# lead vs steel THE DEBATE CONTINUES



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

​
*which do you perfer*

lead2444.44%steel3055.56%

*what size do you shoot*

9mm1731.48%10mm1120.37%12mm2342.59%14mm11.85%16mm23.70%


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

hey guys ,

ive started this thread so people come and discuss the long running debate of lead vs steel there seems to be a approximate 50/50 split between the two i personally 12 mm steel because even at ridiculously low speeds it causes devastating damage upon impact some people prefer lead because of the greater energy transfer but i prefer the driving power of steel please post and vote in the poll

thanks :king:

P.S this poll is for hunters and target shooters im a hunter my self


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

rocks


----------



## treefork (Feb 1, 2010)

paper


----------



## Cjw (Nov 1, 2012)

Scissors


----------



## Jaximus (Jun 1, 2013)

Lizard


----------



## BC-Slinger (Jan 6, 2013)

Well lead is my choice for hunting and steel for target slinging.

Cheers

Bc-Slinger


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

Imperial said:


> rocks





treefork said:


> paper





Cjw said:


> Scissors





Jaximus said:


> Lizard


spock


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

Imperial said:


> Imperial said:
> 
> 
> > rocks
> ...


DEAR GOD IM SO CONFUSED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## treefork (Feb 1, 2010)

kirk


----------



## Jaximus (Jun 1, 2013)

Imperial said:


> Imperial said:
> 
> 
> > rocks
> ...


THANK YOU! That was going to drive me crazy!

Magpie, I'm with BC-Slinger on this one. I really like steel for punching paper, beating up cans and lighting matches, but it's hard to beat the kinetic impact of lead. For the same weight projectile the lead is going to have a better ballistic coefficient, deeper penetration and retain more energy downrange.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

still steel is a killer!


----------



## Aussie Allan In Thailand (Jan 28, 2013)

In my opinion for what is worth, ya can't beat lead for energy transfer to target for hunting.

For paper target shooting, sure steel is is the go.

But you spend a disproportionate time finding particularly round shot rolling away from the target area, unless into a catch box arrangement, which I do not have.

Gotta put a box under my current arrangement.

Cheers Allan


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

is there anything to be said for our forefather the humble shepherds sling the Romans used doctors of the time have said hey have removed lead shot from the body's of dead soldiers this means  LEAD IS A KILLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Tom Kretschmer (Apr 4, 2013)

cotton balls


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

t



scarfaceTom said:


> cotton balls


thanks mate killer!


----------



## NaturalFork (Jan 21, 2010)

Oh Dr Sheldon cooper.... Lead is the best for hunting in my opinion.


----------



## Tom Kretschmer (Apr 4, 2013)

dang magpies said:


> t
> 
> 
> 
> ...


sorry mate, the temptation was to big


----------



## Crac (Mar 3, 2013)

Jaximus said:


> it's hard to beat the kinetic impact of lead. For the same weight projectile the lead is going to have a better ballistic coefficient, deeper penetration and retain more energy downrange.


can you explain the why?


----------



## NaturalFork (Jan 21, 2010)

Crac said:


> Jaximus said:
> 
> 
> > it's hard to beat the kinetic impact of lead. For the same weight projectile the lead is going to have a better ballistic coefficient, deeper penetration and retain more energy downrange.
> ...


More mass...


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

i disagree with the better pentration


----------



## Tom Kretschmer (Apr 4, 2013)

NaturalFork said:


> Crac said:
> 
> 
> > Jaximus said:
> ...


 less diameter...


----------



## Tom Kretschmer (Apr 4, 2013)

scarfaceTom said:


> NaturalFork said:
> 
> 
> > Crac said:
> ...


= more power on a smaller surface


----------



## treefork (Feb 1, 2010)

The word your looking for is " density". Lead is denser than steel. More weight for equal size.


----------



## studer1972 (Mar 17, 2013)

I disagree with steel being better for target shooting. Steel ricochet with fork hits is nasty. Lead hits, deforms, and falls. Lead carries more momentum for a given projectile size, due to the higher weight. If you can afford $10 a shot, try tungsten carbide or plain tungsten. I bought a 1/2" tungsten carbide ball, but am afraid to shoot it, too afraid of losing it. Tungsten is heavier than lead and is hard like steel, best of both worlds if it wasn't for the expense. A lot of folks in the hunting sections of the Big 3 forums recommend .44(~11mm) lead for hunting. If you like the football shape of ancient Roman lead sling bullets, try lead egg weight sinkers. 3/8 and 1/2" should work well as an equivalent to those size lead balls.

