30-06 and 12 Gauge Slug


PDA






huntinhound8
December 22, 2010, 12:31 AM
What will do more damage at ehhh 50 yards? 2 3/4" rifled slugs only.

If you enjoyed reading about "30-06 and 12 Gauge Slug" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
H&Hhunter
December 22, 2010, 12:49 AM
What will do more damage at ehhh 50 yards? 2 3/4" rifled slugs only.

Define "damage"?

huntinhound8
December 22, 2010, 12:51 AM
Damage...bigger exit wound. Things like that...

Xfire68
December 22, 2010, 12:55 AM
I think it would depend allot on what type of projectile the 30.06 was shooting as well?

The slug is bigger and weights more then any 30.06 bullet but, the 06 has speed on it's side?

If I were a deer I would not want to be hit by either or would I?:evil:

huntinhound8
December 22, 2010, 01:06 AM
30-06...Remington Core-Lokt 180 grain soft point

JDMorris
December 22, 2010, 01:12 AM
Why does it matter? either will efficiently take a deer as long as you place the shot well and use the correct ammunition, to want a bigger exit wound is a little sick...

huntinhound8
December 22, 2010, 01:14 AM
"to want a bigger exit wound is a little sick... " Just want general info...

janobles14
December 22, 2010, 01:23 AM
its gonna be a slug at 50 yards if you are taking into account exit wounds and pure shock factor as well as "simple ballistics."

a brenny at the muzzle is toting around 2900 ft/lbs at the muzzle and 1900 at 100 yds with a massive shock factor and exit wound at 50 yds.

a 180 grainer from the 06 is around 2900 at the muzzle and 2500 at 100 yds but may not expand so well at 50 yds. it also doesnt have the same wound channel capabilities at this distance.

ExtremeGunCare
December 22, 2010, 01:44 AM
Ah what a great question. Well look at what you're utilizing the caliber for. You said 50 yards. At this range a 12 gage rifle slug will produce a bigger exit than a 30.06.

I hunt in Missouri, ILL isn't too far from me and know many hunters utilizing the rifling 12 gage slugs for hunting. This year I personally Black Powder hunt all three gun seasons. The reason why I utilized the Black Powder is because I knew I would not be shooting over 100 yards where I hunt 90% of the time. By the way I am still deadly past 200 yards with Black Powder.

But in my care, I am in a dense cedar location where I am lucky to get over 60 yards. I had used in the past 25.06 and 308 but would get deflections from unseen twigs, vines etc hence missing or not swiftly harvesting. With the Black Powder, I had no issues in harvesting everything I aimed at.

Now my Black Powder is a 50 cal. which is not too far off from the same capabilities of a 12 gage slug. So ask yourself this. What is the reason why your wanting to decide between a 30.06 or 12 Ga? If you are only using it with in the 50 yard range, go for the 12 Ga. If you think you may in the future go further shots, utilize the 30.06.

I may suggest go for both if you have the means. ILL has laws where you can not utilize "high power" rifles like the 30.06 so make sure you are not in an area with such laws for hunting.

Good Shooting

Jason Lumetta
ExtremeGunCare (http://www.extremeguncare.com)

JDMorris
December 22, 2010, 01:50 AM
a .30-06 will have a tendency to "jello" more than exit wound, as the slug would just blow out alot of meat. I took down a small pine tree with a single shot from a 400 grain slug once.

stonecoldy
December 22, 2010, 01:50 AM
I can't speak for a .30-06 but will say after shooting more than a few whitetails at over 100 lbs. to over 200 lbs., at 50 yards behind the shoulder you'll find a dead deer shortly. I've recovered a couple Remington 1 oz. Sluggers but had exits on higher than center shots. All were runners but not far. They never made it very far. Never had a DRT but all easy to track.

pat86323
December 22, 2010, 02:08 AM
I for one see no reason that wanting a bigger exit is a sick thought. Bigger holes mean better blood trails generally speaking. The real question is "why wouldnt you want a bigger exit?"

