Hunting with lead free bullets

[Cdog]

I have decided to switch from lead bullets to non-lead and think I am going to try Barnes TTSX bullets as everybody seems to love them. I now shoot 308 Win - 168 gr Lead but think I should go to a lighter 150 gr TTSX as they seem to like higher velocity to expand out at further distances. Up to now I only hunt deer but think this would work on elk and moose. What are people’s experiences when changing to lead free?

I also came across this website which promotes lead free bullets and give every reason in the world to switch including lead fragmentation in animals including x-ray shots which got me paranoid about lead consumption! It also gives interesting info about shot placement vs lead bullets. Check it out: http://www.huntingwithnonlead.org (http://www.huntingwithnonlead.org/)

[Ryo]

My main reason for using copper is I don't have to worry about bullet disintegration at close range with my .243 - and I'm a big fan of close range shots.

The other reasons they provide on that website are sound.

Downsides:
- price
- I don't think you're going to get that mass shock, drop on the spot effect, unless you're shooting for it (spine, double shoulders, etc.). Correct me if I'm wrong.
- May not behave in your gun
- There is potential for running out of steam and the bullets not expanding in something like a .30-30

[mastercaster]

I made the switch two years ago and love the TTSX. The five deer I've shot with them were all one shot kills,,,,all dropped on the spot except for one that was running away when I shot it which fell about 5 yards away. No meat damage,,,,when they say you can eat the meat right up to the hole they aren't kidding, at least for mine.

The loads I developed are very accurate for the two rifles I like to hunt with. I dropped down from the 165 gr. Accubonds for my 308, right down to 130 gr. TTSX and feel confident it would drop any moose or elk with the right bullet placement. Getting 3000 +/- fps out of my 22" barrel using Varget. Using 150 gr. bullets would be fine, too. You just won't get as much velocity but you'd still be able to shoot any animal under 300 yards with them.

I use the 120 gr. TTSX in my 7-08 over Varget ,,,,2920 fps.

I do a lot of practice shooting, too, but I use much cheaper lead bullets that have close to the same POI. I just make sure once the season is about to start that my TTSX rounds are totally dialled in ,,,,(1 3/4" high at 100 yds.)

I like the idea of not eating lead contaminated meat,,,,even though I have been in the past but that doesn't mean it hasn't caused some harm that hasn't manifested yet.

[tikkahunter]

I only shoot barnes TTSX, and I have more than a handful of different calibers. Never been disappointed. Only 1 animal moved after impact, and that was a moose that went 5 yards. I have been very happy with the groups that I get, as opposed to other "high end" bullets. I am sure you will be very happy if you decide to go with Barnes.

[Fella]

I find Barnes to be a little cheaper than say Accubonds and Partitions. I've only shot 1 deer with them so far, 168gr TTSX from my .30-06, and I would definitely recommend using lighter bullets if you go the TTSX way. Deer dropped on the spot but it was definitely overkill, especially because it was a 20 yard shot.

[Surrey Boy]

I tried Hornady Superformance GMX in 2011 and haven't looked back. Supreme hunting ballistics in my 30-06.

The downside is expense, and bullet dimension variety. I can see it unsuitable for match shooters, or anyone who isn't hunting. Varminters/trappers who don't eat their kills wouldn't gain anything from leadless bullets and may have more pelt damage.

[Ron.C]

I too use non lead bullets. I shot two small whitetail deer last fall with my 7mm-08 / 140gr barnes TTSX's. Was goat hunting with earlier in the hunt with this set up. Both were heart lung shots to minimize meat loss. Neither dropped on the spot but neither made it further than 20 yards. I'm going to use this setup for spring bear.

I shoot Barnes bullets in my inline muzzleloader, and 7mm-08, and accubonds "in my 06" because I wanted a quality bullet that will still perform well if I ever hit solid bone. And if I'm goat hunting, or hopefully soon sheep hunting, I am going to intentionally be shooing high shoulder unless the animal is in a spot where there is no fear of it getting somewhere nasty. I want these bullets to smash the shoulder hard and penetrate into the upper chest. Yes, there will be meat loss. With these animals, my concern is knocking them down as quick as possible.

