Smooth Bore Spin Stabilization? Rifled slugs?

[faustus]

Ok, I just felt like sharing this ....

So, it seems there is a bit of a controversy out there.

Are rifled slugs like the Brenneke or a rifled Foster slug more accurate because of spin stabilization? And to be honest ... after doing a lot of reading on the subject .... and after today's result I don't know any more ....

I have a cantilever Hastings Wadlock barrel ... and which has straight grooves ... and in order to prevent a projectile from spinning.

I tried slugs out of this barrel in the past ... but I never got good results ... and I thought it is because the slug can't rotate in the barrel .... and I gave up on that idea ... and in my mind ... that barrel was a shot or buckshot only barrel.

So, today ... just for the heck ... I tried some Federal TruBall slugs out of that barrel .... and to my surprise the grouping was really not bad.

Here the barrel with a red dot mounted:

220373

And here the result at 50 yards:

220374

Specs:
- 12ga Hastings Wadlock barrel
- Improved Cylinder Choke
- distance 50 yards/meters
- 2 to 2 1/2 inch group
- Federal 12ga TruBall slugs
- 3 shot group

With that result ... I am not sure any more what to think of rifled slugs spin stabilization ... :-(

I mean that barrel prevents a projectile from spinning while passing through the barrel ... So, if there is any spin stabilization happening ... it would happen after the slug left the barrel ... and that just seems .... hmmmmm ... lets say very unlikely ...

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Thoughts anyone?

[longbow]

I would have agreed not long ago and even Brenneke states that the helical ribs on their slugs does not cause any rotation. However... Taofladermaus has shot video of rifled slugs rotating in the air. The rotation is slow so certainly not fast enough for spin stabilization but enough to correct for extreme deviations in flight so instead of veering off one way the slug takes a spiral flight much like helical fletching on an arrow which keeps slightly bent shafts on a relatively true course.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRPo19DWlZY

But no, rifling on slugs does not cause rotation in the barrel. It is air drag in flight that causes rotation. I will disagree with Taofledermaus there! What would cause the slug to spin in the bore? If there was heavy fouling in the bore that might do it as the ribs cut fouling but with a slug pressing against the clean bore there is no rotational force, no drag or friction component to cause rotation.

Several factory rifled slugs have shot very well for me, so much so it is annoying that my home cast and loaded slugs generally do not perform as well. I believe a good portion of the problem is in the wad column. Factories can spec what they want and buy by the 10's of thousands so can be very consistent with loads and wad columns... and they are using new hulls.

Also, Federal Tru-Ball has a pretty good reputation for accuracy so you picked a good one to test.

I am not clear on exactly what wadlock barrels do because I find it hard to believe that a wad full of shot rotates in the barrel... what would cause rotation? Bore friction is high so whatever causes wad rotation has to work at it. Not saying that wadlock barrels don't improve patterns, they obviously do or they wouldn't exist but just how does that wad rotate without wadlock? Or maybe it is the tighter bore of wadlock barrels tightening patterns?

Longbow

[RMc]

After some searching, I located this 1991 DOJ/FBI Report which documents slow rotation as a contributing factor to rifled slug accuracy:


"The slight rotation imparted by the ribs reduces the effect of manufacturing irregularities. In tests performed by Winchester-Western, the slug rotation was confirmed, resulting in consistently smaller groups for rifled slugs than unrifled slugs…"

"The basic Foster slug, however, remains a
hollow lead cup, heavier at the point. It has 14
small angled ribs swaged into the side of the
slug. The rifling tends to be obliterated by the
passage of the slug through the barrel, especially
through a full choke. Some spin does result
from the ribs, however, and tests show a very
slow spin of approximately one turn in 24 feet
of travel to one turn in 129 feet of travel,
depending upon the choke used...

Neither Brenneke nor Foster slugs depend
upon the rifling ribs or projectile spin for stability.
The slugs are stable because they travel
through the air like a sand-filled sock with the
heavier toe forward (O'Connor 1965), unlike
symmetrical lead balls (Figure 3). The trailing
light end acts as a stabilizer. The slight rotation
imparted by the ribs reduces the effect of manufacturing
irregularities. In tests performed
by Winchester-Western, the slug rotation was
confirmed, resulting in consistently smaller
groups for rifled slugs than unrifled slugs
(Sterett 1966)."

