not enough energy to puncture the skin is killing game?????

He appears to have completely missed the point that a single shotgun pellet hitting a pigeon isn’t going to have the exact same energy as a rifle / pistol round hitting a bullet proof best! 

 

Its probably more akin to someone hiring a golf ball at the vest😂 you’d feel it but just carry on... 

[lancer425]

Playing devils advocate in a vain attempt to put some credence into CSs theory, Perhaps a longish range goose shot with a slowish lead load of  could be stunned Causing it to fall and crash down on rocks / frozen ground killing it that way without breaking skin or wind LOL! . May BE Perhaps ?

[Continental Shooter]

On 06/02/2019 at 23:33, lancer425 said:

Playing devils advocate in a vain attempt to put some credence into CSs theory, Perhaps a longish range goose shot with a slowish lead load of  could be stunned Causing it to fall and crash down on rocks / frozen ground killing it that way without breaking skin or wind LOL! . May BE Perhaps ?

thanks mate, appreciate it 

My old uni colleagues have alreay restore my self believe after this witch hunt ... nothing better than a discussion with like minded, knowledgable person to get you stop worrying yo umight be wrong

 

ta muchly

 

[Scully]

5 minutes ago, Continental Shooter said:

thanks mate, appreciate it 

My old uni colleagues have alreay restore my self believe after this witch hunt ... nothing better than a discussion with like minded, knowledgable person to get you stop worrying yo umight be wrong

 

ta muchly

 

It's not a witch hunt. It's merely a silly claim. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

[Seadog1408]

As long as you are happy with your theory that's all that counts, I mean, there are still people who think the world is flat!

[Continental Shooter]

each to their own mate

The only thing i can say i did wrong is assuming  you understood the 'stopping power' from the 'killing power'; i should have never assumed so given you don't even know the meaning of certain word i usedand for that i apologise.

 

[Seadog1408]

Was that in answer to my post?

but please, for the less intelligent members on here please do explain how a single lead pellet without enough energy to penetrate a feather can kill a bird with trauma.?

Edited February 11, 2019 by Seadog1408

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Now where is that popcorn smiley?

[Smiler23]

Back to the origional Question, Iv recently bought 2k super steel, for £440. Slightly larger at 32grm, than op asked for but for my ducking needs these little shells will do me nicely

[hambone]

Going back to schooldays my mates and myself would often "mitch" and spend our day on waste ground playing with various airguns. Most of us had Gats or Diana sp50 type things which were about as powerful as a pea shooter' . One day I took a shot at a jackdaw at the top of a tree which I later found out would have been a good distance for a 12ft/lb air rifle. I watched that pellet climb slowly into the air and hit the very unlucky bird on the head, it fell stone dead. Now I am not saying that penetration is not desirable/necessary or most likely to kill but I know that you can kill without it. And yes I know that even the .177 pellet  is a lot bigger than most shot used.

[Continental Shooter]

1 hour ago, hambone said:

Now I am not saying that penetration is not desirable/necessary or most likely to kill but I know that you can kill without it. 

Thank you, that's exactly what I've been saying all along. 

Same thing happens when you kill with a slingshots, as far as I recall none of my kill have had any penetrating trauma, only blunt force traumas to the right place.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

9 minutes ago, Continental Shooter said:

Thank you, that's exactly what I've been saying all along. 

Same thing happens when you kill with a slingshots, as far as I recall none of my kill have had any penetrating trauma, only blunt force traumas to the right place.

What size shot do you use in your slingshot?

[Seadog1408]

8 hours ago, Continental Shooter said:

Thank you, that's exactly what I've been saying all along. 

Same thing happens when you kill with a slingshots, as far as I recall none of my kill have had any penetrating trauma, only blunt force traumas to the right place.

You seem very adept at cherry picking posts to try and support your claim, now the post you semi quoted mentioned hitting the bird in the head not hitting it in the feathers, so please can you answer my question from my earlier post regarding feather penetration and trauma?

[Continental Shooter]

8 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

What size shot do you use in your slingshot?

when we were kids we didn't bother looking at the pellets' size, whatever we could scavenge from my grampa shop would do (typically Italian #13 -  #1).

When in the field if we run out of pellets we would shoot with stones too.  If the shot was capable of delivering enough energy it would kill, sometimes you would see the bird taking off and falling few yards away dead.

[Continental Shooter]

59 minutes ago, Seadog1408 said:

You seem very adept at cherry picking posts to try and support your claim, now the post you semi quoted mentioned hitting the bird in the head not hitting it in the feathers, so please can you answer my question from my earlier post regarding feather penetration and trauma?

yeah sorry, did not respond as it seem an extrapolation of few concepts rebuilt to suit.