As far as worrying about lead contamination in game shot with lead bullets, you probably have more to worry about from the mercury in your old fillings :lol:

[Tron]

168ttsx is a great bulllet. Stick with the same weight and hunt moose, elk deer and anything else you want. They hold together and Cary there weight. I've used them since 2008 and killed moose, elk, bears, deer, goats. All one shot.

[Gateholio]

In a .308 with a TTSX, I would go no more than 150gr TTSX, for general hunting purposes (assuming 0-350 yard shots)

[mastercaster]

168ttsx is a great bulllet. Stick with the same weight and hunt moose, elk deer and anything else you want. They hold together and Cary there weight. I've used them since 2008 and killed moose, elk, bears, deer, goats. All one shot.

Considering that Barnes TTSX bullets retain almost 100% of their original weight, that would be like shooting a 200 gr. lead bullet based on how much it would end of weighing after the shot made contact. Don't know any hunters who shoot that heavy a bullet out of their .308s. Gotta remember,,,, all 165 gr. bullets are not considered equal. Big difference between monos and cup and core /bonded bullets.

I use the 165 gr. TTSX out of my 300 WSM because I can speeds up over 3000 fps. Barnes love speed!

[Boner]

In a .308 with a TTSX, I would go no more than 150gr TTSX, for general hunting purposes (assuming 0-350 yard shots)

Why not? Could be several reasons I can think about. Just curious.

Maybe the extra speed, possibly lower recoil?

I like the 168's, I just wish I can find a faster recipe that shoots as well as what I'm using right now. I haven't played with Varget yet...

[pappy]

I have shot 100 grain e-tips out of a 25-06 I had, they were very accurate in that gun. Took a coyote at 360 yards and didn't find the exit hole till I skinned him. It's a safe bet that bullet never opened up but he jumped when he was hit and made it less than five yards. I have taken a pile of moose, elk, deer, a couple of black bears and a couple of sheep with 210 ttsx out of my 338 (my favourite gun) I have almost always had good results. A few required more then one shot, I think a couple of those ttsx just penciled thru as the shots where lung shots with a complete pass thru at very short ranges. They are not long range bullets as i have found they don't open up very well past 300 yards, I have usually managed to get around 200 yards or less for hunting shots. I have recovered three ttsx over the years, all the rest were the usual Barnes pass thru. My first pick of a bullet to try in a new gun is the accubond, if it doesn't group then the ttsx. I only use the ttsx in my 338, the rest of my guns shoot accubonds.

[.264winmag]

'Experts' also recommend only eating Halibut 6 servings a month, Albacore 3, we're easily 2-3 times that. I feel great, grew up on cup/core game. Far worse things for you, no doubt.

[Salvelinus]

168 gr Ttsx apparently can be more difficult to get good groups on for some rifles than 165s for the 308 cals. Don't know why this is, but I suspect it is the longer length of the 168s which might not work as well in slower twist barrels. Watch out for this in all lead free bullets. They tend to be longer for the bullet weight, especially for "high" bc bullets like the nosler etips or lrx's

I started loading Barnes copper bullets the first time this problem gained publicity with studies on lead contamination of game out of the Midwest states nearly 10 years ago. I don't know why there isn't a stronger push to replace lead ammo with lead-free designs for most hunting applications, especially considering this new evidence. As long as there's sufficient velocity, the performance on game is as good or superior to lead bullets. As a general rule, think inside 300 yds for most standard calibers and can be pushed quite a bit further with magnums and/or careful attention to bullet weight or higher bc varieties. Know the limits of the bullet, spend some time with a ballistics calculator and you can be sure they'll work every time. None of the animals I've shot have known the difference.

It's true you are not going to suffer acute lead toxicity from eating meat from game shot with lead ammo, I don't think there is any concern about getting sick in any way that you'd actually feel sick or realize it. The problem is more recognized for feeding children or pregnant women any quantity of lead. There is a huge amount of scientific literature on the effects even a small amount of lead could have on development. It's why it was banned from paint, gas and a bunch of other products over the years. I have a young family. Why would I risk exposing them to lead when there is a clear alternative that works just as well or better? Lots of people aren't aware so I'm glad the word is getting out more.

