Tungsten buckshot for leopard follow up?

[steve white]

Given a former thread claiming tungsten shot passes through geese, ducks, etc. could we extrapolate that increased performance to tungsten buckshot? If no 9 tungsten is passing through birds, would tungsten buckshot end the debate about penetration/effectiveness on wounded leopards? It would not flatten on bone or the facial musculature of a tiger like soft lead. Would it guarantee proper penetration? And who is willing to load and try it? (I think I would...) What say ye?

 

[BourbonTrail]

I can’t wait for IvW to read this thread.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Given that I could shoot the leopard with a .458 Lott and Nosler Safari ammunition twice for cheaper per round cost, I think this is a non starter.

 

[BeeMaa]

First we need to look at the reason for the origin of TSS, because it was the banning of lead for the use of waterfowl combined with the ineffectiveness of the replacement steel shot. This legislation brought a few major breakthroughs in the shotgun community. First was the 3.5" magnum shotgun first made commercially available in the Benelli Super Black Eagle. Second was the advancement of materials used in waterfowling ammunition. This came in the form of steel blended with other non-toxic metals like bismuth and eventually TSS.

The density of the TSS (18 g/cc) is much greater than even lead (11 g/cc) and this took the waterfowl ammo industry in the exact opposite direction that steel and bismuth did. Instead of needing one or two sizes larger shot compared to what was commonly used for lead, now they could go much smaller, have more pellets and (arguably) be more lethal on birds.

Example with chart inserted below...
Typical lead load for goose was #2 shot when it was legal
Then the normal steel load for goose became B or BB or even BBB
TSS load for goose is 7 or 7.5 shot from Federal and Apex

There is no doubt that TSS has performed well in the laboratory and the field. Although not safe for use in all shotguns due to some of the materials used in the past, all modern shotguns with proper chokes can enjoy the advantages of TSS. The only sticking point is cost, and it's a big point. In some cases TSS ammo can be 3x more expensive than steel and 2x the price of steel/bismuth blends. The argument comes when a waterfowl hunter uses one shot of TSS ammo to down a bird vs using 2 or 3 shots of steel.

So now let's try to extrapolate this to hunting something other than waterfowl. What size would one consider for such an undertaking? Goose loads went from #2 lead to #7.5 TSS...so buckshot could theoretically go from 00 down to FF? Maybe all the way down to BB or B? That could be a debate...

A quick search revealed that finding TSS pellets in a size larger than BB (.180") is not easy. What I did find (on Amazon of all places) is #6 shot (.110") being labeled as "buckshot", which I thought was a little amusing.

The bottom line is that there is no ban on lead where there is leopard hunting so this entire post is for naught. Not to mention the increase in cost. Thanks for reading and you can now go back to debating CRF vs PF.

 

[Hunting Hitman]

Given that I could shoot the leopard with a .458 Lott and Nosler Safari ammunition twice for cheaper per round cost, I think this is a non starter.

This is correct.

I would like to see the results of tss in buckshot but haven’t seen anything that big. The most I’ve loaded is tss 5 shot and that was beyond destructive

HH

 

[Hunter-Habib]

Not me. I’ve actually done it on two of my three man eating Royal Bengal tigers in ‘81 and ‘88. Shotgun was a fully choked 12 gauge ( 2 3/4”) Pakistani single barrel (my life’s first firearm) and ammunition was Eley Alphamax 2 3/4” Eight Pellet L.G. Both were frontal shots taken over torchlight at ranges under 20 yards (while the tigers were sitting and feeding over a natural kill). On both occasions, all eight L.G pellets had hit the tigers.

First tiger died 7 1/2 hours after I shot him. Postmortem showed that six L.G pellets had hit him in the chest, but all of them had flattened out on the rock hard chest muscles without even remotely managing to reach the heart. Two L.G pellets had managed to pierce the throat and rupture the trachea and some of the blood vessels. This was what eventually caused the tiger to eventually succumb.

