Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/22/2004 4:18:02 PM EST
I thought some of you may be interested in this. I'm reading a book called "Green Berets at War" written by Shelby L. Stanton. I wanted to show you guys something that was wrote in that book that pertains to our discussion board here:

"Sp.4th class Edward L. Woody and Sfc. James C. Cooper led the 513th MSF Company in a frenzied downslope charge that spilled into some of the last NVA-held trenches. Woody had leaped out of a crater on the main slope and thought he was being closely followed by Chinese Nungs. He reached a bunker only to find himself alone facing several North Vietnamese infantryman. Before the startled defenders could open fire, he killed them with one blast of the shotgun he always carried as a medic (to "keep peoples's heads down when I work on somebody")."

You gotta love them 12 gauge shotguns. screw the m4. Just kidding. I know a shotgun doesn't have as much reach but I think it's underrated as a cqb weapon. If you think I'm wrong about being underrated just look at the ratio of people that post on here compared to the m4 posts. But I guess this website is call "AR15.COM" not "12GAUGE.COM" I guess the reach is the biggest drawback though, eh? How far do you think a 12 guage is "really" effective out to. I mean with buckshot. I don't mean how it performs in gelatin and such, I mean "really" .
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 4:25:02 PM EST
The biggest drawbacks is the # of shells in the magazine and the slow reloads. For me, in my training I've found, the shotgun is a great weapon but if I'm going up against more than 3 threats, gimme my AR.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 8:18:28 PM EST
AR is really only a 10-15 shot weapon since it can take 2-3 hits to put a BG down! While a shotgun can down 2-3 BG with ONE shot! Heck, even though a shotgun may "only" hold 7 rounds, it is so easy and fast to top off the ammo tube that it is not even an issue!
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:29:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By Blain:
AR is really only a 10-15 shot weapon since it can take 2-3 hits to put a BG down! While a shotgun can down 2-3 BG with ONE shot! Heck, even though a shotgun may "only" hold 7 rounds, it is so easy and fast to top off the ammo tube that it is not even an issue!



You really believe that?
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 9:32:00 PM EST
Reloads are a hell of a lot faster on the M4.
Link Posted: 9/22/2004 10:27:53 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 6:56:37 AM EST
I will say this, a shotgun is the most fearsome handheld weapon inside of 50 yards that exists.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 7:14:54 AM EST
I've got to say that I love my 12 gauges. I've never been in combat but If it's close range I think I'd go with it. My reserve unit was just in Kuwait and we complemented the guards with M16 with another with a ~14" Mossberg 590. Even state side we pair them when we're condition 1.
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 8:21:19 AM EST

Originally Posted By Blain:
I will say this, a shotgun is the most fearsome handheld weapon inside of 50 yards that exists.



+1
Link Posted: 9/23/2004 12:39:35 PM EST
If someone breaks into my home, the 12-gauge will be my weapon of choice for self defense.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 7:46:00 AM EST
Yes, shotgun > AR for close range.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 7:51:31 AM EST
Shotguns are great............for breaching.

Every target isn't going to be at 50 yards or less.

Choose a carbine or rifle.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 3:55:02 PM EST
Actually, the army found that most engagements WERE at 50 yards or less. Shotgun all the way.
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 7:36:24 PM EST
Plus the man in the sand said 100!!!!!!! And he aint using no 3-1/2. He saids it's a 500. I wonder what load the military does use? I bet one of my american rifleman's say. Does anybody know???
Link Posted: 9/24/2004 8:04:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/24/2004 8:11:00 PM EST by innocent_bystander]
home.sprynet.com/~frfrog/shotgun.htm


The Effectiveness Dilemma

At this point a brief discussion of small arms "effectiveness" is in order. When talking about the effectiveness of any small arms system, it should be noted that the military looks at effectiveness in a different light than the law enforcement or civilian user. The police officer or civilian is interested in the immediate termination of the actions of the individual shot—the proverbial "instant incapacitation." The military on the other hand is primarily interested in creating a wound that will require medical treatment and hopefully the use of several other enemy troops to help the individual who was hit.

