Copper bullets - the limitations

I am surprised by your findings of failure below 2400fps. The same gel tests used for lead core bullets indicate sufficient expansion and energy delivered well below that. Peregrine claim 1600fps for instance...but the consensus of anecdotal reports on the internet that I have seen put the Barnes at around 2,000. Could you expand on your 2,400fps findings a bit?

I understood that the main advantage and the reasoning behind the relatively light for calibre lead free bullets is the terminal energy derived from being able to accelerate/propel them at higher velocity...it is more efficient to deliver energy by velocity than mass?

"The kinetic energy of a moving object is directly proportional to its mass and directly proportional to the square of its velocity. This means that an object with twice the mass and equal speed will have twice the kinetic energy, while an object with equal mass and twice the speed will have quadruple the kinetic energy"

The design of the bullet...the size of the hollow point and / or dum dum style splitting of the Nielsen type will have more of an effect on the minimum velocity required for expansion, but the energy will obviously be delivered in different ways...over a wider area...if the bullets are designed to fragment.

Alan
As I said in the post, different people will have different ideas about what velocity they are effective at. My personal findings are around the 2400 fps mark. I know some of the kiwis are saying 2450 to 2600, I know a few on this site that agree the 2400 number. I wouldn't trust the information that Barnes publish, they are trying to sell you bullets.

The reasoning behind light for calibre monolithic bullets is 1. if they are not light for calibre they are too long to stabilise in most standard twist rifles - look at scrumbags post above, two 90gr bullets and the E-Tip is 109 thou longer than the lead. A quick calculation and the stability factor in a 243Win 10 twist barrel is 1.02 - it will not stabilise. 2. They will not reliably expand below a certain velocity ( I'm saying 2400 fps) so they have to be light so you can drive them quickly.

I'm not sure about the Neilson bullets breaking up either. The petals don't worry me but the very aerodynamic shaft thats left exiting at who knows what speed and angle does. It will certainly kill the deer quicker but what other potential problems are you letting yourself in for?

You're quite right. For normal stalking ranges of sub 200 yds, providing you do go light for calibre bullets the monolithics can all do a good job. My interest was in whether they can be made to work for those who stretch those "normal" ranges a bit. I would think the likes of @dodgyknees and his kiwi mates are all dreading a lead ban as at the moment their type of hunting couldn't happen.
 
I think there is an interesting point to this.

Something like a 6mm 95 gr Hornady SST shot with muzzle velocity at 3,000fps (2,000 ftlbs ME) impacts at 400yds (Long shot for deer stalking) with a speed of 1,990 fps and 837 ftlbs of Energy

If we look at the same bullet type, 140gr 6.5mm SST shot at 2550 fps MV (again 2,000 ftlbs ME and slow for quite a few standard chamberings) impacts at 400yds with a speed of 1900 fps and carries energy of 1,127 ftlbs.

Muzzle velocity is not always the answer. I fear that 6mm bullets for hunting in non-lead will not be good friends.

I'd be interested to see some independent data on how the various non-lead bullets open up at different speeds.

Scrummy
The issue here is that you can trust a lead bullet to expand 1990 fps and do some fantastic terminal work. In fact many would say that a 1900 fps TV is where the SST does it's best work and what it's designed for. You cant trust a copper bullet to expand sufficiently at 1900 fps so it doesn't matter how much energy it's carrying, if it pencils through without expanding you've got a long walk ahead of you.
 
The reasoning behind light for calibre monolithic bullets is 1. if they are not light for calibre they are too long to stabilise in most standard twist rifles - look at scrumbags post above, two 90gr bullets and the E-Tip is 109 thou longer than the lead. A quick calculation and the stability factor in a 243Win 10 twist barrel is 1.02 - it will not stabilise. 2.
And that reasoning there my friend is why when I wanted a nice light stalking rifle I ordered a 257 Roberts rather than a .243W.
 
I have been doing a lot of thinking about copper bullets recently. I’m putting a new rifle together and want to make sure it’s future proof come the lead ban which whether we like it or not is probably inevitable within the next 5 years. I’ve also read a few threads where people are obviously confused about the switch and how to do it most effectively.

Here is my take on it all. I’m sure some will disagree but this is the logic I’m happy with.

I started by running some numbers. I know through my own experience with GMX, TSX, TTSX and LRX bullets that I need to achieve a TV of 2400 fps if they are going to expand reliably and kill deer quickly and humanely. The bullet manufacturers bang in about 2000 fps expansion but in my experience this is not true. Plenty of others have corroborated this, some even feel 2400 is a bit low. I don’t believe it matters whether you are talking about Barnes, Hornady or Noser, all their copper bullets behave in a very similar way.

