# speed kill????



## Canada_Hunter (Mar 21, 2004)

What do you guys think about this one?Do you think the fast steel is much better than the 1300 and under stuff?I was a firm believer in 1550 fps shell until last year...I patterned my gun with federal classic 3 inch 1 1/8 oz 1550 fps and it wasnt really good...the drylocks were a bit better in the same load...but nothing compared to the federal 2 3/4 inch 1 1/4 oz of 2 at 1275 fps...the pattern were the best i could find with my mod choke or imp cyl...So i bought a couple box to try on geese.And i must say im impress...I tought it will cripple them at 40 yds but they are stone dead...So i think 200fps dont really do much of a difference...What do you guys think???


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

There's some 'experts' who believe that going slow for steel is better. It's kind of like when you throw a nerf ball; when you throw it slow and steady it'll fly straight and go farther than if you throw it as hard as you can...and it veers off course and air resistance slows it down faster at the higher speed. Some think steel is the same way because it's so light and it delivers more energy at longer ranges at slower speeds.

Personally I like the fast stuff. I think as long as you're shooting them at short distances it doesn't really matter and the fast stuff hits them harder when they're close.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Nothing wrong with warp speed even, so long as the pattern is full *at the range you're shooting birds*. In addition to the effect of speed Matt describes, the necessary steel payload trade off of lighter/faster becomes problematic the greater the range - there often simply aren't enough pellets getting to the "x" to get the job done.

The pattern board never lies. Get yourself a CONSEP chart and a smattering of different shot sizes/payloads/speeds, step back to the *maximum distance *you will shoot, and the pattern board will speak for itself.

As between pattern density and speed, which kills more consistantly? Both would be great, but hard to achieve with light/fast loads, especially when operating other than close-in and choosing the larger of acceptable shot sizes.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Pattern is important but it is not everything.Schock is what kills birds.The faster the pellet is when making contact...the more shock.

Think of it this way...If someone hits you in the nose,but only half-heartedly,you don't suffer much damage,even though he hits you with a full punch.BUT if he hits you in the same place but with velocity...you not only show damage,but probably are knocked off your feet.

This speed can be compensated for somewhat by using larger shot size.That's why in the old days when we switched from lead to steel,we were told to use 2 sizes larger.

Plus the larger,faster pellets will be more likely to break wings.

I shoot reloads that travel at 1450 fps or faster.BUT my Benelli doesn't pattern well with loads over 1600 fps.

Of course there are laws of Physics here....which means something going faster will have an opposite reaction and kick more.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

I'm content to let people do what they want.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

This is one of my favorite round 'n round, never ending debates.



KEN W said:


> Think of it this way...If someone hits you in the nose,but only half-heartedly,you don't suffer much damage,even though he hits you with a full punch.BUT if he hits you in the same place but with velocity...you not only show damage,but probably are knocked off your feet.


Someone hits you in the nose with a 60mph hammer or a 90mph hammer, you're deep 6'ed in either case. I'd rather take my chances with someone hurling 5 90mph hammers at me, than 8 60mph'ers. About 1275 fps w/ heavier payloads = the metaphoric 60mph hammers - more than enough speed to get the job done, and denser patterns to boot.

Fast (or what is left of it down range) is great, so is big, but only if not sacrificing densities. Most fast/light loads will force you to make that sacrifice at anything other than tight ranges (because of a pattern's cone shape). For hunters who are always very picky about shot selection and who use smaller shot sizes and always kill cleanly on the first shot, :wink: fast/light is the ticket. For the rest of us, slower/heavier is our better friend.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Why not use a heavier 90mph hammer???

Why limit yourself,use the best of both worlds.....fast,1450 and up,and heavy,BB's for geese and 3's for ducks.

Faster WILL put more shock into them,bigger will do more damage.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

KEN W said:


> Why limit yourself,use the best of both worlds.....fast,1450 and up,and heavy,BB's for geese and 3's for ducks./quote]
> 
> Ahhhhhh, almost perfect for the hypothetical, disciplined hunter just described, who takes all shots at 40 yards and under. Distance has been proven as deceiving, however, and most don't. Those shot sizes are not within the CONSEP mantra for large birds at longer ranges. And, most would still need to do some choking work to make the BB's, especially in 3" vs. 3.5", hit recommended densities at 40 yds.
> 
> Fast, big and dense are the trifecta, but also mutually exclusive for steel at anything other than tight ranges. The pattern board never lies. If you're looking for a "one size fits all", it's still slower/heavier.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Federal 2 3/4 inch in 1's or 2's.....works good for me on field and water....only $5.99 per box too. Shoot a Benelli Super 90 and kill most every thing under 40 yards. I figure I can always send Ron out to pick up any cripples. Left Ron, Left!

Ok the hammer thing.....remember this from high school? What difference in distance would a hammer traveling 90mph have to cover to meet the same nose with a hammer traveling 60mph from the opposite direction?


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Guess we will agree to disagree...I'll take fast and heavy that patterns the best in MY gun.

I hated physics in HS.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Experience has taught me that for some people it doesn't matter what they use for shells they are going to be deadly with a shotgun. Others can do all the ballistic stuff they want and they still will not out shoot some guys. In general. the guys who shoot more and do all the extra work are better shots simply because they shoot and practice more than others but not always.


----------



## smalls (Sep 9, 2003)

*cough* krueger *cough*


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Field hunter, What are you doing answering questions for Monty. The Monty I know rarely kills anything beyond 12 yards and always claims the ones that I killed!!! You can't be monty making such bold statements. I do agree with the Ron thing, You have him very well trained to respond to hand signals!!!! :lol: :lol: :wink:


----------



## Ryan_Todd (Apr 11, 2004)

i can't see there being much difference with 200 fps except for maybe the lead distance. in my experience the slower loads tend to pattern better.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

GG, love the signature!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

For waterfowl, for whatever reason, I'm not nearly the shot I want to be or should be for as much as I shoot. Yeah, I drop more than I miss, but historically haven't "stoned" nearly as many as I'd like at various ranges - too many nicks, even at what are very reasonable ranges. Upland, different story, generally. That's the primary reason I'm anal about the CONSEP stuff and really want to fine tune my steel patterning. Shoot whatever the heck you like, but if you're interested in this stuff (and enough must be, as it keeps coming up) and you want to get more lethal whatever your shooting skills, you may as well let science do as much of the work as possible.

Patterning is like a set of gears. When you torque one feature, the others move too, very predictably but most often very unproductively. To go faster, you generally have to give up payload and what you have left is going to "fly" more. To go bigger, you have to give up pellet count. But, to shoot bigger birds at longer ranges, you should use bigger shot. Giving up payload and pellet count and sending out more "fliers" translates directly into less dense patterns, most evident at longer ranges. And it doesn't matter how big/fast your hammers are if you don't hit critters enough times in the right spots, i.e. pattern densities. That's the rub.

The bottom line is this: If you buy into the CONSEP method (a big if for some, I acknowledge), it is virtually impossible to make the required pattern densities with fast/light steel at acceptable but distant ranges. Don't believe me, try the board. If you always shoot close (Ken, never hunted with you, so we may not be disagreeing at all), fast/light/big steel can pretty easily be made CONSEP-friendly, especially if you shoot 3" for duck loads and 3.5" for goose loads. Those shell capacities will allow you to be fast/light/big/dense (get your minds out of the gutter) at close ranges with minimal choke work.

To find that one "perfect", "one size fits all", CONSEP-friendly lethal load for each species at all acceptable ranges, however, you'll have to sacrifice some features for others, and "fast" will need to go. That's okay, as long as you start out at about 1275fps, give or take.

If you have no interest in this stuff, or think CONSEP is as wacko as Jacko, pick the cheapest stuff with whatever characteristics you like and wail away! Heck, dogs and hunting partners need to earn their keep too.

p.s. I know what Dan's talking about - I was wondering if we had a FH imposter too. If memory serves, the FH I hunted with last pheasant opener 'bout put my poor, aged chocolate (and both of us) in the hospital trying to run down all of his nicked roosters. :lol:


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Ya know....between you and Chris I hardly ever got a shot! I'm still impressed with how fast you brought down two partridges in that group....before I got my gun up. Ok, I'll cncede that the $5.99 stuff might not be the best.....If, I want to pattern say a 2 3/4" in 1 1/8 load, what three or four cmpanies would you guys suggest? I might learn something.

Maybe we wouldn't need to look for the ones I nicked! By the way, I'm in the process of convincng my wife that a second dog wouldn't be that bad.
(keeping my fingers crossed)


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

> If, I want to pattern say a 2 3/4" in 1 1/8 load, what three or four cmpanies would you guys suggest?


You know, that's the funny thing. If you start taking apart various mfg's shells, and even different lines of shells within the same mfg., and worse yet from year to year, you'll be amazed at the difference in shot quality. And you'd think that buying the "premium" line of any mfg. would ensure better shot, but not the case. There's some really spendy stuff out there with really crappy shot - and this will hurt patterns, especially at faster rates. Call Kevin - he found a "promo line" load this year from I believe Federal that had some really good shot, was slow/heavy and will probably pattern pretty well for a very good price.

You might be able to get some duck or goose loads to pattern decently on those characteristics, but probably only to closer ranges. With a 3" shell, at say 1 3/8 oz., you'll find a lot more flexibility. If you want to "make grade" on BBB's at long goose ranges, you'll have to go to 3.5" and 1 9/16oz. If you want to err on the side of caution without disecting a bunch of shells, find something 1275-1350 with the smallest of recommended shot sizes for that species/range - chances are you about 80% the way towards a good pattern.



> By the way, I'm in the process of convincng my wife that a second dog wouldn't be that bad.


What's the saying about forgiveness and permission? :wink:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Dan...I don't disagree at all...I just look for the fastest load that will give me a good pattern.

Then I decide on shot sizes.As I said above...I like BB in 1 3/16 oz. at 1550 for geese and 3's in 1 oz. at 1550 for ducks.


----------



## Canada_Hunter (Mar 21, 2004)

Most of my shot are really close...thats why i dont want to use BB...they put big holes in the meat.Anyway i already did some pattern test with my guns and it seem the fast stuff dont do verry well out of an imp cyl or a mod...this is the main reason why i use the slow velocity and for me its working great!I bought some Kent yesterday at 1550 fps to see what they can do in my gun...thanks for the reply


----------

