<P style="MARGIN: 0px">There's several types of tungsten shot coming onto the market. One such shot is being called Tungsten Super Shot tm. It's almost pure tungsten made from powder and formed with heating into round pellets, a process called "sintering". It's weight is heavy enough to allow the use of smaller pellets and lighter shot charges to achieve the same pattern density and penetration as heavier charges of larger size Hevishot. </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">On a thread on the shooting reloading forum of the Refuge, a comparison was done between 1 3/4 oz. #2 Hevishot 10ga. load (119 pellets) and a 1 1/4 oz. 12ga. #5, TSS load (129 pellets), fired at a 3/8" plywood board at 70 yards. On firing the 1 3/4 oz. #2 Hevi load, 77 pellets hit the board and 55 gave a complete pass through. On firing the 1 1/4 oz. #5 TSS load, 127 hit the board and all 127 gave complete pass through.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">The developer is expecting that people will buy it, even though it will be more expensive per unit of weight than Hevishot as they can use smaller pellets and lighter shot charges and still obtain the same performance as heavier charges of bigger Hevishot pellets.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">The performance is impressive, as will be the expected price.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">http://www.refugeforums.com/refuge/showthread.php?t=352712</P>
New Tungsten Shot To Become Available
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Joined
·
476 Posts
<P style="MARGIN: 0px">If it preforms as they state ,it may be interesting .</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">I must have missed the post on the cost .</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">I did read he plans on selling the shot for 5% over total cost .</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">Also the 7 1/2 shot for ducks should allow small shot charges to still have enough pellets to be efective with ducks.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">One thing I read that bothers me is that they are testing "Lead" wads for the loads ,I would be fearful of barrel and choke dammage.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">Johnch</P>
<P>There's was only one fleeting speculation on cost, that being about $1 more per shell. However, that estimate was so preliminary I wouldn't put much faith in it. As with Hevishot, I would not use it for waterfowling. I get satisfactory results from using steel shot loads. I lose very few birds I hit, probably averaging less than 1 a year. However, I lose 100% of those I miss. Spending more money on shells would only increase the cost of my misses. Now, if they could develop a proximity fuse for use in shotshells, that might be worth the extra cost.<IMG src="http://www.websitetoolbox.com/images/boards/smilies/biggrin.gif" align=absMiddle border=0></P>
<P>It is too bad we spend more time & money on more lethal shells than we do on learning to shoot better. Some call it better conservation because you do not cripple as many birds, others say that it increases opportunity because you can take longer shots. Why do we need to be able to kill birds at over 40yds. Most guys do not even know what 40yds looks like. I am not a good shot, but within that 40 yd limit, I have no problem killing birds with any steel shot load out there. Throw away the decoys, calls and camo and we will just go out with enough fire power to kill something. I was one of the original testers of the first steel shot loads and because I did not know any better, shot the same as allways. Did not see any difference. A 15 year study in Calif. using range finders, hunters that did not know if they were using steel or lead, showed that the problem is with the gunner, not the steel loads. Lead shot users averaged a kill rate of 29%, the steel shot gunners averaged 28%. I would like to see the numbers today with the new steel shot loads available! Just my opinion & observation. We make this great sport more complecated than needed. From calling to the special loads. I refuse to pay the high price for these special loads. What is the real objective? Expanding the range, increasing confidence or just a matter of attitude toward the drive just kill a bird. Jim</P>
<P>There was a post this morning concerning the cost of the TSS. It was $62 per kilogram (2.2 lbs), or $28.18 per pound, $1.76 per ounce. Then you have to include the cost of loading it if you are buying the bulk shot, which should be about $0.25, plus the cost, if any, of the case.</P>
Sounds like I won't like this tungsten for the same reason I didn't like the first Tungsten Iron load. It blows right through the animal without much energy transfer. One hard shot is just as poor as the next if you ask me regardless of what it weighs. So okay you shoot the bird the shot blows through it so it flies a while then falls stone dead. No thanks. Too much money. I like hevi shot and know it works and just got a bunch on sale so I'll stick to that when I run out back to steel shot. I know hevi shot is hard shot as well but do it not being uniformly round I think it transfers the energy better.
