• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Buckshot penetration at extended distance

Thanks for this info. I'm still very new to shotguns and this has pushed me into wanting a low recoil shell for HD. My house is a 2 story built in 1901, it's large but tight. No long hallways. It's also very close to the house next-door, maybe about 2-3' in the most narrow spot. Anything 40 yards and beyond, I would have to be out in the streets shooting it up.
 
Glad to see you guys gettin in to this! I think anyone who has taken the step to purchase a firearm to keep in the home for HD/SD should ignore all the hype of any given load till they can pattern a handful of loads on their own at their own specific ranges.

FWIW, the mil-spec Winchester 00 is identical in all of its components to the Winchester Super X with the hull and casehead being the exceptions. Otherwise, the shotcup, gas seal and buffer are all the same. The Winchester Ranger seems to do a little better in the low recoil version.

I highly recommend firing the Fed FC loads, Hornady VersaTite, and Winchester Ranger side x side. May as well try the Super X too! Makes for a fun day and helps you the end user sort through hype, BS, and packaging to find what works best for YOU!!!

Honestly, if you can find Hornady TAP LE red box light magnums, (they use the VersaTite wad which is the same as the Fed FC) they're comparable in price to the Fed LE132 and still pattern decently. For me anyway, the pattern is more open than the FC but not wildly. Its good enough i t meets my personal criteria out to 10 yards and I keep it on hand.

Now, if you have your heart set on the FC, look up Kyles Gun Shop. He's actually here in cincy and I plan to visit soon, but to the point here, he has a good price on the Fed FC! ;)
 
My brother in law is getting ready to retire from the force. He has done it all, from homicide to SWAT. He seemed very excited when I showed him my gun the other day.
Anyway... He side we can set up a range so we can shoot and I'll be able to learn from a person that has years of training.
I have a bunch of goods left over from some remodeling. Plan to set up a few walls in the next couple of weeks. I'll do some shell reports when I do :)
 
Rossignol said:
This was 25 yards. The FC low recoil lacked the energy to penetrate the target fully.

I'd like to try the full power version of the FC and put it up against the Hornady VersaTite full power.
Click to expand...

I re-watched that video. (You have some first-rate videos, by the way.) Was the drywall backing just one layer...or two...and was it backed up by plywood or something? I'm amazed that the LE-132 failed to punch through that drywall at only 25 yards. That's just pitiful.

Thanks so much for all the work you've done on this really important subject. Please advise when you test the LE-127 and the full-power VersaTite. As you've noted, the LE-127 is actually a 'reduced recoil' load, compared to the Hornady.
 
Nice video Rossi. I find this interesting not only from a HD perspective but also a hunting perspective. If the pellets won't penetrate a couple of sheets of drywall at 25 yards how effective are they on a deer? I've never been a big fan of buck but I was surprised that it did not penetrate more at that distence.
 
Thanks, I really appreciate the kind words!

That was a single layer of drywall (1/2") and 3/4" plywood.

Yeah man, I'm hopin to be able to get some of the fuller power LE127 soon!
 
Federal's Premium line PFC-154 is the same as the LE-127 load, up to and including the "Flite Control" cup. Just a different colored hull.

If I recall correctly, you ID'd a Premium line load that duplicates the low-recoil LE-132. That might help some of our members to know that, Brad.
 
Rossignol said:
That was a single layer of drywall (1/2") and 3/4" plywood.
Click to expand...

Thanks...I was curious.

The LE-132 may be a better load for indoors than I was thinking...I just wouldn't want to use it at much more than bayonet-range. Which, in fairness, encompasses most SD shootings, including police-action shootings. Not that that's a good idea...in fact, we try to train our shooters to open up the distance and not get so darn close to people. But that's assuming you have, or can force, a choice for yourself.

Sometimes we don't control events. Sometimes they control us. That's why we reach for a shotgun: To conclusively dominate a homicidal attacker at what would normally be handgun distances, or a bit beyond.
 
Right, and I agree with your perspective.

Ideally you want to keep some distance between your self and the threat but things can close fast and the 21 foot rule comes to mind. The Fed FC fits here and fills its role for HD/SD, but here's something I've been pondering for some time;

Rather than such a precision load at close ranges like the Fed FC, would it be better to have a slightly or somewhat more open pattern like what I've seen from Hornady full power VersaTite, to gain benefit from each of the .30 cal pellets, each causing its own wound tract and temporary cavity?

What does your experience say here?
 
