Non-Lead Ammo Discussion online

[Versatile_Hunter]

2 hours ago, Modern hillbilly said:

Bravo! Changing hearts and minds then insinuate and pass judgement when met with questions and facts that don't align with your scripture.

Ahh insinuation...let me try....Maybe you want to burn down my city? Wear black and beat some people who don't agree? 

I'm not sure what your rambling about with conservation or conspericies where did anybody say that?

Jesus, must everything be tribal? 

[phantom]

lead been around for  hundreds of years   while I'm sure copper is  safer and if I can get it  would use it  there  are guys that shoot 10s  of thousands of lead rounds  every year like hick45 and he is still alive looks good to me .    I don't have a problem with people warning about lead as long as they don't force it on people .   like  airedale   wrote above  I believe  this is just another   Trojan horse from anti gun  and hunting  people to mess with hunters and gun owners  their  agenda  is to get the guns  more then any  heath issue or environment  problem .

Edited September 26, 2020 by phantom

[Curmudgeon]

I just read this thread. I'm not going to try argue against the outlandish claims. You guys are going to keep doing what you are doing. Ignore the panel discussion. The good thing is, if half of hunters switch to copper, half as many eagles and kids will consume lead. If they can't find copper this year, maybe they will bury their gut pile, or order ammo special through a dealer, or buy it next year.

Six years ago when I started on this forum - because someone alerted me to a non-lead ammo discussion here - there were only a handful of us on this site using copper. Most were using it because of improved performance. These days, when these discussions come up, a significant number are using it for both improved performance and environmental reason. Now that the price is pretty much the same as lead, I'm having trouble finding a real controversy? If it is available, and costs the same, who wouldn't use a safer product?

Here are some thoughts.

On availability - A young woman who I mentored has become a serious hunter. She just bought a new Weatherby Camilla in .243. She is coming out tomorrow to sight it in. I went to Walmart and a Mom and Pop shop yesterday looking for copper ammo. Walmart had Winchester .243 Copper Extreme Point 85 grain at $22.83 a box. I bought some. They also had .270 copper 13o grain at the same $22.83 price and 300 Win Mag copper 150 grain at $26.44. Their ammo case was half empty. The Mom and Pop shop had lots of ammo but little copper. That is normal. They get it for me on request. However, the price was 50% higher than Walmart. The had the same .243 copper I bought for less than $23 was almost $35.

On burying gut piles - good idea but who carries a shovel? Anything you can do to minimize visibility from the air is helpful. I do believe that ravens and eagles are starting to associate rifle shots with dinner time. Two years ago I had an eagle circling right overhead as I field dressed a deer. I've also seen ravens around when shots are fired.

People concerned with wildlife do not care what bullets you use at the range or for self defense. Dragging HSUS into this discussion is like comparing looters to peaceful protestors - an entirely different thing. HSUS clearly wants to end sport hunting while many advocates of non-lead are hunters. How do you reconcile that?

[airedale]

LEAD AMMO PETITIONS

ANTI-HUNTERS PETITION TO BAN LEAD-BASED AMMUNITION

Anti-hunting activists, cloaking themselves as conservationists, have been working at the state and federal levels to reduce sport hunting by seeking a ban on the use of lead-based ammunition. Leading the “Get the Lead Out” campaign is the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), a radical animal rights group that falsely portrays itself in television ads as a mainstream animal care organization.1

In early June 2014, HSUS, along with eleven other organizations and five alleged hunters, filed a fifty-page petition with the Department of Interior (DOI) requesting that the DOI promulgate a regulation stating: “The use of nontoxic ammunition shall be required when discharging any firearm on any land owned, managed, administered, or otherwise controlled by the National Park Service or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.” The petition is available at: http://www.fws.gov/cno/es/CalCondor/PDF_files/HSUS-Petition.pdf. HSUS incorrectly claims that the ban on lead-based ammunition will affect

160 million acres of public land managed by the National Park Service (NPS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Actually, the NPS manages 84.6 million acres while the FWS manages 96.2 million acres (mostly wildlife refuges) for a total of 180.8 million acres or about 7.5% of the national acreage.

The other anti-hunting wildlife organizations that signed onto the petition were The Fund for Animals, Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Wildlife Conservation Society, the International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council, the National Wildlife Rehabilitators Association, the South Florida Wildlife Center, the Chocolay Raptor Center, the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition, the Northwood Alliance, and the National Wolfwatcher Coalition.

