A load comparison: H&N Versus Crosman

I ran an experiment tonight so as to better understand the performance of a few of my favorite hunting loads and the results were pretty awesome! I took two popular pellet manufacturers and ran a straight up and down comparison of expansion with a couple of loads that I use often. I used my unregulated Puncher Breaker topped off at about 200 bar for each test. I fired each load into a block of modeling clay. I was at a range of 15 yards and these were all in .177 caliber. I used the H&N Barracuda Hunter Extreme 9.57 grain pellets versus the Crosman Premier Piranha 10.5 grain pellets and then the H&N Terminator 7.25 grain pellets versus the Crosman Premier Destroyer 7.4 grain pellets. And then for good measure I tossed in a pellet that I would like to see made and I'll get to that later. I tried to use pellets with similar shaped heads and as similar weight as possible so as to keep things as equal across the board as I could and again this test was only for expansion -- I wasn't going for FPE or accuracy or any of that other data -- all I was looking to measure was expansion. This is the first time I've done any testing like this and I'm just getting started as a reviewer/tester/presenter so go ahead and lay the comments and suggestions on me -- I welcome all criticism because I want to improve and make this more than a hobby. So here we go...

In the smaller weight pellets there really wasn't a clear better performer and what these pellets did inside the clay was no surprise. Penetration between the two was as near to identical as to make no difference and both pellets came apart leaving just the main pointy center mass somewhat intact. Due to the design of the head of these pellets these really can't be said to expand so much as come apart and end up sending tiny little pieces of lead in all directions like a frangible firearm projectile. That's a pretty cool result as the frangible nature of the loads can add to the lethality and thus aid in humanely dispatching your target. There was some expansion of the center pointy section though not enough so as to make it impossible to determine what it was and not enough to drastically effect the penetration. The H&N Terminator 7.25 grain pellet came out of the clay at a diameter of 5.1 mm for a total of 0.6 mm of expansion. Not bad. The Crosman had very similar performance and came out of the clay at 5.3 mm for a total of 0.8 mm of expansion. If you'd like to know how much weight each shed just let me know I will update this post with that data. 

The real shockers for me were the heavier pellets and it's not for the reason you might think. Penetration was surprisingly similar to that of the lighter weight pellets. That was a very interesting result as I would have thought the extra mass would be harder to stop and therefore would penetrate deeper but this was almost not the case at all. The difference in penetration from the lighter loads was negligible. My first real surprise was the H&N Baracuda Hunter Extreme as it did not perform at all as I had anticipated. This load came out of the clay at a mere 4.7 mm for a total of 0.2 mm of expansion. It also has a similar shape to the lighter loads and so it appears as though it behaved like a frangible projectile as well and not so much like a hollow point. My next surprise was more of a shock. The Crosman Premier Piranha came out of the clay at a whopping 7.1 mm for a total of 2.6 mm of expansion. That is nearly the size of a .30 caliber round. That was a truly stunning result. The penetration of the Piranha was a bit less than the other three loads so by all accounts this massive expansion does indeed lend itself to stopping the projectile rapidly therefore quickly expending all of its energy inside the target. In either case both of these loads expended all of their energy inside the target very quickly and given the frangible nature of the one and the massive expansion of the other it seems that they too would make humanely dispatching your quarry possible.

Overall, in terms of dumping their energy, all four projectiles had very similar penetration depth and three of them had similar expansion. If you're looking for something more frangible then perhaps the Crosman Premier Destroyer, the H&N Baracuda Hunter Extreme and Terminators would be the desirable load. If you're looking for something that has dramatic expansion and stays together well then the Crosman Premier Piranha seems to be a good option. All four rounds, whether they fragmented well or stayed together well, appear to expend all of their energy fairly rapidly inside the target and so any one of the four would make a humane load for small game. 