Thus, the military considers that an effective hit is one that delivers approximately 58 foot pounds of energy to the target rather than one that instantly shuts down the target. While a shot pattern typically opens up about 1" per yard of range, a good riotgun with a load of #4, #1, or 00 buck can provide several, if marginal, hits on a full length human target out to about eighty yards at that range when directed with a good set of sights, but one does not get "instant incapacitation." If viewed in the military perspective the 12 gauge riotgun firing buckshot can be "effective" on individual targets at that range.

The table below shows the average results of firing at fifty and seventy-five yards at a full length human silhouette with #4, #1, 00, and 000 buck from cylinder bored, rifle sighted, riotgun. Note: most of the hits at 75 yards were very "marginal."

Loading Avg. Number of Hits
(Full sized humanoid target)
50 Yards 75 Yards
27 pellet 4 buck 10 3
34 pellet 4 buck 6 2
16 pellet 1 buck 6 2
20 pellet 1 buck 7 4
9 pellet 00 buck 3 1
12 pellet 00 buck 4 2
8 pellet 000 buck 1 0

Less anyone thinks that only one or two pellets of buckshot will effectively turn off an attacker, consider what is actually striking the target. A pellet of 00 buck is essentially a 54 grain, .33 caliber projectile that is traveling between 1000 and 1300 feet per second. This puts the effectiveness of each pellet of #4 buck at about the .22 rimfire level and 00 buckshot at the muzzle somewhere between that of the .32 ACP and .380 ACP cartridges, none of which any serious person will bet their life upon. The table below gives some interesting data.

Shot Size Pellet Diameter (in) Pellet Weight (gr) Sectional
Density Velocity (fps-20" bbl) Individual Energy (ft lb) Number of pellets in loading Total Weight (oz) Total Energy
(ft lb)
000 .36 70 .077 1265 250 8 in 2¾" 1.3 2,000
00 .33 54 .070 1295 200 9 in 2¾" 1.1 1,810
0 .32 48 .066 1200 155 12 in 2¾" 1.3 1,860
1 .30 40 .063 1215 130 16 in 2¾" 1.5 2.080
4 .24 20 .052 1260 70 27 in 2¾" 1.2 1,890
#6 Shot .11 1.9 .022 1290 7 280 in 2¾" 1.25 1,970
.32 ACP .31 71 .104 900 130 - - -
.380 ACP .35 90 .102 950 190 - - -
38SPL +P .35 158 .177 890 280 - - -

At 75 yards a 00 buck pellet is only traveling at about 830 f/s and has only about 85 ft lb of kinetic energy. At 100 yards the kinetic energy is about 70 ft lb. In addition, shot, because of its spherical shape (and thus low sectional density) has inherently poor penetration compared to a conventional bullet, especially if deformed by intervening material. (#4 buckshot is especially known for this problem.) The so-called "premium" buckshot loads with their hardened and/or plated pellets generally give better performance because the pellets don't deform as much.

Link Posted: 9/25/2004 5:27:55 AM EST
For close in, nothing beats a shotty. I carried one for two tours in the late 60's. Lot of brush fighing, and a night nothing better. RJW
Link Posted: 9/25/2004 2:13:01 PM EST
Earlier this year two men walked into a small southeastern oklahoma bank. They were aremd with a
illegally converted sten gun and FAL. The tellers in the bank managed to trip the silent alarm. The town had two polis officers on duty and they responded. They arrived as the bank robbers exited the bank. One was armed with a 12 gauge the other a .357 magnum. In th eensuing gun battle the good guys score was two, the bank robbers 0. The bank robbers opened up with fully aitomatic fire and th eofficers stood their ground and got hits. The robbers were both transprted to Tulsa hospitals in extremely serious condition.
Link Posted: 9/25/2004 4:31:08 PM EST
Yeah but according to innocent bystander, it's a poor choice. And he's got the data to back it up. ooooh.

