# Ok, all you master waterfowlers...



## mjbarney12 (Feb 13, 2011)

Do any of you use Remington "Hypersonic" Steel shot? What do you think of it? Have you ever tried Winchester "Blind Side" with it hexagonic shape? 

Hypersonic claims a 1700 fps velocity while Blind Side is apparently a 1400 fps velocity. Have you found either one of these to be more accurate and more effective than each other or more effective than say, your traditional, standard steel-shot. For myself, when I've been out looking for steel shot to buy I'm looking for the cheapest stuff I can get in 3-inch shells because it is all so dang expensive.

I assume that a box of either of these types of shells is going to be at least twice as much as standard steel shot. Is that correct? If so, is it worth the extra cost? Assuming one can shoot with any level of consistent accurace, will using either Blind Side or HyperSonic lead to more birds hitting the water and in my lab's mouth with a happy retrieve?

Thanks for your thoughts.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

I have used Hypersonics. They shoot low and slightly behind ducks.


----------



## thrillseaker (Sep 26, 2010)

I'm trying the blind side this year, and so far I miss just as much as I do with the winchester Xpect, which is $10.00 a box cheaper.


----------



## mjbarney12 (Feb 13, 2011)

*So wyogoob*

perhaps the hypersonics are not as fast as they claim then??? Or do you think you tried to adjust for how fast the claim is and "overcompensated" which led to shooting behind them?


----------



## hotspot (Jan 12, 2009)

Its not the arrow its the Indian. Meaning a shot brand, size, gimmick isn't going to make you shoot better. Spending time practicing and perfecting your shooting will make you better. That isn't to say that many different loads pattern better for your hunting desire. IMHO being a better Indian/shooter is 80+% of the battle. Just a thought. Disclaimer, I'm no expert Waterfowler.


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

wyogoob said:


> I have used Hypersonics. They shoot low and slightly behind ducks.


 :lol: You quack me up Goob.


----------



## Phragmites (Sep 12, 2007)

What I look for is cripples, I want a load that is going to put them down quick and efficently I have shot both loads and can't recommend either, patterning your shotgun to see what shell, choke, shotgun is going to be the most effective is highly recommended, Right now I am using Kent 3" 1 1/8th oz #3 with a .675 terror tube and a browning silver shotgun and that is what the paper tells me from patterning the shotgun at 40 yards is the best combination for my hunting situation.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

If you're consistently shooting right behind the ducks then hypersonic might help you. I doubt blind side makes much of a difference except possibly at long ranges but I've never tried it.

I shoot 3" #2's at 1450 feet per second and I've been knocking them dead out to 45 yards or so (when I can hit them). Admittedly, I've never patterned a duck load before. I just tried different types until I found what worked for me, then stuck with it.

In my opinion, consistence is important. If you stick with something you will ultimately learn to use it well.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Al Hansen said:


> wyogoob said:
> 
> 
> > I have used Hypersonics. They shoot low and slightly behind ducks.
> ...


 :mrgreen:


----------



## STEVO (Sep 13, 2007)

I am way suprised Shaun Larsen hasnt chimed in. Regardless of the advice others give to you, I would definately go with Shaun's suggestions. He knows his waterfowling!!! By god, he has shooted 8 hundred and something carp!!! :shock:

Plus his mom is hot!!! :mrgreen:


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

For what it's worth... The shot itself is going to do little, IF you don't know WTF we are doing as shooters. Which I think is what everyone else is getting at. I will be the first to admit, I am a lousy shot. My dad, excellent shot. We've used the same shells for years. He'll knock the same bird dead, that I would wound, and have to put another shot on, once it's hit the water. 

I cannot help but think that the penetrating power of the "non-round" pellets would be greater than the round stuff, though.


----------



## JuniorPre 360 (Feb 22, 2012)

My brother used it and it mushroomed/ bulged his barrell. We took it to a gunsmith and he explained what had happened, as he has seen 5 other guns with the same problem from the same shells. The shells have a special kind of wad that left debris inside of the barrell. The next shot, pressure built up and made the buldge.


