[H&Hhunter]

If you haven't been to the convention in Reno try and make it a point at some time in the future to do so. I worked the show and had some time to sneak around as well. I was also able to slide in on a Zimbabwe trip with 4 friends. That will be this summer.

In anycase I met some really great people both professional and sportsmen alike. A great crowd of folks. With out any name dropping I'll just tell that I was honored to meet some famous old time PH's.

On the first day a smiling PH that we book for came by our booth with a shreded jacket and asked if he could have another as he had a spot of bother with this one on. This was his first ever accident with any animal in bush in over 40 years and the story is worth repeating.

He had a client wound a large male leopard with a gut shot. The cat ran into the tall grass. Gerald decided that the best option was to have a tracker drive the Land Rover into the tall grass while the and the client stood in the bed of the truck to see if they could flush out the cat.

Gerald was armed with an 870 stuffed full of 00buck. In anycase as they proceded into the grass Gerald cut the blood trail and had the driver stop the truck. As he started to dismount he heard a rustle in the grass and turned just in time raise his shotgun getting off two quick shots one in the cats on shoulder and the other straight into his chest as the cat was airborne. And then the cat was on him. knocking them both into the bed of the truck. He was able to keep the cat off of his throat by feeding it his arms and hands which took a horrendus mauling. After several second of wrestling with the cat in the confined spaces of the truck bed the cat seperated and jumped out of truck and was in the process of reentering when Gerald was able to shoot him again killing him with the shotgun at about 10 feet.

During the post mortem Gerald was able to ascertain that both of the first shots were spot on however the buck shot did not penetrate through the mucsle of either the shoulder or the chest. All of the shot was bunched up nice and pretty in a wad with about two inches of penetration.

the last shot that killed the cat did so with a head shot but only several pellets even got through the skull.

Gerald suffered severe had and arm wounds typical of a leopard mauling and nearly lost his left thumb. And has lost feeling in that hand. he also recieved some very nice remodeling of his face where the casts claws dug into his cheek bones. he was lucky it wasn't worse.

Gerald is yet another PH who no longer uses buckshot on anything.

SHOTGUNS ARE FOR THE BIRDS.

(I have intentionally not included the last name of the PH for privacy sake)

[Dan the Man]

I too have just returned from the SCI convention. It was really very nice. With all the people, I thought the transportation to and from the convention center might be a problem, but that was not the case at all. And with 5000 exhibitors, there was always something to look at! A friend of mine there asked me to join his bongo/Lord Derby Eland trip to Cameroon, but I had to turn him down :-(.

It is interesting that one of the seminars I attended indicated that 12 gauge buckshot was an adequate choice for leopard at close range. However, I think my preference would be a double with softpoints. I'll certainly keep your story in mind once I get to leopard hunting.

I hope you enjoy your trip to Zim!

Regards
--Dan

[JohnKSa]

What kind of 00 Buck only penetrates 2" in soft tissue at point blank range??? Maybe stuff that's been carried around for a decade or so in 100+degree heat?

I'm not a big shotgun fan, but that little penetration surprises me.

I'd be inclined to blame the ammo quality/condition more than the choice of weapon/caliber/gauge.

[Byron Quick]

John,

Go hog hunting with buckshot, then butcher the hog. Take a handgun to kill the hog with after you shoot it with buckshot.

Ask Al Thompson about buckshot performance on the boar he killed at pointblank range. It was not old and had not been exposed to extreme temperature.

I'll give you the short version: Al doesn't use buckshot anymore.

[Art Eatman]

A 30-caliber round ball of some 30 grains, at about 1,200 ft/sec. Nine of them, which separate as they travel. Not exactly what I'd expect for deep-penetration loads. Buckshot kills via blood loss over time, rather than instantly from bone breakage shrapnel and deep penetration into vital organs.

Art

"Time is of the essence, in the presence of teeth or tusks."

