Rio Royal Buck (00/#1/#4) compared to Federal Tactical 00 Buckshot

I conducted a test comparing the affordable (and available) Rio Royal Buck and compared it to what I consider to be the gold standard of buckshot in the 00 Federal Tactical. The test gun was my Girsan MC321 Tactical (18.5" barrel) and I used a light modified and full choke for the test. The following loads were tested...

- Federal Tactical 00 buckshot (9 pellets)
- Rio Royal Buck 00 buckshot (9 pellets)
- Rio Royal Buck #1 buckshot (12 pellets)
- Rio Royal Buck #4 buckshot (21 pellets)
- Rio Royal Buck #4 buckshot (27 pellets)


With the Rio Royal Buck, one shot was taken with each choke from 10 and 20 yards, and three shots were taken with each choke from 30 yards. With the Federal Tactical, one shot was taken with the light modified choke at 10, 20, and 30 yards. All patterns were done on standard IDPA targets. To assist in seeing the pattern, the targets at 20 and 30 yards (and some at 10) have a red dot added to each hole left by the buckshot. The goal of this test was to pattern the buckshot, not necessarily place as many pellets in the -0 zone as possible. These loads did have different points of impact at 30 yards.

Results: Federal Tactical 00 buckshot (9 pellets)



Results: Rio Royal Buck 00 (9 pellets)

 

Results: Rio Royal Buck #1 (12 pellets)

 

Results: Rio Royal Buck #4 (21 Pellets)

 

Results: Rio Royal Buck #4 (27 pellets)









Conclusions

Price
I bought my Rio Royal Buck from Buds for $3.50 for a sleeve of 5. At that price practice and stockpile is affordable enough, but I'm not going to run through hundreds of rounds of it when compared to birdshot. I can generally get the Federal from work, but it's never going to be regularly found at Rio's price.

Recoil and Reliability
The Federal Tactical 00 buck is a normal recoiling round for 12 gauge, maybe a little stronger than a standard 1 1/8th oz load of birdshot. It runs my inertia MC312, any my shotgun is a bit picky with birdshot loads. The Rio Royal Buck is firm in recoil, and more than the Federal, but not punishing. The 27 pellet #4 buckshot loads did feel very equal to a stout 1 1/4th oz field load. All load fed just fine.

Capacity
The Rio has a rolled crimp and is slightly longer than 2 3/4". My 8 shot tube would only hold 7 rounds with it.

Patterning
Federal Tactical 00 buckshot is still the king of tight patterning buckshot that will run through inertia semi-auto shotguns. Rio wasn't going to unseat it, though if it did I wouldn't complain. Still though, it patterned well enough for budget loads and I certainly would feel comfortable taking a 30 yard shot with it in a self-defense situation.

I think choking up to full provides a slightly negative effect on pellet count. The Federal isn't meant to be shot through tight chokes due to the wad design.

I thought the #1 buck was the worst of the bunch in my gun. The 00 buck patterned well in my opinion. Between the two #4 buck loads, I would probably prefer the 21 pellet load. It recoils a little less and is pretty close with pellets on longer shots.

Your mileage may vary.

 

Cool test, thanks for sharing. I have a fair amount of Rio #00 and #0000 as well as slugs. I don’t shoot Buck from anything tighter than IC and my experience is pretty similar in patterning tests to yours (mainly Benelli Nova). The Federal results are impressive.

 

@NWcityguy2 great job! I have done the same myself. For me, Federal Flyght Control 00 for the win! Everyone who has a shotgun for self defense should do the same to know what works in their shotgun!

 

Definitely a great review! Federal Tactical is definitely a great load, though I do use Rio for home defense. I use the 27 pellet #4 buck load for the gun I carry with me around the house, and I use the reduced recoil 00 buck rounds for my bedside gun.

I do however keep federal Tactical/ Remington slugs on hand for my car gun, seeing as I don't have a say over any possible engagement distance.

Your test is a good show of the difference between a conventional buckshot with 0 additional assistance (buffer, wad, plating)
Versus a very good premium defense load with all the fixings.

For me it all comes down to cost, distance you may need to use the round at, pattern at those distances, and availability of the round.