Crime Laboratory, Digest April 1991 - Volume 18, No.2

Full report here:

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/132229NCJRS.pdf

What I find most interesting is the varying rate of spin noted for different amounts of choke constriction.

[Boomer81]

After some searching, I located this 1991 DOJ/FBI Report which documents slow rotation as a contributing factor to rifled slug accuracy:


"The slight rotation imparted by the ribs reduces the effect of manufacturing irregularities. In tests performed by Winchester-Western, the slug rotation was confirmed, resulting in consistently smaller groups for rifled slugs than unrifled slugs…"

"The basic Foster slug, however, remains a
hollow lead cup, heavier at the point. It has 14
small angled ribs swaged into the side of the
slug. The rifling tends to be obliterated by the
passage of the slug through the barrel, especially
through a full choke. Some spin does result
from the ribs, however, and tests show a very
slow spin of approximately one turn in 24 feet
of travel to one turn in 129 feet of travel,
depending upon the choke used...

Neither Brenneke nor Foster slugs depend
upon the rifling ribs or projectile spin for stability.
The slugs are stable because they travel
through the air like a sand-filled sock with the
heavier toe forward (O'Connor 1965), unlike
symmetrical lead balls (Figure 3). The trailing
light end acts as a stabilizer. The slight rotation
imparted by the ribs reduces the effect of manufacturing
irregularities. In tests performed
by Winchester-Western, the slug rotation was
confirmed, resulting in consistently smaller
groups for rifled slugs than unrifled slugs
(Sterett 1966)."

Crime Laboratory, Digest April 1991 - Volume 18, No.2

Full report here:

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/132229NCJRS.pdf

What I find most interesting is the varying rate of spin noted for different amounts of choke constriction.

The varying spin would, in my mind, be because as you get tighter and tighter choke, those helical lines grab harder and thus impose more spin on the slug (all be it very slightly in comparrison to a sabot out of a rifled barrel). Open choke = barely grabbing the rear fins. Full choke = tight grip thus imposing slightly more spin.

[Hogtamer]

Rmc and Longbow seem to have this right as usual. I would suspect that many of those soft lead "rifled"slugs down the bore would produce major leading of the barrel. Sure nice groups though, and yes, the trueball loads do have a good reputation for accuracy.

[GBertolet]

Is wadlock really intended for slugs? Just asking. I was under the impression it was to keep shotcups from rotating, allegedly preventing shot from dispersing more. Something like turkey hunters would use with fine shot for headshots on gobblers. Seems to work ok for slugs though.

[9.3X62AL]

Wadlock was marketed as a shotcup rotation preventer, meant for shot load dispersion control. Does the idea work? Dunno.

I have shot a BUNCH of 12 gauge Foster slugs over the years. My usual grouping with rifle-sighted Rem 870 barrels at 50 yards is in the 3"-4"/5-shot ballpark.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I don't think Longbow's or the FBI/DOJ's judgements would surprise anybody with a serious interest in the subject. A spirally grooved slug can indeed spin, but to an extent that can't possibly stabilise it.

Archers did indeed discover the benefits of spiral feather fletchings, to spin the arrow. But the reason for this being beneficial is quite different. An irregularly shaped arrow will deviate to one side. That will be a curved path, like a boat with the helm over, rather than straight-line, so it may worsen drastically at long range. If it spins, it will deviate to every direction in turn, and describe a corkscrew path, which might be the same at all ranges to which the arrow travelled. As long as the diameter of the spiral was smaller than, just for supposing's sake, a Frenchman, it could be perfectly satisfactory.

Almost certainly this inspired the first use of rifling, for the wrong reasons, just as cauterising a wound to give any entering devils a hard time could bring rather uncomfortable sterilisation. But that isn't gyroscopic stabilisation like a rifle bullet must have. If we take the length and diameter of an arrow, and any of the calculations of required twist developed in the firearms age, we could probably twist the arrow in two before achieving that.