[kudu]

This question of buckshot was raised before. Here is a link to go to about African PH's and their go to guns.

http://www.african-hunter.com/the_firearm_files.htm And then go to this article. "A Guide to Rifle Choice for Dangerous Game Part 1"

[JohnKSa]

Ok, I want to make one thing perfectly clear. I'm not a shotgun person. I have never hunted with a shotgun and have no plans to start. So, I'm not trying to defend anything--I'm just struck by an apparent anomaly.

First of all, 00 Buck pellets are 33 caliber and weigh about 54 grains.

Second, I have no problem believing that 00 buck is a loss on hogs. BUT, hogs and leopards are built pretty differently, from what I understand. Not many people call hogs thin-skinned or soft, but it seems that leopards are pretty widely accepted to be thin-skinned.

I'm not a big Fackler fan, but according to his numbers, #4 buck penetrates up to 10.6" in gelatin.

Another reference http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs10.htm indicates that #1 buck consistently penetrates more than 12" in ballistic gelatin. The article goes on to say that the larger pellets are not recommended because they can overpenetrate (i.e. penetrate even more than the #1 buck). This site also mentions that BIRDSHOT has a permanent crush cavity of 6". Am I to believe that 00 buck is outpenetrated by BIRDSHOT?

This website http://www.steyrscout.org/terminal.htm reiterates the #4 buck penetration numbers but also shows that #4 shot (not buck) penetrates up to 11" with most of the pellets reaching around 5". It goes on to show that a 12 ga rifled slug penetrates to 14".

The article referenced about use of shotguns in Africa makes mention of 12ga slugs getting stuck just under the skin of a lion and not being able to penetrate the ribs of leopards. How is it that hundreds of deer are killed annually with 12ga slugs if slugs can't reliably penetrate past the ribs or skin of the animal they're shot at?

What's going on here? Are the big cats really that tough?

[Greybeard]

Maybe the buckshot being used on African cats are just low-recoil "substitute-another-term for-kitty-cat" loads. :D

[kudu]

Ballistic gelatin is a poor substitute for evaluating penetration in flesh. There is a lot of different densities involved with flesh and bone, alot of give. Many gunwriters will tell you that gelatin is only good for showing how dramatic a channel looks. A well built bullet will penetrate gelatin many times the distance of buck and still in game not penetrate as far as it needs to destroy massive bone and muscle. And yes the kittys in Africa are as tough as they say, and so is almost all the other game there including plains game.

I know all the tests say different, but practical field testing with gelatin is a far cry from real tests in live flesh. I have taken dozens of deer with slugs, so I understand the dilemma of choosing slugs. I have only made 1 trip to Africa, but the toughness of the game there is a whole different thing than back here.

[Stand_Watie]

I've never shot a big cat, but I have killed and butchered a few feral hogs/russian boar that we have trapped and they are a remarkably tough animal.

My neighbors have been hunting them pretty much forever (they came over and set up the trap on my property this weekend so maybe I'll have some pics for you later) and they have some unbelievable stories to tell, like shooting a hog and then trailing it for miles and miles with the dog, and when they found it it had gone all that way with an absolutely perfect shot right through the vitals, both lungs etc. I don't believe buckshot would penetrate the chest cavity of a boar of any size at all.

[Art Eatman]

I've always had trouble remembering the specifics on OO buck. Thanks.

It sounds to me that the issue of shotguns and buckshot on critters like leopards is really the difference between killing vs. stopping it "right now". A leopard, after a load of buckshot, might well be on its way to being dead--but those last few seconds can be rough on a hunter that's a fraction of one second from the leopard.

I dunno. I've seen deer run 40 or 50 yards after an '06 bullet had totally pulped the heart. That's about all I can go by. The deer was killed, but not stopped instantly...Heck, I put a hot '06 load into a coyote at maybe 40 yards, blowing out a fist-sized chunk of breast bone. He spun three circles and ran off some 50 feet before piling up.

But I won't argue with the guys who've BTDT...

:), Art

[Stand_Watie]

I read somewhere that a person shot through the heart has enough oxygen remaining in their blood to function for well over a minute. People normally don't, because we're conditioned by hollywood to clutch our chest and keel over, but of course leopards etc aren't big James Bond fans usually.

