Persuade me that I can't use target shells for upland hunting

[Brutus]

Still working on my Winchester 7.5 lead target loads value pack from Walmart. Sharptails, ruffled grouse & hares. 100 shells $19.99.
If I do my part they croak forthwith. Full choke mostly for the 20 G.

 

[Butcherbill]

12g #7.5 target load is 90% of the time what I use for grouse, with the right chokes it’s deadly out to 40y. I prefer to hunt snowshoe hare with a .22lr but the same target load has killed hares with no problem, .22 is better at the distances I see hares and 9 times out of 10 it’s a head shot and no meat lost to pellets.

 

[Big Bad]

Snipe (AFAIK) are cosidered migratory, so (AFAIK) we're not supposed to use lead for snipe, but other than that...

If you're not required to use non-toxic loads, I think good quality lead shot target loads are fine choice. Contrary to popular opinion and marketing, there is no practical advantage to very high speed lead shot loads for efficiently killing small birds in the uplands. There is always a trade off with more velocity and heavy payloads, and the target shooting community has figured out what works best with repeatable results. The main difference between good target loads and most hunting loads is the quality of the shot. Best quality target loads are almost always a better choice for hunting small birds because they use the best quality ( hard) lead shot and produce the most uniform patterns.

The currently fashionable cheap hunting loads loaded with soft shot at high velocity are the worst choice - pattern poorly, recoil more. Soft shot loaded to high velocity usually patterns poorly because of deformed shot and "blown" holes in the patterns. Cheap target loads are also loaded with cheap, soft shot, but at least most are at a sensible velocity so still pattern reasonably OK and don't beat up the shooter with excessive recoil.

If you really want the best, choose something like ( for example) Federal Gold medal, Winchester AA or Remington STS, loaded at no more than 1250 fps. You will bring home the birds.

Snipe are definitely defined as migratory birds, and hunting them requires the use of non-toxic shot Canada wide. You'd have to check your regs in your province about Woodcock, but I suspect they are also considered migratory and Federally regulated.

In comparison, steel hunting loads actually benefit from speed. Steel pellets don't deform under firing pressure and their light weight can be somewhat compensated for with more velocity. But it's hard to make general recommendations for steel upland loads. You will need to pattern your gun to find out what works best for you with steel.

Both snipe and woodcock are migratory and require the special federal 'duck stamp' permit. Even if there was a non-toxic shot requirement for them, glad to hear there isn't, it would be almost impossible to selectively comply, and certainly to enforce it. Actually though, I just threw in those species as examples. While in my happy hunting years I used to see plenty, especially woodcock, I now see none because the productive area was built over with private homes. Another vanished game bird is the mourning dove, in the 80s there were numerous flocks of a hundred or more but they weren't legal to shoot, but a few years after those flocks disappeared Ontario legalized hunting them.

Thanks for the confirmations about hunting with target shells, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. I most definitely believe that high brass shells are self defeating, pattern wise, for upland wing shooting.

 

[Falconflyer]

To reiterate what canvasback said, higher velocity in a lead load doesn't nessesarily equate to more killing power or more range. Tests have shown that a 1300 fps load slows to roughly the same speed as a 1150 fps load by the time they reach 40 yards, after that they maintain the same velocity. This is due to increased wind resistance as you push the projectile faster. The faster load will get to 40 yards slightly quicker than the slower load but it's all the same after that asuming the shot is the same size and hardness and shot from the same barrel. In fact the slower load will usually keep a tighter pattern due to it's slower velocity. Steel shot is pushed fast to make up for the lack of mass to maintain speed, being light it slows very fast and loses power quickly.
So it you want more range or killing power then heavier and harder shot is your best bet, not velocity.

 

[brybenn]

In southern Ontario we still have lots of doves. Although non toxic shot is mandated I've had to move to #6 shot in steel to effectively drop them. #7 steel wasn't effective past 20 yards. I wish we could use lead for doves. Would be a 410ers dream

 

[Maritime Storm]

To reiterate what canvasback said, higher velocity in a lead load doesn't nessesarily equate to more killing power or more range. Tests have shown that a 1300 fps load slows to roughly the same speed as a 1150 fps load by the time they reach 40 yards, after that they maintain the same velocity. This is due to increased wind resistance as you push the projectile faster. The faster load will get to 40 yards slightly quicker than the slower load but it's all the same after that asuming the shot is the same size and hardness and shot from the same barrel. In fact the slower load will usually keep a tighter pattern due to it's slower velocity. Steel shot is pushed fast to make up for the lack of mass to maintain speed, being light it slows very fast and loses power quickly.
So it you want more range or killing power then heavier and harder shot is your best bet, not velocity.

Lyman did this testing in the early 80's, I have the chart in the basement somewhere. A load starting at 1300fps and 1145fps have virtually the same speed and energy at 40 yards. Steel is effected the same way, the British have been doing extensive and load development of steel in the past couple of years with the pending lead shot ban coming into effect shortly. Most of their "standard steel" loads are around 1300fps for clay and field loads, the "superior steel" at 1500fps performs very little better. The biodegradable wads the use and the shinning champion, made of paper and allow steel to be shot through any gun under Imp.Mod choke without damage.

 

[iron cat]

The thing about pushing steel fast is that you are also pushing a larger diameter shot.
I have been using #8 skeet loads in a 28 gauge for years on ruffed grouse where we are shooting them in fairly open country. Early season however, I prefer a bigger shot size because of the amount of foliage in the trees.
My main pheasant load however is a 1 ounce of nickle plated 7's with 70 grains of FFG in a 2 1/2" brass case- hardly what one would call a high perfornance load. However it iS a "Smokin'" load !!
Cat

 

[brybenn]

And a highly classic load at that

 

[Ravage]

Small shot like that won't penetrate much and there is a lot of pellets so your gonna be picking lead out of birds a lot. I use #4 there is less pellets but they penetrate usually fully through so you don't have to pick pellets from meat. Plus winter fur or feathers are thicker so grouse and rabbits are tougher.
That's my thinking on the matter anyways

 

[the spank]

Some of the replies on the quality of target loads is very entertaining. I'll take a top quality target load, be it factory or reload any day for upland birds. I've killed a lot of grouse and pheasants using both factory and homemade target loads.

 

[Maritime Storm]

Agreed.

 

[3macs1]

Some of the replies on the quality of target loads is very entertaining. I'll take a top quality target load, be it factory or reload any day for upland birds. I've killed a lot of grouse and pheasants using both factory and homemade target loads.

I hear you Spank and agree. Did we do special hunting loads rarely for birds yep with no.6 plated shot for when the leaves were very heavy . Did we do special loads in 7 1/2 NOPE never grabbed what we had for targets and killed birds
Cheers

 

[Big Bad]

In the 80s, Orvis used to sell a super spreading 12 G shell that was designed to open up into a cloud of shot as soon as possible, don't know how those worked out but they did stop selling them.

As far as shot size goes, I'm a disciple of Burton Spiller, who pointed out that in order to bring down a bird you need as many hits as possible in hopes of breaking bones and ending its flight. A man who basically devoted his life to shooting ruffed grouse, he favoured #8 shot, when he could get it as he travelled around New England throughout every hunting season of his life except Sundays. In his books he tells at least one story about a shop keeper who tried to force #4 on him as the best choice, which to my eyes was rather like someone lecturing the Pope on how to be Catholic. I do favour 71/2 myself though.

Spiller of course originally wrote for the Derrydale Press that produced those quite beautiful books. It's been too long, I'm gonna have to reread his stuff this season, unfortunately in reprints.

 

[Falconflyer]

Kent used to make a "spreader" load for close targets but I haven't seen them since the 90's. Back then I had stripper chokes to retard the wad and cause the pattern to open more quickly (at least in theory) but these days I just try to shoot more precisely and seem to do just as well.

 

[Falconflyer]

Some of the replies on the quality of target loads is very entertaining. I'll take a top quality target load, be it factory or reload any day for upland birds. I've killed a lot of grouse and pheasants using both factory and homemade target loads.

I think the main difference between a good target load and a hunting load is the price!

 

[iron cat]

Small shot like that won't penetrate much and there is a lot of pellets so your gonna be picking lead out of birds a lot. I use #4 there is less pellets but they penetrate usually fully through so you don't have to pick pellets from meat. Plus winter fur or feathers are thicker so grouse and rabbits are tougher.
That's my thinking on the matter anyways

I have killed late season sharptails, ruffys and roosters with smaller shot for over 40 years with no issues at all.
I tend to swing and hard focus on the head of the bird, I normally don't get many pellets in the breast .
Cat

 

[mikeyb]

I've been using #7.5 shot in a 1oz. load for years. 1200 fps is plenty. Low recoil, good patterns, plenty of energy to 30 yards. I usually buy two flats of target loads each year, one #8 for actual targets and a #7.5 for upland birds.

 

[3macs1]

I think the main difference between a good target load and a hunting load is the price!

For us being reloaders. The only difference between 7 1/2 rounds we would do for hunting vs target was the hulls
We used a lot of semi's hunting in small gauges and didnot want to lose our aa hulls so would use federals to be lost in the woods

 

[Ashcroft]

I've been using #7.5 shot in a 1oz. load for years. 1200 fps is plenty. Low recoil, good patterns, plenty of energy to 30 yards. I usually buy two flats of target loads each year, one #8 for actual targets and a #7.5 for upland birds.

Don’t hunt tiny birds like woodcock or quail but on forest dwelling grouse I see no definitive difference between 7 1/2 and 8. Longer ranges, bigger tougher birds like wild roosters and sharptails I like 6 better. Often for upland hunting with a 12 I use 1 ounce of 7 1/2 in my more open choked barrel, 1 ounce of 6 in the tighter choked barrel. Nice even well filled out patterns will put more birds on the ground than higher velocity and those high quality target loads are optimized for best patterns. The specific brand choice for your gun will depend on your patterning results……you do pattern your guns don’t you?

 

[Pinfire]

Artisan gunmakers have been building double-barrelled sporting guns for about 480 years. Wing-shooting has been around since the flint-lock was perfected, about 407 years ago. The use of nice, round chilled shot has been around for 240 years. Percussion primers have been used in one form or another for 217 years, and the modern centre-fire cartridge first appeared 169 years in the past. Modern ‘hammerless’ sporting guns as we know them have been around for 151 years, the venerable boxlock for 147 years. The pump shotgun appeared 140 years ago. The modern over/under is a recent addition to the gun rack, at a mere 122 years – the same age as the semi-auto. And over the past 100-plus years, just about the only thing anyone has actively improved is what, exactly? Screw-in chokes? Plastic stocks? 3 ½” shells?

Perhaps there is a time and place for each of these, but the fundamentals of wing-shooting haven’t changed, and birds haven’t yet evolved armour. This has left the marketing departments of gun companies and ammunition manufacturers frantically scurrying about to sell the latest ‘improvements.’ Yet, as folks in this forum have learned through years of experience, 7/8 to 1 ¼ oz of lead shot travelling at around 1000-1200 fps will kill about anything flying, feathered or clay, as long as the gun is pointed correctly, and within range. It doesn’t matter if the box says ‘field’ or ‘target.’