The same could be said of the slow-spinning shotgun slug: deviation converted into a corkscrew path, rather than gyrostabilisation. The difference, though, is that it is difficult to bend a slug. A smooth and regular nose and skirt are probably just as good.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Wadlock was marketed as a shotcup rotation preventer, meant for shot load dispersion control. Does the idea work? Dunno.

I have shot a BUNCH of 12 gauge Foster slugs over the years. My usual grouping with rifle-sighted Rem 870 barrels at 50 yards is in the 3"-4"/5-shot ballpark.

This isn't unusual, with various types of slug. The trouble is that groups at 100, with any kind of smoothbore projectile, tend to be a lot more than twice as big.

I also think the slight spin a rifled slug can achieve arises in the air, and not from friction in the bore or choke.

[9.3X62AL]

This isn't unusual, with various types of slug. The trouble is that groups at 100, with any kind of smoothbore projectile, tend to be a lot more than twice as big.

I also think the slight spin a rifled slug can achieve arises in the air, and not from friction in the bore or choke.

I have seen similar outcomes past 50 yards. At 100 yards, most shots stay in the black on a B-27 target--with more than half inside the 8-ring. Our regimen largely said "Pick up the rifle" once engagement ranges exceeded 50 yards.

[bikerbeans]

Shotshells for Germans and arrows for the French. I don't care for your gun control laws but I like your hunting seasons.

BB

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Shotshells for Germans and arrows for the French. I don't care for your gun control laws but I like your hunting seasons.

BB

Well, my wife is German, and she has more non-antique shotguns than I do. I tend to think of Colonel Fremantle on the field of Gettysburg - although I've got his book, and he had neither red coat, teacup nor official position. Talking of civil war and the consequent beheadings, he says "of course we wouldn't dream of doing it nowadays."

[Blood Trail]

I would have agreed not long ago and even Brenneke states that the helical ribs on their slugs does not cause any rotation. However... Taofladermaus has shot video of rifled slugs rotating in the air. The rotation is slow so certainly not fast enough for spin stabilization but enough to correct for extreme deviations in flight so instead of veering off one way the slug takes a spiral flight much like helical fletching on an arrow which keeps slightly bent shafts on a relatively true course.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRPo19DWlZY

But no, rifling on slugs does not cause rotation in the barrel. It is air drag in flight that causes rotation. I will disagree with Taofledermaus there! What would cause the slug to spin in the bore? If there was heavy fouling in the bore that might do it as the ribs cut fouling but with a slug pressing against the clean bore there is no rotational force, no drag or friction component to cause rotation.

Several factory rifled slugs have shot very well for me, so much so it is annoying that my home cast and loaded slugs generally do not perform as well. I believe a good portion of the problem is in the wad column. Factories can spec what they want and buy by the 10's of thousands so can be very consistent with loads and wad columns... and they are using new hulls.

Also, Federal Tru-Ball has a pretty good reputation for accuracy so you picked a good one to test.

I am not clear on exactly what wadlock barrels do because I find it hard to believe that a wad full of shot rotates in the barrel... what would cause rotation? Bore friction is high so whatever causes wad rotation has to work at it. Not saying that wadlock barrels don't improve patterns, they obviously do or they wouldn't exist but just how does that wad rotate without wadlock? Or maybe it is the tighter bore of wadlock barrels tightening patterns?

Longbow

Jeff, the guy behind the camera and the brains of Taofledermous is a good friend of mine and a regular contributor on my Buck and Slug Reloading page on Facebook.

We went round and round on this issue. The rifling is all but swaged out once the slug leaves the barrel, so any rotation is incidental and don’t affect anything.