<P>The energy transfer difference between the smaller TSS and the larger Hevishot pellets seems to be the primary bone of contention now. The issue of the irregular shape of the Hevishot wasn't brought up, but I suppose it could be an additional factor in favor of Hevishot. Several were arguing that penetration with Hevishot is adequate and the larger frontal areas of the larger Hevishot pellets would likely provide a greater amount of tissue distruction than the smaller, but denser TSS. Most are waiting to see the results of live bird comparison tests to determine which is better from a performance standpoint.</P>
Joined
·
185 Posts
<P>no thank's..................i'll stick with steel........</P>
Joined
·
476 Posts
<P style="MARGIN: 0px">I saw a test where they showed that shooting Hevi Shot ( in this test) was not realy much more costly than shooting steel.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">The testers found that the Hevi shooters hit and killed more birds thit the first shot than the steel shooters .</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">Few of the Hevi birds needed to be finished off on the water.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">If I remember the stats the steel shooters shot like 2.5-1 shells or higher, to kill the same number of birds.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">I will try to find the link.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">Johnch</P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0px">I believe that there are two main advantages of Hevishot over steel shot for hitting birds. The first is that the velocity of the Hevishot loads are relatively close to what most shooters use in lead to practice, so their leads remain similar. The second advantage is that the greater density of Hevishot allows for the use of smaller pellets and, therefore, denser patterns than obtainable with steel pellets of comparable effectiveness. The advantage of TSS would be in allowing the use of lighter weight shot charges and pellets even smaller than Hevishot, yet retaining the killing power of Hevishot pellets in larger sizes.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">I make a special effort to load and shoot plenty of fast lead loads so my annual readjustment to fast steel loads goes seamlessly as possible. Nevertheless, it usually takes me about 7-10 shots with fast steel to settle back into the groove. However, I doubt that either Hevishot or TSS would offer any appreciable advantages to me in hitting the birds worth the extra cost involved. I make the extra effort to get my loads and chokes working together to make steel shot loads effective for my hunting purposes.</P>
<P>How can you argue that Hevi shot or TSS won't out perform steel shot? JMO that's like saying a 350 big block won't outperform a small slant 6. Granted if you have the birds close enough it is irrelavent but let's face it sometimes it is nice to have a little reserve for stubborn birds.</P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0px">I don't think I have ever read anyone say that Hevishot or TSS is not better than steel shot. The only shot type I have heard being used that is worse than steel is tin shot they tried in England. It is said to have been like shooting sand, it is so light and ballistically inefficient.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">The argument has always been whether the additional performance gained in using them is worth their higher cost. In my case, I don't use Hevishot as I don't shoot at ducks or geese with my 12 ga. beyond 50 yards, or geese beyond 60 yards with my 10ga. I insure I use chokes and loads that will deliver killing pellet penetration and patterns at those ranges with steel shot. My problem is not bringing down the birds I hit, but hitting those at which I shoot. I lose very few birds I hit, averaging about 1 a season, but I lose 100% of those I miss. Using Hevishot or TSS would not likely improve the hit/miss ratio, just increase the cost. </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">For those who do not take the time to pattern their guns, who won't make the effort to get good chokes and steel shot loads for their guns, who shoot few shells each season or shoot birds at long ranges, the more expensive non-toxic shots like bismuth, TM, Hevishot and soon, TSS, offer an opportunity to get good patterns and killing loads similar to or better than formerly obtained with lead with relatively little extra effort, albeit at a significant increase in cost over steel shot.