I'd like to add that all of my shotguns with 5 round tubes will still hold 5 rounds when loaded with Rio shells.

~ Leo

 

Great report, NWcityguy2.

This is what I've found as well regarding the various buck shot rounds with and without wads/shot cups. For some purposes I like the way the ones with no wads (S&B, Rio, etc.) open up quickly at short distances (and they happen to be relatively inexpensive, too), then for other purposes the Federal Flite Control will keep the shot charge together much tighter when needed.

Chokes of course play a role too, but IME, not as much as the wad and shot charge. By playing around with different wads, shot size, shot charges, and muzzle velocities you can have a HUGE impact on shotgun patterns. Then add in choke selection (if you have that option) and you can do a lot more to change the performance of shotgun loads than you can via handloading for rifles. For me, THAT is the major benefit to loading your own shot shells - it gives you a TON of control over your pattern. I have screw-in chokes in my shorter-barreled shotguns and find them very useful, especially if I don't have a selection of different loads to choose from to accomplish the task at hand.

 

Based on your targets, in this instance you do get what you pay for.

The Federal's seemed to have much tighter groups.

Thanks for posting this.

 

@NWcityguy2, thanks for testing these loads and for posting your results! Particularly with regard to the effect of varying chokes and buckshot pellet sizes.

Patterning I did about a year ago comparing Rio 00 reduced recoil buck and Federal Flight Control 9 pellet 00 buck through my Mossberg 500 18 1/2" cylinder bore produced similar results. The Flight Control pattern at 30 yards was about the same as the Rio at 10 yards!

In addition, I patterned Ranger 8 pellet 00 buck and Suprema 9 pellet 00 buck loads. Through my gun, the cheap-o Suprema and the more expensive Ranger both shot bigger patterns at 30 yards compared to the Rio load.

If I can find the pics of that testing I'll post them. Although the targets won't be nearly as easy to understand as yours.

I really like the Rio loads for training. But for serious social work, the Flight Control 00 buck is by far the right choice.

 

Thank you everyone for the interest and comments. Rio Royal Buck definitely is a "get what you pay for" proposition, but I was pleasantly surprised by the 00 and #4 (21 pellet) results. I would put them above the S&B alternative, if for nothing else than a smell after shooting due to the S&B felt wad.

I have some S&B loads left from almost 20 years ago, but I will update this test with those results.

 

Nice write-up, your time is appreciated. The results are understandable, Flite Control to 'standard' wadding. IMO, using Flite Control within the confines of ones house is a bit of a waste, maybe even detrimental. Why do I say that, within the confines, distance wise, of ones house, a bit of opening up of a pattern would be a good thing. Flite Control is close to a slug, not many would recommend using slugs INSIDE ones house. Once you get out side, distances open up, Flite Control comes into it's own. 30-50 yards are shots one could put most if not all pellets on target where 'standard' 00 buck would produce many 'flyers'. I have 'standard' #1 buck loaded in my shottie, side saddle has 3 slugs, 3 Flite Control 00 buck. Sounds good in theory!

 

@NWcityguy2 , the photos that I took of my earlier patterns really stunk, so I went out and shot some better pics this afternoon.

The only buckshot I have is 00. I shot six loads today; one has 8 pellets with the rest having 9 pellets. Three are full velocity and three are reduced velocity.

Here's the pattern I got with Rio Royal, 9 pellets of 00 buckshot, full velocity



and this is Rio Royal, 9 pellets of 00 buckshot, reduced recoil.



This is Suprema 9 pellets of 00 buckshot, full velocity.



This was the Ranger 8 pellets of 00 buckshot, reduced recoil.



This is a Fiocchi 9 pellets of nickel-plated 00 buckshot, reduced recoil



And finally, this was the Federal Flight Control load with 9 pellets of 00 buck. It is kind of pointless to shoot this load at 10 and 20 yards (it just blows a big hole in the cardboard) so I just shot it at 30 and 40 yards.




Except for the Suprema load at 30 yards, every pellet fired hit paper. The Suprema sprayed 5 pellets off target at 30 yards. For self-defense purposes, I'd say that the maximum range for this load should probably be 20 yards.