I went and dug up a report from the FBI ballistics lab that says rifling in foster slugs don’t cause any significant spin to affect accuracy. I’m going with that.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/132229NCJRS.pdf



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RMc]

After some searching, I located this 1991 DOJ/FBI Report which documents slow rotation as a contributing factor to rifled slug accuracy:


"The slight rotation imparted by the ribs reduces the effect of manufacturing irregularities. In tests performed by Winchester-Western, the slug rotation was confirmed, resulting in consistently smaller groups for rifled slugs than unrifled slugs…"

"The basic Foster slug, however, remains a
hollow lead cup, heavier at the point. It has 14
small angled ribs swaged into the side of the
slug. The rifling tends to be obliterated by the
passage of the slug through the barrel, especially
through a full choke. Some spin does result
from the ribs, however, and tests show a very
slow spin of approximately one turn in 24 feet
of travel to one turn in 129 feet of travel,
depending upon the choke used...

Neither Brenneke nor Foster slugs depend
upon the rifling ribs or projectile spin for stability.
The slugs are stable because they travel
through the air like a sand-filled sock with the
heavier toe forward (O'Connor 1965), unlike
symmetrical lead balls (Figure 3). The trailing
light end acts as a stabilizer. The slight rotation
imparted by the ribs reduces the effect of manufacturing
irregularities. In tests performed
by Winchester-Western, the slug rotation was
confirmed, resulting in consistently smaller
groups for rifled slugs than unrifled slugs
(Sterett 1966)."

Crime Laboratory, Digest April 1991 - Volume 18, No.2

Full report here:

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/132229NCJRS.pdf

What I find most interesting is the varying rate of spin noted for different amounts of choke constriction.


Jeff, the guy behind the camera and the brains of Taofledermous is a good friend of mine and a regular contributor on my Buck and Slug Reloading page on Facebook.

We went round and round on this issue. The rifling is all but swaged out once the slug leaves the barrel, so any rotation is incidental and don’t affect anything.

I went and dug up a report from the FBI ballistics lab that says rifling in foster slugs don’t cause any significant spin to affect accuracy. I’m going with that.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/132229NCJRS.pdf

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


A most interesting divergence of conclusions based on the same report!

[jeremy360]

Has anyone here made their own wedge or version of a tru-ball just to test accuracy (throwing economics out the window here of course)?

[longbow]

I think so but don't recall details. Corbin sells a variety of plastic balls and I think there was another source someone was at least suggesting for use. I know there was discussion but I don't recall if there were tests.

http://www.corbins.com/bball.htm

Yeah, looks like Corbin tops out 3/8" which would be too small.

These may work:

http://www.plasticballs.com/plastic-balls-polypropylene.html

or these:

http://www.hooverprecisionplastics.com/Plastic-Balls.html

I haven't taken any Tru-Ball rounds apart to measure slug diameter but have read that Federal increased Foster slug diameter to nominal bore size. If so the Tru-Ball wouldn't need to expand a lot... not like swelling a Lyman Foster up by 0.025" anyway.

If you have a Foster slug mould it is not a bad idea to try if you can find a plastic ball to fit the cavity. Not sure if there is any advantage over a slightly oversize slug that swages down but the Tru-Balls do seem to have a reputation for good accuracy.

Go for the gusto and give it a try Jeremy! Don't forget to post pics.

Longbow

[faustus]

A Federal TruBall taken apart .... it has a very solid wad and the ball that centers the slug ....


220650

220651

[Hogtamer]

Those photos are very revealing. Nothing special about the slug but !wow!what a wad. Solid column hard plastic for a straight launch and they obviously believed that centering the wad for a perfect launch is the key to accuracy. The ball being lower than the slug also promotes quick and uniform obturarion. We lowly home loaders can only drool at that.

[Blood Trail]

Those photos are very revealing. Nothing special about the slug but !wow!what a wad. Solid column hard plastic for a straight launch and they obviously believed that centering the wad for a perfect launch is the key to accuracy. The ball being lower than the slug also promotes quick and uniform obturarion. We lowly home loaders can only drool at that.

We’ll find a way.


What’s the diameter of that ball?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[faustus]

Ok, I just measured the ball with calipers ....

It is 0.4980 inches in diameter ...

And the wad is harder than any of my other wads ... it is even harder than the SPW/ Hammerhead Slug wad from slugsrus.com ...

