Federal Classic Rifled Slugs vs Federal "Tactical" Slugs ?

up-down · August 10, 2001, 01:07 PM

Could anyone tell me the performance difference between these two types of rifled slugs? I understand the Tactical are lower recoil but does this translate to poor down range performance? I am all for less kick but not at the expense of ballistics.

Dave McC · August 10, 2001, 01:24 PM

What's the mission? For deer,I'd stick to the higher velocity ones IF accuracy was up to snuff.

For HD and "Serious" shotgunning, the lower velocity ones may be better in your use environment, or quite possibly NO slug's a good idea.

In any case,bench testing is the only way to determine which slug works best for YOU in YOUR gun.

HTH...

up-down · August 10, 2001, 02:10 PM

I certainly agree ones mission might dictate the ammunition but also ones ammunition might dictate the mission. This was why I was looking for more of a ballistics difference between the two shells which would help in my decision. You are right that range work would show accuracy differences and point of impact changes with distance but still wouldn't give hard numbers on performance. I have been unable to find published table on slugs so maybe I am just looking for something that is just not reasonably available. Thanks for the impute.

August 10, 2001, 03:04 PM

Federal's website has data for all their loads. IIRC, they claim something like 1600 fps for the classic and 1300 for the "tactical".

up-down · August 10, 2001, 09:11 PM

Thanks Jeff, Federal did have some good numbers on their regular slugs.

Glamdring · August 11, 2001, 11:18 PM

What do you consider max range in the field for slugs?
The Tactical/low recoil slugs are moving slower so they will drop faster and have much less energy at any given range vs standard slug.

BTW Specs for Shotgun ammo is usually based on 30" barrel which is almost a foot longer than my slug gun's barrel. I expect actual velocity in a slug gun is much lower than what they claim in their listings of the ammo.

Bullmoose · August 11, 2001, 11:49 PM

Since we are talking tactical use it probably doesn't make a bit of difference between the two. You shouldn't have to be shooting at distances over 60-70 yards. Remember that the average SWAT team sniper shot is only about 75yards and they have those fancy scopes on rifles that shoot 1/2MOA groups out to 300 yards and more (Of course they don't get to bring their benches to use at the scene and they are usually out of breath to get there or about blind from looking through the scope so long, plus the problem with the adrenaline, etc.), but LEO's don't get to readily disengage like we civilians can. I would use the reduced recoil slug that shoots best in my gun and hits smack dab in the middle of the 00 pattern at the tactical limit of the buck when it is sighted at 60-70 yards. That raises another point: why is everybody pushing their magic bbl/choke mods that are supposed to give you fist size groups of Buck at xx yards then the instuctor tells you to slug up at anything past 12-15 yards. Am I missing something besides the business end of the equation? My stock 870 cylinder bbl will deliver good enough at that range as it comes from the factory w/o a $75 tap job and a fancy $100 choke or $200+ of bbl mods.

Erick Gelhaus · August 12, 2001, 03:34 AM

Bullmoose noted:

Quote:

That raises another point: why is everybody pushing their magic bbl/choke mods that are supposed to give you fist size groups of Buck at xx yards then the instuctor tells you to slug up at anything past 12-15 yards. Am I missing something besides the business end of the equation?

A few reasons from where I sit:
a) Not everyone understands the patterning and I'm pointing this finger at the user. If you - generic - don't know what you're gun will do, you need to drop to the low end of the spectrum. I've got a few 870s in my department's armory that need to switch to slug at about 9 yds because they pattern so horribly. I don't know of any instructors recommending a general switch to slugs at that short of a distance - Not saying there aren't any but I don't know of them.

The teaching side & the gunsmithing side of things do not always go hand in hand. Some instructors may not be aware of the compensators, barrel work, alternate loads out there. And while I hope if one is teaching, they're trying to keep up with the new stuff. Though, I'll admit it isn't possible to keep track of everything that is appearing.

I think the reduced slugs are a pretty good thing but I'll take my hot Brennekes as a load of choice.

Intel6 · August 12, 2001, 01:15 PM

You also need to ensure that the slugs you choose work reliably in your shotgun. I picked up a box of the Remington "low recoil" slugs to give them a try. Found out they wouldn't cycle my Rem 11-87 Police, the hulss didn't even make it out of the reciever. I shot up the rest in my 870 went back to Brenneke slugs.

