Disparaging price difference

Jump to latest Follow Reply
JaceSpace1369 said:
It actually isn't, I just made the price comparison. Trenier didn't have the hades in stock so I couldn't use those as a direct comparison but their other jsb pellets are the same price. It comes to about $22 dollars cheaper and Trenier packages their tins exceptionally. Whereas Pyramyd Air is hit or miss.
Click to expand...

Screenshot below for my most recent order of 12 tins of .22 Atomics from Pyramyd. That comes out to 2.8 cents per pellet. Show me cheaper, please.

And yes, there was a coupon code added for $25 off, but this is still a valid price comparison since Pyramyd has such coupon codes several times each year and they often run for months at a time. I use such a coupon every time I purchase from them, so it's not just a one-off savings.

Anybody and everybody: Show me Atomics/Hades that are cheaper than 2.8 cents delivered per pellet, and you will be crowned the Cheap Pellet King of AGN!!! 🫅


atomics99.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: JaceSpace1369
Upvote 0
Spartan said:
Screenshot below for my most recent order of 12 tins of .22 Atomics from Pyramyd. That comes out to 2.8 cents per pellet. Show me cheaper, please.

And yes, there was a coupon code added for $25 off, but this is still a valid price comparison since Pyramyd has such coupon codes several times each year and they often run for months at a time. I use such a coupon every time I purchase from them, so it's not just a one-off savings.

Anybody and everybody: Show me Atomics/Hades that are cheaper than 2.8 cents delivered per pellet, and you will be crowned the Cheap Pellet King of AGN!!! 🫅


View attachment 490732
Click to expand...
Can't argue against that! That's a banging deal in comparison.

I did just find that Bullet Central has .22 Polymags on sale at $11.88 per tin!

Screenshot_20240824_124106_Chrome.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartan
Upvote 0
I like the Hades/Atomic much better than the polymag.

The Hades is kind of the best of both worlds. You get the ancillary tissue destruction from the “expansion”, without adding the increased smooth frontal area of all the other expanding projectiles (hollow point designs).

The Hades doesn’t “expand”, the front smashes back into the cavity along the “atomic” lines. This smashing does not require the same amount of energy that turning a hollow point inside-out does. The sharpness, and three-petal design leads to better penetration and more exit wounds in my experience.

.22 Polymag on the left, .22 Atomic on the right.

IMG_0074.jpeg


Same gun, same velocity, same 4lb clay block. Atomic went about an inch deeper.

Which one of these would you rather get shot with?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JaceSpace1369
Upvote 0
JimD said:
You guys are right about polymag and metalmag pellets. I bought a tin in 2020 and they haven't shot well in my 3 PCPs so I have not purchased more. They are way more expensive. Relative to expansion, I've only tested them in wet paper and a dead squirrel from my Prod. Metalmags were the only pellet I tested that expanded at all at Prod velocity. CPHPs certainly do not. A couple slugs did not.

I am not a "energy dump" advocate. I don't think that the target really cares how many fpe the projectile expends making a hole in the target. It cares how quickly it looses blood pressure. I prefer more penetration to a wider hole so I can, hopefully, get an exit hole too. Two holes seems to drop blood pressure immediately leading to DRT results consistently. I also did a little approximate math to get a relative feel for how big a hole is big enough comparing the cross sectional area of squirrels to deer. I think a .177 hole in a squirrel damages about the same cross sectional area as a .75 inch hole in a deer. A .22 hole in a squirrel is roughly equivalent to a 1.2 inch hole in a deer. Seems to me that airgun pellets really don't need to expand to damage enough of a squirrel.

I do agree that shooting through animals leaving substantial energy in the projectile can damage things behind the target and reducing the velocity more by having the projectile's velocity decrease more in the target can be a good thing from this standpoint. I think we need to be careful about what we shoot at and what is behind it regardless but less penetration can still be a good thing from this standpoint. Instead of shooting up in trees with my 50 fpe 25 caliber shooting 33.95 grain MKII JSBs I just use my 18 fpe 177, however (it likes 9.5 grain H&N Baracuda FTs). If it exits it will be pretty well spent and the poor ballistic coefficient common to 177 pellets means it will fly about half as far on a miss. But using expanding ammo in a 30+ fpe 22 and never missing would be another way to go.
Click to expand...
I will clarify that I found polymags for $11.89 on bullet central and Trenier also has them fro $11.99.

l personally like shooting expanding projectiles due to shooting in urban areas. But if I were in the woods, I likely wouldn't care either which I'd use between domed or "hollowpoint" pellet as long as I get the necessary penetration.

I personally haven't found the polymags to shoot the greatest in most airguns I have tried but the notos seems to like them a lot and I have seen that because the tip separated once inside the cavity cause 2 wound channels and less chance of going outside of the body. I normally don't need a blood trail so this works out for me.
 