Second tiger died four hours after I shot him. Postmortem showed that seven L.G pellets had hit him in the chest, but all of them had flattened out on the rock hard chest muscles without even remotely managing to reach the heart. One L.G pellet had managed to sever the jugular vein in the throat, which eventually did him in.

As far as leopards are concerned, I’ve personally seen my white hunter shoot a charging leopard in the chest and head twice with a 12 gauge 3“ Magnum Remington Model 11-87 (which was loaded with Remington Express 3” Magnum Ten Pellet O.O.O Buck shells). The range was four meters (give or take). The leopard was stunned, but didn’t drop. At that point, the Remington Model 11-87 had jammed. Fortunately, the leopard was dispatched by another member of the party, who was using a .416 Remington Magnum (loaded with 400Gr Nosler Partition soft points). Postmortem showed that the pattern of the two shotgun blasts was tight enough to be covered by the palm of my hand. Almost all twenty O.O.O Buck pellets were found inside the leopard. The pellets which had struck the leopard in the head had cracked and dented the skull. And a few had actually glanced off. But not even one pellet had managed to get through into the brain by actually piercing through the skull bone. The pellets which had struck the leopard in the chest had actually flattened out on the animal’s hardened chest muscles, without even remotely managing to get through into the chest cavity.

I’ve personally followed up and shot one wounded African leopard with a fully choked 12 gauge 3” Magnum Laurona boxlock ejector over-under (that was loaded with Federal Premium 3” Magnum Copper Plated Ten Pellet O.O.O Buck shells). First shot was taken at less than ten meters. Leopard continued with the charge. Second shot was under five meters. Leopard folded. Postmortem showed that the first shot (a head shot) had left seven pellets in the leopard’s head. He had been blinded in one eye. Three of the pellets had glanced off the skull. Not a single one of those copper plated O.O.O Buck pellets had actually managed to pierce the leopard’s skull and reach the brain. They had cracked and dented the skull, sure. But that was about it. The pellets had all flattened out. The second shot (a frontal chest shot) had left all ten pellets inside the leopard’s chest. But most of those copper plated O.O.O pellets had flattened out against the leopard’s hardended chest muscles. Only three of the pellets had managed to tear into the heart.

Buckshot= SHOT FOR BUCKS (deer). NOT leopards, lions or tigers. Tungsten shot might work impressively on birds. But the great cats are a whole different ball game. In my opinion (and experience), the best tool for following up any wounded leopard, lion or Royal Bengal tiger into the thick stuff is a short handy double rifle in .500/416 Nitro Express (loaded with 400Gr Nosler Partition soft points).

 

[steve white]

First we need to look at the reason for the origin of TSS, because it was the banning of lead for the use of waterfowl combined with the ineffectiveness of the replacement steel shot. This legislation brought a few major breakthroughs in the shotgun community. First was the 3.5" magnum shotgun first made commercially available in the Benelli Super Black Eagle. Second was the advancement of materials used in waterfowling ammunition. This came in the form of steel blended with other non-toxic metals like bismuth and eventually TSS.

The density of the TSS (18 g/cc) is much greater than even lead (11 g/cc) and this took the waterfowl ammo industry in the exact opposite direction that steel and bismuth did. Instead of needing one or two sizes larger shot compared to what was commonly used for lead, now they could go much smaller, have more pellets and (arguably) be more lethal on birds.

Example with chart inserted below...
Typical lead load for goose was #2 shot when it was legal
Then the normal steel load for goose became B or BB or even BBB
TSS load for goose is 7 or 7.5 shot from Federal and Apex

There is no doubt that TSS has performed well in the laboratory and the field. Although not safe for use in all shotguns due to some of the materials used in the past, all modern shotguns with proper chokes can enjoy the advantages of TSS. The only sticking point is cost, and it's a big point. In some cases TSS ammo can be 3x more expensive than steel and 2x the price of steel/bismuth blends. The argument comes when a waterfowl hunter uses one shot of TSS ammo to down a bird vs using 2 or 3 shots of steel.

