Pellets vs 1st Gen vs 2nd gen slugs

[Franklink]

I was recently quoted in an oldd conversation about slugs and thought it better to start a new topic rather than continue over there.

The newest flavor of slugs, the kind that look like rimfire bullets, ala Altaros and the type Mike Nische has been recently sharing results from, are not the same thing as the 1st gen slugs we've been fighting with for 8 or so years.

From a performance standpoint, there are now three classes of airgun projectiles.

-Pellets
-1st Gen slugs (flat base/ generally cone shaped)
-2nd Gen slugs (similar shape to .22 rimfire, round-nosed often with boat-tails and/or truncated bases)

Out to 100 yards, it is extremely rare to find a 1st gen slug that will outshoot a good high BC pellet.

The 2nd Gen slugs are essentially air powered rimfires, with comparable (and sometimes better) performance. Their BCs and retained energies are downright scary when compared to what we think of coming from an airgun (outside of traditional big bore airguns).

Lumping 1st Gen and 2nd gen slugs together as the same thing is akin to letting Lia Thomas swim with woman and then being surprised that he's kicking their asses. Ie they're simply not in the same class b/c they're so vastly different.

This is a sesame street game of which one of these is not like the others. And the air powered rimfires are simply a completely different animal than what we've been calling slugs for most of a decade now.

Those bad boys are BULLETS.

 

[ChrisT]

Guess I haven't paid that close of attention to gen1 vs gen 2 slugs, but super great to know advancements are happening. I will have to pay closer attention now. If wasn't for the 22rf case being smaller that the pill od this might have shown up a lot sooner. The lowly rimfire rebated heel is a stumbling block, but its form factor is so entrenched that it likely would never change on a grand scale. I did read of a .22 rimfire cartridge being produced along the lines of traditional CF pils. Of course this results in different chambering for the cartridge case making it non-interchangeable between the 2. Eons ago there were rimfires reaching 72 caliber non-rebated heels.

 

[Franklink]

Guess I haven't paid that close of attention to gen1 vs gen 2 slugs, but super great to know advancements are happening. I will have to pay closer attention now. If wasn't for the 22rf case being smaller that the pill od this might have shown up a lot sooner. The lowly rimfire rebated heel is a stumbling block, but its form factor is so entrenched that it likely would never change on a grand scale. I did read of a .22 rimfire cartridge being produced along the lines of traditional CF pils. Of course this results in different chambering for the cartridge case making it non-interchangeable between the 2. Eons ago there were rimfires reaching 72 caliber non-rebated heels.

Gen 1 versus Gen 2 is just my verbiage.

Slug versus bullet is probably a more clear delineation. BCs, and therefore performance, are vastly different.

Gen 1 "slug" are these and similar....


Gen 2 "bullets" are these and similar.....

 

[Ballisticboy]

I suppose the rounds in my avatar would qualify as Gen 2 "bullets", even though they were designed 30 years ago for sub 12FPE guns. It's a pity we never produced any apart from experimental rounds. I've only got about two left over now, not to be fired.

 

[Spartan]

I suppose the rounds in my avatar would qualify as Gen 2 "bullets", even though they were designed 30 years ago for sub 12FPE guns. It's a pity we never produced any apart from experimental rounds. I've only got about two left over now, not to be fired.

Up until now, I always thought the pic in your avatar was of a CF air tank.

 

[JungleShooter]

From a performance standpoint, there are now three classes of airgun projectiles:
● Pellets
● 1st Gen slugs (flat base/ generally cone shaped)
● 2nd Gen slugs (similar shape to .22 rimfire, round-nosed often with boat-tails and/or truncated bases)

Cole,

where you're right, you're RIGHT!

I'd agree with your classification system, Gen1 slugs, and Gen2 slugs.

Just yesterday I was looking to update my slug specs tables, and stumbled on two more candidates of Gen2 slugs, besides
● Altaros and
● Mike's of ThomasAir.


These are glorious times to be an airgunner!!

Matthias



● Skout Sniper Slugs (made by Corbin)
.25cal | 48.80gr

● ZAN ELR Slugs
▪ .22cal | 35.00gr
▪ .25cal | 43.50gr

 

[Franklink]

@JungleShooter,

I agree on the Corbin made Skout and the ZAN ELR, those both seem to be gen 2s.

I imagine there's a BC cutoff somewhere for the gen1, probably something like 0.12-0.15? What says the gen pop here on AGN? And above that BC cutoff is a gen2/bullet.

 

[Scotchmo]

@JungleShooter,

I agree on the Corbin made Skout and the ZAN ELR, those both seem to be gen 2s.

I imagine there's a BC cutoff somewhere for the gen1, probably something like 0.12-0.15? What says the gen pop here on AGN? And above that BC cutoff is a gen2/bullet.

Gen1 BC cutoff about 0.12-0.15? Assuming that’s for a G1 BC? What’s the cutoff for a gen2? And rather than G1, gen2 is probably more like RA4. Or maybe G7?

 

[Ballisticboy]

The boat tails on the Zans looks to be correct, it is very easy to get it wrong, as those on a lot of slugs seem to be. Boat tails are a classic case of more is not always best.

