Cartridge price drop

[Hamster]

If 28g and .410 shells weren't so ridiculously expensive compared to the 12g I'm certain most of us would have one or more in the gun cabinet, I have had both and due partly to costs and also poor choice and availability sold them on.

 

As much as I agree with the supply and demand rule in this case you will never create the demand without the supply.

[neutron619]

If 28g and .410 shells weren't so ridiculously expensive compared to the 12g I'm certain most of us would have one or more in the gun cabinet, I have had both and due partly to costs and also poor choice and availability sold them on.

 

As much as I agree with the supply and demand rule in this case you will never create the demand without the supply.

 

Chicken & egg.

 

I certainly agree that it would be nice to have a better supply of (more balanced) cartridges. I've been looking for some of the Gamebore 3" .410 shells for about 6 months now and so far no-one I've visited / asked has them or can obtain them, for example.

 

On the other hand, one can't reasonably argue that the .410 or the 28ga are the most capable tools for a shooter looking for their first (only?) gun. There's a reason for the ubiquity of the 12 gauge (and increasingly the 20ga) and that's that the shooter won't be limited by anything other than their own skill or the absolute limits of a shotgun's capability. That's certainly not true of the .410.

 

The market cannot reasonably grow for the .410 / small gauges when people have expectations of a shotgun's capabilities and won't accept essentially unnecessary limitations. Whether they're actual limitations - e.g. do we really shoot a lot of 50-yard birds, or are most of them 25-35yd? - or imagined, they still push the market in the direction of the larger bores.

 

People consciously making the choice to lose 10-15 yards of range in favour of lighter gun, lesser recoil, perhaps a degree of "unusualness" do so for good and valid reasons, but in strict ballistic or "does it kill the bird" terms, they're still trying to use a tool that is less capable than others available for the job. It doesn't follow that it has to be inhumane (though clearly some gun / cartridge combinations are), but as much as we all argue about what load we think we need, we're basically all agreed that we don't want to cause unnecessary suffering to living creatures. On one level, the market is geared to helping people avoid doing just that and the people who shoot small gauge with expensive cartridges don't really have a good counter-argument, except that their shooting skill can make up any "defecit".

Edited May 9, 2017 by neutron619

[Rewulf]

 

Chicken & egg.

 

 

 

The market cannot reasonably grow for the .410 / small gauges when people have expectations of a shotgun's capabilities and won't accept essentially unnecessary limitations. Whether they're actual limitations - e.g. do we really shoot a lot of 50-yard birds, or are most of them 25-35yd? - or imagined, they still push the market in the direction of the larger bores.

 

 

With respect, the market cannot and will not grow for .410, whilst a cart for it costs twice as much as 12g.

As far as effective ranges go, and humane kills, if the target is too far away ,dont take the shot.

Same goes for 12 g , you dont shoot at birds beyond its effective range, be it shot size/load ,that can be interpreted differently, by different people.

Right tool for the job really.

[neutron619]

With respect, the market cannot and will not grow for .410, whilst a cart for it costs twice as much as 12g.

As far as effective ranges go, and humane kills, if the target is too far away ,dont take the shot.

Same goes for 12 g , you dont shoot at birds beyond its effective range, be it shot size/load ,that can be interpreted differently, by different people.

Right tool for the job really.

 

Agreed on all points.

 

The only thing left, that no-one's said out loud yet (so to speak) is that it's clear that cost of cartridges is everything for most people.

 

It seems to be very unusual that people choose which shells to buy on the basis of their actual capabilities, as opposed to cost. I personally find that somewhat strange - there's an advantage to be gained in identifying a capable-for-purpose shell, then using it over and over, rather than always buying what's cheapest this week, but I realize I'm the exception, not the rule.

 

It is somewhat ironic that the least capable cartridges - I'm thinking of the £8.15 I once paid for a box of 2" .410 shells (because I was curious, not because I ever intended to point them at birds) - are often the most expensive. Still - that's a market driven by cost rather than specification. I'm currently trying to think of a market where specification is the dominant factor - I imagine it's more common in younger, less developed markets - but I'm struggling at this point.

Edited May 9, 2017 by neutron619

[wymberley]

 

Agreed on all points.

 

The only thing left, that no-one's said out loud yet (so to speak) is that it's clear that cost of cartridges is everything for most people.

 

It seems to be very unusual that people choose which shells to buy on the basis of their actual capabilities, as opposed to cost. I personally find that somewhat strange - there's an advantage to be gained in identifying a capable-for-purpose shell, then using it over and over, rather than always buying what's cheapest this week, but I realize I'm the exception, not the rule.

 

It is somewhat ironic that the least capable cartridges - I'm thinking of the £8.15 I once paid for a box of 2" .410 shells (because I was curious, not because I ever intended to point them at birds) - are often the most expensive. Still - that's a market driven by cost rather than specification. I'm currently trying to think of a market where specification is the dominant factor - I imagine it's more common in younger, less developed markets - but I'm struggling at this point.

 

Struggle you will. The bottom line is increasingly becoming - well - the bottom line. I'm just waiting for someone to produce some 28 or 30g 3" 12b cartridges to use in my 3" chambered gun which weighs in at 6&3/4 lbs made because it was cheaper to leave the reamer in than change to a 2&3/4" version even though the odds on are that no one is going to use a conventional 3" load in a gun of that weight - well, not twice anyway.

[Hamster]

When I had my 28 gauge the only load I could buy (irregularly) from my regular supplier was 19g of 6's ! They could get 28 gram on special order but who needs the recoil of that through a light gun and it defeats the whole object of having a small bore anyway.

 

Had I been able to get hold of say 24g of 7's I would then have almost certainly kept it because I could have used it for the odd fun round of clays and also carried it around on an afternoons walk somewhere for the odd shot or three where my 12g clay gun is silly heavy.

 

The primary reason I got rid was ammo so yes chicken and egg but the shooter can only use something if it's being catered for properly.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Hamster

[Wb123]

Whilst a smaller gauge would be fun to try i fail to see what else it would bring for my shooting (mostly clays with the odd walked up bit of game).

 

 

Over the last two years i have averaged only 4-5000 cartridges a year so cartridges are not a huge expense, but it is the most frequent major outlay which feels painful to the wallet. Even if doubling in price .410 would not actually be a huge difference in expenditure, the £25 for clays each time i go out is easilly forgotten in a way that the 2000-3000 cartridge stockup roughly every six months isnt.