Pellet vs slugs for hunting

[davelarson]

Yeah they are incredibly tough critters. I missed the brain with a .25 caliber and hit the sinus area, it took four more shots to whittle it down. Not a fun experience at all.
I used the wrong hash mark on the scope.
Earlier this year there was a huge coon eating cat food on my porch, the poor thing had a bloody stump instead of a tail, and 3 huge lacerations across its back as if it were attacked by a machete.
As far as slugs go I think they would be fine for raccoons, the Knockout slugs in .177 are devastating.
This slug was at 1020 fps and opened up on a chipmunk at 40 yards.
I believe it would be adequate for humanely dispatching a raccoon providing the brain was hit.
I’ll test the penetration of the 13.43 grain .177 knockout slugs today on hard fir and split the wood to see the results of the slugs compared to pellets.
I’ll be sure to post about it later today.

 

[dens228]

Won’t wood be a less than ideal media for testing expansion? I hope we can standardise on one media - gel has too many variables , however magazines soaked in water (almost typed wet magazine) taped together should be an acceptable media as someone else posted earlier.
That may make our results a bit more universally applicable.
I propose the following format
Projectile weight/ muzzle velocity/ bc/distance to target/ penetration and expanded diameter

I may give that a try after these storms pass and the weather warms up.

 

[N2 Shooter]

Won’t wood be a less than ideal media for testing expansion? I hope we can standardise on one media - gel has too many variables , however magazines soaked in water (almost typed wet magazine) taped together should be an acceptable media as someone else posted earlier.
That may make our results a bit more universally applicable.
I propose the following format
Projectile weight/ muzzle velocity/ bc/distance to target/ penetration and expanded diameter

What do you mean gel has too many variables? Gel is one of the few mediums that can demonstrate not only the permanent wound channel, but the temporary one. I don't think people really understand just how tough 10% ballistics gel is, and the amount of force required to get gel to deform can translate to terminal performance.

Additionally, penetration depth is not the end all be all. How was the damage along the penetration track? Was it nice and smooth or was it raggedy and jagged? A raggedy wound channel that is more shallow is better than a clean one that is deeper, if the raggedy one is deep enough to reach the vitals. Everything else is icing on the cake.

 

[iAMzehTOASTY1]

What do you mean gel has too many variables? Gel is one of the few mediums that can demonstrate not only the permanent wound channel, but the temporary one. I don't think people really understand just how tough 10% ballistics gel is, and the amount of force required to get gel to deform can translate to terminal performance.

Additionally, penetration depth is not the end all be all. How was the damage along the penetration track? Was it nice and smooth or was it raggedy and jagged? A raggedy wound channel that is more shallow is better than a clean one that is deeper, if the raggedy one is deep enough to reach the vitals. Everything else is icing on the cake.

I want some of that gel
.....OK ALOT....bc I would test at least 50 types in a couple hours

 

[N2 Shooter]

I want some of that gel
.....OK ALOT....bc I would test at least 50 types in a couple hours

I'm just trying to get well enough to do some more Ballistics Gel testing, but something else on my body breaks down before the other thing even heals.

 

[iAMzehTOASTY1]

I'm just trying to get well enough to do some more Ballistics Gel testing, but something else on my body breaks down before the other thing even heals.

I hear ya...
Time keeps ticking
Hoping you get better

 

[dizzums]

unless its big bore and you need deep penetration on big things i thing 'swugs' are just another candy gimmick .. think a slug is going to knock out a tweety bird better than a pellet? no, and unless its a high end gun that can be tuned to get a decent trajectory they will be slower and have a big looping flight path, which equals 'less' hits in the real world .. double the energy means nothing if you cant hit it ...

 

[N2 Shooter]

In a forum with global reach and not many gel manufacturers of ballistic gel globally- gel will have many variables. I can’t cook up a batch to match the clear gel by ballistics gelatin.
That’s what I meant- gel is a great medium if you can get us a standard recipe ( for those who either can’t or won’t spring for gel).

I understand your point.

I wanted to know what was going on with the ammo I was shooting, and I caught Clear Ballistics Gel on a Black Friday sale, so I sprung for it.

Here is a video I did of my test.

 

[BlackICE]

Great video. Seem to me at closer ranges if you don't need more than 6" of penetration the Polymag is the winner.

 

[davelarson]

Won’t wood be a less than ideal media for testing expansion? I hope we can standardise on one media - gel has too many variables , however magazines soaked in water (almost typed wet magazine) taped together should be an acceptable media as someone else posted earlier.
That may make our results a bit more universally applicable.
I propose the following format
Projectile weight/ muzzle velocity/ bc/distance to target/ penetration and expanded diameter

Yeah wood isn’t the best for a wound channel test, but I just figured that it would show penetration capabilities and what happens to the slugs.
I didn’t get time to do the test yesterday but I will today. I’m going to use .22 .30 and .177 slugs and pellets.
It should be interesting.

 

[N2 Shooter]

unless its big bore and you need deep penetration on big things i thing 'swugs' are just another candy gimmick .. think a slug is going to knock out a tweety bird better than a pellet? no, and unless its a high end gun that can be tuned to get a decent trajectory they will be slower and have a big looping flight path, which equals 'less' hits in the real world .. double the energy means nothing if you cant hit it ...

You are taking a few too many liberties with these assumptions. There are many slugs in many sizes and calibers and weights. A high end gun always helps, but it's not needed to shoot slugs, and I've shot a many .25cal slugs well with a $500 Hatsan Bullboss.

Most slugs will have a higher Ballistic Coefficient that a diabolo pellet of the same weight, which means at 50 yards, the slug will be flying faster and flatter than a pellet of the same weight.

Why are you equating looping trajectories with misses, and associating that with slugs? Shoot at enough distance, and you'll have looping trajectories with pellets too. Scope Dope has been around for forever, and any airgunner shooting at varying distances knows how to use it. If anything, slugs can improve your accuracy in windy conditions, as the higher BC slug is not pushed around as much as pellets.

With my Maverick VP .30 cal, I shoot Hybrid Slugs with 85 fpe at the muzzle and 68 fpe at 75 yards. I also shoot Hades at 85 fpe at the muzzle, but they lose energy like crazy and only carry 38 fpe at 75 yards! When dealing with tough pest like groundhogs, I want that extra 30 fpe when delivering bodyshots.

I completely understand you finding slugs don't fit your personal needs, but they can't be thrown in the gimmick bin without considering many more scenarios. I'm fond of Hybrid Slugs because the massive expansion greatly reduces over penetration over a diabolo pellet, which is important when pesting on permissions with plenty of farm equipment.

 

[davelarson]

Well I did the penetration test on dense lodgepole pine. It’s only good for seeing how far the projectile gets into a hard dense material.
The RedWolf .22 HP and 25.39 grain knockout slug is the picture with my hand.
The other one is the .30 JSB 44.75 pellet.
I’m a hand model as a side job by the way.
I just finished a different test using BulletFreaks suggestion.
Wet paper, the results surprised me very much.
I’ll post it next but first I want to shoot the .177 RedWolf HP with knockout slugs into the hard pine so we have that comparison too.
All the testing done at 18 yards.

Edit: I just added the pictures of the .177 RedWolf and knockout slugs

 

[davelarson]

Well I did the penetration test on dense lodgepole pine. It’s only good for seeing how far the projectile gets into a hard dense material.
The RedWolf .22 HP and 25.39 grain knockout slug is the picture with my hand.
The other one is the .30 JSB 44.75 pellet.
I’m a hand model as a side job by the way.
I just finished a different test using BulletFreaks suggestion.
Wet paper, the results surprised me very much.
I’ll post it next but first I want to shoot the .177 RedWolf HP with knockout slugs into the hard pine so we have that comparison too.
All the testing done at 18 yards.

Edit: I just added the pictures of the .177 RedWolf and knockout slugs

View attachment 344852

View attachment 344853

Don’t know what happened to the pictures! Oops
There they are

 

[davelarson]

Here’s the test done with wet paper. I had a few old paper backs that I taped together and then soaked them.
What was very surprising to me was that nothing got through the first book!
So everything dumped all its energy into one inch of paper.
The .30 was the deepest penetration in the book, but not by much at all.
The .177 RedWolf with the knockout slugs was very impressive.
It went as deep as everything except the .30 and look at the mushrooming of the slugs.
Test done at 18 yards.
Looking forward to seeing BulletFreaks test with gel!

