Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
07-01-2006, 08:31 AM
#21
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,233
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
*Just for clarification sake I will adress each point seperately.(I am not trying to pick apart the post only trying to add knowledge to certain points.)
Complete B.S....
It is a fact thatthe respected names in the industry,Leupold, etc, all use the exact same scopes for theirshotgun models as they do for their riflemodels. The only difference between the great majority ofshotgun/muzzleloadermodels and the riflemodels is the parralax settings. (50-75 for shotgun, 100-150 for rifled)
(Ifyou are discussing the scopes at the low end of the market...then this really wouldn't be a quality/durabilty discussion in the first place...
)
hopefully the 4x32 shotgun/muzzleloader scope??? a slug guns recoil will tear up the insides of a regular rifle scope so badly a load of buck shot will have better grouping then you will get from a box of slugs.
It is a fact thatthe respected names in the industry,Leupold, etc, all use the exact same scopes for theirshotgun models as they do for their riflemodels. The only difference between the great majority ofshotgun/muzzleloadermodels and the riflemodels is the parralax settings. (50-75 for shotgun, 100-150 for rifled)
(Ifyou are discussing the scopes at the low end of the market...then this really wouldn't be a quality/durabilty discussion in the first place...
)
07-01-2006, 08:45 AM
#22
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,233
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
"As far as not using 2 3/4 inch slugs in it. I don't know about that and I am pretty certain JCC will dissagree with that as well. Most of the 2 3/4 inch slugs work better and can have just as much power. You may find the faster slugs will not shoot well out of your barrel. From what I have seen most average slug guns like 1700 fps or under to shoot accurately out to 100 yards and beyond. You get up around 1900 fps and the accuracy seems to fall off at longer distances".
I do agree thats slugs do the best under 1700 fps, but what I dont understand is what the heck is he talking about? every 12 gauge 3 inch saboted slug I have ever used have a printed MV less than 1600 fps....
also how exactly can he say "MOST" 2 3/4 inch loads work the best I think he'd be more correct by saying some. He is obviously implying that 3 inch shells have a higher velocity which is also not true either, there are many other 2 3/4 inch loads that actually produce higher velocity then some 3 inch loads so he is incorrect there too. He also implies that slug loads with lower velocity has the same energy as loads with higher velocity thats a really big load of bull it doesnt take a genious to understand that weight x velocity = energy so PLEASE!! tell me how a load with less velocity has the same power as a one with a higher velocity???? PLEASE tell me I seriously want to know????
jcchartboy please tell me how exactly your buddy paul is absolutely right???
I do agree thats slugs do the best under 1700 fps, but what I dont understand is what the heck is he talking about? every 12 gauge 3 inch saboted slug I have ever used have a printed MV less than 1600 fps....
also how exactly can he say "MOST" 2 3/4 inch loads work the best I think he'd be more correct by saying some. He is obviously implying that 3 inch shells have a higher velocity which is also not true either, there are many other 2 3/4 inch loads that actually produce higher velocity then some 3 inch loads so he is incorrect there too. He also implies that slug loads with lower velocity has the same energy as loads with higher velocity thats a really big load of bull it doesnt take a genious to understand that weight x velocity = energy so PLEASE!! tell me how a load with less velocity has the same power as a one with a higher velocity???? PLEASE tell me I seriously want to know????
jcchartboy please tell me how exactly your buddy paul is absolutely right???
Your difficulty here is failing to understand what Paul was saying clearly...Hewas making two seperate points which you did not seem to deliniate.
Point one...most 2 3/4 slugs are more accurate out of most guns.
Point two...most guns have difficulty shooting sabots that a muzzle velocity over 1700 accuratelly.
(While I agree this may be true, I believe the fault lays on poorly designed guns, not the sabot. The factories tests these new sabots extensively out of quality barrels and actions. They have excellent results. However, many average shotgunhunters expect to take out their 25 yr old beater, (or a gun simply not designed for these types of shells)and reach the same kind of accuracy...it is just not going to happen. There are numerous guns on the market that will shoot these slugs accurately...a testament to the fact that it is not an inherent flaw in the bullet, only a mismatch between gun/bullet.
07-01-2006, 10:44 AM
#24
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
I guess I could have worded things better. And I am man enough to admit when I screw up. You are correct in that most of the newer faster slugs are indeed 2 3/4 inch shells. They use a lighter bullet in most cases. My bad.