So if you’re going to maximise the effective range of your rifle with a copper bullet you need to reduce the weight of the bullet you’re using, probably to the smallest available in your calibre, to launch it as fast as possible and maximise the range at which it drops below 2400 fps.

My humble 7mm08 currently launches a 150gr ABLR at 2740 fps. It’s still carrying 1000ftlb of energy at 700m and doing 1750 fps which I trust an ABLR to expand at. Now I’m not one to shoot deer at 700m, but I have shot injured deer at over 500m and like to have the option to do it reliably. I also enjoy whacking the odd steel plate at range.

Switch to the 110gr TTSX, the fastest bullet I can get in 7mm, and I can launch it at 3150 fps. It hits the 2400 fps threshold beyond which I don’t trust it to expand properly at just 250m. So my effective killing range has dropped from 700m to 250m through the change to copper bullets. It’s also got the aerodynamics of a brick.

I ran the numbers on my 280ai. That usually shoots a 160 ABLR. It’s still carrying 1000 ftlb’s and 1700 fps at 950m - way beyond the range at which you would shoot deer, but they are the numbers. Switch to a 120 TTSX launched at 3400 fps and it hits the 2400 fps barrier at just 400m. Scary stuff. Our effective ranges are going to take a hammering come the change.

The real danger is that someone who doesn’t understand the difference between copper and lead, of which there will be plenty, will just switch the 165gr lead bullet in their 308Win for a 165gr copper one. They will launch it at around the same velocity, call it 2600 fps. The bullet will perform badly and the deer will run at ranges over 100m. That’s if it get’s to the deer at all as the additional length of the 165gr copper over the usual lead bullet means his standard 12 twist barrel fails to stabilise it and it’s going sideways.

There are two major issues with copper currently.
  • As BC is a factor of mass, as well as cross sectional area and form, copper bullets of the same length and design as lead bullets will always have a lower BC due to the lower density of copper. You could design a copper bullet to have the same BC as a lead bullet of the same mass, but it would be significantly longer and as a result be unlikely to stabilise in most peoples standard twist barrels. The lower BC of todays copper bullets compared to their lead equivalents means they scrub off speed and energy much more quickly, reducing the effective range.

  • Reliable expansion below 2400 fps is a major design issue. If we could trust them to expand down to the 1600 fps that we trust our lead bullets to (lower in some cases) then their effective range would be extended significantly. This is going to take a major redesign of how they work. At the moment Nosler, Hornady and Barnes all have almost identical designs and all perform equally badly. GS Custom in SA have taken a different approach and reports are that they do expand much more effectively and reliably than the other manufacturers, but I have no experience of them. I will try some before long as a limited selection of designs is available through the Dutch importer.
So for copper to really replace our lead bullets like for like the manufacturers need to get their **** together and design bullets that expand reliably at 1600 fps, design longer bullets that give us an equivalent BC to our lead ones and work with the rifle manufacturers to deliver us faster twist barrels in their rifles to stabilise them.

When they achieve that none of us will have any reason to complain about a lead ban, because copper will perform as well as our old bullets. Until then there is going to be a lot of resetting of range limits and a significant change of bullet weight used if we are to continue to cull our deer humanely.

For normal stalking ranges of sub 200m, providing we are changing our bullet weights down to the smallest available in our calibre (243 to 80gr, 270 to 110gr, 30cal to 130 gr) we should all be alright. But if you want to extend those ranges you’re going to have to know what the TV is for your rifle with your bullet of choice and make yourself happy that your bullet will expand sufficiently at that speed.
You think too much!

load them and shoot them, treat them no different to lead and get on with the job!

I really can’t understand what all the fuss is about, i find it all very bizarre 😂
 
Last edited:
You're just trying to keep yourself in work 🤣🤣🤣
Not at all, I’ve tracked very few deer shot with non toxic, only 3 of my own 10 years ago.

as you well know, I shot mon toxic for many years before I witnessed you for your L2.

so I’ve got a fair few years experience 15 now in total.
 
Last edited:
Well I have been educated a little more today. Thanks for the various suggestions and PM's. It appears that a few smaller bullet companies have been working hard on solving the problem and come up with solutions that do work down to lower TV's. GS Custom I knew of but they are tough to get hold of. I didn't know about DK Bullets, Neilson bullets or Peregrine bullets.

The PeregrineVLR-4 bullets look most interesting, with plenty of evidence from customers that they do indeed work reliably and effectively down to 1600 fps and they have a reasonable BC to boot. I'm going to give them a try I think. They make a 6mm 84gr that looks like it will be ideal for everything up to Red hinds.