Maybe try these, but at this price, I can't believe they're actually tungsten:
http://cheapsinkers.com/sinkers/tungsten-bullet-sinker-worm-weights.html


----------



## Tom Kretschmer (Apr 4, 2013)

Let's try "rhenium" or diamonds


----------



## BCLuxor (Aug 24, 2010)

I own lots of both steel and Lead.. simple answer .. both get the job done steel can shoot paper , steel can shoot rabbit, lead can shoot paper , lead can shoot rabbit etc.. Practicality dictates that we use the round for each specific task based on cost, kill efficiency , location etc. For brute power at the speed and distance I shoot at I would go with steel simply because its cheaper and less of a PITA standing over my stove casting lead round balls only for them to be lost over the field.. I carry both with me though and if I spot oppourtunity for a kill I just switch to the Lead.


----------



## Tex-Shooter (Dec 17, 2009)

I get tired of saying that steel slides off of game much worse than lead. 1/2 inch steel for target and 44 cal. lead for hunting. They both weigh the same. -- Tex


----------



## studer1972 (Mar 17, 2013)

scarface: you have to be Bill Gates before you can afford anything more dense than tungsten. Gold, rhenium, platinum, iridium, and osmium are all way more than $100 for a 1/2" sphere. Tungsten is barely affordable, those others are dreaming.


----------



## Jaximus (Jun 1, 2013)

I've found the micro-cratering in moon rock gives it amazing performance on small game. Some might see shooting moon rocks at squirrels as a little extravagant, but you've gotta use what works.


----------



## Tom Kretschmer (Apr 4, 2013)

studer1972 said:


> scarface: you have to be Bill Gates before you can afford anything more dense than tungsten. Gold, rhenium, platinum, iridium, and osmium are all way more than $100 for a 1/2" sphere. Tungsten is barely affordable, those others are dreaming.
> 
> oh


oh, really? 

sorry about my stupidity...


----------



## studer1972 (Mar 17, 2013)

<sheldon cooper>was that sarcasm?</sc>


----------



## All Buns Glazing (Apr 22, 2012)

I'm not voting as it's not as simple as this vs. that. As tex said, they're for different purposes and generally one's used for plinking, one's used for hunting.

For the record, I used 9.5mm steel cos I'm a can puncher.


----------



## ceedub (Apr 22, 2013)

I cant argue on behalf of either. I will say that I like lead better only because if you have a cast its cheaper and remanufacturable. Lead sure hits hard but steel is fast.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2013)

ceedub said:


> I cant argue on behalf of either. I will say that I like lead better only because if you have a cast its cheaper and remanufacturable. Lead sure hits hard but steel is fast.


It is faster out of the gate but lead has a better ballistics coefficient and therefore at practical ranges shoots both flatter and arrives with a higher velocity (given the same weight projectiles in steel and lead). There are graphs in the forum.


----------



## ruthiexxxx (Sep 15, 2012)

In an ideal world I would shoot only lead. I love the 16mm balls...and occasionally the 38 gramme ovals if I want a heavy impact. But they are bloody expensive to buy and a real pain in the nether regions to cast so, in practice, i mainly shoot M10 hexnuts.

(Wouldn't the perfect ammo in terms of density be depleted uranium ?)

Incidentally i just watched a documentary on making golf balls (sad i know) and it came out with the interesting statement that the dimpling on the surface DOUBLED the distance travelled because of reduced wind resistance ! I found this figure most surprising...but then wondered on the implications for us. Maybe some enterprising speed record seeker might get to work on his ammo with a Dremel ?!


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

ruthiexxxx said:


> In an ideal world I would shoot only lead. I love the 16mm balls...and occasionally the 38 gramme ovals if I want a heavy impact. But they are bloody expensive to buy and a real pain in the nether regions to cast so, in practice, i mainly shoot M10 hexnuts.
> 
> (Wouldn't the perfect ammo in terms of density be depleted uranium ?)
> 
> Incidentally i just watched a documentary on making golf balls (sad i know) and it came out with the interesting statement that the dimpling on the surface DOUBLED the distance travelled because of reduced wind resistance ! I found this figure most surprising...but then wondered on the implications for us. Maybe some enterprising speed record seeker might get to work on his ammo with a Dremel ?!


ive been saying for the longest time, a dimpled ball of lead would go a little bit more further, i dont think its going to be a lot, but perhaps just a few feet more. the science seems to be in its favor. but at the same time, look at the material that golf balls are made of. i also believe the depth and distance of dimples will also affect the distance and flight path. any forum slingshot scientist want to take a stab at it? especially with the warm weather on the western globe.


