Is Bismuth Shot really more effective than Steel?

This will be my first year hunting with Bismuth. I have an old A5 16 gauge w/modified choke that I bought several years and I've decided to hunt with it this year. I bought a case of Bismuth #5 for it. In my 12 gauge, I normally hunt with #2 or #3 steel shot and I got a case of Bismuth #4 to try this year. I am hoping to get out next week and do some patterning.
 
Here are a few of my pattern numbers with several bismuth and steel loads to give you an idea of the performance differences you might find.

PATTERNING RESULTS
The patterns were shot at 40 yards with a Remington 870 Special Purpose 12-gauge using a 28-inch Rem-choke barrel and factory flush Modified Rem-choke, .018-inch constriction from a bore gauge. The 40-yard (muzzle to target) pattern data is the result of pellet hits registered in a 30-inch post-shot inscribed circle from five separate pattern shots.

PATTERNS / 40 YARDS / Modified Rem-Choke (.018” constriction)
Boss Unmuzzled Bismuth 2 ¾” 1 ¼ oz #4 Bi (192 pellets) / pattern 126 (66%)
Boss Unmuzzled Bismuth 3” 1 3/8 oz #5 Bi (267 pellets) / pattern 143 (54%)
Boss Unmuzzled Bismuth 3” 1 ½ oz #3/#5 Bi duplex (226 pellets) / pattern 121 (54%)

Kent Upland Bismuth 2 ¾” 1 ¼ oz #5 Bi (197 pellets) / pattern 119 (60%)
Kent Waterfowl Bismuth 2 ¾” 1 ¼ oz #4 Bi (212 pellets) / pattern 126 (59%)

HEVI-Bismuth 2 ¾” 1 ¼ oz #5 Bi (228 pellets) / pattern 85 (37%)
HEVI-Hammer Upland 3” 1 3/8 oz #3 Bi/#3 Steel duplex (181 pellets) / pattern 101 (56%)

Fed. Speed-Shok 3" 1 1/4 oz #3 steel (186 pellets) / pattern 128 (69%)
Rem. Sportsman 3" 1 1/4 oz #3 steel (193 pellets) / pattern 146 (76%)
Win. Xpert 3" 1 1/4 oz #3 steel (195 pellets) / pattern 131 (67%)

Fed. Speed-Shok 3" 1 1/4 oz #2 steel (154 pellets) / pattern 115 (75%)
Rem. Sportsman 3" 1 1/4 oz #2 steel (152 pellets) / pattern 110 (72%)
Win. Xpert 3" 1 1/4 oz #2 steel (146 pellets) / pattern 106 (73%)
 
Marketing more often than not works and for many outdoorsmen a higher price means "must be better" or "more exclusive". This is true in just about everything in life ... clothing, haircuts, restaurants, outdoor hobbies, sporting equipment ...

BOSS has done a great job marketing and if you tie in their limited production runs (historically) ... they do a great job selling what they produce.
 
Old shotguns with old barrels have been my only reason to shoot bismuth ... usually I just use them where I can still shoot lead.
 
I been shooting bismuth. It is an advantage. Of course the most important thing is where you point the gun. I'll take any advantage I can get. It is high priced, so I look for sales in the offseason.
 
Joe Hunter said:
PATTERNS / 40 YARDS / Modified Rem-Choke (.018” constriction)

HEVI-Bismuth 2 ¾” 1 ¼ oz #5 Bi (228 pellets) / pattern 85 (37%)
Click to expand...

That is a terrible pattern percentage with a modified choke.

In fact that is a bad pattern percentage for a gun with no choke.

This may explain why Roster's study determined that unbuffered bismuth demonstrates a higher crippling rate than steel for waterfowl.
 
Last edited:
Here's the data on the Hevi loads.

12 GA HEVI Bismuth loads
I cut open five shells, from the same box as the shells to be patterned, and the components (powder and shot) were weighed, counted, and measured for consistency. Here are my findings from those dissections.

