The .410 – world’s smallest shotgun calibre

[wymberley]

36 minutes ago, Ultrastu said:

I have to agree with fell side on this .and disagree with Bill the author of the article .I find a modern .410 the perfect tool to start youths  and all newcomers to the sport .on clays and quarry. Including flying game .

What is the difference  between 19 grm of no7.5 shot from a  .410 and  21 grm of no 6 shot from a 12b . About 25 pellets  and 0.3 of a mm  the velocity  is the same  the power the same the pattern size and density the same  .

The biggest  difference  is that a .410 ou is a dream to shoot and handle  where the 12 b can be too long and heavy for smaller people  .the chance of breaking a clay dropping a bird  at 30 yds the same  .

I took my boy (15 years ) out in the hide with his .410 ou . Shooting pigeons over the stubbles for the first time (previously  shot clays ) .he took 30 mins to get his eye and confidence up and then started dropping birds all over the place. Shots out to 25 /30 yds with 18 grms or 7.5 shot .

He didn't wound any and the dog retrieved those that needed a dispatch  .he loved his day in the hide with his gun - confidence high .he had 22 birds in around 3 hours .not bad for a calibre that  "shouldn't be used on flying birds " eh? 

 

The benefits (and the disadvantages) of anything are best served if those stated are accurate. The difference is on average 68 pellets. The velocity at the muzzle is the same but the 12 bore energy is greater. If the pattern designations are the same then all things being equal the pattern from the cartridge with the greater number of pellets should be the more dense.

[London Best]

3 minutes ago, wymberley said:

The benefits (and the disadvantages) of anything are best served if those stated are accurate. The difference is on average 68 pellets. The velocity at the muzzle is the same but the 12 bore energy is greater. If the pattern designations are the same then all things being equal the pattern from the cartridge with the greater number of pellets should be the more dense.

Yes, 68 pellets in favour of the 19 gram load of 7.5’s

[Poor Shot]

19 minutes ago, Fellside said:

In my experience of coaching 8 - 12 year olds a 26” barrelled 410 O/U with 14 gram Eley Trap 7 1/2 cartridges is the ideal set up. At this age, even with the bigger kids, the 28 bore is a little muzzle heavy and they start leaning back to compensate for the weight after a few shots. With the correct 410 set up - and with open chokes, they have no ballistic disadvantage out to 35 yards. Subject to skill levels, they can start on the more challenging stuff like skeet for example. By the time they’re 13 (if big enough), then a step up is OK. They grow hellishly fast and can often move straight to a 20 bore if they’re body strength will allow. 
That’s my two penneth in all of this - for what it’s worth………🙂. Ramble over. 

Depends on the gun and the child I suppose. I was tiny as a child (still am as an adult) and would have probably benefit more from the lightest gun possible until past 12 Y/O but there are kids in the extended family who are 5'5" and 45kg at 12 Y/O who could probably use either with no bother. 

The youth stocked 26" kofs guns are near enough the same in both 410 and 28 bores. It only takes so much extra material for additional bore diameter after all and the actions are identical for the small bores. 

As said, if they're out there making noise with a gun, are comfortable and hitting a few things then I'm sure they aren't bothered what the diameter is of the cartridge going in or what's coming out the end. 

 

[wymberley]

52 minutes ago, Fellside said:

In my experience of coaching 8 - 12 year olds a 26” barrelled 410 O/U with 14 gram Eley Trap 7 1/2 cartridges is the ideal set up. At this age, even with the bigger kids, the 28 bore is a little muzzle heavy and they start leaning back to compensate for the weight after a few shots. With the correct 410 set up - and with open chokes, they have no ballistic disadvantage out to 35 yards. Subject to skill levels, they can start on the more challenging stuff like skeet for example. By the time they’re 13 (if big enough), then a step up is OK. They grow hellishly fast and can often move straight to a 20 bore if they’re body strength will allow. 
That’s my two penneth in all of this - for what it’s worth………🙂. Ramble over. 

Like many other old dodderers I'm not always in favour of so called progress. However, the changes to the 410 in more recent years is an exception. I was on the first BASC coaching course and we were well sponsored by various makers once the 'clinics' were up and running. Back then the more readily available suitable calibres for the smaller folk - youngsters and ladies - bottomed out at the 20 bore. We managed to get a self loader in that calibre which helped to drop things down by a year or two, but what we would have given for a more recent 410 is nobody's business. Mind you, still don't see the point in stuffing heavy loads in small guns.

Edited September 12 by wymberley

[Fellside]

3 minutes ago, Poor Shot said:

Depends on the gun and the child I suppose. I was tiny as a child (still am as an adult) and would have probably benefit more from the lightest gun possible until past 12 Y/O but there are kids in the extended family who are 5'5" and 45kg at 12 Y/O who could probably use either with no bother. 

