Hornady SST slug performance

[blockdoc]

This year I bought a house and land in a rugged mountainous area. The land is mostly pretty steep, so when deer hunting, I wanted the deer to drop fast & not have to track it.

I bought a 12ga Browning Silver, put a Leupold scope on it, and then tried out some rounds. My shots are all close up - typically 25 yards at most likely shot sites.

At 25-50 yards, the Hornady 300gr SST was the most accurate. I was delivering dead bulls eyes with them. The Winchester Super X were very similar, but I ultimately went with the Hornady.

Yesterday morning, a buck came through at about 50 yards. Didn't expect to see one there, so of course that's where he showed up. I hit him with one round, and he didn't know he was hit. Ran about 15 yards, stopped to look around and see what was going on. I fired again. Then I saw 2 holes in his side, and he dropped 1 second later. The first shot probably did it, but I was ensuring he didn't run. He was dead within seconds.

In retrospect, my shots were too far back. I took out one lung & the bullets exited through the gut (he was quartering to). I shoulda aimed farther forward.

I think the rounds performed very well. Hit right where I aimed, and dispatched him fast despite not having the best shot placement. These 2 shots were unsupported from my stand at 50 yards away, and he had ran 15 yards between them.

The SST seems to be a very good round out of the Browning, and recoil really isn't much at all for a 12ga.

 

[Mr.Downtown]

"My shots are all close up - typically 25 yards at most likely shot sites."

That worked out real well. Good job.
Just asking though. If your shots are all close, why not use a lesser expensive slug. At that range you would not need a premium round that is designed for longer ranges. I shoot the Lightfield slugs. They work for me in both my smooth bore and rifled slug barrels.
I am looking at it from the cost side, but what you are using seems to work well.
Again, good job with shooting your deer.
Steve.

 

[blockdoc]

It's a good question - if I can do the job for less money then why not. The Winchester would have done as well, and may have had even more terminal ballistic results - it's 1oz, or about 450gr, which is about 50% heavier than the Hornady.

In my tests, the Hornady were dead bullseye and overlapped holes. The Winchester were about an inch right, with about a 1" group. While the Winchester would have performed fine and cost less, I went with my gut. As for cost, I already had the shells - I bought a box each of several slugs to test.

Around here, I don't need the Hornadys. But I'm more confident with them, should I go somewhere else requiring a longer range. That will happen Friday, when I hunt on a buddy's farm. If I have any updates from then, I'll post it.

Bottom line, the answer to your question is I decided based on a gut feeling to use them over cheaper slugs I have here.

 

[cce1302]

Nothing wrong with that.

My dad has used those before and liked them. They were very accurate in his shotgun. I think I have win silvertips.

As far as cost goes, 1-2 slugs per year to fill your freezer probably won't break the bank. Heck, even 4-5 if you give meat to family and friends will probably be okay.

It's not like you're going to be using these to hunt doves. $$$

 

[Big Chris]

I like the SST in my mossberg. Tried alot of differant rounds and they were they most consistant. I havent had to track any of my deer with them either.