steel chalenge

[Doctor Lecter]

change = price hike  always ,  good to know our elected organisations  are fighting our corner !!   

 

[JDL]

anyone  shooting the orston 100 esp steel challenge  this Sunday 12th  , I'm having a go , I'm interested to test steel shells over 12 stands ,  and  see how they and ( me )  perform  and the cost shell wise    !!!  

Are you willing to share the results of your ‘test”?

After multiple price increases in a short period, we’re now paying around €200 per 1000 for 28gr Fiocchi T3.
In the meantime Gamebore Black Gold went to €300 per 1000…
As there isn’t much difference between them, I expect Gamebore to lose a lot of the market share they had here.

I'm not going to comment on the other posts, as I don’t want to contribute to the ban on lead shot 

Maybe it’s time to support FITASC by participating in their competitions.
As far as I know they don’t want to move away from lead, and don’t want to organize a competition on a steel only ground.
 

 

[Jan Powell]

As far as I know they don’t want to move away from lead, and don’t want to organize a competition on a steel only ground.

For obvious reasons.

 

[Doctor Lecter]

Are you willing to share the results of your ‘test”?

After multiple price increases in a short period, we’re now paying around €200 per 1000 for 28gr Fiocchi T3.
In the meantime Gamebore Black Gold went to €300 per 1000…
As there isn’t much difference between them, I expect Gamebore to lose a lot of the market share they had here.

I'm not going to comment on the other posts, as I don’t want to contribute to the ban on lead shot 

Maybe it’s time to support FITASC by participating in their competitions.
As far as I know they don’t want to move away from lead, and don’t want to organize a competition on a steel only ground.
 

i shot orston steel challenge sunday 12th , bought 250 hull pro steel  28g  7s £65  ,   12 stands nothing too drastic or eye sight tests , one stand, 6 single clays full use of the gun  , couple of clays a good distance ,    the shells were very good , i noticed no extra noise or recoil  and hitting power was impressive ,  barrels were dirtier than using lead, but cleaned up fine , as a average shot i was happy enough with 82/100 ,     i don't advocate we remove lead shells and turn to steel , but now having shot steel  i have a opinion , i just hope in the future regarding steel cartridges  we the shooters are actually involved in any changes and not dictated to  !!     

 

[Salopian]

I was going to write 'Food for thought ' but it may be more apt to entitle this post 'Thought for Food'.

It is all very well shooting clays with steel (soft iron) shot because clays are hard and brittle and will shatter fairly easily if struck .

But Game is a living creature with soft tissue and flesh & bone , when Game is struck by Lead pellets the lead deforms and dissipates its energy and causes mortal wounding and shock to the organs assisting in causing instantaneous death .

Steel (soft iron) does not deform so readily so the result is akin to hitting the creature with something similar to being hit or injected with more than 300 hypodermic needles  if centred in your pattern .

Indeed there are videos online showing birds that have been shot with steel showing holes clean through the carcase .

Can I ask the scientists and pro steel advocates " Is this a humane act ?" 

Being as BASC is a  hunting , shooting , and conservation organisation have they not been a little hastey in promoting the use of steel shot ?

 

[Charliedog]

Not convinced there is an issue using lead for clays, the discussion appears to be around lead in the food chain from game shooting, steel has been used successfully in wildfowling without the mortal injury mentioned (I have no experience of this), I suspect there are a lot more pricked birds on so called high bird shoots with people using lead ammunition shooting out of range birds though.

 

[chesterse]

I also shot the steel challenge at Orston.

I had 28 gun 7s Hull prosteel and 28gm 7s Fiocchi steel.

Read that you need to be a couple of chokes more open so shot imp/c and noticed I was getting some good kills but a fair few chippy ones. Half way round changed to 1/4 optima choke and kills were much better and more like I would get with lead.

The Fiocchi thumped so much even through an auto that I was flinching a lot. My friend who was also shooting the Fiocchi noted that he was also getting kicked around a lot.

The Hull cartridges were softer to shoot but on a long teal seemed a little slow to reach the target.

I was very concerned about the price of the Hull at £7 a box of 25. The Fiocchi were £5 a box from another source.

The Hull cartridges could be used in standard or superior proof up to half choke and the Fiocchi apparently with standard proof and any choke!

All in all I don’t think you need to open up the chokes too much as long as you are half or less and whilst steel was ok for a typical sporting round I don’t think 7s would cope too well with really long targets you see occasionally or maybe the pellet size needs to go up .

Shall not be rushing to move away from lead.

 

[Luke_(NL)]

I am not a steel advocate, but I don't think the arguments presented here for lead are likely to change what's in motion. Especially not that shooting game with steel is somehow less humane than shooting game with lead. Point is, you're shooting an animal to end its life. Personally I have no issues with that - hunting is part of life, puts food on the table and pest control is useful and necessary. I do think its a bit hypocritical to say that shooting an animal with cartridge A is morally different from shooting it with cartridge B. As a game shooter you should always endeavour to kill cleanly, accounting for every circumstance including the range of the shot. If you can't do so with steel, you probably can't with lead either.  