I don't know how different feline anatomy is, but a few seconds of remaining animation would be plenty of time for a leopard to put a big hurt on. I think you've all probably seen that lion video, he kept moving for quite some time after several rifle shots.

[H&Hhunter]

John,

Unfortunatley leopards are not mde out of ballistic gelatin. I know for a fact that #4 buck out of a 10ga at 25 yards will not reliable penetrate all the way through a coyote. I believe that they are less than 10.6" wide.

Ballistic gellatin trests are prety much worthless in predicting bullet performance on critters. I've seen the same load on the same day on the same shot placement do two entirely different things. One went all the way through the other barely got into the chest. There are just too many variables on live animals.

One thing is for sure however. There is an inordinate number of leopards that do not stop to buckshot. The .45-70 shooting 405gr soft points in a fast handeling lever gun is starting to really come into it's own for a leopard gun. As is the fast pointing double with soft points.

I've said it before and I'll say it again if you want to use a shotgun loaded with buckshot to sort out a wounded leopard be my guest. I have enough scars in my collection already and don't need anymore braging rights.

The numbers tell the story. A full 85% of accidents with leopards happen with a shotgun in hand.............

[HankB]

I've only taken one leopard, and for that I used a .30/06. But after skinning, and examining the carcass, I found myself thinking that a shotgun with buck WOULD be OK at close range. Leopards are soft, and it's not unusual for the leopard hunter to outweigh his prey. I find it hard to believe that a charge of 00 buck at what sounds like "off the muzzle" range would only penetrate 2" or so on a leopard and have little or no effect on the cat. Unless the load was underpowered for some reason.

A lion, on the other hand, is far more massive than a leopard. I wouldn't care to face a lion at short range with a scattergun.

Let's see, only 2" penetration on a leopard with buckshot . . . and yet some people suggest BIRDshot, and even skeet loads, for home defense against two legged intruders who may be wearing things like heavy coats . . . hmmm . . .

BTW, concerning the reputed "toughness" of African game . . . as far as "plainsgame" is concerned, I didn't find them in the least bulletproof. Hit them right, and they go down right away. Hit them not so right, and they stay on their feet longer. Just like comparably-sized North American game.

As far as the "Big stuff" goes, I have just enough experience to be dangerous, so I'll defer comment. ;)

[Art Eatman]

Shotgun penetration: A buddy of mine and his wife both were taken suddenly drunk. An overindulgence of the "favorite beverage". He decided that the (bleep) pet parrot had pooped on his favorite recliner just once too often. He grabbed the bird and headed out the back door. She grabbed the shotgun, saying, "If you let that bird loose outdoors, I'll shoot you!"

He did, and she did. About 15 to 20 yards; 20 gauge; #9 Skeet.

Visiting him in the hospital, showing no sympathy to amount to a hill of beans, I asked him about the damage. He said the docs had picked out some 60 pellets, but he had permanent souvenirs still inside. They had penetrated into his liver...

And that's part of why I figure that inside my living room, the five yards or so between me and Mr. Troublesome would create that scenario of, "We are gathered here to mourn the passing of..."

:D, Art

[JohnKSa]

I have no illusions that gelatin is flesh. However if it truly were THAT bad at representing penetration, no one would use it. After all, the whole point of gelatin is to gauge penetration and determine wounding characteristics. If it did a terrible job of the one thing that is its sole purpose for existance, someone would come up with someone else. Agreed, gelatin doesn't represent bones, but humans have bones, and from what I understand, penetration in gelatin is used as a rough approximation of penetration in humans.

I'm not questioning the fact that buck is not stopping leopards in Africa--I think it's pretty hard to stop something that fast and that close after it's got a good dose of adrenalin going. I'm also not questioning the fact that buck is a miserable choice for hogs given their incredible toughness--and also due to the fact that they usually have a layer of caked on dirt or mud acting as armor.

I accept that #4 buck (.24" pellets) at 25 yards won't exit a coyote--but we're talking about 00buck (.33" pellets) at point blank range. The shot column hasn't even opened up--there's going to be a single entrance wound--something over an ounce of lead balls going about 1200fps all hitting within about a 1" circle.

