Now that’s what I’m talkin’ about!
It seems all the common stand-ins for the real thing produce unrealistic expectations.
It seems all the common stand-ins for the real thing produce unrealistic expectations.
Upvote 0
Nothing beats the real deal. This is a 17.5 gr. NSA .22 cal. removed from a squirrel.
Nothing beats the real deal. This is a 17.5 gr. NSA .22 cal. removed from a squirrel.
Velocity? That seems like a pretty small animal to produce such expansion, according to some.
I've used plumber's putty, but I'm sure modeling clay is less expensive. Any of these things is a good base of comparison between pellets, but I haven't found anything that is really reliable in determining how a pellet or bullet will perform in an animal. Too many variables between skin, bone, internal organs, etc. For the little critters dispatched with air rifles, I think it's a good idea to use the softest testing medium available. A pellet that shows good expansion in solid clay, may shoot through a squirrel with little or no expansion. But, I've never used a pellet that wasn't totally effective if placed in the brain! I've decided it's more useful for me to practice shooting than testing terminal performance.