shells vs. full bodies

[Storm Ockels]

I personally use full bodies over shells because the attention they draw, but would shells work just as good? What are the major differences?

-Storm Ockels

[CamoHunter870]

I assume we are talking about mallard fullbodies vs shells.

In my mind, unless you are sitting them on the ice and just using actives and feeders, shells are more effective then the fullbodies since you can put more of them out. The fullbodies look better but by the time a mallard realizes the shell doesn't have feet, it should be dead.

Advantages of mallard shells are you can carry more of them while disadvantages I would say is they dont move as much in the wind and take longer to set up.

Advantages of mallard fullbodies are they offer more realism and movement but you can't carry as many.

Use both, you won't be sorry :)

[calling4life]

We aren't birds, can't tell you definitively whether or not they would work just as good. Same with silos vs. fullbodies, rags vs. ...... and so on.

Experience tells me no, they do not, but then at times, yes every bit as good and perhaps better. If I had to go for an overall, my 14 seasons have shown me that no, the shells aren't as good.

You can look at both decoys and see the differences.

Most of this pertains to goose though, for ducks, I couldn't tell ya, I don't use shells.

[kberggren]

Depands on which shells you are using. If you are using actives there is some difference but i have not seen a difference in the feeder shells vs the feeder fullbodies. The last 3 seasons i've been using 18 Fullbody actives, and 30 Feeder Shells and been having great success in places i have a long walk in, these 4 dz decoys fit in 2 12-slot bags! My brother has some active shells and they look fine but for actives would rather have fullbodies.