Copper vs lead

[Texas Cazador]

I shoot TTSX in most of my rigs. I shoot high shoulder shots to take out the running gear and they stop in their tracks. Good performing bullets on whitetail, muleys and elk.

 

[richhymas]

No offense but in my experience the Hammer is twice as accurate, easy to load and retains 70% of it's weight. When you invest thousands of dollars and in my case (AZ and WY) wait years to draw a tag on a hunt I have found that the Bullet is the cheapest but most important part of the pie. I personally want the weight retention And a good BC in my Bullet. If you give the Hammer a chance you will be converted! Good Luck on you hunts.

I have looked at the hammer bullets but never fired one. My understanding is that the BC is actually quite poor in the hammer bullets. I hunt with a 300 WM in Idaho and consider myself to be safe and ethical out to around 700 yards with ideal conditions. Can a hammer safely and humanely kill deer and elk out to 700 yards? My fear would be that it would drop below the required impact velocity. If not, what hammer bullet and MV do I need to accomplish this?

 

[richhymas]

I have a lot more things to worry about than lead in the game that I've shot. If you get rid of bloodshot meat, how much lead will you actully have in the meat? I'd be willing to bet that high cholesterol, and high blood pressure are more of a health concern than lead from lead bullets in game meat.

I agree with x-ray the meat to find out. I got a piece of copper in my back strap big enough to hurt my teeth from a Barnes. The meet was not bloodshot. Looked fine when I cut up the steak. Lead is softer and finer and probably smaller and harder to find.

 

[richhymas]

If you don't metabolize it your not going to have it in your blood, we can only metabolize it as very, very fine particles so a chunk of lead just passes though like anything else, we are in actual danger of getting heavy metal poisoning from eating an animal that has metabolized it from the water or grasses, that's the actual danger, deer around mine sites with test way high, you eat them, you will test high even shooting a mono bullet.

There is a difference between absorbing it and Metabolizing it. Depends on the form it is in for absorbing it. Metal is not metabolized but it is still poison if it gets absorbed. Stomach acid will dissolve some of it. I suspect some will come out the other end rather than being absorbed if you swallow a chunk of lead but if it's vaporized and lots of surface area more will be absorbed.

 

[BEEMAN]

I have looked at the hammer bullets but never fired one. My understanding is that the BC is actually quite poor in the hammer bullets. I hunt with a 300 WM in Idaho and consider myself to be safe and ethical out to around 700 yards with ideal conditions. Can a hammer safely and humanely kill deer and elk out to 700 yards? My fear would be that it would drop below the required impact velocity. If not, what hammer bullet and MV do I need to accomplish this?

I believe guys have killed deer and elk in excess of 700 yds. Maybe some will chime in. I think there was a few guys using 28 Nosler with 143 HH. Probably some in 30 cal with 181 HH. Some with 338's.

 

[kfreeze]

The other thing I found is the lighter bullets typically have a lower sd. I also saw a difference in the tipped versus tsx in barnes. For example in 35 caliber tsx with low sd and fairly high velocity. Really good expansion and wounding. 7mm ttsx 140 gr. High sd even at 3000 fps impact very little shock and wounding on lung shots. Looked like an arrow wound.

I saw the same thing with a tipped tsx once. And now I dont use them. I get the older tsx's.

 

[antelopedundee]

I read an interesting article about copper bullets and weights compared to lead. It was an older article and I can't Find it anymore. Basically it stated that if you use non lead bullets you can drop the weight of the bullet for similar performance because they retain 90-100% of their weight upon impact vs lead bullets that retain 50-70% of there weight.
So in theory shooting a 100 grain copper would give you similar results as a 140'ish grain lead bullet.
Thoughts? I have been switching over to non lead and was interested it this really holds true.

Without reading this whole thread, I would think that one would want to use a non-lead bullet that will work with the same twist rate that is used for the lead based bullet. In 6.5/.264 I prefer 130 grain class bullets, so I'd expect to use something like the Barnes 127 grain LRX or something similar from the Hammer/Absolute line.

 

[CTK]

I have only shot A few deer with Barnes bullets. All were clean pass throughs and seemed to perform similar to an Accubond on whitetails. I have almost exclusively loaded ttsx bullets for my son. They have performed flawlessly and have been the most accurate bullets in his Tikka and Sako rifles. In the case of his Sako they are ridiculously accurate. Similar to Accubonds, he usually gets a tiny entrance hole and fairly small exit hole. Insides are heavily damaged. my son is 11 so these are not long shots. Cannot speak to long range terminal performance. Attached photo is .277 130 TTSX recovered yesterday under the hide of opposite shoulder of a whitetail. Probably a 75y shot. He shot it slightly quartering away. 270 Win. load was a full dose of H4831. I no longer use reduced loads for him. This is the first Barnes bullet that I have ever recovered. 150lb ish. buck ran 30 yards. Textbook expansion from the bullet.