Upvote 0
Coinwa said:
I like the Hades/Atomic much better than the polymag.

The Hades is kind of the best of both worlds. You get the ancillary tissue destruction from the “expansion”, without adding the increased smooth frontal area of all the other expanding projectiles (hollow point designs).

The Hades doesn’t “expand”, the front smashes back into the cavity along the “atomic” lines. This smashing does not require the same amount of energy that turning a hollow point inside-out does. The sharpness, and three-petal design leads to better penetration and more exit wounds in my experience.

.22 Polymag on the left, .22 Atomic on the right.

View attachment 490753

Same gun, same velocity, same 4lb clay block. Atomic went about an inch deeper.

Which one of these would you rather get shot with?
Click to expand...
I don't really like the clay tests with the Atomics/Hades, I have always found to get different results on live animals rather than when shooting into clay or water.

This is a 25.39gr Hades Monster pellet shot at around 880fps and recovered from under the skin of an iguana shot at 57yds

20240820_190948.jpg


20240820_190945.jpg


20240820_190941.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dairyboy, Bedrock Bob, Coinwa and 1 other person
Upvote 0
Jace….

Note how sharp and jagged that pellet is, vs. the smooth “mushroom” created by expanding pellets. The Atomic/Hades does that too.

I’m thinking that some bone was involved in that impact. I think the JSBs are super soft, so they tend to do that when hitting stuff that’s a little harder than them.

Iguana hide is pretty tough too, so I’d imagine that gets the deformation started before the pellet even gets to the vitals.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JaceSpace1369
Upvote 0
JaceSpace1369 said:
I don't really like the clay tests with the Atomics/Hades, I have always found to get different results on live animals rather than when shooting into clay or water.

This is a 25.39gr Hades Monster pellet shot at around 880fps and recovered from under the skin of an iguana shot at 57yds

View attachment 490758

View attachment 490759

View attachment 490760
Click to expand...

When you say "under his skin" I assume you are meaning the skin on the exit side?

What size iguana? How far across one of those lizards? Through a shoulder or leg?
 
Upvote 0
Bedrock Bob said:
When you say "under his skin" I assume you are meaning the skin on the exit side?

What size iguana? How far across one of those lizards? Through a shoulder or leg?
Click to expand...
Yes, so he was shot quartering my left side so I got a below the armpit shot, traveled about 4 inches and was stuck between the skin and flesh
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bedrock Bob
Upvote 0
I test penetration in wet paper based upon writings by Finn Aagaard who was a professional hunter in Africa and a guide and then later in life wrote books and for outdoor magazines. Finn's opinion was that wet paper best simulated animal muscle tissue. So I use it instead of clay or water. If I had some I would test them next time I do a test. I may do another test soon. I've retuned my P35-25 to about 50 ft lbs and am interested how far the 34 grain JSBs it likes penetrate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JaceSpace1369
Upvote 0
JimD said:
I test penetration in wet paper based upon writings by Finn Aagaard who was a professional hunter in Africa and a guide and then later in life wrote books and for outdoor magazines. Finn's opinion was that wet paper best simulated animal muscle tissue. So I use it instead of clay or water. If I had some I would test them next time I do a test. I may do another test soon. I've retuned my P35-25 to about 50 ft lbs and am interested how far the 34 grain JSBs it likes penetrate.
Click to expand...
When you do a test like this, do you end up stalking many pieces of wet paper together?
 
Upvote 0
JaceSpace1369 said:
Yes, so he was shot quartering my left side so I got a below the armpit shot, traveled about 4 inches and was stuck between the skin and flesh
Click to expand...

Pretty much exactly the weight and velocity of a 22 short. And from your description about the same bullet performance.

I never got shorts to fly 50 yards with any accuracy. So that's pretty impressive!

Have you ever seen Paul Harrels penetration tests on YouTube? He uses oranges for lung tissue, beef ribs around it in a leather jacket for skin. I think it's the best attempt to simulate a large animal.

You could build a lizard with chicken breasts stuffed into a sneaker....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scotty1 and TimeRabbit
Upvote 0
JimD said:
I test penetration in wet paper based upon writings by Finn Aagaard who was a professional hunter in Africa and a guide and then later in life wrote books and for outdoor magazines. Finn's opinion was that wet paper best simulated animal muscle tissue. So I use it instead of clay or water. If I had some I would test them next time I do a test. I may do another test soon. I've retuned my P35-25 to about 50 ft lbs and am interested how far the 34 grain JSBs it likes penetrate.
Click to expand...
Finn was one of my favorite writers, I read everything I could find that he penned.

I had the pleasure to randomly meet him on the plains of the Pawnee Grasslands one afternoon in the late 80’s (he moved to the States in 70).

I agree that wet newsprint and phone books are excellent ballistic testing media, it’s a bit more abrasive than clay and a little harder on bullets.

