TSS Penetration

[Hobbes]

I tried searching for some info that I'd posted in response to a thread that was running back in 2018 (I think) when I'd first bought TSS to hand load.  I couldn't find the thread but maybe it was before my hiatus from forums for a while.  I did find a lot of discussion, some of it on target some of it sort of and some that I couldn't follow.  If I recall correctly, I found a page by accident somewhere that had really close info, maybe a little too close.  If you copy it, you do so at your own risk.

Maybe some folks have gotten past this and I'm giving info they already understand but maybe it'll help some.  There may be errors in my original reasoning and I ve not ran any numbers since this, so errors in my math are possible.  I think the reasoning is sound regardless.

Here it is as previously posted:

I'm not the best at explaining energy and how it relates to penetration.  I mix some of the terms that really arent interchangeable, and may have even done it here (hopefully not). I know it's been done multiple times in the last few pages.

This isn't an attempt to persuade the use of Tungsten Super Shot.  I've just recently purchased some and have previously stayed on the side of "dead is dead" and kept using my old faithful lead.  However, this is a very small/ simple look at why smaller TSS shot out performs larger Lead (Pb) shot.  There is a lot more to this than what I've done, but it should give you some idea of why it works this way.  I'm not beyond needing correction, so have at it.

I've seen charts that show that 18 g/cc tungsten #9 shot out penetrates 11.3g/cc lead #6 shot in ballistic gel.  However, the tiny #9 TSS obviously weighs less than #6 lead (360/ounce vs. 221/ounce).  So why do the lighter weight #9's out penetrate the heavier #6's?  Here are few things to consider.  (If you are concerned with significant figures you may want to look away.)

Lets verify the shot counts:

#9 shot is 2.03 mm diameter, giving a volume of 4.38 mm3 or .00438 cm3

#6 shot is 2.79 mm diameter, giving a volume of 11.37 mm3 or .01137 cm3

Using Volume and Density:

A TSS #9 (18 g/cm3) weighs .07884 grams = .00278 ounces = 1.2167 grains

A Pb #6 (11.3 g/cm3) weighs .12848 grams = .00453 ounces = 1.9827 grains

Number of shot per ounce:

TSS #9 -  1/ .00278 oz = 361/oz

Pb #6 – 1/ .00453 oz = 221/oz

There are a number of things that will affect penetration...........mass, velocity, cross sectional area, surface area, hardness.  The simplest way to determine penetration is to do like most have done and just shoot ballistic gel and measure the results.  There is nothing better than real world results, but the numbers can sometimes clear up some of why that just happened.

Kinetic Energy gets thrown around a lot so let's look at that:

KE = Mass x Velocity squared divided by a Constant.   Mass is in grains, Velocity in fps, and K is 450,435, and KE is in foot pounds

Instead of punching in all the numbers, I used Google, so the numbers could vary a little.

KE of #9 TSS @ 1200 fps = 3.8882 ft lbs

KE of #6 Pb @ 1200 fps = 6.3359 ft lbs

Now consider cross sectional area.

The cross sectional area of a # 9 = 3.24 mm2

The cross sectional area of a #6 = 6.11 mm2

#9 TSS
3.8882/3.24 = 1.20 ftlbs/mm2

#6 Pb
6.3359/6.11 = 1.04 ftlbs/mm2

So we can already see that a TSS #9 has more energy per mm2 than a Pb #6, both traveling at the same velocity.

Someone said before that the difference in wind resistence would be negligible.  I wouldn't say that considering that the cross sectional area of #6 is 89% larger.

Same for the surface area:

The surface area of a #9 shot = 12.95 mm2

The surface area of a #6 shot = 24.45 mm2

Let's assume that the drag forces of air and the object that we are shooting (penetrating) only acts on the front half of the sphere:

#9 shot = 6.475 mm2

#6 shot = 12.225 mm2

So without looking at any other numbers we can see that the TSS #9 has 15% more energy per unit of area than the Pb #6 (1.2 ftlbs/mm2 vs. 1.04 ftlbs/mm2).  We can also see that the Pb #6 has almost 90% more drag forces acting against it than the TSS #9.  More energy and less drag force will yield more penetration.

Another factor that I'm not even capable of calculating is how deformation or shape of the shot affects penetration.  It's my understanding that TSS is "more spherical".  That would increase penetration.  It is also harder, so it would not deform like lead.  Deformation sucks up energy that is used for penetration, so the harder shot would not lose penetration capability due to deformation.

Add all of that to 360 TSS #9's  vs. 221 Pb #6's and there is a clear winner.  However, I agree with many..............dead is dead, so if your lead is getting it done and you don't want to spend the extra cash

[Hobbes]

I just found some copy of the old thread that Google had stored (just text) and apparently I had ran similar numbers on Hevi13 and Federal Heviweight afterwards that someone asked about:



#6 Hevi (12 g/cc and 209/ounce)
1.09 ftlb/mm2
Surface are creating drag = 12.225 mm2

#7 Fed. Heavyweight (15 g/cc and 219/ounce)
1.26 ftlb/mm2
Surface area creating drag = 10.135 mm2

[runngun]

Awesome information!!!
Thanks for taking the time to share.  And you explained that very well!!!

Have a good one
          Bo

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

[Turkeybutt]

I found that information very enlightening!
Thank you for sharing that information and for the time it took to come to those conclusions.
I use it, it works, enough said!

[Yoder409]

Another factor that I'm not even capable of calculating is how deformation or shape of the shot affects penetration.  It's my understanding that TSS is "more spherical".  That would increase penetration.  It is also harder, so it would not deform like lead.  Deformation sucks up energy that is used for penetration, so the harder shot would not lose penetration capability due to deformation.