12 GA 2 ¾" HEVI-Bismuth load
1 ¼ oz #5 Bi (228 pellets) @ 1400 fps
PELLET COUNT / WEIGHT (grains) (1 ¼ ounce = 546.9 gr)
234 / 497.0 gr
231 / 491.2 gr
228 / 484.6 gr
227 / 485.8 gr
222 / 468.5 gr
Aver. 228.4 / 485.42 gr + flax seeds 12.68 gr

PELLET SIZE (25 pellets, 5 pellets/shell, #5 pellet dia. = .120”)
.126”, .125”, .124”, .124”, .123”, .122”, .121”, .120”, .119”, .119”, .119”, .118”, .116”, .115”, .115”, .114”, .113”, .112”, .112”, .111”, .110”, .109”, .107”, .096”, .093”
Aver. .11532” dia.

POWDER / SHELL (grains)
33.8 gr
33.7 gr
33.5 gr
33.4 gr
33.4 gr
Aver. 33.56 gr

PATTERNING RESULTS
The patterns were shot at 40 yards with a Remington 870 Special Purpose 12-gauge using a 28-inch Rem-choke barrel and factory flush Modified Rem-choke, .018-inch constriction from a bore gauge. The 40-yard (muzzle to target) pattern data is the result of pellet hits registered in a 30-inch post-shot inscribed circle from five separate pattern shots.

HEVI-Bismuth load
12ga 2 ¾” 1 ¼ oz #5 Bi (228 pellets)
40 Yards / Modified Rem-choke
Patterns: 99, 97, 81, 74, 72
Aver. 84.6 (37.04%)

12 GA 3" Hevi-Hammer Upland Duplex (bismuth/steel) load
1 3/8 oz #3 Bi (55 pellets) + #3 Steel (126 pellets) = 181 total pellets @ 1350 fps
PELLET COUNT / WEIGHT (grains) (1 3/8 ounce = 601.6 gr)
183 / 568.9 gr
183 / 565.1 gr
181 / 557.3 gr
179 / 545.9 gr
178 / 549.9 gr
Aver. 180.8 / 557.42 gr + flax seeds 16.38gr
(Bi/55.4 + Steel/125.6 = 181 pellets) (Bi/30.6% of payload)

PELLET SIZE (25 pellets, 5 pellets/shell, #3 Bi pellet dia. = .140”)
.149”, .148”, .148”, .146”, .146”, .146”, .145”, .145”, .143”, .143”, .142”, .142”, .141”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .139”, .138”, .138”, .138”, .137”, .137”, .136”, .134”, .131”
Aver. .14128” dia.

PELLET SIZE (25 pellets, 5 pellets/shell, #3 Steel pellet dia. = .140”)
.141”, .141”, .141”, .141”, .141”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .140”, .139”, .139”, .139”, .139”, .139”, .139”, .139”, .139”, .137”
Aver. .13976” dia.

POWDER / SHELL (grains)
40.0 gr
40.0 gr
39.9 gr
39.4 gr
39.4 gr
Aver. 39.74 gr

PATTERNING RESULTS
The patterns were shot at 40 yards with a Remington 870 Special Purpose 12-gauge using a 28-inch Rem-choke barrel and factory flush Modified Rem-choke, .018-inch constriction from a bore gauge. The 40-yard (muzzle to target) pattern data is the result of pellet hits registered in a 30-inch post-shot inscribed circle from five separate pattern shots.

Hevi-Hammer Upland Bismuth/Steel Duplex load
12ga 3” 1 3/8 oz (Bi/55 + Steel/126 = 181 total pellets)
40 yards / Modified Rem-choke
Patterns: 107, 102, 102, 100, 94
Aver. 101.0 (55.86%)
 
John Singer said:
That is a terrible pattern percentage with a modified choke.

In fact that is a bad pattern percentage for a gun with no choke.

This may explain why Roster's study determined that unbuffered bismuth demonstrates a higher crippling rate than steel for waterfowl.
Click to expand...

You're right. In this case for some reason the "hevi" brand shells are terrible. Joe had posted about this in the past. Not sure why but he's had terrible results with them. Stay away from any of these loads. Whether the original hevi brand or even the Federal hevi bismuth. I still can't believe Federal puts out shells like this. A real head scratcher.
 