So now let's try to extrapolate this to hunting something other than waterfowl. What size would one consider for such an undertaking? Goose loads went from #2 lead to #7.5 TSS...so buckshot could theoretically go from 00 down to FF? Maybe all the way down to BB or B? That could be a debate...

A quick search revealed that finding TSS pellets in a size larger than BB (.180") is not easy. What I did find (on Amazon of all places) is #6 shot (.110") being labeled as "buckshot", which I thought was a little amusing.

The bottom line is that there is no ban on lead where there is leopard hunting so this entire post is for naught. Not to mention the increase in cost. Thanks for reading and you can now go back to debating CRF vs PF.

View attachment 503259

Except that Kawshik or someone said that lead pellets flattened against the facial musculature of a tiger, much less the bone and tungsten won't deform--penetration and momentum are what I am seeking to address.

 

[BeeMaa]

FYI - Apex Ammo TSS Buckshot 3.5" 2 1/2 oz BB @ 1175 fps...$70/5 shells, but currently out of stock.

I'd like to see what that load does to a coyote, pig or other predator at a distance of 50 yards or less.

EDIT...just for reference I found this on YT.

 

[IvW]

And who is willing to load and try it? (I think I would...) What say ye?

Sure as shit not me....wound a leopard and try it and let us know how it went.....make sure your medical insurance is up to date.....
Want to use a shotgun? Use a sxs with at max 24 inch barrels double triggers and Brenneke slugs....
Before you do try it first on bushpigs in corn fields at night.

 

[Longwalker]

I have zero experience with buckshot but do have some with tungsten birdshot. It really is amazing stuff. Tungsten shot does not act like lead shot. Holds tighter patterns, MUCH deeper penetration, never deforms, and breaks ( bird ) bones far more often. I have pass shot geese very effectively at 60-70 meters with a standard one ounce / 28 gram charge of #6 tungsten shot from my 16 ga. double. I can't reliably kill geese at half that distance with #6 lead shot. Tungsten is superior to lead shot for certain. I suspect tungsten buckshot would penetrate the chest muscles of a leopard and would not bounce off the skull.
BUT - if a shotgun would be used to follow up a wounded leopard, I can't see the point of choosing buckshot over a good Brenneke or similar strong / deep penetrating slug. At the short distance the shotgun would be employed, the narrow spread of shot pellets would be no practical advantage, and the penetration of a good slug would be superior ( I suspect) to even tungsten shot.
Someone (other than me) should volunteer to prove this theory ;-)

 

[Dukeisok]

No experience with wounded leopards. Lots of experience with tungsten. It would absolutely work. There is a guy in North Carolina who stocks and sells tss in all sizes. He is as reasonable as tungsten gets (still very pricy), and has loads of reloading data for whatever you want. I bought some number 4 buck from him but never got around to using it.

The only problem (other than cost) I see is that tungsten throws a very dense pattern, even with a cylinder choke, and behaves more like a slug at the distances I imagine you would be shooting a leopard. That and the importance of stacking the pellets correctly and ensuring no choke constriction as that stuff has no give and would theoretically split any choke if the shot is so large they wedge into it.

 

[flatwater bill]

I have done a lot of buckshot testing for bear defense. It is not possible to do controlled trials for stopping bears, leopards, lions or anything else. They simply won't divide themselves into two equal groups. The tester must make some assumptions. Mine were 20 meter (22yd) range, or less......50 cm diam pattern or less, (20 inches). 300kg (660 pound) target. Of 14 different but strong "buckshot" loads, only two passed my tests. One was 3" 12 ga loaded with 2 oz of TSS size T shot......by far the best, and the other was 12 ga 2.75" loaded with 1.5 oz of TSS #2. Nothing approached these loads.....(not 000 buck from quenched wheel weight). Comparing 30-60 year old buckshot technology for defense is like comparing a 30-30 to a 338 Lapua for long range shooting. It is easy to draw the wrong conclusion. Don't generalize. Disclaimer: I have never shot a leopard, and do not intend to.....................good shooting.............FWB

 

[Dukeisok]

This is correct.

