Ammunition advice

[Wwm]

Advice needed. I have recently changed back to using a 6.5x55 to allow for non-lead ammunition. Sako 120 gr Barnes TTSX groups well but first few chest shot deer (roe) were all through and through with virtually no expansion or blood trail. All ran 50 yds plus. Luckily the teckles found them without a problem stone dead. So changed to Winchester 139 gr, luckily groups at same POA but first two deer shot (fallow) the bullet just about disintegrated. Chest shot (through the shoulder) failed to exit and the fragments were in the rib cage and skin.
Previously (20 years ago) I used Federal 139 gr without any issues but seems to be impossible to find in the local dealers.

I don't want to go back to homeloading so any advice on other ammo/availability very welcome.

 

[enfieldspares]

If you give an idea of whereabouts you are in the UK other members might be able to see what gunshops local to them have in stock?

 

[Wwm]

Based in Wrexham - but we travel widely next week, Bristol, Devon and Lincs.

 

[Erik Hamburger]

I have just been spending quite some time trying trying to find a RFD who is willing to supply me with lead-free .243W (.308W lead-free is reasonably widely available). I cannot understand the lack of interest shown by RFD's in supplying something which they claim to trade in - calls are not returned, emails are not replied to, when speaking face-to-face and you get a promise they will 'get back to you', they don't.
In my search I came across 'LAPUA NATURALIS' , Premium lead-free factory loaded. Directordi, maybe worth a try if available in 6.5x55?
This is available in .243W but at a price....£59 for a box of 20 (.243W) so almost £3 a pop. However, well worth it if the claimed reduced meat wastage, the great accuracy and the total retention of bullet mass is true. Or is it all Marketing hype?
So...is it true? Does anyone have any experience with Lapua Naturalis?

 

[stalkerboydy]

Advice needed. I have recently changed back to using a 6.5x55 to allow for non-lead ammunition. Sako 120 gr Barnes TTSX groups well but first few chest shot deer (roe) were all through and through with virtually no expansion or blood trail. All ran 50 yds plus. Luckily the teckles found them without a problem stone dead. So changed to Winchester 139 gr, luckily groups at same POA but first two deer shot (fallow) the bullet just about disintegrated. Chest shot (through the shoulder) failed to exit and the fragments were in the rib cage and skin.
Previously (20 years ago) I used Federal 139 gr without any issues but seems to be impossible to find in the local dealers.

I don't want to go back to homeloading so any advice on other ammo/availability very welcome.

I use 120gr TTSX in my 6.5x55se admittedly home loads I've shot a lot of Fallow Muntjac CWD and Roe from 30yrd out to 250yds through the ribs and had no issues i personally rate them as good as Nosler Partition 125gr

 

[JTO]

Norman Clark Gunsmiths

 

[Yorric]

Directordi
How fast were you driving the TTSX bullets & at what range?
TTSX are designed to pass through & almost invariably do. They provide two outlets for blood flow. However if the impact velocity is low, you were possibly not driving them fast enough & not getting full expansion.
The TSX bullet doesn't expand as quickly as the more recently designed TTSX.
Barnes say that their bullets should be loaded for fast flight & recommend using a slightly lighter bullet weight to enable the high velocity. This is to ensure full expansion which in turn makes for excellent bleed out due to the cutting action of the four sharp petals which form. The fact that the Barnes bullets don't break up means they retain their energy well & have excellent penetration. They also don't create as much bruising & meat loss as is caused by more fringible bullets.
Traditionally 6.5x55 loading data was conservative (for old weak actioned rifles) so load recomendations were designed to give low pressures & this resulted in low velocity. This is fine when shooting soft point ammunition & adequate expansion was the result. Modern rifles with good strong actions can be run at high enough pressures to permit faster bullet delivery.
I shoot 308 with 130 grain TTSX, running at about 2900 ft/sec & don't get slow kills.
I believe that smaller diameter calibres will make for poorer bullet expansion & that is why I don't use TTSX in my 243 or my 223.