Why the main stream manufacturers can't innovate like this and produce better bullets is beyond me, leaving the hard work to the smaller bespoke bullet makers, probably to copy them at a later date when they have been proven. Well my money is going to go to the little guy who has done the original thinking.
 
Muzzle velocity is not always the answer. I fear that 6mm bullets for hunting in non-lead will not be good friends.
Your energy comparison would be best with bullets from the same chambering to get more of an understanding of the velocity mass relationship between lead core and lead free

From the VIHT tables

150gr Sierra hpbt BC 0.397 MV2831 Energy @M=2670 @100=2260 @200=1909
110gr Barnes TTSX BC 0.296 MV3225 Energy @M=2541 @100=2052 @200=1645

At 265yards the TTSX is still above Nigel's cut off point at 2408fps and by my reckoning the energy is where you want it...scrubbed off by drag inside the animal...not residing in the bullet's mass.

I'd be interested to see some independent data on how the various non-lead bullets open up at different speeds.

Scrummy

There are lots of comparative gel tests on YouTube....What would you accept as an independent source? Have you found any independent data sources of lead core bullets at different speeds to compare to?


Well I have been educated a little more today. Thanks for the various suggestions and PM's. It appears that a few smaller bullet companies have been working hard on solving the problem and come up with solutions that do work down to lower TV's. GS Custom I knew of but they are tough to get hold of. I didn't know about DK Bullets, Neilson bullets or Peregrine bullets.

The PeregrineVLR-4 bullets look most interesting, with plenty of evidence from customers that they do indeed work reliably and effectively down to 1600 fps and they have a reasonable BC to boot. I'm going to give them a try I think. They make a 6mm 84gr that looks like it will be ideal for everything up to Red hinds.

Why the main stream manufacturers can't innovate like this and produce better bullets is beyond me, leaving the hard work to the smaller bespoke bullet makers, probably to copy them at a later date when they have been proven. Well my money is going to go to the little guy who has done the original thinking.
The Peregrines are interesting not least in their seating...no driving bands to speak of just ridges....While you are about it have a look at the LeHigh Defense range...I bought a box of their Controlled Chaos 115gr mono metal which also are claimed to expand/work at lower velocities than others...one of their significant advantages is at £54 for 100 No. they are about half the price of most lead free.

Alan
 
Not at all, I’ve tracked very few deer shot with non toxic, only 3 of my own 10 years ago.

as you well know, I shot mon toxic for many years before I witnessed you for your L2.

so I’ve got a fair few years experience 15 now in total.
What is the typical range you are shooting at?

Cartridge? Deer species?

Would be interesting to know.
 
I have shot many deer with my .300 winmag loaded with Barnes TSX in 180 grain. Fantastically accurate and devastating. Furthest shot has been 215m on fallow. Straight down. Used on reds/Sika and even muntjac it’s been extremely reliable over the last 7 years.
However, it’s been a different story in the load development for my 6.5 x 55. Barnes TSX in 120 grain didn’t work.
Now to try Fox in 123 grain alongside TTSX in 120 grain. Trouble is with Sako Gamehead Pro in 130 grain it’s a tack driver. But that’s lead, and it’s not allowed on one of my grounds so I have to try to develop the copper solution.
Also - my butcher is much keener to take my lead free shot carcasses as the customers are asking for that.
Right or wrong, lead free is inevitable so ...........
 
So I've been using the Nielsen sonic hunt bullets for a while now, load development for my .270: sako brass full length sized, 54.5gr of RS60 at 3.314" OAL chronographed speed at 3058fps with 6.5fps SD

I've knocked over roe and sika out to 200yards and even when shot placement (my fault) wasnt ideal they have expanded and killed the deer on the spot. Really impressed with them and so far have no reason to believe they wouldn't cope with a 300yard shot.

I've also used TTSX 110gr at about 3400fps and shot deer to 250m dropping Hinds on the spot.

I've also used fox 130gr in .308 and no qualms about them either taking roe, sika and big red stags.

Copper/monolithic/whatever you want to call them do work. I'm certainly not anti-lead, and continue to use it where I can. But the day will come where lead for stalking will be gone and those behind the curve will have to catch up.

That's my 2p for what it's worth!
 
What is the typical range you are shooting at?

Cartridge? Deer species?

