advice on steel shot please

[lancer425]

The theoretical figures by that i mean density is clearly showing lead at a clear advantage whatever clear actually means that is.

Clear for me means that in the early days of non tox i along with many others could see no light at the end of the tunnel, Reloading steel and the rare at the time winchester and remington ammo proved to us steel did work and in fact it did work far better than the periodic table indicated it would.

I treated steel like i had always done any lead ammo i patterned everything i used, i still do this with lead of steel or any other shot.

If you have sporadic gappy patterns you are not going to get the results no matter how good your marksmanship skills are.

Choking is important but not in every scenario skeet guns fixed full or old trap guns can prove just as good as multi choked guns.

Everybody needs to pattern loads any loads, if steel is patterning at the ranges you are shooting things at and suitable sized shot employed steel is equal on killing efficiency and even on range it only gives up roughly ten yards max on lead in 12bore and 10 bores. Patterns don’t kill all by themselves lethal pellets kill thrown in the right place in good uniform patterns.

[Guest cookoff013]

the problem with steel shot, is it was treated like lead, its got a sizing same as lead, (mm)

then loaded in weights similar to lead, loaded at speeds for lead.

then they expanded the chamber sizes.

then they ramped up pressures for both cip and saami.

then they created slower burning powders that are low density..

[Gerry78]

Hankook1 you have annoyed a hornets nest here mate lol Theres been a lot of debate on this forum regards lead v steel were ive been slated because of my OPINION on steel passing right through ducks You have to give credit to the pigeon for playing dead lol IM sure when you get your feet in the door at the wildfowling club the local fowlers will tell you about what the best steel to use Ive been shooting over 20 years and still have doubts over steel shot but thats just me :good:

[motty]

Gerry, you don't get it, do you. If steel passes through a bird, then so will lead!

[lancer425]

Gerry, you don't get it, do you. If steel passes through a bird, then so will lead!

This.

[Gerry78]

I do get it motty and your correct both could pass through a duck but ive seen steel do it many times my years fowling compared to lead as i say only my opinion Id take lead any day over steel but thats only me That lads post shooting a pigeon with steel shot and the pigeon getting up and flying away ive seen to much ducks being hit properly and steel wounding IM sure Motty by your records you know what your talking about But iv known what ive seen over the seasons

[Richie10]

Aim for the head next time.

 

Pattern the steel with different chokes, that gives you better results.

 

When I first used steel I was unimpressed but then I educated myself and find no issues using it.

[neutron619]

One original observation I can offer about the lead v steel debate is this. I do a lot of punt gunning which means I get to shoot more ducks on the water with a shoulder gun than most. When using lead, pre `96, you`ll see lots of splashes on either side of the stripe of the shot on the water. These are deformed pellets that don`t make it to the target, many having lost almost all their velocity. Apparently these deformed fliers can make up up to 15% of the entire shot charge. You don`t get these fliers with steel. Shoot a cripple with a steel load and all the shot gets to the vicinity of the target their being no deformed pellets. Steel is balistically more efficient than lead.

 

Old thread now and interesting to read - I only have one comment.

 

"Ballistic efficiency" is a term which has a particular meaning but it isn't to do with how well or badly something patterns. I've no argument with what was asserted - i.e. that it patterns tighter - which I also believe to be broadly true. It just that "higher ballistic efficiency" doesn't mean that. In fact, steel is less ballistically-efficient than lead because it retains its kinetic energy less well and for a shorter duration than an equivalent lead pellet of the same size and initial velocity.

 

This isn't an argument about how well it penetrates, or whether it mushrooms or anything else either - other people have covered the arguments there - but only to point out that, if you're going to use terms with particular meaning, it's worth being sure that you've got the meaning the right way round, else it can get very confusing, very quickly.

 

As an aside, I happen to think that the modern steel cartridges are generally very good and, as I've commented before, find Gamebore's 32g/#4 load to be an excellent all rounder. I more often use that than a lead cartridge on the occasions I shoot a 12 gauge. At long ranges though (40-55+ yards) I've found it to be occasionally and puzzlingly ineffective, just like the OP. This usually involves corvids, which, for whatever reason, don't seem to come down as easily for me, using steel.

[mudpatten]

Hi neutron,

 

I can see what you`re getting at but would respectfully point out that I did not use the term "ballistic efficiency", I said "Steel is ballistically more efficient than lead".

 

Additionally, I can`t find where I wrote "Higher ballistic efficiency", but that might just be me unable to see for looking.