Like I've said before, experience is never at the mercy of theory. Charts and graphs are great. But they don't always prove real life. If you want to put all your faith in them go for it. Now I realize that are gi friend may be exxagerating but maybe he isn't. I also realize, "greased" isn't necessarily technical. I even further realize that if you do need to engage at further distances, it would probably a be a poor choice. But I personally don't see myself shooting at someone over 100 yards in a self defense situation. In fact I don't see myself shooting at anyone over 25 yards in a self defense situation. You may and that's just fine. But your charts don't PROVE everything.

cowboyhat, thanks for serving. It is very interesting that you used a shotgun in country. I'm assuming you mean vietnam. What type did you carry? You must've thought it was a good choice if you carried it 2 tours. What type of shot did the military use? What I find interesting is I've looked at alot of pictures and books about vietnam and I barely ever see a guy with a shotgun. Obviously the m16 reigned supreme. You see the m14 of course. But very rarely a shotgun. I guess you carried a unique weapon for combat which makes it that much more sweet in my opinion. I'm not sure why I feel like that but I do.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 4:16:58 AM EST
IMHO shotguns are a poor choice for most military applications. The increasing use of body armor among the world's military makes shotguns of limited use because of poor penetration. The most rudimentary body armor can stop any buckshot load at anything beyond point blank range. Even criminals are increasingly using armor, and that in part accounts for the increased use of rifles and carbines by law enforcement. Shotguns have their uses, but they are poor general purpose arms in the modern military.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 10:51:53 AM EST
Well Herbg, you may be right. But glocklovinredleg has distinctly said he likes it in Iraq. So take it for what it's worth.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 11:59:27 AM EST
The Infantry troops think otherwise. I read an after action report where the grunts in both the USMC and the Army loved the shotguns and wanted more of them issued.
As for the people on here they're either looking for shotguns for 3 gun matches or for one to protect their homes from scumbags who want to rape and loot.
All branches of the military issues pistols. Not much penitration on modern body armour.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 3:00:34 PM EST
It's funny you say that. There was an article in the american rifleman a while back and the name of the article was "Give us more shotguns". It was about world war I. Good article.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 5:16:17 PM EST

Originally Posted By Blain:
I will say this, a shotgun is the most fearsome handheld weapon inside of 50 yards that exists.



I'd say a flamethrower ranks up there somewhere! I like shotguns too for close range. And as far as the body armor issue is concerned: the towel heads causing trouble in Iraq aren't wearing any!!!

-YJ
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 7:38:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By JJREA:
I thought some of you may be interested in this. I'm reading a book called "Green Berets at War" written by Shelby L. Stanton. I wanted to show you guys something that was wrote in that book that pertains to our discussion board here:

"Sp.4th class Edward L. Woody and Sfc. James C. Cooper led the 513th MSF Company in a frenzied downslope charge that spilled into some of the last NVA-held trenches. Woody had leaped out of a crater on the main slope and thought he was being closely followed by Chinese Nungs. He reached a bunker only to find himself alone facing several North Vietnamese infantryman. Before the startled defenders could open fire, he killed them with one blast of the shotgun he always carried as a medic (to "keep peoples's heads down when I work on somebody")."



Read "Point Man" and "Diary of a Navy Seal" by Watson. The both give good print about shotguns in combat. He carried a 5 shot Ithaca 37 called "Sweet Lips", then carried an 8 shot Ithaca 37 called "Sweatheart" in Vietnam.

Really good plugs for the old '37 in combat.

Out
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 7:44:47 AM EST
Yes, the shotgun is devastating at distances under 50 yards. But what if you get pinned down by rifle fire from 2-300 yards away? You don't have a weapon to reach them

I've been reading reports from Iraq where units have come under fire from mortars 6-700 yards away and have had nothing that could reach them. They only had M249s and didn't have M60s or M240s with them. They were asking for more M14s and M240s.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 9:48:23 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 2:58:40 PM EST
Innocent bystander, I could be all wet but it seems it would be pretty difficult to pick someone off at 6-700 yards with an m4. I'm sure it could be done but is that necessarily the answer? Now of course a shotgun would, only if you pointed at about 45 degrees in the air. he he he h ehe he . Hey, wouldn't that be a neat confirmed kill. Just kidding. But 6-700 yards is typically a sniper rifle role or possibly a darn good shot with an m-16 without optics. But not everyone runs around with a sniper rifle either. So here again your points are in my opinion kind of weak and I'm wondering why it is your mission in life to berate the weapon? Actually I really don't care. It just seems funny to me that guys have this thing about putting down other peoples choices. My mamma always told me if you aint' got something good to say, why say it at all. But I suppose I'm sort of breaking that rule disagreeing with you. I think if I was a sniper, I'd like a shotgun over my shoulder in case it gets close in. In my opinion it's better than a pistol. But hey, I'm just talking because I'm not a soldier. I'm just some guy interested in firearms and defense.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 6:20:08 PM EST
Oh geeeeeeze, the shotguns myths again.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 6:50:43 PM EST
JJREA,

Reread my post. 7.62 is for that range.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 7:09:06 AM EST
AAAAH BUT YOUR FIRST POST STATED CHOOSE A "CARBINE" OR A RIFLE. WHATEVER THE CASE IS, WE AGREE IT'S NOT THE BEST FOR EVERTHING BUT I THINKS IT'S GOOD FOR ALOT. OK? GOOD. IF YOU DON'T THAT'S OK. I DON'T HAVE AN M14. I'D LIKE ONE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ONE.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 11:12:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By QuinlanV:

Originally Posted By Blain:
I will say this, a shotgun is the most fearsome handheld weapon inside of 50 yards that exists.



+1


+2
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 11:30:23 AM EST
Some drills to try.


Put out five IPSC/IDPA targets at varying distances from ten to fifty yards.

Now on the clock with the shotgun engage each of them in tactical order with one round of buckshot.

Note time.

Do the same thing with your AR but double tap each target.

Note the time.

Now do the same thing but engage each target with two rounds from the shotgun and three from the AR. This will force a reload for both (AR mags downloaded to 28 or 29).

Note the time. Reloading the shotgun sucks.

Now do the same drills with targets between 25 to 100 yards. Hmm not to many shotgun pellets on the longer distance targets.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 5:38:55 PM EST
Innocent bystander. I know, I know, you've got the best choice and you've got all the facts and data to back it up. I commend you. Now why don't you take your bullshit and get out of my thread. Start your own about how you have the best gun in another forum and others can chime in there. If you don't like shotguns, why are you even in this forum anyways??? Isn't that considered trolling? Again, I don't see why it is some peoples mission in life to crap on everyones joy where ever they go. A shotgun has a good track record in combat. I'm sorry you don't agree. It's ok for people to like different choices. Just because it's not yours doesn't make it wrong. In my opinion, there is no such thing as the perfect gun for all missions. If your 5.56 carbine is for you than terrific!!!!!!!!!! I don't fault you for it. It's a good weapon. But it's not the only one. If you haven't noticed we're trying to hilight the pro aspects of the shotgun, and I was only kind of joking when I said forget the m4 (which I though I stated clearly enough, plus I own a shotgun and not an m4 so the shotgun I have is better than the m4 I got, I do have an a2 though and think it's a fine weapon also but again, not the only fine weapon). I'm herein going to refrain to responding to your posts about this matter.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 7:36:32 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2004 7:37:12 PM EST by innocent_bystander]
I'm sorry, didn't mean to hurt your feelings.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 11:12:57 PM EST

Originally Posted By yellowjacket:

Originally Posted By Blain:
I will say this, a shotgun is the most fearsome handheld weapon inside of 50 yards that exists.



I'd say a flamethrower ranks up there somewhere! I like shotguns too for close range.
-YJ



Did he say FLAME THROWER ? ? ? ? Did he really say flamethrower????


ROTFLMAO
Link Posted: 9/29/2004 12:33:43 PM EST
For affective, put em down hits, 200 yards plus, I want a 7.62, with me, next to me or behind me. For punching paper or ringing steel, the 5.56 is ok out to several hundred yards. Squads should be multy-weaponed and skilled.
As for speed of loading, I hope the military starts adopting the loading tubes that hold 4-8 rounds. Have seen these used by skilled gunners, and only a couple of seconds to reload and start firing again.
OK now everyone get back to extolling the virtues of the shotty.
Top Top