Jump to content

Effective Killing Range of Steel Shot


Recommended Posts

See Scully every other point ignored!

My point is that steel at any range does not kill effectively unless its in the head at any range.

I know what I have witnessed and others witnessed out for the 1st time recently. That is by the by!

My personal view is that steel on the basis of ethics (which you are so keen on) should be banned. It does not kill effectively and it pollutes the ground, waterways with huge plastic wads!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Funny this topic has come up. I watched a video on you tube of Johnny from the gun shop testing lead at 100 yards. Patterns were none existent.

With modern non toxic like HW18 retained energy will be capable but consistent  patterns tight enough will be the problem. 

Steel loses energy with large pellets due to poor drag co efficientcy.

Edited by figgy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

See Scully every other point ignored!

My point is that steel at any range does not kill effectively unless its in the head at any range.

I know what I have witnessed and others witnessed out for the 1st time recently. That is by the by!

My personal view is that steel on the basis of ethics (which you are so keen on) should be banned. It does not kill effectively and it pollutes the ground, waterways with huge plastic wads!

I have a large number of ducks and geese in my freezer that would disagree, you're welcome to ask them, but they don't give very good conversation 

Edited by Big Mat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

See Scully every other point ignored!

My point is that steel at any range does not kill effectively unless its in the head at any range.

I know what I have witnessed and others witnessed out for the 1st time recently. That is by the by!

My personal view is that steel on the basis of ethics (which you are so keen on) should be banned. It does not kill effectively and it pollutes the ground, waterways with huge plastic wads!

You know as well as I do that it does kill well - within certain parameters - but as with any shot type, it will run out of steam at some point.

Your choice of 4 shot would not be my choice for driven ducks. I would probably go for no.2.

Your point about pollution is, at best, hypocritical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

I'm interested in a few of the responses!

This one that is as relevant to lead as it is to steel. If the recent advances can change steel so much why will lead loads not have advanced in that case, which was previously dissed on the other threads?

Also interested that no-one has come forward with pictures of hole in bits of paper to claim the true distance!

I've been using steel on a good few driven duck shoots, personal choice RC Camouflage Hyperfast 34/4. My main concern is not hitting them and this applies to any height is the lack of clean kills you actually achieve with it. 

I had some other posters from here on a day recently and they could not believe firstly what height they did work at but also how many kept going after being hit hard only to die 100 yards later. On plucking steel shot ducks you often find the exit holes causing very little damage on pass through. Same as full metal jacket ammunition used in wars!

I've seen ducks and geese killed with steel out to 100 yards frequently! However those doing it have spent best part of 45 years shooting high ducks and geese unto 7 days a week from the age of 7+.

Could of sworn only cigars were smoked on these posh shoots....:hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we are using a less ballistically efficient material (steel) and shooting bigger birds (ducks and geese now) and have managed to increase the range from 90 to 100 yards. Siting unnamed pigeon watch members as witnesses. 

To top it off there's 7 year olds that have presumerably done such a thing as well and keep doing it 7 days a week for the last 45 year's.

It write more but I'm shooting 704 yard hares in the morning with my sub 12 Springer and open sights so must sleep (lead free pellets of course). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Smokersmith said:

Perhaps we've all missed something ... we know pheasants are 1m long ... a goose is clearly 3m wide, and has a head the size of a watermelon, so it'll be much easier to get those 'lucky strikes' 

By Jove I think you're on to something there!:good::whistling::lol::rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have little experience of steel beyond Gambore Super Steels 4’s, but I can testify as to their effectiveness on ducks to the same extent as lead within the ranges at which I shoot them. 

I tend not to raise my gun to anything I consider I can’t bring down effectively. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

I'm interested in a few of the responses!

This one that is as relevant to lead as it is to steel. If the recent advances can change steel so much why will lead loads not have advanced in that case, which was previously dissed on the other threads?

Also interested that no-one has come forward with pictures of hole in bits of paper to claim the true distance!

I've been using steel on a good few driven duck shoots, personal choice RC Camouflage Hyperfast 34/4. My main concern is not hitting them and this applies to any height is the lack of clean kills you actually achieve with it. 

