I too am making a drastic change in long guns for SD and SHTF situations...

Does anyone know of any actual tests of shotgun loads on soft body armor? Buckshot and slugs? I am curious, because I was under the impression that the projectile did not need to actually penetrate the material in order to be lethal (or at least cause fairly devastating injuries). I'm assuming buckshot would not work very well, but the sheer impact force of a slug would certainly cause an attacker some issues; even if not immediately lethal. A 1oz slug at 1600 fps comes in at 2487 ft lbs. of energy (at the muzzle), that's gotta count for something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bubbatime

Now I'm using a Benelli M2.

---

Great shotgun; probably the lightest on the market and is the huge choice of 3 gun competitors. You might consider getting a Limbsaver recoil pad for it, it really helps with the recoil.

One thing bothers me about the M2 a bit. I contacted Side Armor to see if I could use the mod 3 side saddle they make for the M4 (shown in the pics in my OP). The rear of the rail would have to be trimmed a bit to clear the rear ghost sight on the M2, but the holes all line up. They said they were concerned about reliability problems with that side saddle. We're still conversing about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bubbatime

...While the shotgun puts more lead down range, the carbine defeats body armor and is more accurate.

---

Weeeell, I'm workin' on that. There may be more than one way to defeat soft armor. If the armor has plates, I'd give the advantage to the shotgun again. Not that the shotgun would penetrate the plates, but it may still deliver a severe blow to the body. Think like getting punched really hard. Eichorn talks about this in post #31 and I tend to agree with his reasoning.

Without the plates, the material should flex inward significantly, perhaps enough to traumatize the heart, knock the breath out of the lungs etc. I don't know that, just thinking out loud here.

I heard on my Magpul shotgun videos that even the rubber buck and slugs become lethal if fired at too close of a range and they went on to say for LE, their department will have guidelines regarding at what ranges you can do what with non-lethal. Of course I'm talking without a vest here, but pointing out trauma, i.e. blunt force trauma is a reality and just might be true for a shotgun against a vest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bubbatime

...I also wouldn't take a hostage rescue shot with a shotgun, but I would with a mini14 or AR15. Each has it's benefits.

---

Well, yes and no - and this is why you must know your shotgun very well. I know my Benelli with Federal reduce recoil, 9 pellet, 00 buckshot will pattern in the X ring of a B27 target at 7 yards. Now the wadding - that's a whole 'nother issue. So if I had a hostage situation and a reasonable shot, it would certainly be feasible to take the shot KNOWING what my gun/load would do. I'm not saying anyone should do that, I'm just saying, I know what my gun/load will do consistently....

The other alternative, and this is just as situational dependent as anything in a gunfight, is to do a changeover to a slug (or two). This again speaks to the versatility of the shotgun, and emphasizes the critical need to be proficient in all aspects of it. The slug at closer ranges will be more accurate than most of us can shoot with a handgun.

But all your points are quite valid and food for thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eichorn

Does anyone know of any actual tests of shotgun loads on soft body armor? Buckshot and slugs? I am curious, because I was under the impression that the projectile did not need to actually penetrate the material in order to be lethal (or at least cause fairly devastating injuries). I'm assuming buckshot would not work very well, but the sheer impact force of a slug would certainly cause an attacker some issues; even if not immediately lethal. A 1oz slug at 1600 fps comes in at 2487 ft lbs. of energy (at the muzzle), that's gotta count for something.

---

I'm trying to get some insight about this, the only thing I've found even close is this, you'll have to scroll down the page for the shotgun tests:

The Box O' Truth #16 - Level IIIA Armor - Page 3

As I recall, they don't specify the specifics of the buck or slugs, but it's still pretty impressive.

To me the problem is what one would have in his shotgun when the fight starts. If it were buck, we'd sure want to know how effective it would be against body armor. Else we'd have to load some powerful slugs as our go to round and that means some pretty good beating on our shoulder.

I'm working on something about this - I will probably take some time, but this is a must know for me.

quick question (probably a stupid one) what does SHTF stand for? I'm usually pretty good with acronyms but I am stumped. Also is there anywhere on the forum where it lists the common acronyms? ::::Preparing to do self head slap and say ohhhh when someone answers this::::

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stan6406

quick question (probably a stupid one) what does SHTF stand for? I'm usually pretty good with acronyms but I am stumped. Also is there anywhere on the forum where it lists the common acronyms? ::::Preparing to do self head slap and say ohhhh when someone answers this::::

---

S h i t Hits The Fan. Had to work at that a little to get the first word through the filter.

I wouldn't be too hard on yourself, if that's all you don't know, you have it made :yup:

Ooohhhhhh I get it now thanks

Thanks for the link Tangle; I hadn't seen that one. It was quite interesting, I only wish he'd used a ruler on the dents, so you could see how deep they were.

Quote:

---

To me the problem is what one would have in his shotgun when the fight starts.