Edit: I got a sliver getting the pellets out of the wood and possibly compromised my hand model career.

 

[iAMzehTOASTY1]

Even in 177 cal a 13 grain slug is pretty close to a 14 grainer 22jsb.
A 20grain 177 slug trumps a 18 grain 22 pellet in my opinion.
These 177 heavies are penetrating like crazy in my limited testing- I will be making some test media to get my own comparisons done. The reason for shooting an airgun for me is the thrill of long range shooting without a long range- getting the dope right is all that matters.

With correct dope even a tx 200 shooting a 8.4 grain JSB hits way out there!

Which brand on the 20gr.177s?

 

[iAMzehTOASTY1]

H&N has 13, 16 and 20 grainers

Thanks! I've had pretty good results all around with h&n brand; gunna have to try their .177 sluggies
I have their 40gr .22s
Hit like freight trains

 

[Wr250r]

I would bet on the knockouts at 50 yards.

 

[iAMzehTOASTY1]

Here’s the test done with wet paper. I had a few old paper backs that I taped together and then soaked them.
What was very surprising to me was that nothing got through the first book!
So everything dumped all its energy into one inch of paper.
The .30 was the deepest penetration in the book, but not by much at all.
The .177 RedWolf with the knockout slugs was very impressive.
It went as deep as everything except the .30 and look at the mushrooming of the slugs.
Test done at 18 yards.
Looking forward to seeing BulletFreaks test with gel!

Edit: I got a sliver getting the pellets out of the wood and possibly compromised my hand model career.

View attachment 344864

View attachment 344865

View attachment 344866

View attachment 344867

From these pics for p3sting; I'd choose the Hades or redesigns I like how they fragmented

 

[JimD]

Thanks for posting hour results davelarson. I've shot wood several times but I don't get much penetration and even within a board there are differences in the density. So I prefer mdf and my test block with 1/4 inch pieces makes it easy to get some feel for the depth of penetration.

When I test in wet paper I tie the bundle loosely so the water fully penetrates. You did not seem to get a lot of penetration but you got a lot of expansion so maybe that explains it. If the paper is not saturated the penetration will be less, however. But as long as all the projectiles hit the same block it still gives you relative performance.

I started doing penetration tests after loosing a couple squirrels with my Prod in it's original tune. I think they died but they died in a neighbors yard. He did not complain but I didn't want to keep pushing my luck. I tested various projectiles from my Prod and also turned up it's power. I also hung a dead one by it's tail and shot it with several projectiles (from 25 yards away). At it's original tune, my Prod wouldn't shoot through although a couple heavy pellets were partially through the skin on the off side. They almost made it. After the retune, the simple domed pellets will shoot through - but only on a straight side shot. So most real world shots do not go through but I get deeper penetration and the 11 shot after the retune all died quickly.

So my Prod gets used whenever I test penetration. It likes copper plated FTTs so that is what I shoot into the paper. I consider it to represent my minimum acceptable penetration. An expanding pellet or slug from a more powerful gun is OK as long as it gives me the penetration of the Prod. But for now I just shoot domed pellets in all my airguns. They kill quickly and are very accurate. 32fpe 22 and both 25s almost always shoot through but the squirrels nearly always are drt.

If you get a chance, you might try a dead critter penetration test too.

 

[357cal]

This is just my opinion, I think it comes down to how much power is your pcp putting out? and is it regulated? and another is,, what's the distance of your target? I have a AEA big bore 357 and its unregulated. I can use a 84gr pellet but over 1000fps it is unstable so slugs are a better choice but if you have a regulator you could adjust the speed down to 800 to 920ish or so. This is is the speed you want for pellets. Then there's distance. pellets are for lets say. inside 100 yards and slugs are for longer distance, slugs have a better B.C rating. There is a place for both.