Ian

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

Drop me a PM

We import Fox Non Lead bullets and manufacture the factory ammo in the UK to our spec

They are now being used extensively by the Forestry Commission on all species with great success.
Data collected demonstrates excellent knock down power, reliable exits and expansion, excellent accuracy from factory ammo in stock Tikka/Sako rifles

· The design does not rely on terminal velocity to expand reliably (High BC, small meplat design does)
· The material does not break up even when run hard into ballistic clay and harder substrates
· They suffer none of the deviation from straight line performance that some brands have demonstrated
· They are available in numerous cartridges and calibres at prices that compete with standard lead ammunition
· The Factory Ammunition is made from REACH complaint powders so will remain consistent and available post Jun 2018
· We publish the Factory ammo load data we use so it can be replicated from reloading components/bullets


Production run of the following ammunition is due for delivery this week:

50gr .223 (3300 fps)
80gr .243 (2900 fps)
123gr 6.5x55 (2870 fps)
100gr 6.5x55 (2950 fps)
130gr .270 (3050 fps)
130gr 7x57 (2895 fps)
130gr .308 (3010 fps)
150gr .308 (2900 fps)
150gr .30-06 (2950 fps)
165gr .30-06 (2870 fps)

 

[Yorric]

Hi Ed
Those Fox bullet factory load specifications are interesting. _ Very fast!
Could you tell us the recipes for 308 with the 130 grain Fox bullet, & the 30-06 with the 150 grain version please?
I'm looking to try some of these bullets when I run out of the Barnes TTSX. The price is attractive too.

Ian

 

[Laurie]

Directordi
How fast were you driving the TTSX bullets & at what range?
TTSX are designed to pass through & almost invariably do. They provide two outlets for blood flow. However if the impact velocity is low, you were possibly not driving them fast enough & not getting full expansion.
The TSX bullet doesn't expand as quickly as the more recently designed TTSX.
Barnes say that their bullets should be loaded for fast flight & recommend using a slightly lighter bullet weight to enable the high velocity. This is to ensure full expansion which in turn makes for excellent bleed out due to the cutting action of the four sharp petals which form. The fact that the Barnes bullets don't break up means they retain their energy well & have excellent penetration. They also don't create as much bruising & meat loss as is caused by more fringible bullets.
Traditionally 6.5x55 loading data was conservative (for old weak actioned rifles) so load recomendations were designed to give low pressures & this resulted in low velocity. This is fine when shooting soft point ammunition & adequate expansion was the result. Modern rifles with good strong actions can be run at high enough pressures to permit faster bullet delivery.
I shoot 308 with 130 grain TTSX, running at about 2900 ft/sec & don't get slow kills.
I believe that smaller diameter calibres will make for poorer bullet expansion & that is why I don't use TTSX in my 243 or my 223.

Ian

I can't comment on lead-free US factory loads, but if they are like the traditional cup and core bulleted US cartridges that I've chronographed, you'd have a big problem. The cartridges I tried were woefully underloaded even against the US SAAMI MAP of 51,000 psi on the modern Piezo crystal methodology. The very low MVs produced suggested pressures in the mid to high 30,000 psi. Moreover, velocity spreads from two mainstream makes ran into three figures despite the ammunition being tested in a custom competition rifle with a top-notch barrel in near new condition. This again is indicative of underloading with the pressures generated too low to see powder charges burn efficiently. Loading Barnes and similar bullets that need decent velocities to this sort of level would be a prescription for poor terminal performance.

European loaded ammunition will produce higher pressures and better velocities even if kept down to the 45,000 psi limits for older rifle actions for Krags and Swedish Mausers, but I don't see why Lapua and Norma wouldn't use the still higher 55,000 psi limits for modern rifles in state of the art sporting loads.

 

[Wwm]

Ed, will drop you a pm. Eric we are due to meet up in the next few weeks so this converstaion can be continued.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

Hi Ed
Those Fox bullet factory load specifications are interesting. _ Very fast!
Could you tell us the recipes for 308 with the 130 grain Fox bullet, & the 30-06 with the 150 grain version please?
I'm looking to try some of these bullets when I run out of the Barnes TTSX. The price is attractive too.