Harder meaning ... I can't compress it with my fingers or when leaning on it with my body weight ... I can't deform it a bit with just finger pressure .... whereas all my other wads will deform to some extend ...

[RMc]

Those photos are very revealing. Nothing special about the slug but !wow!what a wad. Solid column hard plastic for a straight launch and they obviously believed that centering the wad for a perfect launch is the key to accuracy. The ball being lower than the slug also promotes quick and uniform obturarion. We lowly home loaders can only drool at that.

That said, I sometimes wonder when experimentation with seating "rifled slugs" on a thick bed of granulated plastic buffer, like Remington factory 20 gauge and .410 rifled slug loads, will begin?

[BAGTIC]

Notice that the Foster slugs have a solid raised ring around the base to help form a gas seal. This ring is going to prevent smooth air flow along the fins that might otherwise provide some spin. I suspect that if things were reversed and the ring was at the beginning of the fins airflow would be smoother and more effective.

Military experience with mortar bombs and other fin stabilized projectiles shows that fin stabilization is ineffective above the transonic speed range (+/- 1080-1280 fps) unless the fins project out into the airstream.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Those photos are very revealing. Nothing special about the slug but !wow!what a wad. Solid column hard plastic for a straight launch and they obviously believed that centering the wad for a perfect launch is the key to accuracy. The ball being lower than the slug also promotes quick and uniform obturarion. We lowly home loaders can only drool at that.

This subject comes up alot. This picture of the Federal Slug and wad shows something I have thought about but not talked about very much. keeping the projectile centered in the bore during firing. I consider this to be the primary factor in smooth bore accuracy. I think that ball is there to keep the skirt of the slug centered in the bore as well.

First: and I want to be clear about this as it is absolute fact. The Ribs on a shotgun slug are NOT there to rotate the slug. Their sole purpose is to keep the slug centered in the bore and collapse if ran thru a choke.

I asked this question at the Brenneke Booth at SHOT a few years ago and the person with Brenneke as his last name told me they get asked that question a hundred times a day. Since they invented the ribs I would say they are most knowledgeable about this topic.

Moving on.

As stated above,,, spinning one turn in 29-129 FEET! accomplishes nothing, and where as it might happen, it doesn't affect accuracy. Lets say the slug is rotating at 1 turn in 50 feet. That's 24 turns per second at 1200 FPS or 1440 RPM. So it might rotate 24 times before it hit a target 400 yards away,,,, or 3 times at 50 yards!. IE: pointless.

By comparison, a .30 cal bullet shot from a 1:12 twist barrel at 2700 fps is spinning at 162,000 RPM's! Many are twice that.

That is spin stabilization!

Now lets look at the other two projectiles. The Slug and the Ball. Assuming both of these projectiles are perfect,,, IE: a Perfect Sphere like a ball bearing, and a perfectly formed Slug, which we'll say was turned on a lathe so there are no casting imperfections.

Both of these projectiles are launched from a smooth bore and the only influence the barrel has is to accelerate the projectile to Muzzle Velocity.

I submit that the only things that would affect accuracy would be external forces(wind, atmospheric pressure, temperature) great enough to overcome the inertia of the projectile. Inertia keeps the projectile going in the same direction unless acted on by external forces.

In space where none of those external forces exist,,, the only thing affecting it's direction would be Gravity of a large entity, and if that were not present the projectile would continue in whatever direction it was headed and theoretically if you could launch many projectiles from the same gun they all should go thru the same hole. Incidentally Rail Guns are Reality and were are talking 15,000 fps! and the shape of the projectile doesn't matter in space. I guess you could compensate for gravity much the same as we do on earth.

Back on earth, if you eliminate all the external variables, we can narrow our hunt for accuracy down to the shape of the projectile and how consistently we can launch it.

With respect to the Round Ball, a ball bearing is as good as it gets. My .662 round balls cast from a Lyman mould are decent but they have a prominent Sprue on one side. Once that Sprue starts starts catching air it will affect the flight of the ball, and there is nothing anyone can do about that. However at the distances that ball will be shot. 25-75 yards, and maybe 100 max, it is probably capable of hitting a man sized target, and the results will be devastating.

