Do you expect your Pellet gun to shoot Slugs?

.........
I got lucky 1 1/2 years ago with my .22 Red Wolf HP and it shot lights out with the first slug I tried, the .217 JSB KO. Other guns not so lucky and some just won’t shoot slugs of any kind. 
But it seems as slugs become more popular shooters are complaining more and more that their Pellet gun doesn’t shoot Slugs. 

.........

Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly. A pellet gun that shoots slugs (well) involves a lot of luck, some deep ties to an airgun manufacturer (and an accompanying YouTube channel), or flat out dishonesty. I started a topic a few months ago asking for typical slug groups at 100 yards. Some showed some of their cherry picked stuff, but I got the very distinct feeling that this slug insanity is a bit emperors new clothes-esque (nobody willing to stick their neck out and call bull-poop on the "slugs are better" argument). In fact, I started another discussion questioning how come we aren't seeing markedly better scores from the slug shooters in the Extreme Field Target events (out to 100 yards and up to 100 fpe). If slugs are the shiz-nit, how come they can't outscore us poor guys shooting pellets? 

In fact, quite appropriate timing to pose this question as I finally had a chance to test 3 more types of slugs in my long ranger just this weekend, and........no go. And, mind you, this is a gun that I had a new barrel machined for, a 12 land/groove UNCHOKED LW. The 3 slugs I tested yesterday gets the grand total up to around 12 or so, and none of them have shot as well as the 25.4gr MRDs. And I'm talking 100 yard accuracy here, not the shooting a slug at 30 yards sillyness. The "common knowledge" knocked around the forums is that unchoked does better with slugs, but not in the case of this gun. Really I think that is the gist of your post/peoples frustration with slugs-ubiquitous claims that are simply passed on, but never confirmed by the passer-on'er. 

For the detail-interested....the gun I mention above is a Taipan Veteran Long that was purchased specifically as a long range/high BC gun for Extreme Field Target and long range pdog popping. The OEM barrel was superb....with JSB 18s, and nothing else. I needed something with a higher BC, either the MRDs, or perhaps even a slug. The ensuing experiment was a rebarrel with an unchoked LW blank. The emphasis on the unchoked being that the OEM barrel was severely overchoked and hated heavy/high BC .22 projectiles (slug or pellet). So the logic was that an unchoked barrel might do better with the MRDs, and maybe even a slug. Well so far I'm 12 varieties (various brands and different configurations of weight/diameter/design) of slug deep and every one has the same problem Steve123 mentioned: 2 or 3 or even four into a kinda decent group, and then 1 or 2 that simply don't go where they should. And the errant shots can not explained (excused) away by wind, or flinching during trigger break, or etc etc etc. If this particular gun didn't shoot the MRDs so unbelievably well, I'd be pretty pissed. 

And the above scenario is just with one gun. I'm privileged to get to shoot a lot of high quality guns; my own, review guns, and friend's guns. A pellet gun that shoots slugs better than pellets is a rare bird. I can think of two that have come through my hands (out of a relative many) that shot slugs quite well. A .22 Red Wolf Standard with GCU2 board (review gun) did really good with the 0.216, 20.2 grain NSAs. And a .177 Brocock Concept Elite (I own this one) does really good with 12.5gr NSAs. Those particular stand-outs still have/had a pellet that shot better than the slug that the gun did/does pretty well with. Every other gun that I have touched did or does MUCH worse with slugs than pellets. 

The claims of ANY airgun shooting MOA @ 100 yards CONSISTENTLY, with slugs or pellets, gets taken with more than a grain of salt from me. Even more so when the claimer is wearing his birthday suit and strutting around like a peacock. 

"The claims of ANY airgun shooting MOA @ 100 yards CONSISTENTLY, with slugs or pellets, gets taken with more than a grain of salt from me. Even more so when the claimer is wearing his birthday suit and strutting around like a peacock."

Sure seems extremely open minded. I especially like that second, purely scientific part. But, any individual can determine for themselves what "gets taken" by them.

Mod Edit: derogatory or inflammatory comments deleted per forum rules. 

But I bet sorensd might disagree.

"The claims of ANY airgun shooting MOA @ 100 yards CONSISTENTLY, with slugs or pellets, gets taken with more than a grain of salt from me. Even more so when the claimer is wearing his birthday suit and strutting around like a peacock."

Sure seems extremely open minded. I especially like that second, purely scientific part. But, any individual can determine for themselves what "gets taken" by them.

