Hey guy

I know this topic has been beaten to death, but I just want one more piece of assurance. I've heard the stories of BC messing up barrels and chokes. Has anyone shot BC through a Browning Gold and Browning chokes without issue?

Thanks

The entire concept of Black Cloud ruining barrels is premised upon the notion that the shot string is separating from the wading INSIDE THE BARREL, which is almost physically impossible.

Fire at will.

Check this out, I think this explains it all. There is no way the shot can come in contact with the barrel. The only way that I could see damage happening at all is if you were using one of those choke tubes that strips the wading away from the shot and you didn't have it screwed in tight. Anyway if you were shooting with a "stripper" you'd be defeating the whole purpose of shooting the BC.
http://www.blackcloudammo.com/features_benefits/FLITECONTROL_Wad.aspx

I would gladly kick an old lady down stairs if I were assured that I wouldn't have to read one more asinine question about the merits or "dangers" of black cloud.

It glides through like corn through a goose's azz. No problems there.


I have had no problems shooting BC with my Browning gold or SBE II.

Even if you had a wad stopper it won't touch the barrel because the pellets are free of the barrel when the wad gets hung up.

I can see anyway physically possible the pellets can get out of the shot cup before they are released out of the choke.

No one is making you 'read' anything...it your own choice bud.

Well is there any chokes that that flightstopper wad is getting caught up in?

Yep, my thoughts exactly. If your choke tube wasn't screwed in all the way and this would prolly apply to any choke tube and pretty much any brand of steel/nontoxic shot combination. You "might" damage the threads in your barrel. I really see no more risk shooting BC than you would have shooting anything else.

Oh man... is it duck season yet?

I don't know. I don't shoot Black cloud. In my opinion black cloud is nothing but a market hype that seems to be working very well, so far as hype. Nothing can change, speed and weight of the pellet and metallic density. There is nothing else. When the pellets leave the barrel there is no other factors.

Some claim spectacular kill shots, DRT on the ducks ect. Well tell me then what it is that creates that. Is it the odd shpae of the pellet? I don't know. I just have a hard time getting past the science.

There are other factors to consider. Factors such asa maybe that shot shell weapon choke combination was better suited for each other than the shells being shot prior to black cloud. Maybe their pattern density increased where spectacular results were displayed.

I just refuse to read "spectacular" on the internet and run out and pay my left arm's worth to buy a box of shells when I pound them stone dead at 40 yards with Walmart Remington 9 bucks a box shur shot #4 pellet.

I liken it to this. I watched the firt hunting show on the outdoor channel for the first time the other day in a long time. The commercials kill me. They are product pimps. I didn't finish the show because of the commercials. I refuse to buy that crap. I think the same thing of black cloud, all hype to get the dollar. Yall go on a pay $28 a box, I'll shoot myself in the big toe before I buy a box of it.

Agree, if I miss one duck a day because I am using $9 wal-mart shells versus taking out a loan to buy BC's then I am ok with that. If you can shoot you can shoot!

Physics fail.

Were that the case, then a field point would be 100% as lethal to game as a broadhead of the same weight mounted to the same arrow and fired at the same velocity from the same bow. Additionally, a solid bullet such as that used on African game - we'll say a Nosler Solid for the sake of argument - would have no advantage whatsoever over a round ball of the same weight and caliber fired at the same velocity. When mbogo is looking at me like I owe him money, you can kiss my [censored] if you think I'm hurling musket balls at him.

For that matter, if wound channel size and energy transfer do not make a difference in lethality, then I assume you have ball ammunition in your carry and home defense handguns.

Seperate those two, wound channel and energy transfer.

What more energy tranfer is there with black cloud than regular ammo. The weight of the pellet does not change.

Wound channel. Why would I care about a wound channel if I kill them deader than a nail with Remington.

With a home defense hangun your talking about apples compared to water melons here. It would not bother me one bit to defend myself with ball ammunition. That is if I had 10 rounds hitting the target at the same time like a shotgun would. A pistol is a one pellet deal. Love your thought process but it still aint making me buy a box.

