Federal #1 Buck with FliteControl Released!
- Thread starter NYCShooter
- Start date
Rugerismisticness
New member
Over here, we like everything to be tight. Our patterns, our 1911s, our wo.. yeah, tight is good. I have no doubt that a flite control product is a more effective hunting round than a standard product. There is no question that I will hit the deer/pig/goose, but hitting with the extra pellets on mass is much more effective than having maybe 4 buck pellets hit the deer. Other mfgs have already started to copy, I believe Win has a new waterfowl load with a flite control knockoff.
As an adult I've always known #1 Buckshot is better for security than #00 as is #0 Buck which I myself prefer (more controllable than #1 too and I don't even need to pay more for less recoil). But since when and why is a tighter pattern better just because it is smaller?
By that logic a bullet is better/I] and maybe a .17 Ackley Bee is best! Isn't a proper shotgun pattern the goal? Hence choke!? This isn't new. But the perspective is...
An example above demonstrates an inherent feature and the benefits of a shotgun as well as implying what's likely to happen when tacticooly circumvented.
But now I get it: mostly marketing gimmick with an admittedly interesting but very narrow usefulness (play on words intended) whose application was largely outlined by major metroplitan area lawyers. A solution looking for a problem. That found a certain clientele. Forgive me if I think it will sell best in malls and especially if positioned as "limited distribution" or marked" LEO."
As for that choke, even tanks have used straight unrifled tubes and sabot rounds for decades which is all "Flite" is -- shot loaded into a straight-shooting sabot cup.
Well, the more the merrier.
Now, if you'll excuse me, there's a great new article in Guns & Ammo on which is better, the AR or AK, and in this volume they also discuss the merrits of this new #1 Buck Flite-Control -- right next to a Federal ad with an "operator" promoting it.
By that logic a bullet is better/I] and maybe a .17 Ackley Bee is best! Isn't a proper shotgun pattern the goal? Hence choke!? This isn't new. But the perspective is...
An example above demonstrates an inherent feature and the benefits of a shotgun as well as implying what's likely to happen when tacticooly circumvented.
But now I get it: mostly marketing gimmick with an admittedly interesting but very narrow usefulness (play on words intended) whose application was largely outlined by major metroplitan area lawyers. A solution looking for a problem. That found a certain clientele. Forgive me if I think it will sell best in malls and especially if positioned as "limited distribution" or marked" LEO."
As for that choke, even tanks have used straight unrifled tubes and sabot rounds for decades which is all "Flite" is -- shot loaded into a straight-shooting sabot cup.
Well, the more the merrier.
Now, if you'll excuse me, there's a great new article in Guns & Ammo on which is better, the AR or AK, and in this volume they also discuss the merrits of this new #1 Buck Flite-Control -- right next to a Federal ad with an "operator" promoting it.
Last edited:
Stevie-Ray
New member
Hmmm.....maybe some #1 Buck will make it to the store shelves with this new entry. I've been using expressly 00 Buck, as #1 is next to impossible to find around here.
cheyenne'sfinest
New member
dude.... seriously
gehrhard, you're not very bright are you
gehrhard, you're not very bright are you
TheKlawMan
Moderator
And here I thought that the petals on a flite control buckshot round were designed to act more as an air brake and slow the cup so as to prevent it from interfering with the flight of several pieces of shot by slowing the shot cup so as to detach it from the shot while the tail fins of a sabot round are designed to stabilize a single missle; those fins remaining with the sabot shot all the way to target.
"But since when and why is a tighter pattern better just because it is smaller?"
Gerhard, I know it is pointless to argue with you, but it is kind of fun. To answer your question:
Since always.
This seems to be the exact same situation as with the bear defense thread, your argument is only valid if the person firing the gun misses. Yes, a wider spread is indeed better than a narrow one if I miss the target by just a hair, but if my point of aim is on target then the narrow one is considerably better. You seem to believe that nobody in the entire world is capable of hitting a target with a shotgun and so should plan to miss their intended point of aim and then rely on wide shot spread to hit their target for them. That is a complete failure of logic.
Benefits of a tight pattern with buckshot:
1.) Less chance of shot missing the target and hitting someone/something else that you would prefer not to be hit.
2.) If you hit the area you are aiming for on the target then you will get far more shot in that target area and do more damage.
3.) You can fire from further away and hit the target with more of the shot. At 35 yards without flight control you are lucky to get 3 pellets of 9 to hit a man-sized target. With flight control you would be unlucky to get less than 6 pellets of 9 to hit the target.
I would think you would be ALL about this idea given your firm belief that 000 magnum buckshot is better for Alaskan bear defense than 600 grain magnum slugs. One of the stronger arguments against 000 is that you can't hit the bear reliably at more than 25 yards, and if you wait until it is at a more reliable range like 15 yards you will only get one shot no matter what instead of having a chance for two or more like you would with slugs. If they ever released a 000 magnum with flight control that would at least make that point against your argument a little less strong.