And that's only going to penetrate 2" in thin-skinned game? Does everyone realize that 2" means that if you poke your index finger into the resulting hole, it's not going to make it all the way to the second knuckle before hitting the bottom?

Why is virtually every LEO Agency in the US carrying REDUCED power 00 buck for use against what amounts to thin-skinned animals (clothed humans) if it can't reliably penetrate 2"? The FBI scrapped the 9mm because it wouldn't reliably penetrate 12"--but they're still banking on the 12ga with 00 buck even though it won't penetrate a 6th as far?

Why is someone writing articles about 12ga slugs just barely penetrating lion skin when we know full well it will shoot clear through a deer or a person?

What about Art's story? #9 shot will make it to a man's liver but 00buck won't penetrate 2" in leopard flesh?

Something really doesn't add up here.

[Byron Quick]

John,

Some folks don't use ballistic gelatin to simulate flesh. The reason they didn't use ballistic gelatin is that it doesn't reliably represent the results of living tissue. The ones with the right connections have used human cadavers...even that presents problems because projectiles behave differently in cadavers than in live flesh. Others have shot living dogs and such to test ammo until the animal rights people starting raising hell.

All ballistic gelatin does is give you a benchmark against other rounds' performance in ballistic gelatin. The relation of performance in ballistic gelatin to performance in human flesh...or any flesh...is unproven.

[JohnKSa]

All right, I'm not a gelatin expert--but if I spent my whole life poking holes in gelatin and selling books about the results, I think I'd want to make sure it was worth more than just "relative penetration results." Given the tremendous demand for understanding wounding effects, etc. I think that if there were something better than gelatin, someone would have invented it and made a million selling the formula.

Also, even if you assume that it's only good for relative penetration, then over 12" of penetration for 00 buck (seems to be a good number from what I found on the web) is very similar to the penetration of a 9mm bullet in gelatin. That would say, then, that we would expect 00 buck to penetrate a similar amount to a 9mm bullet. Can anybody here tell me, with a straight face, that a 9mm bullet won't penetrate past 2" in a thin-skinned animal?

BUT this is turning into a whole 'nother argument! I've gotten a lot of responses about gelatin, but I'd rather we address the "meat of the matter" as it were. ;)

Let's FORGET about the gelatin and address the basic issue. That is the issue of someone saying that a .33 cal, 54 grain lead ball @ 1200fps won't penetrate past 2" in flesh (muscle).

[Byron Quick]

Nope, ain't saying that OO buck won't penetrate past two inches in flesh.

Whitetail deer? Yeah, it'll penetrate past two inches.

Feral hog? I've seen one pellet make it past the gristle plate.

Leopard? I've never skinned a leopard. I don't know.

I do know this: It depends on what species you're talking about. Some flesh is tougher than other flesh. Some species' skins...while being maybe the same thickness...are tougher than others.

I do know this: I've shot a twelve gauge loaded with OO buck at a plywood board from a distance of three feet. It was not one hole. There was about a five inch spread of the individual buckshot.

[Stand_Watie]

If anybody in the cedar creek lake area (halfway between Tyler and Dallas) has a .12 guage and a box of buckshot, I know where there's a good sized feral hog we could do some ballistic penetration tests on, it was shot saturday night, with this chilly weather it probably hasn't even started to rot.

I've got a digital camera, a sharp knife and a strong stomach that I'll volunteer to the operation.

[Iain]

Isn't this issue less about 'thick skinned' or 'thin skinned' game and more about muscularity? Correct me if I am wrong but here is my theory:

For the most part human beings are quite weeny, we may be strong compared to others but compared to a silverback gorilla we are all pretty lightly muscled and slightly boned. The link that kudu posted talks about slugs being stopped by the muscle wall of a lions chest. Seems entirely possible when you are talking about an animal capable of strength and power far in excess of any human and most other animals.