---

That is a good point. While there is the option of a head shot or switch to slug, it would be interesting to know what a buckshot load to center of mass would do to someone wearing armor. If we consider that bare knuckle boxers were capable of producing "knock outs" from body punches to the heart, it would seem a slug might produce a similar effect. Whether buckshot could produce this effect I don't know.

My understanding is that soft body armor works by spreading the impact out over a larger area and flexing, sort of like a net. It would seem that the larger impact area of the buckshot might be counter productive in delivering a powerful blow. That said, if you were reasonably close, that might be mitigated. Assuming a 9 pellet 00 load, it would deliver about 1886 ft lbs. of energy (at the muzzle). Of course this is all conjecture, but 1886 ft lbs. is vastly more than a handgun would deliver; around 4 to 5 shots with a handgun (at least in regards to energy delivered).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eichorn

...My understanding is that soft body armor works by spreading the impact out over a larger area and flexing, sort of like a net. It would seem that the larger impact area of the buckshot might be counter productive in delivering a powerful blow. That said, if you were reasonably close, that might be mitigated. Assuming a 9 pellet 00 load, it would deliver about 1886 ft lbs. of energy (at the muzzle). Of course this is all conjecture, but 1886 ft lbs. is vastly more than a handgun would deliver; around 4 to 5 shots with a handgun (at least in regards to energy delivered).

---

Which emphasizes the point that if we plan to use a shotgun for PD (Personal Defense), HD (Home Defense), & SHTF situations, we need to know what our gun and ammo combo will do. E.g. I know my Benelli M4 with Federal OO 9 pellet buck, will put all nine shots in the X ring of a B27 target at 7 yards. That's about fist size, but that particular load will not have that 1886 ft-lbs you mentioned.

I have some other 00 loads that are more powerful, but then again that goes back to what we start out in the shotgun with. Do I want the reduced recoil for lower recoil, faster follow up shots, and less distraction on our shoulder, or do we want the higher power stuff in case they have body armor. Then if they don't have body armor will all that extra power cause over penetration?

What would be nice is if a 00 9 pellet low recoil load would incapacitate the BG with soft armor at least momentarily to give us time to assess and find the head or an unprotected area.

Of course multiple rounds could be applied too; pretty much beat the guy out of service.

I will offer a few test that we did with "less lethal"(bean-bag rounds) in the mid-90's when we (our dept's SWAT team) did most of our own testing of potential new products. The "bean bags" travel at substantially less velocity than "reduced recoil or full power" loads (usually between 600 and 900 fps). I personally got shot with the "bean bag" rounds on numerous test from 5 yards to 15 yards while wearing level III-A soft body armor. These shots were center of mass shots (but I made sure they did not shoot direct hits to the solar-plexus since I didn't relish the idea of having the sternum cracked or broken).

At those distances the "bean bags" were very painful and caused several of the "test subjects" to drop to their knees from the pain. I was able to remain standing and continue forward after a brief stagger effect. The rounds caused substantial bruising and did cause mild fractures on some who took direct hits to the rib cage. My shots were without the benefit of a "shock plate". I can imagine that someone under the influence of drugs/adrenilin would have the ability to continue, although slowed momentarily. These were less than scientific results but did involve people who were in top shape and motivated to resist the effects.

I cannot imagine a "reduced recoil", much less a "full power" load not causing substantial damage to individuals wearing "soft armour", and especially against a "slug". I especially see their effectiveness when used inside the confines of most buildings/houses with those short distances. I am reluctant to use "reduced recoil" rounds after seeing their dismal performance in real shootings over the last few years by our dept. We discontinued "reduced recoil" use last year due to VERY poor effects against real persons, they did not stop the threat in an acceptable manner. I personally believe a shotgun is without equal as a self defense weapon when used proficiently within most structures within approximately 25 yards, IMHO.

Great info popo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by popo22

...I am reluctant to use "reduced recoil" rounds after seeing their dismal performance in real shootings over the last few years by our dept. We discontinued "reduced recoil" use last year due to VERY poor effects against real persons, they did not stop the threat in an acceptable manner...

---

Wow, that is interesting. Low recoil, reduced recoil, tactical loads, etc. seem to be 'all the rage' in shotguns. It is interesting that common thinking is that the low recoil is 9 times better than getting shot with a single 9mm - more hits, faster, and traveling slightly faster ~1200 fps.

However, I'm an engineer and numbers bother me. For example is getting shot with reduced recoil really 9 times the effect of one 9mm round? Not at all! We think of all that shotgun load as a complete package, but it is not. It is actually 9 individual low mass, ball pellets traveling at about 1200 fps. E.g. a single 00 pellet weighs 54 grains, compared to say one 9mm weighing 124 grains - the 124 gn is 2.3 times heavier, i.e. mass-ier (ahhh, another new word!).