Keep in mind that the round ball was the projectile of choice for the first 500 years of firearms. Reason being they were effective!

Shotgun slugs are a refined version of the round ball. Once again the key to accuracy lies in how consistently they are shaped and launched. Those Federal Wads look like a good way to do it.

I shot this 3 shot group offhand at 50 yards last week at Front Sight. The rectangle is 3x4" so that is a @2 1/2" group. Don't know if shooting off a rest would have improved the group so I will have to try and get back to you.

The Ammo was Federal Low Recoil Slugs, and I'd say if you could duplicate that level of performance with your home brewed ammo,,, you were pretty much as good as it gets.

Randy

[Cap'n Morgan]

I'm sure whatever spin is imparted on a Foster slug (or a Brenneke slug for that matter) is caused by the front of the fins where the airflow and air compression is greatest. The rear of the slug is pretty much travelling in a vacuum.

[RMc]

Large bore round ball rifles do not require fast rifling. How about 1 turn in 12 feet!

http://underhammers.blogspot.com/2011/09/forsyth-rifling-forgotten-magic.html

[Blood Trail]

This subject comes up alot. This picture of the Federal Slug and wad shows something I have thought about but not talked about very much. keeping the projectile centered in the bore during firing. I consider this to be the primary factor in smooth bore accuracy. I think that ball is there to keep the skirt of the slug centered in the bore as well.

First: and I want to be clear about this as it is absolute fact. The Ribs on a shotgun slug are NOT there to rotate the slug. Their sole purpose is to keep the slug centered in the bore and collapse if ran thru a choke.

I asked this question at the Brenneke Booth at SHOT a few years ago and the person with Brenneke as his last name told me they get asked that question a hundred times a day. Since they invented the ribs I would say they are most knowledgeable about this topic.

Moving on.

As stated above,,, spinning one turn in 29-129 FEET! accomplishes nothing, and where as it might happen, it doesn't affect accuracy. Lets say the slug is rotating at 1 turn in 50 feet. That's 24 turns per second at 1200 FPS or 1440 RPM. So it might rotate 24 times before it hit a target 400 yards away,,,, or 3 times at 50 yards!. IE: pointless.

By comparison, a .30 cal bullet shot from a 1:12 twist barrel at 2700 fps is spinning at 162,000 RPM's! Many are twice that.

That is spin stabilization!

Now lets look at the other two projectiles. The Slug and the Ball. Assuming both of these projectiles are perfect,,, IE: a Perfect Sphere like a ball bearing, and a perfectly formed Slug, which we'll say was turned on a lathe so there are no casting imperfections.

Both of these projectiles are launched from a smooth bore and the only influence the barrel has is to accelerate the projectile to Muzzle Velocity.

I submit that the only things that would affect accuracy would be external forces(wind, atmospheric pressure, temperature) great enough to overcome the inertia of the projectile. Inertia keeps the projectile going in the same direction unless acted on by external forces.

In space where none of those external forces exist,,, the only thing affecting it's direction would be Gravity of a large entity, and if that were not present the projectile would continue in whatever direction it was headed and theoretically if you could launch many projectiles from the same gun they all should go thru the same hole. Incidentally Rail Guns are Reality and were are talking 15,000 fps! and the shape of the projectile doesn't matter in space. I guess you could compensate for gravity much the same as we do on earth.

Back on earth, if you eliminate all the external variables, we can narrow our hunt for accuracy down to the shape of the projectile and how consistently we can launch it.

With respect to the Round Ball, a ball bearing is as good as it gets. My .662 round balls cast from a Lyman mould are decent but they have a prominent Sprue on one side. Once that Sprue starts starts catching air it will affect the flight of the ball, and there is nothing anyone can do about that. However at the distances that ball will be shot. 25-75 yards, and maybe 100 max, it is probably capable of hitting a man sized target, and the results will be devastating.

Keep in mind that the round ball was the projectile of choice for the first 500 years of firearms. Reason being they were effective!