In a weapon dedicated to home defense, I personally would much prefer a buckshot load that has faster downrange dispersion of the pattern. The reason being is that, as we've talked about previously here, your target very likely ain't gonna stand stock still, like a B-27 silhouette, and let you shoot him. Very likely when he sees your weapon, he's going to go in motion, either to flee you, or flank you. One case can be okay...but in the other instance you'd do well to down him before he makes it to cover.

The tight patterns of the Flite Control buckshot loads at short range deny you any real downrange dispersion and, for all practical intents and purposes, you just as well use a rifled slug. In a HD scenario, we'll all have measured off the longest shot we'd likely have to make, and that can give you a big edge in ammo selection. The somewhat larger dispersion of non-FC buckshot loads makes it easier to hit targets that have gone in motion, especially lateral motion, like when he's trying to flank you. An HD shooter can check the downrange dispersion of various loads from the choke in his individual shotgun so he'll know precisely what he's dealing with.

It all varies, depending on the shooting distances and angles in and around your homestead...and, of course, your skill level. The idea behind the Flite Control buckshot loads was originally to stretch the effective range of buckshot by a few more yards, for those numerous police agencies who mandated buckshot-only for their officers' shotguns. Police-action shootings are more haphazard, while home defense is often a more easily defined proposition. Low-recoil FC buckshot loads, with their reduced velocity, can certainly be relied on to not over-penetrate on a torso hit at across-the-room distances...but the same can be said about non-FC full-power #1 and 0-buckshot.
 
Thanks for the link, Br'er Tom. I looked through that thread again. Lots of good input. I don't think anyone mentioned the problem of hitting people once they go in motion, and the things we can do to give ourselves an edge.
 
My question here pertains more to the possibility of each pellet creating its own wound tract and temporary cavity rather than every pellet hitting one area.

Ballistic gel data can be somewhat inconclusive just due to the variables associated with the medium. There's an awful lot not taken into account that can affect results and outcome.

Not so much that I want to rehash or debate shot vs. precision as much as stay on point within this topic. More within the confines of apples to apples to apples if you will.

Beyond what is to be gained by having the pattern open up somewhat pertaing to targt acquisition, what can potentially be gained or lost in a loads abilty to stop a threat. Does each pellet creating its own wound, " let air in, let blood out" stand valid here?

I keep both low recoil FC and full power VersaTite on hand.
 
Rossignol said:
My question here pertains more to the possibility of each pellet creating its own wound tract and temporary cavity rather than every pellet hitting one area.

Beyond what is to be gained by having the pattern open up somewhat pertaing to targt acquisition, what can potentially be gained or lost in a loads abilty to stop a threat. Does each pellet creating its own wound, " let air in, let blood out" stand valid here?
Click to expand...

Sorry it took so long to answer, but I wanted to get the best info I could. I contacted a longtime friend, now retired, who is the professor emeritus of the forensic pathology program here at I.U. School of Medicine. I attended a lot of autopsies with him over the years.

He told me it is very difficult for a well-equipped, well-appointed ER trauma team to effectively handle more than about two separate gunshot wounds (GSW) in the same torso at the same time. Additional separate gunshot wounds, he told me, make it difficult for even the most skilled medical personnel...but if the additional gunshots are also in the patient's torso then the prognosis isn't good. But...you weren't talking about making things hard for the ER doctors.

The effectiveness of the buckshot-loaded shotgun centers on the multiple wounds tracks it causes through the vital area of the mid-to-upper chest. There is about a 95% plus certainty that one or more of those wound tracks will end up in the heart, or the other major blood bearing vessels of the upper body, and/or strike the upper spine. The heart goes into overdrive under stress, which (once it...or nearby major vessels...have been perforated by a GSW) only serves to accelerate the loss of blood and a fatal drop in blood pressure. That's what causes the target to collapse in short order, and even more quickly if the upper spine is struck.

The challenge, as ever, is to get as many deep-penetrating pellets from the buckshot column into the vital area of the mid-to-upper chest as possible so the vital area is thoroughly saturated. It isn't a matter of "letting in air", or "letting out blood" in the form of external bleeding. Those factors have little, if anything to do over the few seconds of time that decide who wins, and who loses, the gunfight. Most often is it high-volume internal blood loss that does the job.

Seems like it would behoove each of us to take the time needed to learn how our individual shotguns pattern at various distances, and learn the limitations of each weapon.
 
Your last statement, very well said.

As always, thank you for the info and goin the distance with your homework to be thorough in your response!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top