Ian

Few gaps as I don't have them to hand but straight from the QL file on a 24" barrel

55gr .223 (3200 fps) 23.5gr RS40 - COAL 56.5mm
80gr .243 (3300 fps) 37gr N150 - COAL 67mm
123gr 6.5x55 (2870 fps) 42gr N550 - COAL 74mm
100gr 6.5x55 (3100 fps) 45gr N550 - COAL 74mm
130gr .270 (3050 fps) 56gr N560 - COAL 81.9mm
130gr 7x57 (2895 fps) 41gr N140 - COAL 76mm
130gr .308 (3010 fps) 45gr N135 - COAL 69.5mm
150gr .308 (2900 fps)
150gr .30-06 (2950 fps)
165gr .30-06 (2870 fps) 53gr N150 - COAL 79.7mm
145gr 7mm RMM (3050fps) 65.5gr N560 - COAL 80.5mm


all pressures are WELL within Piezo SAMMI spec

Proof House results on 308 130gr Factory ammo show :

Velocity Energy P1
Mean 916.02 3532.64 3876.64
Std Dev 2.57 19.82 86.97
Maximum 920.13 3564.3 4001.22
Minimum 913.24 3511.17 3737.55
Max-Min 6.89 53.18 263.67


Stafistical Analysis Kl.n:3.98 CIP Conformity
Pn<:Ftuax 3877<4l50bw Conforms
Pn+(Kln x Sn)<=1.15 Ptmax 4223<4772bar Conforms

 

[Heym SR20]

What's the performance of the 270 like on Reds

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

What's the performance of the 270 like on Reds

I personally only have a small sample size and the last few were 50:50 neck and chest shots
Necks don't count as representative of killing power in my opinion

Of the chest shots the range has been 120-200yds, none ran more than 5-10yds
Entry and exits on all were clean and bruising was minimal

I am personally running 130gr homeloads over 56.5gr N160
The factory load of 56gr N550 was also used in the sample above


more data will be coming in over the next weeks as the FC and other agencies and estates report

 

[bobthenailer]

Here is what I posted a while back on UK Varminting with relation to my experience using Non Toxic projectiles, I have just cut and paste from my original post.

I was an under stalker on a large estate in Dorset for a total of 9 years culling aprox 600 Sika Hinds per year. For the first 4 years I used my .243 along side the Head stalker who also used a .243. We both used 95GN BT's myself using Hornaday SST's and "J" using Nosler. During that period we experienced little problems despite the myth that "SIKA are hard to kill". My experience is that like all other species of deer if you place the projectile ( a good projectile) in the correct area they will die. I know that the internet will say different but that is just my findings having culled in excess of 4000 or so.

The estate then took on the idea of going lead free due to some poorly written paper by some bearded flip-flop wearing yoghurt muncher who had zero knowledge about ballistics, rifles, ricochet templates etc. Unfortunately this idea was given credence by an equably poor written magazine article about how wonderful lead free ammo was.

We presented our case to the estate manager explaining the increased risk of ricochet backed up by the fact that when we were both serving Military any solid copper projectile was deemed prohibited even on a range that was cleared for 155 Howitzer direct fire. We presented data collected by the German government regards the use of non lead projectiles for hunting (who also at that time were going down the lead free route) A decision in which they did a complete U turn after several fatalities and near misses due to ricochet and thru and thru passes.

We were eventually told that is the way it is, If we didn't want the job we could resign.... Testing started that first year using Barnes TSX projectiles in .243 80GN as these at the time were the only available projectiles. Accuracy was pin point absolutely hole on hole when load testing however we noted that as expected we did have ricochets even from a soft sand berm. We again approached the estate manager with our concerns only for it to fall on deaf ears.

After much discussion between J, myself and an independent ballistic specialist it was decided to proceed with caution onto the live tissue testing. More animals were passed up within that first two months than were culled. This was due to our fear of ricochet so we not only ensuring a safe backstop we had to take into consideration any risk of ricochet. Thankfully one of our neighbours was a military range so when the range was active we could be mildly confident the the sea that surrounded part of the estate would be clear of shipping as the range had a danger area monitored by the radar station. This area of the estate was almost the only part that we could feel a little more confident.