H&Hhunter
December 22, 2010, 02:11 AM
Well it's pretty subjective but a 1 oz foster type slug is a pretty anemic round. It will poke a big hole a deer and may or may not exit depending on where you hit it. It is very similar to a large bore muzzle loader wound. The 06 load you speak of will do more explosive shock type damage and depending on where you hit the deer may leave a gaping exit wound, a slightly larger than caliber exit wound or not exit at all.

There are no definitive answers with a bullet or a slug wound and how it will perform. Either will kill a deer grave yard dead at 50 yards.

So the short answer to your question is that it depends on lots of stuff.

Art Eatman
December 22, 2010, 10:04 AM
No such thing as "always", but I've seen the occasional '06 exit wound where you could stick a fist in it and not get blood on your hand.

Then again, I once had an '06 blow up inside a mule deer's neck; no exit wound. He didn't go anywhere, of course, so it didn't really matter...

huntinhound8
December 22, 2010, 12:07 PM
I have shot one deer with 00 buck and it left no blood trail...ended up walking around it for about 20 minutes before I found it. I'd like to just drop 'em and be done with it. ;)

pat86323
December 22, 2010, 12:16 PM
that is a perfect example of why exit holes are nice, i know it doesnt happen all the time no matter what caliber you use but exits allow for more blood flow. In the rocky terrain that i often hunt i like to see some blood. I cant follow tracks in the dirt.

Kachok
December 22, 2010, 12:27 PM
The 30-06 is capable of making more soft tissue damage and creating more "shock" but the 12ga slug is no slouch either at 50 yards. Both will quickly and cleanly kill any deer that ever walked, difference is the 06 is also suitable for much larger game as well. I have seen ballistics gel tests for both, the 06 was way more impressive.

336A
December 22, 2010, 01:40 PM
From reading your posts it sounds like that you are hunting in dense terrain where your shots are going to be close in. If that is the case I'd pick the shotgun over the rifle if that is all you have to choose from.

Kachok
December 22, 2010, 01:55 PM
Shotguns do have an additional advantage in dense brush that has nothing to do with terminal performance. Shotgun slugs move slower, have more mass, are larger caliber, are front heavy, and are flat or very slightly rounded at the front. These are all the factors in deflection when shooting through brush. That means if you shoot a slug and an 06 through the same brush/leaves/grass the slug will fly streighter then the high speed bullet.

H&Hhunter
December 22, 2010, 02:18 PM
These are all the factors in deflection when shooting through brush. That means if you shoot a slug and an 06 through the same brush/leaves/grass the slug will fly streighter then the high speed bullet.

Kachok,

There have been several studies done on that subject and the old "brush buster" myth is just that a myth. The only factor that seems to allow for any reliability when shooting through brush is how close the animal is to the obstruction in question.

If you shoot through brush expect to miss or wound. I've had a .470 NE firing a 500gr round nosed solid bullet go completely off course after having shot through some light brush at close range. Don't count on a 438 gr soft lead slug to do any better.

kk0g
December 22, 2010, 02:32 PM
Kachok,

There have been several studies done on that subject and the old "brush buster" myth is just that a myth. The only factor that seems to allow for any reliability when shooting through brush is how close the animal is to the obstruction in question.

If you shoot through brush expect to miss or wound. I've had a .470 NE firing a 500gr round nosed solid bullet go completely off course after having shot through some light brush at close range. Don't count on a 438 gr soft lead slug to do any better.

Very true. If the bullet hits a small piece of brush very close to the target, then chances are the deflection may not be enough to cause a miss in the very short distance it has left to travel to the target. If a one ounce slug hits even a blade of grass close to the muzzle, it will cause enough deflection to result in a miss.

