Slug Guns of The Future

[federali]

     I first started deer hunting in 1959, in a portion of New York State limited to shotguns. Rifled barrels did not exist and dedicated slug barrels were in their infancy. Then, if anyone had predicted shooting 3" groups at 100 yards, you would have been laughed off the range.
     The effective range of most shotgun shotgun/saboted slug combinations is now approaching 200 yards, which makes me wonder what the deer hunter will take afield 25-50 years from now, assuming there's still deer hunting and we haven't allowed the great white fathers in DC to disarm us. I predict that the youngest readers here will someday hunt with shotguns capable of consistent 300-yard performance. However, as many of the areas we now hunt in continue to become suburbanized, even current shotgun slugs may be deemed hazardous to use. So, I also see someone inventing a slug that will self-destruct after a pre-determined amount of travel, perhaps 250-300 yards. Within that range, accuracy and knockdown power would be unaffected. 
     Just my thoughts.

[Jimbo47]

Don't think it would ever be able to push 300 yards and have enough velocity to get a big slug that far down range and still be effective.

It's limited to the amount of powder you can stuff into a shotshell, and it would never be a long range varmint rifle.

I do think loads can be developed to increase accuracy even more at the distances we have now, and maybe even developing (I hope) some urban friendly loads that are super quiet, and accurate at short distances for pest control.

[Silvertp]

For the future I'd like to see, but doubt we ever will, a move toward suppressed barrels.  Something that reduces the muzzle blast to a muffled "thump".  I believe there are shrouded barrels that provide suppression for 10/22 barrels available now.  After all, it is usually the sound of the shots that alarm folks and cause some level of opposition to shooting in a particular area (NIMBY).

As for 300 yard shotgun slugs...no reason it couldn't be done now.  Most accurate combination's in rifles are the result of crazy levels of detail applied to building the weapon and developing the loads.  Same can be done for the shotgun. 

Where "slug" or short range restrictions are in place due to safety concerns resulting from dense populations of folks we may already be defeating the purpose with sabot driven slugs.  Where the same are implemented to "reduce" harvest or provide more challenge I think we have exceeded the intent with 250 yard capability w/muzzleloaders and 150 yard slug kills.

Guess from a personal standpoint, and regardless of technology, my current and future is to place the focus on "hunting" and not just shooting.  I enjoy the challenge of long range shooting as much as the next person.  However, my quest for making "extreme long shots" has been rolled back to substitute hunting skills and familiarity with my weapon to fill tags. 

Silvertp

[alleyyooper]

I see the hand writing already where we used to be able to use shot guns and straight wall pistols and muzzle loaders to hunt gone. Where just a few years ago a shot gun shooting at a target 100 yds or more was considered a long shot and many times not attemped where as today people are talking about 300 yard shots.
Even some of the areas we used to be able to hunt with a bow are gone because the ubarn powers that be think the range of cross bows is to great right now.
Lot more tree huggers live in those areas that in the country areas more wide open.

   Al

[w8n4rut]

The shotgun slugs and rifled slug barrels have become absolutely amazing over the past few years. Since the invention of sabot wrapped bullets, the ammo companies have come leaps and bounds. However, I believe that the sabot theory is still in its young stages. As the demand continues to go up for longer range shotguns, so does the research and development from gun and ammo manufactures. I understand that the shotguns shortcoming is one that is its greatest asset and that is bullet weight. Slugs effective range is greatly decreased because of the rate of drop the bullet incurs as a result of the heavy weight it is carrying down range and the deminished velocity that is needed to make an efficient and humane kill at extended distances.

With all that being said, I would not be surprised if what we one day see is a sabot cup designed to house a known long range bullet (i.e. .30 cal. 168 grain Nosler Ballistic Tipped). However, the sabot propelled from a rifled barrel with an insane twist rate, one that could get the bullet to stabilize. I know this sounds absolutely crazy, but it goes back to the premise, if you build it, consumers will pay for it. As we know, wooded areas to hunt are getting more and more scarce to  hunt by the day. With that being said, the need to hunt more wide open fields that poses 250+ yard shots become more common, especially in shotgun only states. And for some reason, Game Managament personnel in these states stay true to the premise that shotguns do not have long range properties and dangers that rifles poses. Yes, it is time for them to wake up and smell the roses. Shotguns of today and the future are for REAL!

A good example of capabilities is years and years ago scientists sat down and studied the sport of drag racing. There findings came up with it to be virtually impossible for a human being to get in a car and drive it down a 1/4 mile drag strip with speeds any faster than 225mph. Well, turn on the tv, they are going 320+mph on a regular basis.

I am excited to watch the future of shotgunning unfold, and the limits continued to be pushed to what we think is beyond belief. Happy Hunting!

