I keep hearing rumors that you measured Longbeard #6's and people keep saying "a lot of the pellets were #7"
I too measured a #6 and the AVERAGE size came out to be .11135", which is LARGER than #6. Yes, some of the pellets were #7 size, but some were #4, #5, and #6 as well.
I'm trying to bust these myths as I had 369 pellets that weighed 1.76 oz. Once again, averaging out to weighing MORE than a #6.
I cut open one 3" Winchester Longbeard shell with a stated 1.75 oz. of shot from Lot # LT1GH29. The "slug" was clear, intact and secure with only one noticeable void.
I removed the slug of resin and shot and weighed it. It weighed 1.80 oz. Then I fractured the slug and weighed the shot, after cleaning all of the resin off each individual pellet. The shot charge weighed exactly 1.75 oz. as stated.
Then I performed an actual count of all of the pellets. The actual count was 432. Using an accepted #6 lead pellet count per oz. of 218, a 1.75 oz. load would have 381 #6 pellets. So, in this particular shell there were an extra 51 pellets.
Here's a link to a site which displays widely accepted pellet counts and measurements and the one that I used for my examination http://www.hallowellco.com/shot_size_chart.htm (http://www.hallowellco.com/shot_size_chart.htm)
There are other charts that can be used and the pellet counts may vary from chart to chart. Since manufacturers are not required to disclose the exact composition of lead pellets, which may influence weight and hardness, and there are no real SAAMI standards, those count numbers can differ.
Individual pellet weight will depend upon what and how much of each alloy (antimony, arsenic, etc.) is added to the lead used in the pellets but the copper wash, commonly referred to as copper plate, adds very little.
You can see from the chart that #6 shot should be 2.79mm and #7 shot should be 2.59mm
Due to grading standards used by most manufacturers, the size of most common lead shot is pretty uniform. For example, lead shot must conform to the minimum size limits to be considered in the Still Target Shooting Championship. Officials have cut open shells to verify sizes of pellets.
I prefer to us mm rather than inches when measuring such small things as shot because it gives me a more precise measurement.
Again, I cleaned off all of the resin that was clinging to the shot, that took a good bit of time since it clings very tightly to each pellet and binds some together but measuring the shot with that resin on it could badly skew the results.
To be very clear and fair and also so that I did not have to count all 432 pellets, I simply scooped up a random sample of pellets and measured them in mms.
Here are the exact measurements of the 23 pellets in the load that I measured:
2.67
2.55
2.52
2.57
2.75
2.59
2.59
2.73
2.54
2.74
2.67
2.65
2.79
2.64
2.59
2.61
2.60
2.59
2.61
2.62
2.75
2.72
2.65
That represents a random count of about 5% of the total pellet charge in that particular shell. Weighing the shot charge, separate from the encapsulating resin and performing a random count of a percentage of the cleaned pellets seems to be a fair method of evaluating the size of the pellets in that particular shell.
If I were to perform those same tests in 5 or 10 different shells, I might find results that were the same, similar or different results of course.
I have also cut open one 3" Longbeard shell with #4 shot and one 3.5" shell with #4 shot. I found weights of the cleaned shot charges to be exact on those shells as well. There were some differences in the encapsulating resin in both clarity and integrity. I suspect that has to do with the size of the shot but have not cut open any additional #4 shot shells to verify or support that supposition.
I have not cut open any of the #5 shot shells.
I have not cut open the corresponding #5 shot shells.
I hope that helps some.
Thanks,
Clark
Thanks for that. The #6 3" that I cut open had 369, counted by 2 different people. I guess there is some slight variation there. My shell averaged .11135" which, as you know, is SLIGHTLY larger than #6.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 21, 2014, 11:01:31 AM
Thanks for that. The #6 3" that I cut open had 369, counted by 2 different people. I guess there is some slight variation there. My shell averaged .11135" which, as you know, is SLIGHTLY larger than #6.
Was your Lot # the same as Clark's??? :OGturkeyhead:
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 21, 2014, 11:01:31 AM
Thanks for that. The #6 3" that I cut open had 369, counted by 2 different people. I guess there is some slight variation there. My shell averaged .11135" which, as you know, is SLIGHTLY larger than #6.