[bacon_overlord]

I started with nosler ballistic tips and Hornady ssts. They both gave quick kills, but explode, especially at medium short ranges, and do a lot of meat damage. And spread the lead throughout. I switched to Barnes tsx in 150 and just as or more effective because it punches thru bone. Took 2 deer at 85 yards last fall, and as they say eat right up to the hole.
I shoot 7mm RM Tikka t3, and they sighted in easily on load work up. Just make sure you clean your barrels well with Wipeout or similar to remove all fouling, especially copper.

[Fella]

Why not? Could be several reasons I can think about. Just curious.

Maybe the extra speed, possibly lower recoil?

I like the 168's, I just wish I can find a faster recipe that shoots as well as what I'm using right now. I haven't played with Varget yet...

Weight retention is a big reason. These bullets tend to lose only 5% of their original weight.

[Pioneerman]

I have been using non lead for 15 years prob, Went from Barnes X to TSX then TTSX, but now I shoot the Hornady GMX bullet. I have never had a issue with copper fouling and seems odd that it would be since every bullet other than lead molded rounds are in copper. Are others finding that the Barnes or Hornady are softer yet hold together better than lead?

[Surrey Boy]

Why not? Could be several reasons I can think about. Just curious.

Maybe the extra speed, possibly lower recoil?

I like the 168's, I just wish I can find a faster recipe that shoots as well as what I'm using right now. I haven't played with Varget yet...

Monometals need a minimum 2000fps to expand properly, so more kinetic energy retained by greater mass is undone by sacrificing muzzle velocity. Effective range is limited to the point whereat the bullet slows below 2000fps, rather than 1200 ft-lb.

Hornady LeveRevolution 45-70 has overcome this, but the other side of that equation is that those bullets could not be fired from a 460 Weatherby and still hold together. Monoliths have a narrower range of efficacy than lead jacketed bullets.

[Darksith]

I would not use a lead free bullet in a 308. Sorry the velocity just simply doesn't work out. I have a lot of experience using lead free, and was using them in my 30-06 but then stopped after a poor result. Even the 30-06 is on the fence in regards to lead free bullets like the GMX out past 100 yards. Never had an issue when shooting a deer, but did encounter a problem with a moose, which is why I started to research more about the lead free. Velocities are questionable and I don't believe one needs the penetration power required when hunting a deer. Understand your bullet and how it works, make your own decision, but ensure you are shooting at ranges within the acceptable velocity preformance curves

[ljalberta]

I use 150g TTSX in my .308, and I won't ever be going back. The velocity is plenty for my comfortable shooting range (under 400 yds), and the wound channels have been devastating on both whitetail and elk for me.

[Pioneerman]

If you look at Hornady web site the 150 gr GMX for 308 is showing effective speed out to about 450 yards So guess it depends on what distances you hope to be shooting. Also this is expansion on flesh not counting bone so if you hit a shoulder at 500 it will still expand, this is how their chart works , or at least when they told me when I called. Plus if you want to use a cheaper round for practice the sst is same design as GMX and can expect same ballistics in range or field use.

[Boner]

Monometals need a minimum 2000fps to expand properly, so more kinetic energy retained by greater mass is undone by sacrificing muzzle velocity. Effective range is limited to the point whereat the bullet slows below 2000fps, rather than 1200 ft-lb.

Hornady LeveRevolution 45-70 has overcome this, but the other side of that equation is that those bullets could not be fired from a 460 Weatherby and still hold together. Monoliths have a narrower range of efficacy than lead jacketed bullets.

Fair enough. I always went by the 1800 fps that Barnes claimed, but(not the best example) if you punch the numbers in for Barnes 308 win factory made bullets at their posted speed of 2700 fps (I know every rifle will have a different number, probably lower) you can stretch it out to 425 yards and still be above the 2000 fps threshold.

This is why I skip the 150 ttsx altogether and play with the 130's and 168's. I feel the 150's are redundant.