The petition is crammed with pseudo-scientific statements, junk science, and citations to studies that showed higher lead levels in consumers of wild game killed by lead ammunition as well as raptors that supposedly feed on gut piles. Yet there is no documented case in this country of a hunter or anyone else dying or becoming ill from eating game killed with traditional ammunition. The Iowa Department of Health has tested blood lead levels of residents for fifteen years; if lead in venison was a serious risk, it would have surfaced by now in the 525,000 youths and adults that have been screened. Although studies by North Dakota and Minnesota found elevated levels of lead in the blood of persons who ate venison killed with traditional ammunition, the North Dakota study also found that “some individuals with substantial wild game consumption may have lower blood lead levels than some other individuals with little or no wild game consumption.” In short, the study was inconclusive for showing that game killed with lead ammunition constituted a public health danger if consumed. Other studies have found hardly any lead content in whole pieces of meat as compared to ground meat.

When the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services released the results of its study in 2008 regarding human consumption of venison, it could only conclude that there was an “indeterminate” public health hazard from the harvest of 500,000 deer because elevated blood lead levels had not been confirmed among consumers and the measured lead content in venison varied greatly. But that did not stop the agency from recommending a transition to non-lead (often referred to as “green” or “non-toxic”) ammunition, despite the lack of strong evidence proving a threat to public health.

In 2009, the Toxicology and Response Section of the Michigan Department of Community Health could not “conclude whether eating lead-contaminated venison in Michigan could harm people’s health because it is difficult to predict the impact of eating lead-contaminated venison on a child’s blood-lead level without knowing what other lead exposures a child may have.” (Emphasis added) In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated in 1989 that “ecause of industrialization, lead is ubiquitous in the human environment.” One study discovered that the average blood level of 14,000 tested Americans was 2.58 micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood, whereas 10 mcg/dl for children and 25 mcg/dl for adults is considered high. In the North Dakota study of persons who consumed game killed with lead-based ammunition, no one tested higher than 10 mcg/dl and the average was 1.27 mcg/dl, according to the CDC.

It is not too much of a stretch to interpret the Michigan study as suggesting that elevated lead levels in condors and bald eagles might not be solely caused by ingesting bullet fragments or lead shot, if any. To support their emotional case, anti-hunting organizations invariably showcase a photo of a prostrate bald eagle, with rumpled feathers, allegedly dying of lead poisoning. Then they claim that the iconic birds’ survival is severely impacted by lead-based ammunition. Yet the FWS has stated that breeding pairs increased by 724% between 1981 and 2006. Moreover, bald eagles are no longer listed as an endangered species. Scientists who have argued for banning lead-based ammunition have merely assumed, not proved, that elevated lead levels in raptors were caused by ingesting bullet fragments and lead shot from dead game. After all, lead is a natural part of the environment.

Thirty-three hunting, shooting, and conservation organizations subsequently addressed a letter to Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell on July 23, 2014, that stated several points repeated in this paper. The letter concluded by calling the HSUS petition “quite simply an attempt to drive hunters, and subsequently recreational target shooters, off of Federal public lands. It is unnecessary, has no basis in sound science and should be rejected by the Department.”

Make no mistake, HSUS’s main goal is not to protect wildlife but rather to end hunting. Twenty-four years ago, HSUS president and CEO Wayne Pacelle, while director of the Fund for Animals (with which HSUS later merged), declared, “We are going to use the ballot box and the democratic process to stop all hunting in the United States. We will take it species by species until all hunting is stopped in California. Then we will take it state by state.” (Full Cry Magazine, Oct. 10, 1990). The regulations sought by HSUS would actually reduce wildlife and their habitats through the loss of license fees, and 11% excise taxes on firearms and ammunition (which have so far raised over $7 billion in support of wildlife conservation since enactment of the “Pittman-Robertson Act in 1937) because many hunters cannot afford the non-toxic ammunition.