And now for the final load -- one I would like to see produced -- and how it performed. I'll start by explaining that I made this load myself from a H&N Piledriver 21 grain pellet and I'll also say that I don't recommend anyone do this at all. It's not a practice in which I engage often as it can be unsafe. In short -- Don't Try This At Home! I planed down a scrap piece of wood and then drilled a hole through it so that these long pellets would just stick above the wood by a millimeter or two. Maybe even less, I'm not sure I just went by feel and winged it. I then took my flat Exacto knife and gave the meplat a bit of a larger flat than it had before. I then marked the center of the pellet and took a 1/16th drill bit to it giving it a deep hollow point cavity. I then used a larger spur wood bit to increase the opening size of the hollow point and round off any flat meplat left. Since I had used my flat Exacto knife to mark the center of the pellet I went ahead and used it again to cut those marks into the lead as deep grooves kind of like what you see on the H&N Baracuda Hunter Extreme. I then smoothed any rough edges on a very fine sanding block. I topped off the reservoir or the Puncher Breaker to make sure that it was at about 200 bar like the other tests and then sent the thing down range. The expansion was tremendous and the devastation inside the clay was conspicuous. It didn't expand quite as symmetrically as the previous tests so I eyeballed it and put my calipers on what appeared to be the two points farthest apart and it came out to be exactly 9 mm or 35.caliber. Expanding to twice its original size notwithstanding it did penetrate deeper than the previous tests and its wake down the entire length of the channel created in the clay was utter devastation. The amount of energy expended by this load into the clay was prodigious. Even if only for my own use I would like to see this load manufactured. So if that means that I reach a point that I'm swaging them only for myself then so be it. I'm not completely done with my design and I have a lot of saving to do to be able to order a die and swaging press but I'll get there. If anyone else would like to see this load created please let me know and I'll try to keep interested parties informed of the progress.

Thank you all for taking the time to read this and now please do send me your replies, suggestions, critique and criticism. I need all the input I can get so as to improve and move forward toward making this passion less of a hobby. 

Always be safe, stay free. 

The Broke-ass Airgunner. 
 
Interesting that you call shooting a pellet a load. From my experience, there’s a big difference. There is also a big difference when comparing bullets to pellets. When a bullet from your favorite load strikes a target, it mushrooms because the bullet carries all it’s mass in the back of the projectile. Physics keeps driving it forward after the tip strikes something. With a pellet, all the mass is on the front of the projectile. When it strikes something the flimsy waist does little to help with expansion. Unfortunately pellet guns rely on the head diameter for accuracy so messing with them to make them fragile enough to expand is very tricky. A pellet with good expansion has a good chance of shooting like crap.
 
Interesting that you call shooting a pellet a load. From my experience, there’s a big difference. There is also a big difference when comparing bullets to pellets. When a bullet from your favorite load strikes a target, it mushrooms because the bullet carries all it’s mass in the back of the projectile. Physics keeps driving it forward after the tip strikes something. With a pellet, all the mass is on the front of the projectile. When it strikes something the flimsy waist does little to help with expansion. Unfortunately pellet guns rely on the head diameter for accuracy so messing with them to make them fragile enough to expand is very tricky. A pellet with good expansion has a good chance of shooting like crap.

I agree to a large degree but I think it would depend on the manufacturing practices of the pellet producers. You're absolutely correct about the center of mass in a bullet versus a pellet and how a bullet continues to drive forward because of that aft center of mass. Using a diabolo shape for drag stabilization and imparting spin stabilization with the center of pressure behind the pellet and the center of mass ahead of the center of pressure causes all kinds of funky physics to happen over the range of velocity from muzzle to impact. These forces acting on the pellet can inherently cause the pellet to shoot like crap whether it's made with a higher tin content lead for rigidity or lower tin content for expansion. As we already know it comes down to velocity of the projectile, spin rate of the barrel, weight of the projectile and of course the terminal ballistics acting on the projectile. If one can find that sweet spot I would think that even a good expanding pellet could shoot and group well. However I think the extreme limit of the diabolo shape has been reached and without exotic new materials we're at about the highest level of performance that can be expected from the rifles in terms of pressure, regulation, plenum capacity, barrel design, et cetera. Basically what I'm saying is that the diabolo shape is completely played out and the advancements that can be expected from the rifles now that they have attained top of the pyramid performance we won't be seeing any truly revolutionary advancements in the future... not from the diabolo pellet, and though small advancements will keep the technology moving ahead, not from the guns themselves. I believe that the next big revolution in airgunning is going to be in the projectile. And I believe that swaging with softer lead in the shape of slugs such as being done by Nielsen Specialty Ammo and a choice few of the larger manufacturers will see the elite brands of guns reaching out to 300 yards accurately, or perhaps further, with very good expansion from the projectile. I have been doing a lot of research on this subject and I have in mind a projectile design that will be a part of that next big step and I plan on developing it. My million dollar idea so to speak. I just don't have a baseline. So that was the reason for the test. I'm going to expand on it in the coming weeks and months and will be posting the results as I go. I'm also going to be putting out videos to go along. It's going to be a long row to hoe but I believe it would be worth it in the long run if we're able to reach out to 300 yards or more with accuracy and lethality. I am really going to have to fine tune my design and come up with a better means of producing it on a budget because as I'm sure the rest of you are aware if you really get into this sport you can end up like me... a broke-ass airgunner. Just thinking about the equipment necessary to make a prototype for testing will require amounts of money that my wife and I simply cannot expect to make. Because she is disabled due to an incomplete spinal cord injury at the C5/C6 of the neck from a head on collision we have to be very careful with our income because too much and she would lose her disability benefits. The challenges ahead of me are daunting. In fact at times they seem insurmountable -- but I knew I had to make that first step and it started with my first test. And I'm going to have find creative ways (barter or trading, patreon/cloud funding maybe?) of getting the necessary resources but that, as with all things, is in due time. Thanks for the conversation and you're input -- it's all valid and all valuable. 