I once shot a rio steel shell ( 1 1/4 2) that put i think 35ish pellets on a 30" circle at 35yds with IC choke. I thought I missed the board. Had someone else shoot it and it looked like a blunderbuss, shot hitting ground in front of it, 3 feet to every side.. it was actually pretty funny. Same loads in benelli were fantastic pattern.
 
I just recently got into the non toxic game, only do upland hunting.

Bismuth should do better from physics side but I agree that the brittleness is the downside. The vast majority of loads I patterned with bismuth did not pattern great. The boss 1-1/2 oz work but only because it has enough pellets. Steel just patterns amazing, but I do think the long shots are the downfall. They can't compare to lead in that regard.

This year I'm testing a 410 tss handload. Patterns like steel, hits harder than lead. Not that everyone should use it, but its actually cheaper than the commercial bismuth loads. Very excited to try it out.
 
John Singer said:
It's the off season, let's have a discussion.

First, let me qualify. I hunt strictly with nontoxic shot. I have for several years now.

I have been using steel for waterfowl hunting since before the national ban on lead shot.

I pheasant hunt a number of State and Federal properties where nontoxic shot is required.

A couple of years ago, I started using bismuth for pheasants. I found it to be quite effective. However, I do not think it is more effective than steel shot. Bismuth is definitely softer than steel, and it can safely be fired in old guns with a fixed full choke.

In my experience, it is not more effective and not worth the additional cost for either pheasant or waterfowl hunting.

Have any of you found bismuth to be more effective than steel?
Click to expand...
No!
 
LittleBigHorn22 said:
I just recently got into the non toxic game, only do upland hunting.

Bismuth should do better from physics side but I agree that the brittleness is the downside. The vast majority of loads I patterned with bismuth did not pattern great. The boss 1-1/2 oz work but only because it has enough pellets. Steel just patterns amazing, but I do think the long shots are the downfall. They can't compare to lead in that regard.

This year I'm testing a 410 tss handload. Patterns like steel, hits harder than lead. Not that everyone should use it, but its actually cheaper than the commercial bismuth loads. Very excited to try it out.
Click to expand...

3/4oz #9 TSS. Same penetration as steel BB and bismuth #2. 2" gel penetration at 53yd.

Note I would never ever take a shot even close to this range, pattern testing was done for Ballistic Products for their load development. But clearly it would work, no pheasant is making it through that.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240806_134925.jpg
    IMG_20240806_134925.jpg
    2 MB · Views: 18
KEOutdoors said:
3/4oz #9 TSS. Same penetration as steel BB and bismuth #2. 2" gel penetration at 53yd.

Note I would never ever take a shot even close to this range, pattern testing was done for Ballistic Products for their load development. But clearly it would work, no pheasant is making it through that.
Click to expand...
I believe I fully understand the theory & ballistics behind TSS, & I'd love to try some someday. I'm quite certain, though, that TSS is no more forgiving than other shot materials. If I make a good shot, it doesn't matter the shot material, as long as my load is appropriate. And I keep recalling all the little creatures shot with solid .22 bullets that've run/flown away, never to be seen again. This season, please post some pictures that demonstrate the destructive power of a tiny #9 pellet packed with energy. I'm really interested. Will one shatter a wing/leg bone? Will 2 or 3 of them through the boiler room have the same effect as a single #4? How much do 4 of them through the breast affect a bird's ability to fly? The whole point of shooting a bird is to be somewhat destructive, & I have no experience with tiny shot, even though it may pass through 2" of gel at 50 yds. Thanks.
 
A5 Sweet 16 said:
I believe I fully understand the theory & ballistics behind TSS, & I'd love to try some someday. I'm quite certain, though, that TSS is no more forgiving than other shot materials. If I make a good shot, it doesn't matter the shot material, as long as my load is appropriate. And I keep recalling all the little creatures shot with solid .22 bullets that've run/flown away, never to be seen again. This season, please post some pictures that demonstrate the destructive power of a tiny #9 pellet packed with energy. I'm really interested. Will one shatter a wing/leg bone? Will 2 or 3 of them through the boiler room have the same effect as a single #4? How much do 4 of them through the breast affect a bird's ability to fly? The whole point of shooting a bird is to be somewhat destructive, & I have no experience with tiny shot, even though it may pass through 2" of gel at 50 yds. Thanks.
Click to expand...