According to HSUS’s playbook entitled “The HSUS Lead-Free Campaign: A Strategic Offensive to End Suffering and Destruction Caused by Lead Ammunition,” the organization has “intentionally chosen to concentrate first on banning the use of all lead ammunition for hunting in California and pursuing a ban on federal lands owned by the Department of Interior in order to build momentum for the campaign and to spur change within the various ammunition manufacturers and state wildlife agencies.” The HSUS petition did not arise from concerns about public health safety or wildlife health. Its genesis resides deeply in the HSUS goal to eliminate hunting.

In 2007, with the use of flimsy studies, HSUS persuaded the California Legislature to pass the Ridley-Tree Condor Preservation Act that requires use of non-lead rifle and pistol ammunition when hunting big game in areas used by the California condor in southern and central parts of the state. In 2013, the legislature amended the Act to phase out all lead ammunition by 2019 for hunting any wildlife in California. The draconian ban has never been supported by any scientific evidence showing that the levels of lead found in condors or dead bald eagles resulted from ingesting lead bullet fragments or shot contained in gut piles.

Gun rights and hunting groups have attacked the California law as an effort to ban hunting. They have been vindicated by the revelation that FWS’s California condor recovery coordinator, John McCamman, withheld release of the agency’s 18-page report, “California Condor Recovery Program, Project Update and 2011 and 2012 Lead Exposure Report” until after the legislature passed the final version of the bill on September 10, 2013. The report showed that there had been little change in the condors’ blood levels despite the 2007 ban on use of lead ammunition in condor areas. Trying to salvage the Obama administration’s lack of transparency, an FWS spokesman, Scott Flaherty, said, “It’s a scientific fact that lead poisoning is a leading cause of death in condors.” While that may be true, a plethora of California condor studies have not established as a scientific fact that the source of the birds’ lead poisoning is traditional ammunition.

As shown below, the HSUS petition is not the first attempt of anti-hunting groups to severely restrict hunting by making common types of ammunition unavailable and requiring hunters to buy expensive alternatives, a situation that would force many hunters to forego hunting altogether. Indeed, surveys by the National Shooting Sports Foundation found that 36% of California hunters stated that a ban on traditional ammunition would cause them to stop hunting or hunt less because of the increased cost of alternative ammunition, thereby causing a loss of jobs and state and local tax revenue. There is also no alternative ammunition available for about half of the calibers used by hunters.

In March 2012, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and other groups filed a 107-page petition with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate lead bullets and shot used in hunting and shooting sports (target, trap, and skeet shooting) as well as fishing sinkers under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, which, the CBD well knew, exempts ammunition. A few weeks later, without bothering to print its response in the Federal Register, the EPA rejected the petition because it was substantially similar to another CBD petition filed in August 2010 that the EPA had quickly denied for lack of jurisdiction. When the CBD challenged the EPA in court, the judge mainly dismissed the appeal because the U.S. Supreme Court, in City of Arlington, Texas v. Federal Communications Commission, had held in May 2013 that courts should give an agency broad deference to determine its jurisdictional authority. Although the EPA has not decided whether to deny the 2012 petition’s request to ban lead fishing sinkers, it denied a similar petition in November 2010.

Less than a month ago, the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission rejected, by a 5-1 vote, a petition by an anti-hunting activist and part-time raptor rehabilitator to ban use of non-toxic ammunition by hunters. The petition based its arguments on the raptors admitted in the past year to a facility run by the Birds of Prey Foundation. It offered no evidence of collateral damage to the state’s wildlife populations caused by using traditional ammunition and, of course, underestimated the effect of such a ban on access to affordable ammunition. The majority of the petition signers were non-residents.

The HSUS petition, relying on emotional arguments and sketchy studies, is a backdoor attempt to persuade the Department of Interior to indirectly curtail hunting on public lands. While various state agency studies have found elevated levels of lead in persons who consume game killed with traditional ammunition, no state or federal agency, including the CDC, has documented a single case of illness or death linked to lead poisoning caused by eating such meat. If the petition is granted, it is only a matter of time before the HSUS petitions for the same restriction on all 500,000,000 acres of land (one-fifth of U.S. surface land) managed by the DOI. It would heavily impact Nevada because the BLM manages almost 48 million acres in this state, or about 68% of the total acreage. HSUS is in this fight for the long term. So should be hunters and the real conservationists.