----------



## leon13 (Oct 4, 2012)

al flying objects i get down with Kryptonite ! good night !

cheers


----------



## All Buns Glazing (Apr 22, 2012)

studer1972 said:


> I disagree with steel being better for target shooting. Steel ricochet with fork hits is nasty. Lead hits, deforms, and falls.


If I'm going to get a forkhit, I'd rather have one with steel. Lead destroys forks  Luckily, I have long passed my forkhit days!

The reason I don't use lead is that I'm a little girl and I'm scared of absorbing lead, even though I've thoroughly researched it and have deemed it safe in the logical part of my brain. Unfortunately, I'm a crazy person who waves bones at comets and worships the sun and logic sometimes takes a backseat to superstition, old wives tales and heresay.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

i did a test with steel last night 12mm on a plastic pot at the same speed my rocks were struggling to go through both sides i tried the steel it just went in and out almost no sound no movement just in one side out the other with the rock it was sort of splitting the plastic but the steel was making a whole i found the plastic piece six feet away i didn't find the steel rocks take the back seat in my opinion

ps if your looking for cheap steel http://www.ebay.ie/itm/6mm-7mm-8mm-9mm-10mm-11mm-12mm-loose-chrome-ball-bearings-GRADE-100-AISI-52100-/130955303709?pt=UK_sportsleisure_cycling_bikeparts_SR&hash=item1e7d8b5b1d


----------



## TimR (May 22, 2011)

All Buns Glazing said:


> The reason I don't use lead is that I'm a little girl and I'm scared of absorbing lead, even though I've thoroughly researched it and have deemed it safe in the logical part of my brain.


Safety is something worth considering. You aren't going to absorb much lead from just shooting, but melting and casting could be hazardous, and if you shot huge amounts onto a hard surface you might generate some dust.

On the other hand steel is directly and immediately dangerous. It bounces off any hard surface with a velocity very close to what it hit with, in the high 90's percentage wise. Shoot steel at 200 fps and hit something hard, it's coming back at your face - or somewhere else you didn't predict - at 180 fps plus.

When my kids were small I let them shoot airguns, but only with lead pellets. BBs were never allowed in the house or on the property.


----------



## Crac (Mar 3, 2013)

OldSpookASA said:


> It is faster out of the gate but lead has a better ballistics coefficient and therefore at practical ranges shoots both flatter and arrives with a higher velocity (given the same weight projectiles in steel and lead). There are graphs in the forum.


http://slingshotforum.com/topic/19769-quick-and-dirty-comparison-of-ball-types/


----------



## ceedub (Apr 22, 2013)

dang magpies said:


> i disagree with the better pentration


lead will have vastly superior penetration if fired at similar velocities. More weight, more mass, more kinetic energy, smaller circumstance. If you were to be comparing steel projectiles to wooden projectiles, each of the same weight which do you think would preform better? The same principles apply.


----------



## TimR (May 22, 2011)

ceedub said:


> lead will have vastly superior penetration if fired at similar velocities. .


I think that at low velocities lead will penetrate objects better, for the same reason it penetrates air better.

That should change at the point where the velocity was large enough to cause the lead to deform. If the lead flattens too much penetration will decrease.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

i ran tests lead vs steel last night 75-100 fps steel went straight through the pot like a nice clean hole but the lead sorta smashes through


----------



## ceedub (Apr 22, 2013)

TimR said:


> ceedub said:
> 
> 
> > lead will have vastly superior penetration if fired at similar velocities. .
> ...


that depends also on the lead your using. Pure lead is very malulabel but the lead that I cast is from wheel weights and it is hard enough that you can not scratch it with you teeth and hardly even with a knife. It does not deform on impact.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

lead might me more destructive but not because of penetration steel penetrates more cleanly but lead smashes through


----------



## Henry the Hermit (Jun 2, 2010)

dang magpies said:


> lead might me more destructive but not because of penetration steel penetrates more cleanly but lead smashes through


I'm sure many of us are waiting anxiously for the evidence to back up this assertion.