However in almost every case when the same weight bullet is used in a 3 inch shell vrs a 2 3/4 inch shell the velocity increases. Especially with the newer loadings. I will again admit that they are still under 1900 fps though, since most of these rounds use a 1 once bullet. And I am talking the newer offerings using muzzle loader or pistol type bullets. Not the older saboted or rifled pure lead slugs. Those wander all over the place in velocity, shell length really means nothing anymore.
So I will simplify my statement and say that it really doesn't matter how long the shell is. I have seen shotguns shoot both pretty accurately and they could handle 3 inch shells. There are not too many guns made anymore that only shoot 2 3/4 shells.
Just like any other rifle I think the more important thing is finding a load that matches the harmonics of your barrel. I have an H&R Ultra slug with the heavy barrel chambered for 3 inch magnum shells. Believe it or not this gun will shoot 2 3/4 inch rifled slugs into one ragged hole at 100 yards (3 shot groups).
Now if you could find two loads that had identical charges of the same powder with the same slug but in different length shells. Then fired them from corresponding rifles with matching chambers and one was more accurate than the other I might be inclined to believe it. And repeat it with different rifles. I don't think it will happen though.
The truth is there are too many people out there shooting guns with three inch chambers using 2 3/4 inch loads with very good accuracy.
And my statement about the faster type bullets not being accurate is fairly on. I belong to a lot of hunting sites and have done a lot of research on the web and talking to other hunters in person about what slugs worked in what guns. In most cases the average slug gun, like an 11-87, 870 with rifled barrels, H&R and other simular guns with 1-34 to 1-36 inch twist rates do not like bullets faster than 1700 some fps and most prefer loads around 1550. This is not always the case, I have seen some that shoot the faster rounds fairly well. It is always worth giving a try if that is what you want to use. I just wouldn't buy a whole bunch of it until you find out if your gun likes it or not.
We also need to quantify what we mean by "works well" I see some that say "My guns shoots the faster slugs just fine.". Well, let's define "just fine". Some are happy with 2 or 3 inch groups at 75 yards. Or even 4 inch groups at 100 yards. To me this is not fine, to me that is barely acceptable. I am talking 1-1.5 inch groups at 100 yards off from a bench. Almost every slug I used shot well at 50 yards and most did well out to 75. However some just don't stablilize well enough out to 100 yards. Don't just assume that because you get 1 inch groups at 50 you will get 2 inch groups at 100. It doesn't always work that way, especially with slugs.
And the whole point in using the lighter faster bullet is to get more range, or I would think that is that is point. Well if the gun doesn't shoot accurate enough at those ranges what is the point? I mean if you get 4 or 5 inch groups at 100 yards I doubt it will group well enough at 150 that I would want to shoot at live game with it. Flat shooting doesn't mean much if there is 7 inches difference from shot to shot.
Oops, sorry went off on a rant there.
My original point is you are correct, shell length really doesn't effect velocity that much. However I still stand by my opinion that shell length does not effect accuracy.
Paul
However in almost every case when the same weight bullet is used in a 3 inch shell vrs a 2 3/4 inch shell the velocity increases. Especially with the newer loadings. I will again admit that they are still under 1900 fps though, since most of these rounds use a 1 once bullet. And I am talking the newer offerings using muzzle loader or pistol type bullets. Not the older saboted or rifled pure lead slugs. Those wander all over the place in velocity, shell length really means nothing anymore.
So I will simplify my statement and say that it really doesn't matter how long the shell is. I have seen shotguns shoot both pretty accurately and they could handle 3 inch shells. There are not too many guns made anymore that only shoot 2 3/4 shells.
Just like any other rifle I think the more important thing is finding a load that matches the harmonics of your barrel. I have an H&R Ultra slug with the heavy barrel chambered for 3 inch magnum shells. Believe it or not this gun will shoot 2 3/4 inch rifled slugs into one ragged hole at 100 yards (3 shot groups).
Now if you could find two loads that had identical charges of the same powder with the same slug but in different length shells. Then fired them from corresponding rifles with matching chambers and one was more accurate than the other I might be inclined to believe it. And repeat it with different rifles. I don't think it will happen though.
The truth is there are too many people out there shooting guns with three inch chambers using 2 3/4 inch loads with very good accuracy.
