# Can Test?



## Slingshot28 (Feb 15, 2021)

I have been reading some old hunting post and alot of them have the can test in them. My question is does the ammo have to go through one side or both of the steel can to kill. Also some of them say one side for birds or 2 side for fur bearing.
P.S. I can not hunt where I live it just gives me a reason to test the tubes I have at my house.


Thanks, Slingshot28


----------



## S.S. sLinGeR (Oct 17, 2013)

Both sides is what I would want for hunting anything.


----------



## Booral121 (Jan 6, 2019)

This can test? The can being a tin can yeah like soup or dogfood yeah 🤔 and does the can get fixed to say a post or something or just hung from a string or that cause obviosly your going to get a different outcome from a fixed and freehanging tin 🤔 and I take it its 10m. If anyone could let me know please and I will try three of my hunting setups out and see how they fair 🎯👊👍🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿


----------



## Slingshot28 (Feb 15, 2021)

I think they were soup cans that were filled with water and then shot at probably hanging or resting on the ground. Some other people would shoot an empty can.


----------



## KawKan (May 11, 2013)

I have a problem with the tin can test, mostly because it is so vague. 
No ammo is specified, although I suspect the test is based on 3/8-inch (9.5mm) steel. 
Experience shows that smaller steel is better at penetration and larger steel is worse. Also, that 1/2-inch steel is deadly even without penetration. 
But shooting cans is always fun, and comparing the damage can be informative - if not definitive.


----------



## vince4242 (Jan 11, 2016)

Ray I think the can test is more for confidence that you're going to make a clean kill. My example is I had my hunting setup that was too weak. It took three shots dead on the head to kill a squirrel. I got the job done but it was not a clean kill and I felt really bad. When I did the can test filled with water, ½" steel and 7/16" steel did not penetrate the can on either side but made a huge dent on the front side. I shortened the band set by ½" and did the test again months later before I was ever going to try and hunt again, and low and behold the ½" steel went through the front and made a big dent in the back, 7/16" did the same and almost went through, and 3/8" steel went straight through both sides without even tipping the can over. This gave me a good idea that 3/8 with that band set, and my draw length is the right ammo for hunting. 7/16" steel almost went through the back so maybe that would be good too but it was a good indication that I was on the right track after my failed hunting attempt with a weaker band set earlier the year before. 

I hope that helps anyone trying to understand about the steel can filled with water test.


----------



## High Desert Flipper (Aug 29, 2020)

KawKan said:


> I have a problem with the tin can test, mostly because it is so vague.
> No ammo is specified, although I suspect the test is based on 3/8-inch (9.5mm) steel.
> Experience shows that smaller steel is better at penetration and larger steel is worse. Also, that 1/2-inch steel is deadly even without penetration.
> But shooting cans is always fun, and comparing the damage can be informative - if not definitive.



I am with @KawKan on this. I think the can test is a great and simple general test for larger ammo like 3/8", 7/16", and 1/2". But the test comes with some caveats.

I did a bunch of shooting at water filled soup cans and relatively slow moving 5/16" (~230 fps) gets through both sides pretty easily thanks to its small diameter. On the other hand, 7/16" going at the same speed and with TONS more impact energy usually only gets through one side and sometimes just knocks the heck out of the can without even getting in.

I don't hunt much but impact is interesting to me. There are a lot of good apps out there to calculate energy simply from putting in mass and velocity, and I find these to be really informative. For instance, 5/16" steel going 230 fps has about 3.6 ft lbs of energy, while 7/16" going the same 230 fps generates about 10.1 ft lbs.

Bullet Energy Calculator is a simple app widely available for Android.


----------



## Booral121 (Jan 6, 2019)

Right can test totally pointless at metres my setups obliterating it 👎🎯 I hunt really really well with no bigger than 0.65 in any brand of elastic unless its snipersling yellow then I use 0.70 all tapered 18-23 using 8.7mm steels or 9.5mm or 8.4mm lead these setups hitting the kill zone on birds rabbits hares whatever even cans there dead 😉


----------



## High Desert Flipper (Aug 29, 2020)

I also recently tested some tungsten ammo. While it is very expensive (like $0.5 per ball) it was really interesting. It is ~2.2x denser than steel and ~1.5x denser than lead, so a 5/16" tungsten ball weighs more than a 3/8" steel ball. 

For hunting, these balls may be the ultimate since they will hold velocity and energy down range thanks to the small diameter and high density. The tungsten balls will also have a lot more penetration than similar mass steel or lead balls that have larger diameters at similar weights









High impact (and high cost) fun- tungsten ammo


I have been curious to try different kinds of ammo and had it in the back of my head that the super dense tungsten balls sometimes used in shotgun shells might be fun to try. I looked around a bit and found that some do make tungsten buckshot that is ~2.2x as dense as steel, although it is very...




www.slingshotforum.com


----------



## THWACK! (Nov 25, 2010)

KawKan said:


> I have a problem with the tin can test, mostly because it is so vague.
> No ammo is specified, although I suspect the test is based on 3/8-inch (9.5mm) steel.
> Experience shows that smaller steel is better at penetration and larger steel is worse. Also, that 1/2-inch steel is deadly even without penetration.
> But shooting cans is always fun, and comparing the damage can be informative - if not definitive.


Prior to the invention of the slingshot, ancient folk had fun playing the game "Kick the can".

THWACK!


----------



## Pedroito (Aug 22, 2021)

vince4242 said:


> Ray I think the can test is more for confidence that you're going to make a clean kill. My example is I had my hunting setup that was too weak. It took three shots dead on the head to kill a squirrel. I got the job done but it was not a clean kill and I felt really bad. When I did the can test filled with water, ½" steel and 7/16" steel did not penetrate the can on either side but made a huge dent on the front side. I shortened the band set by ½" and did the test again months later before I was ever going to try and hunt again, and low and behold the ½" steel went through the front and made a big dent in the back, 7/16" did the same and almost went through, and 3/8" steel went straight through both sides without even tipping the can over. This gave me a good idea that 3/8 with that band set, and my draw length is the right ammo for hunting. 7/16" steel almost went through the back so maybe that would be good too but it was a good indication that I was on the right track after my failed hunting attempt with a weaker band set earlier the year before.
> 
> I hope that helps anyone trying to understand about the steel can filled with water test.


why filled with water? would it be harder without water (because of unstability)?


----------