Funnily enough I just saw an ad on Dutch tv where the animal protection association is advertising for clay pigeon shooting. Of course as a statement against game shooting, but still the first tv ad I've seen promoting clays. 

 

[MartynB]

 I do think its a bit hypocritical to say that shooting an animal with cartridge A is morally different from shooting it with cartridge B. As a game shooter you should always endeavour to kill cleanly, accounting for every circumstance including the range of the shot. If you can't do so with steel, you probably can't with lead either.  

Totally wrong . It’s nothing to do with range . It’s to do with killing . It is morally wrong to shoot an animal with something that isn’t the best available ammunition be it cartridge or bullet  to render it stone dead ( if of course , you do your part ) . It’s not range it’s the ability of the shot to transfer its energy and not bore straight through wounding or crippling  .   To that end nothing yet proposed does the job like lead The other issue is that the shot animal if it is intended for the table you want the minimum damage possible , this is just my opinion but walloping half a dozen shot sized for a goose  , through a pheasant , makes it unfit for the table . 
 

 

[Jan Powell]

Setting aside the cost, risk of damage to barrels and ricochet concerns, the long and short of it is this. Steel loads are nowhere near as effective as lead loads for all disciplines bar skeet. Steel pellets suffer a huge drop off beyond 40 metres and lack the ballistic energy required to break targets effectively. That's consistently proven through research and, frankly, isn't really a debate anymore.

As for the future, it's certainly possible steel will be forced upon the sport although disciplines like trap and skeet where shot fallout is easily contained and recycled have have a much stronger case for retaining lead. I certainly see no move towards any lead alternatives in southern Europe, Russia or the USA and with the might of the ISSF CEO behind the scenes I don’t envisage anything changing soon.

I fear steel and lead alternatives will disproportionately affect the club shooter more than anyone. How many of those will continue with the sport if and when steel becomes mandatory only time will tell. 

Although I'm loathed to post it as this one will just go on and on, here's a short video from Russell Mark that explains all...

 

[Luke_(NL)]

Totally wrong .

I stand corrected then. 

It’s nothing to do with range .

How so? Every circumstance including range would account for one's ability to render a clean kill. 

It’s to do with killing . It is morally wrong to shoot an animal with something that isn’t the best available ammunition be it cartridge or bullet  to render it stone dead ( if of course , you do your part ) . It’s not range it’s the ability of the shot to transfer its energy and not bore straight through wounding or crippling  .   To that end nothing yet proposed does the job like lead

I'm not sure about this statement. Keyword being "available", then yes. As I said, lead has been banned here for quite some time, and hunting goes on as before, likely because shooters have adapted accordingly. The 'best available cartridge for stone dead' may well be something other than what's allowed or considered ' proper', but we still abide by law and custom.  I take issue with a blanket statement saying that all hunting that isn't done with lead is 'morally wrong', almost as much as the similar statement that "all hunting is wrong" .  See how easy it is to be at the wrong end of a generalisation?

 The other issue is that the shot animal if it is intended for the table you want the minimum damage possible , this is just my opinion but walloping half a dozen shot sized for a goose  , through a pheasant , makes it unfit for the table . 

True indeed. But at odds with your statement that one would have to use whatever most definitely renders it stone dead.  
 

 

[TRINITY]

3 hours ago, Jan Powell said:

Setting aside the cost, risk of damage to barrels and ricochet risk the long and short of it is this. Steel loads are nowhere near as effective as lead loads for all disciplines bar skeet. Steel pellets suffer a huge drop off beyond 40 metres and lack the ballistic energy required to break targets effectively. That's consistently proven through research and, frankly, isn't really a debate anymore.

As for the future, it's certainly possible steel will be forced upon the sport although disciplines like trap and skeet where shot fallout is easily contained and recycled have have a much stronger case for retaining lead. I certainly see no move towards any lead alternatives in southern Europe, Russia or the USA and with the might of the ISSF CEO behind the scenes I don’t envisage anything changing soon.

I fear steel and lead alternatives will disproportionately affect the club shooter more than anyone. How many of those will continue with the sport if and when steel becomes mandatory only time will tell. 

Although I'm loathed to post it as this one will just go on and on, here's a short video from Russell Mark that explains all...

I like Russels clips but to me this particular one is meaningless. As an experiment he should have compared steel and lead using pellets of identical mass and not identical size. The results proved nothing at all . However in all fairness he alluded to that in his conclusions. 

 

[Paul120]

I like Russels clips but to me this particular one is meaningless. As an experiment he should have compared steel and lead using pellets of identical mass and not identical size. The results proved nothing at all . However in all fairness he alluded to that in his conclusions. 

It would be interesting to see an experiment that would show what load would be comparable in not only shot size but weight of shot required to keep the pellet count to get the same density of pattern. 

From the tables I've seen of the pellets sizes, weights and counts per ounce, if you go up the 2 sizes to replicate the mass of each pellet you reduce the number of pellets by around 100 per ounce or around 30%.  It doesn't seem to be 1 x no7 lead  = 1x no 5 steel. I guess this has to do with volume and pythagoras or it could be that the shot size  standards are  not consistent .  So maybe to replicate fully you would need to up the load from 1 ounce to 1 1/4 or ,even  1 1/3. It would be interesting to see. 

