Basc could do nothing they were the catalyst for the ban, they capitulated their position when they introduced the five year voluntary lead ban for live quarry shooting.
Lead ban date announced
- Thread starter Mike L
- Start date
Basc could do nothing they were the catalyst for the ban, they capitulated their position when they introduced the five year voluntary lead ban for live quarry shooting.
A free machining brass has up to 3.5% lead, and on average 3%.
For example, CW613N.
This means you are right on the borderline even with brass bullets, e.g. Fox's,
The cases contain lead, but are picked up by anyone with manners, so guess they don't count.
Primers contain lead styphnate. A large primer has 0.5 to 1 gram (seems a lot as the size is small, but lead is heavy), the formula is C6HN3O8Pb, so are they measuring 3% by weight or by mol? By mol, 1 atom of Pb, over (6+1+3+8+1) is 1/19, which is over 5%.
Last edited:
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
maybe not full brass bullets, but mix brass and copper at something like 80/20 and it should be good I’d imagine.
Aren’t fox bullets exactly like that
Key words you've used there are "has up to".
I'm interested to know who already has done the exact metallurgic compositions for all these non-lead options and who in the future will also be verifying and ensuring this...
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
I reckon it will have to be declared on import certificates for non U.K. made bullets to ensure alignment to regulations.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
The Spirit of Jimmy Dean...
RJD
Well-Known Member
Disappointing to see the failures to deliver exemptions which were widely self congratulated over.
The question now has to be how can BASC, CA etc be held to account for their dereliction of duty to members which is at best negligent and arguably fraudulent? These old boys clubs with secret handshakes who demonstrate nothing but contempt for members whilst actively promoting the circle jerk with publications and YouTube channels they sponsor (using members money) or failing business run by the offspring of the old boys club that they poured members money into..
My issue isn’t with non tox, copper is fine in rifles in bigger calibers and although steel doesn’t work on game bismuth is fine too, it’s how the organisations behave, particularly BASC, whilst congratulating themselves for doing a good job.
The question now has to be how can BASC, CA etc be held to account for their dereliction of duty to members which is at best negligent and arguably fraudulent? These old boys clubs with secret handshakes who demonstrate nothing but contempt for members whilst actively promoting the circle jerk with publications and YouTube channels they sponsor (using members money) or failing business run by the offspring of the old boys club that they poured members money into..
My issue isn’t with non tox, copper is fine in rifles in bigger calibers and although steel doesn’t work on game bismuth is fine too, it’s how the organisations behave, particularly BASC, whilst congratulating themselves for doing a good job.
Woodenbeam
Well-Known Member
I think there’s a bit more justification for the two items you’ve listed than banning 243 lead bullets through rifles to control an ever expanding deer population
They are going on about lead in the meat but they need to sort the lead water pipe out first surely that’s more damaging anything to try and screw the people with guns over
Mathematically, that wouldn't count. If you set a limit of 6.17 then that means anything up to 6.17499999999etc.. Alternatively they could have set the limit at 6.170000mm if the intention was to prevent 6.1722.
Ironic coming from someone who loves telling everyone else what to do.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
And reg. the .243, you can massage the numbers from here to eternity, it’s not excluded and you’ll have to shoot non-toxic.
If somehow via a John Nash moment, someone could calculate that it’s excluded and it’s in fact smaller than what the calipers say (
), the rules would be immediately changed to sweep it up with the regulation. Pointless trying.
.243 sucks anyway,..
If somehow via a John Nash moment, someone could calculate that it’s excluded and it’s in fact smaller than what the calipers say (
), the rules would be immediately changed to sweep it up with the regulation. Pointless trying..243 sucks anyway,..
Never. I've been instructed by local govt to use lead on my roof rather than any of the various alternatives.
Wildlife also eats lead from rooftops too.
lotuseater
Well-Known Member
I predict the cost of copper ammo will drop as the demand and production rises in anticipation of the ban.
I predict that lead ammo will get increasingly less available at the same time as manufacturers transition along with shooters.
I predict that projectile and load development will result in a workable .243 copper cartridge in the coming 2 or 3 years.
I predict that lead ammo will get increasingly less available at the same time as manufacturers transition along with shooters.
I predict that projectile and load development will result in a workable .243 copper cartridge in the coming 2 or 3 years.
nf-fuse
Well-Known Member
I don't know about that. If Europe and the USA don't take up copper it won't ever get very cheap or have the variety that lead currently does.. I would think anyway.
Like most things...we are going to be forced to use it ..end of.
Copper kills fine if you put the bullet in the right place
Copper is crap if shooting gongs...leave a crap little copper coloured smear on the target...lead leaves a nice dent
Copper is expensive compared to lead but since we are all rich and elite the general public dont give a f**k about our plight
Being forced down this route is cack but its a done deal now (unfortunately)
Copper kills fine if you put the bullet in the right place
Copper is crap if shooting gongs...leave a crap little copper coloured smear on the target...lead leaves a nice dent
Copper is expensive compared to lead but since we are all rich and elite the general public dont give a f**k about our plight
Being forced down this route is cack but its a done deal now (unfortunately)
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
I agree with you.
As regards the .243 there are already of good options on the market that work and work well, ie are accurate and kill well.
There are two challenges with the 243.
1) in Scotland there was a requirement to use a minimum of 100gn bullet. 243s are on the edge of stability with a 100gn, and with a longer copper bullet, this would be often be beyond the limits of stability.
Scotland changed the legislation making an 80gn bullet the minimum- this has been the case for the last couple of years.
2) Short barrels. There is a fad for short barrels with many going as short as 16”. The 243 is a small high velocity cartridge that benefits from a longer 22 to 24” barrel to achieve full velocity with most factory loads on the market. Shortening the barrel reduces velocities quite substantially (50 fps per inch is often quoted), and often to a level where they do reach velocities required for min muzzle energy.
This is not just with copper bullets, but with all bullets. So a 243 that doesnt meet muzzle energy with copper probably won’t do so with lead bullets either.
2 solutions. 1) don’t shorten the barrel - every barrel shortening is the choice of the owner and / or 2) work up loads using a faster powder so that you get the velocity.
The likes of RWS do make short barrel cartridges, but these are in European legal big game cartridges such as 308. Legal big game is typically min of 6.5mm and 2,000 joules of energy at 100m, so unlikely available in 243.
As with Heym SR20, there's workable .243 80gr loads that meet muzzle energy requirements...
Would help if organisations like BASC get their info right on it though... Their chap was apparently saying at one of the "talk stalking" events in Scotland that the 80gr loads were borderline compared to the 100gr... Then Ed from Edinburgh rifles apparently came on and had to correct them that it's the other way around
Similar threads