 

I believe that the term I used, your highlight in red, is an effective description of what I meant, which is not that which you`ve interpreted it as being.

 

If that makes sense.

[neutron619]

I can see what you`re getting at but would respectfully point out that I did not use the term "ballistic efficiency", I said "Steel is ballistically more efficient than lead".

 

You'll have to forgive me for being unable to drive a wedge between these two sets of words - the latter appeared very much to be implying the former.

 

Additionally, I can`t find where I wrote "Higher ballistic efficiency", but that might just be me unable to see for looking.

You didn't. I simply paraphrased, having inferred a meaning, hence my use of quotations to denote an imagined thought or idea.

 

I believe that the term I used, your highlight in red, is an effective description of what I meant, which is not that which you`ve interpreted it as being.

I accept that my interpretation of your meaning was incorrect. However, my interpretation of what you actually said is correct.

The dictionary (Odhams New English Dictionary, "John Bull" Edition, 1932 - though I'll warrant very few of the meanings have changed) on the shelf above my desk defines ballistic efficiency as: "a measure of how well or how poorly a given projectile is able to overcome the resistance to motion of the medium through which it passes."

In this case "high" ballistic efficiency means a high capacity to overcome resistance to motion; a "low" ballistic efficiency means a low capacity to overcome said resistance.

In the comparison of difference substances - i.e. steel and lead - the comparison must be between projectiles of either identical volume or identical weight and, either way, being of the same shape.

Steel is therefore less ballistically efficient than lead, because, in projectiles of equal weight, the steel projectile will be larger and therefore encounter more resistance from the medium, or, in projectiles of equal volume, the steel projectile will have a lower mass and therefore lower momentum, which again will cause it to have a lower ability to overcome the resistance of the medium, of the two.

At no point does any of this break into the realm of shotgun patterning.

What you meant, I believe, is that steel pellets will tend to give higher (percentage) pattern performance than lead pellets, when fired under identical conditions. With this, I do not disagree, but it is categorically not what the words you used described.

Edited October 24, 2017 by neutron619

[Gerry78]

Winchester brought out blindside steel shot its shaped like small cubes inside the wad when i asked a browning rep who happend to be in local gunshop he told me the reason being steel doesn't expand like lead inside the bird just a thought on lead v steel thats why ive had more wounding with steel than lead and thats me using half choke in shotguns

[lancer425]

Well folks i have some bad news you in the above posts we have square pellets steel being bigger so not penetrating in the next breath steel exits lead expands . Then we have the severe lack of density on shot of equal size and velocity.

I know what i think, some of you have not got your act together regarding your marksmanship and patterns are less than average.

I have heard all this before every excuse under the sun, when in reality you missed its that simple.

Steel works well debate all you like if hit them right with good patterns of suitable size steel shot loads stuff dies.

And in 12s and 10s until you are over 60 yards lead has no appreciable advantage in killing ability.

[motty]

A Browning rep said it, it must be true!

[GingerCat]

Lead does not expand in a bird and wound channels kill. I can't remember the last bit of lead shot I found in a pigeon as it mostly passes through. I've never seen any that's expanded either. I noticed the same with steel shot that I've used also.

A poor shot is just that. Blaming it on steel is just an excuse.

[Gerry78]

Nobody is blaming bad shooting the problem bein is that if you have a different opinion on the majority of the shooting community then your wrong I know what ive seen over the seasons regards steel shot and id class myself as a descent shot Ginger cat you say [wound channels kill] if thats the case then every bird you hit with shot should be dead on the spot So why do you get wounded birds regards the first post on this subject the pigeon got up and flew away According to your Knowledge then it should have been dead

[Gerry78]

Thats what the rep said motty nice shooting by the way on youtube some lovely pigeons shot

[GingerCat]

Nobody is blaming bad shooting the problem bein is that if you have a different opinion on the majority of the shooting community then your wrong I know what ive seen over the seasons regards steel shot and id class myself as a descent shot Ginger cat you say [wound channels kill] if thats the case then every bird you hit with shot should be dead on the spot So why do you get wounded birds regards the first post on this subject the pigeon got up and flew away According to your Knowledge then it should have been dead

Gerry, I've hit my fair share with lead that's been wounded as well as steel. The point I'm making is that if the shot passes through (the wound channel) it had more power than it needed to hit a vital organ. I'm not saying everything is hot would be dead.

The point I'm making i guess is to use the **** within its limits be it lead or steel but steel if passing through has more poke than required in any case.