I'm not capable of calculating this, either.   But, just in layman's terms, think of the difference between a round nose jacketed bullet and a full metal jacket bullet.  "Mushrooming"..............or flattening eats up projectile energy.  Not to mention the resulting projectile (pellet) deflection effect due to the deformation.  Straight line penetration always wins.

I've never put a TSS pellet on a turkey.  I'm still old skool and shoot Hevi 7's.  You laid out, in great detail, some pretty convincing number theories............which I believe are very telling.  But, I can believe one thing, and KNOW the same........or another.  What I do KNOW is that the Hevi 7's will give exit wounds on a gobbler's head a LOOOOONG way farther away than will lead 5's or 6's.  Seen it.  Done it.  At 3-4 gm/cc MORE than Hevi 7's the TSS can't be anything other than more of the same.

Whether a guy can bring himself to foot the price tag of the tungsten shotshells or not is up to him.  Lead still kills convincingly as ever.  But the effectiveness of the expensive stuff is in NO WAY in question or even a topic for debate.

[Tom007]

A wealth of info, thank you.

[ChesterCopperpot]

Unless we're discussing extended ranges, the energy and penetration benefits aren't a selling point of TSS in any way other than justifying smaller shot as ethical means of take. Lead #6s, Hevi #7s, TSS #9s at 40 and under don't make a lick of difference. Ain't none of them bouncing off his head. The selling point is numbers and pattern density and it's a hell of a selling point. It's why I shoot them.

Now, all that said, if you really are going to have a discussion of sufficient energy and penetration, density has to be factored into the equation. I'm no mathematician and don't know how that variable fits, but the greater penetration of TSS primarily has to do with how much denser a material it is. There would come a point in flight when the lead #6 and the TSS #9 would both be carrying the exact same amount of kinetic energy and if they both struck target at that precise moment the TSS would out penetrate the lead. The danger of this conversation will always be that the end question of all of this information boils down to at what distance does the TSS #9 no longer have sufficient penetration and energy to kill a turkey, and how does the #9 compare to #8 or #10? Without any mathematics the answer to that question is, "A whole hell of a lot farther than we ought to be shooting at them."

So, again, the energy and penetration debate is only relevant for two things: 1) convincing someone that TSS #9 carries enough energy to be an effective means of take at ethical ranges (of course it does); 2) discussing extended ranges (and it's plenty capable well beyond distances we should be shooting). The selling point is and will always be, pattern density, pattern density, pattern density, and particularly TSS's uncanny ability to provide that benefit to sub gauges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ol bob]

I'm just a dumb ol country boy so when I started messing with tss I put up a sheet of  tin at 40 yards and shot it with a 12 ga. 31/2 # 6, and a 20 ga. 2 3/4 # 9 tss after looking at the results I put the 12 ga. up for good.

[Yoder409]

The selling point is and will always be, pattern density, pattern density, pattern density, and particularly TSS's uncanny ability to provide that benefit to sub gauges.

End of the day...............bottom line.    Yep.   

[Hobbes]

Yes, pattern density, and that's easily enough understood by anyone that has shot it or seen the pattern photos.  That's why I mentioned the difference in the number of shot in an ounce.    The numbers above do take into account it's higher density and show why that, the tiny frontal surface area, and it's hardness improves penetration.  They do not indicate at what distance they have similar kinetic energy overall or per unit of area.  That would take calculations in loss of velocity for each.  I could have also assumed a hotter lead load because I shot them for years, but it was easier to show that velocity being relatively equal.....TSS out penetrates and why density is so important to it. However, I want no part in adding to any data that already shows how far TSS will kill a bird.  There's enough folks that'll do that.

Just so I'm not misunderstood, this wasn't an exercise in selling TSS.  It simply informs those who've asked why a #9 out penetrates larger lead shot, and there are several who have and still do. 

I can go back to copper plated lead if necessary and kill just as many birds, but I've chose not to.  There will come a day that lead is outlawed altogether.

 

[Hobbes]

I'm just a dumb ol country boy so when I started messing with tss I put up a sheet of  tin at 40 yards and shot it with a 12 ga. 31/2 # 6, and a 20 ga. 2 3/4 # 9 tss after looking at the results I put the 12 ga. up for good.

Ol Bob, I'm a country boy as well and I've proved myself dumb on more than one occasion.  Your method is as good as any and likely the only way some folks will believe it. 

[ChesterCopperpot]

My very, very favorite thing about TSS: FoxTrot Hot Rods made my hundred year old 2.75" fixed full 20ga Model 12 shoot better patterns than a whole lot of people's super modified modern 12ga set ups. That alone is worth the price of admission. I'd probably pay $20 a shell to hunt that gun with that pattern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hobbes]

My very, very favorite thing about TSS: FoxTrot Hot Rods made my hundred year old 2.75" fixed full 20ga Model 12 shoot better patterns than a whole lot of people's super modified modern 12ga set ups. That alone is worth the price of admission. I'd probably pay $20 a shell to hunt that gun with that pattern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've considered it in my grandfather's model 12 sixteen ga. 
Foxtrot is where I'd get the ammo as well.

[Spurs Up]

This makes my head hurt...

http://oldgobbler.com/Forum/index.php/topic,99477.msg981369.html#msg981369

[CowHunter71]

#6 lead out of my 12ga has never let me down as long as I have done my part out to 40 steps. No need for a real Turkey Hunter to pull the trigger past 40yrds.