[caddisguy]

I am a huge fan of lead. I recall reading a study a while and just looked it up that put my mind at least so I just googled again... study shows people eating wild game regularly had approx 50% more lead in their blood than people who do not eat wild game, but average levels were 1.27 micrograms per deciliter (compared with 0.84 with those who did not eat wild game) which is WAY below the CDC's guideline of 10 micrograms per deciliter.

There is certainly an environmental incentive to go lead-free (and I agree with lead-free shot when migratory bird hunting) but I don't think shooting big game with lead is bad for anything and it does a great job. Blasting 1000 target rounds at clays over a cut block probably isn't good though.

Disclaimer: my view points might be a little off due to lead contamination

[Ajsawden]

I have shot 168gr tsxs from my 30-06 for 9 years now. If I hit what I'm aiming it (buck fever has not got easier with age) then it's dead, period. Last fall it Dropped a bull moose running towards me like a sack of hammers and was First tsx recovery. Bullet stopped shortly after complete severing of spine. One pedal sheared, otherwise perfect expansion. Also just started shooting 150gr nosler etips from my 280. All did their job brilliantly, no concerns.

[ajr5406]

For all around hunting out of a 30-06, I have been using 165gr lead core bullets. If I were to switch to TTSX, would you recommend going down to 150gr?

[Darksith]

http://www.chuckhawks.com/hornady_GMX_150.png
the far right is what GMX bullets do at 2000fps...thats not acceptable to me. The second from the right is 2700 fps, which is pretty close to minimum desired expansion

http://www.handgunsmag.com/files/2010/09/hgbullett_071207a.jpg
Same thing again...its about max damage, and 9/10 outta 10 shot placement will get the job done, but when you miss the spot by just a hair, you want enough damage absorbed in the animal to still put it down...that 1/10 times haunts a guy for a long time. Understand your bullet, your gun, and your velocities down range. Make the right choice, and sometimes its just easier to bring a different type of bullet when you leave the house.

[todbartell]

308 I would look at the 150gr TTSX. That's what I've been using in my Ruger m77 GSR

[Lionhill]

Some lite reading for your decision on using lead:


A significant International Symposium was organized in Brussels on 20 October 2015 by the Association ofEuropean Manufacturers of Sporting Ammunition (AFEMS) and the World Forum on Shooting Activities(WFSA).The Symposium focused on the sustainable use of lead in ammunition and its impact on both theenvironment and human health. The Symposium also provided an overview of the ballistic features of bothlead and non-lead ammunition and assessed the current legislation at the European and International level.Background informationLead is present naturally in a variety of forms, but only metallic lead is used in sport shooting and huntingammunition.The use of lead metal is highly sustainable because it can be recycled an infinite number of times and theavailable technologies make the process economically advantageous. It has been used in the ammunitionindustry for centuries because it possesses excellent ballistic features and is highly cost effective. No othermaterial can guarantee the same results in terms of performance and sustainability.The use of lead in ammunition is already highly regulated and its proper management minimizes thepossible negative impacts on environment and health. Several scientific studies and research papers showthat metallic lead in ammunition has no significant impact on human health and the environment ascompared to other forms of lead. For example, lead fragments in game meat, if ingested, cannot bedirectly absorbed by the human body because they are in metallic form. By comparison, food consumed inlarger quantities and by the general population, such as cereals, dairy products, vegetables and tap water,have the greatest impact on human dietary exposure to lead. Moreover lead shot and projectiles used inboth indoor and outdoor shooting ranges are regularly collected and recycled.Restrictions in the use of lead in ammunition would inevitably damage both hunting, a necessaryprerequisite in game management as well as a traditional cultural practice, and sport shooting, a highlydisciplined activity which increasingly involves young people and women.

The symposium was attended by 110 delegates, including journalists, politicians, scientists, members ofenvironmental institutions, hunting and sport shooting organizations and food agencies.Three influential keynotes speakers from the European Parliament and the European Commissiondescribed the current position and future strategies of the European regulatory bodies, thus giving furthersignificance to the event.

