Steel shot vs. lead and others- Lethality

Surprising yes. Surprising Outdoor Life would buy that truckload of BS. Anyone who understands the basic laws of physics knows much lighter steel pellets need to have more velocity to achieve the same penetration as lead. Sure it's possible to compensate for the weight difference by increasing the shot size (= increasing the pellet weight) but that means sacrificing the pattern density (less pellets) and reducing penetration (larger pellets = greater resistance upon impact). I can't do anything about the pattern density without going to smaller shot (i.e. bismuth or tungsten which = $$$$$), but I can boost penetration of larger shot by increasing velocity. I have tried 1400 fps BB shells when that's all I could get. Might have been just as effective if I'd thrown them at the geese. Even 1450 is pretty much a waste of money. 1550 fps 1 1/8 oz BB is the stuff that kills. Or at least it will bring the honkers down.

Shooting pheasants with #2 shot? Really? Why? Sure, they are the same size as mallards but they're not wearing the same armor. Pluck a duck and a chicken and you'll see what I mean. #4 steel is PLENTY big enough to kill pheasants. I do it all the time with very few birds flying off banged up. Actually, I have done well enough shooting them with #6 steel.

As to judging "lethality" based on hunting experiences recorded, that can depend on so many other factors that have nothing to do with the shotgun shells used: effectiveness of hunter (skybuster or skeet pro), type of hunting (pass shooting or blasting birds close range from a layout blind), even time of year. How does the analyst know which birds that flew off were wounded? Presumably the only "wounded" birds tallied were those that fell with a broken wing.
 
The guy on the other thread with the shot string analysis used some genuine science. Pretty hard to argue with photographic evidence. Pretty hard to believe this kind of "believe it because I say so" analysis. Too many factors can be manipulated (or fabricated?) for the desired result.
 
I've said it a few times on here already, but I noticed a huge difference in the amount of cripples on doves I had when we were forced to move to steel shot statewide.

I've been hunting dove every year since 2001. When I shot with lead I would have at most 1-2 cripples per limit of doves using the standard 20 gauge dove loads. When we had to move to steel shot in 2019 I have 5-6 cripples per limit running 20 gauge #6 steel dove loads. It's been consistently that way every year since. I know I'm just one data point but it's happened enough times now that it definitely points to the reduced lethality of steel in my experience.
 
I suspect that there are some holes in the methodolgy here. One thing that caught my eye was that the hunters didn't know what kind of load they were shootiing. I'd say that not knowing how to adjust your lead could produce some skewing of cripple rates (unless they had all the different shot sizes at the same velocity (and even then, there's going to be differences in pattern)).

That said, I believe that there's a lot of data behind this and it's not hard for me to believe that the differences are smaller than most think. I've been going back and forth between lead 6's and steel 4's for pheasant, for several years now and I don't really notice any difference in lethality. I think it's likely that the differences are starker for hunters who are more liberal about the shots they take.
 
Brandon270 said:
I've said it a few times on here already, but I noticed a huge difference in the amount of cripples on doves I had when we were forced to move to steel shot statewide.

I've been hunting dove every year since 2001. When I shot with lead I would have at most 1-2 cripples per limit of doves using the standard 20 gauge dove loads. When we had to move to steel shot in 2019 I have 5-6 cripples per limit running 20 gauge #6 steel dove loads. It's been consistently that way every year since. I know I'm just one data point but it's happened enough times now that it definitely points to the reduced lethality of steel in my experience.
Click to expand...
What changes did you make when you went to steel? If you're shooting the same choke, shot size, and velocity, I wouldn't be surprised if wound ratio increased. Increase shot size and muzzle velocity. Then see what happens.

Another factor that GREATLY affects steel ammo is wind. Lead shot can also be affected by wind but a stiff breeze will wreak havoc with steel. In a hard wind I may have to double my lead on geese. Or shorten it. I strongly suspect, though have yet to test it on a patterning board, that wind blows apart a steel shot pattern.
 
I switched to steel shot for all upland birds when Indiana started requiring non-toxic for doves on government ground. My personal results would indicate that it works better, but that's not taking into consideration that I've become more proficient with a shotgun and that I'm shooting a gun that actually fits me. Regardless, I'm a believer that the negative perception that steel gets is mostly a result of poor shot selection by the shooter combined with the human condition to resist change in any form but especially when that change is mandated by the government.
I enjoyed the article👍
 
OntarioHunter said:
What changes did you make when you went to steel? If you're shooting the same choke, shot size, and velocity, I wouldn't be surprised if wound ratio increased. Increase shot size and muzzle velocity. Then see what happens.

Another factor that GREATLY affects steel ammo is wind. Lead shot can also be affected by wind but a stiff breeze will wreak havoc with steel. In a hard wind I may have to double my lead on geese. Or shorten it. I strongly suspect, though have yet to test it on a patterning board, that wind blows apart a steel shot pattern.
Click to expand...
Shot size went up from 8.5 to 6. Speed went from 1250 to 1400fps choke is modified. We don't get much wind in central CA during dove season so that would have no affect in my situation. Like I said if it just happened one season I'd blame it on bad luck but 3 years in a row has me blaming the steel shot.

On the contrary I've been a big fan of the performance results of using all copper bullets for hunting with my rifles.
 