 

[TRINITY]

It would be interesting to see an experiment that would show what load would be comparable in not only shot size but weight of shot required to keep the pellet count to get the same density of pattern. 

From the tables I've seen of the pellets sizes, weights and counts per ounce, if you go up the 2 sizes to replicate the mass of each pellet you reduce the number of pellets by around 100 per ounce or around 30%.  It doesn't seem to be 1 x no7 lead  = 1x no 5 steel. I guess this has to do with volume and pythagoras or it could be that the shot size  standards are  not consistent .  So maybe to replicate fully you would need to up the load from 1 ounce to 1 1/4 or ,even  1 1/3. It would be interesting to see. 

I dont think you need to up lift the load. Let's say a 28gm lead load contained 350 pellets. Then you would need a steel cartridge that also contained 350 pellets and a total shot load of 28 gm.  The steal cartridge would have a different volume of shot and each pellet would obviously be a slightly larger size. However I suspect that the experiment conducted by Russel would show no significant difference between lead and steal. You may also need to alter the choke slightly as it is accepted that steel throws a slightly tighter pattern.

 

[Gavin]

Shoots  have been watered down to keep all classes happy over the last number of years.  When forced to shoot steel they will be watered down some more.  Personally I don't care about scores but enjoy a challenging shoot,  with steel the distance will have to be pulled back as luck should not come in to deciding a shoot.  This is an expensive sport and for now enjoyment outweighs the expense  that won't be the case for me if forced to use steel.

 

[Doctor Lecter]

Shoots  have been watered down to keep all classes happy over the last number of years.  When forced to shoot steel they will be watered down some more.  Personally I don't care about scores but enjoy a challenging shoot,  with steel the distance will have to be pulled back as luck should not come in to deciding a shoot.  This is an expensive sport and for now enjoyment outweighs the expense  that won't be the case for me if forced to use steel.

wow"  watered down shoots" ?   let me know where they are , i will try and improve my averages !!!    are you cpsa , do you shoot registered targets ?      shoots i attend seem hard enough or me  !   

 

[Deershooter]

Shoots  have been watered down to keep all classes happy over the last number of years.  When forced to shoot steel they will be watered down some more.  Personally I don't care about scores but enjoy a challenging shoot,  with steel the distance will have to be pulled back as luck should not come in to deciding a shoot.  This is an expensive sport and for now enjoyment outweighs the expense  that won't be the case for me if forced to use steel.

Go and shoot Orston , Kegworth, east of England , grange farm ! Come back and tell me these cpsa shoots are watered down ( oh sorry you don’t seem to be a member ) 

 

[Gavin]

Go and shoot Orston , Kegworth, east of England , grange farm ! Come back and tell me these cpsa shoots are watered down ( oh sorry you don’t seem to be a member ) 

Wrong end of the stick  I shoot in Ireland  and wasn't referring to just registered shoots.  But the same thing is happening in Ireland as the UK.  grounds set a tough shoot and get slated for it.  Fair play to those who shoot the tougher grounds a lot don't.  Iv shot some really tough shoots over here and enjoyed them but for every 1 person that enjoys a tough shoot 20 ***** about them.  Speaking to UK shooters that have shot in Ireland the general consensus was shoots in Ireland are tougher than the UK   that's not the case any more. target setters have got better but they have to please everybody.  Back on topic the limit of a shotgun will be less with steel 

 

[Doctor Lecter]

Wrong end of the stick  I shoot in Ireland  and wasn't referring to just registered shoots.  But the same thing is happening in Ireland as the UK.  grounds set a tough shoot and get slated for it.  Fair play to those who shoot the tougher grounds a lot don't.  Iv shot some really tough shoots over here and enjoyed them but for every 1 person that enjoys a tough shoot 20 ***** about them.  Speaking to UK shooters that have shot in Ireland the general consensus was shoots in Ireland are tougher than the UK   that's not the case any more. target setters have got better but they have to please everybody.  Back on topic the limit of a shotgun will be less with steel 

ah point taken , but the shooting governing bodies must consult us the members / shooters  before any decision is made on steel shot !!    

 

[Paul120]

I dont think you need to up lift the load. Let's say a 28gm lead load contained 350 pellets. Then you would need a steel cartridge that also contained 350 pellets and a total shot load of 28 gm.  The steal cartridge would have a different volume of shot and each pellet would obviously be a slightly larger size. However I suspect that the experiment conducted by Russel would show no significant difference between lead and steal. You may also need to alter the choke slightly as it is accepted that steel throws a slightly tighter pattern.

Due to the way shot sizes are defined it's not a straight forward just replace x number of x type shot with y number with y type.

The wisdom is that 2 shot size increase in steel is required to match lead. I can't find a 5 1/2 steel shot size. 

I'm no expert, it's just what I read from the tables. 

I got this example of the tables off outdoor product guide .com but there are others available.