Shotgun general

>>33335385
Anything would work. It's just that marketing is extremely effective on stupid people.

>>33335385
>What's the deal with all these meme shell ideas?
Shotguns generally operate on low pressures, and the shell has lots of space, so there's lots of things you could do, potentially (regardless of if it's good, useful, fun, or safe).

>>33335385
>I've seen some regular looking buckshot with wire attached to all the pellets and it gets marketed as anti-drone. Why wouldn't steel birdshot work most drones are pretty flimsy looking.
Given that the main idea is gov't drones, neither would work.

>>33335385

Is it normal for the mossberg 835 to have a hard time cycling 2 3/4 shells unless you rack the gun hard and fast? I've used a 500 and I could rack it at any pace I wanted so this is different for me

Where are there cheap 3 or 3 1/2 #6-8 shells anywhere for dove/skeet?

Would 3 1/2 BB shells at 1550 fps using a full choke be good for home defense or should I get buckshot? I live in an apartment so I'm slightly worried about penetration

>>33335526
Most drones are not gov ones and there is no reason to shoot at those.
I mean the type of thing anyone has They're usually quadcopter designs. Or the type of stuff that isis tries to repurpose I read in the news they took one out with a missile, but these things especially like consumer ones seem like a modern day sporting clays for skeet shooting targets.

>>33335561
>and there is no reason to shoot at those
Says you, there's lots of good reasons to disable gov't drones.

Regular commercial hobby drones are of little concern, they can't spy at you from 10000ft or fire missiles.
If I needed to destroy a hobby drone I'd just use normal birdshot.

>>33335558
>I live in an apartment so I'm slightly worried about penetration
Don't use a gun then. Bullets are made to penetrate, they do damage by penetrating.

Rubber bullets and beanbag rounds are less lethal memes you could try if you feel like getting killed or sued.

>>33335558
>I live in an apartment so I'm slightly worried about penetration
Shotgun isn't really an amazing choice for you.

Buy a (preferably self-loading) rifle or carbine in some chambering that puts out a lightweight bullet at very high speed, such as 5.56mm, 5.45mm, or even 5.7mm (if you buy into that meme).

The light bullet weight ensures a reduced risk of penetrating interior walls, while the high speed of the bullet means it still has very good terminal effect.

It'll be loud though, so consider buying active hearing protection, shields your ears from loud noises while you can still hear perfectly what's going on around you.

Do Remington 1100's have the same extractor as the 870's?

So I've been looking into the ideal buckshot load for my 12ga, and found some confusing suggestions.
www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=176
this guy says that #1 buckshot is the smallest you can go while still getting reliable penetration, but
www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/02/robert-farago/shotgun-penetration-with-various-rounds
these gel tests show #4 reliably penetrating 15 inches of gel. The tests are without clothing but that still seems adequate to me. Even if it's not surely any of the sizes in between would do the trick?

>>33335575
>>33335632
wouldnt bird shot or a target load be fine? Especially with copper bbs?

If I want a double barrel for fun/skeet/birds is SxS vs O/U going to make that much of a difference?

File: another shitty paint explanation.png (3KB, 241x426px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 241x426px

>>33335385
>I've seen some regular looking buckshot with wire attached to all the pellets
It has existed since Blunderbusses were a thing. It has some advantages, like unchanging spread, and was used extensively in Europe for roe deer hunt at some point.

>>33336308
The anon just said, you need penetration to kill shit. If you want to risk not killing shit (and possibly getting sued for the massive surface damage bird shot would cause) then load up that bird shot.

>>33336308
No it's not fine, you're launching projectiles at a high velocity, it's going to fuck shit up.
I really want to rant about penetration and terminal ballistics. Most bullets are designed to stop penetrating at a certain depth but I don't want to talk about why I think it's a terrible idea as far as terminal ballistics go.

If you're worried about something being past your target don't fucking shoot. Always know what is behind your target.
If you don't know don't do it.
If you have to use force always assume it's going to be considered lethal, force is force, there is no such thing as non lethal force. You never know if a force is going to be lethal or not there are too many factors.

File: 07091.jpg (71KB, 1000x673px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1000x673px

>>33335632

I think you're right to suggest a fragmenting round but, for the sake of arguing, wouldn't it be adequate? BB loads out of a 2 3/4 get about 13 inches of penetration in gel. I guess clothing would become an issue though.

Image related

>>33337145
That hardly looks further than knife distance. I think it's too cruel to maim. Things can die from any wound. Birdshot has too many pellets that are too small I wouldn't expect a hole like that and hearing lungs gurgling on blood with the ringing. I don't think you're doing any walls any favor dry wall is two sheets about less than half a foot apart its not going to dodge anyone on the other side.

>>33335385
>>33335561
Just use birdshot on drones. If it works on birds, why wouldn't it work on drones?

>>33337145
Jesus. Hope I never have to use my shotgun and see that shit.

If you're concerned about overpenetration, I've heard really good things about #4 buckshot for home defense. The pellets are smaller than 00 buck, but still retain a large chunk of their power and definitely more suited to defense than birdshot. Just a suggestion.

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/defensive-ammunition-ballistics/66147-shotgun-ammo-buckshot.html

File: 1488580463322.png (3MB, 4298x5198px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4298x5198px

>>33335385
>>33335396

>>33335561
>Most drones are not gov ones and there is no reason to shoot at those.