[IOWA DON]

In Iowa one of the reasons given for shotguns with slugs versus rifles is safety. For the most part shotgun slugs offer no saftey benefit except in the eyes of those who know little about ballistics. That is, slugs ricochett more than rifle bullets and the fact that rifle bullets can travel farther when shot into the air is irrelevent. Deer are on the ground not up in trees. And no one should shoot at a deer offering a skyline shot. However even then, one would not know what a shotgun slug might hit 800 yards on the other side of a hill with a shotgun versus a mile on the other side of a hill with a rifle. Pennsyvania had a safety sudy done comparing shotgun using slugs with rifles and I think the results showed rifles being safer. Here in Iowa rifles seem to get the non-hunting locals worked up as they don't have any knoledge of ballistics. Likewise, I doubt if they are aware of the advances in slugs and slug guns. Actually, from most of the deer hunters I talk with they don't seem to appreciate the advancement in technology because they mostly use the old pumpkin ball slugs.

[w8n4rut]

IOWA DON, I totally agree with you in regards to shotguns being no safer than rifles. It is still a projectile being sent through the air that has no discrimination for what the projectile is going to hit. The fact of the matter is a hunter has a responsibility to take safe shots.

Now in regards to the pumpkin ball scenario, I was in that category once. I shot a smooth bore gun with pumpkin balls. I would like to mention that I have been successful over the years with that set-up, taking well over many whitetail deer. However, "deer hunters" who are resistant to long range slug guns must not have tried them. The argument can be made sabots are much more expensive, but how can you argue accuracy for money. We as hunters owe it to the animals we pursue to make quick and clean kills. I have seen too many hunters unload $7 worth of pumpkin balls, because they made less than an accurate shot placement, and are now trying to kill an animal that is wounded.
However, you can pay $10 dollars for a box of sabots, and put one well placed round through a deer's vitals, and make a quick retrieval of that animal. All the while you still have 4 rounds left in the box of 5 sabots that cost $10.
I shoot slugs that are all made from the same lot #, to ensure accuracy with no deviation. Over the past 3 years I have taken my limit (3) of whitetails every year, and have never had to get into a 3rd box of slugs over the course of three years. When I hunted with pumpkin balls, I would go to the woods with no less than 2 boxes of slugs.

[IOWA DON]

w8n4rut

Your comment about using slugs from the same lot interested me. I used to use the best Winchester slugs in my 20-ga Thompson Center TCR, but switched to the Hornaday SST's when they came out. I did not do much target shooting with them, only checking sights, and would get 3 to 3-1/2 inch groups at 100 yards. I've got quite a few boxes of the Hornaday slugs bought at dufferent times over the past few years. About a month ago I went to the range to check sights and got a 1-3/4 inch group and then one that was slightly smaller. That's a lot better accuracy than in the past. If I had got only one very good group I would have dismissed it as luck, but two, I think I got a couple boxes of ammo that were really better. Or at least better in my gun.

I hunt alone and do not shoot running deer so long range trejectory and accuracy are important. I think most Iowa hunters hunt in groups and drive deer. They generally shoot at runing deer so probably only hit them consistantly at close range. Therefore the accuracy factor is probably not too important. However, the higher velocity would be an advantage as the required lead would be less. Also, I think a lot of missing or at least hitting non-vital areas happens. A couple years ago I watched a drive (not as a hunter) and gutted out the first deer the party got. If I remember correctly it had 8 or 9 slug holes in it and 3 of them were in a vital area. I also remember talking with a young man who told me he shot a 20-ga rather than a 12-ga. The reason was because he did so much shooting on deer hunts that his shoulder would get very sore with a 12-ga. He also admitted that he missed much more often than he hit.

Having grown up in Nebraska I much prefer rifles to shotguns, but we are stuck with shotgun slugs, at least for the seasons in which bucks can be shot. Rifles are allowed in some fairly unpopulated counties during the January antlerless season. I get a lot of permits then and use a rifle. However, most of the other hunters I have seen still drive deer even when using a rifle. I always though the drive method of hunting was used here to make up for the short effective range of shotgun slugs. The thing is though that there is a lot of open fields and oportunities for long shots. I've probably shot 30 antelope in Wyoming where long shots are considered normal. However, the average range I've shot deer here in Iowa with rifles is probably farther. Anyway, the new long range slugs are a real advantage in my opinion.

DON

[w8n4rut]

DON

I have had much luck in regards to slugs when I have stayed with the same lot #. It sounds like you got a great lot of slugs on your later purchase. The problem with trying different lots is that it can get expensive looking for that right lot. However when you find that right lot#, get back in the car and go buy all the slugs from that same lot #. It really is amazing to me how much just ammo can affect accuracy from one lot to another, especially in slugs.

[mcwoodduck]

I think you will see more guns built for the slug gun market based on Bolt actions with sleek lines.
I also think you will see a return of brass cases with slugs and sabots designed more like rifle rounds than the old Pumpkin ball or the dart sabot slug.
For some reason I think 20 ga will win the slug gun wars with a 3" brass hull loaded with a 7/8 to 1 oz plastic or soft metal ringed Brass or bronze slug that is very long and with the lighter alloy you will acheive good stabilty and velocity.  Or a lead version of the Minnie Ball loaded in a 2 3/4" 20 ga hull at 1300 - 1500 FPS at about 600 grains.
I think that 200 to 250 yards are going to be the max design criteria.  After all states and counties that have shotgun as a rule over rifle are worried about distance, other wise they would allow rifles.