Steel Sucks!

Gatehouse said:
Not much of a waterfowler myself, but I've often wondered- Is the 2-3 shots you take with steel = to one shot of the Bismuth/TM etc shells in cost?

Liek, if you often have to use more than one round of steel, why not use the other $$ stuff and only use one shot?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, three poor hits with tungsten are no more effective than three poor hits with steel. Learn to shoot and pattern your gun and the stuff kills at moderate ranges. If you want to push ranges, then yes, there are better more expensive alternatives.

I find it funny that many of the same guys whining because they can't sky bust with steel are the same ones maligning hunters that took long range shots at big game. Something about not being real hunters I recall?????
 
Jay said:
My experience...

When the steel law came into effect, I followed everyone else and went with BB's and #2's for ducks... I found LOTS of the birds were wounded and "missed"... They seemed to fly right through the loose pattern offered by shells containing large pellets, ie BB's and #2's... If they were hit, it was usually by one or two pellets and at most, three or four...

Then the FAST steel with 1550 feet/sec velocity came out... I bought several boxes of #4... And I have NEVER LOOKED BACK!!! Ducks that are within range, say 30 to 35 yards, DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Steel is approximately 30% lighter than lead. This can be offset by increasing the velocity of the steel pellets... The bummer is that the lighter steel pellets don't carry the same WHOMPH down range as lead...

So, my advice is to try some #4 steel shells GOING 1550 feet per second OR FASTER... With steel, it's SPEED THAT KILLS!!!

Good luck and let us know how you make out.

Cheers
Jay
Click to expand...


I load my own to #4 steel and 1550 or better and as a hunter who has shot 4-500 ducks a year believe me steel going fast kills awesome. smaller faster shot is the key ,not bigger shot.
 
Bogman said:
I load my own to #4 steel and 1550 or better and as a hunter who has shot 4-500 ducks a year believe me steel going fast kills awesome. smaller faster shot is the key ,not bigger shot.
Click to expand...

That just might be my problem!I'm going from #2s to #4s for this saturday to see if there is a difference.
 
sheephunter said:
Didn't I say from the beginning to shoot under 30 yards with steel but I'm still interested in this shaking theory of yours or should I just add it to the list?

If you want to shoot further, use tungsten or bismuth.
Click to expand...


I shot a couple of geese last year in a field that had BB steel shot falling out from their feathers when I plucked them. I shot them with 4 Hevi so the pellets weren't mine. Someone else had taken a crack at them with BB steel and had only bruised them.

I've shot many geese myself at ranges under 30 yards where there were pellets bound up in the down that didn't penetrate the body. This happens particularly often with larger steel as opposed to smaller stuff that cuts through the feathers a little better.

Like you said though, under 30 yards, steel will do the job if you hit them well.
 
gravyboat said:
Well I've also shot ducks since I was 10 so don't try to pull that "I've shot more ducks than you BS". Lead is done old timer, non-toxic shot is here to stay. It's not Liebral bans as some of the tinfoil hat wearers would like to put it, it's in the migratory bird treaty. It has to be that way, unless of course you are more than happy to let the bird populations get run so low that we don't have hunting anymore. If you've never seen a duck dying from lead poisoning than you've never spent much time in the marsh. Maybe you should join an organization like Delta or DU and get a little better informed.
Click to expand...

LOL.

I didn't say I shot more ducks than you... I'm saying that basically I've been at it for a little while. Gotta love how people take what you say and twist it around :)

I'm from Newfoundland. In all the years I've lived here, my father, his father etc. never had to clean lead shot out of gizzards. Furthermore, we don't have waterholes that are heavily populated (IE Ontario/Quebec where 4-5 guys on average daily are camped out banging off shells with a rocky/sandy bottom).

As for not spending much time in a 'marsh' I live in a rural community of about 40 people. We do not have cable TV, highspeed internet or even a convienence store. My entire 'back yard' is nothing but woods, bogs and ponds.

I don't need to join Ducks Unlimited to know what goes on in the woods here. I've seen Canadian hunting shows on TV before (mostly in Ontario/Que) shooting waterfowl. You get 4-5 guys there in very shallow marsh with their decoys setup firing off shot after shot. Around my area, the ground/bog/pond bottoms are so soft and soggy the shot sinks tremendously.

