Did you read the post above about shorts and CB caps?
Copper kills what calibres
- Thread starter David78b
- Start date
shbangsteve
Well-Known Member
It is possible to make a bullet with similar density and characteristics to lead. Tungsten matrix or bismuth. Just would cost a bit more.
You just said that currently they weren’t very accurate.
This, in and of itself, tells us no more than that nineteenth century technology doesn’t solve the problem.
Things have moved on a bit since the 1880s...
This is painful. It’s like saying ‘you can only go so fast with a propellor plane, clearly breaking the sound barrier is impossible. If it was possible, someone would have done it.’
With some motivation and technological ingenuity, it seems like this is a pretty solvable problem.
Yes of course it is, or gold, but who is going to invest in that or pay that for .22 ammunition?
So, why are subsonic copper rounds in.22 not available then?
The other thing is the market is very small so people may well not invest, people in the US generally aren’t worried about subs as they don’t generally use moderators.
I imagine because, as things currently stand, there’s not much incentive for the ammunition companies to invest in developing them.
That may well not change in the US. It will certainly change in the UK and the EU, which are big enough markets to justify the investment. Whoever cracks it stands to do very well.
PS I don’t think you’re an idiot, I think you are choosing to ignore the issues. Those being the fact that a 30 gr in a .22LR case will basically rely on the primer compound with no charge to remain subsonic which doesn’t tend to lend itself to accuracy and the fact that you lose 30%+ of the energy which is an issue for humane kills.
IF in the next 2 years a lead free subsonic bullet that shoots 1/4” out of my current rifle (so equivalent to my eley load) then I will offer you a sincere apology.
Until then, I don’t think you’re an idiot, I think you are wrong.
Last edited:
How do you think the lead ban will affect Eley and their employees?
I would hope that Eley are investing like crazy in non lead...
Plans announced to phase out lead ammunition in bid to protect wildlife
The Government is considering a ban of lead ammunition to protect wildlife and nature as part of new plans under UK REACH
"The plans announced today will consider phasing out the use of lead ammunition across all environments across England, Scotland and Wales."
All means all, including target sports
Or they know their trade well enough to know they'd be flogging a dead horse . . . .
That may possibly test our stalking skills a bit too far and brings to mind images of middle aged stalkers going all Rambo and leaping out of highseats on to passing deer with captive bolt gun in hand
Remington made /make a hyper speed steel cartridge in 3" magnum, a group of us a few years ago experimented with them and others brought from John Forsey guns and Just cartridges . They included Silver steel by Gamebore with a fibre / paper wad . After shooting a few hundred though out a season on a couple of local farm syndicates the results were :- 1, A high bird was 35 yrds unless you used Remington 1s or bb's 2, Most used a plastic wad built like a washing up bottle . 3, The recoil of a high speed steel magnum is very similar to a 416 Rigby and the shooting of 30 or 40 a drive would take a better man than me even though a semi . 4, I don't know why but what steel doesn't prick, it shreds to pieces !! As for the Gamebore a great idea but completely under powered and used up on decoyed Pigeons !!
Sorry, but find me a usable bullet material which produces the same or shorter lengths for equal weight/density compared to lead.
I'm almost certain that all the other supposedly 'non-toxic' offerings (brass, copper, tin, unobtanium etc) will all produce longer, less dense bullets.
Tungsten? Depleted Uranium?
Try making a bullet out of the former, and for the latter... I'd rather stick with lead.
As for why you need a certain weight of projectile to work in a rifled barrel, anyone who has played around with an air rifle will soon realise that there is an ideal pellet/slug weight and shape which gives a good compromise between accuracy, velocity and retained energy.
I pay little attention to the REACH UK consultation. I see no prospect that what REACH UK does will be in any material way different from what will be put forward by ECHA, following the ongoing consultation, voted on by the EU Parliament, then legislated by REACH (EU). The UK pledged to align itself with REACH on 1 Jan 2021 (Brexit). REACH UK is the newly formed dept. of our HSE, now needed because we can no longer use the EHCA to do the hard work for us to maintain alignment. I expect that the personnel involved (if we have enough suitably qualified people interested in doing the work) will be on a very steep learning curve at the moment.
I suppose, in the worst case, REACH UK could take the lazy approach and just go for a 100% lead ban for the UK, regardless of the consequences, but surely they won't be that stupid ? I sincerely doubt either that REACH UK will instead opt for laxer rules for the UK than the EU, legally they cannot anyway.
What actually matters is the ECHA review, all in play there at the moment. I have commented about that on other threads. Suffice it to say that the ECHA review does not consider banning lead from projectiles (bullets and shot) used in target shooting in contained environments. Indoor range shooting, clay shooting on formal grounds etc.
The starting point was, yes, a total lead ban. But already some exceptions are agreed for formal target shooting, and the door is open for further derogations as the consultation and followup emerge. It is all in play still.
My thoughts on the relevance (or not) of the UK REACH consultation:
UK REACH lead ammunition review announced
Sorry, what I you trying to tell me by this?? That you were all proved right? With last year’s announcement the became a self fulfilling prophecy. Either way, what ha it got to do with me shooting foxes with lead bullets or rabbits that don’t enter the food chain? because you and the other 8...
www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk
My understanding of the ECHA consultation proceedings and timescales:
UK REACH lead ammunition review announced
@Sharpie please visit the FACE website for more information on the work that has been taking place on these proposals. Also, the meaningful deadline for submissions is 5 May. Re. deadlines: I am pleased to hear that you, BASC, or the BSSC that you mentioned previously, or is it just FACE (the...
www.thestalkingdirectory.co.uk
The consultation considers not just toxicity, but socio-economic impacts, and their proportionality.
I have posted copious references on that thread for those who wish to take an informed interest in developments, rather than just indulge in speculation
I would expect (hope) that our big cartridge manufacturers will be making strong submissions directly to the ECHA consultation, or have already done so. As will the EU ones.
Finally, I see, as yet, no technical alternative to continuing to use soft lead in .22LR subsonics, which can and do expand significantly, in real life use (photo examples on another thread here) Bismuth alloys are a brittle material, OK for shotgun shot which is required to remain intact. Tungsten matrix, or Tungsten/iron, likewise, though less brittle, and shockingly expensive. Copper, or alloys are three times or more harder than lead, any expansion has to be engineered into them somehow.
scrumbag
Well-Known Member
There are starting to be copper bullets used in long range .22lr shooting but might be a while before it comes through to stuff you will see used for plinking.
In terms of centre fires:
.222 and .22-250 might struggle a bit with 50 gr bullets to make weight for Scottish roe (Thinking 1:14 twists. I'd be a little concerned about the reliability of getting 1:12 .223 Rem to reliably stabilise for that matter)
100gr copper bullets in .243W will be difficult to stabilise with most common twists. Might make a few of the folks who use 243W for the bigger deer in Scotland have problems.
If you try and get your lever action to large deer legal in England could be interesting...
Scrummy
In terms of centre fires:
.222 and .22-250 might struggle a bit with 50 gr bullets to make weight for Scottish roe (Thinking 1:14 twists. I'd be a little concerned about the reliability of getting 1:12 .223 Rem to reliably stabilise for that matter)
100gr copper bullets in .243W will be difficult to stabilise with most common twists. Might make a few of the folks who use 243W for the bigger deer in Scotland have problems.
If you try and get your lever action to large deer legal in England could be interesting...
Scrummy
enfieldspares
Well-Known Member
My input is that as far as rifles are concerned, for deer, it depends on two things. One may, or may not, be changed and is the law. The other lies in the individual's own power and that is barrel twist rate.
Where the law presently mandates a minimum bullet weight of 100 grains. I know from my own experience with my (now sold) 6mm Remington Parker Hale that it's twist rate won't stabilise 100 grain bullets that are "long". Thus unless the law is changed most old school .243 Winchester and 6mm Remington rifles won't work with non-lead 100 grain bullets.
Which is what SCRUMBAG and others also state.
These then will become unusable as the law presently stands if the 100 grain requirement remains unless the individual owner rebarrels his or her rifle to a different twist rate. But it may be that the cost of that far exceeds the original purchase price of the rifle and/or its current value. I have no idea if the .240 and .244 Holland will be also affected or Weatherby's "knock-off" of the .240 Holland.
In respect of shotguns I think others have covered the matter well enough.
Where the law presently mandates a minimum bullet weight of 100 grains. I know from my own experience with my (now sold) 6mm Remington Parker Hale that it's twist rate won't stabilise 100 grain bullets that are "long". Thus unless the law is changed most old school .243 Winchester and 6mm Remington rifles won't work with non-lead 100 grain bullets.
Which is what SCRUMBAG and others also state.
These then will become unusable as the law presently stands if the 100 grain requirement remains unless the individual owner rebarrels his or her rifle to a different twist rate. But it may be that the cost of that far exceeds the original purchase price of the rifle and/or its current value. I have no idea if the .240 and .244 Holland will be also affected or Weatherby's "knock-off" of the .240 Holland.
In respect of shotguns I think others have covered the matter well enough.
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
I would agree - a few years ago steel was crap. Things have come a long way in the technology. And we haven’t yet seen the full potential that is being used eleswhere.
Re recoil - well its a question of getting the correct fitting gun for the job. Putting a heavy load through any standard weight kicks the living day lights out of you. Just try the 2 3/4 alphamax magnums. You need the correct gun for the job. Most high game guns are long barreled 8 1/2 lb weight specialists. Most Wildfowling is now done with semi automatics. My Franchi Affinity weighs well under 7lb, but happily shoot 3” high velocity steel cartridges that cleanly kill - as in dead in air, high ducks and geese on the foreshore. And ducks and geese are tougher than phaesants.
As others have said on this thread, Americans have been lead free on waterfowl for decades and they shoot them very well at good distances with no issues whatsoever.
Last edited:
It seems to me that we are held back here in the UK by low CIP rulings
Might be do-able. In England/Wales, from at least a 20" barrel.
E.g. this lot are loading 30-30 with 150gr Barnes TSX, at SAAMI pressure limit, to nominal 2350 fps (1840 fpe). Presumably the large hollow point of the TSX allays any concerns about the tube mag. exploding, and the bullet length is no more than that of a lead 170 grainer.
And quote that in practice (not from the test barrel), they have seen
➤ 2,271 fps -- Winchester 1894, 20-inch (circa 1953) ... 1718 fpe
➤ 2,247 fps -- Winchester 1894, 20-inch (circa 1963) ... 1682 fpe
➤ 2,198 fps -- Winchester 1894, 16-inch Trapper (circa 1993) ... 1609 fpe
30-30 WIN. LEAD FREE Rifle Ammunition
30-30 WIN. LEAD FREE Rifle Ammunition Field Proven rifle and gun ammo. Maximum firepower bullets. Best ammunition for rifles and guns for sale. Buffalo Bore. Strictly big bore. Strictly Business.
www.buffalobore.com
TBH I don't see pushing a 150gr copper bullet as much different than a lead bullet, and there is plenty of load data that suggests 150 gr lead loads that can comply. If you are prepared to load a bit hotter than SAAMI/CIP, then there could be some good margin. A spin through a simulation package might elucidate. 30-30 is a very low pressure round, and modern guns are much stronger than those made in 1895.
Similar threads