Mod Edit: derogatory or inflammatory comments deleted per forum rules. 

But I bet sorensd might disagree.

Click to expand...

I figured all caps on the word "CONSISTENTLY" would be sufficient, but it seems you missed it. 

Or maybe we have different ideas of what that word means. To me, in this context, I'm meaning more often than not, or, the majority of the time. 

So, again, show me a guy claiming to shoot groups of a reasonable # (say 5 shots since that seems to be the standard most shoot?) @100 yards, MOA or better, with an airgun- (slugs or pellets) most of the time (or "CONSISTENTLY") and I'll show you a liar.

I've seen sorends results. Cool guy, talented shooter, accurate gun. But I'll be raising an eyebrow if he tells us MOST of his long range groups are moa. 

Just talking about realistic expectations here-not trying to have a fight. 

"and I'll show you a liar." "Just talking about realistic expectations here-not trying to have a fight."

There you go. Everyone can have an opinion.

"The claims of ANY airgun shooting MOA @ 100 yards CONSISTENTLY, with slugs or pellets, gets taken with more than a grain of salt from me. Even more so when the claimer is wearing his birthday suit and strutting around like a peacock."

Sure seems extremely open minded. I especially like that second, purely scientific part. But, any individual can determine for themselves what "gets taken" by them.

Mod Edit: derogatory or inflammatory comments deleted per forum rules. 

But I bet sorensd might disagree.

Click to expand...

I figured all caps on the word "CONSISTENTLY" would be sufficient, but it seems you missed it. 

Or maybe we have different ideas of what that word means. To me, in this context, I'm meaning more often than not, or, the majority of the time. 

So, again, show me a guy claiming to shoot groups of a reasonable # (say 5 shots since that seems to be the standard most shoot?) @100 yards, MOA or better, with an airgun- (slugs or pellets) most of the time (or "CONSISTENTLY") and I'll show you a liar.

I've seen sorends results. Cool guy, talented shooter, accurate gun. But I'll be raising an eyebrow if he tells us MOST of his long range groups are moa. 

Just talking about realistic expectations here-not trying to have a fight.

Click to expand...

I think Mike N is there in consistency already with slugs, or almost so. IMHO the test would have to be done in a indoor test facility designed for that purpose of testing precision like the Lapua test facility has because of wind fooling with the vertical and horizontal when shooting outdoors, and not done in a indoor range like what Bobby used in his pellet testing because there were odd wind currents in there from HVAC. As good a shot as Mike N is, it's hard to shoot inside an inch outdoors at 100Y. Much harder for most of the rest of us.

I didn't post this earlier like I wanted too but here are some more thoughts I came up with....

The industry is still in it's infancy when it comes to slugs in airguns whereas with pellets the industry is taken about as far as it can be.

Then there's the aspect of ammo. Swaged vs cast slugs, quality control, and a balanced projectile lacking odd flight characteristics. I'd be willing to bet that some designs are not optimal for most airguns yet and that are commonly sold at this time. Over time things will improve.

Let's back up a bit here. If there are big flyers with slugs then something is wrong somewhere right?! That could come from a bunch of things. I'm imagining the work involved in trying to locate just one problem but there's likely more than one problem happening simultaneously. Here's some things that come to my mind and I'm not even a gunsmith or involved in the industry - poor or inconsistent quality of, ammo, barrels, twist rates not correct, rifling profiles too intrusive, chambers not centered or not designed right, bad crowns, bad tunes, and or guns simply not capable of producing the amount of precision expected, and not using a lube, vs using a lube, and types of lubes used on slugs. More things?!

I think it's amazing that some of these rifles shoot slugs as well as they do considering what they are, even with flyers?!

What do we expect, and this is not aimed at anybody in particular??? With flyers, Is 2 moa good, 1.5 moa, 1 moa, or .5 moa??? The amount of precision expected certainly has a bearing on what is considered a flyer, I'd certainly take a .5 moa gun with flyers opening up a group to 1 moa, oh heck yeah I would!!!!. I'd be plenty happy with an airgun and ammo combo that shot sub 1.2 moa in the calm outdoors, that might mean that most groups would be 1"-ish, and some less than an inch. It's hard to expect 1 moa at 100Y all day long outdoors even with the best rimfires and rest systems. Just putting this out there - It's not easy to do .75 moa all the time with my 6mmBR off a bipod and rear bag shooting on the ground prone, I still get the occasional 1" group at 100Y trying as I may not too.

