TexasCHLforum.com

Good news: LE1321B available here: http://www.ammunitiondepot.com/Federal- ... 321b-a.htm

Bad news.... $6.97/5 pack

JALLEN wrote:Good news: LE1321B available here: http://www.ammunitiondepot.com/Federal- ... 321b-a.htm

Bad news.... $6.97/5 pack

I think if Flight control would keep it too tight at in-house distances, then a slug should be equally effective.

I think if you look at all the ballistics tests by all the sources we have cited the main thing I would take from it is that #1 buck penatrates 14-18 inches with 15-16 .30 caliber balls. For home defense that is more then adequate and unless you need more then 18 inches of penatration #1 is the way to go. In your home 10 yards is a long stretch! Even standard buck loads without flight control are great. Also if you can find it don't forget Winchester and Remington make a #1 buck load that is non plated that I am sure would produce very similar results at close range for $2-3 less a box. I think where the flight control pays off most is 12 yards and greater distances.

I have a case of low recoil Winchester Ranger 12G if anyone's interested. I'm only looking to sell as a whole case. Send me offers

JALLEN wrote:Good news: LE1321B available here: http://www.ammunitiondepot.com/Federal- ... 321b-a.htm

Bad news.... $6.97/5 pack

Bad news or not, the lives of my daughter and granddaughter (who live with me) are worth it! Thanks!

Beiruty wrote:

JALLEN wrote:Good news: LE1321B available here: http://www.ammunitiondepot.com/Federal- ... 321b-a.htm

Bad news.... $6.97/5 pack

I think if Flight control would keep it too tight at in-house distances, then a slug should be equally effective.

Tight is good inside the house. There are too many innocents in there to have scattered lead balls zooming around.

As for slugs... I don't want a round I fired to penetrate walls (including brick) and hit the house across the street.

I would grab first my AK74 or M400. HD shotguns are cool but not ideal. As for your rd ending somewhere outside your house, I recommend not to miss.

Pawpaw wrote:I won't use reduced recoil loads, but that's because I'm using a semi-auto. Since I'm effectively betting my life on the function of my shotgun, I want full-power loads.

If you're using a pump (or you have THOROUGHLY tested you semi-auto with them) there's not a thing wrong with reduced recoil ammo.

The reason I didn't get a pump for HD is because I have almost no experience with them. I don't want to be the guy that "short shucks" a pump when the chips are down.

Well... I have to eat my words now. I ordered and received the Federal 132 1B shells that JALLEN posted at the top of this page (Thanks, JALLEN!!!). They are marked. "low recoil" right on the end of the box.

I had seen a couple of sites that mentioned in passing that they were, but even (Federal's website) says nothing about it.

I put some down the pipe today and my Mossberg was spitting out the empty hulls with authority. I'm not worried about trusting my life to this shotgun/ammo combination.

I like Rio Reduced Recoil 00B. It works in my pumps, my SxS, & my Rem 11-48 while not killing my shoulder. But I would probably use a handgun, my AK, or maybe a lever action .357 before a shotgun.

AndyC wrote:

Redneck_Buddha wrote:I know I might catch some flak for not utilizing the 3" shell capability of the shotgun, but absent that I'd appreciate what you all use for your home defense rounds.

Flak? Not at all. 3" shells are for those long-range duck and goose shots; irrelevant for defense.

Right now, 0-buck (12-pellet) backed up with a few slugs - but I'd strongly urge you to pattern the buckshot at various distances eg 10, 15 and 20 yards and see how big the pattern gets. Try different ammo too, such as those FliteControl shells JAllen mentioned.

No flak from here. If I could get them to feed reliably in my 590, I would have it loaded up with Aguila Minishells http://www.aguilaammo.com/shotshells.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have tested and patterned these with my gun and they perform just fine, the only problem is that the carrier or lifter on the Mossberg is not long enough and the shells just kind of launch from the magazine to the breech and sometime they land sideways or backwards. My one attempt at extending it destroyed my only spare, and I decided to give up on that project.

Pawpaw wrote:Well... I have to eat my words now. I ordered and received the Federal 132 1B shells that JALLEN posted at the top of this page (Thanks, JALLEN!!!). They are marked. "low recoil" right on the end of the box.