I would like to see the results of tss in buckshot but haven’t seen anything that big. The most I’ve loaded is tss 5 shot and that was beyond destructive

HH

Collections

ALL TSS SHOT PRODUCTS

www.super18tungstenshot.com

They have whatever you need and I can vouch for them.

 

[steve white]

Collections

ALL TSS SHOT PRODUCTS

www.super18tungstenshot.com

They have whatever you need and I can vouch for them.

So, according to them, #1 buckshot for grizzly bear...and maybe no choke for charging close range?

 

[steve white]

Solids in a rifle are well known for shattering bones hit--why wouldn't tungsten do the same? It's actually harder and heavier
Why not some cadaver tests for bone performance?

 

[Dukeisok]

According to KPY shotshell ballistics, tungsten number 1 buck has 57% more penetration than lead 00 buck.. (1250 fps load gives 15 inches in gel at 32 yards versus 9.3 inches for the 00 buck). What does that mean for bears? I have absolutely no clue, but physics is fun and tss is good stuff. Number 9s are devastating on a body shot swan and #7s give reliable pass-throughs on swan, which are the biggest birds I shoot. Never killed a mammal with one simply because there is nowhere near me that requires a shotgun for hunting and I try to always choose the most appropriate weapon for the task, generally a centerfire rifle.

If someone wishes to try number 1 buck against a charging grizzly or leopard I'm sure it would work just as I am sure there are better options. and just as sure as I will be happy to shake their hand at the campfire after, assuming they survive.

I'll hang on to my 416 Rigby or 375 H&H.

 

[flatwater bill]

I'm sure that my scoped, 11 pound .416 Rigby would be able to stop a charging grizzly. But I felt better able to reliably hit a fast moving target with a 7 pound, cylinder bored 12 ga with 18 inch bbl. That is why I worked up and tested loads. I suppose the Rigby would take waterfowl out of the air at great range ....but I don't use it for that either....FWB

 

[KWALATA SAFARIS]

Cats (Leopard) are all about hydrostatic shock and wound channel, that kills them instantly.
The “softest” soft possible is your best choice by a country mile.
On a charging cat I reckon the tungsten shot in a semi-auto would be a decent option.
About 15 years ago I had pellets (lead) follow the curvature of a leopard skull with no penetration into it after a solid hit in the face, shortly afterwards I was familiarized with Remington’s “green medicine”which was a nickel plated lead pellet which the hound guys loved.

I have my preferences/go to, on a wounded cat, but can’t see why it would not work on a charging leopard.
As far as going out and “smoking” one with buck shot tungsten, IvW’s summation is spot on “sure as shit not me”
My best Always.
Jaco

 

[TTundra]

First was the 3.5" magnum shotgun first made commercially available in the Benelli Super Black Eagle.

I think Mossberg with their 835 beat out everybody for the release of the 3.5". Oddly enough this came up at work not too long ago and thus why I retained this trivia,

 

[BeeMaa]

I think Mossberg with their 835 beat out everybody for the release of the 3.5". Oddly enough this came up at work not too long ago and thus why I retained this trivia,

You are absolutely correct.

The Mossberg 835 (3.5" chamber) was introduced in 1988, while the Benelli Super Black Eagle came out just after the Federal legislation in 1992. The SBE was the first semi-auto shotgun capable of 2.75", 3" and 3.5" without any adjustments. This is what put Benelli on the map (in the US) with waterfowl hunters along with its reliability and clean running action. So maybe not the first overall, but among the first semi-autos.

I appreciate the correction.

Side note/history lesson - If you happen to be on a waterfowl hunt with someone who has an early production original SBE, they are very proud of the H&K import stamp on it. They were made in Italy and imported by H&K until the late 1990's when they opened the Benelli factory in Accokeek, MD. All subsequent SBE stampings are marked as such. I'm going to visit an AH member next year who has one of these H&K stamped shotguns and I can't wait to take a closer look.