The youth stocked 26" kofs guns are near enough the same in both 410 and 28 bores. It only takes so much extra material for additional bore diameter after all and the actions are identical for the small bores. 

As said, if they're out there making noise with a gun, are comfortable and hitting a few things then I'm sure they aren't bothered what the diameter is of the cartridge going in or what's coming out the end. 

 

It’s the barrel weight…..out beyond the action. This is what makes the difference. Even 4oz extra on the 28 bore can make a big difference to a youngster - because of where the weight is. When I took my then 10 year old to a BASC coach, the coach worked out which type of 410 was best, not which calibre. He had a wide selection…! He was (is) very experienced and looking back he was spot on. 

At the opposite end of the scale, I’ve seen some younger children on shooting grounds getting horribly kicked by a borrowed 20 bore. They sometimes just don’t have enough size about them. Not pleasant - enough to put them off for good. That’s the other thing which the 410 has in its favour, it is very gentle on the shoulder. Anyway, nice to chat about all of this, but I’m off to reccy some decoying for tomorrow. It’s easy to get carried away by shooting topics isn’t it? Who knows I might take the 410 out…..! 

[Ultrastu]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

The benefits (and the disadvantages) of anything are best served if those stated are accurate. The difference is on average 68 pellets. The velocity at the muzzle is the same but the 12 bore energy is greater. If the pattern designations are the same then all things being equal the pattern from the cartridge with the greater number of pellets should be the more dense.

Thanks for the help wymberley  .your correct the difference  is 68 pellets in favour of the .410-   19 grm no7.5   over the 12b  21 grm load of no 6 shot  .

As for energy .presuming  the muzzle velocities  are the same then the 21 grm load will have more muzzle energy  (by 2 grams (not much ) and the bigger no6  pellet will hold around 5 % more energy at range than the smaller no7.5 .

But energy is largely  irrelevant  as we neither shoot quarry at point blank or at 50 + yds  the ranges we are interested in is between 10 - 40 yds usually  .where virtually any individual pellet  will have enough  if combined with enough of its mates to do the job effectively. 

So it comes back to pattern density .

I personally  feel this thought process displayed by the author  comes from a place of shooting 12b with 32 grm game loads at pheasants .probably at birds at 40 yds plus. Where such a gun and cartridge shines .

Give the same guy a .410 with 16 grms of no 6  and he wonders why he can't kill the same birds .so blames the calibre and calls it useless .

He wouldn't be able to drop the same bird with a 21 grm load of 6 from a 12b 

The calibre isn't the issue it's the cartridge that's the limiting factor .

A great proving point is no9  tss shot in a  .410 have you seen what these cartridges  can do ? Dropping geese at 40 yds stone dead .  

Forget this cal v that cal  and compare cartridges  .

[Ultrastu]

Just to reinforce the point about gun fit /weight /recoil and confidence  .

I'm taking a friend  clay pigeon  shooting soon .as he  has shown an interest. He is a VERY  accomplished  shot  but not with a shot gun ,his usual discipline  is extremely  different to shotgun shooting flying targets.  So to get his eye in and start with the basics  I will put him on my .410 ou.  Get him hitting targets up to 25 yds (gun and cartridge  more than capable ) where he can totally concentrate  on the clays and sight picture and gun fit and swing through  etc without recoil ,noise , weight   and all the other off putting elements slowing him down .

He is a big strong lad and he can shoot a 12 b all day long but the .410 is the better starting place in my opinion  .

 

Edited September 12 by Ultrastu

[Old farrier]

Personally a fan of the 4.10 especially the modern ones with the modern cartridges 

would I start a youngster with on definitely low noise low recoil obviously targets to suit 

definitely shoot game with one as most 40 yard 🤔🙄 pheasant are realistically 30 

On the negative side cartridges are expensive there doesn't appear to be much in the pipeline to replace lead if it’s banned for game shooting that’s affordable with a fibre wad 

thought about travelling to the Basc world 410 championship but it’s a long way for 50 targets did shoot in the British open 410 comp 100 targets a very good event 

[wymberley]

2 hours ago, Ultrastu said:

Thanks for the help wymberley  .your correct the difference  is 68 pellets in favour of the .410-   19 grm no7.5   over the 12b  21 grm load of no 6 shot  .

As for energy .presuming  the muzzle velocities  are the same then the 21 grm load will have more muzzle energy  (by 2 grams (not much ) and the bigger no6  pellet will hold around 5 % more energy at range than the smaller no7.5 .

The total muzzle energy for the19 g is 293 ftlbs and for the 21 g is 324. At 30 yards the individual pellet energy for the 19 g is 1.2 ftlbs and for the 21 is 1.9 - an extra 58%.

But energy is largely  irrelevant  as we neither shoot quarry at point blank or at 50 + yds  the ranges we are interested in is between 10 - 40 yds usually  .where virtually any individual pellet  will have enough  if combined with enough of its mates to do the job effectively. 