You're welcome. Shotshells are shotshells and we see differences at the patterning board or in targets in competition very often. It's a time consuming process, as you know, to really examine in detail the contents of a shell. Physically removing the resin from that shot took more time than anything else of course as you know. It's tenacious stuff!
Thanks,
Clark
Quote from: allaboutshooting on February 21, 2014, 12:14:16 PM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 21, 2014, 11:01:31 AM
Thanks for that. The #6 3" that I cut open had 369, counted by 2 different people. I guess there is some slight variation there. My shell averaged .11135" which, as you know, is SLIGHTLY larger than #6.
You're welcome. Shotshells are shotshells and we see differences at the patterning board or in targets in competition very often. It's a time consuming process, as you know, to really examine in detail the contents of a shell. Physically removing the resin from that shot took longer more time than anything else of course as you know. It's tenacious stuff!
Thanks,
Clark
Yep, I took a copper tube and put end caps on it. Put the shot in there with a couple of copper threaded fittings floating around in there with sharp edges to knock the resin off. I only did that AFTER measuring 10 pellets. The 10 that I actually measured had all of their resin removed individually. For the total weight (minus resin) I used the copper tube shake method, it was very fast but I did lose a small amount of copper plating.
I'm gonna ask you again, klemson. Was your Lot # the same as Clark's???? :OGturkeyhead:
Quote from: SKFOOTER on February 21, 2014, 01:54:11 PM
I'm gonna ask you again, klemson. Was your Lot # the same as Clark's???? :OGturkeyhead:
I was at work earlier. My lot number was LT1GH15
So only one pellet of the 23 was a true #6 and 16 of the 23 were actually #7 interesting
:morning: That would explain the up to 70 more pellets in the paper for a 6 shot lead load.
Lead 7's at 40?
Hey some like them from the Fed 7 lead posts.
What do think?
So are the 5s more like 6s then? I can only find 5s around here.
Sorry, have not found any info on the 5 shot yet or seen pattern count on the whole big papers.
Would think with all the patterns though someone would have did it.
They 4's seem to be normal counts so far. Patterns good, nothing crazy in the 10 but darn good that will wreck any turkeys day!
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 01:26:41 AM
So only one pellet of the 23 was a true #6 and 16 of the 23 were actually #7 interesting
The #6 I cut open had 4,5,6 and 7s in it. With an average between 5&6 but a lot closer to 6.
SO THIS IS A > MAG BLEND < :fud:
Clark would you like to trade boxes with me? I have 18 shells from this lot, I would prefer 7 size.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 09:27:12 AM
Clark would you like to trade boxes with me? I have 18 shells from this lot, I would prefer 7 size.
that is a pretty funny statement after the conversation me and you had yesterday about penetration the other thread.
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 10:35:33 AM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 09:27:12 AM
Clark would you like to trade boxes with me? I have 18 shells from this lot, I would prefer 7 size.
that is a pretty funny statement after the conversation me and you had yesterday about penetration the other thread.
I think maybe there was some misunderstanding. When did I say Lead 7 was insufficient?
I should make a statement since what I said was obviously misconstrued. I would love to shoot TSS #8 or 9. I think they, along with lead 7.5 would kill any turkey walking. I was just arguing the statement about TSS 9 hitting like lead 4.
At 40 yds, the lighter but more dense pellet will have less drag (because of size) but it's part of the velocity equation determined by it's weight will be higher. These factors practically even out at 40 yds and both will be traveling very close to the same speed. The lead pellet will have 3 times the mass at the same speed meaning more hitting power. TSS may penetrate similarly into gelatin due to the size being much smaller. By carrying more energy, the lead 4 will perform better on a bird that isn't made of ballistics gel. His same effect is seen when shooting a 3/4" broadhead vs a 2" broadhead. Penetration into gel doesn't tell the whole story.
Now, I'm not an idiot, I know TSS performance will be better due to hardness and density, but the availability of good lead shells today makes it a no brainer to me to shoot Longbeards. I don't think the difference is as large as most think.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 10:37:40 AM
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 10:35:33 AM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 09:27:12 AM
Clark would you like to trade boxes with me? I have 18 shells from this lot, I would prefer 7 size.
that is a pretty funny statement after the conversation me and you had yesterday about penetration the other thread.