And my statement about the faster type bullets not being accurate is fairly on. I belong to a lot of hunting sites and have done a lot of research on the web and talking to other hunters in person about what slugs worked in what guns. In most cases the average slug gun, like an 11-87, 870 with rifled barrels, H&R and other simular guns with 1-34 to 1-36 inch twist rates do not like bullets faster than 1700 some fps and most prefer loads around 1550. This is not always the case, I have seen some that shoot the faster rounds fairly well. It is always worth giving a try if that is what you want to use. I just wouldn't buy a whole bunch of it until you find out if your gun likes it or not.
We also need to quantify what we mean by "works well" I see some that say "My guns shoots the faster slugs just fine.". Well, let's define "just fine". Some are happy with 2 or 3 inch groups at 75 yards. Or even 4 inch groups at 100 yards. To me this is not fine, to me that is barely acceptable. I am talking 1-1.5 inch groups at 100 yards off from a bench. Almost every slug I used shot well at 50 yards and most did well out to 75. However some just don't stablilize well enough out to 100 yards. Don't just assume that because you get 1 inch groups at 50 you will get 2 inch groups at 100. It doesn't always work that way, especially with slugs.
And the whole point in using the lighter faster bullet is to get more range, or I would think that is that is point. Well if the gun doesn't shoot accurate enough at those ranges what is the point? I mean if you get 4 or 5 inch groups at 100 yards I doubt it will group well enough at 150 that I would want to shoot at live game with it. Flat shooting doesn't mean much if there is 7 inches difference from shot to shot.
Oops, sorry went off on a rant there.
My original point is you are correct, shell length really doesn't effect velocity that much. However I still stand by my opinion that shell length does not effect accuracy.
Paul
07-01-2006, 10:50 AM
#25
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blissfield MI USA
Posts: 5,293
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
Longrifle, the barnes 1 ounce loads you are using, am I too assume they are the 3 inch 1500 fps version? I see they offer a 2 3/4 inch and 3 inch loading with a slightly higher velocity in the 3 inch. I have only ever seen one type on the shelf. I might look around and see if I can find both just to see what works best. I mean heck I'll take the extra FPS of it will shoot well.
Might have to go look for some this weekend.
Paul
Might have to go look for some this weekend.
Paul
07-02-2006, 01:31 AM
#26
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: A flat lander lost in the mountains of Northern,AZ
Posts: 3,171
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
ORIGINAL: jcchartboy
*Just for clarification sake I will adress each point seperately.(I am not trying to pick apart the post only trying to add knowledge to certain points.)
Complete B.S....
It is a fact thatthe respected names in the industry,Leupold, etc, all use the exact same scopes for theirshotgun models as they do for their riflemodels. The only difference between the great majority ofshotgun/muzzleloadermodels and the riflemodels is the parralax settings. (50-75 for shotgun, 100-150 for rifled)
(Ifyou are discussing the scopes at the low end of the market...then this really wouldn't be a quality/durabilty discussion in the first place...)
*Just for clarification sake I will adress each point seperately.(I am not trying to pick apart the post only trying to add knowledge to certain points.)
hopefully the 4x32 shotgun/muzzleloader scope??? a slug guns recoil will tear up the insides of a regular rifle scope so badly a load of buck shot will have better grouping then you will get from a box of slugs.
It is a fact thatthe respected names in the industry,Leupold, etc, all use the exact same scopes for theirshotgun models as they do for their riflemodels. The only difference between the great majority ofshotgun/muzzleloadermodels and the riflemodels is the parralax settings. (50-75 for shotgun, 100-150 for rifled)
(Ifyou are discussing the scopes at the low end of the market...then this really wouldn't be a quality/durabilty discussion in the first place...
)
edit: I do realize that higher quality scopes it boils down to mainly parallax adjustment. On one of my slug guns I have a Nikon Monarch 2-7x32mm I also have this same scope in a 4-12x40mm on one of my muzzleloaders. If I didnt think they could withstand the recoil they sure as heck would not be on those guns.
But again I was generally speaking about simmons since the man stated he had a 4x32 simmons on his gun. A slug gun will tear up the insides of a regular riflescope from a lesser quality brand like Simmons. So I was merely stating I hope his simmons scope was one of their shotgun/muzzleloader scopes......
07-02-2006, 01:53 AM
#27
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: A flat lander lost in the mountains of Northern,AZ
Posts: 3,171
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
ORIGINAL: Paul L Mohr
I guess I could have worded things better. And I am man enough to admit when I screw up. You are correct in that most of the newer faster slugs are indeed 2 3/4 inch shells. They use a lighter bullet in most cases. My bad.