I invite you to visit my area. Perhaps YOU can then be better informed.


sheephunter said:
Ah cool, the name calling begins. As with registration, if we want to keep hunting rather than crying in our soup, we have to jump through a few hoops. I don't like it and I'll fight it but I'll also do everything I can to keep enjoying hunting and if that means learning to shoot steel effectively, I'll do it. I could take your approach and cry and stomp my feet and whine about the good old days and quit hunting birds or worse yet, shoot and cripple them because I'm too proud to admit there is something to learn but truthfully, I think I'll keep hunting and killing humanely thank you very much!

Your logic is as full of holes as the last goose I shot with steel! :D
Click to expand...

There was no name calling. However your logic is one full of holes, my friend. Your 'put up, shut up, take what they give us' mentality is exactly the reason our firearms laws are so ridiculous today. Is lead legal? No. Should we fight it? Yes!

This is no different than our fight for the registry. If we all thought like you did, we could just shut up and put up with the registry. Hell, it doesn't 'hurt' us... we can still shoot with it in place... so why complain? ;)

In areas where lead content is high and the bottom is pretty much rock or sand, then yes I can understand a need for a ban on lead shot. In areas where lead shot has zero effect on waterfowl, then no. I for one am sick and tired of another area's woes infecting mine.

Somehow this thread was turned into a "You don't know how to use steel/learn to pattern" crock of crap, when actually it was about how much steel shot sucks in comparison. Pattern all you want, I'm willing to bet if steel was optional, 95% of you 'steel lovers' would be singing a different tune. If I'm so wrong, why are so many others agreeing with me?
 
Last edited:
sheephunter said:
Unfortunately, three poor hits with tungsten are no more effective than three poor hits with steel. Learn to shoot and pattern your gun and the stuff kills at moderate ranges. If you want to push ranges, then yes, there are better more expensive alternatives.

I find it funny that many of the same guys whining because they can't sky bust with steel are the same ones maligning hunters that took long range shots at big game. Something about not being real hunters I recall?????
Click to expand...


Ya know what I find funny. People who add in words like "skybusting" and "poor hits" when extended ranges and poor hits have never been mentioned, for no other purpose then to come accross as elitist and be as condescending as possible.
Some will say it's me name calling, but there's a growing majority who think it's a spade being called a spade.

Poor hits with a shotgun, hmmm.. I recall in another thread that apparently with shotgunning you have no control over where the individual pellets hit each time, so cripples are more acceptable...

Finally, ...
For a person who is such an advocate of hunting, at least in written word, you really seem to be out of touch with many "common " hunters and their issues, ...

I aslo enjoy your comments on the unethical use of steel,...
 
Last edited:
Gatehouse said:
Not much of a waterfowler myself, but I've often wondered- Is the 2-3 shots you take with steel = to one shot of the Bismuth/TM etc shells in cost?

Liek, if you often have to use more than one round of steel, why not use the other $$ stuff and only use one shot?
Click to expand...

The high density stuff runs from $2.50 to $5.00 a shell. Good steel is around a dollar a shell.

I still do buy a lot of high density shot but I reserve it for the times I take out people who don't shoot waterfowl very often. They get the first few shots and I use the HD to clean up cripples and finish lightly hit birds that are trying to get out of Dodge.

For regular hunting I just use the steel and let them get close and then shoot them in the head. If a bird is coming down with its head up I usually shoot it again before it hits the weeds and if their head is up when they hit the water they get a swat on the water too. My dog works hard enough without having to chase cripples all over the lake.

I shoot around 250 to 300 birds a year so spending $5 a shell for every shot is not going to happen.
 
sheephunter said:
I'm still interested in this shaking theory of yours or should I just add it to the list?
.
Click to expand...

Because steel shot is considerably lighter for its size than the other, heavier nontoxic pellets (Bismuth, Kent Matrix, Federal Tungsten-Iron, and Remington Hevi-Shot),;) it is not as good a projectile;). Steel runs out of energy (and thereby range and penetration) more quickly. That's how the beads shake out of the feathers, the poor penetration. Higher speed can make up for some of that, but just some.