This led me to wondering if there are any reports of steroided up bodybuilders being shotgunned. Couldn't find any reliable reports, and I advise against searching for 'bodybuilder shotgun' on google. Seems there is a form of porn returned. Anyway, I am 5'7" and 160lbs which is not huge, but I was thinking - ok buckshot in the chest at close range is probably going to do for me, but what would buckshot in the thigh (thickest and largest muscles in the human body) do to my leg? Not willing to try, but is worth thinking about.

I have no experience with buckshot nor hunting, but a reasonable experience of my own physiology and respect for the much more powerful physiques nature has endowed other animals with.

[Greybeard]

Mr. Lewis -

If not so much on my plate this week, I would probably grab a boomer and buck and roll the 2 hours or so to your neck of the woods. But, before doing so, would probably ask that ya make sure the other hogs had not already "feasted" away their brother. ;)

[Stand_Watie]

Greybeard

It's only about a few minutes walk from my doorstep to the spot where ms piggy met her demise, so I'll be glad to check and confirm if anybody wants to take up on the offer. You can usually see a pretty good flock of buzzards around here anytime that a critter that big softens up enough for them to get their beaks into it. My neighbors will probably all have a good chuckle at my expense if they spot me shooting a dead hog though.

Still, it's a thought - why do you suppose they don't use animal carcasses for testing? It seems to me that that would be more credible a test than gelatin, and I know the pound euthanizes millions of stray dogs every year so there has to be a lot of them that are person sized.

[Greybeard]

Yep, I suspect the neighbors might REALLY have cause to think "gun nuts" over that ... ;)

[kudu]

I belive that using already dead animals that are cold and stiff would defeat the purpose to see what live warm moving flesh and bones would do in the same instance. Two completely different mediums.

[H&Hhunter]

Sorry double post

[H&Hhunter]

Let's FORGET about the gelatin and address the basic issue. That is the issue of someone saying that a .33 cal, 54 grain lead ball @ 1200fps won't penetrate past 2" in flesh (muscle).

John,

First of all I am just repeating a story from a very reliable source who has the scars to prove his story. I was not there.

But lets try and break this down just for fun.

A .33 cal 54gr lead ball at 1200fps has no sectional density to speak of. Sectional density is an indicator of penetrativie quality. I would offer that a .22LR bullet at a weight of 34 grs at a simular velocity would have better pentrative quality or possibly nearly the same as your lead ball given the fact that the ball has more surface area and less sectional density at a compareable velocity.

Lets not get hung up on the 2" penetration thing this may or may not be an exact number. The statement may have been an underexageration. The fact of the matter is that none of or at least not enough of the shot got to the right place to kill the cat in time. This is a farily common problem with buckshot on cats.

There are two things I'd like to test as well.
1. take your shot gun and try to point contact shoot into as reliable medium and then see how good the penetration is. I questioned gerald about the incident and he seems to think that had something to do with it. He said the shot was all buched up in a wad and didn't have time to spread out. He thought that that may have caused the poor penetration. His second shot at the airborne cat was either touching or nearly touching the cat. The third and final shot was at a distance of about 10 feet and it did the trick.

2. I've often wondered if the contraction of muscle tissue makes any difference in penetrative quality. I don't know the answer to this but it seems to me that an animal in full contractive muscle state (such as a jumping cat) may have some effect on a bullets performance. Especially one marginal as a 54gr lead ball.

Lastly it has been the trend recently to get away from buckshot on cats as a follow up weapon as the stats show a high failure rate inregards to stopping. I can promise you one thing if Gerald had been using a his .470NE with soft points and had hit the cat in the chest with a contact shot we wouldn't be having this discussion. The question is could he have hit it with that platform? I THINK I can shoot just as fast and accurate with a well fitted double rifle as a shot gun.

The PH's I speak to are split 50/50 on the shotgun thing some swear by it others shun it. The newest fad in leopard back up seems to be a guide gun in .45-70 equiped with ghost rings.

Next time I speak with Gerald I'll ask him as to the state of the ammunition it may well have been in the truck on the dash for the last 5 years.

