View Full Version : HEVI-Shot Marketing Claim Misrepresentations
Shawn Dodson
09-29-10, 12:12
"Each HEVI-SHOT pellet has a halo of torn tissue surrounding it, unlike the relatively light damage done by the Steel BB’s. This tissue damage is caused by HEVI-SHOT’s irregular pellet shapes."
"And look at the tissue damage! HEVI-13 pellets tear up vitals."
"Look at the tissue damage! HEVI-METAL pellets tear up vitals - see the halo of torn gel and NO black residue! Boost your clean kills and reduce crippling."
-- http://www.hevishot.com/images/stories/Catalog.pdf
When fired into Perma Gel test medium it appears HEVI- pellets merely cause an unusual fissue to form around the pellet at the terminus of the penetration track, which HEVI-Shot refers to as a "halo" of damage. Never mind that the rest of the penetration path DOESN'T SHOW ANY SIGN of increased disruption.
Misinformation such as this is what happens when ammunition manufacturers don't consult qualified wound ballistics professionals to evaluate the terminal performance of their products.
I’m not sure I follow. Why is a “qualified wound ballistics professional” necessary for is ducks, geese and turkey. Which one of the so called experts would even comment on such a thing related to waterfowl?
Hevi Shot KILLS better than steel. Go to your blind and shoot both.
Probably because there have been loads using Hevi-shot that have been marketed for LE and military use...
Shawn Dodson
09-29-10, 17:10
I’m not sure I follow. Why is a “qualified wound ballistics professional” necessary... To properly interpret wounding effects. To provide facts versus speculation.
Do you hunt waterfowl or turkey? I do and out of the 60 days a year alotted for waterfowl seasons I spend about half of that in the field. I also guide on the side. I've shot my limit of Turkey most season also. I shoot nothing but Hevi-Shot and will absolutely swear by it. When I had to shoot steel I was shooting 3' #2's or 3's for ducks and 3.5" BB's for Geese. I also had way too many cripples. With Hevi-Shot I'm shooting 3" 4's and sometimes 6's for ducks and 3" 2's for geese. Cripples have dropped by at least half and probably closer to 75%. Yes they are expensive but when you consider having to put 3-4 rounds into a crippled goose or duck on the water compared to 1shot and a kill with HS the price kinda evens out a bit.
As far as what they are saying it seems like a accurate description. I may have missed it but I didn't see where they said the wound channel was any different. The penetration is definitely greater and that is with smaller pellets than steel.
I know what a wound ballistic professional is and have had discussions with a few including the "Doc" in the past.
In most cases it really doesn’t seem to matter what the experts say anyhow seeing it’s all about dated FBI protocol and their standards. When you ask LE departments what they use and why most have told me because it’s what the "others" use and they should know what works best. Sounds good if we have to go to court!
Seems you have an issue with Remington and their shot shells. The advertisement you posted was geared 100% toward wild game birds. Nothing in it was geared toward Mil or LE usage.
As watrdawg said the stuff really works and has made a huge difference on wild game vs. steel.
Robb Jensen
09-29-10, 20:56
FWIW using 12ga 3.5" 4s in my Benelli SBE I've taken turkeys at 55yds. I've seen a few turkeys taken at 65yds with the same ammo.
Don't know about the LE/Mil/defensive Hevi-shot ammo.
BuckskinJoe
09-30-10, 05:27
In most cases it really doesn’t seem to matter what the experts say anyhow seeing it’s all about dated FBI protocol and their standards.
Negative flat assertion based on meretricious conjecture, or do you have credible evidence to support for such a claim? What alternate standards do you suggest and why? Support your claims.
Shawn Dodson
09-30-10, 11:05
Do you hunt waterfowl or turkey? I do and out of the 60 days a year alotted for waterfowl seasons I spend about half of that in the field. I also guide on the side. I've shot my limit of Turkey most season also. I shoot nothing but Hevi-Shot and will absolutely swear by it. I have no reason to doubt your experience with HEVI-Shot.
However I do know that HEVI-Shot's claim of a "halo of tissue damage" is pure bullshit.
How do you know that? Not starting anyting just curious. When I'm looking at the pics in the link you provided you can see what they call the HALO effect around the BB when it stops in the Gel. Wouldn't that HALO area equate to damaged tissue? If so, then the claim would be correct. I wold think that the only true way to determine the affects of HS pellets would be to do necropsies of game shot with both HS and Steel loads and compare the differences between the 2 pellets.
I have wondered for a while about Hevi-Shot for LE, and SD use. I have seen high density loads offered for SD, but the pellets are often small like BB or T (which do not always provide adequate penetration). #1 buckshot seems to provide the best wound volume, but with a potential lack of pentration due to soft shot. Would #1 size Hevi-shot provide an advantage over traditional lead 00 buckshot loads? Also I have noticed the increasing popularity of the Black Cloud loads from Federal. These feature a ring/belt (think the planet Saturn) around some of the pellets in the load. This is intended to increase tissue disruption. Would such a pellet design in a larger size like #1 or 00 provide an increase in wound trauma. I realize that buckshot is fairly effective already, but if technology can improve on this I see no reason not to.
There is no doubt that Hevi-shot outperforms steel shot. In addition, when we tested the Remington 00 Buckshot 9 pellet Hevi-shot load a few years ago for a military organization, the terminal performance of the Hevi-shot was noted to be at least as good as the then current lead 00 Buckshot loads.
To me it appears that the "HALO" or chunk removed from the "Perma-Gel" is on the front or impact side. It seems strange that the disruption is not through the entire block or wound channel. I would find it hard to understand why the wound channel isn’t the same size and that we don’t see more of a temporary wound cavity.
I think what’s happening is once the pellet enters and is surrounded by the Perma-Gel that it’s skidding through the material and no longer spinning therefore not showing the same type of disruption.
Just don't see a small pellet going all the way through a block of the medium.
Perma gel is NOT an accurate test media...
Shawn Dodson
10-01-10, 10:38
When I'm looking at the pics in the link you provided you can see what they call the HALO effect around the BB when it stops in the Gel. If you're curious then you're in the best position to answer your own question. Next time you bag waterfowl or turkey carefully examine the wounds produced by the HEVI-Shot, especially those that stopped inside the bird. See for yourself if there's a visible "halo of torn tissue" that extends beyond what the pellet came into direct physical contact with.
However I do know that HEVI-Shot's claim of a "halo of tissue damage" is pure bullshit.
Fair enough. Marketing types get to write the advertising copy, not the engineers. That's the way it always works in a Dilbert world. You, of all people, should know that you need to take advertising copy with a grain of salt and a switch to decaf.:D
I don't worry about gel tests on waterfowl ammo anyway. I want penetration and 3" 12-gauge Hevi-shot is the only load that I have ever seen where pellets have completely penetrated a flying Canada goose.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.