For HD? I know 00 seems to be the very popular from what I have read for HD but it seems like 0 Buck has a better pellet count to weight ratio at 12 .32 cal pellets for a standard 2 3/4 shell vs 8 or 9 .33 cal pellets in a standard shell. Just wondering why it's not used or talked about much. I guess you can make the same argument for 1 buck but I have not tried it yet, I wouldn't want to go below .30 cal pellets because I feel that they lack penetration for the intended purpose IMHO.
How about 0 buck..
- Thread starter Dee
- Start date
- Status
Fred Fuller
Moderator Emeritus
Any buckshot with a pellet size greater than .30 should work, IMHO. If you want to try 0 buck, pattern some first at various ranges and see how your gun likes it.
lpl
lpl
Red Tornado
Member
I find your logic faultless. However, I think the main difference is how many white dots show up when they x-ray the corpse. I have a mix of 00 and #4 for HD, but would be happy with anything in between as well.
RT
RT
Youngster
Member
0 buck works well, however it's basically the same thing as a typical 12 pellet 00 2 3/4 round, with 0B you're just pushing slightly smaller pellets a touch slower.
Thanks guys; Youngster I didn't know there was 12 pellet 00 B in a standard 2 3/4 shell, that's interesting, I thought they were only in 3" shells, I would like to know the brand. I have been mainly trying out Remington at Wall Mart, sometimes Winchester also at Wally world.
I tested out some #4 buck but most of the pellets wouldn't penetrate 1 gallon jugs of water at 15 yards or so so that is why I wouldn't trust it as much for HD despite it's much higher pellet count.
I tested out some #4 buck but most of the pellets wouldn't penetrate 1 gallon jugs of water at 15 yards or so so that is why I wouldn't trust it as much for HD despite it's much higher pellet count.
Maverick223
Member
00 seems to have a bit better selection, and most single aught that I see is unbuffered and hasn't a shot cup, which tends to deform shot resulting in a load that patterns poorly, is less accurate, and has lackluster penetration. When strictly used for HD No. 1B is my choice (for greater shot count without sacrificing performance/penetration), albeit hard to procure. While I find No. 4B to be an excellent choice for opossum and raccoon (probably do well with dogs/yotes as well) and even better shot count, it doesn't afford enough penetration for my taste.
I bought a box of the gimmicky Remington HD shells (a mix of No. 2 and No. 4 shot) about a week ago, because it was on sale for $1/rnd (regularly more than double that) at BPS, but honestly don't hold much hope for the load (for a HD role anyway).
I bought a box of the gimmicky Remington HD shells (a mix of No. 2 and No. 4 shot) about a week ago, because it was on sale for $1/rnd (regularly more than double that) at BPS, but honestly don't hold much hope for the load (for a HD role anyway).
Youngster
Member
Federal, Remington, S&B and Dynamit Nobel all make a 12 pellet 00 2 3/4 load. Winchester did in the past although it looks like its out of production currently. There may be a few others as well.
Yes, I too remember having read about the optimal balance between penetration (determined by pellet weight) and cross section area of tissue affected (determined by both available quantity and size of pellets) being found in the #0-#1 size range, with the 12 pellets of #0 taking the lead (in the 2-3/4 shell class). 000 would have more penetration but covers less area on the target, #4 covers more area but has far less penetration.
The FBI study perhaps considered effective range of 18 yards the distance where all pellets would reliably fall onto a torso sized target??... because 00 buck is most definitely deadly well beyond that.
Youngster
Member
I like 000, you may only get 8 pellets in a 2 3/4 load, and they don't have plating or any of the fancy extras you can get in 00. However, the additional penetration and "smash" per pellet are pretty impressive when it comes to shooting up test media, or flesh and bone for that matter.
Maverick223
Member
I believe it was No. 1B (16 pellets in 2-3/4in. & 24x in a 3in. Mag.) that was the clear choice WRT tissue cavitation.