----------



## Pumpgunner (Jan 12, 2010)

Gotta say, Blindside seems like another gimmick to sell the latest greatest ammo. There is absolutely no way that a flat cube has better aerodynamic/penetration properties than a round sphere, that's a law of physics that no amount of marketing b.s. can break. 
However from other folks that I have talked to that shoot blindside it's a good load for 30 yards and under, but it loses pattern density and energy quickly. Pretty much any shell will kill inside 30 yards so I don't see the point in paying the extra $.
As far as hypersonics, it's an interesting idea and I'm looking forward to seeing how the new super-fast loads develop over the next few years. I know that some reloaders are shooting 1800+fps loads now, it can't be long before the ammo companies follow up! I remember when Fasteel at 1500fps blew people's minds.


----------



## JuniorPre 360 (Feb 22, 2012)

Pumpgunner said:


> Gotta say, Blindside seems like another gimmick to sell the latest greatest ammo. There is absolutely no way that a flat cube has better aerodynamic/penetration properties than a round sphere, that's a law of physics that no amount of marketing b.s. can break.
> However from other folks that I have talked to that shoot blindside it's a good load for 30 yards and under, but it loses pattern density and energy quickly. Pretty much any shell will kill inside 30 yards so I don't see the point in paying the extra $.
> As far as hypersonics, it's an interesting idea and I'm looking forward to seeing how the new super-fast loads develop over the next few years. I know that some reloaders are shooting 1800+fps loads now, it can't be long before the ammo companies follow up! I remember when Fasteel at 1500fps blew people's minds.


Did you happen to notice the damage that blindside did? I had a buddy that shot them with a full choke. He did make a lot of far shots and the shot went all the way through the ducks and destroyed them. I wasn't sure if anyone else had seen the same thing. I had never seen anything like this before.


----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

I have been using the Hypersonic Steel. It really makes up for my shoddy shooting as of late :x Seems like I have forgotten how to lead the shot when I have a duck crossing from left to right and have been shooting behind them. But the HS Steel seems to make up for that a bit.

Funny though, the real reason I bought the stuff was for geese. I figured that the little extra energy behind the shot would give me a bit more knock down when I shot a goose. But it has honestly become one of my preferred loads


----------



## dubob (Sep 8, 2007)

mjbarney12 said:


> For myself, when I've been out looking for steel shot to buy I'm looking for the cheapest stuff I can get in 3-inch shells because it is all so dang expensive.


My go to duck load is Winchester Xpert 2 3/4" at 1550 with 1 1/16 oz of #3 shot. It kills ducks dead when I do my part and it is reasonably priced for the most part. Paying extra for some marketer's wet dream (hypersonic, blindside, et al) is foolish IMHO.

If you're looking for cheap, you may want to check out the Rio Steel at Sportsman's; $10.99 for 3" 1550 loads or $99.90 a case for Winchester Xperts at the new Scheels store in SLC. Scheels also offers a 5% discount on case sales but I don't know if that is included at $99.90. Call and ask. That Xpert price at Scheels is better than either Sportsman's or Wal-Mart by the way.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

dubob said:


> mjbarney12 said:
> 
> 
> > For myself, when I've been out looking for steel shot to buy I'm looking for the cheapest stuff I can get in 3-inch shells because it is all so dang expensive.
> ...


I agree, dubob. The Experts are perfectly fine out to 40 yards. Dead is dead, after all. I prefer 4's to 3s, but that's a small point. They're not the highest quality shell, in that the shot could be more uniform in size. I have some B&P stuff that's 2 3/4" 1 1/8 ounce at 1400FPS that are higher quality, but the WW are just as effective.

There will always be the new latest and greatest load. As someone said above, if you deviate from a sphere for shot, you decrease the ballistic coefficient, downrange energy, and increase flyers. None of those things are good. I'd rather shoot the Expert Target load, 1 1/8 ounce of 6s at 1325FPS for $7.00/box than the latest gimmick.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

JuniorPre 360 said:


> My brother used it and it mushroomed/ bulged his barrell. We took it to a gunsmith and he explained what had happened, as he has seen 5 other guns with the same problem from the same shells. The shells have a special kind of wad that left debris inside of the barrell. The next shot, pressure built up and made the buldge.


Good grief. I Googled "Blindside bulged barrels" and it looks like it has happened quite a few times. Seems the wad leaves residue that slows the following shot down enough to over pressure the barrel.

Thanks for the heads-up.


----------



## JuniorPre 360 (Feb 22, 2012)

wyogoob said:


> JuniorPre 360 said:
> 
> 
> > My brother used it and it mushroomed/ bulged his barrell. We took it to a gunsmith and he explained what had happened, as he has seen 5 other guns with the same problem from the same shells. The shells have a special kind of wad that left debris inside of the barrell. The next shot, pressure built up and made the buldge.
> ...