----------



## ceedub (Apr 22, 2013)

Steel sounds amazing, I wonder when the worlds military, law enforcement, fire arms manufacturers, and sportsman communities are going to catch on to how much superior its penetration qualities are?


----------



## Jaximus (Jun 1, 2013)

I'm just throwing this out there, but does anyone else think of endofworldprepper whenever they read Magpie's posts?

All the polls, all of the claims. Is it really just me? Does it matter?


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2013)

ceedub said:


> Steel sounds amazing, I wonder when the worlds military, law enforcement, fire arms manufacturers, and sportsman communities are going to catch on to how much superior its penetration qualities are?


Well they already have! That is why they use steel jackets upon lead projectiles. Best of both worlds. The lead does not deform because the steel protects it... That is also why a lot of armor penetrators are made of tungeston, harder than lead and strong as steel...

Come on kiddies, this maybe rocket science, but it is rocket science from 1890.


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2013)

Jaximus said:


> I'm just throwing this out there, but does anyone else think of endofworldprepper whenever they read Magpie's posts?
> 
> All the polls, all of the claims. Is it really just me? Does it matter?


I really try not to think of anything but what people actually write when reading a post, BECAUSE, this medium REALLY sucks when it comes to expressing opinions.

There are folks in the forum that have said things which I feel were not kind towards other members. I try REALLY hard to realize that maybe, the words they use to describe something are just not the words that I would choose.

With respect to does it matter? Yes it does matter. A weapon like a slingshot (catapault) certainly benefits from a more efficient projectile.

It is hard though, if you are shooting squirrels at 15 yards, it may be that glass marbles will do the job just fine. Whereas if you are shooting rabbits at 40 yards, you may want the weight and penetration of lead. Then again, if you are shooting pheasant at 25 yards on the wing an nice steel ball is exactly what you want...

Bottom line this for you... It matters. It does not matter enough for us to fight over it.


----------



## Jaximus (Jun 1, 2013)

OldSpook, I agree that ammunition choice is critical with a slingshot. My last post was entirely off topic and had nothing to do with ammo. Internet communication breakdown coupled with me being a smart a$$ I guess, haha.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

Jaximus said:


> I'm just throwing this out there, but does anyone else think of endofworldprepper whenever they read Magpie's posts?
> 
> All the polls, all of the claims. Is it really just me? Does it matter?


i'm not a prepper just mildly psychotic from being stuck in the emerald isle for thepast 7 years i have to let my anger out some how and breaking stuf with a slingshot fits the bill perfectly :yeahthat: BTW how the hell am i a prepper?!


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

Henry in Panama said:


> dang magpies said:
> 
> 
> > lead might me more destructive but not because of penetration steel penetrates more cleanly but lead smashes through
> ...


dont worry man ill post some pics in a few days when my STEEL arrives


----------



## All Buns Glazing (Apr 22, 2012)

dang magpies said:


> Jaximus said:
> 
> 
> > I'm just throwing this out there, but does anyone else think of endofworldprepper whenever they read Magpie's posts?
> ...


The sentence structure and the use of "the emerald isle" proves it's not him.

This is off topic, but when he was referring to "endoftheworldprepper", he was referring to a member who was banned a month or so ago. I would be deeply offended if I was you, but you're not me, so consider yourself lucky!


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

All Buns Glazing said:


> dang magpies said:
> 
> 
> > Jaximus said:
> ...


ahhhhhh!!!! I get it i was a little confused there for a minute why was he banned?


----------



## ceedub (Apr 22, 2013)

OldSpookASA said:


> ceedub said:
> 
> 
> > Steel sounds amazing, I wonder when the worlds military, law enforcement, fire arms manufacturers, and sportsman communities are going to catch on to how much superior its penetration qualities are?
> ...


uh I have never heard of a steel jacket? Steel on steel at high velocity is a very bad thing. Kinda hard on a barrel. Steel and tungsten cores yes, but not jackets.


----------



## ruthiexxxx (Sep 15, 2012)

ceedub said:


> OldSpookASA said:
> 
> 
> > ceedub said:
> ...


the jackets are copper aren't they?


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

most bullets are copper jacketed


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

dang magpies said:


> most bullets are copper jacketed


knew it!!!


