Air Gunner article on pellet performance

[Enthusiast]

I've just read the article by Simon Everett in the March Air Gunner. I must say one of the best articles I've read, top stuff. It explains and demonstrates the effect of different shapes of pellets through a BSA Scorpion. I learnt loads - if you are interested in this sort of thing, read it!

I am inspired to go shooting...(just off to the dump Dear!)

Richard

[Pontiac]

Tesco run tomorrow Rich???

[Enthusiast]

Tesco run tomorrow Rich???

You're getting the idea young fella me lad

[blackscale]

Tesco run tomorrow Rich???

....blimey awake...and witty!!

Good stuff....Richards scared of giiiirlls...

[Pontiac]

Wide awake since 6:15 when Siobhan woke me up to take her to work! On my day off

I'm way ahead of you Richard, Way ahead of you

Best advise my dad ever told me.
When you go shopping, ALWAYS pick the uglyest thing, They won't ask you to go out with them again

[Enthusiast]

:
Good stuff....Richards scared of giiiirlls...

just the one Dear boy, just the one

[DEL67]

I did read it but his groupings didn't look very impressive, infact very disappointing. If you look closely at the picture of the box of Logan Penetraters you can see they're the 20 grain ones and not 16grn. No wonder they were starting to tumble. It would have been better if he used a pellet that gave him 1/2" maximum groupings aswell then you'd get a better comparison but as it is they were all over the place. He also mentions it only take 0.75 ftlb to kill a rabbit and Nick Jenkinson has quoted 3 ftlb. Oh dear it sounds like i'm having a dig now.I did enjoy reading it though and there were some very interesting facts.

[Fluffybuck]

I haven't read the article, but 0.75ftlb to kill a rabbit sounds a bit too low.

I would put my guess at 2-2.5ftlb, with a medium weight pellet and with energy measured at point of impact.
Pellet weight has a big influence on penetrative power. Heavier pellets tend to penetrate more easily, due to their extra inertia. Smaller calibres tend to penetrate slightly deeper than the equivalent pellets in larger calibres.
.177 has about a 10% penetration advantage over a .22 at short-to-medium ranges, but at long range, air resistance has slowed the lighter .177 somewhat and it's penetration power is comparable with a .22.

At 12ftlb, a heavyweight pellet would probably have 15% more penetration power than a medium weight and about 25% more than a lightweight.

Although rabbits have sometimes been killed by the concussion of a non-penetrating shot, I would prefer to ensure that shot gets inside the skull, where the soft brain will be easily destroyed after pellet entry.

Muzzle energy would need to be much more than 2ftlb, to compensate for energy loss with distance.

[DEL67]

I haven't read the article, but 0.75ftlb to kill a rabbit sounds a bit too low.

I would put my guess at 2-2.5ftlb, with a medium weight pellet and with energy measured at point of impact.
Pellet weight has a big influence on penetrative power. Heavier pellets tend to penetrate more easily, due to their extra inertia. Smaller calibres tend to penetrate slightly deeper than the equivalent pellets in larger calibres.
.177 has about a 10% penetration advantage over a .22 at short-to-medium ranges, but at long range, air resistance has slowed the lighter .177 somewhat and it's penetration power is comparable with a .22.

At 12ftlb, a heavyweight pellet would probably have 15% more penetration power than a medium weight and about 25% more than a lightweight.

Although rabbits have sometimes been killed by the concussion of a non-penetrating shot, I would prefer to ensure that shot gets inside the skull, where the soft brain will be easily destroyed after pellet entry.

Muzzle energy would need to be much more than 2ftlb, to compensate for energy loss with distance.

Unlike you Fluffy, I'm no expert on this and only go on what i read and is known in general which is 3ftlb/4ftlb. Not that it would make any difference because at 50 yards there is still more than enough to do the job. But.. you'd think that the Editor would read the article before it goes to print. Maybe it was a misprint or just over looked but to me it stuck out like a sore thumb.