Kachok
December 22, 2010, 03:13 PM
My point exactly. Less deflection is less deflection no matter how you look at it. Nobody should ever attempt to shoot a deer 30' behind a brush pile no matter what you are shooting, but if he is standing in said brush your deflection with a slug is too small to worry about. Some high speed rifle rounds will yaw dramaticly at the 1st graze or a leaf or twig. Some light constructed bullets moving at VERY high speeds have even burst in mid air!

H&Hhunter
December 22, 2010, 03:31 PM
Kachok,

A shotgun slug is actually LESS stable when encountering an obstacle even a small one than a spritzer type bullet. Even if your target is within a couple of feet of the obstacle you can get a complete miss or worse a wounding.

Check this out...

Author: Stan Warren
Everyone knows that heavy, round-nosed bullets plow through brush better than the skinny, pointed types...right?

Everyone knows (don't they) that heavy, round-nosed bullets plow through brush better than the skinny, pointed types. Alas, the facts do not bear witness to this gray-bearded shooting axiom.

The fellow showed up on the Cumberland Plateau in hopes of getting a shot at one of the long-toothed porkers that call that rugged area home. His rifle was a spanking new .444 Marlin, and he figured that the 240-grain bullet with a fat chunk of blue-gray lead showing would be just the ticket. With its modest velocity of about 2,300 feet per second, his shooting logic dictated that it would shoulder through the laurel and rhododendron with no trouble.

After a clean miss and another shot that struck well away from his point of aim, our hero figured that his sights were off. A check back at the hunting lodge showed no such problem. Instead, his brush buster just could not do what had been expected.

Please do not get me wrong here. I like the .444 Marlin and cartridge of similar design, but at the same time have no illusions. The .30-30, .35 Remington, .45-70 and others may not be speed demons, but will certainly write a solid ending for various sorts of big game. It is a mistake, however, to think that they can perform the impossible.

The purveyor of these words has no sacred cows in the shooting business. After all, who else would go to the trouble to prove that round-nosed bullets can be doggoned nearly as accurate as spitzers under hunting conditions?

Let us take a look at the actual configuration of the lauded brush busters and see if physics and common sense cannot combine to point out a few problems. First of all, most of the flat-point and round-nosed bullets are fairly short compared to their length. That means in the language of the trade, that it will have a rather low ballistic coefficient while a longer, more trimly shaped bullet will have a higher ballistic coefficient. The bullet which is longer for its weight will overcome the resistance of air better, hence will have better ranging abilities. Now, we are not worried about long distance work, but rather crashing through limbs, brush and other obstacles between us and the target. Does the BC have any bearing here. Yep, sorry to say that it does.

First of all, a short, fat bullet has a short axis on which to spin, thus maintaining its gyroscopic effect. Tip that chubby chunk of lead by hitting an obstruction and it can go all giddy on you. As strange as it may sound, a longer, slimmer bullet is actually harder to tip off its axis and be rendered a flyer or ricochet. If you do not believe me, check with the folks at NASA who design rockets.

For instance, the BC of the bullets being used in the .444 mentioned earlier ran .165 while that of a 150-grain round nosed bullet in .30 caliber checks in at .266 in the Speer configuration. More racy designs intended for distance work can reach around .425, and you can take it from me that they work just fine in the woods. Now we come to the real truth: nothing can be counted on to "shoot through" obstructions.

It may come as a surprise to some to learn that this concept is not something new and radical springing from the Space Age. In my library is an excellent book by Lawrence Koller called "Shots At Whitetails" in which he documents these same results. His choice for woods work on deer was the .250-3000 Savage despite the fact that the copyright date on the work is 1948. You can bet that Mr. Koller was hunting when there were a substantial number of .38-55, .44-40 and other big bore rifles were in use.

The exposed lead necessary on bullets lacking high velocity becomes another hindrance here. Think about it: that soft lead that is carefully formed to make the bullet as accurate as possible is not going to like smacking into things, not even in a small way. Hit a limb, even a small one, with that soft metal portion of the pill you are trying to deliver and it is going to deform, tear or both. What we could call its ballistic integrity, the accuracy potential of the original shape, has been damaged or destroyed.

I can recall as a youngster when the only baseball available for our games started to shed its leather cover. Not only was it hard to throw straight, but the wind resistance and lack of a concentric shape made getting any distance out of a hit or throw almost impossible. You sure could throw some tricky pitches, however. We could go on to compare a basketball and football, how one does a good job on straight line throws and the other does not. I think you get the picture.

wombat13
December 22, 2010, 04:10 PM
Kachok,

A shotgun slug is actually LESS stable when encountering an obstacle even a small one than a spritzer type bullet. Even if your target is within a couple of feet of the obstacle you can get a complete miss or worse a wounding.

Check this out...

Author: Stan Warren
Everyone knows that heavy, round-nosed bullets plow through brush better than the skinny, pointed types...right?

Everyone knows (don't they) that heavy, round-nosed bullets plow through brush better than the skinny, pointed types. Alas, the facts do not bear witness to this gray-bearded shooting axiom...


First of all, a short, fat bullet has a short axis on which to spin, thus maintaining its gyroscopic effect. Tip that chubby chunk of lead by hitting an obstruction and it can go all giddy on you. As strange as it may sound, a longer, slimmer bullet is actually harder to tip off its axis and be rendered a flyer or ricochet. If you do not believe me, check with the folks at NASA who design rockets...



I disagree with this section. Have you ever looked at the toy gyroscopes or seen the high school physics demonstration of the gyroscopic effect? In both cases the gyroscope has an extremely short axis with as much mass as possible as far as practical from the axis. My high school physics teacher used a 10-speed bicycle wheel with weights along the rim.

This suggests that a short, fat bullet will have greater stability due to the gyroscopic effect than a long thin bullet of the same weight because the mean distance of the mass from the rotational axis will be greater in the short fat bullet.

I also note that the author of that article post no facts or analysis to back up his claim and instead merely appeals to the authority of unnamed NASA scientists.

ETA: My college physics is very hazy, but I believe that the gyroscopic effect is related to angular momentum. Angular momentum is mass X radius X angular velocity (basically rpm). It gets a little more complicated since a bullet isn't just a weight at the end of a string; the mass is distributed throughout the bullet from the rotational axis to the exterior of the bullet.

Again, if memory serves, angular momentum would have to be calculated as the integral of mass X radius X angular velocity as the radius goes from zero to the maximum radius of the bullet. Also, in that integral, the mass would have to be expressed as pi X 2 X radius X material density (2 x radius is the diameter; the diameter x pi is the circumference; circumference x material density gives the mass of the thin ring that far from the rotational axis. As one integrates the mass of the infinitely thin rings from radius zero to the max radius one gets the "mean" mass x radius.

I may be a bit off, but the bottom line is that having the mass farther from the rotational axis increases angular momentum which is related to the gyroscopic effect. This means that short, fat bullets will have greater gyroscopic stability than long, thin bullets of the same weight.

H&Hhunter
December 22, 2010, 05:46 PM
Wombat please do the following and report back on your findings.

Go get a pile of sticks or dowel rods. Set them up with targets at varying distances behind them. Shoot your slugs and bullets through them at the targets. I've done so and my results were that the outcome is totally erratic. You can not tell what a bullet or slug will do after encountering an obstacle.

Maybe you'll have a different outcome.

My findings were that if the target was much beyond three feet away from the sticks I don't care what you are shooting you are pissing in the wind.

In both cases the gyroscope has an extremely short axis with as much mass as possible as far as practical from the axis.

I agree with you however you can't build a bullet in that shape.

Art Eatman
December 22, 2010, 08:13 PM
Going back to the 1940s, it seemed that every ten years or so somebody would test this "brush busting" idea. I dunno. I guess I've read at least a half-dozen of these efforts.

"Erratic" is as good a word as any.

The controlling variable seems to be the distance between the brush/limbs/twigs and the intended target.

janobles14
December 23, 2010, 12:28 AM
This suggests that a short, fat bullet will have greater stability due to the gyroscopic effect than a long thin bullet of the same weight because the mean distance of the mass from the rotational axis will be greater in the short fat bullet.


but unless im sadly mistaken (which is often the case!), slugs dont spin as do normal spitzer bullets. rifled slugs dont spin but only allow air passage and passage through choked barrels. they fly due to forward mass. im not sure of the spin rate of a sabot slug though.

wombat13
December 23, 2010, 01:26 PM
Wombat please do the following and report back on your findings.

Go get a pile of sticks or dowel rods. Set them up with targets at varying distances behind them. Shoot your slugs and bullets through them at the targets. I've done so and my results were that the outcome is totally erratic. You can not tell what a bullet or slug will do after encountering an obstacle.

Maybe you'll have a different outcome.

My findings were that if the target was much beyond three feet away from the sticks I don't care what you are shooting you are pissing in the wind.

Quote:
In both cases the gyroscope has an extremely short axis with as much mass as possible as far as practical from the axis.
I agree with you however you can't build a bullet in that shape.
I don't disagree with you that in practice there might not be much difference in the brush busting ability of various bullets. I thought it would be important to point out that the author of the article you posted knows very little about basic physics despite claiming to know (and claiming that NASA scientists would back him up).

Longer thinner projectiles will have better aerodynamic properties. Shorter fatter projectiles will have a greater gyroscopic effect. Is it possible to make a bullet short/fat enough to have a substantially higher gyroscopic effect (that is noticeable in practice) and still aerodynamic enough to have acceptable exterior ballistics? I have no idea.

wombat13
December 23, 2010, 01:30 PM
but unless im sadly mistaken (which is often the case!), slugs dont spin as do normal spitzer bullets. rifled slugs dont spin but only allow air passage and passage through choked barrels. they fly due to forward mass. im not sure of the spin rate of a sabot slug though.
I would be surprised if this is the case. If so, what is the point of rifling the slug? If the forward mass is what allows it to fly straight (like a badminton birdie) then why does it need the rifling?

I suspect that the simplest answer is the correct one. Rifling the slug spins it as it passes through a smooth barrel, just like a rifled barrel spins a smooth bullet.

336A
December 23, 2010, 01:44 PM
The purpose of the ribs also known as rifling is to allow the slug to be shot safely through full choked guns. You can find this info here http://www.brennekeusa.com/cms/h_faq.html

wombat13
December 23, 2010, 01:46 PM
I have only fired into the brush once and I hope I never have to do so again. It was three days ago. I shot a doe out in an open field with my ML. She was farther away than I estimated so I hit her low breaking her front leg (note: I will not take my ML out next year with out a range finder and I will practice range estimation in the coming year). She ran into the brush and laid down. I let her lay awhile but was going to lose the light. So I followed the blood trail to where she was laying in thick brush. I observed her for another 30 minutes before taking what I thought was a low probability shot through the brush. I fired the 300 gr. Barnes expander through the brush and hit her directly in the vitals and she was gone in seconds. She was about 20 yards from me and the last yard or so was brush (small woody plants no larger in diameter than my little finger).

The crazy thing is that I blew the shot that I was confident in making and made the shot that I thought was low probability.

What did I learn?

1. I'm pretty poor at estimating range, particularly out in an open field.
2. I need to practice estimating range and will buy a range finder well before next season so I have time to test my self with it.
3. I need more practice shooting from field positions. I think my poor shot was just a matter of range estimation, but it is possible that I just screwed up the shot. More practice doesn't hurt.

336A
December 23, 2010, 01:58 PM
That is another reason to make time in the off season to get out and scout the area that you going to hunt. Not only do I try to figure the movement patterns and such but if there are open medows and such I pace them off so I know ahead of time. It makes situations like that a little easier then taking a SWAG at it.

Guiding101
December 23, 2010, 02:47 PM
Old practice was that a bullet was to expend all of its energy inside of the targeted animal and stick into the hide on the opposite hide. In this all kinetic energy is disoppated in the animal. I disagree with that logic, at least in close range practice. A round that can transfer all of it's energy at 50 yards would be seriously lacking at 100 yards, etc. This also causes quite a conumdrum when it comes to tracking. Escpecially fatty animals, as the adipose tissue can quickly clog a single entry wound very quickly. However I do like big holes in game. 50 and inside, the slug is hands down the clear cut winner as an instant stopper, as it will transfer it's energy across its flat broad face rapidly. Unless of course your target is moving........then the lack of speed will be all too apparent. But extending the range beyond 50 and/ or at moving game, the 06' will look like a Cadillac in comparison.

Now as to the deflection theories. All seem relevent in their own relms. I can agree with all points. However I would like to add to this: I firmly believe bullet makeup is more important than speed or shape of projectile when it come to deflection. The reason (I feel) that old "brush busters" seemed more effective than today high velocity speer type rounds was that soft lead was the standard loading practice. Lead has less deflection than does hard copper or steel jacketing. Even lead used today is of a harder than material than it was in the days when a 38-55 was the new kid on the block. Try this. Hit a soft lead ball with a bat. Hit the same diameter steel ball with said bat.......which travels farther.....the steel.....this can equate into deflection. Maybe I'm way of base with that. thoughts

d2wing
December 23, 2010, 03:24 PM
I've shot lots of deer with both. The 30-06 is way more lethal, way more accurate. High speed rifle bullets damage a lot more tissue, and drop any deer way quicker than any slug. I've seen this many times over. Shotguns are for the birds, period.

kk0g
December 23, 2010, 03:56 PM
I would be surprised if this is the case. If so, what is the point of rifling the slug? If the forward mass is what allows it to fly straight (like a badminton birdie) then why does it need the rifling?

I suspect that the simplest answer is the correct one. Rifling the slug spins it as it passes through a smooth barrel, just like a rifled barrel spins a smooth bullet.

It's called marketing. "Rifled" slugs stabilize because of forward mass. If Winchester decided to quit "rifling" their slugs and marketing them as such, which ones do you think your average hunter will buy......... the Remington rifled slug, or the Winchester non-rifled slug?

wombat13
December 23, 2010, 04:12 PM
It's called marketing. "Rifled" slugs stabilize because of forward mass. If Winchester decided to quit "rifling" their slugs and marketing them as such, which ones do you think your average hunter will buy......... the Remington rifled slug, or the Winchester non-rifled slug?
I've never seen a rifled slug. Are they hollow at the back like a badminton birdie? In order for a projectile to stabilize because of forward mass, the center of mass has to be in front of the center of drag. In an arrow, the tip is heavy which puts the center of mass in front of the mid-point and the fletching creates a good deal of drag putting the center of drag behind the mid-point. Same with a badminton birdie.

In order for a slug to stabilize the same way it would have to be hollow at the rear.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
December 23, 2010, 04:13 PM
lol, Not entirely true guys. The "fins" on say the Remington rifled slug" serves 2 purposes. First and foremost is crush potential. The fins will crush in on themselves without deforming the initial shape of the projectile and fit through heavy choke barrels. The second thing is, if you look at the way they are cut, they actually do generate a bit of spin. Now granted it is nowhere NEAR the amount of spin that is needed to stabilize these chunks, but it does generate some and it does help. Sabots on the other hand are a whole other world. They are shot through rifled barrels only. You shoot one through a smooth bore it will be a "good luck figuring out where you hit" situation. Some rifled slugs will shoot well from a rifled barrel. But you will NEVER see a sabot slug perform well from a smooth bore.

If you enjoyed reading about "30-06 and 12 Gauge Slug" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!