So we have a low mass, ball 'bullet' traveling at about handgun speeds. The energy of each ball, given a velocity of 1200 fps, is 172.5 ft lbs with very little, if any expansion - 172.5 ft-lbs is all the work the individual pellets can do. OTOH, a 9mm 124 gn hollow point bullet at the same speed has an energy level of 396 ft-lbs and expands.

So if we're going to claim equivalency, nine 00 pellets are about equivalent to nine 9 mm rounds with a bullet weight of 54 grains! Who is going to shoot a 54 gn, 9mm ball at 1200 fps and expect good terminal performance? How about if we shoot 9 of them into the threat? Will they penetrate acceptably with an energy of 172.5 ft-lbs? A .380 auto has 200 ft-lbs of energy with a bullet weight of 90 gns - that's almost twice the mass of a 00 pellet!

But, the most I've found in 2-3/4" is 9 pellets, 00 pellets @ 1325 fps. That is more 'powerful' than the same load at 1200 fps - about 27% more.

So what load did you replace the low recoil with?

We are currently issuing "Federal Premium 2 3/4 in 8 pellet oo". I am not saying that this is the "best" (or most effective round available) load, it is just what we decided to go with instead of the "reduced recoil" loads. We had numerous shooting involving both human and canine (usually "pit-bulls"), due to the large number of incidents involving dog attacks. We were finding a total lack of penetration with the "reduced recoil" rounds and therefore lack of immediate stopping power. We also issue "rifled slugs" for specific situations.

Talk about good timing I too have a renewd interest in shotguns for many of the same reasons. Earlier this year I re-connected with my roots and took a deer with my Mossberg 500A 12GA. I really love the way a 1oz slug hammers deer, typically it is a DRT scenerio. As a matter of fact I've never had a deer run when hit solidly with a slug. This year I did a lot of thinking and decided I needed more of a do it all barrel length. I ended up ordering a 20" vent rib barrel, that way I could run standard cheap rifled slugs as well as the full range of shot shells. I hunted with just the two beads that are supplied on the barrel and at 50 yards placed a Brenneke K.O. slug perfectly centered between the shoulders of a smallish WT deer, I can't ask for more than that. For slugs I'm a firm believer in Brenneke for use in smooth bores, for rifled barrels I couldn't tell you, I haven't used my rifled barrel for years due to the crazy prices of sabot slugs.

From the little bit that I've read I see that some you have concerns about various forms of body armor. Well if you don't mind paying a little extra for ammo feast your eyes on these little beasties fellas' NEW! Special Forces Maximum Barrier Penetration Magnum

http://www.brennekeusa.com/cms/filea...nformation.pdf

I've never used these heck I wasn't even aware of them until my interest was re-newed in my scattergun this year. However they sure are impressive anyway you want to look at it. I just got a new Lee Load All II to replace the one that I foolishly let go years ago. Soon I'll be reloading my own shotgun ammo again which will also include buckshot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by popo22

We are currently issuing "Federal Premium 2 3/4 in 8 pellet oo". I am not saying that this is the "best" (or most effective round available) load, it is just what we decided to go with instead of the "reduced recoil" loads. We had numerous shooting involving both human and canine (usually "pit-bulls"), due to the large number of incidents involving dog attacks. We were finding a total lack of penetration with the "reduced recoil" rounds and therefore lack of immediate stopping power. We also issue "rifled slugs" for specific situations.

---

Thank you so much! That perfectly agrees with the theory I described in my previous post. 00 pellets, weighing 54 gns traveling at 1200 fps shouldn't have much penetrating power.

I have been pretty impressed with Federal Premium 000, 8 pellet at 1325 fps. They pattern tight and the pellets are 0.36" diameter instead of 0.33" in dia for the 00. The 000 weighs 70 gr and at 1325 fps would have an individual pellet energy of 273 ft-lbs which is almost 30% more energy and momentum over the 00.

Overall energy would be 2181 ft-lbs. Of course you would feel more recoil too, feeling more recoil would probably be better than being eaten by a vicious dog though or human. :ticking:

Here is some more food for thought, especially for those that think shotguns with slugs aren't accurate at distances much beyond 100yds. This falls into the category of know your firearm and equipment. Shotgun Slugs at 230 Yards - YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by popo22

We are currently issuing "Federal Premium 2 3/4 in 8 pellet oo". I am not saying that this is the "best" (or most effective round available) load, it is just what we decided to go with instead of the "reduced recoil" loads. We had numerous shooting involving both human and canine (usually "pit-bulls"), due to the large number of incidents involving dog attacks. We were finding a total lack of penetration with the "reduced recoil" rounds and therefore lack of immediate stopping power. We also issue "rifled slugs" for specific situations.

---

Hmmm...I can't find a single listing on the Federal website for a 00 8 pellet. There's a 00 9 pellet @ 1325 fps and a 000 8 pellet at 1325 fps, but I don't see 8 pellet 00 anywhere????