I think maybe there was some misunderstanding. When did I say Lead 7 was insufficient?
You didn't and neither did I. I just think it's funny that a much as you have pushed these shells and there quality you now wanna trade for these shells that are cleary not what they are stated to be by the manufacturer. I know you also cut some open that were correct shot size and i 100% believe yoj but don't you think just maybe that all these great pattern lately with the longbeards #6's could have a little to do with Mr bush's findings.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 10:57:47 AM
I should make a statement since what I said was obviously misconstrued. I would love to shoot TSS #8 or 9. I think they, along with lead 7.5 would kill any turkey walking. I was just arguing the statement about TSS 9 hitting like lead 4.
At 40 yds, the lighter but more dense pellet will have less drag (because of size) but it's part of the velocity equation determined by it's weight will be higher. These factors practically even out at 40 yds and both will be traveling very close to the same speed. The lead pellet will have 3 times the mass at the same speed meaning more hitting power. TSS may penetrate similarly into gelatin due to the size being much smaller. By carrying more energy, the lead 4 will perform better on a bird that isn't made of ballistics gel. His same effect is seen when shooting a 3/4" broadhead vs a 2" broadhead. Penetration into gel doesn't tell the whole story.
Now, I'm not an idiot, I know TSS performance will be better due to hardness and density, but the availability of good lead shells today makes it a no brainer to me to shoot Longbeards. I don't think the difference is as large as most think.
not calling you an idiot by no means we are just having a friendly conversation
And to your broadhead statement which one of those broadhead would get better penetration on a trophy buck shoulder?
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 11:08:35 AM
And to your broadhead statement which one of those broadhead would get better penetration on a trophy buck shoulder?
Considering the weight difference of TSS 9 and lead 4 is threefold and their down range velocities are all but equal (within 8 fps), you would have to compare a 900 grain arrow with a 2" cut to a 300 grain arrow with a 3/4" cut (and assume velocities are the same) Obviously I would take the 900 grain 2" cut.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 10:57:47 AM
I should make a statement since what I said was obviously misconstrued. I would love to shoot TSS #8 or 9. I think they, along with lead 7.5 would kill any turkey walking. I was just arguing the statement about TSS 9 hitting like lead 4.
At 40 yds, the lighter but more dense pellet will have less drag (because of size) but it's part of the velocity equation determined by it's weight will be higher. These factors practically even out at 40 yds and both will be traveling very close to the same speed. The lead pellet will have 3 times the mass at the same speed meaning more hitting power. TSS may penetrate similarly into gelatin due to the size being much smaller. By carrying more energy, the lead 4 will perform better on a bird that isn't made of ballistics gel. His same effect is seen when shooting a 3/4" broadhead vs a 2" broadhead. Penetration into gel doesn't tell the whole story.
Now, I'm not an idiot, I know TSS performance will be better due to hardness and density, but the availability of good lead shells today makes it a no brainer to me to shoot Longbeards. I don't think the difference is as large as most think.
Never shot any TSS have you...not trying to bash....just wondering....??
Lead is good , plenty good to kill any gobbler standing on the earth within 40 paces that's a fact , I have a opinion that the new Winchester longbeard is perhaps the best lead turkey load ever devised , ever - now best doesn't mean it's what you should use or be it right for your needs - something else may suit your needs - notice I didn't say it was the best turkey load , I said LEAD
With that being said , all the drama doesn't revolve around the LB's ability to drop a gobbler at 40 yards , it was the over ambitious claims that raised eyebrows - I do think Winchester has a product that sells itself there is no need to spend money on expensive adds , tv time , add space on back pages of mail order catalogs etc.... And no need for tv personalities , nothing personal , I don't take any of those folks seriously , and I'm not in the minority by thinking that way . the tall claims ....well I'm not the public relations department for Winchester , so if people are unhappy this season because they bought into the hype on the tv , and the side of the box , and they had to sit there and watch a gobbler run off with a broken wing .....cause they did what the side of the box told them to do ....and shoot at a gobbler at 60 yards --- well that's Winchesters problem
If your satisfied with shooting to 40 yards etc.... The issue is at rest-
:agreed:
Gonna be a lot of crippled birds when fellas think they can sling 40yd lead #6's at a 60yd birds and the kicker is they are really #7's
I ain't a rocket man but I think Old Gobler is right! The Truth will be know after the season is over. I been wondering how that number 7 shot at over 35 yds is gonna kill that turkey at 70. When the boys come home with their head hangin down and saying I just don't understand. Its winchesters reputation that's on the line. Don't misundrestand me I think they make good shells but these ranges are a joke. Its gonna be cry'in time. Is it election time yet, I want to here some real truth????(haha) cluck
Years ago, about 18 or 19 to be exact, Federal had a 7 1/2 lead load, they patterned great! I shot two gobblers with them, both at about 35 yards, rolled both of them and watched both of them fly away.
Quote from: cluck on February 22, 2014, 09:56:51 PM
I ain't a rocket man but I think Old Gobler is right! The Truth will be know after the season is over. I been wondering how that number 7 shot at over 35 yds is gonna kill that turkey at 70. When the boys come htome with their head hangin down and saying I just don't understand. Its winchesters reputation that's on the line. Don't misundrestand me I think they make good shells but these ranges are a joke. Its gonna be cry'in time. Is it election time yet, I want to here some real truth????(haha) cluck
i doubt that many people have the beans in there bag to tell us what happens when they take a shot at long range with this bird load.
Quote from: Old Gobbler on February 22, 2014, 06:23:25 PM
Lead is good , plenty good to kill any gobbler standing on the earth within 40 paces that's a fact , I have a opinion that the new Winchester longbeard is perhaps the best lead turkey load ever devised , ever - now best doesn't mean it's what you should use or be it right for your needs - something else may suit your needs - notice I didn't say it was the best turkey load , I said LEAD
With that being said , all the drama doesn't revolve around the LB's ability to drop a gobbler at 40 yards , it was the over ambitious claims that raised eyebrows - I do think Winchester has a product that sells itself there is no need to spend money on expensive adds , tv time , add space on back pages of mail order catalogs etc.... And no need for tv personalities , nothing personal , I don't take any of those folks seriously , and I'm not in the minority by thinking that way . the tall claims ....well I'm not the public relations department for Winchester , so if people are unhappy this season because they bought into the hype on the tv , and the side of the box , and they had to sit there and watch a gobbler run off with a broken wing .....cause they did what the side of the box told them to do ....and shoot at a gobbler at 60 yards --- well that's Winchesters problem
If your satisfied with shooting to 40 yards etc.... The issue is at rest-
Great post!
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
Ill be using them. Ill be keeping my shots 40 and under and I guarantee that many birds will die to this load be it 4's, 5's, or 6's. Just hopefully by the grace of god people will have enough sense not to try and take these ridiculously long shots at turkeys and seriously think that its #1. Acceptable #2. Ethical. It doesn't matter to me whether the 4's are 5's and the 5's are 6's and the 6's are 7's I dont have a doubt in my mind that at 40 yards a lot of turkeys will die but I also have no doubt in my mind that there will be a lot of wounded turkeys because of these numbskulls out there that believe everything that they hear. I appreciate guys like Clark and klemson taking the time to break these shells and find out this kind of information. But just everyone agree that no matter what if shots are taken at ethical ranges that this shell will lay the turkeys in the dirt. It shows improvements for lead by leaps and bounds.
:TrainWreck1:
Since the #5 loads are putting up better numbers than people are used to getting with #6's, I'd encourage people to step up to the #5's. Just shoot the #5's and be done with it. Whether they be #5, #5.5, or #6 size pellets, or even a blend of the above sizes, they will be awesome.
Old Gobbler for President!!
mudhen
I counted a 3.5 number six today after I saw the little holes in my target and came up with 496 pellets. So that is in line with what clark posted.
Quote from: 300Mag on February 23, 2014, 08:41:45 PM
I counted a 3.5 number six today after I saw the little holes in my target and came up with 496 pellets. So that is in line with what clark posted.
What was the total weight of all the shot?
After reading this thread I went and counted the LB patterns I shot Fri. I shot at 3x4 sheet of plastic table cloth, same thing I pattern my waterfowl loads on.The 3 1/2" #5, I counted 313, 312 total hits on the paper.The 3"6's I counted 394 and 362.The shot chart I use has #5 listed at 340 in 2oz.and 394 in 1 3/4 of #6.