* * * * * * * * * *

The DOI was scheduled to take action on the HSUS petition by November 1 but, as yet, no decision has been reached. If you want to protect your hunting heritage and rights: (1) call the Department of Interior at (202) 208-3100; (2) e-mail the DOI at [email protected]; or (3) mail Secretary Sally Jewell, Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240, and ask the DOI to deny the HSUS petition.

 

1 HSUS staff and state directors attend state wildlife agency meetings and, HSUS claims, serve on state boards and commissions. It is an effective organization, having won 30 of its 42 ballot initiative campaigns. HSUS has enormous, mostly liquid, financial resources of over $200 million. Yet less than one percent of its budget is donated to local pet shelters, far less than it funnels into its pension plan. Still, a majority of Americans believe that HSUS is a pet shelter umbrella group that contributes most of its money to local organizations that care for dogs and cats. With so much money available, HSUS cannot be outspent but it can be defeated, as shown most recently in its unsuccessful campaign to effectively end bear hunts in Maine by bankrolling (with $2,500,000) a ballot initiative that, if passed, would have outlawed the use of dogs, traps, or bait.

[Trial153]

This place is turning in douche bag central. You cant even have a discussion without the partisan hacks jumping in on every thread and interjecting their insanity.

[airedale]

From Europe where they are also trying to ban lead ammo.

Where does lead intake in the human body really come from?

Based on the available data, the EFSA concluded that the main lead intake contribution “is provided by products based on cereals (16.1%), milk and dairy products (10.4%), non-alcoholic beverages (10.2%), vegetables and their derivatives (8.4%), water (7.0%), alcoholic beverages (6.7%),” adding that “consumption of game meat with high lead concentration does not significantly change the total intake” .

Is consumption of game meat with high lead concentration dangerous? According to scientific studies, drinking tap water for a week is just as “poisonous” as eating the most “lead contaminated” food in Europe.

Moreover, two Swedish qualified researchers reveal that eating 3 kg of wild boar meat – one of the most “lead contaminated” food in Europe, with a content of 4,7 mg. per kg as a result of the use of lead in ammunition – is “equivalent to the exposure from one week consumption of tap water respecting the lead limits defined by EU Authorities” . Exactly: drinking tap water for a week is just as “poisonous” as eating the most “lead contaminated” food in Europe .

We will allow you the pleasure of discovering many other studies and researches on that website telling the truth about lead in ammuniton.

By this do we mean that lead is healthy and there's no problem at all? No. We simply affirm that science is one thing, and ideology is another. It's the same difference between a demonstrated risk and a crusade.

As we already stated, alternative materials for ammunition look worse than better, while the attempt by the EU Commission and ECHA has the potential to completely stop the use of shotgun ammo in hunting and seriously affect all shooting disciplines as well. And above all, do you really think that after banning lead in ammo, they will stop there?

In conclusion, we want to leave you with this quote from the website leadinammunition.com

“Although the use of lead in ammunition is already highly regulated and its proper management in hunting and shooting sports minimize possible negative impacts on environment and health, it is very often subject to systematic requests for replacement with alternative materials, especially by non-governmental organizations, national and international political groups, as well as international conventions aimed at protecting the environment and animal species. 'LEAD-FREE' DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN 'PROBLEM-FREE'.” 

[airedale]

11 minutes ago, Trial153 said:

This place is turning in douche bag central. You cant even have a discussion without the partisan hacks jumping in on every thread and interjecting their insanity.

I understand your frustration, when the truth is exposed and you get caught and have no answer you resort to deflection and name calling!

Al

[Trial153]

I understand your frustration, when the truth is exposed and you get caught and have no answer you resort to deflection and name calling!

Al

Not name calling. Description, which you by the way you did a bang up good confirming.

 

[airedale]

Again I want to reiterate, all of this lead ammo ban business has already been taking place in Democratic run California. Anyone truly interested in what the effects have been need only do a simple search and go to the California versions of this hunting message board and get the information straight from the people that are dealing with these laws.

Al

[airedale]

7 minutes ago, Trial153 said:

Not name calling. Description, which you by the you did a bang up good confirming.

Thanks, that confirms to me I am doing my job! Have a good day.

Al

Edited September 26, 2020 by airedale

[Trial153]

Thanks, that confirms to me I am doing my job! Have a good day.
Al

Yea if you consider this a job, its shows how shallow you are.

[phantom]

So how did all the  people and  animal's survive for  hundreds of years ago when all they used was lead ? 