Thanks for doing the test and taking the time to write it up. Would be interesting to see how they all group.

You're welcome and most importantly thank you for taking the time to read it. As for the grouping strings I have one word for how cold it is here at the moment -- Nebraska. And there isn't an indoor range nearby so it may be a while before the weather is conducive to a grouping test at distance but I'll get that put together for you and get it posted... just as soon as I can walk out the back door without my boogers freezing in 0.2 seconds. 
 
As far pellet expansion goes, When I shoot a 55 gallon drum with an H&N Baracuda pellet from my BSA Lonestar .25 at 20 yards, I get an expanded pellet about equal to the size of a dime. I also get a dent in the 55 gallon drum about equal to the size made by a ball peen hammer using the ball end if you hit the barrel really hard. In a CZ 452 shooting Velocitors, the bullet will penetrate the barrel.

When shooting a rabbit in the head, the .25 cal Lonestar blows the eyeballs out of their sockets. I have NEVER recovered a pellet from my Lonestar when shooting small varmints as they are always pass throughs. When using something like a segmented Stinger in my CZ 452, the bullet fragments into 3 pieces and their is rarely any pass through on a body shot of a prairie dog. In fact. the BSA Lonestar is a good pellet rifle when finding two PD's lined up so that you can get two PD's with the same pellet. Shooting a PD or rabbit with 40 grain round nose subsonic .22LR, I always get a pass through on a body shot, but the rabbit or PD often just runs away. On a body shot with the Lonestar .25, it is usually dead right there. On a body shot through the gut, I have killed PD's quicker with the .25 Lonestar than with a .204 Ruger shooting 40 grain Hornady match bullets which sounds like an exploding water bottle from a distance. The sound is clearly audible at 100 yards even when wearing ear muffs. The .25 Lonestar is just very efficient at killing small animals, and to get the same effect in .22LR I have to move up to Stingers and Velocitors where I get expansion.

I once lined up five 1/2 gallon milk cartons filled with water and shot them at about 10 yards to determine penetrating power of the .25 cal Baracuda and the .22LR Stinger. BSA Lonestar .25 and CZ 452 .22LR were used. The Stinger came to rest in the third milk carton and had good expansion. The Baracuda penetrated all five milk cartons and was never recovered. That seemed to explain why I had never recovered a pellet from the Lonestar when shooting PD's at any angle, but with Stingers there was often no exit in a long body shot. Skunks, porcupines, you name it, just never a recovery of a pellet when the varmint is shot with the Lonestar .25. The same is true if using a .22LR subsonic round nose bullet. The .22LR subsonic just does not have the knock down effect of the .25 cal pellet.

This is how it works in Montana, but YMMV depending where you are and the type of varmints you shoot. I once killed a Badger at a PD town that required that I empty my entire magazine from the CZ 452 into it. He was a big one that had gotten huge on eating PD's. The first round in just got him mad and he acted like he was going to attack me. As more rounds went in him, he eventually changed his mind and the last round went through his butt as he headed down his hole. The Badger was never recovered, and the hole was big enough for a toddler child to fall into. I have yet to kill a Badger with the Lonestar .25, and since it is a single shot, I am a bit apprehensive. Best that I carry my CZ 75 9mm if going after big bad Badgers with a single shot airgun.

Phil