Sixteen speakers covered every conceivable aspect of lead in civilian ammunition, with presentationsorganized into five different panels: environment, legal issues, ballistics, human health and other issues.Three expert journalists managed the lively and animated debates which followed the presentations as wellas sharing their own assessment of the issues.The Symposium opened with a welcome address from Mr Torbjörn Lindskog (AFEMS President) whowelcomed participants and introduced the first keynote speaker, Ms Natalie Pauwels (DG ENVI), whopresented the EU Environment Policy priorities over the coming years. The afternoon session was openedby Mr Herbert Keusgen (WFSA President) followed by a keynote address from Ms Renata Briano (VicePresident of the EU Parliamentary Intergroup “Biodiversity, Hunting and Countryside”).Panel 1: Environment (Speakers: Patterson – Verdonck – Göttlein; Moderator: James Crisp)Mr Rick Patterson (SAAMI Executive Director) spoke about the California Condor whose blood lead levelsand population number did not change despite the introduction in 2008 of a ban on lead huntingammunition and 99% compliance with the ban.Mr Frederik Verdonck (ARCHE Consultant) presented the results of experiments which were carried out todemonstrate the magnitude of the effects of lead shot ingestion on population size, growth, and extinctionof upland avian species that ingest these substances. The results suggested that lead shot can causepoisoning of individual birds but they have no significant impact on population level.Mr Axel Gottlein (Professor for Forest Nutrition and Water Resources at the Technische Universität ofMünchen) presented the results of a comparative assessment of the environmental impacts of differenttypes of bullets.

....In his presentation, Mr Klaus-Hinnerk Baasch (Doctor, Toxicology) explained that, despite several concernsabout human health and wildlife, lead contained in ammunition has no relevance to consumer protection,species protection or the environment.Mr Christer Holmgren (Senior Advisor at SEPA) presented the methodology and results of his recent study,‘Lead in Game Meat’, which showed that only 1-2% of present lead metal fragments are converted tobioaccessible forms in the human gastrointestinal tract.Mr Pier Mannucci Mannucci (Scientific Director at the Policlinico Hospital Foundation of Milan) reviewedthe case-control study of the Swiss Public Health Office, showing that there is no risk of a significantincrease in the body burden of lead for the average consumer of wild game hunted using lead ammunition.A similar case control study is now being conducted in Italy.Mr Holger Von Stetten (Doctor, Internal Medicine) stressed once again that banning lead huntingammunition does not reduce the lead pollution of the total population. Human dietary exposure to leadamong consumers occurs largely through the most commonly eaten foods and only in a very small partthrough game.

Complete report: http://www.afems.org/download/members/Press_Release_Symposium.rev_ENG.pdf

[Cdog]

Wow, the feedback has been awesome! Everybody has a strong opinion! I read that copper bullets like a slower twist rate so I am wondering how my 1:10 twist would work with 150 gr ttsx using H4895. I will have to experiment at the range with different grain charges... any recommendations?

[Bugle M In]

Guess it is just one of the things you have to try for yourself...
Shot placement is "always the major factor"....1st.
Hit the right spot, then ya, a lead free bullet will work perfectly, and, the benefit is "lead free contamination".
But,
Any poorly placed shot, is just that...results quite often in poor outcomes in killing.
Doesn't matter what you shoot then, lead or lead free.
And then there are those in between shot placements....???
I used the Win XP3, they have lead with a plastic tip, and they work great when hitting the mark...but,
there have been times when they just punch thru with little damage, generally from a shot passed thru an area
without bone (I always try to hit just on the outside edge, back of the shoulder line...so no bone really).
So, when that happens, I find the bullet very "unreliable".
Sometimes I think the plastic tip makes the situation worse....I don't know?
And, the fact that they have a insert in them to make them mushroom less, but retain a ton of weight like the
nosler partion....sort of..??
I think at times they don't expand like a true "accubond" will, and react like a " copper bullet"...IMO

What I am trying to say, in my opinion, if you are going to use those complete copper bullets, you would most
likely need to accept to change your "aim point"....meaning you have to aim "right into the shoulder".
That way you are utilizing the bullet to it's "maximum potential".
It's something I am thinking to reconsider as well (aiming into the shoulder), it's just that I don't like to
ruin the meat, so that is why I am behind the shoulder rear edge line....but it does mean that you will only
have the tip portion of the heart to hit, but, you will obliterate the liver.
A little to far behind that, it becomes less and less effective.
It's these softer tissue shot placements that "I feel" have better results using a bonded bullet (lead).