They weighed 2 ounces.
Just curious if you actually weighed it. Did you trust that it was 2 oz but not trust that it was #6?
regardless of what they are doing on the patterning boards in it pretty much obvious that Winchester is having qualities control issue with there lead supplier. we have seen results just in this post of counts that would show the #6's loaded with #5,#6,#7, and blends of them all. maybe someone should email them and ask them whats going on.
the patterns im getting its going to smoke a gobblers noggin :z-guntootsmiley: that's really all that matters to me :TooFunny:
Quote from: knightrider on February 24, 2014, 10:29:54 AM
the patterns im getting its going to smoke a gobblers noggin :z-guntootsmiley: that's really all that matters to me :TooFunny:
That's where I am with it. I have 3" and 3.5" 6's. If they pattern like they are supposed at 40yds that's all I care about. The issue of long range shooting is an issue that is addressed at all of the farms and leases I hunt on. We addressed this issue with HTL and will address it with these LB shells. The majority of turkey hunters are hunting in leases, hunting camps, or at some level in groups of hunters. When I am guiding I take it as my responsibility to educate folks on what is ethical and the importance of shooting inside 40yds. As turkey hunters it is our responsibility to do whatever we can to educate other turkey hunters and not leave it up to Winchester or Environmental Metals. They are just trying to sell shells in a competitive market.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 11:08:35 AM
And to your broadhead statement which one of those broadhead would get better penetration on a trophy buck shoulder?
Considering the weight difference of TSS 9 and lead 4 is threefold and their down range velocities are all but equal (within 8 fps), you would have to compare a 900 grain arrow with a 2" cut to a 300 grain arrow with a 3/4" cut (and assume velocities are the same) Obviously I would take the 900 grain 2" cut.
#1: The actual weight difference is closer to 2.6x for the lead 4 to the TSS 9
#2: You can't just discount the density of the projectile because you don't understand the math behind how much "harder" a more dense projectile will hit (TSS) than a less dense (lead).
Would you still want to shoot that 900 grain arrow if you knew the 2" broadhead was going to become deformed instantly upon impact, losing that momentum and not pushing the energy through the animal? Would you rather get hit w/ a 1 pound, 10" water ballon or a softball (weighs roughly 6.25 oz) at 10 yards assuming they're both going 60 mph?
Even more importantly, would you rather get hit w/ 5 of those same water balloons or 50 of those softballs?
Quote from: Longshanks on February 24, 2014, 11:09:55 AM
Quote from: knightrider on February 24, 2014, 10:29:54 AM
the patterns im getting its going to smoke a gobblers noggin :z-guntootsmiley: that's really all that matters to me :TooFunny:
That's where I am with it. I have 3" and 3.5" 6's. If they pattern like they are supposed at 40yds that's all I care about. The issue of long range shooting is an issue that is addressed at all of the farms and leases I hunt on. We addressed this issue with HTL and will address it with these LB shells. The majority of turkey hunters are hunting in leases, hunting camps, or at some level in groups of hunters. When I am guiding I take it as my responsibility to educate folks on what is ethical and the importance of shooting inside 40yds. As turkey hunters it is our responsibility to do whatever we can to educate other turkey hunters and not leave it up to Winchester or Environmental Metals. They are just trying to sell shells in a competitive market.
Great post!
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
Quote from: huntindawg on February 24, 2014, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 11:08:35 AM
And to your broadhead statement which one of those broadhead would get better penetration on a trophy buck shoulder?
Considering the weight difference of TSS 9 and lead 4 is threefold and their down range velocities are all but equal (within 8 fps), you would have to compare a 900 grain arrow with a 2" cut to a 300 grain arrow with a 3/4" cut (and assume velocities are the same) Obviously I would take the 900 grain 2" cut.
#1: The actual weight difference is closer to 2.6x for the lead 4 to the TSS 9
#2: You can't just discount the density of the projectile because you don't understand the math behind how much "harder" a more dense projectile will hit (TSS) than a less dense (lead).
Would you still want to shoot that 900 grain arrow if you knew the 2" broadhead was going to become deformed instantly upon impact, losing that momentum and not pushing the energy through the animal? Would you rather get hit w/ a 1 pound, 10" water ballon or a softball (weighs roughly 6.25 oz) at 10 yards assuming they're both going 60 mph?
Even more importantly, would you rather get hit w/ 5 of those same water balloons or 50 of those softballs?
I do understand the math behind it. I do know that a more dense pellet will have less drag and retain better velocity. Also, its smaller size will allow it to penetrate ballistics gelatin better, none of that was ever discounted by me.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 24, 2014, 12:40:18 PM
Quote from: huntindawg on February 24, 2014, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 11:08:35 AM
And to your broadhead statement which one of those broadhead would get better penetration on a trophy buck shoulder?
Considering the weight difference of TSS 9 and lead 4 is threefold and their down range velocities are all but equal (within 8 fps), you would have to compare a 900 grain arrow with a 2" cut to a 300 grain arrow with a 3/4" cut (and assume velocities are the same) Obviously I would take the 900 grain 2" cut.
#1: The actual weight difference is closer to 2.6x for the lead 4 to the TSS 9
#2: You can't just discount the density of the projectile because you don't understand the math behind how much "harder" a more dense projectile will hit (TSS) than a less dense (lead).
Would you still want to shoot that 900 grain arrow if you knew the 2" broadhead was going to become deformed instantly upon impact, losing that momentum and not pushing the energy through the animal? Would you rather get hit w/ a 1 pound, 10" water ballon or a softball (weighs roughly 6.25 oz) at 10 yards assuming they're both going 60 mph?
Even more importantly, would you rather get hit w/ 5 of those same water balloons or 50 of those softballs?
I do understand the math behind it. I do know that a more dense pellet will have less drag and retain better velocity. Also, its smaller size will allow it to penetrate ballistics gelatin better, none of that was ever discounted by me.
So even though you understand the math, you would still choose to shoot the inferior product? Got it.
Quote from: huntindawg on February 24, 2014, 01:42:08 PM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 24, 2014, 12:40:18 PM
Quote from: huntindawg on February 24, 2014, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 22, 2014, 11:45:29 AM
Quote from: highwaygun on February 22, 2014, 11:08:35 AM
And to your broadhead statement which one of those broadhead would get better penetration on a trophy buck shoulder?
Considering the weight difference of TSS 9 and lead 4 is threefold and their down range velocities are all but equal (within 8 fps), you would have to compare a 900 grain arrow with a 2" cut to a 300 grain arrow with a 3/4" cut (and assume velocities are the same) Obviously I would take the 900 grain 2" cut.
#1: The actual weight difference is closer to 2.6x for the lead 4 to the TSS 9
#2: You can't just discount the density of the projectile because you don't understand the math behind how much "harder" a more dense projectile will hit (TSS) than a less dense (lead).
Would you still want to shoot that 900 grain arrow if you knew the 2" broadhead was going to become deformed instantly upon impact, losing that momentum and not pushing the energy through the animal? Would you rather get hit w/ a 1 pound, 10" water ballon or a softball (weighs roughly 6.25 oz) at 10 yards assuming they're both going 60 mph?
Even more importantly, would you rather get hit w/ 5 of those same water balloons or 50 of those softballs?
I do understand the math behind it. I do know that a more dense pellet will have less drag and retain better velocity. Also, its smaller size will allow it to penetrate ballistics gelatin better, none of that was ever discounted by me.
So even though you understand the math, you would still choose to shoot the inferior product? Got it.
Man, you should probably re-read what I've posted. I can't buy TSS anywhere, and I only reload for rifles and pistols currently. When I do decide to reload for shotguns, yes, I would like to try TSS. I shot Hevi-13 (really 12) for about 4 years and liked it but never had phenomenal patterns in any of my guns. The only HTL load I would shoot right now would be Federal HW but at 3 times the cost of a sufficient lead load, I just don't see the need.
I read exactly what you wrote, you equated a lead #4 to a 900 grain arrow w/ a 2" broadhead and a TSS #9 to a 300 grain arrow w/ a 3/4" broadhead and then said given the choice you would shoot the lead #4. You didn't put any caveats on range or price or anything else, so I just took that to meant you were either ok w/ shooting inferior products or you didn't understand how the density of a projectile could cause it to deliver energy onto a target.