>>33335572
>>and there is no reason to shoot at those
>Says you, there's lots of good reasons to disable gov't drones.

He wasn't talking about Gov't drones

>>33336308
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaR1EVybUgc

Maybe? There isn't a consensus but just about anything will go through drywall, it's like paper mache.

>>33336308
Birdshot can be pretty deadly when real close (when all the shot hits one spot) but it starts spreading out fast, very fast, probably where vidya devs get the idea that shotguns have so much spread.

Would NOT recommend unless it's the only thing you have.

>>33337145
As said, it can work, effectively too, but you're basically gonna have to be within jizzing distance, birdshot and other small pellets start spreading their pattern almost immediately.

Turkey or hare shot might fare somewhat better.

>>33341485
I remember Doom's shotgun actually having reasonable spread, to the point where you could reliably hit enemies with it on the other side of large rooms. But then in Doom 2 the "super shotgun" **fun to play with at least** went full retard and shotguns have been like that ever since.

>>33341765
>I remember Doom's shotgun actually having reasonable spread, to the point where you could reliably hit enemies with it on the other side of large rooms.

I think this was mostly a consequence of some lazier coding than intent. It had a spread of 7 pellets, each with individual random (horizontal only) deviation. this had a tendency to just have them all even out in a pretty tight line

>>33342044
They could have easily given it more spread by changing a parameter in it's RNG function, but decided to make it tight I suspect because it played better that way.

File: Ithaca-37-SEAL-01_zpscwum0dcz.jpg~original.jpg (59KB, 800x387px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 800x387px

>>33341765
I think with the SSG they were looking to fill a niche in your arsenal, since the levels were now larger in scope and had a bunch of new, meaner enemies for you to face.

However I'm not sure they considered the balance as well as they could, the regular shotgun puts out 7 hits (in a horizontal pattern, which is plausible if you consider pic related), for 1 shell, however the SSG puts out 20 hits in a huge wide spread, for 2 shells, so while you use shells faster, you can get a lot more "value in for your money", so to speak.

The SSG, with a full hit, could score almost rocketlauncher tier damage, for common and plentiful ammo and no splash damage risk, on top of an increased chance of stunning enemies (more hits means calculating for the pain state more times). It just ends up giving you more for spent resources if used right (not difficult), so for Doom 2 the basic shotgun becomes all but obsolete. I think they should have considered changing the basic shotgun to fire either 10 pellets, and/or have a much tighter spread to allow it to differentiate itself from the SSG much better and carve out a new niche for itself.
That way it would also see better use in Deathmatch, given that like 75% of all Deathmatch boils down to Super Shotgun Jousting (try to move in as close as possible to score as full a hit as possible before the other guy finishes reloading his SSG).

Duke Nukem 3D was another game that actually depicted it's shotgun pretty fairly, tight spread at reasonable distances.
It was digitized from a real gun too, a Winchester 1300 Defender with a TacStar VFG and heat-shield, supposedly belonged to Texas Department Of Corrections (so it was some prison guard's trusty pal once upon a time).

File: Ithaca M37 'Vietnam SEAL style'.jpg (258KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 2048x1536px

>>33342044
The reason for the pretty much entirely horizontal spread was probably for the reason that there really isn't all that much verticality in the first Doom (you can't even look up or down), so they figure on average it would be more useful for the player if the pellets would just consistently hit in the direction he could actually aim at.

Though again, it's actually possible to make a shotgun that has a horizontal spread pattern, might not quite as clean and perfect as in Doom, but it was absolutely a thing.

For Doom 2, the maps were now much larger, and you would often face a lot more monsters at a time, along with some more vertical play in the gameplay space.

>>33342083
>that pic
>Special Warfare Special Weapons
I've got that book. Good book.

>>33342083
>>33342139
In doom 1&2 you can't look up, but if the enemy is above or below you the shotgun (and other guns) will still hit them. The verticality of the SSG spread is pretty much just for looks.

>>33342184
Yes and no, you can't look up, and auto-aim will generally help point your fire closer to an enemy (whether or not you want it to), as long as you're within enough distance.

The SSG can sometimes allow you to reach beyond what auto-aim would typically allow though, so it has some special uses.

>>33342301
I don't remember the vertical autoaim having any distance limitation. I'm pretty certain it didn't. You just have to be close enough that you can actually aim right at the enemy, if you're off to one side then it will shoot straight ahead.

What makes some over/under scattergats be priced at thousands of dollars? Is it purely a lack of demand?

>>33336290
Get the full power federal flight control OO Buck and stop worrying about it.

>>33342378
Probably the same thing that makes golf clubs so expensive. Affluent target market.

>>33342378

>>33342409
Said it best. The real only purpose of a solid over under is for trap/skeet shoots. Maybe bird hunting depending on your state's hunting laws but even then most allow you 2-4 rounds to use in your guns internal magazine anyway. Trap/Skeet is still by and large an old rich white dude's game.

>>33342347
>I'm pretty certain it didn't
It did, at long distances it simply wouldn't register.

Some encounters in TNT Evilution and Plutonia were based on this limitation, to make the fight annoying.
I think there was an arch-vile up in a window in one map (TNT 15 I'm pretty sure), and from down on the ground you simply just couldn't get a shot off on him (but he sure could start setting you on fire if you stayed within his eyesight)

>>33342408
>stop worrying about potentially getting a lot more firepower than 00 in the same package