Whether you ever buy a box or not is immaterial to the discussion. We're talking physics now. You claim that weight is the only factor that determines energy transfer when it is not. Surface area plays a role in energy transfer. Any calculation of the deceleration of a rigid object entering a fluid object (or reducing its kinetic energy - the energy created by that object's motion) must take into account the surface area of the rigid object. That is kinetic energy transfer, not to be confused with muzzle energy, which is a simple derivation of mass and velocity.

As for your handgun's are a one pellet deal argument, it is also inaccurate. A handgun (or rifle for that matter) is never a one shot deal unless you hit the i, striking a blow to the central nervous system via a spine or head shot that is instantly fatal. Otherwise, all defensive engagements require multiple rounds on target in order to take the target out of the fight. Thus it is always preferable to create the most severe wound channels possible in order to effect death or incapacitation through loss of blood.

Defensive handgun or carbine 101.

You miss my point. One shot and one projectile from a handgun striking a target VS. 1 shot and 10 projectiles striking a target at the same time from a handgun. You catch 10 rounds of ball ammo at one time your going down plain and simple.

The simple fact of it all is the mouse trap aint getting any better. Why? The same old wood mouse trap works like a charm. Sure there are mouse trap SYSTEMS you can buy now. It doesn't kill a mouse any more dead than DRT. Everyhting in the hunting industry has turned to a SYSTEM of some sort. We can't describe our product just like any other project we must have an edge over the competition. What better way to do that than to hype the product.

To make something die as a result of a gunshot you are absolutely correct. You either stop the nervous system or you blood let it. I don't see the ducks getting shot and falling in the deeks as a result of blood letting, it is letahl blow to the nervous system. If a pattern is tight enough to put multi pellets on a bird it will kill the bird. Just like the mouse trap SYSTEM, how dead do you want it to be before it is called dead?

I aint wanting to here but I am just saying the king is naked until I get proved otherwise.

A fatal CNS hit is effected through either a direct blow that severs the spinal column or hits the brain or by the shockwave created by the deceleration (kinetic energy transfer) of a solid object into liquid body mass. You can view the shockwave in slow motion here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U623g6ReRbw

An irregularly shaped solid object like an expanding rifle round inherently transfers more energy during deceleration than an object of uniform dimensions, such as a musket ball. That is immutable, 100% mathematically irrefutable physics. Thus, the irregularly shaped pellets of Black Cloud have a higher percentage chance of transferring a lethal dose of kinetic energy to the CNS at a greater distance than does a round pellet. There is absolutely NO refuting that point.

You are correct in stating that a well-placed and dense pattern of round shot is instantly lethal because of the quantity of wounds. Again, there is no refuting that. However, given the physics of the terminal ballistics of Black Cloud's beer-keg-with-a-razor-hula-hoop pellets, marginal shots with BC should, mathematically, produce more fatal results than round pellets. Claiming that even an exceptional wing shot can center a bird every time is hyperbole.

I can't look at u tube at work anymore they cut off our access. I am very aware of energy tranfer. You are absolutely correct about energy xfer.

I don't see a lot of pass through shots when it comes to ducks. If a round pellet strikes a bird and a jagged pellet strikes a bird then how do you calculate the difference between the two when it comes to energy transfer. You don't because there isn't a difference, both received 100% tranfer of energy.

There are more factors involved. The best flight, so far as loss of energy, comes from a sphere. How do you calculate the loss of energy in a jagged projectile. What would it matter if both projectiles stop in the bird?

If we agree that a well placed pattern on a bird at 40 yards will kill them stone dead, then what is it we are talking about here.

What I am trying to say is I can't fall for the marketing hype and spend $28 for a box of shotgun shells when I do the exact same thing with a $9 box of shells. Nobody has shown me the difference, especially a $19 a box difference.

I have been killing birds for 3 and half decades. I just can't see the need for the Wham BAM Black Cloud hype. I had a buddy tell me "Oh man you gotta try this stuff" and gave me a box. I couldn't hit a bull's arse with it. Mind you I had no pattern tests to figure out what was going on. I gave away the remaining shells and went back to Winchester Drylocks.

Since then I have switched over to Remington and I have had no problem with killing them deader than a nail out to 40 yards. So I ask you if you were a salesman with an eye on my wallet, what would you tell me to convince me I needed to pay an additional $19 a box to kill ducks?

Its all in good ole sitting around the fire conversation

The only thing missing is a couple of neat glasses of bourbon.