All the other loads held every pellet on paper out through 30 yards. For both Rio loads and the Fiocchi, I think that the maximum safe range should be 30 yards. The Ranger could probably go out to 35 yards.

Interesting, both of the shots I took with the Federal Flight Control showed what might be a "9th pellet flyer." Excluding these flyers, the Federal load could probably hold every pellet on paper at distances of up to 50 yards. The 40-yard pattern being off-center is shooter error.

I couldn't see any consistent differences between the full velocity and reduced recoil loads.

Everything was shot through a Mossberg 500, 20" barrel, cylinder choke, equipped with a red dot sight. The red dot is zeroed for Rio slugs at 50 yards. This may be why most of the 30-yard patterns were centered lower than the POA. The big black dots were the point-of-aim.

 

It probably runs counter to the opinions of defensive "experts", but the pattern of the Federal Flight Control is too tight for home defense applications- I want some effective spread at expected fighting distances. The whole reason a shotgun is used is to have a larger "beaten" zone than a single projectile weapon.

 

Depends on your home, I guess. I live on 40 acres. We have huge porcupines and badgers that can really trash gardens and orchards. I don't want to pussyfoot around when I get a shot at one of those beasts...a .223/5.56 or a 9mm pcc won't cut it. I want to hit with a full load of heavy buckshot. Just getting a couple of pellets on target only makes 'em mad.

But that's the cool thing about taking the time to pattern a variety of buckshot loads. Say you decide that your most likely self-defense distance is twenty feet. Then you can identify, and load your gun with, ammo that you've proven is perfect for that scenario.

But say your fight doesn't go as planned, and you find that you need to reach out a little further. If you've identified a suitable load beforehand, and you put some of this reach-out-and-touch-someone stuff in your sidesaddle, then, if you practice, you can quickly reconfigure your tool so that you can also deal with the new situation.

That flexibility in the moment, plus the devastating effectiveness of heavy buckshot and slugs, is why the defensive shotgun is one of my preferred tools.

 

I tend to agree. I've never asked for buckshot to have less usable range.

 

Me, I want the most pellets in the vital area and the deepest penetration… The idea is simple. I’m wanting my opponent’s ability to return fire ended right then- with a single shot if at all possible… Better yet with competent handling and good tactics I’m expecting most to be at such a disadvantage that they give up and not a single shot is needed…

All of my shotgun experience was in police work and I always had it in hand on any hot calls so that’s my perspective. Very happy to say that almost every time my opponents gave up without a fight when they saw I had them cold with a weapon they could not survive… and to me that was the best outcome possible.

 

Not to hijack the thread, but I gotta ask, that looks like an older model Maverick 88 (does it have a roll mark on the left of the receiver?)...

How long have you been slinging rounds with it?

 

@SOAB ,The left side of the receiver is covered by the velcro sidesaddle, but the gun has dual action bars, a tang mounted safety, and the model rollmark is on the bottom of the receiver. I'm no expert, but I think that makes it a 500. True?

I've only owned this particular gun for three or four years, but I'm at least the third owner. The first, I believe, was a police officer. I've been blasting away with my first 500, a combo field/security, though, for at least 15 years. And I just bought a used 590. They're all great guns.

 

That is true, and the fact that you stated it was a 500 in your post(which I had even quoted), but alas, I think I typed this while I was several shots into a bottle of vodka... Not gonna lie, I was probably just looking at pictures.

The only real differences between the two are the pinned forend, lack of tang safety, fitment.

The question regarding the roll mark had to do with older 20xx-201x Maverick 88's having a the make and model scrolled on the left side of the receiver.

Anyhow, thanks for answering back, even though my question probably was a bit confusing. I think I'll stop scrolling THR while while partaking


~Leo

 

Me too because I don't want have do any extra work fixing any damage done to my home.

 

A lot went into this comparison. It is much appreciated.

 

Great test

Positive proof, tests must be done

Wads make a huge difference. Reloading allows choosing your preferred wad and buck size. Which may not be commercially available.

Rio does spread quicker, but is budget friendly, allowing for more practice.

In my 870 8+1, Rio will load 8+1. As has everything I have loaded in it. Slugs, buck or birdshot, star or roll crimped.