Shotgun slugs are a refined version of the round ball. Once again the key to accuracy lies in how consistently they are shaped and launched. Those Federal Wads look like a good way to do it.

I shot this 3 shot group offhand at 50 yards last week at Front Sight. The rectangle is 3x4" so that is a @2 1/2" group. Don't know if shooting off a rest would have improved the group so I will have to try and get back to you.

The Ammo was Federal Low Recoil Slugs, and I'd say if you could duplicate that level of performance with your home brewed ammo,,, you were pretty much as good as it gets.

Randy

Not bad. Reminds me of my 75 yard group with 1 oz Lee key drives. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180521/4657fe11cf6fa3637a01aa51230e1f44.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[W.R.Buchanan]

Off a rest, or offhand? They do make big holes! At 75 yards that shows just how effective these slugs can be, and that gun could easily hit at 125-150 yards..

When you look at the Brown Bess Musket which was the main battle weapon of the British Army for close to 150 years, it is not hard to see that weapon being effective out to 200+ yards in volley fire and probably 150 yards on the unlucky individual recipient of a .75 cal round ball. Those guns were in use well into the 1800's and we have to look at why they were used for so long. Could it be they were really effective on both man and beast?

Those guns were the ancestors of our shotguns today. Our round balls are not a whole lot better than those shot 250 years ago, but they are just as effective. Our slugs aren't any better than a Minnie Ball, but we can fire more of them before we have to clean the gun so the major advancement was in Smokeless Powder over Black Powder.

Our ability to change loads quickly is one major advantage we have and lets face it we've got way more firepower. Still avoiding be hit by one of their balls would still be at the top of the list.

If any of you watched the Stars Series "Black Sails" about the Pirates of the Caribbean there was a scene showing a beach landing of the British Marines. The volume of fire put on that beach was scary and showed in no uncertain terms that they were a formidable force to repel. Also there was a lot of round balls going thru logs and other "cover" which was proving to be not too effective as a barrier.

My take away was that getting hit by a .75 caliber round ball, anywhere, was almost a death sentence. Whatever it hit was gone.

This show and my two trips to Front Sight has pretty much convinced me that a shotgun is a far more devastating weapon than any of my rifles in a under 150 yard conflict. My pistols have been relegated to the role of "fighting my way to my Shotgun!."

Randy

[centershot]

There's a lot of truth in what you've said here Randy, I'm pretty sure we all agree on the close range effectiveness of a shotgun! In an urban setting or in a home defense scenario the shotgun is a VERY effective combat weapon. Unfortunately it shares the same pitfall of the lever-action rifle, another excellent weapon in the above scenarios: You gotta' keep it fed! As you've pointed out, training is the key to that, not only for the skills of induced muscle memory but also figuring out your rig; How you gonna' carry your ammo, ENOUGH ammo to make the gun a viable weapon- How do you carry it when transitioning from vehicle to ground and vice versa - How to transition to pistol when needed? These questions, and others, are only sorted out by training under pressure. Probably the single biggest question for most guys is how to carry enough ammo. Let's face it, the size/weight ratio of 12 gauge to 5.56 ammo is about 1:3 and the carbine ammo comes in neat, handy little magazines, shotgun ammo doesn't. Still, with good training, we can neutralize some of the negatives.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Centershot: There are several ways to carry the ammo.

My Shotgun Belt which is a Lowes tool belt with two Competition Shell carriers (sold by Dillon) and a Dump bag is my current setup. I can hang a third one if needed but you can only have so much as it eventually will pull your pants down.

What I was doing during the massive fire drills was loading from the shell carriers, with a full box in the dump bag to replenish the shell carriers when time permitted. When I didn't have time to reload the shell carriers, I simply grabbed individual shells from the dump bag and port loaded using the technique they showed us for left handed shooters. It is the same 4 finger hold on the shell trapping the shell between your index and pinky finger and using the other two to push the shell into the port, just reversed for lefty's. see pic below.

The gun never comes off the shoulder for these operations. You load from underneath the gun, and You tilt the gun hard to the right to give yourself more room to hit the port with your left hand.