I used to soak phone books (do they still make those?) in water overnight and then press the excess water out before shooting them. I’ve still got several projectiles on my reloading bench that were recovered from this type of test.

I miss Finn… they don’t make them like him anymore.
 
Upvote 0
In my Two i had great success with the CDUM at moderate distances like 55 M, so yeah i am going to get me a stash of those for sure, and i am not even a pellet guy.
But it will have to wait a few months before i go lead shopping again, CUZ have to spend money at the dentist and a visit there is easy 30 - 35 - 40 tins / boxes of ammo, CUZ those swine do not work cheap.

Expansion - penetration ASO are not really issues i deal with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JaceSpace1369
Upvote 0
Chief Ten-Beers said:
We can't forget the Centerfire versions as well. The .17 Remington and the .17 Hornet. Real speed Demons.
Click to expand...

And the .17 Fireball, .17-556KAK, .17 Squirrel, .17 Ackley Bee, .17 Javelin, etc., etc., etc. :LOL: There are actually quite a few .17 centerfires!! :)
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Bedrock Bob, JaceSpace1369 and Chief Ten-Beers
Upvote 0
MRaccurate said:
The 17 conversation is interesting. I read that the 17 HMR (Hornady Magnum Rimfire) used a necked-down 22 Mag case. The 17 HM2 (Hornady Mach 2) uses the 22 Long-rifle case. The 17 WSM (Winchester Short Magnum) uses the case from industrial blank rounds for nail guns used for nail driving into cement. I use the first 2 for testing a speed-based sight I developed. I was tempted to buy a 17WSM for the speed, but since I only punch paper, I don't need the power from that round. At 2/3 the cost for HM2 compared to HMR, I covered the cost of a used TC semi-auto. I didn't even know TC made any semi-auto guns. I don't know if the 17WSM uses the same 17 & 20 grain bullet as the first 2 versions. I didn't know there was a 25-grain available. With the speed increase from all 3 calibers, they are very flat shooting rounds. It would be interesting if a 17HS (Hornady Short) would be manufactured.
Click to expand...
Just for clarification the 17WSM is actually Winchester Super Magnum. The rest is correct though, I have had a 17hmr for about 10 years now, I aquired a 17WSM just last year because I do have intentions of going prarie hunting in the near future. The 17WSM has 3 different weight rounds, a 15gr Lead free that goes 3,300fps, the 20gr goes 3,000fps and the 25gr does anywhere from 2,500-2,600fps. The 17hmr also uses a 15gr lead free but it is much less commonly available than the 17gr 2,350fpe and the 20gr 2,100fps it offers. Because of the doubled BC of the 17WSM at 100yds and yonder you have half the hold over of a 17hmr.

Once I learned about the 17M2 I bought 2 cases of ammo, I think it was like $90 for $1000, they were about $9 for a box of 50ct and they're about $12-14 a box now and still incredibly hard to find.
Chief Ten-Beers said:
We can't forget the Centerfire versions as well. The .17 Remington and the .17 Hornet. Real speed Demons.
Click to expand...
Basher said:
And the .17 Fireball, .17-556KAK, .17 Squirrel, .17 Ackley Bee, .17 Javelin, etc., etc., etc. :LOL: There are actually quite a few .17 centerfires!! :)
Click to expand...
Exactly why I didn't mention them lol.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Basher and MRaccurate
Upvote 0
Coinwa said:
Let us know when you sort out that 7mm Win Mag….
Click to expand...

I've never heard of a 7mm win mag either!

I guess I'm really behind the curve here!

I stopped being fascinated with various calibers years ago. I have plenty of rifles and focus on hunting and reloading for the ones I have. Im not really much on keeping up with the tech or the Jones.

I hadn't considered buying a rifle for 20 years until I decided to get a springer. I may get a PCP before too long. But as far as centerfire tech and data goes its just not something I get too deep into these days.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Bedrock Bob said:
I'm still sorting out 7mm rem mag, win mag and short win mag. I'll catch up someday!
Click to expand...

Bedrock Bob said:
I've never heard of a 7mm win mag either!
Click to expand...
It doesn’t exist….

You made up the 7mm Win Mag…. Then forgot you made it up.

I think you’re out of your element Donny….

Actually, it kind of does exist, but not commercially produced and it’s not called the 7mm Win Mag. A .300 Win necked down to 7mm is knows as the 7 Practical. When necked down and improved, it’s known as the 7 Mashburn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MRaccurate
Upvote 0
Coinwa said:
It doesn’t exist….

You made up the 7mm Win Mag…. Then forgot you made it up.

I think you’re out of your element Donny….

Actually, it kind of does exist, but not commercially produced and it’s not called the 7mm Win Mag. A .300 Win necked down to 7mm is knows as the 7 Practical. When necked down and improved, it’s known as the 7 Mashburn.
Click to expand...

This again? Why can't we just have a respectful conversation?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu