Where’s this drive copper fast thing come from?
- Thread starter big ears
- Start date
You shot it at 70m? The reason to drive it fast is so that you have enough retained velocity at longer ranges for them to perform. If you shoot them all at the end of your barrel then sure, you don’t need to drive them fast
big ears
Well-Known Member
traditionally non toxic ammunition loses performance gradually from 2600 fps down to a cut off point of no longer expanding under 2200fps, opposed to most lead bullets which open up down to 1800fps. So if you are shooting a slower low bc bullet at a mid range of as low as 200+ yards you can get disappointing results, hence the general advice to push them fast. Yes you might get more damage up close, but you then won’t be just poking a hole through a deer at 250 yards. I don’t think anyone has ever said that a slow non toxic bullet won’t blow a decent hole through a deer at 70 yards, especially if you hit a couple of ribs
big ears
Well-Known Member
So these bullets maintain 2200fps out to 275m. That is far enough for most shooters.
Other brands claim lower opening speeds down to 1900fps which would push out even further.
I would suggest most deer are shot 100-150m. Not many over 200m.
On these stats there is no need to push bullets at super fast speeds. Speeds that will be difficult to achieve in many shorter barrel rifles. Speeds that lead to excessive carcass damage.
It’s become a mantra that I’m not sure is based on real life fact rather more theoretical shooting than actual shooting.
These bullets have accounted for deer beyond 200m and have performed as expected with good expansion and that is starting at a low speed
From my real life experience copper does not need to be shot at speeds over 3000fps.
BE
Might be more to do with dropping down the weight scale.?
Looking at the picture, I take it you didn’t need a tracking dog to find it
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
My .308 ‘drives’ a Sako copper 162g at around 2550 fps. Seeing damage to roe at 40-80yds, I would not want more velocity
Nor would I want to shoot a sika stag before dark on a woodland edge at 300m with them.
Copper isn’t better or worse, just different working parameters to lead, adopt/apply accordingly.
Nor would I want to shoot a sika stag before dark on a woodland edge at 300m with them.
Copper isn’t better or worse, just different working parameters to lead, adopt/apply accordingly.
The TTSX is relatively aerodynamic and holds the velocity well compared to some other bullet designs. As has been said expansion has the potential to dramatically decrease when velocity drops with range. The velocity threshold depends on whether you are looking for a bang flop shock effect or just for expansion. If you take the higher threshold for a bang flop then you will reach the threshold of 2400fps at 180m and the lower threshold for expansion with a delayed kill at 270m. Increasing MV to 3000fps increases these ranges to 240 and 325m respectively. Now you may never be in a position to shoot beyond 180m but I shoot occasionally by very kind invitation from a good friend on land where it is very unusual to be able to close the distance below about 220m, often 250m. In this situation the extra velocity is useful. The bleeding you see on your photo is blood clot that has crept between the muscle layers as a result of bleeding. Did the carcass lie on that side for a while before it was bled and was the thoracic stick effective?
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
Look on the bright side, you'll salvage a couple of backstraps and haunches.
Shame we can't use .222 or .223rem for roe, it's pretty much all you need.
Edit; don't know about using copper
Shame we can't use .222 or .223rem for roe, it's pretty much all you need.
Edit; don't know about using copper
big ears
Well-Known Member
I calculate 2400fps to be a bit further out than 180m but that’s not the issue.
Perhaps what we are talking about is horses for courses. Choose the right bullet for what you are shooting.
Agree if you are going out to 200-250m then you need a bullet capable of doing that. This 140gr TTSX going at 2850fps I would trust as it has shot fallow at 230m and CWD over 250m.
Most deer are shot at much less distance than this so the need for super speed is very questionable. IMHO
As to the deer, bled out immediately, carried to larder hung for 2 days at 1°C.
Hit the shoulder on way out and will have severed some big arteries. It’s just capillary action that has caused the bruising which was superficial to the muscle. The reason for the picture was to show the expansion/exit hole.
BE
big ears
Well-Known Member
big ears
Well-Known Member
Lost only about 3lb meat. The bruising looks worse but was superficial and thin layer of muscle over chest wall sacrificed. Took out equivalent if our biceps so wound have hit brachial artery hence blood. Shoulders always go to mince so with careful cutting can salvage quite a bit.Look on the bright side, you'll salvage a couple of backstraps and haunches.
Shame we can't use .222 or .223rem for roe, it's pretty much all you need.
Edit; don't know about using copper
Reason for pucture was to show expansion.