This all takes practice, and nobody was born knowing how to do it. There are also many variations of these techniques taught by different schools. I saw one guy who was spitting a shell into the port with his mouth, and he only fed the gun over the top because he thought it was faster.

You also need a shell carrier on the gun for Home Defense so you always have ammo on the gun. Don't get the plastic ones! Get a "Velcro" one ! as when it is empty all you do is rip it off and slap another one on. also there is no mods to your gun if you get the right Velcro one that just has a piece of Velcro tape stuck on the receiver.

I got mine from Browncoat Tactical and they are like $15 each. See pics.

This stuff is not that complicated, however if you don't know these techniques exist it can be pretty daunting to figure them out for yourself.

here's pics.

Randy

[centershot]

Randy, that belt is an ingenious rig, just goes to show what a little thought and imagination can do! When I'm out "shopping" I'm always looking for stuff that can be "other-purposed"!

[W.R.Buchanan]

Yeah,,, I think it was $12.95 and included a tool pouch which I think is in one of the garages never used.

The majority of my Range Bags are Lowes, Home Depot or HF Tool bags. I can't justify paying $100 for something I can make work, and will do the job just fine for $10-15. My first Lowes Tool Bag for my G35 was from 2006 and it is still in use, and in fact it went with me to FS last week.

I also like the LAPG Bail Out Bags which are usually $19.95 on sale. I use them for Range Bags and Pistol Carriers and Ammo Carriers. LAPG has some of the best bags made and the prices are ridiculous low. 3 day Backpacks from $29.95 and they are better made than Maxpedition or any of the high end makers which are 5x the price. I just got an email from London Bridge with all of their 3 day or School packs on sale,,, For $99.95! They are not even half as nice as the LAPG bags which are 1/3 the price. I don't care that they are "Made in Vietnam," as I consider that to be better than "Made in China."

Anyway that's how I do it. YMMV fits here.

Randy

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Off a rest, or offhand? They do make big holes! At 75 yards that shows just how effective these slugs can be, and that gun could easily hit at 125-150 yards..

When you look at the Brown Bess Musket which was the main battle weapon of the British Army for close to 150 years, it is not hard to see that weapon being effective out to 200+ yards in volley fire and probably 150 yards on the unlucky individual recipient of a .75 cal round ball. Those guns were in use well into the 1800's and we have to look at why they were used for so long. Could it be they were really effective on both man and beast?

They were used because in conjunction with rigorously indoctrinated mechanical drill of the kind that remains fossilised on the paradeground, their speed of loading made their abysmal accuracy preferable, for ordinary infantrymen, to the advantages of the rifle. Frontiersmen and Indians probably used a tight-patched ball, but those of line infantrymen would be smaller, to cope with heavy fouling. They also didn't get to pick and choose their gun, at a time when even quality sporting guns weren't as well bored as they would become once the customer got to look through the barrels, and military issue ones were often very badly bored.

Firing a volley at a battalion of well-drilled men, discouraged by flogging of firing-squad from considering the good of their health, would kill few people. It would also be a disastrous invitation to march forward in good order, and fire at twenty yards or so, a volley about as dangerous as any firearm ever made. There was a famous incident at the battle of Fontenoy, when British officers invited the French to take the first shot. I don't know the distance, but most likely it was an attempt to see if they could be suckered. The reason for volleys was also good at that time. It minimised the time in which men would be firing blindly into the smoke.

I have the memoirs of Napoleon's chief of military surgery, Baron Larrey. As in the American Civil War, surgical facilities were sometimes overwhelmed by volume of cases in the big battles, but were far more advanced, when they had the chance, than the traditional rum and hacksaw image. The round ball was indeed very effective, if you could just get it to hit someone. But it didn't produce devitalised tissue which had to be removed, to nearly the extent a modern bullet does, and while it would break bones, it didn't shatter them in the way the Minié or early breech-loader bullets did.

I don't know if it was Lincoln who originated the term "twenty dollar words", a concept which, as a lawyer, must surely have made sense to him. But the word "tactical" seems to fetch a lot more than that nowadays.