Smoothbore vs. Rifled barrel

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Belo, Have you hit anything with them yet?  Friend used them and had terrible terminal performance on the deer.  Just like the shockwaves in the ML. tiny holes in and out.  I wish Federal still made the Federal premiums with the Barnes expander bullets.  I have 7 boxes left and guard them with my life...lol

no, and good point i guess i shouldn't tout them until i kill something. I only shotgun hunted twice this year as most of my spots are rifle. I did notice even on paper how much smaller the hole was, but they grouped better for sure. The litefield has dropped many for me and I've never even tried over 100 yards with them and would probably never need to. I will admit that the litefield is significantly heavier than the sst so it will be interesting to see if the devastation is even close as compared to the litefields. 

Edited December 28, 2017 by Belo

[Five Seasons]

1 hour ago, WNYBuckHunter said:

Ive used SSTs in 12 gauge, 20 gauge, and my .50 cal Muzzleloader. Always the same results, small hole in, small hole out. I tried Remington Copper Solids, same thing. For shotgun sabots I had the best luck with the Remington Accutips. Just as accurate as the SSTs and they open up better in my experience. Still looking for a better option for my ML.

I've lost some deer with my litefields too. Regardless an sst should still do just fine going through those lungs. I guess time will tell for me. Mable I shouldn't have bought 4 boxes lol.

[Five Seasons]

but back on topic. i see no reason to stay smoothbore. the ammo discussion comes after the fact. a rifled barrel will always be more accurate. 

[wolc123]

One reason to keep the smoothbore, is the cost of ammo.   Better terminal performance may be another, and so might be better bush-busting at short range.   As far as the terminal performance of the 12 ga Hornady SST's sabots, the only (3) I have shot them at went down in their tracks.  Each of those shots hit some bone however.  The doe that was hit in the spine crawled about 5 yards, before a second shot to the neck put her down for the count.  The two struck in the shoulders never even twitched.  I would like to see how they do on a center-lung shot.  The thing I liked least, after changing to a rifled barrel and sabots, was the terminal performance on lung shots.  The first sabots I used were Federal (not the Barnes bullet).   They made small entrance and exits, compared to an old full-diameter foster-type, shot out of a smoothbore.   That made the bloodtrails more difficult to follow.   I was hoping that the SST's would improve on that a bit.  It don't look so good for that based on others experiences.  

Greater accuracy at long range would be the primary reason for getting a rifled barrel.  If you can afford it, It makes sense to keep the smoothbore however, and use both, depending on the conditions when & where you hunt.  I still use a short barreled, 12 gauge Rem 870 smoothbore with open sites in shotgun zones in rainy or snowy conditions.   I also carried that to my stands for backup for a few years when I used my inline ML during the regular season.  I liked the ML, but sometimes having more than one shot is nice.  In that service, it accounted for a few "doubles", after downing the first one with my ML.   If I had to choose just one shotgun barrel, between rifled and smoothbore, I would pick the rifled because accuracy and range trumps cost, terminal performance, and bush-busting ability.      

Edited December 28, 2017 by wolc123