As far as the live tissue testing was concerned this was disastrous, we experienced a difficult time, We started to stalk together so one could act as spotter as the physical reaction was so slight and sometimes non apparent. Strike scenes were bereft of pins, paint and left very little evidence of a strike at all. The spotters job became all important. Very often blood would only become apparent after a significant distance. All data was recorded via GPS from shot site to recovery. From memory (I have the data stored at home) the longest track was almost 600M and the hind had been hit double lung. All carcasses upon inspection showed almost no expansion (even a shoulder shot) and little if any transfer of energy.

Due to us working in close partnership with a University who where conducting several studies into Sika deer we were supplying them with lots of data collected during both before the cull and the gralloch giving every available weight and measurement from the carcass, This allowed us the opportunity to have some carcasses (picked at random by the university) placed within an MRI scanner to examine the wound channel within the carcasses. This backed up with science that plain and simple there was little or no expansion. It were as if the deer had been stabbed with a 6mm spike.
It was suggested that the Barnes TSX needed to be driven at max velocity to get the best from them, Well I was pushing them so fast that I burnt my Brl out that first year, Any faster and they would have needed a launch code

.

By the next season the NEW TTSX had arrived, alas this proved no better. Secretly without the knowledge of the head stalker or the estate I had reverted back to lead projectiles keeping a mag loaded in my pocket with the non lead rounds should the head stalker want to see, He never did ask and to this day I'm sure he knew but preferred to remain able to deny any knowledge. I didn't like to deceive my friend like this but such was the lack of confidence with the lead free options available at that time.

Shortly afterwards with the lead free argument gathering pace newer projectiles became available from more manufacturers, Enter Hornady GMX and Nosler E-Tip, At first we could only find a supply of these in .308 cal so in for a variation for .308, I used .308 for many years but had switched to .243 some years earlier and had used it to good effect from everything from Roe to Reds, with the CORRECT projectile and accurate shooting the .243 in my opinion punches well above its weight.
Testing began with Hornaday GMX in 150.5 GN heads, Accuracy was found to be best around middle of the road velocity's. Too fast and the shots seemed to string vertically. (This was confirmed by several of my shooting friends using a variety of rifles and load data.

Live tissue tests were good, Animals showed good reaction to shots having good deep and wide wound channels, Unfortunately we had lost the ability to have the carcass inspected by the MRI test but that was not needed as the wounds were clear to see.The Nosler E Tips performed in much the same way but didn't seem fussy regards the velocity of the projectile. The increased ricochet risk was still present but much reduced in comparison to the Barnes projectiles. Just out of curiosity we loaded some Barnes in .308, Again absolute hole on hole accuracy......and poor terminal effect on live tissue. As a foot note to this I was speaking a few years later to another ballistic specialist who's opinion was that the Barnes head both TSX & later the TTSX was best suited and designed for North American game where deep penetration and the ability to punch thru thicker hide and denser bone structures where the key and where typically there are wider or more open areas the risk of injury from ricochet is reduced.

This is not meant to be a "Bash Barnes Bullets" thread, it is just a reflection of what my findings were at that time with the non lead projectiles that were available at the time (11 years ago).
I have lots of carcass pictures and MRI prints somewhere at home (somewhere after 2 house moves and a divorce) and will post them if there is interest to see them.

My advice would be if you don't need to use non toxic / lead free projectiles then don't. But everyone is free to make up there own minds and use what they wish, If it works for the next man then all good, Just let me know if its near me and I will dig out my kevlar vest and hat!

Sorry for the long post, didn't mean it to go on so long and I have condensed several years of non lead testing into the above. Happy to answer any questions either via the thread or PM.

Kind Regards Bob.