It would be nice to use a 22 cal though I agree.
big ears
Well-Known Member
Agree but then I question this as well. I know this will depend on the capabilities of the calibre you use but for me I use 6.5x55 or 7x57 both have the capabilities of using a wide range of bullet weights and therefore cope with different lengths of bullets which is the issue with copper. In the 7x57 I was shooting 162gr so went to 140gr copper (still a biggish bullet) as to 6.5x55 I’ve used 120gr copper which was a standard lead load. This meant they could be run at speeds not too excessive.
There is a push to run very light bullets for calibre at very high speeds. What I’m questioning is that mantra. Loading copper at lead speeds does work at sensible stalking distances. Choosing the right bullet might be more of the issue rather than the speed you push them at.
Just a thought.
BE
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Things and perceptions don’t change very rapidly in UK hunting.
The first monolithic copper bullets came from the US and were designed as a bullet to provide really good penetration from magnum velocity rifles on large elk and african plains game. They were developed as a solution to bullet failures of traditional cup and core type bullets.
When used on much smaller British deer they had a tendency to pass straight through with little expansion. This was certainly the experience of those using such bullets in the late 1990’s. Fine out of a 270, not so out of a 308.
There is also the myth that you need lots of energy to kill a deer, and lots of energy to make up for the bullet disintegrating as it passes through the body.
When in fact the way any missile kills is by severing major blood vessels and impacting the CNS. Just have a look a bows - energy in the tens of ft lbs, but the kill extremely well.
Fast forward to the current day, there are now many very good designs of monolithics designed to expand well in smaller deer and expand even at impact velocities of 1600 to 1800 fps. Combined with good aerodynamic performance they work out any distance most of us would care to take a deer.
There is also a fixation on bullet weight. Instead we need to think about bullet length. The 130 fox and 140 HIT bullets I am using in my 7x57 and 7x65 are more akin to a 160ish grain lead bullet. Monolithics hold together very well. I expect the little 51gn bullet I use in the 223 would have more than enough penetration to go through the vitals and ruining the day of any deer in the UK.
The first monolithic copper bullets came from the US and were designed as a bullet to provide really good penetration from magnum velocity rifles on large elk and african plains game. They were developed as a solution to bullet failures of traditional cup and core type bullets.
When used on much smaller British deer they had a tendency to pass straight through with little expansion. This was certainly the experience of those using such bullets in the late 1990’s. Fine out of a 270, not so out of a 308.
There is also the myth that you need lots of energy to kill a deer, and lots of energy to make up for the bullet disintegrating as it passes through the body.
When in fact the way any missile kills is by severing major blood vessels and impacting the CNS. Just have a look a bows - energy in the tens of ft lbs, but the kill extremely well.
Fast forward to the current day, there are now many very good designs of monolithics designed to expand well in smaller deer and expand even at impact velocities of 1600 to 1800 fps. Combined with good aerodynamic performance they work out any distance most of us would care to take a deer.
There is also a fixation on bullet weight. Instead we need to think about bullet length. The 130 fox and 140 HIT bullets I am using in my 7x57 and 7x65 are more akin to a 160ish grain lead bullet. Monolithics hold together very well. I expect the little 51gn bullet I use in the 223 would have more than enough penetration to go through the vitals and ruining the day of any deer in the UK.
Last edited:
big ears
Well-Known Member
Exactly this thank you.
Love your analogy with hunting bows.
Early bullets did tend to pass through and there were mutterings of runners and slow kills. Modern ones don’t. Even if driven at “conventional” speeds. IMHO
BE
paulbshooting
Well-Known Member
Yes we all thought lighter and faster was key, it isn't. I am back on lead but when I need to change I will try to go same weight as lead and reasonable speed. What I shoot is 50 to 200m max so not worried about LR ballistics.
You are shooting a highish bc bullet (being a 7mm) at fairly fast speeds. The advice you have heard is to stop people going for a 165gr copper bullet going 2550fps in a .308. Well done, you have proven how well a fairly light for calibre bullet at a high impact velocity can kill a deer. And I think you are wrong about ranges, there are tens of thousands of deer in the uk killed each year past 300m.So these bullets maintain 2200fps out to 275m. That is far enough for most shooters.
Other brands claim lower opening speeds down to 1900fps which would push out even further.
I would suggest most deer are shot 100-150m. Not many over 200m.
On these stats there is no need to push bullets at super fast speeds. Speeds that will be difficult to achieve in many shorter barrel rifles. Speeds that lead to excessive carcass damage.
It’s become a mantra that I’m not sure is based on real life fact rather more theoretical shooting than actual shooting.
These bullets have accounted for deer beyond 200m and have performed as expected with good expansion and that is starting at a low speed
From my real life experience copper does not need to be shot at speeds over 3000fps.
BE
Similar threads
