I did a head-to-head comparison between these two pellets and was surprised by the results.
Not long ago, Greg at Airguns of Arizona asked me if I would like to have a look at the Predator Polymag pellet.
For me, testing pellets always seems a problematic business. The reason is simple: in my view, the number one rule of pellet selection for airguns is: let the gun choose the ammunition. It doesn’t matter what your buddy’s gun shoots or what all the fellows are saying on the internet. What matters is what pellet delivers the greatest accuracy with your airgun at the range at which you intend to shoot. Everything else is secondary to accuracy, because if you can’t hit what you’re aiming at, all other considerations – such as power, penetration, expansion – are moot.
As a result, every airgunner who wants to get the most out of his or her airgun will have to test several different types of pellets, shooting groups with them at the same distances, to see which pellets produce the smallest groups. If it turns out that those tests reveal several pellets that produce very similar (and desirable) results, then you can start thinking about those other considerations such as power, penetration, expansion and so forth as you narrow down your pellet selection. So what’s the best pellet? The one that works best in your airgun. End of story.
Having said that, the Predator Polymag makes some specific claims that are testable. Right on the top of the tin, besides saying “Proven the best hunting pellet made!” and “Superior accuracy and take-down punch,” it also says “The hollow head design with sharp polymer tip offers match grade accuracy with incomparable penetration and expansion.”
Now, whether you get match grade accuracy is going to depend upon which airgun you use to launch the Predator Polymag, but “incomparable penetration and expansion???” I began to think about how I could test that those claims.
I remembered seeing a report on the internet how a fellow had shot bars of soap to test relative penetration, so I decided to do that. I bought some large bars of Ivory soap and shot them at point blank range with my FWB150: two shots with .177 Predator Polymag pellets and two shots with .177 JSB Exacts. Both pellets penetrated the full length of the bar of soap, producing entrance holes, through-tunnels, and exit holes that appeared to be identical. So far, there is no discernible difference in performance between the two pellets, both of which are made by JSB.
It occurred to me that perhaps the Predator Polymag wanted to hit a harder surface to promote expansion, so I then shot a soup can at 13 yards: one shot with each pellet with my FWB150. Both shot penetrated both side of the soup can, and again I could see no discernible difference between the performance of the two pellets.
Okay, I thought, maybe I’m not launching the Predator Polymag shooting fast enough (the FWB generally launches 8 gr. pellets around 640 fps) to really get the best performance out of them and maybe the Predator Polymag pellets need a difference medium to penetrate. So I grabbed a stack of paperback books, taped them together, and took one shot with each pellet at a distance of 13 yards, but this time I was using my Benjamin Marauder, which usually generates close to 20 foot-pounds of energy at the muzzle.
I carefully examined the stack of books and found that only one pellet had penetrated sufficiently to “disrupt” the back cover of the first book, a 440-page paperback. That pellet was the JSB Exact. Paging backward through the book, I found the nose of the JSB Exact pellet poking through page 425. Continuing to page backward through the book, I found that the Polymag Predator disrupted page 385, and I found the pellet poking through page 219.
Both pellets were pretty well mangled when extracted from the book, but both appeared to be expanded about the same.
Taking care, I extracted each pellet from the pages of the book. I found the Predator Polymag had lost its polymer point even earlier in the book, but that there was no discernible difference in the expansion of the two pellets.
The bottom line: if the Predator Polymag shoots accurately in your airgun, by all means use it if it meets your needs (and on the internet, I have read many hunters raving about the performance of the pellet), but I was not able to prove – at least with the .177 version of this pellet – the manufacturer’s claims of “incomparable penetration and expansion.”
Til Next time, aim true and shoot straight.
- Jock Elliott
What a GREAT review as always. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity about a pellet that I have never yet tried even though I am a staunch believer in the utility of a conventional JSB pellet, especially the 14.33 gr, 15.9 gr and 18.1 gr types for most of my airguns.
Patrick,
Thanks for the kind words. I’m glad you enjoyed the review.
Glad to see someone who uses the same ‘scientific’ test as I do.
For years I’ve heard people who test their pellet guns power with things like ballistic gel, Ivory soap bars (from what I understand is the best),,,even the odd pot roast.
Every year when the new phone books come out, I take the old ones down to my basement range and see how my latest airgun/pellet combos stack up.
Bob,
Good to hear from you. It was certainly fun trying to do the tests.
My son said, “Hey, it’s kind of like Mythbusters!” (the TV show).
Aren’t “penetration” and “expansion” basically two mutually exclusive terms? If a pellet has great penetration, it will be a pass-through. If it has superior expansion, it will dump its energy quickly in the target, trading penetration for a larger wound channel (like all hollow points).
Maybe there is some speed/energy level where the Polymags have superior initial penetration (using the polymer point to get through a tough hide for instance), and then expand quickly once the hide is penetrated. If this is the case, then you would need to use a compound target material to test the pellet.
Or maybe the marketing department at Polymag just got a little carried away.
Hey, Jim,
I agree with you: you would think that penetration and expansion would tend to work against each other, wouldn’t you? But then again, I didn’t make the claim, so maybe the Polymag folks had discovered something special. I certainly couldn’t prove it.
Plenty of folks like the Polymag pellet and say it performs well. Shooting them from my FWB 150, I found the Polymags shot to nearly the same point of impact as the JSBs.
In the end, I think your suspicions about the marketing department may be spot on.
Hey Jock,
I think your tests proved exactly what the Polymags are advertised to do; -that is penetration (just like the JSBs) but superior knock down power in that, it dumped all of it’s kinetic energy into the target relatively sooner after penetration. Speaking from an engineer’s perspective, I think a better rudimentary test would be as follows:
1. Determine the max number of bar soaps (taped together) that each pellet will penetrate.
2. Use the lesser number as the basis for the knock down test (i.e., if the max for the polymag is 4bars and that for the Exacts is 6bars, use 4bars for this test)
3. Tape up several batches of the requisite (lesser) number of soap bars together and suspend them from a string. (weigh them and make sure all batches weigh the same)
4. Shoot separate soap targets with each pellet type individually and observe/measure maximum angle of swing of the target produced by each pellet.
The pellet that produces the greater target swing-angle should be the winner of the knock down test.
Al,
Thanks for your comments.
As I recall, the claim the package made was for greater penetration and expansion. I could prove neither.
I’m glad that you put their (Polymags) claims to the test. But I don’t know that paperback books are the best medium (they may be too dense and not allow ideal expansion) I would suggest a less dense medium. I don’t know if you’ve seen these videos, but they show some interesting results. The Polymag appears to have a large temporary cavity, but penetration is much less than other pellets. Now whether that larger temporary cavity equates to “knock down” power is debateable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y63hqWuL7OM&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Nathan,
Thanks for the comments. That”s an interesting video. It would be interesting to know if JSB Exacts produced a similar temporary channel.
I did try ivory soap, but the “wound” channel looked much the same as the channel from the JSB Exact. I also tried metal cans with similar results.
From the looks of it the video I would say no the temporary cavity of the JSB Exacts is smaller in diameter, but it is longer. I wonder if wet newspaper would work as a sutiable medium?
Nathan
I MADE A TEST ON PREDATOR .177 FOR B.C WITH MY MARAUDER, SENDING THESE AT 955 FT/SEC THE RESULT WHERE A BIT DISAPPOINTING AS I GOT A B.C OF .0128 SO MY GUESS IS THEY ARE NOT FOR LONGER DISTANCE SHOOTING, THE EXACT HAS A HIGHER B.C
Jock : just wondering : what do you think about using some actual animals whole or in parts for the test.. I keep some squirrels that are head shot skin and all in the freezer.. thaw them out and shoot them to determine if my real world animal and my gun and pellet will do the job once they are thawed.. dissection shows hitting bones, flesh, etc..
it would be kind of easy to shoot from the same distance two different pellets on two squirrels hit in the same place, same distance, angle, and speed one shot directly prececing the other.. used to read an archery blog that did that testing broadheads.. I am not smart enough to post pics on the forum I frequent, but it seems that would be a test some professional like you might like to do. I would love to check out a rib cage, shoulders, and spine shot w both jsb and preds at 600fps and 900 fps.. or two other high and low speeds you would choose to be representative..
dan kennison
Dan,
I think it is an interesting idea, but difficult to execute with precision and reproducible results. Getting the dissection done without “destroying the evidence” could be tricky too.
Nevertheless, I like your idea.
Thanks a lot for sharing this with all of us you actually recognize what you are talking about! Bookmarked.
I have tried comparing the .25 cal version of the Predator to JSB Exact King and Benji Domed with significantly more devastating results with the Predator. While the “standard” pellets leave a nice hole in “past their prime” tomatoes and sweet potatoes, the Predator has a more explosive effect. Interestingly, they leave a much larger hole entering than exiting. If I could post pictures here to show the difference I would. Perhaps .177 doesn’t have enough mass to demonstrate the difference that might only appear in the larger .25 cal. They group very very well at 20 yards…can’t comment on greater distances since I haven’t tried that yet.
Kelly,
Thanks for your comments. I haven’t tried the .25 Predators.