So it comes back to pattern density .

I personally  feel this thought process displayed by the author  comes from a place of shooting 12b with 32 grm game loads at pheasants .probably at birds at 40 yds plus. Where such a gun and cartridge shines .

Give the same guy a .410 with 16 grms of no 6  and he wonders why he can't kill the same birds .so blames the calibre and calls it useless .

He wouldn't be able to drop the same bird with a 21 grm load of 6 from a 12b 

The calibre isn't the issue it's the cartridge that's the limiting factor .

A great proving point is no9  tss shot in a  .410 have you seen what these cartridges  can do ? Dropping geese at 40 yds stone dead . 

Haven't been 'fowling for many years so haven't a clue about geese, but I do know that the recognised energy requirement for a mallard (and cock pheasant) is 1.5 ftlbs. At 40 yards the 9 TSS (1400MV) is 1.4 ftlbs and for a lead 3, 3.6. The energy density level (assuming  0.5 ftlb threshold energy requirement) which is a better indicator of a pellets' lethal property is 144 for the TSS and 190 for the lead. Perhaps your figures relate to a reliance on a head shot.

Forget this cal v that cal  and compare cartridges  .

 

Edited September 12 by wymberley

[wymberley]

4 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

Personally a fan of the 4.10 especially the modern ones with the modern cartridges 

would I start a youngster with on definitely low noise low recoil obviously targets to suit 

definitely shoot game with one as most 40 yard 🤔🙄 pheasant are realistically 30 

On the negative side cartridges are expensive there doesn't appear to be much in the pipeline to replace lead if it’s banned for game shooting that’s affordable with a fibre wad 

thought about travelling to the Basc world 410 championship but it’s a long way for 50 targets did shoot in the British open 410 comp 100 targets a very good event 

As you rightly say, forget calibre v calibre and concentrate on cartridge. A 21g in a 12 should do the trick. Should you go for the 410, as he's a big lad, you'll have to teach him twice - the second time to amend his swing in order to adjust to the heavier weight.

[Ultrastu]

5 minutes ago, wymberley said:

As you rightly say, forget calibre v calibre and concentrate on cartridge. A 21g in a 12 should do the trick. Should you go for the 410, as he's a big lad, you'll have to teach him twice - the second time to amend his swing in order to adjust to the heavier weight.

Yeah maybe . But at least he will be hitting targets and enjoying himself .

[wymberley]

1 minute ago, Ultrastu said:

Yeah maybe . But at least he will be hitting targets and enjoying himself .

Which at the end of the day is what it's all about.

[Ultrastu]

12 minutes ago, wymberley said:

 

Thanks for the numbers wymberley  .thing is 3.6 fpe of energy from a single pellet even to the head is insufficient  to kill a goose . Let alone 1.4 fpe .

It's the combined energy of multiple strikes that add up to a killing shot .

Drop 20 pellets at 1.4 fpe  on your quarry and it will fold .

Only put 2 pellets at 3.6 fpe on a goose and it won't even change direction .

It's pattern again mate  retained energy is largely irrelevant  .unless your shooting something like a bb sized  pellet .

[Old farrier]

13 minutes ago, wymberley said:

As you rightly say, forget calibre v calibre and concentrate on cartridge. A 21g in a 12 should do the trick. Should you go for the 410, as he's a big lad, you'll have to teach him twice - the second time to amend his swing in order to adjust to the heavier weight.

you may be confusing my post with another 

 

[wymberley]

2 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

you may be confusing my post with another 

 

My profound apologies. I intended, of course, to reply to Ultrastu.

[London Best]

1 hour ago, Ultrastu said:

3.6 fpe of energy from a single pellet even to the head is insufficient  to kill a goose . 

Well, I have agreed with everything else you have said in this thread but that is total rubbish I’m afraid.

Edited September 12 by London Best

[Stonepark]

1 hour ago, Ultrastu said:

Thanks for the numbers wymberley  .thing is 3.6 fpe of energy from a single pellet even to the head is insufficient  to kill a goose . Let alone 1.4 fpe .

It's the combined energy of multiple strikes that add up to a killing shot .

Drop 20 pellets at 1.4 fpe  on your quarry and it will fold .

Only put 2 pellets at 3.6 fpe on a goose and it won't even change direction .

It's pattern again mate  retained energy is largely irrelevant  .unless your shooting something like a bb sized  pellet .

Shotgun pellets kill immediately by striking vital areas, lungs, heart, spine, major arteries, kill soon after by striking liver, minor veins, minor arteries and drop birds by breaking wing bones.

Combined energy is nonsense, as is pellets have "hydrostatic shock".

For geese 6/7 pellets of 2.5ftlbs at 50 yards, each penetrating into organs will kill them cleanly every time if on target. (1 1/4oz lead no3).