I was an under stalker on a large estate in Dorset for a total of 9 years culling aprox 600 Sika Hinds per year. For the first 4 years I used my .243 along side the Head stalker who also used a .243. We both used 95GN BT's myself using Hornaday SST's and "J" using Nosler. During that period we experienced little problems despite the myth that "SIKA are hard to kill". My experience is that like all other species of deer if you place the projectile ( a good projectile) in the correct area they will die. I know that the internet will say different but that is just my findings having culled in excess of 4000 or so.

The estate then took on the idea of going lead free due to some poorly written paper by some bearded flip-flop wearing yoghurt muncher who had zero knowledge about ballistics, rifles, ricochet templates etc. Unfortunately this idea was given credence by an equably poor written magazine article about how wonderful lead free ammo was.

We presented our case to the estate manager explaining the increased risk of ricochet backed up by the fact that when we were both serving Military any solid copper projectile was deemed prohibited even on a range that was cleared for 155 Howitzer direct fire. We presented data collected by the German government regards the use of non lead projectiles for hunting (who also at that time were going down the lead free route) A decision in which they did a complete U turn after several fatalities and near misses due to ricochet and thru and thru passes.

We were eventually told that is the way it is, If we didn't want the job we could resign.... Testing started that first year using Barnes TSX projectiles in .243 80GN as these at the time were the only available projectiles. Accuracy was pin point absolutely hole on hole when load testing however we noted that as expected we did have ricochets even from a soft sand berm. We again approached the estate manager with our concerns only for it to fall on deaf ears.

After much discussion between J, myself and an independent ballistic specialist it was decided to proceed with caution onto the live tissue testing. More animals were passed up within that first two months than were culled. This was due to our fear of ricochet so we not only ensuring a safe backstop we had to take into consideration any risk of ricochet. Thankfully one of our neighbours was a military range so when the range was active we could be mildly confident the the sea that surrounded part of the estate would be clear of shipping as the range had a danger area monitored by the radar station. This area of the estate was almost the only part that we could feel a little more confident.

As far as the live tissue testing was concerned this was disastrous, we experienced a difficult time, We started to stalk together so one could act as spotter as the physical reaction was so slight and sometimes non apparent. Strike scenes were bereft of pins, paint and left very little evidence of a strike at all. The spotters job became all important. Very often blood would only become apparent after a significant distance. All data was recorded via GPS from shot site to recovery. From memory (I have the data stored at home) the longest track was almost 600M and the hind had been hit double lung. All carcasses upon inspection showed almost no expansion (even a shoulder shot) and little if any transfer of energy.

Due to us working in close partnership with a University who where conducting several studies into Sika deer we were supplying them with lots of data collected during both before the cull and the gralloch giving every available weight and measurement from the carcass, This allowed us the opportunity to have some carcasses (picked at random by the university) placed within an MRI scanner to examine the wound channel within the carcasses. This backed up with science that plain and simple there was little or no expansion. It were as if the deer had been stabbed with a 6mm spike.
It was suggested that the Barnes TSX needed to be driven at max velocity to get the best from them, Well I was pushing them so fast that I burnt my Brl out that first year, Any faster and they would have needed a launch code

.

By the next season the NEW TTSX had arrived, alas this proved no better. Secretly without the knowledge of the head stalker or the estate I had reverted back to lead projectiles keeping a mag loaded in my pocket with the non lead rounds should the head stalker want to see, He never did ask and to this day I'm sure he knew but preferred to remain able to deny any knowledge. I didn't like to deceive my friend like this but such was the lack of confidence with the lead free options available at that time.

Shortly afterwards with the lead free argument gathering pace newer projectiles became available from more manufacturers, Enter Hornady GMX and Nosler E-Tip, At first we could only find a supply of these in .308 cal so in for a variation for .308, I used .308 for many years but had switched to .243 some years earlier and had used it to good effect from everything from Roe to Reds, with the CORRECT projectile and accurate shooting the .243 in my opinion punches well above its weight.
Testing began with Hornaday GMX in 150.5 GN heads, Accuracy was found to be best around middle of the road velocity's. Too fast and the shots seemed to string vertically. (This was confirmed by several of my shooting friends using a variety of rifles and load data.