Sorry, I was actually referring to the Super Sonic shotgun shells. Lot's of options and new things... I'll just stick to my good ole crappy Xperts.


----------



## Donttreadonme (Sep 11, 2007)

I shot the Hypersonics at geese all last season and didn't see much of a difference. Dead is dead and I do just as well with the Remington "blue box" as the Hypers with much less recoil.


----------



## BigMac (Feb 12, 2012)

Shoot the cheapest you can find! Get them in 30 yards or closer & they all die the same. Dose not mater if it is 3.5", 3", 2.75" or 1.25 oz. or 1 oz. of shot. Bring them in range like others have said & they all kill. Also a point I want to raise on high speed ammo is they are measuring FPS at the muzzle. By the time it is down range it's slowed way down.


----------



## Pumpgunner (Jan 12, 2010)

BigMac said:


> Shoot the cheapest you can find! Get them in 30 yards or closer & they all die the same. Dose not mater if it is 3.5", 3", 2.75" or 1.25 oz. or 1 oz. of shot. Bring them in range like others have said & they all kill. Also a point I want to raise on high speed ammo is they are measuring FPS at the muzzle. By the time it is down range it's slowed way down.


I've seen a lot of data that says that no matter how fast steel shot leaves the barrel it will be travelling at a sub-sonic speed after 30 yards, and the faster it leaves the barrel the faster it slows down. I still believe that there is an advantage in higher speeds but I'm not sure if it's really all that much. The truth that will always beat all the marketing, hype and speculation is that the closer you get the birds in, the less it matters what you're shooting at them.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

I have shot both. The hypersonics are fast and will change the way you shoot. As stated before being a better shot will help more than the shells. I try to practice with the same velocity always to try and be more consistent. The blind sides I do like. They are the same velocity as most other shells but they do alot of damage when you hit a duck. I have shot geese with them in 3 inch and they penetrate well. They do kill more ducks and cripple less. If you are worried about damage to meat don't shoot blindside they will destroy a duck. Now if it comes down to price it's your call. I shoot cheap shells until the migration starts. When the bigger ducks show up I'll pull out the blindside.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Pumpgunner said:


> The truth that will always beat all the marketing, hype and speculation is that the closer you get the birds in, the less it matters what you're shooting at them.


Indeed. This is why I think it's laughable that people would pay a premium price to shoot Black Cloud Close Range shells.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

The formula for drag resistance shows that drag is proportional to the square of the velocity. In other words, if you double the velocity of a given projectile, you quadruple the drag. So, let's say you shoot two loads, one at 1400FPS, the other at 1700FPS. The faster load starts off ~21% faster, but the drag is ~47% higher. Thus, it will slow down almost 50% faster than the slower load. The downrange advantage of the faster load essentially disappears, as mentioned above. While it's true that the faster loads will have an advantage over slower loads at any given range, it's really minimal. I don't have the ballistics figures any more, but if memory serves, faster loads don't increase your effective range by much more than 3 yards.

My favorite load is B&P shells, which are 1385FPS-1410FPS. No need for hypersonic loads with funny shaped pellets. Just hunt. Get the birds in under 40 yards and you'll do fine.


----------



## LETTER-RIP (Sep 14, 2007)

I to as mentioned above like the Winchestor XPERT. 2 3/4 4 shot. It patterens well out of my old A-5. I have been considering the 6 shoot that they have to see if it works just as well. If you get them in close you dont need much to put them down.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

All the fancy math and marketing hyperbole aside, what it really boils down to is knowing your load and taking close shots with a high kill percentage. I've shot the same load at waterfowl now for 15 years. I use the same load on everything from teal to swans. (3" 1 1/8 oz #4 Steel going about 1650 fps) It patterns well out of my gun, I know the lead on birds, and when the birds are in the kill zone, they fall out of the sky like a loaf of bread. Am I limited? I don't think so. Hunting to me, no matter what the quarry, has always been about "how close" not "how far". Like Paddler said, keep your shots within a close reasonable range, and you kill em dead as a hammer with any shell on the market. You wanna up your wound and release stats and haggle more birds, keep taking those stupid long shots out there at 60 plus yards.


----------