However in almost every case when the same weight bullet is used in a 3 inch shell vrs a 2 3/4 inch shell the velocity increases. Especially with the newer loadings. I will again admit that they are still under 1900 fps though, since most of these rounds use a 1 once bullet. And I am talking the newer offerings using muzzle loader or pistol type bullets. Not the older saboted or rifled pure lead slugs. Those wander all over the place in velocity, shell length really means nothing anymore.
So I will simplify my statement and say that it really doesn't matter how long the shell is. I have seen shotguns shoot both pretty accurately and they could handle 3 inch shells. There are not too many guns made anymore that only shoot 2 3/4 shells.
Just like any other rifle I think the more important thing is finding a load that matches the harmonics of your barrel. I have an H&R Ultra slug with the heavy barrel chambered for 3 inch magnum shells. Believe it or not this gun will shoot 2 3/4 inch rifled slugs into one ragged hole at 100 yards (3 shot groups).
Now if you could find two loads that had identical charges of the same powder with the same slug but in different length shells. Then fired them from corresponding rifles with matching chambers and one was more accurate than the other I might be inclined to believe it. And repeat it with different rifles. I don't think it will happen though.
The truth is there are too many people out there shooting guns with three inch chambers using 2 3/4 inch loads with very good accuracy.
And my statement about the faster type bullets not being accurate is fairly on. I belong to a lot of hunting sites and have done a lot of research on the web and talking to other hunters in person about what slugs worked in what guns. In most cases the average slug gun, like an 11-87, 870 with rifled barrels, H&R and other simular guns with 1-34 to 1-36 inch twist rates do not like bullets faster than 1700 some fps and most prefer loads around 1550. This is not always the case, I have seen some that shoot the faster rounds fairly well. It is always worth giving a try if that is what you want to use. I just wouldn't buy a whole bunch of it until you find out if your gun likes it or not.
We also need to quantify what we mean by "works well" I see some that say "My guns shoots the faster slugs just fine.". Well, let's define "just fine". Some are happy with 2 or 3 inch groups at 75 yards. Or even 4 inch groups at 100 yards. To me this is not fine, to me that is barely acceptable. I am talking 1-1.5 inch groups at 100 yards off from a bench. Almost every slug I used shot well at 50 yards and most did well out to 75. However some just don't stablilize well enough out to 100 yards. Don't just assume that because you get 1 inch groups at 50 you will get 2 inch groups at 100. It doesn't always work that way, especially with slugs.
And the whole point in using the lighter faster bullet is to get more range, or I would think that is that is point. Well if the gun doesn't shoot accurate enough at those ranges what is the point? I mean if you get 4 or 5 inch groups at 100 yards I doubt it will group well enough at 150 that I would want to shoot at live game with it. Flat shooting doesn't mean much if there is 7 inches difference from shot to shot.
Oops, sorry went off on a rant there.
My original point is you are correct, shell length really doesn't effect velocity that much. However I still stand by my opinion that shell length does not effect accuracy.
Paul
I guess I could have worded things better. And I am man enough to admit when I screw up. You are correct in that most of the newer faster slugs are indeed 2 3/4 inch shells. They use a lighter bullet in most cases. My bad.
However in almost every case when the same weight bullet is used in a 3 inch shell vrs a 2 3/4 inch shell the velocity increases. Especially with the newer loadings. I will again admit that they are still under 1900 fps though, since most of these rounds use a 1 once bullet. And I am talking the newer offerings using muzzle loader or pistol type bullets. Not the older saboted or rifled pure lead slugs. Those wander all over the place in velocity, shell length really means nothing anymore.
So I will simplify my statement and say that it really doesn't matter how long the shell is. I have seen shotguns shoot both pretty accurately and they could handle 3 inch shells. There are not too many guns made anymore that only shoot 2 3/4 shells.
Just like any other rifle I think the more important thing is finding a load that matches the harmonics of your barrel. I have an H&R Ultra slug with the heavy barrel chambered for 3 inch magnum shells. Believe it or not this gun will shoot 2 3/4 inch rifled slugs into one ragged hole at 100 yards (3 shot groups).
Now if you could find two loads that had identical charges of the same powder with the same slug but in different length shells. Then fired them from corresponding rifles with matching chambers and one was more accurate than the other I might be inclined to believe it. And repeat it with different rifles. I don't think it will happen though.
The truth is there are too many people out there shooting guns with three inch chambers using 2 3/4 inch loads with very good accuracy.