Trying to compare BC's for the different slug designs is a problem as the drag curve shapes are different and none of them look like the G1 shape. As said above, RA4 or G7 will be better for boat tailed rounds, though G7 is perhaps a bit extreme if speeds are high. This is why I have tried to produce more relevant drag laws, but there are still a lot of variables. In the end, only purpose made drag laws for each design will give truly accurate trajectories, though it will depend on the ranges of interest how accurate the BC method can be. For many, it will probably suffice.

 

[MrP]

One thing I noticed is that MP molds was making a mold for these types of projectiles for a year or so at least before people started selling them online. Eight cavity mold I believe designed to go with the original K-1

In fact the altaros turned slugs are nearly the same in profile, even down to the three small drive bands.

 

[Franklink]

Gen1 BC cutoff about 0.12-0.15? Assuming that’s for a G1 BC? What’s the cutoff for a gen2? And rather than G1, gen2 is probably more like RA4. Or maybe G7?

I was thinking anything above that arbitrary BC of 0.12-0.15 from the first gen slugs would be a gen2/bullet.

That seems to be the defining characteristic separating the two, MUCH improved performance from the bullets over the gen1 "slugs", especially at 100+ yards. BC is just a way to quantify that. And yea, using the appropriate drag profile for the respective type of projectile. Or at least the best currently developed drag profile for each projectile shape.

I started this thread with the intent of separating the two projectiles from each other. Common practice is to call them both "slugs" which is somewhat accurate. But their performance and downrange retained energy is very different.

For a hobby where we've got geniuses shooting 3000psi pressure vessels with a .223 Rem from about 20 feet away........I think there needs to be a demarcation between these projectiles in our verbiage. For a certain contingent of the bell curve of human intelligence, they're going to think "awwe it's just an airgun, it's safe to shoot with those houses or that highly trafficked road back there," without realizing that they're shooting a projectile that will retain a greater percentage of its fpe when it gets to that road or house than a .22 rimfire would.

 

[Dairyboy]

I was thinking anything above that arbitrary BC of 0.12-0.15 from the first gen slugs would be a gen2/bullet.

That seems to be the defining characteristic separating the two, MUCH improved performance from the bullets over the gen1 "slugs", especially at 100+ yards. BC is just a way to quantify that. And yea, using the appropriate drag profile for the respective type of projectile. Or at least the best currently developed drag profile for each projectile shape.

I started this thread with the intent of separating the two projectiles from each other. Common practice is to call them both "slugs" which is somewhat accurate. But their performance and downrange retained energy is very different.

For a hobby where we've got geniuses shooting 3000psi pressure vessels with a .223 Rem from about 20 feet away........I think there needs to be a demarcation between these projectiles in our verbiage. For a certain contingent of the bell curve of human intelligence, they're going to think "awwe it's just an airgun, it's safe to shoot with those houses or that highly trafficked road back there," without realizing that they're shooting a projectile that will retain a greater percentage of its fpe when it gets to that road or house than a .22 rimfire would.

Yeah I love the idea of shooting these gen2 slugs/bullets however the FPE being shot and the BC I wouldn't shoot them anywhere I wouldn't shoot my .22lr. Then at that point I think I'll just grab my .22lr if it were safe.

 

[Ballisticboy]

The bullet type shape with a boat tail is different to the conventional slug shape in far more ways than just the BC. Boat tails not only change the drag but the aerodynamic stability and the dynamic stability as well. The bullet with a boat tail is more aerodynamically unstable and usually has less dynamic stability. More twist rate can be used to maintain gyroscopic stability, but that tends to reduce dynamic stability, so it all becomes a balancing act.

The changes to the aerodynamics changes the way bullets react to problems such as yaw rates on leaving the barrel, which in turn affects the size of the errors at the target. Getting it right is not simple, but it can be done, with the potential to improve group sizes, particularly at longer ranges.

 

[dizzums]

anything can be done .. you know it 'used to be' that stock-cars were meant to keep an affordable yet very competitive and enjoyable class of racing for the average guy .. are they 'better' now that they really arnt at an affordable level? .. sure they are, but what direction did the once enjoyable sport go? .. i can throw thousands at anything at all and 'improve' it, trust me .

 

[LONESTAR .25]

Yeah I love the idea of shooting these gen2 slugs/bullets however the FPE being shot and the BC I wouldn't shoot them anywhere I wouldn't shoot my .22lr. Then at that point I think I'll just grab my .22lr if it were safe.

I agree. Our sport is getting close to going over the line. The alphabet snoops are watching.

 

[LONESTAR .25]

anything can be done .. you know it 'used to be' that stock-cars were meant to keep an affordable yet very competitive and enjoyable class of racing for the average guy .. are they 'better' now that they really arnt at an affordable level? .. sure they are, but what direction did the once enjoyable sport go? .. i can throw thousands at anything at all and 'improve' it, trust me .

It's like fishing with the newer technology like fish finders. Past 2 years forward facing sonar has had a huge impact on fish caught and some killed. Some pros have taken a stand to ban them and I agree. Love my down and side imagine, it's enough for me.