Edited October 25, 2017 by GingerCat

[lancer425]

Lead does not expand in a bird and wound channels kill. I can't remember the last bit of lead shot I found in a pigeon as it mostly passes through. I've never seen any that's expanded either. I noticed the same with steel shot that I've used also.

A poor shot is just that. Blaming it on steel is just an excuse.

All the above is corect, gery if you read what i said it could be any number of issues causing birds not to be killed clean , bad marksmanship or ammo or choice of choke for the range involved or shot size and to lesser extents Velocity but not withstanding PATTERNS.

All these could be labelled as Marksmanship no good marksman buys a box of ammo from jeffs gun shop ventures out to take living things without knowing what he and his gun and ammo are doing.

So even a good technical marksman is powerless to do any more than lead a flying target once he has pulled the trigger science takes over, and if he has honed his skills and checked his gun and cartridge are suitable steel or lead will kill cleanly, but if anything is amiss anywhere the potential to wound injure and be cruel some thing which we all abhor.

I do not know you Gerry any more than you know me, but i am sure you do your best to get everything into place with yourself and your equipment, But i will say may be just May be have not done enough patterning work with your steel.

Could be a gun issue as in choking if basic things like fit are good.

I know this if i do my part properly in range or my equipment steel kills clean.

[Gerry78]

Lancer and ginger cat i agree lead wounds too im just stating the amount of wildfowl ive seen wounded with steel over the years has been bad not all by me i may add Your right ive seen some idiots taking wild shots with open chokes I Bought invecture DS chokes for my browning i patterned my gun on a wooden sheet at 30 35 40 yards with mixture of gamebore steel and Hull steel 2 3/4- 3inch shells using 1/4 1/2 chokes the spread was spot on regarding pattern on the duck target When got out fowling after couple outings finally got some duck ONE DRAKE mallard i shot perfect approx 32yards Flew on then dropped down till the water dog got it guess WHAT was wounded Just couldnt my head around it after pattering the gun lol

[GingerCat]

It happens. The other day I shot a pigeon that was about 20 yards out and the wad, yes the felt wad, was stuck in its chest. I'm sure that's what killed it. The shot was witnessedto by a chap off this forum. Or rather me digging the wad out.

As for birds being wounded when they shouldn't really have been;that happens too. Last Sunday a friend shot a pigeon hard at about 35 yards. The bird rose up and I didn't think it was going to drop dead so shot it again.

That was lead. The same carts later killed a bird stone dead at an easy 60 yards by the same gun (quite remarkable shot). That birds was hit by at least 10 pellets.

[lancer425]

Lead wounded waterfowl same as it wounds rabbits pheasants other things, if you take shots in range do the patterning you can do no more some wounding will happen it is inevitable and goes with the responsibility of being a hunter this as to be accepted regardless of ability.

You have to do your level best to make sure everything is at optimum performance including yourself.

As i said you will get some wounding regrettable as it is.

[6.5x55SE]

Lead wounded waterfowl same as it wounds rabbits pheasants other things, if you take shots in range do the patterning you can do no more some wounding will happen it is inevitable and goes with the responsibility of being a hunter this as to be accepted regardless of ability.

You have to do your level best to make sure everything is at optimum performance including yourself.

As i said you will get some wounding regrettable as it is.

Mate I'd give up . You can lead a Horse to water springs to mind

[lancer425]

Mate I'd give up . You can lead a Horse to water springs to mind

I know exactly what you are saying it is real simple stuff this we are dealing with it has to be if i am having anything to do with it.

[KB1]

Lancer and ginger cat i agree lead wounds too im just stating the amount of wildfowl ive seen wounded with steel over the years has been bad not all by me i may add Your right ive seen some idiots taking wild shots with open chokes I Bought invecture DS chokes for my browning i patterned my gun on a wooden sheet at 30 35 40 yards with mixture of gamebore steel and Hull steel 2 3/4- 3inch shells using 1/4 1/2 chokes the spread was spot on regarding pattern on the duck target When got out fowling after couple outings finally got some duck ONE DRAKE mallard i shot perfect approx 32yards Flew on then dropped down till the water dog got it guess WHAT was wounded Just couldnt my head around it after pattering the gun lol

 

You should have bought the 'Invector' DS chokes instead Sorry, I couldn't resist

[motty]

Gerry, the drake mallard was obviously not shot 'Perfectly'. The patterns you are getting may be good, but the pattern has to still be placed correctly. It is equally likely that the duck would have flown on if you had been using lead.