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_metal_jacket_bullet

all you will ever need to know


----------



## studer1972 (Mar 17, 2013)

I've bought cheap Russian ammo with steel jackets and even steel cases.


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2013)

From the link above, the first sentence: "A full metal jacket (or FMJ) is a bullet consisting of a soft core (usually made of lead) encased in a shell of harder metal, such as gilding metal, cupronickel or less commonly a steel alloy."

Less commonly a steel alloy...

Artillery shells are often gilded in copper and jacketed in iron or steel. FMJ bullets were mandated by the Geneva Convention because lead did so much more damage due to deformation during penetration. Nations have since discovered that a long ogive will destabilize and make an FMJ bullet tumble upon impact in watery medium, thereby bypassing the intent of the Geneva Convention.

There are a lot of ways to skin a cat.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

OldSpookASA said:


> Disregard, apparently the information which was here has already been linked.


WHA?


----------



## Tube_Shooter (Dec 8, 2012)

dang magpies said:


> i did a test with steel last night 12mm on a plastic pot at the same speed my rocks were struggling to go through both sides i tried the steel it just went in and out almost no sound no movement just in one side out the other with the rock it was sort of splitting the plastic but the steel was making a whole i found the plastic piece six feet away i didn't find the steel rocks take the back seat in my opinion
> 
> ps if your looking for cheap steel http://www.ebay.ie/itm/6mm-7mm-8mm-9mm-10mm-11mm-12mm-loose-chrome-ball-bearings-GRADE-100-AISI-52100-/130955303709?pt=UK_sportsleisure_cycling_bikeparts_SR&hash=item1e7d8b5b1d


No! that is not cheap steel

This is 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/160994489507?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

Tube_Shooter said:


> dang magpies said:
> 
> 
> > i did a test with steel last night 12mm on a plastic pot at the same speed my rocks were struggling to go through both sides i tried the steel it just went in and out almost no sound no movement just in one side out the other with the rock it was sort of splitting the plastic but the steel was making a whole i found the plastic piece six feet away i didn't find the steel rocks take the back seat in my opinion
> ...


HOLY MOLY!


----------



## Henry the Hermit (Jun 2, 2010)

dang magpies said:


> Henry in Panama said:
> 
> 
> > dang magpies said:
> ...


Good luck. There is whole bunch of us out here who have used both lead and steel. And for what its worth, 75 - 100 fps isn't likely to penetrate anything stronger than paper regardless of type of projectile.


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

Henry in Panama said:


> dang magpies said:
> 
> 
> > Henry in Panama said:
> ...


i know mate its a pathetic FPS i need different bands and a 101 other things


----------



## dang magpies (Jul 3, 2013)

for another one of my ideas from a guy with to much time on his hands check out my non lethal grape ammo idea

http://slingshotforum.com/topic/25457-grapes-as-non-lethal-ammo-yup-i-said-grapes/


----------



## muddog15 (Aug 15, 2012)

TimR said:


> All Buns Glazing said:
> 
> 
> > The reason I don't use lead is that I'm a little girl and I'm scared of absorbing lead, even though I've thoroughly researched it and have deemed it safe in the logical part of my brain.
> ...


I have had this happen to me & my grandson target shooting with steel, we had to duck & run a couple of times. My target is a 8" diameter plastic gong that is made for guns and is supposed to,,,,,,,, dang it I forget what it's called but the material is supposed to fill in the bullet hole. It doesn't work but that is the kind of stuff it is I have a second one I take to the gun range. Anyway my trap has wood in it to weight down the blankets, if we miss and hit the wood the things will ricochet extreamly bad.


----------



## SuperMonkeySlinger (Jan 28, 2013)

Lead wins.

Debate over 
Kidding.

SMS


----------



## Davidka (Jun 8, 2013)

dang magpies said:


> ps if your looking for cheap steel http://www.ebay.ie/itm/6mm-7mm-8mm-9mm-10mm-11mm-12mm-loose-chrome-ball-bearings-GRADE-100-AISI-52100-/130955303709?pt=UK_sportsleisure_cycling_bikeparts_SR&hash=item1e7d8b5b1d


You should read the description: it's only 7 BBs...


----------



## Tube_Shooter (Dec 8, 2012)

For the woods 11mm lead looped 3050 tubes.....wallop!

Catch box 9.5 steel for target practice

So both


----------



## TimR (May 22, 2011)

I was going to buy steel for target shooting.

But I've had second thoughts.

The ricochet problem with steel is huge. Lead is no problem, but is not reusable as long.

So I've standardized on marbles for now. A 5/8 marble is the same weight as 1/2 steel or .44 lead. Marbles will bounce a little but if you hit something really hard at velocity they just break and don't come back at you like steel does.


----------



## Aussie Allan In Thailand (Jan 28, 2013)

Lead IS reusable, after like 10 to 15 shots- remold yourself.

It is not hard at all.

Provided you can shoot ( and it DOES fly as straight as round) drilled cylindrical shot.

See my downloaded profile pics for a depth and diameter for weight chart, okay.

Cheers Allan


----------



## Hrawk (Oct 25, 2010)

Lead ?

Steel ?

Pfft, amateurs.

Go get yourself some tungsten.


----------



## ruthiexxxx (Sep 15, 2012)

I did a bit of comparison the other day with a very large and tough pumpkin. It was interesting that the 16mm lead penetrated better than the lobrounds (approx the same weight) and better than the big ovals (38grammes) although these devastated the first couple of inches.
On the other hand the lobrounds smoke through both sides of a thick steel can whereas lead seems more inclined to flatten them.
I suppose one has to decide whether one's intended prey is more like woody vegetable matter or like steel


----------



## B.P.R (Dec 28, 2012)

Im certain lead causes more damage than steel...

Steel will hit and penetrate...

Whereas lead will hit and contort...

Causing more damage on its path...


----------



## ruthiexxxx (Sep 15, 2012)

B.P.R said:


> Im certain lead causes more damage than steel...
> 
> Steel will hit and penetrate...
> 
> ...


Yes, the impact of those 38 gramme ovals is massive


----------



## Tex-Shooter (Dec 17, 2009)

Steel will ricochet off of a animal much more often than lead, especially if the shot is not centered on the animal or bird. To show how this works hit something hard with a ball-peen hammer and then with a lead faced hammer. -- Tex


----------



## ryguy27 (Nov 8, 2013)

ruthiexxxx said:


> On the other hand the lobrounds smoke through both sides of a thick steel can whereas lead seems more inclined to flatten them.
> I suppose one has to decide whether one's intended prey is more like woody vegetable matter or like steel


Lead Is Quite Soft Of A Metal. When Hitting A Harder Target It Deforms As Tex Was Saying. But A Nice Soft Pumpkin Shouldnt Harm It Too Much And Since It Is Denser Using The Same Mass Of Lead And Steel The Lead Will Focus The Damage Over A Small Area Penetrating The The Soft Target Deeper While The Larger Steel Rebar Pieces Will Rip Through Devastatingly For A Short While Due To The Larger Area That Slows It Down. Though I'd Rather Not Get Hit By Those Lobrounds You Make! They're Terrifying!


----------



## mr. green (Nov 3, 2012)

Imperial said:


> Imperial said:
> 
> 
> > rocks
> ...


 Yoda


----------



## TimR (May 22, 2011)

mr. green said:


> Imperial said:
> 
> 
> > Imperial said:
> ...


Gesundheit


----------



## Henry the Hermit (Jun 2, 2010)

??


----------



## Crimson Owl (Jun 29, 2014)

Yea.... Nobody uses steel hexnuts as ammo.... -_- come on folks. We just saw a uk lad knock out 17 pheasants easy with STEEl hexnuts. Im thinking these options are clearly better then rocks.


----------



## DogBox (Aug 11, 2014)

ruthiexxxx said:


> B.P.R said:
> 
> 
> > Im certain lead causes more damage than steel...
> ...


Are these "38 gram ovals" pictured to get a mind picture of what we are talking about?

Is that also what you are calling "lobrounds"?

I am thinking 3/8" or 7/16" rio [rebar] guillotine cut - rotated 90° for each cut x 1/2" pieces would fit the bill and easy enough to make...?


----------



## ruthiexxxx (Sep 15, 2012)

DogBox said:


> ruthiexxxx said:
> 
> 
> > B.P.R said:
> ...


----------



## Tentacle Toast (Jan 17, 2013)

Likin' that sling, ruthie...

...it's good to see you


----------



## ruthiexxxx (Sep 15, 2012)

thanks amigo


----------

