doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Steel shot.

Guys who have stuck with it will tell you that steel already works well enough for waterfowl. The problem is making it work as well as possible for upland game. And, for those of us who shoot "classic" shotguns, making it work--to the greatest degree possible--in century old guns. The CIP has already developed guidelines for steel shot loads that they consider to be safe in guns that meet standard CIP proof (850 bars). Basically, their requirements for ammunition that meets CIP standards limits shot size, velocity, and pressure. The same loads should work in vintage American guns in good condition. I don't believe any of those loads are commercially available in the States currently, but they probably will be--or some American manufacturer will jump on the bandwagon and produce similar loads.

These loads will not be as good as lead, if for no other reason than the fact that steel is inferior, ballistically, to lead. But they will provide a cheaper option than the soft nontox shells for those of us with vintage guns.

I've never shot steel at waterfowl but I've saw it shot and shot and shot and shot at the same waterfowl numerous times.

"Works well enough".....I'd agree it's better than shooting nothing.

There aren't any manufacturers that give a rats ass about a sliver of the already rapidly-declining hunting community, namely, old guys who dearly love their old guns.

I will never give up feeding my dearly loved old guns a diet of lead shot.

I don't break clays of any kind, I only use my guns to hunt with, which most seasons is not nearly enough.

The only living beings I pose a danger to are the upland birds I kill, which most seasons are not nearly enough.

Some British cartridge manufacturers produce steel loads that are deemed safe for use in lighter English proofed guns. The ammunition has been through proof tests but is cautioned against use in anything tighter than half choke. I did a bit of experimenting and used them out of an Ithaca 37 pump action with Modified choke. I have also tried them through a Beretta 20 bore. I was dissatisfied with the performance finding that there seems to be just a narrow band of effectiveness. Too close and it will blow things to bits; a little tiny bit farther out and it wounds more than it kills. I do find the Ithaca 12 with steel pellets very good for trimming those hard to get to tree branches and that is all I now use them for; well that and blowing out crow nests and squirrel dreys.

A lot of ducks shot here in Britain find their way to the game dealer for onward sale. A lot of game dealers will not accept them if shot with steel as their cutomers, which are the stores, will not have them for fear of people breaking their teeth and complaining. Lagopus.....

I've seen it shot at pheasants, numerous times, by a long-time hunting partner. He shoots mostly modern autoloaders, hunts a preserve where nontox is required, and hunts public areas in MN and SD (and used to do the same in IA) where the rule is also no lead. So he made the decision to shoot it all the time. Me, I'll stick with lead as long as I can, and I'll fight like heck to make sure we can ALL stick with lead--until the nontox proponents can come up with the "good science" to show that it poses a real danger, to either the birds we shoot or to the humans who consume the game. That being said, I've seen wild roosters fly off crippled carrying both lead and steel pellets, and I've seen them killed with both lead and steel pellets. Although I'll never be convinced steel is as good as lead, I am already convinced it's better than its detractors are prepared to admit.

Steel (iron) shot will never equal lead shot period. Yet stell shot used properly is a very effecient shot. Biggest problem is waterfowl hunters don't have the foggiest idea how far 40 yards is, plus have not patterned their guns with the diffenet steel loads available. I spent a lot of years observeing waterfowl hunters when lead was legal and most didn't know how far 50 yds. was, and when they switched to steel their range estamation didn't improve. Goose hunters were the worst at it.

Steel shot was just an easy way out of a drummed up problem .

I reckon that if I did not care too much about good shotguns and could be happy shooting the guns which are built to be safe for steel shot, then perhaps steel shot would not seem like such an abomination to me as it does now. However I have developed preferences in guns over the years, and I find that I want to shoot guns which balance well and which are a pleasure to use. This type of shotgun and steel shot in my opinion are mutually exclusive and do not belong together. So this factor together with the way steel shot does not work as well as lead make me unhappy with the idea of ever shooting steel again. Shotshell manufacturers should be taken to task for all their promotion of steel loads and their failure to provide economical non-lead loads which are safe in good guns.

Exactly, GWWs. The by now hackneyed adage "Life's too short to hunt with an ugly gun" is simply true. I know I could never work up the enthuiasm to get out of bed on a chilly early morning to ride out to the woods so I could roam for hours with my Benelli and little ball bearings. Killing is not that high on my priority list. If that day ever came I know I wouldn't tote a steely death-ray, I'd simply stop hunting birds.

Well, there are barrel-safe options. Unfortunately, they're all pretty expensive--and I don't think even a total ban on lead will result in inexpensive, barrel friendly nontox loads appearing. But unless you hunt a whole lot, the extra cost isn't going to send you to the poor farm.