4.) Third post, first photo:
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=257470&start=40
7 yards is home defense range. If you put 15 pellets of #1 with 14-18" gelatin penetration capabilities in to that small an area on someone whatever part of their body you hit WILL be destroyed. It will be destroyed in a way that only extremely heavy revolver or rifle rounds like .454 casull or .45-70 can replicate. The difference is those rounds, even in JHP form, are guaranteed to overpenetrate any human they hit and carry on a considerable distance beyond them where they may kill or injure someone else. So it basically wins on every level: It creates a larger single entrance wound than any handgun or rifle round. It spreads out after doing so to create a wider wound inside the body with more likelyhood of hitting vital organs or the CNS than any handgun round. It penetrates deeper than all but the strongest handgun rounds yet not so deep that it is all that likely to injure someone behind the target. Non-flight control does NOT do all this because even at 7 yards it creates multiple smaller entrance wounds instead, which means slower bleedout.
The one other advantage I see it as having is the reduced recoil. I personally have my HD shotgun loaded with five 3" #1 buckshot shells. Being magnums their is a ton of recoil and followup shots will be slower than I would strictly prefer. If I can get 99% of the stopping power of my magnum shells with half the recoil, that is a win-win in my book.
Sorry, but there is a very good argument for why this is highly effective home defense ammo, and superior for that purpose to regular buckshot.
Gerhard, I know it is pointless to argue with you, but it is kind of fun. To answer your question:
Since always.
This seems to be the exact same situation as with the bear defense thread, your argument is only valid if the person firing the gun misses. Yes, a wider spread is indeed better than a narrow one if I miss the target by just a hair, but if my point of aim is on target then the narrow one is considerably better. You seem to believe that nobody in the entire world is capable of hitting a target with a shotgun and so should plan to miss their intended point of aim and then rely on wide shot spread to hit their target for them. That is a complete failure of logic.
Benefits of a tight pattern with buckshot:
1.) Less chance of shot missing the target and hitting someone/something else that you would prefer not to be hit.
2.) If you hit the area you are aiming for on the target then you will get far more shot in that target area and do more damage.
3.) You can fire from further away and hit the target with more of the shot. At 35 yards without flight control you are lucky to get 3 pellets of 9 to hit a man-sized target. With flight control you would be unlucky to get less than 6 pellets of 9 to hit the target.
I would think you would be ALL about this idea given your firm belief that 000 magnum buckshot is better for Alaskan bear defense than 600 grain magnum slugs. One of the stronger arguments against 000 is that you can't hit the bear reliably at more than 25 yards, and if you wait until it is at a more reliable range like 15 yards you will only get one shot no matter what instead of having a chance for two or more like you would with slugs. If they ever released a 000 magnum with flight control that would at least make that point against your argument a little less strong.
4.) Third post, first photo:
http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=257470&start=40
7 yards is home defense range. If you put 15 pellets of #1 with 14-18" gelatin penetration capabilities in to that small an area on someone whatever part of their body you hit WILL be destroyed. It will be destroyed in a way that only extremely heavy revolver or rifle rounds like .454 casull or .45-70 can replicate. The difference is those rounds, even in JHP form, are guaranteed to overpenetrate any human they hit and carry on a considerable distance beyond them where they may kill or injure someone else. So it basically wins on every level: It creates a larger single entrance wound than any handgun or rifle round. It spreads out after doing so to create a wider wound inside the body with more likelyhood of hitting vital organs or the CNS than any handgun round. It penetrates deeper than all but the strongest handgun rounds yet not so deep that it is all that likely to injure someone behind the target. Non-flight control does NOT do all this because even at 7 yards it creates multiple smaller entrance wounds instead, which means slower bleedout.
The one other advantage I see it as having is the reduced recoil. I personally have my HD shotgun loaded with five 3" #1 buckshot shells. Being magnums their is a ton of recoil and followup shots will be slower than I would strictly prefer. If I can get 99% of the stopping power of my magnum shells with half the recoil, that is a win-win in my book.
Sorry, but there is a very good argument for why this is highly effective home defense ammo, and superior for that purpose to regular buckshot.
mrgoodwrench76
New member
Although I'm probably just setting myself up to get bashed, I have to agree mostly with Gehrhard. If your goal is to achieve the tightest pattern possible, then why use a shotgun at all?
Maybe my purpose (clays mostly) for a shotgun differs from the majority. I use them to make a lot of holes spread over a large area so that I dont have to be dead on target to get the job done.
I can see both sides to this but it sure seems like a marketing gimmick to me. I also feel the Judge falls into this catagory as well (novelty, marketing gimmick) but to each their own.
Has anyone here personally tried this stuff out yet? Forgive me but I tend to skim read. While everyone here seems to be of the opinion that this is definately the greatest thing out there, what are your opinions based on?
Really, your second post here on this fine forum is just to insult someone? Finest indeed.
Maybe my purpose (clays mostly) for a shotgun differs from the majority. I use them to make a lot of holes spread over a large area so that I dont have to be dead on target to get the job done.
I can see both sides to this but it sure seems like a marketing gimmick to me. I also feel the Judge falls into this catagory as well (novelty, marketing gimmick) but to each their own.