And my statement about the faster type bullets not being accurate is fairly on. I belong to a lot of hunting sites and have done a lot of research on the web and talking to other hunters in person about what slugs worked in what guns. In most cases the average slug gun, like an 11-87, 870 with rifled barrels, H&R and other simular guns with 1-34 to 1-36 inch twist rates do not like bullets faster than 1700 some fps and most prefer loads around 1550. This is not always the case, I have seen some that shoot the faster rounds fairly well. It is always worth giving a try if that is what you want to use. I just wouldn't buy a whole bunch of it until you find out if your gun likes it or not.
We also need to quantify what we mean by "works well" I see some that say "My guns shoots the faster slugs just fine.". Well, let's define "just fine". Some are happy with 2 or 3 inch groups at 75 yards. Or even 4 inch groups at 100 yards. To me this is not fine, to me that is barely acceptable. I am talking 1-1.5 inch groups at 100 yards off from a bench. Almost every slug I used shot well at 50 yards and most did well out to 75. However some just don't stablilize well enough out to 100 yards. Don't just assume that because you get 1 inch groups at 50 you will get 2 inch groups at 100. It doesn't always work that way, especially with slugs.
And the whole point in using the lighter faster bullet is to get more range, or I would think that is that is point. Well if the gun doesn't shoot accurate enough at those ranges what is the point? I mean if you get 4 or 5 inch groups at 100 yards I doubt it will group well enough at 150 that I would want to shoot at live game with it. Flat shooting doesn't mean much if there is 7 inches difference from shot to shot.
Oops, sorry went off on a rant there.
My original point is you are correct, shell length really doesn't effect velocity that much. However I still stand by my opinion that shell length does not effect accuracy.
Paul
Just so you know Im an avid handloader and I tend to put alot of rifle ideas into my slugging ideas. Also out of my two sluggers one is a mossberg 500 the other is a mossberg 930 they both donnot shoot 2 3/4 slugs nearly aswell as they do with 3 inch slugs. I can believe you when you say from your view that most guns do better with 2 3/4 inch slugs but from my view of things 3 inchers do better. I suppose what it boils down too is ones opinion and ofcourse trial and error and figuring out what works best for your gun.
I will admit that I could very well be wrong about my original post about immediately cutting out 2 3/4 inch slugs if you have a 3 inch chamber.
I'm like you when it comes to acceptable accuracy with a scoped slug gun anything less than 1.5 inch at 100 yards is unacceptable but asfar as a iron sights go a 2 to 3 inch group I believe would be acceptable chances are by adding a scope it will tighten up to an 1.5 inch or better.
07-02-2006, 08:14 AM
#28
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,233
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
I can see where you are coming from. but when I talk slugs I'm talking slugs you know chunks of lead or copper 3/4 oz or better from a 20 ga or 12 ga. I did give some thought later that maybe you were talking about these socalled slugs which are merely pistol bullets shoved into shotshells.
(Normally, I would ask that you remember that we are discussing whitetail hunting, but I don't even think that is neccesary...feel free to discuss the topic however you would like.)
07-02-2006, 12:51 PM
#29
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 276
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
Just got back from the range.
Started out at 50 yards. The tightest groups were the Remington Copper Solids, then the Winchester Super X, and finally the Federals being the loosest. At 100 yards the Federals starting grouping much better, Copper Solids were a little loose and the Winchesters were the loosest. Again there are so many variables, it was very very humid with a nice 5mph breeze in my face. I was shooting off sand bags too....What was weird is, at 50 and 100 all the slugs held the same area of the target, not once did they raise at 50, or drop at 100. I have never seen that before...Kinda scary actually.
Started out at 50 yards. The tightest groups were the Remington Copper Solids, then the Winchester Super X, and finally the Federals being the loosest. At 100 yards the Federals starting grouping much better, Copper Solids were a little loose and the Winchesters were the loosest. Again there are so many variables, it was very very humid with a nice 5mph breeze in my face. I was shooting off sand bags too....What was weird is, at 50 and 100 all the slugs held the same area of the target, not once did they raise at 50, or drop at 100. I have never seen that before...Kinda scary actually.
07-02-2006, 02:12 PM
#30
Typical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 906
RE: Recommended Slugs for an 11-87?
Gentlemen i shoot a new england firearms partner single shot 12 ga. with winchester sabot slugs in three inch. Open sights and this gun shoots a 1 1/2 group at 75 yards and i shot three boxes in hte group but i was shooting from a rested position off hand im sure it wont be that great........just an observation on my part...... i did forget to mention it is a rifled barrel.