Brandon270 said:
Shot size went up from 8.5 to 6. Speed went from 1250 to 1400fps choke is modified. We don't get much wind in central CA during dove season so that would have no affect in my situation. Like I said if it just happened one season I'd blame it on bad luck but 3 years in a row has me blaming the steel shot.

On the contrary I've been a big fan of the performance results of using all copper bullets for hunting with my rifles.
Click to expand...
That should be sufficient. The pattern should be tighter than it was with lead shot so I am surprised the rate of crippling increased. I would maybe have expected the rate of missed shots would increase. Modified with steel shot should throw a pattern similar to full choke with lead. If your misses have indeed increased try IC choke. Also, if you maintained the same weight payload in the shells when moving up to #6 from #8.5, your pattern will be considerably less dense. That might be a factor affecting increased rate of cripples. Maybe think about stepping up to 3" shells which can increase the pattern density while still maintaining velocity.
 
I have followed Tom Roster work on Non Toxic shot for years It’s excellent. But that article does not tell the whole story. I hunted pre Steel shot law came into effect. I have also tried all the Non Toxic types of shot Regardless of cost. First when Steel Shot came out it was not very effective but I will admit it is way better today.
To say it’s as effective as Lead shot is not 100% correct. Is it close to the old standard Duck and Pheasant 3 3/4dr 1 1/4oz shot of 4 or 6 shot promo loads with soft lead shot most duck hunters used at the time Lead was legal. To say Steel Shot is effective as Winchester 12ga 3inch Mag 1 7/8oz 4 shot copper plated shot is not even close, this is what I used for Mallards and No Steel Shot load has ever came close to it’s performance. Remington Wingmaster Tungsten load was the Winchester equal.
So if you are talking old Lead Shot Promo Loads, Yes Steel Shot Today is ok.
I lost a solid 10 yards range with Steel Shot today vs Winchester copper plated Lead shot Period.
Do I use Steel shot today yes Remington Nitro Steel and I also use Remington Wingmaster HD shells also yes I still have some and use it on the 2nd and 3rd shot in my gun shooting over decoys. I always use Steel for the first shot because it’s cheaper. Also you get what you pay for and with Steel buying the premium shells is worth it for a couple reasons #1 performance #2 corrosion resistance. Just my 2cents.
 
I tend to shoot #3 steel for all my duck and upland hunting. For years have shot as light of load as possible for the velocity as mentioned above. When I started shooting and sticking with one load, as much as possible, things got much better. Do go up to bigger loads for goose hunting. With bigger birds, and I think this holds for lead as well maybe to not quite the same degree, you need to lead the head and not the body. Which can be easier said than done.
 
There's been no proof using steel shot accomplishes the goals used to justify requiring other than lead (OTL). The push to OTL comes practically entirely from industry, not consumer.

"Hunters shooting steel did require more shells to bag their birds (ducks, geese, pheasants and doves) than with lead loads"

And he claims to have profited from OTL for forty years.

"I also did testing for ammunition manufacturers Remington, Environ-Metal, and Winchester"


.
 
I absolutely hate steel for ducks.....lost too many birds .....I used Heavy-shot and stone birds at solid 40 yd shots now. And that 1700 FPS Kent is BS....kicks like a mule even in an auto
So, I was hating the steel rule in CA until I figured out how lethal #7 is on doves and quail......
The winchester stuff goes about 1350.....far less leed needed on doves and they simply die when hit....20 ga improved cyl....seriously....lead them by less than the slower lead shells...impresive.

Quail....I dont have a problem killing a limit with steel either- no complaints.

Now the problem is finding the damn steel required to hunt here in CA.

Chukar-----well.....I spend the extra on bismuth as I had too many kinda shake when I hit them and keep going....

My 3 cents...
 
It's hard to imagine how a less dense material could perform better, ballistically, all things considered.

There's no way that losing energy faster is ever a plus.

I say go heavier than lead - #9 Tungsten is devastating on turkey!
 
I always shoot steel. I hunt private and public land in north dakota. If you get caught with lead on public is a ticket
 
Beesting said:
I always shoot steel. I hunt private and public land in north dakota. If you get caught with lead on public is a ticket
Click to expand...

Therefore there is no question about it for you - and, indeed, you've made no comment regarding the subject (lethality of steel shot).
 
PaulFWI said:
Therefore there is no question about it for you - and, indeed, you've made no comment regarding the subject (lethality of steel shot).
Click to expand...
Lethality of steel vs lead is no difference in my opinion. It's all on how good of a shot you are. People blame birds getting away on the shot (steel-lead) just be a better shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mtmiller
FWP Upland Gamebird Hunting Reg Meeting
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
sclancy27
sclancy27
Oak
Proposed Dolores Canyons National Monument
Replies
16
Views
1K
elkduds
elkduds
D4570
Dang, I think that's "close enough" for coyotes.
Replies
11
Views
673
Hammsolo
Hammsolo
perma
Holy copper fouling!
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
Boarmaster
Boarmaster
Y
Statistics for differentiating between groups?
3 4 5
Replies
96
Views
4K
yakimanoob
Y
Yeti GOBOX Collection

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,621
Messages
2,027,014
Members
36,247
Latest member
Pwrwrkr

Share this page

Back
Top