But it is not the combined energy of the pellets but using the law of averages that 1 or 2 of the 6/7 pellets will strike something vital and cause the kill.

I have dropped geese at 40 yards with 1oz load of No7 (only had duck cartridges with me) and they only have 1ftlb energy per pellet at that range but sufficient pattern to ensure multiple 6/7 head/neck/spine hits and clean kills, whilst the body was getting hit with 20-30 pellets, which could not penetrate the breast and most were just under the skin having expended their energy on feathers and skin.

 

 

 

[Ultrastu]

47 minutes ago, London Best said:

Well, I have agreed with everything else you have said in this thread but that is total rubbish I’m afraid.

Well to be fair I haven't actually shot a goose with a single no5    3.6 fpe pellet in the head . I have shot pigeons in the head while trying to dispatch them in the hide with an air gun at point blank .and I know exactly the energy required with a .177 pellet that will switch it off .its above 3.5 fpe .granted that will be with a slower moving but heavier projectile than a shot gun pellet .but if we are talking energy alone it stands .so I was extrapolating  .a goose head being much much bigger and heavier set than a pigeon one ,  I'd expect somewhere around 5 - 6 fpe to be the minimum energy  .but I may be wrong .

The neck is a softer and more vulnerable kill zone on a bird  and would probably  require less energy to be fatal .rabbits also have a minimum limit to the energy required and that's around 4  fpe for a well placed shot and much higher for a badly placed one .

In my experience  .

[London Best]

10 hours ago, Ultrastu said:

rabbits also have a minimum limit to the energy required and that's around 4  fpe for a well placed shot and much higher for a badly placed one .

In my experience  .

As a 13 year old, before I learned how to properly despatch rabbits by hand, I used to carry a Webley Mk1  .177 pistol made in 1928 and producing well under 2ft.lb. Wounded or ferreted rabbits were killed instantaneously using that air pistol.

[Cranfield]

As 9-10 year old I used a Farmers 9mm "garden gun" to shoot winged and ground vermin, inside and around his farm buildings, some of which housed cattle and pigs.
It was very effective and created no damage.
The same Farmer gave me an Webley bolt action .410 when I was 11-12 and a 12 sbs 12 bore when I was 14.
 

 

[HantsRob]

I'm, always impressed with the breadth and depth of knowledge on this site.

Whilst not a BASC fan, I think the article was written for the layman and excluding RF which is not seen as a traditional shotgun shell, most people would say 410 is the smallest "normal" calibre of shotgun. 

I took it for what it was, a coffee break article, and if nothing else it has generated (mostly) an interesting topic. Sorry to say, I have enjoyed this thread more than the original article! That is probably due to it feeling like a rushed article, but still has provided more than 5 minute relief.

[London Best]

1 hour ago, HantsRob said:

I'm, always impressed with the breadth and depth of knowledge on this site.

Whilst not a BASC fan, I think the article was written for the layman and excluding RF which is not seen as a traditional shotgun shell, most people would say 410 is the smallest "normal" calibre of shotgun. 

I took it for what it was, a coffee break article, and if nothing else it has generated (mostly) an interesting topic. Sorry to say, I have enjoyed this thread more than the original article! That is probably due to it feeling like a rushed article, but still has provided more than 5 minute relief.

Bill’s article stated a lot of things I have heard before over many years, but which are just so wrong.

[wymberley]

30 minutes ago, London Best said:

Bill’s article stated a lot of things I have heard before over many years, but which are just so wrong.

Several of your posts have given your opinions that the authors have got it wrong with no further explanation. It would be handy to hear your opinions as to why this is so, detailing what is correct and the reasons for it.

[Old farrier]

2 hours ago, HantsRob said:

I'm, always impressed with the breadth and depth of knowledge on this site.

Whilst not a BASC fan, I think the article was written for the layman and excluding RF which is not seen as a traditional shotgun shell, most people would say 410 is the smallest "normal" calibre of shotgun. 

I took it for what it was, a coffee break article, and if nothing else it has generated (mostly) an interesting topic. Sorry to say, I have enjoyed this thread more than the original article! That is probably due to it feeling like a rushed article, but still has provided more than 5 minute relief.

As you weren’t a shooter back in the day you wouldn’t have experienced the old 4.10 and ammunition so probably don’t realise how drastically the guns and ammunition have improved 

although I’m sure you are aware of the capabilities of the little guns 😂

[enfieldspares]

If the level of knowledge of the .410" (which other than the rimfire shotgun calibres is the most at risk regarding a banning of lead) is what has been shown by the Bill Harriman article I have now decided that I will not be asking my local MP to attend the BASC Presentation at the political conference it will be attending. What is not wanted being told to MPs is nonsense being said about the .410" cartridge's unsuitability "for shooting moving, aerial targets".