None of that matters when it comes to shotgunning birds, everything mentioned leads to cripples. Breaking a wing, a leg, cutting big hole in meat etc.

We kill birds by multiple disruptions of vital organs; heart, brain, lungs, spinal cord. Thats why a tight pattern is so necessary when it comes to bird hunting, just hitting the bird and breaking a couple bones is not enough! Large shot doing damage is an old way of thinking, back when guys shot #2 lead to make a big hole (often resulted in flyoffs or soaring birds that die 100yds out, or runners).

It would be the exact opposite for critters, especially talking a .22, we kill those by shooting large projectiles that do terminal damage so it is incapacitated and bleeds out from the wound. If you do not do enough damage (or hit a vital) it is a lost animal.

So to answer your question, the small shot works extremely well. It doesn't take a big hole though the brain or heart to turn off the light switch, and the retained energy is mostly what makes it penetrate so far so it will break bones about like lead #2-#4 would. Dont get caught up on the physical size of the pellet, guys are having great success on waterfowl using #10-10.5 shot as well. I have shot mallards with #10 and I shoot 12-14lb canada geese with 7s and 8s.

That load has 275 pellets in it, you are going to put several dozen through the bird if you hit it. The best part is the little holes do not do a ton of meat damage and should not get stuck in any birds under 60yds.

The tough part is getting it to open up at close range, that is what I am currently working on at the patterning boards. Right now I dont have a choke for a sub 30yd shot that will not put 75 pellets+ in the bird. (Note this is a 4 ft sheet of paper)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240806_135314.jpg
    IMG_20240806_135314.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 10
KEOutdoors said:
None of that matters when it comes to shotgunning birds, everything mentioned leads to cripples. Breaking a wing, a leg, cutting big hole in meat etc.

We kill birds by multiple disruptions of vital organs; heart, brain, lungs, spinal cord. Thats why a tight pattern is so necessary when it comes to bird hunting, just hitting the bird and breaking a couple bones is not enough! Large shot doing damage is an old way of thinking, back when guys shot #2 lead to make a big hole (often resulted in flyoffs or soaring birds that die 100yds out, or runners).

It would be the exact opposite for critters, especially talking a .22, we kill those by shooting large projectiles that do terminal damage so it is incapacitated and bleeds out from the wound. If you do not do enough damage (or hit a vital) it is a lost animal.

So to answer your question, the small shot works extremely well. It doesn't take a big hole though the brain or heart to turn off the light switch, and the retained energy is mostly what makes it penetrate so far so it will break bones about like lead #2-#4 would. Dont get caught up on the physical size of the pellet, guys are having great success on waterfowl using #10-10.5 shot as well. I have shot mallards with #10 and I shoot 12-14lb canada geese with 7s and 8s.

That load has 275 pellets in it, you are going to put several dozen through the bird if you hit it. The best part is the little holes do not do a ton of meat damage and should not get stuck in any birds under 60yds.

The tough part is getting it to open up at close range, that is what I am currently working on at the patterning boards. Right now I dont have a choke for a sub 30yd shot that will not put 75 pellets+ in the bird. (Note this is a 4 ft sheet of paper)
Click to expand...
Right. If all you do is break a bone or blow a chunk out of the breast meat, you've got a cripple on your hands. I'm not suggesting that's all that's required to harvest a bird, cleanly or otherwise. I'd very much like to see picture evidence of what a #9 mini-pellet does when it encounters meat, bone, or whatever. Right now, you seem to be one of the best resources. Thanks for all the info.
 
Last edited:
A5 Sweet 16 said:
Right. If all you do is break a bone or blow a chunk out of the breast meat, you've got a cripple on your hands. I'm not suggesting that's all that's required to harvest a bird, cleanly or otherwise. I'd very much like to see picture evidence of what a #9 mini-pellet does when it encounters meat, bone, or whatever. Right now, you seem to be one of the best resources. Thanks for all the info.
Click to expand...

I will absolutely try to remember to take some pictures and share reports for you this season. Remind me in November if I forget. I'll probably go the preserve to get the dog some work in early October if we get cool weather but we all know those birds are not built like a wild one, definitely not wasting my expensive shot on those!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top