Don't you already know this:confused::confused::eek:
 
I wonder how many folks have read up on the Cooperative North American Shotgunning Education Program (CONSEP) research on steel shot versus lead shot.
 
There was no name calling. However your logic is one full of holes, my friend. Your 'put up, shut up, take what they give us' mentality is exactly the reason our firearms laws are so ridiculous today. Is lead legal? No. Should we fight it? Yes!

This is no different than our fight for the registry. If we all thought like you did, we could just shut up and put up with the registry. Hell, it doesn't 'hurt' us... we can still shoot with it in place... so why complain?
Click to expand...

Ah perfect....you've totally run out of comments about what I actually said so now all you have left to resort to is inventing things and attributing them to me so you can argue those invented points. Sorry Bub, not biting. You wanna discuss my actual thoughts and actions I'm here but your pathetic attempt to attribute words and actions to me that don't apply is, well, just pathetic.
 
Somehow this thread was turned into a "You don't know how to use steel/learn to pattern" crock of crap, when actually it was about how much steel shot sucks in comparison. Pattern all you want, I'm willing to bet if steel was optional, 95% of you 'steel lovers' would be singing a different tune. If I'm so wrong, why are so many others agreeing with me?
Click to expand...

It didn't turn into anything. Obviously if it takes you 5 shots to kill a teal with #2 3" steel, you obviously don't know much about shooting steel. I've never said steel was equal to lead but some of us have at least taken the time to learn to use it effectively rather than spending five bucks shooting a one pound bird. I'm not singing any tune other than when used properly and within its performance envelope, steel is effective. Step outside that envelope and you are either unethical or uneducated.......I was just hoping it was lack of knowledge.
 
Ya know what I find funny. People who add in words like "skybusting" and "poor hits" when extended ranges and poor hits have never been mentioned, for no other purpose then to come accross as elitist and be as condescending as possible.
Some will say it's me name calling, but there's a growing majority who think it's a spade being called a spade.
Click to expand...

I think the fact that guys are shooting birds five times or losing 60% of birds speaks to the fact that steel is being used improperly.......skybusting and inaccuracy would seem the two most common culprits to me but maybe you have another theory. You can't shoot steel like you did lead and if you are trying to do so, you are unethical! Pretty straightforward. You are right, a spade is a spade.
 
Last edited:
sheephunter said:
I think the fact that guys are shooting birds five times or losing 60% of birds speaks to the fact that steel is being used improperly.......skybusting and inaccuracy would seem the two most common culprits to me but maybe you have another theory. You can't shoot steel like you did lead and if you are trying to do so, you are unethical! Pretty straightforward. You are right, a spade is a spade.
Click to expand...

You are putting a lot of info between the lines. No one said they were trying to use steel like lead.

Fry shot at a teal 5 times with # 2 shot. A teal unlike a goose has a kill zone smaller than a golf ball. That kill zone would easily be missed by the pattern of # 2 shot at anything beyond 20 yards (hence why I shoot the small stuff -- denser patterns). Who mentioned losing 60% of their birds?

But we understand. You are the steel god. You've probably even written a magazine article or gotten your face on TV a time or two and that makes you much more knowledgeable on the matter than us troglodytes.;)
 
But we understand. You are the steel god.
Click to expand...

Now that is funny. I take a little time to educate myself on the use of steel shot and I'm a God....LMAO Man, a number of people on this site sure are terrified of knowledge...........This ain't rocket science or some divine intervention....hit birds properly and use steel with in its performance envelope and you'll have dead birds.....don't and you won't. No hand of the Lord in that statement is there?
 
Last edited:
sheephunter said:
Now that is funny. I take a little time to educate myself on the use of steel shot and I'm a God....LMAO Man, a number of people on this site sure are terrified of knowledge...........This ain't rocket science or some divine intervention....hit birds properly and use steel with in its performance envelope and you'll have dead birds.....don't and you won't. No hand of the Lord in that statement is there?
Click to expand...

Well the same could be said for a 1/2 ounce load of mule deer turds. So what?

The point of the conversation was that lead was superior to steel in most aspects of killing birds (granted you don't need to lead as far with fast steel) and that steel has limitations which make it the poorest (albeit cheapest) choice of shot available.