Has anyone here personally tried this stuff out yet? Forgive me but I tend to skim read. While everyone here seems to be of the opinion that this is definately the greatest thing out there, what are your opinions based on?
Really, your second post here on this fine forum is just to insult someone? Finest indeed.
Yeah Gehrhard but if you use a choke then you won't be able to hit the target. The whole point of a shotgun is to spread shot so wide you can hit things while pointing the gun in the opposite direction. 
As with the bear defense thread you change your position when it suits you as long as it lets you "win" in your own mind.
Oh, and chokes don't even begin to compare with open-bore flight control for pattern tightness, at least not unless you use a full choke and test a bunch of ammo until you find just the right one.... At 10 yards:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot45_3.htm
There was only one shot that compares with those from a full choke in his earlier testing in that series, and that was with low-recoil 8 pellet ammo.
Seriously Mr. Goodwrench? Just like when Gehrhard said it, that tightest pattern = bullet thing is a complete failure of an argument. There are only two options for someone who says that: 1, they are an idiot. 2, they know it is an idiotic thing to say but they say it anyway because they have no valid point to make. Go back and actually read my last post.
I don't know if this is the greatest thing ever or not. I really don't. What I do know is that the very fact they are making another load in the very rare but awesome #1 buck is great in and of itself. I know the fact that they don't really charge hardly anything extra for it makes it worth trying. I know that the 7-10yard shot patterns I have seen from flight control are ridiculously tight and would clearly be incredibly devastating to an intruder on that basis alone. That is enough for me to say I want to try it out.
Also I would be surprised if a number of people here haven't used flight control 00 buck since it has been around for many years.
As with the bear defense thread you change your position when it suits you as long as it lets you "win" in your own mind.
Oh, and chokes don't even begin to compare with open-bore flight control for pattern tightness, at least not unless you use a full choke and test a bunch of ammo until you find just the right one.... At 10 yards:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot45_3.htm
There was only one shot that compares with those from a full choke in his earlier testing in that series, and that was with low-recoil 8 pellet ammo.
Seriously Mr. Goodwrench? Just like when Gehrhard said it, that tightest pattern = bullet thing is a complete failure of an argument. There are only two options for someone who says that: 1, they are an idiot. 2, they know it is an idiotic thing to say but they say it anyway because they have no valid point to make. Go back and actually read my last post.
I don't know if this is the greatest thing ever or not. I really don't. What I do know is that the very fact they are making another load in the very rare but awesome #1 buck is great in and of itself. I know the fact that they don't really charge hardly anything extra for it makes it worth trying. I know that the 7-10yard shot patterns I have seen from flight control are ridiculously tight and would clearly be incredibly devastating to an intruder on that basis alone. That is enough for me to say I want to try it out.
Also I would be surprised if a number of people here haven't used flight control 00 buck since it has been around for many years.
arentol, you might be a little light in knowledge or experience regarding shotguns, their application, or performance as well as other firearms but don't stamp your feet at me over it. Geez.
In any case, avoiding an argument, I'll stipulate that we no longer want traditional shotgun pattern but a tight grouping that Flite Control offers. Now that you've tired yourself out, please explain why a few inch pattern of #1 Buckshot is better than a few inch pattern of 00.
Oh, the irony...
In any case, avoiding an argument, I'll stipulate that we no longer want traditional shotgun pattern but a tight grouping that Flite Control offers. Now that you've tired yourself out, please explain why a few inch pattern of #1 Buckshot is better than a few inch pattern of 00.
Oh, the irony...
Last edited:
As for the comments about "why use a shotgun at all?" ...I think many home owners and experts would agree that a rifle is the best choice in many defense circumstances. However, I can go buy a maverick or NEF pump for less than $200 or a 500 or 870 for a little more. Most suitable rifles will cost significantly more.
Handguns also tend to cost significantly more, and many people can become adequately proficient with a shotgun with less trigger time than they could with handguns.
Handguns also tend to cost significantly more, and many people can become adequately proficient with a shotgun with less trigger time than they could with handguns.
TheKlawMan
Moderator
Gerhard; For many folk, several pellets of buckshot have sufficient stopping power while reducing the risk of over pentration as compared with a single bullet.
The box o truth good but highly over rated! Penetration tests done on 5/8 dry wall (lots only have 1/2 inch walls). The dry wall is spaced 1-2 inches apart (my walls and rooms are much larger than that). All of this changes the amount of penetration through these walls. Throw in pictures, studs, tables, dressers, furniture, shot deflection, ALL change the results.. Bottom line use the biggest, hardest hitting, controlable weapon, be sure of your back stop.
I know that. BUT, my point is the tests would be more valid with more distance between the sheet rock pairings, perhaps 6-10' to simulate actual "room" sizes (distance and sheet rock penetration = lower velocity= lower wall penetrations). Putting the rock within the first 18"-24" just isn't a good test. I also know I don't live in a house with 1or2 inch walls! Perhaps they were simulating shooting in a double wide trailer...