So, in a nutshell, using copper, aim for bone, and it should work great, bullet retains more weight, thus more
effective, but you will lose meat, but, no lead in it.
And a bad shot placement will lead to very poor results...IMO.

Where lead may give you a slight advantage in that category...IMO
Lead gives you some room for those in between shot placements, and, better results if you are not aiming for bone,
and wanting to recover as much meat as possible, but, you may consume a little lead...

Aim for bone, and don't let the shot distance get way out there.....That's just my opinion

[Darksith]

Guess it is just one of the things you have to try for yourself...
Shot placement is "always the major factor"....1st.
Hit the right spot, then ya, a lead free bullet will work perfectly, and, the benefit is "lead free contamination".
But,
Any poorly placed shot, is just that...results quite often in poor outcomes in killing.
Doesn't matter what you shoot then, lead or lead free.
And then there are those in between shot placements....???


I honestly don't think thats an opinion, I believe this to be fact. This is the exact same concern I have after some unfortunate actual results rather than just theories and notions developed by advertising and ideas. The pass through without expansion due to improper velocity, or hitting a soft spot on the hide which acts essentially as a FMJ bullet. I learned the hard way that there are certain times you really wish you were shooting a softer bullet that possibly breaks up much easier. Don't get me wrong, I have and continue to purchase the GMX or the TTSX bullets, but they have a certain use and are not my going out hunting and see what I can find bullet. Grizzly, Bison, even possibly moose where I know distances will be close, they are a great round. Anything where I may decide to go down range further...it becomes a questionable decision that may bring on regret

[Bugle M In]

Yes, I shoot really damn good at the range...better than most...but..
When out in the woods, it doesn't always work out that way...
It's the "crummy shots" that concern me with cull copper bullets.
As stated, Grizz and Bison....for sure, great choice in my opinion.
Long range sheep.....or a buck on the fly....uhhh...I will stick with Accubond.

I think we have all seen what a berger can do "way out there"!

[tikkahunter]

Guess it depends on what you guys consider a long range shot. I dropped an elk in its tracks at 458 yards (that's long for me) with a Barnes TTSX 180gr in December. Was lucky enough to recover the bullet, and did exactly what it was supposed to do.

[Darksith]

Guess it depends on what you guys consider a long range shot. I dropped an elk in its tracks at 458 yards (that's long for me) with a Barnes TTSX 180gr in December. Was lucky enough to recover the bullet, and did exactly what it was supposed to do.
what did you shoot it from? And Im not saying that if you hit shoulder its not going to do what its supposed to do...hell at 458yards and hitting bone thats probably the round I would want flying through the air, but at 458yds and you only hit soft hide...there is a change you just wounded an animal that will die from infection never to be seen by you again. Its not about the 8 or 9 times out of 10 that everything goes right, its about the other 1 or 2 times where something small happens that has a negative result and limiting those instances.

The only reason distance is relevant is because it is directly tied to velocity. Hell if I could have my round travelling at 2700fps forever, its the only bullet I would ever use. Thats why out of say a .308 I personally don't think you are going to acheive an ethical velocity very far down range and I wouldn't use that type of bullet. In a 300 win mag hand load, that same bullet is much more effective in a way wider range of situations.

[Mark-R]

Great discussion. Just ramping up on this topic myself and found this article to have a good overview of expansion issues but also touches on other motivations behind banning certain bullets.
Hint: usual suspects.

https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Homogenous+copper+bullets+can+be+inhumane.html

[Harvest the Land]

Great discussion. Just ramping up on this topic myself and found this article to have a good overview of expansion issues but also touches on other motivations behind banning certain bullets.
Hint: usual suspects.

https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Homogenous+copper+bullets+can+be+inhumane.html

Very interesting read - thanks for sharing. I like to read different points of view than mine, especially when they're backed with evidence. You've given me something to think about