Live tissue tests were good, Animals showed good reaction to shots having good deep and wide wound channels, Unfortunately we had lost the ability to have the carcass inspected by the MRI test but that was not needed as the wounds were clear to see.The Nosler E Tips performed in much the same way but didn't seem fussy regards the velocity of the projectile. The increased ricochet risk was still present but much reduced in comparison to the Barnes projectiles. Just out of curiosity we loaded some Barnes in .308, Again absolute hole on hole accuracy......and poor terminal effect on live tissue. As a foot note to this I was speaking a few years later to another ballistic specialist who's opinion was that the Barnes head both TSX & later the TTSX was best suited and designed for North American game where deep penetration and the ability to punch thru thicker hide and denser bone structures where the key and where typically there are wider or more open areas the risk of injury from ricochet is reduced.

This is not meant to be a "Bash Barnes Bullets" thread, it is just a reflection of what my findings were at that time with the non lead projectiles that were available at the time (11 years ago).
I have lots of carcass pictures and MRI prints somewhere at home (somewhere after 2 house moves and a divorce) and will post them if there is interest to see them.

My advice would be if you don't need to use non toxic / lead free projectiles then don't. But everyone is free to make up there own minds and use what they wish, If it works for the next man then all good, Just let me know if its near me and I will dig out my kevlar vest and hat!

Sorry for the long post, didn't mean it to go on so long and I have condensed several years of non lead testing into the above. Happy to answer any questions either via the thread or PM.

Kind Regards Bob.

 

[Wwm]

Bob

thanks for the input. I would be interested in seeing the scans, if you can find them. Please pm me if you do. Ed's views on the current range of projectiles are really interesting and he reinforces what you say about the 'right projectile in the right place.'

Peter

 

[Laurie]

Bob, what you say on ricochet risks is very interesting. Although I knew of them, I hadn't realised they're as great as that.

 

[bobthenailer]

Hi Laurie,
Unfortunately we found that they (Barnes both TSX & TTSX) bounced like the proverbial bouncy thing. Rather like a .22 Rimfire on Stony ground. We found ourselves experiencing the dreaded WIIIIIIINNNNG noise from what would have been a perfectly acceptable soft backstop. This was normally followed by the sick feeling deep in the pit of your stomach and waiting for the telephone to ring or Blue light to be seen. A horrible feeling as anyone who has experienced this feeling will attest.

During the time that we had to use the non toxic particularly early on in .243 we passed up so many culling opportunity beasts as we just dare not fire for fear of ricochet. The only way we could with any confidence was as previously mentioned on the military range boarder where rounds are routinely bounced over the hill and out to sea, hence the no vessel zone and radar.

The ricochet risk in my mind is just too much. I'm sure that there maybe new products on the market as 10 plus years since we conducted trials is a lifetime in R & D speak.

Kind regards Bob.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

Bob, what you say on ricochet risks is very interesting. Although I knew of them, I hadn't realised they're as great as that.

I do not believe they are.
Any round can ricochet and does, spend some time in the Target butts of ANY club or MOD range and you will see them, hear them and feel bullets hitting the mantle and spinning over the top into the backstop!


Ricochet potential is higher in any scenario where mass is maintained post impact
Solid Lead rimfire rounds and Blackpowder ball and solids at low velocities are well known for this.

What they do not tend to do is "zing" audibly as often as jacketed bullets or those with sharp edges post impact (the part that creates the audible ricochet as it spins through the air).
Large angle change ricochets are more often associated with bullets hitting solid, immovable objects that deform the projectile without allowing energy absorption of the impact.
Large Rocks. Walls, Concrete
Not common on Ranges in the arc of fire....

ANY shot should be considered a ricochet risk and shooting deer in rocky areas it is almost impossible to have a shot without a ricochet risk.

NRA ban on using solids should not be assumed to based on there being a clear indication and knowledge of higher ricochet potential
It is in place because no such information exists, hence the recent studies.

Also not to be confused with MOD "ban" on using "expanding" ammunition or "Solids" both of which happen in club use and by the MOD themselves.
The restriction is in place by the MOD on the other users of their ranges to limit the risk profile.
Numerous manufacturers in both the UK and overseas produce monolithic projectiles for the UK military and are tested on MOD ranges, either Field Firing Template ranges or a Barrack Ranges.