 

[snox801]

I switched to Barnes TTSX a few years ago. I went to the 165 gr in my 300 WM. I have shot pronghorn out to 400. Several Blacktails as close as 50 yds. Two elk at 200yds. So all normal hunting ranges and all sizes of animals. The bullets are devastating. Bone is no match for them. They are accurate for me. Animals drop immediately except one elk and I shot forward through shoulders. Broke bones on both sides. That elk went a couple hundred yards. I trust those bullets to do the job every time on every shot.

I you like those then never try hammers or cutting edge because you will never buy a Barnes again.

 

[Doug Crowe]

Regarding terminal performance, people think you need a 180gn bullet to shoot an elk. For lead bullets, that's true because the lead bullet will shed 80gn and you end up with a 100gn bullet. The lead bullet will also "mushroom" which means its leading edge becomes rounded. A round leading-edge causes less tissue disruption than a flat leading-edge. Especially when the flat is moving faster.

A good copper bullet will not shed nearly as much weight, and so you can start with a lighter bullet. This then gives you the additional benefit of being able to run them faster. Win win. Plus a good copper bullet will not form a rounded leading-edge, but a more "squared off" or flat leading-edge (think of shedding nose petals, rather than mushrooming) , which will do better creating hydrostatic shock, which really puts an animal down fast.

Another advantage of copper bullets over lead bullets is that a copper bullet is less likely to "blow-up" when shooting game at close ranges.

For the reasons above, a well-designed copper bullet is simply better than a lead bullet for on-game results. The key being "well-designed" though. All-copper bullet design has advanced significantly over the first designs from many years ago. For example, search "Hammer" bullets and read the field reports. The days of needing a 180gn bullet to take an elk (similarly for deer, antelope, etc.) are over. Most hunters just don't know that, yet.

Since lead has a higher density than copper, lead is still the king for long range shooting.

JMHO

Spot on - I had always thought I needed 165 or 180+ grain bullet to harvest a moose or elk, way untrue as you say. The copper rounds don't break up, so they get far more penetration and speed kills. Now shooting 6.5 Sherman SST 125 grain solid copper rounds which get exit wounds on moose ! I took a moose with my 7mm and 165 grain round, next trip out will be with my 6.5 Sherman SST

 

[707FreedomFan]

Well after reading all the way through, this may be an environmentally friendly hand grenade, but I have been intrigued by Lehigh Controlled Chaos bullets. I have loaded some up and they shoot quiet a bit better in my 14.5" Howa 6.5 Grendel than the 127gr LRX(they shoot fine as well, too heavy overall maybe though) but haven't tested on game.

If you don't know, the principal intent is shedding weight like a traditional lead bullet to dump energy, while the shank pushes through.
I watched a few videos on lead bullets destroying lungs with mono coppers poking an arrow hole, albeit a slightly larger arrow on exit, but clearly no hydrostatic shock imparted.

While my impression was based in theory, that is currently being debated here, I was attracted to the notion of non-toxic particles vs lead dust particles that I would expect within the envelope of traditional lead bullet nose debris..

I'm still interested in testing them and probably Controlled Fracturing which I believe function somewhat like the Hammers, but will research more on what kind of lead I might expect to be in my meat with the TLR or Terminal Ascent that I'm hot for as well.

 

[shinbone]

707 - do yourself a favor. Start with Hammer bullets. You will be very happy with them for accuracy and terminal performance.

 

[707FreedomFan]

I'm looking at them ha

 

[esshup]

I will look at the Hammer bullets after I'm done with this box of Barnes for my .243. I shot 3 deer today with the 85g Barnes TSX. Norhtern Indiana whitetails. First was a doe at about 65 yds, through thick thick 3 year old growth of Sassafrass. I saw a small branch fall at the shot, then the doe dropped (she was about 15 yds on the other side of the thicket. Her tail still flipped a few times but she never moved. Bullet exited. Next was a buck (Earn a buck area), hard quartering away, entered midway back in the ribs, exited the opposite side of his neck. DRT. Roughly 80 yds away. Field dressed 195, 11 point. This evening was a large smart old doe, about 80 yds, I disconnected the heart from the rest of the circulatory system. She went about 15 yds.