I had seen a couple of sites that mentioned in passing that they were, but even (Federal's website) says nothing about it.

I put some down the pipe today and my Mossberg was spitting out the empty hulls with authority. I'm not worried about trusting my life to this shotgun/ammo combination.

Don't blame me! I read about it on Box o' Truth and AR15.com. I recommend reading the articles for oneself.

The supply I ordered from GT Distributors was about half that, but they don't have any, they say.

The ammo I tested, in my Win 1300, from that batch appeared to me to be exceedingly satisfactory for the purpose.

JALLEN wrote:Don't blame me! I read about it on Box o' Truth and AR15.com. I recommend reading the articles for oneself.

The supply I ordered from GT Distributors was about half that, but they don't have any, they say.

The ammo I tested, in my Win 1300, from that batch appeared to me to be exceedingly satisfactory for the purpose.

I'm not "blaming" you for anything except tracking down the ammo I've been wanting for a while!

Even it it had sunk through my thick scull that they were low recoil, I would almost certainly have ordered them anyway. I am thoroughly pleased with them... So much so that I placed another order last night.

Beiruty wrote:I would grab first my AK74 or M400. HD shotguns are cool but not ideal. As for your rd ending somewhere outside your house, I recommend not to miss.

Whether or not a HD shotgun is ideal depens on the house, the user, and the neighbourhood. That's not just a can of worms, that's a whole barrel.

Nobody will aregu that a carbine round is effective for HD...but few people would assert that a round of 5.56 or 5.45 is going to be as effective as the full payload of a round of 12 gauge buckshot (unless body armor is involved). Yes, a carbine has many more rounds on tap - but if you can hit your target, then a shotgun has a better chance of incapacitating that target with a single round.

Yes, the ammo choices offered for carbines can mitigate overpenetration issues quite well (sometimes). Yes, carbines tend to be lighter. Yes, carbines have less recoil. Yes, carbines are easier to accessorize. Yes, carbines are WAY faster to reload when they run dry. Yes, I have put 10's of thousands of rounds through the AR platform. Yes, the AR's ergonomics are outstanding. Yes, a carbine is my own personal choice for HD!

But that doesn't change the fact that a 12 gauge is a VERY good choice for HD if loaded with the right buckshot and used by a competent person. For some people it's a better choice than a carbine. For instance, the gentleman who's been shooting skeet for 20 years with an 870 wingmaster and has never picked up an AR-15 in his life.

For the OP - there's a ton od good suggestions in this thread. 000, 00, 0, or #1 buck will probably do just fine. Odds are that neither you nor the person coming into your home will ever know the difference between them. I would probably choose the #1 buck with the Flite Control wad that JAllen suggested....but if I couldn't find it, I'd but some plain-vanilla 00 buck (seems to be most commonly available) and not stress about the "what-if's" until I found the #1 buck at a reasonable price.

I read an article over 20 years ago that advocated using #4 shot for home defense. The main concern was that in a house with residents in different rooms, 12 ga 00 buck would pose a danger due to over-penetration. The author presented a good case citing the increase in surface area ofa #4 shell over buck being a superior load at in-house ranges. The argument was that the increased surface area of more and smaller pellets at close range (out to 30 ft) would be just as or more devestating to a bad guy with less chance of penetrating multiple walls.


The author was very convincing with his data. I don't remember too much about it as it was a long time ago.

longdog wrote:I read an article over 20 years ago that advocated using #4 shot for home defense. The main concern was that in a house with residents in different rooms, 12 ga 00 buck would pose a danger due to over-penetration. The author presented a good case citing the increase in surface area ofa #4 shell over buck being a superior load at in-house ranges. The argument was that the increased surface area of more and smaller pellets at close range (out to 30 ft) would be just as or more devestating to a bad guy with less chance of penetrating multiple walls.

The author was very convincing with his data. I don't remember too much about it as it was a long time ago.

#4 or even #2 shot will make a horrific looking shallow wound. Often times the shot won't penetrate more than a very few inches. If the pellets just make a nasty looking superficial wound the person shot might take umbrage to you shooting them. #4 BUCK SHOT is the smallest shot I would use in a home defense situation and only if nothing larger was available.