[airedale]

5 minutes ago, Trial153 said:

Yea if you consider this a job, its shows how shallow you are

If it is shallow of me to do everything I can to preserve the traditions of shooting, hunting, fishing and trapping in it's current state I gladly accept!

Al

[Trial153]

If it is shallow of me to do everything I can to preserve the traditions of shooting, hunting, fishing and trapping in it's current state I gladly accept!
Al

Yea spending your day cutting and pasteing on the computer does just that, your delusional.

[airedale]

6 minutes ago, Trial153 said:

Yea spending your day cutting and pasteing on the computer does just that, your delusional.

Thanks for the diagnosis! Have a good day.

Al

[Billdogge]

I try and hunt with only copper. Barnes or Federal Trophy Copper. Great results.

[virgil]

2 hours ago, airedale said:

Again I want to reiterate, all of this lead ammo ban business has already been taking place in Democratic run California. Anyone truly interested in what the effects have been need only do a simple search and go to the California versions of this hunting message board and get the information straight from the people that are dealing with these laws.

Al

Nobody on this thread or this forum has suggested or would support a ban. 

[airedale]

35 minutes ago, virgil said:

Nobody on this thread or this forum has suggested or would support a ban. 

Just making pertinent information available

Al

==============================================================

Anti-Hunting Politician Targets Lead Ammunition in New York

Posted on May 6, 2019

New York Assembly Member Deborah J. Glick (D-Greenwich Village) has introduced Assembly Bill 703, which would ban the use of lead ammunition while hunting. The legislation will receive a hearing May 7 in the Assembly Environmental Conservation Committee. The hearing is to take place at 11 a.m. in room 623 of the Legislative Office Building in Albany.

Take Action Today! New York sportsmen and women should contact their state assembly member and ask them to vote NO on AB 703. Members can contact their assembly member by using the Sportsmen’s Alliance’s Legislative Action Center.

“The anti-hunting lobby uses many strategies to eliminate hunting,” said Luke Houghton associate director of state services for Sportsmen’s Alliance. “Sometimes they use an outright ban on hunting, as Assembly Member Glick has already proposed this year in New York. But other times, the anti’s use burdensome regulations that drive up the cost of participation. That’s clearly the case with AB 703 since the science doesn’t support a ban on traditional ammunition.”

Shaky science that begins with a bias toward lead ammunition has pushed the narrative in headlines and among environmentalists and animal-rights activists that spent ammunition is to blame for the decline of scavengers, notably the California condor. The reality is, none of the science conclusively points to spent ammunition as the source of lead toxicosis.

In fact, per the Washington Times, emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act in 2014, which were buried and delayed by the Obama administration, found little change in the levels of lead in condor blood tests, despite a 2007 ban on lead ammunition in California’s condor zone. 

Other studies extrapolate data of unrelated species and apply it to condors, which is actually noted in the study but is usually absent in news stories and propaganda disseminated by environmentalists and animal-rights organizations.

Further, according to the 2017 Annual Population Status released by the Department of Interior, of the 17 wild condor that died, lead toxicosis was the cause for five mortalities. Six deaths included drowning, electrocution and anti-coagulant poisoning. Since 1992, of the 290 condor deaths, only 76 have been confirmed as lead mortalities. Meanwhile, 123 deaths are unknown, with predation and electrocution accounting for another 45 deaths. 

And, to despite fearmongering by anti-hunting groups about the use of traditional ammunition, multiple studies confirm there is no risk to human health from traditional ammunition.

Hunters rely on traditional ammunition because of its affordability and reliability in the field. If sportsmen are forced to buy more expensive ammunition, it will result in fewer hunters in the field because alternative ammo is substantially more expensive. Ironically, a ban on ammunition containing lead components would actually harm wildlife because the resulting decrease in hunter and shooting participation would mean far less funds available for wildlife conservation programs. 

About the Sportsmen’s Alliance: The Sportsmen’s Alliance protects and defends America’s wildlife conservation programs and the pursuits – hunting, fishing and trapping – that generate the money to pay for them. Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation is responsible for public education, legal defense and research.  Its mission is accomplished through several distinct programs coordinated to provide the most complete defense capability possible. Stay connected to Sportsmen’s Alliance: Online, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

[Curmudgeon]

3 hours ago, phantom said:

So how did all the  people and  animal's survive for  hundreds of years ago when all they used was lead ? 