Would be interesting to know.
Lowland reds through to the humble muntjac 270win 50 - 300m

presently using the fox Hunter factory rounds ans accounted for 2 muntjac and a roe this last this arvo, in fact now in the queue at the chippy on the way home (1 at almost point blank, the other at 150 and a roe at 280)
 
Well I have been educated a little more today. Thanks for the various suggestions and PM's. It appears that a few smaller bullet companies have been working hard on solving the problem and come up with solutions that do work down to lower TV's. GS Custom I knew of but they are tough to get hold of. I didn't know about DK Bullets, Neilson bullets or Peregrine bullets.

The PeregrineVLR-4 bullets look most interesting, with plenty of evidence from customers that they do indeed work reliably and effectively down to 1600 fps and they have a reasonable BC to boot. I'm going to give them a try I think. They make a 6mm 84gr that looks like it will be ideal for everything up to Red hinds.

Why the main stream manufacturers can't innovate like this and produce better bullets is beyond me, leaving the hard work to the smaller bespoke bullet makers, probably to copy them at a later date when they have been proven. Well my money is going to go to the little guy who has done the original thinking.
The reason the main stream manufacturers don’t is probably down to the fact that their by far biggest customer (US) doesn’t need/want anything other than what they already have - which apparently works for them. Sadly this side of the pond is running away with itself, as usual.
Just my humble opinion.
🦊🦊
 
The GS Custom HV are designed to expand down to 1000 fps

I’ve used 95 g Hv and 103g HV many times in various clearances, removal jobs and general stalking using 6.5/284 and 6.5/47

I’ve had to take four follow up shots with them

Distances from near to far, the follow up being required because of my error not the bullet
 
The GS Custom HV are designed to expand down to 1000 fps

I’ve used 95 g Hv and 103g HV many times in various clearances, removal jobs and general stalking using 6.5/284 and 6.5/47

I’ve had to take four follow up shots with them

Distances from near to far, the follow up being required because of my error not the bullet
I would love to use the GSC 75gr in 6mm but Teimens don't have them and they don't think they can get them. Their only option available is the 62gr and I think that's just a bit too light. They also cost €64 plus shipping & duty from Holland, probably £80 by the time they get here. The Peregrines I can get from Ed at £48 a box.
 
I also believe yewtree fieldsports have just launched their 6mm copper bullets, frangible hollow points with plans to R&D 6.5 and .30cal in the near future. British made, certainly worth a look at for guys with 6mm's
 
Lowland reds through to the humble muntjac 270win 50 - 300m

presently using the fox Hunter factory rounds ans accounted for 2 muntjac and a roe this last this arvo, in fact now in the queue at the chippy on the way home (1 at almost point blank, the other at 150 and a roe at 280)
So you’re operating within what I would call the “effective” range, though 300m and beyond is getting a bit iffy. Nigel is asking the question about effective range that probably equates to further than what you're shooting them at, assuming you're using a 130gr or similar.

@NigelM’s main discussion point - what is a safe minimum terminal velocity? - is something that has been carefully explored in our little community. And Nigel’s observation of 2,400 ft./sec is bang on. And his later comment about that maybe being a bit low is even more on the money.

This is a vitally important topic when it comes to switching to copper. You have to know the limitations. We have far fewer restrictions than you guys, lots more deer that are easier to access, and people willing to push the envelope in the field, rather than conduct subjective tests on ballistic gel. This evidence is worth a million times more than “anecdotal reports” from the internet.

(Of course, this post is exactly that.)

Having been accused repeatedly of having a problem with people that disagree with me, I’ll say this. I’m not going to argue about what I say next. If you want to argue about it, that's up to you, but it would help me (and others) respect your views if you able to show that you are regularly in the field shooting deer with all kinds of bullets at the same kind of ranges. If you’re not, then you don’t know, so why bother arguing?

.270 WSM, 129gr Barnes LRX, MV 3,250 ft./sec

The sample size is around 45 red deer, mostly meat hinds and young stags. Field observations by the main shooter (mid 70s, 60yrs experience) and his son (40s, 25yrs+ experience), is that there is a clear cut off in terminal effectiveness between 375-425m. This equates to an impact velocity of around 2,400 ft./sec. All shots are included in the arc of quartering towards to quartering away. Animals shot at around 400m or greater run further, and have a much higher probability of being lost. Wound channel analysis of recovered deer shot in the 350-450m range shows the Barnes bullet “just zips through”, doing minimal damage at ~2,300 - 2,400 ft./sec. Interestingly, the one observation was that the Sierra 77gr TMK is considerably more effective at dropping mature red deer than the Barnes LRX.

These two guys no longer use Barnes, and have reverted back to copper jacketed lead bullets. It was an interesting experiment, but the LRX failed to deliver to its promise.

Within their effective range, the bullet performs as expected, no problem.

Where we do have a problem, is that the effective range is considerably less than some manufacturers claim.
 