Now you're telling me that you do understand that TSS/HTL is much better for smashing beaks than lead, but it's really just too expensive, which is a completely different argument.
Quote from: huntindawg on February 24, 2014, 02:52:12 PM
I read exactly what you wrote, you equated a lead #4 to a 900 grain arrow w/ a 2" broadhead and a TSS #9 to a 300 grain arrow w/ a 3/4" broadhead and then said given the choice you would shoot the lead #4. You didn't put any caveats on range or price or anything else, so I just took that to meant you were either ok w/ shooting inferior products or you didn't understand how the density of a projectile could cause it to deliver energy onto a target.
Now you're telling me that you do understand that TSS/HTL is much better for smashing beaks than lead, but it's really just too expensive, which is a completely different argument.
I've said that from the beginning. "Much" better might need to be defined. I do not think that HEVI-13 (12) is "MUCH" better than 11.34 lead. Also, my reasoning started from someone trying to say TSS 9 hits as hard as lead 4. I believe, without a doubt, that TSS 9 will kill any bird walking. Turkeys aren't armor plated and aren't hard to kill. 1 pellet of lead 7.5 at 40 yards "could" do the trick. Now, with Long Beards, I can slam him with 50-60 pellets at 40 yards with #6 lead for $2/shot.
This is starting to remind me of the nwtf forum.
I just cut open a old federal premium number six 2 1/4 to compare those pellets against the longbeards. It's easy to see the difference. I counted the pellets in the old 1/4 ounce heavier load and got 465 pellets. The new 2 ounce load has 495. That's messed up!! I wish I would of bought 5's now.
Quote from: CrustyRusty on February 24, 2014, 05:03:20 PM
This is starting to remind me of the nwtf forum.
Seems like every thread has turned into a argument since the longbeards came out. Everyone should shoot what they want and stop bashing everyone elses shell choice. They will all kill a stinking turkey. It doesnt remind me of the nwtf forum, it reminds me of 3rd grade....
I know some will say I'm crazy. But I said before I don't care what the charts say on how a lead #4 or #5 will penetrate. I'll say this and those that want to think different more power to them. I would rather shoot Hevi-13 #7's than lead 4's for penetration on the real thing. I used to shoot a ton of lead 4's. The Hevi-13 #7's will beat it on penetration on the real thing. I'm not talking about wood, tin or what have you either. I'm talking about a live turkey.
I've never had a problem killing any turkey with any load I have ever used because I know my limits, my guns limit and the loads limit. That's probably the mantra we all should follow but I know I'm probably preaching to the choir since we all seem to be on the same page here. The sad thing is that the folks who need that lesson most aren't on boards like these.
Quote from: klemsontigers7 on February 24, 2014, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: huntindawg on February 24, 2014, 02:52:12 PM
I read exactly what you wrote, you equated a lead #4 to a 900 grain arrow w/ a 2" broadhead and a TSS #9 to a 300 grain arrow w/ a 3/4" broadhead and then said given the choice you would shoot the lead #4. You didn't put any caveats on range or price or anything else, so I just took that to meant you were either ok w/ shooting inferior products or you didn't understand how the density of a projectile could cause it to deliver energy onto a target.
Now you're telling me that you do understand that TSS/HTL is much better for smashing beaks than lead, but it's really just too expensive, which is a completely different argument.
I've said that from the beginning. "Much" better might need to be defined. I do not think that HEVI-13 (12) is "MUCH" better than 11.34 lead. Also, my reasoning started from someone trying to say TSS 9 hits as hard as lead 4. I believe, without a doubt, that TSS 9 will kill any bird walking. Turkeys aren't armor plated and aren't hard to kill. 1 pellet of lead 7.5 at 40 yards "could" do the trick. Now, with Long Beards, I can slam him with 50-60 pellets at 40 yards with #6 lead for $2/shot.
That "someone" was me, and not only wasn't I "trying" to say TSS 9s hit as hard as Lead 4s, I didn't say it. I said they will penetrate as deeply, and there are a whole heck of a lot more of them in a load than there are lead 4s.