HankB,

I'll agree with your statement on plains game if you put the bullets in the right place they die. That is true in all species there are two however that become bullet resistant when wounded and those are the Blue Wildebeast and the Zebra. A ranch owner friend of mine from South Africa calls them Bluewoundedbeasts. He claims that they are one of the few animals that he can collect three or four trophy fees from the same critter in a single season:D .

The kudu on the other hand I've never seen a softer animal Jeeze cut one with a rusty nail and they'll be bedded up and nearly dead in a hundred yards..........;)

[redneck]

I'm no expert and not real anxious to get into the argument, but I just keep seeing this come up and its got me wondering....

The buckshot crowd always states that at the range in question, the pellets are travelling in a solid mass.
To me that means that you lose the advantage of stringing out a load of shot to hit your target, its like shooting a rifle.
So if given equally fast handling guns that both must be aimed like a rifle, and why not shoot the one with a REAL "solid mass" ie. a bullet, rather than a wad of pellets?

[H&Hhunter]

Redneck,

My point precisley. by definition a wad of pellets ain't going to penetrate worth a crude. it's the ultimate frangable it ain't even held together by a jacket.

To give you an idea a good friend of mine got hit by fragment from a jacketed .44mag 240gr soft point. He shot a piece of steel at about 25 yards and the spray sent a piece into his left arm.

The piece they dug out of him weighed 42 grains it penetrated about 3 inches into his forearm and stopped in his elbow. And it wasn't a round ball it was a sharp flechet looking piece. Single buckshot pieces just don't have the weight or the velocity to do crap on anything outside of the softest lightest critters.

You are always better off with more weight and more velocity for stopping power to a point. The old adage that buckshot enters as a solid mass is flawed in that as soon as it impacts it spreads apart to some degree.

[JohnKSa]

I want to point out again that I'm not a member of the "buckshot crowd"--I'm just trying to reconcile an apparent anomaly.

I figure you're right on the 22LR having better penetration, but then a 22 bullet will penetrate a good foot or more if it doesn't hit bone. IIRC, the 22LR pistol bullet that hit Reagan bounced off a rib and still penetrated deep into his chest cavity. From what I could read of the initial post, it looks to me like bone wasn't an issue in the leopard incident.

I'm also not questioning the honesty of your friend. I'm questioning the quality of his ammo--and maybe his ability to eyeball 2" accurately. ;)

As far as the shot column not spreading out. From my experience shooting an airgun into a ballistic putty pellet trap, if you put a pellet into a hole made by another pellet, the pellet will hit the first pellet and drive it deeper. The resulting depth of penetration is not as much as if you shot two pellets and added the resulting wound channels end-to-end, but it is deeper than either one would have made by itself. That's with a VERY poor projectile in terms of sectional density, and one that will deform FAR more easily than a solid lead ball. So, I would have to say, based on that, the shot column will penetrate much better before it spreads out than after. I have no way to accurately quantify the penetration depth, but you should see penetration that is better than an individual 00 pellet, but not as good as if you shot a solid lead projectile of the weight of the entire column.

Also from my airgunning experience, I can say with some confidence that even relatively soft and non-aerodynamic projectiles will penetrate a surprising distance. I've got a .20 caliber airgun that shoots about 800fps. There is no question that those 11 grain pellets will penetrate 2" or more in flesh--I'm getting more than an inch of penetration in ballistic putty which is far more dense than flesh. Those airgun pellets are pretty anemic compared to .33 caliber & 54 grains @ 1200fps.

The 44mag incident is hard to relate to this topic. As you pointed out, the fragment was heavier than the shotgun pellets, not shaped like a ball, and most of all, we have no idea of the velocity at impact.

One more thing worth throwing out... A couple of the references I found pointed out that there is quite a bit of difference in penetration based on the softness of the pellets. Apparently the harder pellets--especially if they are copper plated too--penetrate much better than a load with dead-soft plain lead pellets. If you're going to ask him about the ammo, you might as well also try to find out if he was using premium buckshot (hardened, plated pellets) or the plain lead variety.