IMHO, too me it's no more than getting "everything" correct "or optimized", to get the right slug shooting well without those big flyers in a airgun. But all it takes is one thing in the system that can cause problems that in turn cause big flyers.

I know that for me if a gun is not capable of less than 2" vertical at 100Y 99% the time, either with pellets or slugs, no matter the cause, then it's not a gun I want, that is if my intent is to shoot that far with it.

Cole, concerning EFT, it's much easier for me to get higher scores with my match 22rf using great ammo in that event than it is with airguns using pellets, most of that is the .172BC going 1060 fps, wind guessing isn't near as critical. With mass produced slugs in the BC of .070 to .1 range, the 1.5 moa, or more - precision, and the POI shifts, I think these all play a part in why we don't see better results. Later this year when I get SURELY's slug barrel I should be square in-between what a great rimfire does and what a great airgun does with pellets. I say "should" because I'm expecting approx 1 moa, a 1.2BC, and 860 fps. This fall or winter I'll try it on the course after the match to see since these won't be mass produced. 

Now if we can get .2 BC slugs going right below 100 fpe, and in the 1 moa precision range, lacking any POI shifts, we'd really see a difference in scores!!! We know the distances so even if such a slug is only going 750 fps it's going to have .3 mil less windage than a standard velocity 22rf in a 10 mph full value wind at 100Y. 

I think there is one thing the airgun industry is lacking that the firearms industry wouldn't put up with - STANDARDS.

Unless there are slug standards it will always be a gamble. Even NSA which is on top of its game right now will obsolete some slugs weights and bring in others - I assume the newer ones are generally better - but by what measure? There's no standard to compare it to.

If anybody can do it, it's Mike N. 

As good of a shooter as Mike is, and as tenaciously as he seems to attack a problem, I'll still be thoroughly impressed if he tells us that the MAJORITY of the groups he's shooting out to 100 yards are sub moa, even with his special slugs and custom mystery barrels. (He's one of very few that I would believe if he were to make that claim.) 

Excellent post that seems to be well reasoned. You note "lots of factors" that COULD be affecting the performance of slugs at this point-I believe that is absolutely true and that is why absolute statements about such shooting are off base. I noted a specific example above, with the seating of 12.5 grain slugs well into the rifling of my Condor (pellets were loose to the point of falling out without seating with a dedicated seating tool) dramatically reducing the number of fliers and distance missed with any fliers that did occur from that rifle. I think yaw of that very short pellet in the leade and into the breech rifling may be related (possibly helped by the deep seating???), and I also think the deep seating PROBABLY eliminated blow-by (or most of it) from the loose fitting slug and thereby improved velocity consistency? Maybe a longer but more "hollow" slug to lower the weight might be a possibility, if lighter weight in a slug is desired for some shooters? Lots of possibilities, few absolute answers, IMO.

I had noted above (removed) that one poster said he believes it's necessary to "build a slug gun" in order to shoot slugs accurately while another said he did build a slug gun and still said he couldn't find a way to shoot accurately with slugs while still others have production rifles (sometimes multiple rifles) that shoot slugs comparably well in comparison to pellets. Few absolutes, most things relative. As usual, IMO.

I have personally gone through dozens of molds and dozens of rifles and of all the testing , rebarrel jobs , and tuning from mild to wild , regulated and non regulated . I have two rifles , that will shoot sub MOA consistently . One is a .257 caliber modified Discovery and the other is an Evanix Windy City . Believe me when I say pellet guns and their barrels are not designed to shoot slugs sub MOA. Twist rates are all over the place , land and grove dimensions are even worse even from the same manufacturer. And let’s not forget , proper sizing , lead mixture with either tin or antimony to put into the mix. Now the two rifles I have listed , the Evanix will still shoot pellets as well as it did in factory form with the choke removed from the factory supplied barrel. ( pure magic) the .257 is well exactly that , a one off rifle that only shoots two bullets well and only one of the bullets at sub MOA . My Impact can’t , the HW100 can’t , the old Daystate can’t , the other Evanix can’t , the other disco can’t , the Hatsan can’t and the list goes on. I’ve been chasing my tail for the last 6 years and been loving every minute of it. When you find one rifle that just gets the job done with the slug you want to shoot , poor some lock tight on the adjustment screws and don’t ever touch it again. 