Clayton · August 12, 2001, 05:28 PM

The Federal Tactical "HydraShok" slugs are my preference. I have shot only one deer with this load, but it performed at least as well, if not better than the standard loadings. It also offers a substantial decrease in recoil. Highly recommended.
www.midsouthshooterssupply.com

August 10, 2001, 01:07 PM	#1
up-down Junior Member Join Date: August 7, 2001 Location: Florida Posts: 14	Federal Classic Rifled Slugs vs Federal "Tactical" Slugs ? Could anyone tell me the performance difference between these two types of rifled slugs? I understand the Tactical are lower recoil but does this translate to poor down range performance? I am all for less kick but not at the expense of ballistics.

August 11, 2001, 11:18 PM	#6
Glamdring Senior Member Join Date: April 24, 2000 Location: MN Posts: 1,399	What do you consider max range in the field for slugs? The Tactical/low recoil slugs are moving slower so they will drop faster and have much less energy at any given range vs standard slug. BTW Specs for Shotgun ammo is usually based on 30" barrel which is almost a foot longer than my slug gun's barrel. I expect actual velocity in a slug gun is much lower than what they claim in their listings of the ammo. __________________ "A traveler has no protection besides his fire-arms; and the constant habit of carrying them is the main check to more frequent robberies" --Charles Darwin from The Voyage Of The Beagle

August 10, 2001, 01:24 PM	#2
Dave McC Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 14, 1999 Location: Columbia, Md, USA Posts: 8,831	What's the mission? For deer,I'd stick to the higher velocity ones IF accuracy was up to snuff. For HD and "Serious" shotgunning, the lower velocity ones may be better in your use environment, or quite possibly NO slug's a good idea. In any case,bench testing is the only way to determine which slug works best for YOU in YOUR gun. HTH...

August 10, 2001, 02:10 PM	#3
up-down Junior Member Join Date: August 7, 2001 Location: Florida Posts: 14	I certainly agree ones mission might dictate the ammunition but also ones ammunition might dictate the mission. This was why I was looking for more of a ballistics difference between the two shells which would help in my decision. You are right that range work would show accuracy differences and point of impact changes with distance but still wouldn't give hard numbers on performance. I have been unable to find published table on slugs so maybe I am just looking for something that is just not reasonably available. Thanks for the impute.

August 10, 2001, 03:04 PM	#4
Jeff, CA Guest Posts: n/a	Federal's website has data for all their loads. IIRC, they claim something like 1600 fps for the classic and 1300 for the "tactical".

August 10, 2001, 09:11 PM	#5
up-down Junior Member Join Date: August 7, 2001 Location: Florida Posts: 14	Thanks Jeff, Federal did have some good numbers on their regular slugs.

August 11, 2001, 11:49 PM	#7
Bullmoose Senior Member Join Date: February 10, 1999 Location: Placentia,CA,USA Posts: 143	Since we are talking tactical use it probably doesn't make a bit of difference between the two. You shouldn't have to be shooting at distances over 60-70 yards. Remember that the average SWAT team sniper shot is only about 75yards and they have those fancy scopes on rifles that shoot 1/2MOA groups out to 300 yards and more (Of course they don't get to bring their benches to use at the scene and they are usually out of breath to get there or about blind from looking through the scope so long, plus the problem with the adrenaline, etc.), but LEO's don't get to readily disengage like we civilians can. I would use the reduced recoil slug that shoots best in my gun and hits smack dab in the middle of the 00 pattern at the tactical limit of the buck when it is sighted at 60-70 yards. That raises another point: why is everybody pushing their magic bbl/choke mods that are supposed to give you fist size groups of Buck at xx yards then the instuctor tells you to slug up at anything past 12-15 yards. Am I missing something besides the business end of the equation? My stock 870 cylinder bbl will deliver good enough at that range as it comes from the factory w/o a $75 tap job and a fancy $100 choke or $200+ of bbl mods.

August 12, 2001, 01:15 PM	#9
Intel6 Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2000 Posts: 426	You also need to ensure that the slugs you choose work reliably in your shotgun. I picked up a box of the Remington "low recoil" slugs to give them a try. Found out they wouldn't cycle my Rem 11-87 Police, the hulss didn't even make it out of the reciever. I shot up the rest in my 870 went back to Brenneke slugs.

August 12, 2001, 05:28 PM	#10
Clayton Senior Member Join Date: July 27, 2001 Location: Bentonville, Arkansas Posts: 266	The Federal Tactical "HydraShok" slugs are my preference. I have shot only one deer with this load, but it performed at least as well, if not better than the standard loadings. It also offers a substantial decrease in recoil. Highly recommended. www.midsouthshooterssupply.com