Maverick223
Member
Here are a few links you might find useful:
Win. No. 1B (great stuff...when you can get it)
S&B 12 Pellet 00 (no buffer, but decent and cheap)
Rem. 12 Pellet 00 (has buffering, but I haven't tried it and it is out of stock)
Win. No. 1B (great stuff...when you can get it)
S&B 12 Pellet 00 (no buffer, but decent and cheap)
Rem. 12 Pellet 00 (has buffering, but I haven't tried it and it is out of stock)
Maverick223
Member
NP, Dee. Just keep in mind that the S&B shells that I linked are a bit longer than standard 2-3/4in. shells due to the design (the way it opens up is different from most). It will still work fine in a 2-3/4in. chamber, but you may loose 1 rnd in a tube magazine. I don't believe the Remmy shells are designed in such a way, but I haven't tried them so I am uncertain.
VA27
Member
Over 30 years ago I learned from an old Federal Trapper that the 1B, 2 3/4", short magnum (21 pellet) is the BEST for 'pest' control.
It's no sissyfied wimp load, it packs a punch on both ends. It has enough pellets for an actual pattern, the pellets have enough mass to penetrate deep and enough diameter to cause severe trauma. Everything from 40lb beaver to 400lb hogs. It all falls to number 1.
A number of years ago I read an article where the author (a police firearms instructor, whose name I sadly don't recall) did extensive testing and came to the same conclusion for anti-personnel use. Number 1 buck was...well, number 1!
Pattern density at extended ranges was better (more pellets on target), penetration was adequate (on flesh) and due to the slightly reduced mass of each pellet, penetration in standard building materials was LESS than 00B!
With 1B you really can have your cake and eat it, too!
Number 1 Buck, it's what real men use!
It's no sissyfied wimp load, it packs a punch on both ends. It has enough pellets for an actual pattern, the pellets have enough mass to penetrate deep and enough diameter to cause severe trauma. Everything from 40lb beaver to 400lb hogs. It all falls to number 1.
A number of years ago I read an article where the author (a police firearms instructor, whose name I sadly don't recall) did extensive testing and came to the same conclusion for anti-personnel use. Number 1 buck was...well, number 1!
Pattern density at extended ranges was better (more pellets on target), penetration was adequate (on flesh) and due to the slightly reduced mass of each pellet, penetration in standard building materials was LESS than 00B!
With 1B you really can have your cake and eat it, too!
Number 1 Buck, it's what real men use!
Maverick223
Member
Do you know where one might procure those shells today? That sounds like a great load for a 2-3/4in. scattergun. I'd be very interested in trying some (seeing how the 2-3/4in. 16 pellet load did well for me, and the 3in. 24 pellet load did even better).
VA27
Member
Everyone used to load it, and then only Winchester loaded it. I haven't seen it in the ammo catalogs in a few years. Haunt every shop you can and buy up all the old stock you can find! I've got about 20 rounds left and then I'll be forced to go with 3".
Maverick223
Member
Story of my life...just when I am considering picking up a new 2-3/4in. chamber 12ga. I might just have to stick to the standard 16 pellet no. 1 or the Remmy HD-2x4 (pending the results of this one)...but if I come across a box you can bet i'll pick it up!
LibShooter
Member
Isn't 0 buckshot nearly impossibe to find in stores? I seldom see it.
Youngster
Member
Yes and no, as the "00" buck made by companies who use shotcups in their ammo appears to actually be in the size range of 0 buck {.32 cal} or a bit smaller, as actual .33 cal 00 pellets are too big to stack in threes inside of a shotcup.
Maverick223
Member
I don't know about elsewhere, but I see it all the time in BPS (it is the cheapest buckshot they sell) and IIRC Gander Mtn. has it as well.
Do you have a source for this? I am not saying that isn't the case, but it would seemingly violate SAAMI standards and specifications.
- Status
Similar threads
