# steel shot penetration table



## krazybronco2 (Aug 6, 2014)

this was copied from a different forum but thought it was some very useful information for us duck hunters but these calculations were done at 59deg F and at sea level so during duck season when it is 32deg F and at sea level (most likely higher elevation) your penetration will be slightly lower due to denser air but pretty darn close.


----------



## steelshotslayer (Aug 6, 2014)

Looks like you roughly lose between one and two tenths of an inch for  between each velocity.  From what I see if the calculations are correct looks liek #3 at 1550 is probably the most efficient load lethal out to 50 yards and the most pellets.


----------



## strutlife (Aug 6, 2014)

What this doesn't tell you is what guage, what inch shell, what length barrel, if forcing cone was lengthened, was gun backbored, polished barrel, if barrel was ported or not and also if choke was ported or not. All of these things can play a huge part in ballistic test. I don't know all there is to know about guns and probly never will. However, this does give you a great overview of performance. Thanks for posting.


----------



## steelshotslayer (Aug 6, 2014)

strutlife said:


> What this doesn't tell you is what guage, what inch shell, what length barrel, if forcing cone was lengthened, was gun backbored, polished barrel, if barrel was ported or not and also if choke was ported or not. All of these things can play a huge part in ballistic test. I don't know all there is to know about guns and probly never will. However, this does give you a great overview of performance. Thanks for posting.



Why ya gotta get techinical HAHAAHA


----------



## rnelson5 (Aug 6, 2014)

What about powder load?


----------



## krazybronco2 (Aug 7, 2014)

strutlife said:


> What this doesn't tell you is what guage, what inch shell, what length barrel, if forcing cone was lengthened, was gun backbored, polished barrel, if barrel was ported or not and also if choke was ported or not. All of these things can play a huge part in ballistic test. I don't know all there is to know about guns and probly never will. However, this does give you a great overview of performance. Thanks for posting.



not really this table is specifally for after the shot leaves the barrel where the only thing acting on the shot is the environment


----------



## king killer delete (Aug 7, 2014)

Well i am going to be at sea level


----------



## thompsonsz71 (Aug 7, 2014)

Ben we gonna test those 3s this week?


----------



## krazybronco2 (Aug 7, 2014)

thompsonsz71 said:


> Ben we gonna test those 3s this week?



suppose to get those chokes from my buddy today if not i still want to pattern a little bit.


----------



## strutlife (Aug 7, 2014)

Dustin, let me know how those 3's work out. I'm curious myself. Might be interesting on the outcome. Might be a very good thing.


----------



## strutlife (Aug 7, 2014)

I know all too well how the environment/atmospheric conditions affects things. I was a Sound Engineer for a band for 5 years. Temp, humidity, barometric pressure and all sorts of other environmental things affect it. We did sound check at 4:30. Starting playing at approx 5:15. Nothing I did on the soundboard, or equalizer rack could make em sound like what I was wanting to hear. With that said, I just settled for the best. Around 7 o'clock, all conditions changed and the sound cleared up. It started at the point in the beginning people were complaining. So, therefore, I had to school them on environmental and atmospheric conditions. Once the sun started going down, it was spot on.


----------



## Headsortails (Aug 8, 2014)

Kinda puts a hole in the "speed kills" theory.


----------



## The Flying Duckman (Aug 9, 2014)

steelshotslayer said:


> Looks like you roughly lose between one and two tenths of an inch for  between each velocity.  From what I see if the calculations are correct looks liek #3 at 1550 is probably the most efficient load lethal out to 50 yards and the most pellets.



Not true on the pellet count.  More than likely the #3 1550 is a 1-1/8 oz load which will mean that the average pellet count will be approx. 178.  The 1400 load will more than likely be a 1-1/4 oz load and will have an average pellet count of 197, which is a 10-1/2% increase in pellets.  Given the increased pellet count (chances of a kill) I would tend to lean toward the #3 1400 for my choice.


----------



## The Flying Duckman (Aug 9, 2014)

Here is a pellet count chart.
http://www.supertrav.com/pelletcount1.html


----------



## thompsonsz71 (Aug 10, 2014)

The 1550 is a 1 3/16 oz load


----------



## The Flying Duckman (Aug 11, 2014)

thompsonsz71 said:


> The 1550 is a 1 3/16 oz load



I seen on another post on here that you guys were patterning this load.  But I don't think that is what the chart at the top of this post is refering to.  If it is, I apologize for my assumption.  However; KB said that he pulled this chart from another forum, and I am pretty sure that they are refering to factory loads.  That is why I posted the link to shot chart.


----------



## krazybronco2 (Aug 11, 2014)

The Flying Duckman said:


> I seen on another post on here that you guys were patterning this load.  But I don't think that is what the chart at the top of this post is refering to.  If it is, I apologize for my assumption.  However; KB said that he pulled this chart from another forum, and I am pretty sure that they are refering to factory loads.  That is why I posted the link to shot chart.



this chart was to help anyone start to understand a little bit more about what they are shooting and can get a rough idea of distances that you might be able to take a bird. alot goes into actually getting that bird to drop.


----------



## The Flying Duckman (Aug 11, 2014)

krazybronco2 said:


> this chart was to help anyone start to understand a little bit more about what they are shooting and can get a rough idea of distances that you might be able to take a bird. alot goes into actually getting that bird to drop.



Agreed! That's why I posted the link to the shot chart.  Not trying to steal your thread or be argumenative.  Just adding data to support the chart.


----------



## thompsonsz71 (Aug 11, 2014)

^ my bad! Haha .... Thought you were referring to what we were testing!


----------



## The Flying Duckman (Aug 11, 2014)

thompsonsz71 said:


> ^ my bad! Haha .... Thought you were referring to what we were testing!



No problem man. Like I said, not trying tobe argumenative, it was just the data didn't match up, that's all.  Some on here don't know about these charts.


----------



## thompsonsz71 (Aug 11, 2014)

The load Ben worked up is gonna be a good one if you ask me.... Also the screamin 2 3/4 load he's workin on might be a hit too


----------



## krazybronco2 (Aug 11, 2014)

The Flying Duckman said:


> Agreed! That's why I posted the link to the shot chart.  Not trying to steal your thread or be argumenative.  Just adding data to support the chart.



no that is good info i think everyone should learn what their shells do and learn more about what is in them.


----------



## patcavscout (Aug 14, 2014)

Thanks for posting this. Do you by chance have a link to the original post on the other forum? I'm kind of curious about if it mentions any of the other variables such as barrel length, shot size, and brand/shot type (hevi-shot,steel, bismuth, etc.) Also I find it curious that there is no #2 or #4 shot size tested.


----------



## krazybronco2 (Aug 14, 2014)

patcavscout said:


> Thanks for posting this. Do you by chance have a link to the original post on the other forum? I'm kind of curious about if it mentions any of the other variables such as barrel length, shot size, and brand/shot type (hevi-shot,steel, bismuth, etc.) Also I find it curious that there is no #2 or #4 shot size tested.



no mention of #2 or #4 if i remember correctly but not hard to get a decent average for #2 or #4 but i will see if i can find that post.


----------