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">Just like the engine comparison, each of us has to decide what we need to "Get R Done". Some of us need more power to do that than do others. I don't pull a big boat trailer. I don't haul heavy or large loads. A vehicle with a small engine works perfectly well for my needs, costs less to buy and less to operate. </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0px">TripleB,</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">There is little disagreement that the non-toxics with a density greater than steel are more lethal at ranges beyond 35 yds but are expensive and cost prohibitive for many waterfowlers. I disagree with the general premiss that high velocity is an advantage in hitting the target although it might be an advantage with steel if hevier pellets are used which should require less lead.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">As you are well aware, a more dense or hevier pellet retains its velocity much better and delievers more energy on target compared to a less dense lighter pellet.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">CODB brought up a good point about the irregular shape of Hevi-Shot maybe having something to do with energy transfer and tissue damage. I have noticed that Kent's TM Impact tears a heck of a hole in the birds.....I've heard that because it is flexible it kind of flattens out on impact and gradually regains its shape and still penetrates deep. I know a muzzle loader round ball of soft lead flattens out and penetrates less the higher the velocity and that an extra hard ball doesn't deform as much and penetrates deeper at the same impact velocity. I think you are right about the TSS and the real small sizes of shot having full penetration capability but because of frontal size tissue damage being less.......kind of like hitting a deer with a bullet that completely penetrates but doesn't expand compared to a bullet the same size that does expand delivering all it's energy to the vitals with out exiting.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">This is an interesting topic.....what do you think?</P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0px">Big Mexican and I did some function testing of the 1 oz. 1300 fps. and 1450 fps. loads for SP10R a week ago with a frozen SBE and frozen shells. The purpose was simply to see if the light charge weights would cycle through a recoil operated gun in very cold conditions. Since the SBE is the most popular recoil operated gun now used in waterfowling, we put Big Mexican's SBE in the deep freeze as well as the shells. All of them fired and ejected without a hitch. Recoil was very soft.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">The 1 1/4 oz. #5 loads used what appeared to be a Precision Reloading steel shot wad. The 1 oz. #7 loads used a Federal wad. The Federal wads did not show any perforations, even though modified choke was inadvertently used. With that light of a charge and small pellet size I wouldn't be concerned about wad perforations. A pellet slipping between the petals might be another matter, however. I believe they are now going in a different direction than lead wads in their wad choice, however. I would also prefer to err on the side of using a thicker than necessary wad and that's what I recommended even though they haven't seen any problems so far with the small shot in the lead wads.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">SP10R had recommended using a skeet 1, or IC, and after shooting the effectively 18" wide patterns at 40 yards with the Mod., I can understand why the skeet 1 or IC choke was recommended. He told me the modified tended to blow patterns, but these were quite good, albeit too tight for 40 yard shooting.</P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px"> </P> <P style="MARGIN: 0px">We'll have to wait for the live bird tests before firming up an opinion on whether the larger shot sizes perform better. My gut instinct tells me that they will, given an equal number of pellet hits. However, the smaller pellets of theTSS loads may afford a greater number of hits, so the truth will have to be established by field testing both. </P>
<P>There have been very few reviews of Hevisteel performance posted. Most have been like Bill's, disatisfaction with the buffer leaking and no apparent increase in killing power over fast steel. The roll crimped loads were too long to feed properly in some 3" guns. They are said to have changed to a fold crimp so the length and buffer leaking issues should be solved, but whether they offer much of an advantage in killing power in the field, as opposed to theoretically, remains unanswered.</P>
<P>The only information I'd seen about them (Hevi-Steel) came from 2 articles I read in Wildfowl. The author seemed to like them, but he did mention the feeding problems. He also spoke highly of the the new Federal loads, and said they'd be priced the same as the old Tungsten-Iron Loads, which I used to buy in 3" for $12.99/box. I know that the T-I loads weren't quite up to Hevi-Shot standards, but for the cost savings they worked well enough for me. I guess I'll have to wait till the season starts to find out about the new Federal loads.</P>
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