I never said anywhere that 1 pellet was required for a clean kill, nor that it would not pierce the feathers.  I even posted a pic of a skinned goose to show 4 non penetrating hits saying 2 pellets were recovered under the skin.

Medically speaking penetrating means that an object pierced through the soft tissues to reach a vital area; a blunt force trauma might force his way through hard tissues (feathers) but not actually pierce the skin or the meat (soft tissue). when the pellets hit the feathers they start releasing energy to allow them to go through. once they stop their run they've already released the penetrating energy however, they release the residual energy which still causes a blunt force trauma.  This trauma, if placed in the right area (head, heart, lungs, etc) might ensure a clean kill as a result of organs shut down or damage.  There is also anotehr factor to be taken into account and is normally described in medical test cases as organ shut down where enough nervous centers are hit by shock waves causing the systems (and the organs it commends) to shut down, and the bird to fall, perhaps, few hundred yards away.  This is the stopping power, not to be confused with the killing power (when a bird is killed and stops on the spot) 

 

[Seadog1408]

Are you sure on the medical definition of penetrating, as I have always found it to mean penetration of the skin into any tissue, not that it has to hit a "vital" area?

On 4 February 2019 at 12:23, Continental Shooter said:

I'm saying that unlike steel, is not necessary for lead to penetrate in order to kill. Kinetic energy transferred from lead pellets will cause sufficient trauma on impact causing internal organs failures, providing they carry sufficient downrange energy. 

As for your point on penetration, you did in fact post the above, so if the lead doesn't have enough energy to penetrate feather please explain ( in laymans terms for us thicko's) how there is sufficient energy to cause trauma to vital organs?

[Scully]

1 hour ago, Continental Shooter said:

yeah sorry, did not respond as it seem an extrapolation of few concepts rebuilt to suit.

I never said anywhere that 1 pellet was required for a clean kill, nor that it would not pierce the feathers.  I even posted a pic of a skinned goose to show 4 non penetrating hits saying 2 pellets were recovered under the skin.

Medically speaking penetrating means that an object pierced through the soft tissues to reach a vital area; a blunt force trauma might force his way through hard tissues (feathers) but not actually pierce the skin or the meat (soft tissue). when the pellets hit the feathers they start releasing energy to allow them to go through. once they stop their run they've already released the penetrating energy however, they release the residual energy which still causes a blunt force trauma.  This trauma, if placed in the right area (head, heart, lungs, etc) might ensure a clean kill as a result of organs shut down or damage.  There is also anotehr factor to be taken into account and is normally described in medical test cases as organ shut down where enough nervous centers are hit by shock waves causing the systems (and the organs it commends) to shut down, and the bird to fall, perhaps, few hundred yards away.  This is the stopping power, not to be confused with the killing power (when a bird is killed and stops on the spot) 

 

Is it not entirely plausible that the goose you hit was also hit in the head? Like I said, I have experience of ducks and pheasants bearing no wounds at all to the body, which nevertheless are dead. The only answer can be is that they were hit in the head. 

[Diss4111]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Is it not entirely plausible that the goose you hit was also hit in the head? Like I said, I have experience of ducks and pheasants bearing no wounds at all to the body, which nevertheless are dead. The only answer can be is that they were hit in the head. 

Or they died of natural causes, they just happened to be over you when that happened

 

[Continental Shooter]

3 hours ago, Scully said:

Is it not entirely plausible that the goose you hit was also hit in the head? Like I said, I have experience of ducks and pheasants bearing no wounds at all to the body, which nevertheless are dead. The only answer can be is that they were hit in the head. 

Absolutely!  can't disagree with that. 

Obviously, had it been hit in the head with sufficient energy, even if not penetrating, that would have been the most contributing factor

in this specific case, i didn't actively check for head wounds but that's because there were no signs of it (i.e. blood or brain material loss); i did however pluck the neck (for making stock) ad was untouched. In the event of a brain damage, i would expect blood to be visible and flowing/dripping off the wound, beak or nostrils; 

the other evidence is that the chest cavity was full of blood cloth in line with the bruises which would indicate BFT as opposed to PT which would leave less bruises around the  entry wound (due to it carrying more energy through the tissues). 

Also, given the  position of the pellet's hit (worth noting how the pellet at the top went through feathers, skin and it got trapped between the fat and meat ) my diagnosis was the collapse was caused by lung and liver damage/shut down (especially the liver would cause a lot of blood loss). 

 

[Scully]

I’ve never really done an autopsy on a duck or goose, so your diagnosis may be right, but I remain highly sceptical that pellets which don’t even have the energy to penetrate skin can have such a devastating effect on vital organs.

i have if course heard of blunt instrument trauma but the size of the instrument has to be relative to the size of the target, and more often than not includes multiple blows of incredible force. I still find it hard to believe that even multiple strikes of pellets have such an effect.