[FONT=&quot]NRA chief executive Andrew Mercer:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"Monometallic bullets, other than solid lead, are banned from use on Bisley (and Pirbright) ranges. This is because solid non-lead bullets are an unknown quantity which may have greatly increased ricochet characteristics which could exceed the available air danger height, which cannot be increased due to the proximity of Farnborough Airport. Regular Bisley shooters will know that light aircraft and small jets overfly the ranges as they approach Farnborough to land.
Moreover, research to establish new safe ricochet parameters for new bullets in common calibres is likely to be very expensive and very time-consuming, meaning civilian shooters will be unable to shoot before it is published and accepted by range operators, such as the MoD, and their insurers."

[/FONT]
Unfortunately we seem to have a scenario where if one brand of one style of bullet doesn't perform, then the entire range of that style of bullets is tarred with the same brush.
We do not have the same approach when we get a runner, POI shift, failed penetration, ricochet, huge carcase damage with a jacketed lead bullet
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]Shoot enough game and you will see a higher number of all the negative aspects.

An interesting analogy is the reputation the 6.5x55 has for producing runners in small to medium sized deer in the UK.
Common on the continent and used for moose and boar alike.
Bullets in factory ammo are often 140-156gr, with reduced MV and loaded with bullet designs like the Norma Oryx, Vulcan and Alaska
Hard bullets designed for larger, thicker skinned game.
Not hard to see why they don't perform on thin skinned light game like roe, fallow and red


In my opinion one of the fundamental errors in bullet design for use on game is to design it like a target round and hope that it performs in its terminal stage.
99% of UK deer are shot at sub 300m
We do not need high BC, boat tail, ballistic tips, small meplat, high calibre radial ogive (VLD) bullets to shoot deer at 100-300m

High BC sells bullets ....it doesn't kill deer

We do need reliable expansion and "killing power" at low and high TERMINAL velocity
ideally in the range of 2000-3000fps without pencilling or breaking up

I have tested and personally used in the field a large range of non lead offerings including several that are not on the UK market
Many of the current non lead bullet designs can and have suffered from:
- Poor expansion at lower terminal velocities (the reason manufacturers run light for calibre bullets or higher MV spec ammunition)
- Wound channel deviation - Less easy to diagnose but statistically significant non linear shot path
- Poor penetration or Break up when confronted with large boned game

but as one size does not fit all
not all bullets are designed equally for all purposes
You wouln't use a bullet designed for thick skinned heavy game
match you bullet, cartridge and velocities to the game you aim to kill

 

[bobthenailer]

Hi Ed,
You are correct that every round fired has the risk element of ricochet, deflection thru and thru pass etc. I always tell new stalkers / shooters that you cannot take it (The projectile) back. Once you send it on its way it's gone and has the potential to destroy what it impacts with without prejudice or regret. It is an inanimate object that will react with whatever gets in it way.

For me in my experience the projectiles that were available at my time of testing which was over 11 years ago were just not up to scratch neither in terminal performance or in the manner in which we experienced ricochet.

Now as I have said no doubt things have moved on in leaps and bounds and I respect that your findings maybe different to mine, I don't claim to have the end say in anything be it right or wrong.
For what its worth I still cull more deer than I would care to admit and I use a 123Gn Soft point in .308 that many would have you believe would be no good. The BC is very low but I don't care...Its the right projectile for the purpose of killing game, energy transference is very high, wound channel is deep.

Now for me this has gone away from the OP question and I wouldn't wish for you to think that I was against non toxic projectiles, particularly as you are a vendor of them. As I have said things have moved on and I'm sure that if I replicated my tests of 11 years ago my finding may well be different.

Everyone is free to use whatever they wish and my findings are just the passage of information from my own tests and are in no way meant to cause you or anyone else to have doubt in there chosen projectile.

I have said enough on this subject and rarely post anything in open forums. For me I have said my bit.

Kind regards Bob.