I had some other posters from here on a day recently and they could not believe firstly what height they did work at but also how many kept going after being hit hard only to die 100 yards later. On plucking steel shot ducks you often find the exit holes causing very little damage on pass through. Same as full metal jacket ammunition used in wars!

I've seen ducks and geese killed with steel out to 100 yards frequently! However those doing it have spent best part of 45 years shooting high ducks and geese unto 7 days a week from the age of 7+.

Clearly in those 45 years of shooting you have never learned to read distance, there is no way in this world that ducks and more importantly geese been killed at 100 yards. You are a deluded individual with no clue about anything other than trying to wind people up.

11 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

See Scully every other point ignored!

My point is that steel at any range does not kill effectively unless its in the head at any range.

I know what I have witnessed and others witnessed out for the 1st time recently. That is by the by!

My personal view is that steel on the basis of ethics (which you are so keen on) should be banned. It does not kill effectively and it pollutes the ground, waterways with huge plastic wads!

Steel is an effective shot, and is available with a fibre shot cup and can be homeloaded with various loads in this format. Lead pollutes too, but at least steel doesn't cause lead poisoning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scully said:

I have little experience of steel beyond Gambore Super Steels 4’s, but I can testify as to their effectiveness on ducks to the same extent as lead within the ranges at which I shoot them. 

I tend not to raise my gun to anything I consider I can’t bring down effectively. 

This is bang on the dot Scully .

I would suggest to the ones who try and shoot wildfowl up to a 100 yds ( which is madness ) to learn more about the habits of the species they go after and use field craft to shoot them at a sensible range instead of hopping a stray piece of shot finds it mark .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, marsh man said:

This is bang on the dot Scully .

I would suggest to the ones who try and shoot wildfowl up to a 100 yds ( which is madness ) to learn more about the habits of the species they go after and use field craft to shoot them at a sensible range instead of hopping a stray piece of shot finds it mark .

I'd suggest that anyone shooting at anything with a heartbeat with a shotgun at 100 yards really should take up another sport

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

I've seen ducks and geese killed with steel out to 100 yards frequently! However those doing it have spent best part of 45 years shooting high ducks and geese unto 7 days a week from the age of 7+.

So we have moved from `Extreme Pheasants & Partridge` with the previous post, to `Extreme Ducks & Geese` with the expected response from most members. The first part of the quote above relates to the old term of `Marsh Cowboy`s`. The second sentence makes me wonder what some people do for a living if they can go shooting wildfowl 7 days a week from the age of 7+ for 45 years. The start of another willy waving post me-thinks. Strange how only the OP seems to have seen these wonderful examples of marksmanship when there is such a wide spectrum of wildfowlers on the forum who never seem to have seen 90 & 100 yrd birds killed, let alone frequently.

Edited by JJsDad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

Big Mat

I betted myself someone would bite with that response within 2 minutes! You sir win! Thanks!

I said out to 100 yards meaning ranges up to this marker point, before it gets used as a rod!

 

I'm sure you just come on here and start a thread to cause an argument 

Also on the 90 to 100 yards you have been talking about in the thread complete and utter rubbish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st thread I’ve started! So that’s an interesting statement! It’s funny how you respond to posts and get slated! 

I quoted driven duck shooting and it’s turned round to wildfowling which is completely different, certainly does not involve firing 250+ shots!

the thread has been twisted to suit an agenda, the point being made was on a recent day the whole party of guns repeatedly complained about numerous ducks being hit hard at various ranges and not killing them cleanly as what they would have done with lead! 

Now in any pattern at any range over 30 yds the Head becomes a very small target which can be missed in a very accurate shot. If steel does not cleanly kill due to the lack of expansion/deformation on impact is it really correct to be using it when ducks are flying on and dying later, especially when on many occasions where picking up can not be easily carried out!

Address the post not the poster!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

1st thread I’ve started! So that’s an interesting statement! It’s funny how you respond to posts and get slated! 

I quoted driven duck shooting and it’s turned round to wildfowling which is completely different, certainly does not involve firing 250+ shots!

the thread has been twisted to suit an agenda, the point being made was on a recent day the whole party of guns repeatedly complained about numerous ducks being hit hard at various ranges and not killing them cleanly as what they would have done with lead! 

