[mp510]

http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=377126

This looks like an interesting load- that sort of gives you a compromise between buck and slug. Anybody have any experience with it?

[armoredman]

Buck and ball, classic black powder musket load.

[Youngster]

Interesting.

I've shot handloads that I'm pretty sure approximated that setup {1 .65 ball, 6 x #1 buck} but I wasn't aware that they were available as factory loading. For what its worth I found these loads extremely impressive, with the caveat that the ball seemed to penetrates nearly as much as a slug and started to get erratic over 50 yards or so.

[Fred Fuller]

Sorta blows any ability to 'thread the needle' if necessary in a defensive situation. I'll stick to separate slugs and buckshot- and they're cheaper that way too.

lpl/nc

[Jorg]

I actually picked some of this up and put it in the "To be tested" pile. Unfortunately, I haven't been out for any "serious" shooting lately so it's still in the pile. Also, I paid about closer to $6 for a box of ten. If you want to try it out, you may wish to shop around.

[Dave Markowitz]

As armoredman noted, this is a modern version of the buck and ball load intended originally for flintlock muskets. Buck and ball was developed in order to improve hit probability in infantry engagements where both sides stood shoulder-to-shoulder. In modern scenarios it's neither fish nor fowl, IMO.

While the Centurion load will be effective if it hits, I'll stick with buckshot if I want a spread of projectiles or slugs if I want something more precise. A .65 caliber ball going down a .73 caliber bore is not going to give good accuracy, while the smaller pellets are going to wind up who knows where.

IMO, YMMV.