shotgun ballistics

T

truenorth777

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
Rating - 100%
30   0   0
i read somewhere that most 12 gauge loads reach terminal velocity at around 12"-14" down the barrel.
if this is true then anything shorter than that is a waste of powder and just gets burned up as flame outside the muzzle.

but, what about low recoil loads?
with less powder to start with, does it get used up before leaving the barrel?
so, would low recoil loads make more sense with a shorter barrel, like an 8.5" ?
 
Great article. It seems to conclude that a 12" barrel is the best compromise between shortness vs. velocity loss. But I think the OP is looking for ways to bend that trend and maximize performance in something shorter like an 8.5".
 
IIRC low recoil loads do indeed lose a slightly smaller percentage of advertised velocity.

However from what I observed while doing shotgun ammo media testing, you don't really to want to give up any additional velocity on top of what you're already losing out of a short barrel, and are better off with full power ammo if you can handle it.
 
Interestingly Marshall and Sanows statistical studies have shown better one shot stops with the low-recoil vs. full power buckshot loads.
This may be due to the generally tighter patterns with the low recoil ammunition.
Also follow-up shots are way faster.
I much prefer the low-recoil buckshot out of my 14" guns. If I had a 10" or 8.5" I might go with the fullpower stuff so I didn't give up lethality.
 
I wouldn't trust Marshall's stats, where you have things like handgun cartridges supposedly equalling 12 gauge buckshot and duty rifle rounds in effectiveness...

On another forums I've heard from street cops who weren't entirely happy with the effectiveness of low recoil buck after switching over, and there also a ridiculously experienced buckshot hunter who didn't think much of it either.
 
read of too many practical experiences of lack of stopping power with low recoil OO. Stopped using it.

no doubt there's faster follow up with low recoil however.
 
If the comparison was simply between the terminal performance of low recoil buckshot, and the best 12 pellet 3" magnum loads available, the low recoil stuff wouldn't come off looking very good. But many members in today's law enforcement community are disinterested in guns in general, and are particularly disinterested in guns that kick. I won't pretend to understand why this apparent contradiction exists. Law enforcement is an armed service, so one would expect those attracted to a career in policing would be gunny, but often such is not the case. If your cops are unable to qualify with the most effective 12 ga loads, steps must be taken that allows them to gain a degree of proficiency; low recoil 12 ga loads are one solution, and the replacement of shotguns with .223 carbines is another. If a shotgun loaded with low recoil ammo is restricted to household or parking stall ranges, and is used only against soft targets, its effectiveness should not come into question; I know I don't want to get hit by 9 pellets of 00 buck at 1100 fps.
 
IMO low recoil buck made a lot more sense back in the days before really effective recoil pads like Limbsaver became a thing, not to mention other recoil management measures.

As well, most full power buckshot loads have become somewhat reduced in recoil by default in recent decades as the payload has become lighter with the reduction of both the size and lead content of the pellets.

For example most major brand 00 buckshot actually measures .310 to .315 caliber instead of .33, and the weight is more like 45 grains instead of 54, so you're basically shooting 1 1/2 sized buckshot and are catching a substantial break on recoil already.
 
This fall I'm going to try to do some deer hunting with my Mossberg Shockwave and Remington "managed" recoil 00 buckshot...will bring the video camera along and have hopes for a 4th episode of my buckshot deer hunting series. Will report back to CGN with a thread when done.
 
With pistols calibers, the more powerful rounds usually lose more velocity when the barrel is shortened, so I'd go for lighter loads in an 8.5", though I don't have actual test results.
For pistol :http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9makarov.html

Brobee said:
hopes for a 4th episode of my buckshot deer hunting series.
Click to expand...
I particularly enjoyed those videos, keep up the good work!
 
Slimshady said:
Great article. It seems to conclude that a 12" barrel is the best compromise between shortness vs. velocity loss. But I think the OP is looking for ways to bend that trend and maximize performance in something shorter like an 8.5".
Click to expand...

yes indeed, ...the original question basically boils down to, what ammunition performs best in a short barrel (like an 8.5").
lots of great comments though, thanks!
 
truenorth777 said:
yes indeed, ...the original question basically boils down to, what ammunition performs best in a short barrel (like an 8.5").
lots of great comments though, thanks!
Click to expand...

um, ...so, nobody with an 8.5 has any ammo performance preferences?
i'm thinking maybe a fast burning powder would get the velocity up closer to terminal sooner for a shorter barrel.
anybody know which brands burn faster than others?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom