School me on lead-free bullets

[ragz]

I wouldn’t always consider less fragmentation to be an improvement.

True, but they were making the case that by reducing fragmentation that the bullet retains energy for improved penetration. I can see this being more applicable/beneficial to short action cartridges with larger game, such as 6.5 CM on Elk.

 

[Broz]

Here is a 180 gr Cutting Edge Lazer at work.

 

[Stick'nString]

Anyone try the Barnes LRX? I’m thinking of loading some up for a tikka 300 wm now that California forces us to use copper. I’ve killed quite a few animals with the 120-150 grain ttsx and regular tsx and all died but ran a bit before tipping over. Save for an antelope doe this year that hit the dirt hard 380 yards.

I was a huge fan of the TTSX until I shot the LRX. Not a pro shooter by any means, but they make me look pretty good.

 

[wildwilderness]

I have used the 168 TTSX out of a 300 wsm @ 3192 FPS. on many elk, mule deer, mt goat. They have always worked very well.

Some things I have noticed- my rifle didn’t like the 175lrx, maybe a twist rate thing since the copper bullets are longer for weight so think like a 215 lead bullet twist rate on the 175lrx.

Also you get more copper fouling so a good cleaning protocol for getting the copper out will be good for accuracy.

I attached a pic of a few recovered bullets-doesn’t happen often, but the left two are from a couple cow elk, one at 355yds hard quarter away and found on opposite shoulder the other same deal at 300 yds length wise through the elk. The far right was from a big bull shot at 792yds and broke major bone and was lodged mid elk.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

What impact velocity on that right one, <2000? Not sure what altitude you were at to run the numbers based on the distance/velocity you listed. I'm assuming <2000 based on other photo's I've seen but always trying to double check assumptions.

 

[Broz]

wildwilderness data samples say a lot to me. Muzzle velocity of almost 3200 fps, and even a tipped solid is struggling to expand at almost 800 yard impact, even in solid bone. Imagine what that bullet would have looked like if it only went through both lungs. Impact velocities, and low velocity expansion rates are very important with all bullets, even more so with solids at distance.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

wildwilderness data samples say a lot to me. Muzzle velocity of almost 3200 fps, and even a tipped solid is struggling to expand at almost 800 yard impact, even in solid bone. Imagine what that bullet would have looked like if it only went through both lungs. Impact velocities, and low velocity expansion rates are very important with all bullets, even more so with solids at distance.

Exactly, depending on altitude the impact might have been 1800 or 2100, I'm assuming closer to 1800 but if that is a false assumption I'd love to know as it'll be a data point in my memory. I shoot the LRX a lot (a bit softer) but really try to keep impact velocity over 2200fps because of all the data I could dig up when picking that bullet years back the 2100-2200fps zone is where I saw the bullet open up its diameter most of the way (faster peeled back further and got a little wider). Agreed, it wouldn't do a lot of damage if just lungs which is exactly why I personally never shoot a barnes style mono through the lungs only (and repeatedly make that statement any time I'm talking about using the bullet, sounds broken record but I don't think that bullet is as effective through lungs).

I'm playing with some hammers now which like the cutting edge break the petals rather than peel but haven't had a chance to check performance on game with them yet.

 

[Broz]

One problem that is alive and well, but sometimes hard for us to admit is, as distances increase our aim point and point of impacts are subject to our wind reading skills. I aim tight in the crease offering me the widest kill zone horizontally. I will not go for the small kill area of a high shoulder shot. Heart level , or just above is king in my world. But in any case, if our chosen bullet does not expand, or fragment, our hunt could end up leaving a very bad taste in our mouths.

Jeff

 

[deerkiller]

since I think we are talking North America pretty much and "elk" seems to be the focus of the conversation I'll just say this - Like other hunters here I've killed or watched kills on a whole bunch of elk over the years, but I'm keeping this comment to say with the past 8 years due to bullet changes/developments - I choose bonded core and mono's because of the mess fragmenting bullets usually make on an animal AND because Bergers spread LEAD fragments all over the place, now that there are copper (or gilding metal) fragmenting bullets I'm thinking …...
"elk" are an interesting animal to hunt with a rifle, some will wilt to the hit and others will act as though we missed, THEN there are those that take a "bad" hit and turn into super elk (with tee shirt and all) - I believe there is no one rule for putting an elk on the ground and these discussions are a great thing - Guys like BROZ can tell us volumes about what you might expect from a "shot" elk but, for me, I'm always prepared for whatever may come when I pull the trigger, late in the day ? THINK bad spot ? THINK elk mingling in a band of 'em ? THINK - prevailing thoughts make elk hunting more than just "point and shoot, game over" - If it can happen, it WILL happen BUT FGS ! use a good bullet !

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

One problem that is alive and well, but sometimes hard for us to admit is, as distances increase our aim point and point of impacts are subject to our wind reading skills. I aim tight in the crease offering me the widest kill zone horizontally. I will not go for the small kill area of a high shoulder shot. Heart level , or just above is king in my world. But in any case, if our chosen bullet does not expand, or fragment, our hunt could end up leaving a very bad taste in our mouths.

Jeff

We're mostly same page, I just crowd forward a bit more on the same vertical plane (not high shoulder) because I want to try hedge my bets a bit more with a drift error of putting a mono further back in just the lungs as I don't think its a good spot for them. I think conventional "put it a few inches behind the shoulder" mindsets get folks into trouble with monos, atleast the petal peeling ones. Keep in mind I am personally only using the barnes to medium range. The performance of the petal shedding versions might change my mind but currently I would be apt to switch to an ELDM or berger at longer ranges over a petal peeling mono. As you noted placement can have issues and a more aggressively fragmenting bullet would be useful if landing a shot outside where I feel is optimal for a barnes type bullet.

 

[Formidilosus]

True, but they were making the case that by reducing fragmentation that the bullet retains energy for improved penetration. I can see this being more applicable/beneficial to short action cartridges with larger game, such as 6.5 CM on Elk.

Energy isn't why it would penetrate deeper. It’s the wrong way to think about it. A mono will penetrate deeper due to a smaller frontal area and higher retained weight. However, that also means it has a smaller, narrower wound channel.

Despite what the article stated- it is bluntly obvious that a fragmenting bullet such as a Berger has a vastly biggger wound channel, and distanc traveled after the impact is measurably shorter on average. Using a radiograph to measure wound channels isn’t going to tell you much.


You can’t have it both ways. People love to talk about how little meat damage monos create. You can’t have “less damage” and “just as good killing” unless you hit the CNS.



Despite the assertion to the contrary, properly done ballistic gel testing which includes multiple types of barriers does show a high correlation to wounds in animals. This area from the author shows a lack of knowledge and understanding about terminal ballistics testing, correlation to live tissue, and personal experience.

Having been apart of multiple necropsies comparing live tissue shots to 10% gel results, the wound are strikingly similar and valleys in average perform exactly in tissue as they do in well conducted ballistic gel testing.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Formidilosus, you typed barnes in your reply where you meant berger (berger highly fragmenting) FYI.

 

[wildwilderness]

For the record, I am still a novice at longer range shooting and have limited experience. Most all of my rifle kills have been 100-400yds with great results. The shot at 792yds was a follow up shot on a wounded bull initially shot at 700yds (the max I felt was appropriate for that set up) this was central AZ about 5000’ so the impact velocity would be about 1900 fps.

I do notice the limitations of the mono metals with lower BC and subsequent loss of energy at greater distance and difficulty in doping the wind. However I like the confidence of it working at close range (where most of the anecdotal “failures” of vld type bullets occur)

 

[ragz]

Energy isn't why it would penetrate deeper. It’s the wrong way to think about it. A mono will penetrate deeper due to a smaller frontal area and higher retained weight. However, that also means it has a smaller, narrower wound channel.

Despite what the article stated- it is bluntly obvious that a fragmenting bullet such as a Barnes has a vastly biggger wound channel, and distanc traveled after the impact is measurably shorter on average. Using a radiograph to measure wound channels isn’t going to tell you much.


You can’t have it both ways. People love to talk about how little meat damage monos create. You can’t have “less damage” and “just as good killing” unless you hit the CNS.



Despite the assertion to the contrary, properly done ballistic gel testing which includes multiple types of barriers does show a high correlation to wounds in animals. This area from the author shows a lack of knowledge and understanding about terminal ballistics testing, correlation to live tissue, and personal experience.

Having been apart of multiple necropsies comparing live tissue shots to 10% gel results, the wound are strikingly similar and valleys in average perform exactly in tissue as they do in well conducted ballistic gel testing.

I am trying to apply your first statements to the real world but I know there are multiple variables involved. And I am not trying to poke holes, just trying to learn.

In the case of a bonded bullet, let's say it fragments more than mono per the article. When that bonded bullet punches through bone, doesn't that mean it's going to fragment more than a mono? Thus reducing or impacting the wound channel past the bone? Imagining an elk shoulder.

 

[Formidilosus]

Formidilosus, you typed barnes in your reply where you meant berger (berger highly fragmenting) FYI.

Thank you. Auto-correct is a punk.

I do notice the limitations of the mono metals with lower BC and subsequent loss of energy at greater distance and difficulty in doping the wind. However I like the confidence of it working at close range (where most of the anecdotal “failures” of vld type bullets occur)

Failures in killing, or a generally misguided belief that what a bullet looks like after it does it’s job determines how well it killed?

When using a fragmenting bullet such as a Berger you have to go up in weight to maintain penetration, but what you gain is a significantly larger wound.

The hunting world’s problem, is we’ve bought wholesale into Barnes advertisements with pretty bullets after killing as a determiner of how they killed. I use Barnes. And GMX, E-Tips, etc. They are good at what they do, however what a bullet looks like at the end has little, to no bearing on how fast things die.

I am trying to apply your first statements to the real world but I know there are multiple variables involved. And I am not trying to poke holes, just trying to learn.

In the case of a bonded bullet, let's say it fragments more than mono per the article. When that bonded bullet punches through bone, doesn't that mean it's going to fragment more than a mono? Thus reducing or impacting the wound channel past the bone? Imagining an elk shoulder.

Impacting how? If the bonded bullets loses weight due to fragmenting on the bone, those fragments spread radially outward from the bullet path creating more damage by tearing, penetrating, crushing more tissue. Depending on the bullet, the main portion that continues to penetrate past the bone is probably as big, or even slightly bigger than most monos.


The overall thing here is monos such as the Barnes TSX/TTSX create relatively narrow wound channels, in fact the narrowest other than solids. This can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on use. But don’t buy into the belief that just because a bullet looses weight that it in inferior.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

FWIW I am a lung shooter. Or bullets do not have issues with soft tissue deformation at high or low vel. If you need to take shoulders our quartering shots they will work equally well. Out bullets control shed weight by the depth of the hollow point, not impact vel.

 

[Broz]

Failures in killing, or a generally misguided belief that what a bullet looks like after it does it’s job determines how well it killed?

When using a fragmenting bullet such as a Berger you have to go up in weight to maintain penetration, but what you gain is a significantly larger wound.

The hunting world’s problem, is we’ve bought wholesale into Barnes advertisements with pretty bullets after killing as a determiner of how they killed. I use Barnes. And GMX, E-Tips, etc. They are good at what they do, however what a bullet looks like at the end has little, to no bearing on how fast things die.

Impacting how? If the bonded bullets loses weight due to fragmenting on the bone, those fragments spread radially outward from the bullet path creating more damage by tearing, penetrating, crushing more tissue. Depending on the bullet, the main portion that continues to penetrate past the bone is probably as big, or even slightly bigger than most monos.


The overall thing here is monos such as the Barnes TSX/TTSX create relatively narrow wound channels, in fact the narrowest other than solids. This can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on use. But don’t buy into the belief that just because a bullet looses weight that it in inferior.

Thank you, this is what I see often and I agree.

 

[ragz]

Thank you. Auto-correct is a punk.







Failures in killing, or a generally misguided belief that what a bullet looks like after it does it’s job determines how well it killed?

When using a fragmenting bullet such as a Berger you have to go up in weight to maintain penetration, but what you gain is a significantly larger wound.

The hunting world’s problem, is we’ve bought wholesale into Barnes advertisements with pretty bullets after killing as a determiner of how they killed. I use Barnes. And GMX, E-Tips, etc. They are good at what they do, however what a bullet looks like at the end has little, to no bearing on how fast things die.






Impacting how? If the bonded bullets loses weight due to fragmenting on the bone, those fragments spread radially outward from the bullet path creating more damage by tearing, penetrating, crushing more tissue. Depending on the bullet, the main portion that continues to penetrate past the bone is probably as big, or even slightly bigger than most monos.


The overall thing here is monos such as the Barnes TSX/TTSX create relatively narrow wound channels, in fact the narrowest other than solids. This can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on use. But don’t buy into the belief that just because a bullet looses weight that it in inferior.

Thanks for the info. Just what I was after.

 

[Rob5589]

FWIW I am a lung shooter. Or bullets do not have issues with soft tissue deformation at high or low vel. If you need to take shoulders our quartering shots they will work equally well. Out bullets control shed weight by the depth of the hollow point, not impact vel.

Factory Tikka T3, 7 RM, 600 yds max on healthy mule deer and similar sized critters, the 131 or 155 or ??

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Factory Tikka T3, 7 RM, 600 yds max on healthy mule deer and similar sized critters, the 131 or 155 or ??

Tikka 7mm are 9.5 twist so you'd probably want to stick to the 143 or 131, personally I'd do the 143 (the extra velocity and likely higher altitude will help stabilize).