Homogenous copper bullets can be inhumane

[xsn10s]

It's a seminal reference.

Yeah I see the body of reference, but not the author or his credentials.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

@WildRose made some very spot on points. I will add that copper is 20% less dense than lead. So the physical size diff between copper and lead bullets is a bit more than he described. Stability is a very big component to terminal performance. Marginally stable bullets can work very well ballistically, but have an increase potential for failure on impact due to yaw impeding fluid from entering the hollow point which starts the expansion process. This holds true for any bullet not just copper bullets. The stability calculators are for determining ballistic stability. That means stability in flight and has nothing to do with whether or not a bullet is stable enough for reliable expansion and terminal performance. I think many of the reports of brand xxx (fill in the blank) failed are not actually a bullet failure but a failure to have enough stability to ensure proper terminal performance.

There is a notion or reputation out there that copper bullets need more speed to work properly. I will address this only regarding our Hammer Bullets. Our bullets do not need more speed to work with full deformation. We impact test our bullets down to 1800 fps for proper terminal performance. This doesn't mean a slight deformation. We expect full deformation and shedding of the nose. Less than this we would almost consider a failure. Our bar is set high for terminal performance. I will add that we don't need none or shoulder impacts to see great terminal performance. If you are a shoulder shooter or a pure lung shooter they will work very well.

When it comes to speed, we have potential for greater muzzle velocity than traditional bullets because Hammers have lower engraving pressure than traditional cup and core bullets and quite a bit less engraving pressure than traditional mono bullets. This is due to our patented radius drive band design, called PDR. Parabolic Drag Reduction. This design solved the copper bullet issues if high pressure in tight bores and poor accuracy in loose bores. So higher velocity potential is a plus not a need.

As @WildRose pointed out. Copper bullets are longer for their weight compared to lead bullets, resulting in the copper bullets requiring more twist to be stable. In general, this results in copper bullets being about 20% lighter compared to lead bullets when maximizing bullet weight for the twist of a given rifle. It is just physics. Weight makes bc. You can only do so much with form or shape of the bullet. So if you have a copper and a lead bullet shaped exactly the same, the lead bullet will be 20% heavier resulting in a proportional increase in bc. The lighter copper bullet will have an advantage in muzzle velocity. This is the classic rabbit and turtle race. The rabbit gets a head start and the turtle always wins the race in the end. The question is, at what point down range does the turtle pass the rabbit? Often it is farther down range than the usable hunting range of the rifle combo or the hunters need / ability.

Here is the link again to the physics paper on terminal performance. Written by Dr. Rath Coombe.

Terminal Ballistics

Anyone who is truly interested in terminal performance and how it works should read this. It is not easy and can't be done in an evening after work. Never the less I am very interested in @FEENIX review of the work.

 

[xsn10s]

Okay so what's the point of asking about his work? What you you all trying to prove? My guess his work is supposed to support some kind of point.

 

[xsn10s]

My guess is Dr. Rath Coombe report is supposed to offset Nathan Foster's article. Just trying to clarfiy so this doesn't veer off too far from a constructive point.

 

[seattleman1969]

This one should be good for atleast 30 pages

Up to 14 already!

 

[seattleman1969]

This one should be good for atleast 30 pages

Up to 14 already! Your prediction appears to be right on track!

 

[Chas1]

14 pages in short order....may hit 30

 

[Len Backus]

A comment on recent banning of BFD Guns.

I just replied to someone who was expressing politely their regret that I have banned BFD Guns for disruptive behavior.

I am posting here my reply to that person.

"Sorry, but I gave him more chances than I normally do. A shame to lose access to his knowledge but this necessarily has had to be done with MANY otherwise good contributors over our 20 years."

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

Up to 14 already! Your prediction appears to be right on track!

I dont think it will make it.... but this one was pretty intense to make up for it!

 

[Footsie80]

https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Kn...G9wpQk3583ooPAZg51cbcATzthQOmC2AZXPb61nesmcPk

Wow, talk about coincidence. I stumbled across this article yesterday when looking to find mono bullet manufacturers since the TTSX I use is difficult to come by these days.

I too found that this article was wrought with biased opinion and did little to discuss ballistics. Of course a .224 at 200 yards is not going to be terminal on large game, but no controls were ever discussed (at least in the parts that I could tolerate reading). The article was also full of spelling and grammar mistakes, so I found it tough to digest.

 

[OldElkHunter1961]

Our shared passion, hunting, has plenty of room for various opinions and individual, anecdotal findings. My results with monolithic bullets are likely to differ from yours as many factors contribute to terminal ballistics results. None of us is the Orical at Delhi and none of us holds a privileged position with respect to knowledge of the truth. Personally my results with homogeneous bullets have been poor. But those are my experiences and I won't try to paint such a nuanced subject with a roller. Enjoy the hunt and support each other. No one else will.

 

[AllenRay]

This.

 

[Paulstarr]

The blanket statements made in this article are simply emotional and uninformed, made by a self important, self proclaimed expert.

I can't speak for other copper or mono bullet manufacturers, but as far as we are concerned, terminal performance is by far the most important reason we got into making bullets. We at Hammer Bullets will never sacrifice terminal performance for anything. Not bc, not price, not production capacity, not anything.

Prior to making bullets Brian and I were those weird guys at the range catching bullets in water jugs to see what they did. Our quest for a better bullet that would make our animals nice and dead without blowing them to pieces lead us to copper bullets. We saw much less meat damage with copper vs lead. We used quite a few diff copper bullets for hunting. In the end they all had some issue that we didn't like. We wound up making our own. With that said we thought if we just purchased the most pure copper available it would make the perfect bullet for hunting. Well, it didn't work that way. If we had known we would have never started this business. We were in to deep at this point with a cnc lathe set up in my garage, that we couldn't afford, and we had to find a raw material that would work. We literally bought thousands of pounds of copper at full price and recycled at less than half price trying to find a copper that would do what we expected throughout the range of velocity required for hunting. In the beginning we used copper that is common in the bullet industry. It did not live up to our standards, but it worked well enough to go to market. We were not satisfied with good enough and continued to try diff copper alloys trying to find our ideal terminal performance. Our ideal bullet was based on this physics study http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html, not personal bias and emotions. By the grace of God we found the copper that we use now. It changed everything. We now had a copper that would perform at high or low velocity, predictably, the way we wanted. We have to continually monitor or copper to make sure that it meets our needed formula to work properly as a bullet.

So to throw a blanket statement aimed at non lead bullets from a personal bias without any first hand experience, let alone scientific knowledge of how a permanent wound is created by a bullet, other than " I have killed lots of animals, therefore I am an expert on terminal performance." is irresponsible at best.

For those of you that want to know more about terminal performance, I recommend you take the time to read the physics paper that I linked. Weather you want to use copper or lead bullets makes no difference. Knowledge is good. Wives tales spread falsehoods that are detrimental.

There is no mistaking what @FEENIX is trying to do. Help inform everyone right? So I am sure he will welcome my thoughts and encourage folks to study the science.

Love this article, it's great to see someone with proper experience writing this response.Many times especially on forums people write articles with very little knowledge and try to pass it off as experience, my reaction is to ignore it because you most times finish up in an argument online.
like Butterban says, don't argue with stupid people, he's right.

 

[JAYgs8163]

Curious how many books have been sold the last 2 days!