.

Welcome to SGW, Rex ! !

If the barrel's marked as suitable for 3" shells, it would be safe to fire any shorter .410 ammo - but may/may not be able to cycle the shorter shell from the magazine reliably.

.

 

.

Welcome to SGW, Rex ! !

If the barrel's marked as suitable for 3" shells, it would be safe to fire any shorter .410 ammo - but may/may not be able to cycle the shorter shell from the magazine reliably.

.

Thanks for the welcome and the reply... no issues with the contents of the shells and the full choke tube length then?

 

No problem shooting those loads through a Full choke. People have been shooting slugs through a Full choke since chokes have been around and manufacturers long ago designed slugs to be safe with all standard chokes of the time.

There should be no problem with the shells cycling either provided the gun cycled fine with 3" shells in the past. Where there could be a problem is with the shells sticking in the chamber upon firing as the heads are made of steel with a brass coating on them. I have handled 3 different complaints in the last 2 weeks regarding this and the steel bases have been the culprit. The same issues happened with Winchester Universals a couple of years back.

 

Capable? Perhaps, but a miserably bad choice. It is a handgun round, designed for a rifled barrel. https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/hand ... e-2-1-2#!/#specs

Unique to the Critical Defense® 410, the 41 caliber FTX® slug actually engages the gun's rifling, and contacts the target nose-on, enabling the patented Hornady® Flex Tip® technology to assist in expansion for greatly enhanced terminal performance.

 

.

Welcome to SGW, Rex ! !

If the barrel's marked as suitable for 3" shells, it would be safe to fire any shorter .410 ammo - but may/may not be able to cycle the shorter shell from the magazine reliably.

.

Thanks for the welcome and the reply... no issues with the contents of the shells and the full choke tube length then?

No.

A 3"-capable .410 will SAFELY shoot anything anyone (professional factory) loads in 2-1/2" or 3" .410-bore shells, birdshot, buckshot, slugs, "home defence" ammunition (which really is usually multi-ball slug shells).

Having a Full Choke would be "less than optimal" with the slug/HD shells, but NOT UNSAFE by any means.

Now, whether or not the shells cycle in the gun trouble-free, only testing can determine that, buy a couple boxes and shoot them, see what happens.

As noted, the "FTX-Bullet loads are a round DESIGNED FOR THE RIFLED TAURUS JUDGE", throwing handgun bullets un-spun from a shotgun is not a "recipe for disaster", but again is "sub-optimal". They will yaw sideways at very short distances (lacking gyro-stabilization) and hit whatever you shoot at sideways (or heavy, non-expanding, back-end first)..

 

No problem shooting those loads through a Full choke. People have been shooting slugs through a Full choke since chokes have been around and manufacturers long ago designed slugs to be safe with all standard chokes of the time.

There should be no problem with the shells cycling either provided the gun cycled fine with 3" shells in the past. Where there could be a problem is with the shells sticking in the chamber upon firing as the heads are made of steel with a brass coating on them. I have handled 3 different complaints in the last 2 weeks regarding this and the steel bases have been the culprit. The same issues happened with Winchester Universals a couple of years back.

Many thanks!

 

Wanting to make sure this 3" chamber .410 is capable of firing the 2 1/2" Hornady 410 Triple Defense shells... (FTX Slug & 2 Round Balls)

This is an old SG obviously, was my Fathers so would like to use it as another option for Home Defense but really want to make sure it's compatible with the ammo listed above.

Thanks in advance!!!

Capable? Perhaps, but a miserably bad choice. It is a handgun round, designed for a rifled barrel. https://www.hornady.com/ammunition/hand ... e-2-1-2#!/#specs

Unique to the Critical Defense® 410, the 41 caliber FTX® slug actually engages the gun's rifling, and contacts the target nose-on, enabling the patented Hornady® Flex Tip® technology to assist in expansion for greatly enhanced terminal performance.

Thanks Randy!

 

deleted... placed reply in wrong place

 

There is more extensive coverage here: https://www.americanrifleman.org/articl ... shotshell/

It isn't a good choice for HD / self-defense out of anything.

 

.

Welcome to SGW, Rex ! !

If the barrel's marked as suitable for 3" shells, it would be safe to fire any shorter .410 ammo - but may/may not be able to cycle the shorter shell from the magazine reliably.

.

Thanks for the welcome and the reply... no issues with the contents of the shells and the full choke tube length then?

No.

A 3"-capable .410 will SAFELY shoot anything anyone (professional factory) loads in 2-1/2" or 3" .410-bore shells, birdshot, buckshot, slugs, "home defence" ammunition (which really is usually multi-ball slug shells).

Having a Full Choke would be "less than optimal" with the slug/HD shells, but NOT UNSAFE by any means.

Now, whether or not the shells cycle in the gun trouble-free, only testing can determine that, buy a couple boxes and shoot them, see what happens.

As noted, the "FTX-Bullet loads are a round DESIGNED FOR THE RIFLED TAURUS JUDGE", throwing handgun bullets un-spun from a shotgun is not a "recipe for disaster", but again is "sub-optimal". They will yaw sideways at very short distances (lacking gyro-stabilization) and hit whatever you shoot at sideways (or heavy, non-expanding, back-end first)..

Appreciate all the great replies, thanks again!

 

There is more extensive coverage here: https://www.americanrifleman.org/articl ... shotshell/

It isn't a good choice for HD / self-defense out of anything.

Interesting review...

So, I guess my next question would be what folks here would recommend for a Home-Defense Shotgun and Round/Shell combination (short of the sawed-off varieties of course)...

It appeared to me that the results showed that the shotgun out-performed, though not flawlessly, most of the handguns designed to fire this shell so for me, I think it would be an acceptable, not optimal mind you, choice for Home-Defense.

Thoughts?

 

If you are forced to use a shotgun for personal defense, you certainly need it to work and work well. There is a huge body of reliable information established by the F.B.I., Duncan MacPherson, and perhaps most notably of all-Dr. Martin Fackler. According to Fackler-IWBA, rapid incapacitation is a function of damaging or destroying tissues that are critical to an attacker's immediate survival. To reliably accomplish this task, the bullet should be capable of penetrating deeply enough to reach and pass through vital structures in the body from any angular aspect. This capability is called adequate penetration.

Fackler-IWBA recommends a minimum of 12 inches of penetration. This 12 inch minimum penetration performance guideline is meant to ensure that the bullet has adequate penetration potential to reach and disrupt vital organs. The 12 inch standard is the prevailing barometer used by the F.B.I., Dr. Fackler, and other reputable sources. Anything less than 12 inches is insufficient and inadequate. Not understanding this has already cost too many people their lives. Bird shot is not an acceptable self-defense shotshell round. To believe that it is could get you killed, and that has been the sad outcome in too many incidents. The appropriate value for minimum penetration depth has generally been assumed to be 12 inches ever since the first FBI wound ballistics meeting in 1987.

We have effectiveness in eliminating life-threatening danger as the sole priority. No one wants to be forced to use a firearm to save lives, but if so forced it must work without fail. There is no substitution for proper training in home defense. It is serious business, one that commands study and practice as though your life and your family's life depended on it-as that is the general idea.

The Firearms Tactical Institute reports:

"Number 1 buck is the smallest diameter shot that reliably and consistently penetrates more than 12 inches of standard ordnance gelatin when fired at typical shotgun engagement distances. A standard 2 ľ-inch 12 gauge shotshell contains 16 pellets of #1 buck. The total combined cross sectional area of the 16 pellets is 1.13 square inches. Compared to the total combined cross sectional area of the nine pellets in a standard #00 (double-aught) buck shotshell (0.77 square inches), the # 1 buck shotshell has the capacity to produce over 30 percent more potentially effective wound trauma. In all shotshell loads, number 1 buckshot produces more potentially effective wound trauma than either #00 or #000 buck. In addition, number 1 buck is less likely to over-penetrate and exit an attacker's body."

 

If you are forced to use a shotgun for personal defense, you certainly need it to work and work well. There is a huge body of reliable information established by the F.B.I., Duncan MacPherson, and perhaps most notably of all-Dr. Martin Fackler. According to Fackler-IWBA, rapid incapacitation is a function of damaging or destroying tissues that are critical to an attacker's immediate survival. To reliably accomplish this task, the bullet should be capable of penetrating deeply enough to reach and pass through vital structures in the body from any angular aspect. This capability is called adequate penetration.

Fackler-IWBA recommends a minimum of 12 inches of penetration. This 12 inch minimum penetration performance guideline is meant to ensure that the bullet has adequate penetration potential to reach and disrupt vital organs. The 12 inch standard is the prevailing barometer used by the F.B.I., Dr. Fackler, and other reputable sources. Anything less than 12 inches is insufficient and inadequate. Not understanding this has already cost too many people their lives. Bird shot is not an acceptable self-defense shotshell round. To believe that it is could get you killed, and that has been the sad outcome in too many incidents. The appropriate value for minimum penetration depth has generally been assumed to be 12 inches ever since the first FBI wound ballistics meeting in 1987.

We have effectiveness in eliminating life-threatening danger as the sole priority. No one wants to be forced to use a firearm to save lives, but if so forced it must work without fail. There is no substitution for proper training in home defense. It is serious business, one that commands study and practice as though your life and your family's life depended on it-as that is the general idea.

The Firearms Tactical Institute reports:

"Number 1 buck is the smallest diameter shot that reliably and consistently penetrates more than 12 inches of standard ordnance gelatin when fired at typical shotgun engagement distances. A standard 2 ľ-inch 12 gauge shotshell contains 16 pellets of #1 buck. The total combined cross sectional area of the 16 pellets is 1.13 square inches. Compared to the total combined cross sectional area of the nine pellets in a standard #00 (double-aught) buck shotshell (0.77 square inches), the # 1 buck shotshell has the capacity to produce over 30 percent more potentially effective wound trauma. In all shotshell loads, number 1 buckshot produces more potentially effective wound trauma than either #00 or #000 buck. In addition, number 1 buck is less likely to over-penetrate and exit an attacker's body."

The 12" gel benchmark reflected in this graphic from your link above (unless I'm interpreting it wrong), appeared to say that the shotgun was capable of such- and the spread seemed decent as well:

Thanks- your info is appreciated.

 

The 12" gel benchmark reflected in this graphic from your link above (unless I'm interpreting it wrong), appeared to say that the shotgun was capable of such- and the spread seemed decent as well:

Yes, you're interpreting it wrong. See: https://www.ammunitiontogo.com/lodge/be ... ense-ammo/ .

The Hornady round has only three projectiles: A standard 2-3/4 inch 12 gauge shotshell contains 16 pellets of #1 buck. Moreover, the FBI protocol . . .

FBI Ballistic Testing Protocol

The FBI test protocol runs through a full cycle of eight test events. Each event is designed to test a hollow point bullet by shooting the ammo through barriers such as wallboard, steel, and auto glass before penetrating ballistic gelatin. The ammunition is then tested for velocity and accuracy. According to the FBI, the results are an assessment of a bullet's ability to inflict effective wounds after defeating various intervening obstacles commonly present in law enforcement shootings .

For our testing purposes we slightly deviated from the strict guidelines so that our results might reflect more of what a civilian may encounter in a self defense situation. We understand though that every defense situation is unique and we cannot just blindly group every shooting into a single category.

With that in mind, our test focused more on one of the eight test events in which the ammunition penetrates heavy clothing prior to impacting the ballistic gelatin.

Shooting into bare gelatin alone is only relevant if you are attacked by naked people.

 

There is more extensive coverage here: https://www.americanrifleman.org/articl ... shotshell/

It isn't a good choice for HD / self-defense out of anything.

Interesting review...

So, I guess my next question would be what folks here would recommend for a Home-Defense Shotgun and Round/Shell combination (short of the sawed-off varieties of course)...

It appeared to me that the results showed that the shotgun out-performed, though not flawlessly, most of the handguns designed to fire this shell so for me, I think it would be an acceptable, not optimal mind you, choice for Home-Defense.

Thoughts?

10, 12, or 20-gauge, Big Buckshot (00, 000, 0000 (in the 10)), launched hard (fast).

Guaranteed to get the attention of the highest doper, if delivered properly, and repeat-delivered as needed (situationally dependent).

 

Oh yeah, it's surely capable. By the way, this gun it's really a catch. I'd shake the hand of that guy who recommended you buy this cutie! Currently, I'm a pharmacy benefit manager, and I wish I could defend myself from audit sharks with a Springfield, but unfortunately, I have to use different tools. If some folks have similar jobs, I strongly recommend looking here at PBM Audit Defense: Key Strategies for Pharmacies in 2022 | JD Supra. There are some useful tips you could make use of! Cheers!