The hard truth to all bullet designs is that they are all a compromise in one way or another . There is no perfect all around projectile , every design will perform better under a certain set of circumstances . Choose a bullet that performs the best under the conditions you expect to encounter . I like Barnes X bullets for some hunting , I also like hard cast , flat nosed , lead bullets in my 45/70 if something is intent on stomping or tearing me apart at close range . In short , do your research and choose accordingly , there are no bad bullets , just bad choices IMHO .

AB
 
The GS Custom HV are designed to expand down to 1000 fps
When I read this Andy I thought nope, no way, must be a typo. So I did some digging and had a chat with a couple of fellas.

This isn't a crack at you in any shape or form, so please take it as simply looking at the source of the claim, because I can see where you got it from.

Go to: GS Custom FAQ Expansion and Weight Retention

3. GS Custom HV Bullets

Expanding monometallic bullets have been found to be unreliable up to now. In many cases, hollow point monometallic bullets would act like solids on soft game with bad results. To eliminate this problem entirely, HV bullets are designed to expand reliably from as low as 1600 fps....


Can't argue with the first two sentences. The expansion initiation of 1600fps is interesting, for a monometallic bullet. Now read further down the page to paragraph #5:

It has been proven that a high velocity flat fronted cylinder shape will leave a larger primary wound channel than a slower, double caliber mushroom. HV bullets are therefore designed to start mushrooming reliably from much lower speeds than most other premium bullets, typically from around 1000fps. Two to four centimeters of penetration is all that is required to fully expand an HV bullet.

So which is it? 1600fps or 1000fps?

I'm going to give the guys at GS Custom the benefit of the doubt, and assume they've made a simple typo in paragraph #5, and that it should also read 1600 fps. I've emailed and asked them to corroborate.

Hopefully they'll get back to me soon.

Now a comment or two about expansion.

A great many of the photos we are shown by boutique monometallic bullet manufacturers, in support of their expansion velocity claims, show what looks to me like nothing more than tip deformation. I've been in touch directly with a couple of the manufacturers mentioned frequently on here, and been sent some interesting material. I appreciate the guys taking the time to do this, but some of the claims of "expansion" are tenuous at best.

Tip deformation and wound channels is something I'm extremely familiar with, from using hard bullets at low speeds in .44 Rem Mag and downloaded .308 Win, when pig hunting over dogs. I know intrinsically what a hard bullet that only suffers tip deformation will do to an animal when shot into the shoulder, or worse still in the crease. The bullet will over-penetrate through the animal, it may tumble, and the animal will run. Sometimes you'll get lucky and get the heart and the animal will run but not far. (Those of you that have stuck pigs with a pig sticking knife know how long it takes a bailed pig to die from several deep cuts into the heart.) These are lessons learned from years of experimentation with regular copper-jacketed lead bullets, hard cast lead bullets and exposed lead tip copper-jacketed flat nose bullets, at MVs of 1300-1600fps.

I don't know why the monometallic manufacturers make these claims of "expansion" at long ranges. Why risk the comeback when it doesn't work? One of them said to me, you know what? Our bullets are really designed to be used at normal stalking distances, 300m max, not medium or long range. They will deform at longer range but it gets a bit iffy. Words to that effect. To me, the need to try and prove that these bullets will work on game at low impact velocities is a real gamble. They know that 95% of the guys that buy their bullets will never test that, and of the 5% that might probably won't fess up to the inevitable fails anyway.

So I totally get what Nigel is saying. Beware. These bullets are a big risk on game at extended ranges. You have to be absolutely on the money to make your shot count, you just don't have the leeway a soft, expanding / fragmenting bullet like an A-Max or GameKing gives you, not even close. Use them at conventional stalking ranges.... happy days! I just wish the BS would be eliminated and the manufacturers stop trying to be all things to all people. These monometallics are not that at all.
 
I think simply put is the technology needed with regards to non lead bullet design has a bit to go. I am not sure if it ever will be anywhere near on par with lead. The bullet manufacturers cannot change the physical property of copper compared to the physical properties of lead. There is good reason why our fore fathers used lead as a projectile since the invention of firearms, development of lead bullets has happened over very long time.

I am forced to use non lead ammo in a 270. I have settled on 110gr bullet but have kept shot max circa 300m. Having used a 270 on a daily basis the best bullets(for killing) I ever found was the 130gr sst's and 140gr ballistic tips. If I had the choice I would still be using these.

I also use a 6.5-284 and 6.5×47 for occasional use. I use 140eld and 123 sst's largely because they have high bc's, I know they kill well and I can.
 
Back
Top