Black powder is a much slower burn. You don't get the fragmentation. That doesn't mean there wasn't a problem. There is little base line data. If you really want to learn, you can find a lot of detailed info in the link below.

[Versatile_Hunter]

3 hours ago, airedale said:

Al

Don’t hijack a thread by copy/pasting pages of text. Provide a link instead. 

[airedale]

14 minutes ago, Versatile_Hunter said:

Don’t hijack a thread by copy/pasting pages of text. Provide a link instead. 

The kind of reply I expect when having to face the truth, nobody is forcing anyone to read what I post. I will continue to post on this board the way I always have, thank you!

Al

Edited September 26, 2020 by airedale

[Versatile_Hunter]

17 minutes ago, airedale said:

The kind of reply I expect when having to face the truth, nobody is forcing anyone to read what I post. I will continue to post on this board the way I always have, thank you!

Al

That’s great if you’re passionate about this - open a new thread in the politics section and share your conspiracy theories about copper bullets. For this thread, a discussion about folk’s  experience using non-lead ammo (ie. experiences with wound channel, bullet fragmentation, etc) would be much more useful. 

[Curmudgeon]

This promotion showed up in my inbox.

BTW - I bought some of the Winchester copper ammo at $22.83 at Walmart. I put a few rounds through at 50 yards. It held a 1" group. I usually use Barnes or Federal Trophy Copper. It will be interesting to learn how this stuff works on a deer.

Edited October 5, 2020 by Curmudgeon
Image did not come through

[Modern hillbilly]

3 hours ago, Curmudgeon said:

This promotion showed up in my inbox.

BTW - I bought some of the Winchester copper ammo at $22.83 at Walmart. I put a few rounds through at 50 yards. It held a 1" group. I usually use Barnes or Federal Trophy Copper. It will be interesting to learn how this stuff works on a deer.

Interesting accuracy results. Did you happen to chrono them? I'm sure terminally they will do just fine.

I've thought about copper just to see it's terminal ballistics but won't use it. 

2 inches at 100. 4 at 200 etc. Mix in field conditions and shooter error, I would personally keep those shots inside 150.  I might as well go open sight lever gun...

That's the other huge issue going with copper, most rifles are designed for lead core. Free bore and twist rate will probably have to change to make copper shoot.(that's why you can't find "heavy" copper who wants to be limited by light bullets?) Along with a major manufacturing change to make mass produced copper bullets half consistent.

Most people already have problems shooting heavier lead fitting to mag length.

Retained velocity is another concern,  from my reading copper needs that velocity to expand(lead can pencil too) Which retained velocity is also an issue again with current use rifles freebore limits bullet weight limiting down range performance.

Just looking quick the 308 winchester "deer session xp" has a measly BC of.387 . Using a moderate range of 300 yards using reviewed groups of 2" it groups 6 inches at 300 a quick and dirty wind drift calculation puts it at 6 inches with an 8mph crosswind.

I surely would not shoot at that range with that load. Personally I want my hunting ammunition to hold a true 1/2" not internet sniper 1/2. If conditions are bad(snow wind numb fingers) I know I can hold 1 moa with it. (I plow a double wide football field area and shoot all winter in all conditions further than my claimed 300 yard example) 

I would venture to guess not even including a good dope most hunters would probably completely miss a deer under these external ballistic conditions and normal  weather conditions at that range.

I'm also not going to develop a load at +$80 a box of 100. Throat erosion would change year to year making it highly cost prohibited having to redevelop or tweak each year.....Unless I got a dedicated deer rifle but I've enjoyed developing different loads for different rifles this year and consider it part of the hunt.

10 or so years ago I looked into custom copper bullets because of their miraculous BC. Doing research They were a flop actual bc, price, availability... consistentcy ...consistentcy = accuracy.. such a long bullet needs more rear weight....Not to mention a custom barrel and custom reamer to just shoot them. Then the added velocity shortening barrel life ...

 

[Curmudgeon]

No I didn't chrono them. I didn't even use a bench rest - just rested it on a plastic saw horse.. If I can hold a 2" group at 100 yards, that is really good. I'm really happy. I've shot only 1 deer over 80 yards in 45 years - out of 60+ animals.