Now in any pattern at any range over 30 yds the Head becomes a very small target which can be missed in a very accurate shot. If steel does not cleanly kill due to the lack of expansion/deformation on impact is it really correct to be using it when ducks are flying on and dying later, especially when on many occasions where picking up can not be easily carried out!

Address the post not the poster!

Indeed it has and just as previously, it's patently obvious that the one who is doing the twisting is also the one with the agenda and I reckon that it's pretty clear to all and sundry just who that might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

 

the thread has been twisted to suit an agenda, the point being made was on a recent day the whole party of guns repeatedly complained about numerous ducks being hit hard at various ranges and not killing them cleanly as what they would have done with lead! 

Now in any pattern at any range over 30 yds the Head becomes a very small target which can be missed in a very accurate shot. If steel does not cleanly kill due to the lack of expansion/deformation on impact is it really correct to be using it when ducks are flying on and dying later, especially when on many occasions where picking up can not be easily carried out!

Address the post not the poster!

Fair enough, but if you find steel isn't as effective as you would like it to be, why shoot at quarry which require it if you know you can't kill them cleanly ?  Or why shoot at birds which can't easily be picked?

We sometimes get birds escaping our wood and heading across the river; if the rivers in spate we don't shoot them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Perazzishot said:

1st thread I’ve started! So that’s an interesting statement! It’s funny how you respond to posts and get slated! 

I quoted driven duck shooting and it’s turned round to wildfowling which is completely different, certainly does not involve firing 250+ shots!

the thread has been twisted to suit an agenda, the point being made was on a recent day the whole party of guns repeatedly complained about numerous ducks being hit hard at various ranges and not killing them cleanly as what they would have done with lead! 

Now in any pattern at any range over 30 yds the Head becomes a very small target which can be missed in a very accurate shot. If steel does not cleanly kill due to the lack of expansion/deformation on impact is it really correct to be using it when ducks are flying on and dying later, especially when on many occasions where picking up can not be easily carried out!

Address the post not the poster!

They obviously can't shoot then

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Perazzishot said:

1st thread I’ve started! So that’s an interesting statement! It’s funny how you respond to posts and get slated! 

I quoted driven duck shooting and it’s turned round to wildfowling which is completely different, certainly does not involve firing 250+ shots!

the thread has been twisted to suit an agenda, the point being made was on a recent day the whole party of guns repeatedly complained about numerous ducks being hit hard at various ranges and not killing them cleanly as what they would have done with lead! 

Now in any pattern at any range over 30 yds the Head becomes a very small target which can be missed in a very accurate shot. If steel does not cleanly kill due to the lack of expansion/deformation on impact is it really correct to be using it when ducks are flying on and dying later, especially when on many occasions where picking up can not be easily carried out!

Address the post not the poster!

Is 100 yards different on driven duck to out on saltings? It's still ********. If your cronies can't kill driven tame supermarket chickens with steel then they really are **** shots. At 30 yards with steel it's dead or missed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Perazzishot said:

See Scully every other point ignored!

My point is that steel at any range does not kill effectively unless its in the head at any range.

I know what I have witnessed and others witnessed out for the 1st time recently. That is by the by!

My personal view is that steel on the basis of ethics (which you are so keen on) should be banned. It does not kill effectively and it pollutes the ground, waterways with huge plastic wads!

you said you seen guys shoot duck and geese at 100 yards with steel in another post make up your ,mind 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So on a day where 1100 shots were fired and a number of ducks were shot hard and made it back to ponds to be be found dead on the water I start a thread to provoke a discussion which results in personal abuse of me and my fellow experienced shooters on a shooting forum. You couldn't make this up! 

A point I'm getting at here is how many folk are hitting (maybe not knowing) quarry using steel shot and making no attempt to retrieve it as it goes on to die later? Is steel being used as a cheap alternative to satisfy the crazy laws made by non shooting committees?

We are polluting watercourses and wetlands with huge plastic wads, in Scotland it is the land on which you shoot which determines the use of non toxic not the species as in England. 

If I can speak to 00's of shooters who say the same then surely it should be banned?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...