BrassFetcher, you are the only channel on RUclips providing this content - and it’s the content that answers questions that every firearms enthusiast has. I read your article on the maximum effective range of shotguns. I was looking up the sectional densities of different shot sizes, and of course, you have an article on it. Will subsonic loads pattern ‘better’ than supersonic loads that are transitioning through the transonic zone? I believe you touched on this briefly in regards to drag force and the velocity of the shell being tested at 1300 fps. I’ve read trap shooter’s forums, stating that subsonic loads are not desired because they do not produce the same ‘cloud’ resulting from supersonic shot. - but that shot is not anything like #1 or 00 buck.
#1 buckshot best size for home defense. Won't go thru an intruder like 00 buck and won't under penetrate with wierd angled shots that lighter buckshot can do. Plus more pellets more better
@@R32R38 It really depends on what kind of birdshot you're using. Most people using birdshot are gonna cheap out and use target loads. Even then, I'd rather have #4 buck.
Dear Brass Fetcher. About a year ago, I saw a video of gel testing with 300blk 220gr subsonic bullets on your channel. Recently, I tried to upload a video as a reference to the Korean Internet ballistic research community, but I couldn't find the video for some reason. Can you tell me why you deleted the video? And if you allow me, can I watch the video again?
@@shanek6582 they make special rigs to test ballistics, you buy the test barrel and bolt it in (about .30 caliber for a #1 buck shot), load the pellet and charge from the breach, and set it off. I know some of the very old ballistic tests used that setup but with a pneumatic actuator to test different speeds and their effects on the projectile.
Great content. Statistically equally effective as 00 in stopping baddies with less risk of over penetration. I would love to see the same test with tungsten/TSS and unplated shot for comparison. Coyotes HATE the TSS #4, Makes thorasic gelatin. 1 buck would just reach the edge of my pasture but still slow down enough to have a buffer for neighbors. Thanks for great content!
I would assume it's even more effective than 00 on humans. Adequate penetration, but way more surface area judging by the massively increased number of pellets.
@@asdfghjk2933 That's part of the rationale for smaller shot size. If it still penetrates more than enough, then why not create more holes? More holes in the target actually improves the chance of hitting something important and creates more wound tracks to bleed through. But the extra penetration of larger shot like 00 isn't actually doing anything useful for me after already passing through the perps internal organs.
AI must have deleted by post. I'll try different wording. 5 rounds of 110 grain plated is my 0000 buck load. Why? Cause that is what I got. Given the test shown, it would be over kill for most ranges.
Just curious, why did you take down ALL of your extensive tests of the infamous G2 RIP round (in no less than 3 calibers)? Your simulated-chest test seemed to show them to be suprisingly viable man-stoppers...
He probably took them down because they make easy panic-fodder for journalists to fear monger about in articles and on television. Those videos would be gold for someone who needs to generate clickbait for the website and wants to run a scary piece about exploding ripper bullets that shoot spikes out into all your organs and penetrates tank armor.
Man I miss this channel
BrassFetcher, you are the only channel on RUclips providing this content - and it’s the content that answers questions that every firearms enthusiast has.
I read your article on the maximum effective range of shotguns. I was looking up the sectional densities of different shot sizes, and of course, you have an article on it.
Will subsonic loads pattern ‘better’ than supersonic loads that are transitioning through the transonic zone?
I believe you touched on this briefly in regards to drag force and the velocity of the shell being tested at 1300 fps.
I’ve read trap shooter’s forums, stating that subsonic loads are not desired because they do not produce the same ‘cloud’ resulting from supersonic shot.
- but that shot is not anything like #1 or 00 buck.
Come back!
Cool, it's nice to see you are still active
Hope your doing great in Fl.
From Jax, Ar.
Miss you homie hope your doing well
Brass, please come back. Your channel is a veritable refuge from bs ammo tests. We need to see 277 fury
Are you ok bro? been 7 months since your last vid.
wait how did you get only one pellet to fire?
Please brass daddy more videos
Would you mind to post again some your deleted old youtube video about gelatin shooting, seems many got missing especially 7.92 kurz vs gelatin
Are you doing alright sir? Haven't seen an upload in a while. If you're still around would you mind doing a 7.62x54r test or maybe 8mm Mauser?
#1 buckshot best size for home defense. Won't go thru an intruder like 00 buck and won't under penetrate with wierd angled shots that lighter buckshot can do. Plus more pellets more better
At inside-the-house ranges even birdshot is going to get the job done in almost all cases.
@@R32R38 There's been tons of people surviving point blank wounds with birdshot. I'm not willing to take that chance.
@@R32R38 It really depends on what kind of birdshot you're using. Most people using birdshot are gonna cheap out and use target loads.
Even then, I'd rather have #4 buck.
@@R32R38 Bad advice.
Dear Brass Fetcher. About a year ago, I saw a video of gel testing with 300blk 220gr subsonic bullets on your channel. Recently, I tried to upload a video as a reference to the Korean Internet ballistic research community, but I couldn't find the video for some reason. Can you tell me why you deleted the video? And if you allow me, can I watch the video again?
I love your vids. Can you do one with the H&K 4.6x30 compared to FN 5.7x28?
Or even a 44 Magnum vs the new 460 Rowland?
keep 'm coming!
Any chance you’ve done short slug rounds coming out of a 590S?
Could you do more air gun video?
Just one pellet? How’d you get that?
Probably cut open a shell or bought a bag of buckshot, some distributers sell it by weight for people who reload their own shells.
@@miles13242 neato
@@miles13242 yeah but there’s no wad coming out either. Just wondering how he fired it
@@shanek6582 they make special rigs to test ballistics, you buy the test barrel and bolt it in (about .30 caliber for a #1 buck shot), load the pellet and charge from the breach, and set it off. I know some of the very old ballistic tests used that setup but with a pneumatic actuator to test different speeds and their effects on the projectile.
Great content.
Statistically equally effective as 00 in stopping baddies with less risk of over penetration.
I would love to see the same test with tungsten/TSS and unplated shot for comparison.
Coyotes HATE the TSS #4, Makes thorasic gelatin.
1 buck would just reach the edge of my pasture but still slow down enough to have a buffer for neighbors.
Thanks for great content!
I would assume it's even more effective than 00 on humans. Adequate penetration, but way more surface area judging by the massively increased number of pellets.
@@asdfghjk2933 Interesting question.
Not so much on really big bodied deer or hogs but you definitely need more there.
@@asdfghjk2933
That's part of the rationale for smaller shot size. If it still penetrates more than enough, then why not create more holes? More holes in the target actually improves the chance of hitting something important and creates more wound tracks to bleed through. But the extra penetration of larger shot like 00 isn't actually doing anything useful for me after already passing through the perps internal organs.
AI must have deleted by post. I'll try different wording. 5 rounds of 110 grain plated is my 0000 buck load. Why? Cause that is what I got. Given the test shown, it would be over kill for most ranges.
Only 1?
LIkely someone contracted them to do this test for some reason, and they published the video with the client's permission
Just curious, why did you take down ALL of your extensive tests of the infamous G2 RIP round (in no less than 3 calibers)? Your simulated-chest test seemed to show them to be suprisingly viable man-stoppers...
He probably took them down because they make easy panic-fodder for journalists to fear monger about in articles and on television. Those videos would be gold for someone who needs to generate clickbait for the website and wants to run a scary piece about exploding ripper bullets that shoot spikes out into all your organs and penetrates tank armor.
???