A bird hit poorly with steel (and if you say you've never hit one poorly you're lying) is more likely to be lost than the same bird hit poorly with lead. This is due to the lightness of steel and its lack of malleability allowing it to deflect off of bones that lead would break.
 
I agree wholeheartedly but there are far too many people that feel steel was a straight across lead replacement and it's not. You need to learn to shoot it properly and you need to realize its limitations. To say it's a poor replacement for steel just shows a lack of knowledge. It's not a replacement....it's a totally different animal with its own limitations. If you respect the birds you hunt, you'll respect those limitations. Sadly, after reading the posts here, there seems to be some people that aren't willing to do that. Sure I'd rather shoot lead but at this time it's not an option and I want to hunt birds so I've learned to use steel as countless other waterfowlers have. I enjoy wingshooting too much!
 
Last edited:
sheephunter said:
Now that is funny. I take a little time to educate myself on the use of steel shot and I'm a God....LMAO Man, a number of people on this site sure are terrified of knowledge...........This ain't rocket science or some divine intervention....hit birds properly and use steel with in its performance envelope and you'll have dead birds.....don't and you won't. No hand of the Lord in that statement is there?
Click to expand...

No one is terrified of knowledge. This thread is about how steel sucks and really, lead us superior in every category. You in all your 'wisdom' think no one else but you knows how to pattern shotgun loads, or probably even hunted. If you came here thinking I want you to 'bite' onto something I said, then you're mistaken. As for lack of knowledge.. you come here strutting around as if you're the king sh*t. Perhaps you can write in your next magazine article how no one can hunt ducks but you :)

It's also funny how you're pretty much alone on what you're babbling with. What does that tell you?

Perhaps we should just give it up... give in, since what is, is and will be forevermore. As mentioned before... where did that attitude get us? I am glad you do not speak for the majority of firearms owners.

As for the lil ol' teal I shot 4-5 years ago, it was alone and was PEPPERED with no2 steel. The shot was a little out, but you can't ALWAYS get shots off inside 20 yards.


Quote:
There was no name calling. However your logic is one full of holes, my friend. Your 'put up, shut up, take what they give us' mentality is exactly the reason our firearms laws are so ridiculous today. Is lead legal? No. Should we fight it? Yes!
This is no different than our fight for the registry. If we all thought like you did, we could just shut up and put up with the registry. Hell, it doesn't 'hurt' us... we can still shoot with it in place... so why complain?
Ah perfect....you've totally run out of comments about what I actually said so now all you have left to resort to is inventing things and attributing them to me so you can argue those invented points. Sorry Bub, not biting. You wanna discuss my actual thoughts and actions I'm here but your pathetic attempt to attribute words and actions to me that don't apply is, well, just pathetic.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No, I didn't invent those points. That is your line of thinking. Perhaps I struck a sensitive nerve? There's nothing to bite. I didn't run out of arguements. My arguement still remains that Lead is superior to Steel in every way, shape and form.

You can't say "Let it be, give in and accept shot regs for what they are, then be a big anti-liberal/fight for our God-given right to bear arms. If you honestly think that way, you are a phoney and nothing more.

Pat yourself on the back for turning a decent conversation among hunters into a pissing contest because we all don't conform to your views.


Anyway, back on topic. Any of you think that shot regulations should be governed by area/zone as opposed to the entire country? I'm sure some of you out there know particular areas where lead shot would have zero effect on waterfowl. (IE boggy areas, mucky ponds, etc.)
 
You in all your 'wisdom' think no one else but you knows how to pattern shotgun loads, or probably even hunted.
Click to expand...

Actually there seems to be a lot of knowledgeable people on this subject as I read through this thread. Quite a lot to be learned from many.
 
Last edited:
I'll sum this whole thread up, steel if used within it's limitation will kill birds as dead as lead. Is lead a better killer at longer ranges?Yes. Nearly all the waterfowlers out there should only be shooting within steels effective range as they do not have the skill to ensure clean single bird kills instead of a flock being peppered. A lot of people blame steel for things that they should only be blaming themselves for. If people realized that they should only be shooting birds at 40 yards and under steel or lead shot should not matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom