Shotgun Ammo Testing

[gunderwood]

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtop ... b066d49b39

[Palladin]

Okay, we've all yakked up tac and home defense loads on here before...

At the time I offered up #4 buck as a good choice, no one gave it a or a .

So my question to you after you've mulled over this data, is would you give it a second thought now?

[CowboyT]

Based on these data, for helping to avoid overpenetration (e. g. apartment), #4 buck looks pretty good. But it looks like #1 buck is the best combination overall.

[gunderwood]

Unfortunately they didn't test my favorite 12ga Federal LE hollow point slug load.

[Jakeiscrazy]

Based on these data, for helping to avoid overpenetration (e. g. apartment), #4 buck looks pretty good. But it looks like #1 buck is the best combination overall.

+1 for my environment I would go with #1 or larger. Great post I haven't seen many good shotgun tests!

[jdonovan]

I've not found any testing with it, but there are a few folks I've been talking with that say the hevi-shot in "T" size is very interesting.
Numbers.... T is hevi-shot, #4 #1 are lead.

Diameter
T is .20
#4 is .24
#1 is .30

Weight is (in grains)
T is 15
#4 is 21
#1 is 41

When we look at sectional density:
T is .017
#4 is .016
#1 is .021

Now keep in mind that lead is going to deform on impact, whereas the heavi-shot is not. That is going to cause the resultant SD to go down... if we assume a 20% expansion of the lead the new SD table looks more like:
T is .017
#4 is .012
#1 is .014


My arm-chair ballistics guessing says the T shot should be a good penetrator even with its relatively light weight, probably at least as good as #4. The hevi-shot T's are available in 3" 12ga, 1350 FPS with a pellet count of 50.

All of that said does anyone have any evidence that shorter range < 20 yds, vs thin skinned game that even #4 buck under performs?

There are enough LE shootings with 00 buck to determine that it is a plenty effective load for its needs.

Based on these data, for helping to avoid overpenetration (e. g. apartment), #4 buck looks pretty good. But it looks like #1 buck is the best combination overall.

ANY projectile that will sufficiently penetrate a human for self defense purposes will also penetrate common building materials.

If you are in a position that you can not accept penetration of walls, then you'll need to switch to a less lethal technology like taser or pepper products.

[gunderwood]

All of that said does anyone have any evidence that shorter range < 20 yds, vs thin skinned game that even #4 buck under performs?

I don't, but it usually illegal to hunt deer sized game with such small shot.

There are enough LE shootings with 00 buck to determine that it is a plenty effective load for its needs.

This is exactly why I error on the side of 00 Buck or LE slugs. I know they work for SD and work well. You don't find many agencies loading up with #4 buck.

Based on these data, for helping to avoid overpenetration (e. g. apartment), #4 buck looks pretty good. But it looks like #1 buck is the best combination overall.

ANY projectile that will sufficiently penetrate a human for self defense purposes will also penetrate common building materials.

If you are in a position that you can not accept penetration of walls, then you'll need to switch to a less lethal technology like taser or pepper products.

I agree with the underlined, but I'm not sure about the less lethal recommendation. While less lethal may work, their failure modes are very bad. If you miss or the first round out of a firearm is ineffective, another is usually immediately available. Less lethal often tend to be single shot devices or near enough to it.

IMHO, life is not without risk. Yes, there is a risk of me missing during a SD situation and causing unintended harm to an innocent, but I think the risk is greatly overblown. The odds of me needing to use a firearm in SD are fairly low because I take other common sense precautions like locking all doors/windows at all times, not leaving valuables in sight, etc.

In the small chance I need a firearm for SD, I want the most effective I can find and that means accepting a certain level of risk; heck, just having the firearm around is a certain level of risk. Furthermore, I always have the option to not shoot. While taking immediate and decisive action is usually the right solution, it isn't for every situation. It takes wisdom to determine how to act and unfortunately, experience is the best teacher and often you don't get it until you need it.

The risk of an attacker is real and present at that moment. The risk of me missing and hitting a innocent is there, but I suggest it is far less than the immediate risk I am presented with in a SD situation. Put a different way, the attacker already wants to rape/murder/harm me and my family and the risk posed by me and my firearm to my family is far less than that attacker.

There is one surefire way to minimize the risk I pose to my family by choosing to defend them, practice...do it often and do it well.

[dorminWS]

This is a great thread with some solid thought, facts and opinions. I used to do a lot of duck & goose hunting out on the eastern shore of MD (and in the Mississippi flyway, too, because I live about equidistant from the Atlantic and Mississippi flyways), and after steel shot was mandated, I started loading 2 BBs with the last shot being Ts (we'd used 4s and BBs with lead). I can tell you the T-shot was a great load to extend the killing radius on a 12-guage with steel shot.

But the self-defense discussion is what really got my attention here. Call me a wimp if you must, but the second-to-last thing in the world I want to do is kill (or even seriously main) somebody. But the absolute last thing I want to do is let some malefactor kill or injure me or mine. For a lot of reasons, the odds are fairly high that one of us will someday be faced with a choice between the two. But like most of us, it worries me a lot that if I was forced to shoot some lowlife, my life and finances might very well be wrecked by a liability lawsuit. And in case ya'll haven't thought about this and realized it, it can easily bankrupt most of us to defend such a suit AND WIN. So if you needed another reason to be very reluctant to drop the hammer on a fellow human, now you've got it. And it's a good cynical hard-boiled one that even the most cold-blooded and macho amongst us needn't apologize for.

I've got a Taurus Judge. It’s pretty big to carry unless a feller was expecting trouble, but it’s always in the center console of my ride. It's always loaded so the first load out is #4 shot. The idea is that it ought to kill a fox, coyote, snake or other varmint that gets close enough to threaten and discourage the heck out of something bigger (including 2-legged snakes). If I need to fire a second shot, the next 2 loads out are the "personal protection rounds". If I am still in an SD posture, the last two loads out are .45 long Colt. My idea is that I keep firing until whatever it is lays down. But I am left with the option of not employing drastically deadly force in the first instance. After that, I’ll fall back on my pocket gun (which has been a Keltec .32 but is about to become a Sig Sauer .380).

Should I have an 18-inch 12-guage behind the head of the bed? I’ll only ever know if it happens, but I hope not. I’ve got the grandbaby factor to worry about. At some point, enough is enough.

[gunderwood]

My idea is that I keep firing until whatever it is lays down. But I am left with the option of not employing drastically deadly force in the first instance.

There is no such thing.

There is no force, less lethal force (such as fists or tasers) and lethal force. If you legally and morally can shoot another human being, you are using deadly force. It doesn't matter if you load up powder-puff, #300 baby-bird shot or ultra magnum 3" exterminator slugs. Lethal force is lethal force. Shooting to wound and other such nonsense is just that, nonsense. You only point a gun at something you are willing to kill/destroy. If you can't do that, you shouldn't point a gun at it IMO.

Very few gunfights are stopped with the firing of just one round because weapons generally carried for SD are not powerful/capable enough to generate instantaneous incapacitation except under very limited circumstances. It happens, but it isn't the normative case. That being said, sometimes one shot is all you get (look at the "21ft rule").

IMHO, it is a bad idea to build your SD strategy around the idea that you will be able to empty a cylinder or magazine into the threat. Every shot needs to be as effective as possible to increase my odds of living. YMMV.

[Jakeiscrazy]

My idea is that I keep firing until whatever it is lays down. But I am left with the option of not employing drastically deadly force in the first instance.

There is no such thing.

There is no force, less lethal force (such as fists or tasers) and lethal force. If you legally and morally can shoot another human being, you are using deadly force. It doesn't matter if you load up powder-puff, #300 baby-bird shot or ultra magnum 3" exterminator slugs. Lethal force is lethal force. Shooting to wound and other such nonsense is just that, nonsense. You only point a gun at something you are willing to kill/destroy. If you can't do that, you shouldn't point a gun at it IMO.

Very few gunfights are stopped with the firing of just one round because weapons generally carried for SD are not powerful/capable enough to generate instantaneous incapacitation except under very limited circumstances. It happens, but it isn't the normative case. That being said, sometimes one shot is all you get (look at the "21ft rule").

IMHO, it is a bad idea to build your SD strategy around the idea that you will be able to empty a cylinder or magazine into the threat. Every shot needs to be as effective as possible to increase my odds of living. YMMV.

Good video on the 21 foot rule.



And another real life instance(Warning this one is a Graphic)

[zephyp]

My idea is that I keep firing until whatever it is lays down. But I am left with the option of not employing drastically deadly force in the first instance.

There is no such thing.

There is no force, less lethal force (such as fists or tasers) and lethal force. If you legally and morally can shoot another human being, you are using deadly force. It doesn't matter if you load up powder-puff, #300 baby-bird shot or ultra magnum 3" exterminator slugs. Lethal force is lethal force. Shooting to wound and other such nonsense is just that, nonsense. You only point a gun at something you are willing to kill/destroy. If you can't do that, you shouldn't point a gun at it IMO.

Very few gunfights are stopped with the firing of just one round because weapons generally carried for SD are not powerful/capable enough to generate instantaneous incapacitation except under very limited circumstances. It happens, but it isn't the normative case. That being said, sometimes one shot is all you get (look at the "21ft rule").

IMHO, it is a bad idea to build your SD strategy around the idea that you will be able to empty a cylinder or magazine into the threat. Every shot needs to be as effective as possible to increase my odds of living. YMMV.

well said.

[jsmithusaf89]

I have two things to articulate here:
1. As I was instructed and have instructed - Shoot to stop, not harm or kill. The later is a coincedental of shock caused by the action of SD. And, in a court of law will be upheld.
2. I have two rather large doberman pinschers that roam and they are both active guard dogs. You'd have to be a idiot to think about coming in to my home unannounced. My larger dobie is Titus, my smaller (?) is Athena. They have a combined weight of 185 lbs. I state the combined weight because anyone who has had experience with guard dogs esp. dobermans know if one attacks, they all attack.
Consider getting a good guard dog. I have two excellent ones, many good stashes, locked windows and doors and am reasonably assured. As to shot load, I have not seen any discussion about the frangible soft impact slugs.

[gunderwood]

I have two things to articulate here:
1. As I was instructed and have instructed - Shoot to stop, not harm or kill. The later is a coincedental of shock caused by the action of SD. And, in a court of law will be upheld.

Agreed. In SD you are never shooting to kill. What I said was that you shouldn't point a gun at someone or something aren't willing to kill. When you use lethal force, firearm or otherwise, you are using force which is generally recognized as deadly and define by law as such. Your intentions are to stop the threat. See the difference? One is intentions (I nor anyone else on this forum want to kill anyone), the other is a force classification and realization that use of such force has a high probability of killing the threat. Legal SD means you are justified in using that force. The way you stated it sounds like you were trying to split the two. I think they are two sides of the same coin.

In fact this goes hand in hand with another SD aspect. You don't draw your firearm until you are justified in using it. Anything else is brandishing.

As to shot load, I have not seen any discussion about the frangible soft impact slugs.

IIRC, one of the loads in the link was just that. Not much penetration.

[CowboyT]

That knife-armed murderous psychopath film was sobering. The other "scenario" film, also. No shotgun or other load will do you one bit of good unless you can bring it to bear quickly enough against the assailant (let's hope we're never faced with that situation!).

[zephyp]

- dont own a gun for SD unless you are willing to carry it
- dont cary it unless you are willing to draw it
- dont draw it unless you are willing to use it
- dont use it unless you are willing to kill in SD (yes, I realize the priority is to stop but that may result in death of your assailant)

IMHO, failure at any point above in your willingness and you should seriously reconsider owning a gun for SD...

[gunderwood]

- dont own a gun for SD unless you are willing to carry it
- dont cary it unless you are willing to draw it
- dont draw it unless you are willing to use it
- dont use it unless you are willing to kill in SD (yes, I realize the priority is to stop but that may result in death of your assailant)

IMHO, failure at any point above in your willingness and you should seriously reconsider owning a gun for SD...

[dorminWS]

- dont own a gun for SD unless you are willing to carry it
- dont cary it unless you are willing to draw it
- dont draw it unless you are willing to use it
- dont use it unless you are willing to kill in SD (yes, I realize the priority is to stop but that may result in death of your assailant)

IMHO, failure at any point above in your willingness and you should seriously reconsider owning a gun for SD...

You are correct on all counts, and I agree. But I still don't desire to kill or maim a fellow human being; no matter how low-down and deserving of the same he or she may be. And as I said, shooting someone is the second-to-last thing I want. The LAST thing I want is to let somebody injure or kill me. And I have more reason to worry than a lot of folks do. I've got extensive spinal implants including a titanium cage that had to be installed to replace two vertibrae (not discs, entire VERTIBRAE.) As a result I am about half-crippled; and my Doc tells me it is a miracle I can walk. It is entirely possible that what I might once have regarded as a moderate butt-whupping would either paralyse or out-and-out kill me. So I would definitely shoot somebody to avoid one.

But I still figure that 4 shot would penetrate to bone and maybe blast out a teacup full of belly fat, and that ought to slow down if not discourage about any assailant. If he/she/it keeps coming, I'll cheerfully serve up heavier shot. But I remain willing and regard it as my duty to give any assailant a chance not to get his killin' done. As somebody already said on this thread, life just includes a certain amount of risk.

And yes, the knife videos are chilling. One might argue that there may be some mitigating consideration for folks like me. (1) I ain't a cop, and will be looking to get away from belligerents, not close with them. (2) It also occurs to me that (unfortunately) cops are probably conditioned very strongly against drawing on an apparently unarmed citizen than any of us are. (3) I think it likely that most people who pull a knife are likely to wave it around and threaten with it before the cut anybody. I've seen people draw both knives and guns more than once (but not on me), and they almost alway got put away with the floor still dry. And I know of situations where both guns and knives have been drawn with inten to kill and killing was done. And I certainly acknowledge that there ain't no way to know which way it's going to be in advance. All that said, the videos still teach that a dude who knows how and ain't hesitant to use a knife can gut you before you can pull a gun. A usefull lesson which I appreciate the opportunity to learn without getting cut.

[zephyp]

But I still don't desire to kill or maim a fellow human being; no matter how low-down and deserving of the same he or she may be. And as I said, shooting someone is the second-to-last thing I want. The LAST thing I want is to let somebody injure or kill me.

Likewise. I hope I never have to use any of my guns in SD, but I will if needed.