Maybe a longer but more "hollow" slug to lower the weight might be a possibility, if lighter weight in a slug is desired for some shooters? Lots of possibilities, few absolute answers, IMO.

I had noted above (removed) that one poster said he believes it's necessary to "build a slug gun" in order to shoot slugs accurately while another said he did build a slug gun and still said he couldn't find a way to shoot accurately with slugs while still others have production rifles (sometimes multiple rifles) that shoot slugs comparably well in comparison to pellets. Few absolutes, most things relative. As usual, IMO.

Click to expand...

Two of the three that I just tested this weekend were of this design, not necessarily out of a desire for lower weight though. They are Griffins, with such a hollow base that they are nearly pellet skirts-almost like an FX slug, but in reverse, with the hollow being in back not in front. My thoughts were that an essentially skirted slug might shoot well since a skirted pellet does. You know, obturation and such. I will add here though, that those hollow based Griffins shot really quite good, and maybe that's where the "relative" that you point out comes in. For some, 10 shot, 1.25 inch groups at 55 yards might be acceptable. But when the same gun can occasionally put ten into a group the size of my thumnail and regularly put 10 into 3/4 of an inch with pellets, well, I'll be sticking with the pellets. 

And we haven't even touched on another negative that I've come across in my personal testing of slugs. The slug that has shot the best out of this gun are the 20.2gr NSAs. But for some inexplicable reason they required double the hold off as the MRDs at 100 yards. And that weird little finding was repeatable. There's one of those many variables that Steve123 listed at play there but no way to know which or to isolate it. Is this particular slug just too short to take advantage of that supposed higher BC? Or as was suggested elsewhere, these shorties are hard to get seated in the bore perfectly concentrically, so they're starting out down the tube a little off-centered? Who knows.

As Hobbyman2007 attested to, shooting slugs accurately isn't like buying a .22 cal airgun and a tin of JSB 18.13s and getting them to go where you want. Lots more to it. Assuming similar slug experiences to what I've personally seen.....if I came into the airgun hobby now and saw all the slug hype and bought an Impact (sticking with the "hype" theme here) and x slug, I wouldn't stick around long. Slugs, the majority of the time (man that statistically significant "majority" word keeps popping up) are a frustrating endeavor, unless you're okay with so-so accuracy. I'm not saying slugs can't shoot well, just that it's not been an easy road in my personal experience. 

Some like to share cherry picked groups and perhaps even tell themselves that is how their gun CONSISTENTLY shoots, and maybe I'm too pragmatic, but, like mentioned earlier, reality is a cruel bitch. 

Seems this conversation depends on whose view of "reality" one wants to accept. You note Hobbyman2007, just as I've noted others. Plenty of views on each side can be read above. THAT is the all relative. I'll go with the "others" for my "reality" because it aligns with what I've seen myself. YMMV.

Thought about this for 15 or 20 minutes and this is easy guys.

Download and print some of Centercut's EBR challenges. 

https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/ebr-target-challenge/?referrer=1

Shoot it, at 100 yards (5 shots per group).

3 of the 5 groups need to have all 5 shots under 1 inch for your gun to shoot slugs @ moa the majority of the time, like this. (and that's a slim "majority")



In other words, three of your 5 shot groups need to have all shots slightly better than 9's. 

Good luck.

(reality)

You must have forgotten. Here ya go. It's all relative.

Mod edit : derogatory comment removed per forum rules

At least you've got the "relative" part down now.

Thought about this for 15 or 20 minutes and this is easy guys.

Download and print some of Centercut's EBR challenges. 

https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/ebr-target-challenge/?referrer=1

Shoot it, at 100 yards (5 shots per group).

3 of the 5 groups need to have all 5 shots under 1 inch for your gun to shoot slugs @ moa the majority of the time, like this. (and that's a slim "majority")

In other words, three of your 5 shot groups need to have all shots slightly better than 9's. 

Good luck.

(reality)

Click to expand...

Or how about a "head to head" "reality" test. Do what you note, but compare pellet to slug. And maybe try them at 125 yards, or 150 yards, since that seems to be the trend these days. Just looking for a little "consistency" in any comparison. But I'm sure you could produce PELLET groups at that range showing your criteria met that I wouldn'tconsider calling less than trustworthy (I won't say lie).

I did an informal count through this topic. Seems it is divided almost 50-50 in opinions on the issue. I guess some opinions are just more valid than others. Relatively speaking.