Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

theecologist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 34 posts

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#11

Post by wl »

bradleyy wrote: post #4
harimau777 wrote: post #2

It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…

Honestly, there are differences. Do they matter? IMHO, no. Most "stopping power" debates are talking about rifles that are vastly capable with or without lead bullets, and with the bans that have happened, the tech has moved forward. e.g. Barnes Bullets (which are copper) are considered a premium round, not just a premium non-lead round. And they aren't really overpriced. WRT shotguns, I don't know this end as well,…

> (the firearms market in general lacks innovation)

As someone who is subject to the California Safe Handgun Roster[0], the amount of innovation in the handgun space in six years is frustrating.

[0] tl;dr: normal people can't buy a handgun released after 2013 new from an FFL.

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#12

Post by buserror »

Lead or "non toxic" ammunition is a big problem. I only do shotgunning, but for these the empirical evidence is that the lead is a better tool to "kill humanely" than for example, steel. Steel doesn't have that "stopping power" that lead has, and requires a lot more, and bigger, shots, and will also have a shorter range than lead...

Also, one of the biggest improvement in hunting cartridges are the 'wads' which used to be plastic, and now are wool or fiber, in any case, biodegradable -- the steel cartridges don't have these as they need a 'cup' to protect the barrels as the shots go out, so you leave big pieces of plastic all over, to be ingested by /other/ wildlife, potentially.

So no real perfect solutions so far; Legally you can't shoot lead anywhere near waterways so we have to use steel, but for example last year I shot a duck, fair an square, nowhere near "out of range" -- this was a 'dead duck' -- we looked for it for 20 minutes to discover it had gone to ground and was NOT dead, it had been broadsided, but some pellets had gone thru the poor bird, and some of the pellets were in the feathers, because they didn't have the energy.

As much as I like hunting my supper -- and I hunt to fill the freezer so I don't ever have to buy chickens -- I really hate to be in that situation where I inflicted undue pain for no reason other than some city environmentalist (who probably sit at his desk all day) making wide ranging decisions like this.

It's going to be difficult to find a metal as "good" as this job as lead; I would love for steel to work really, perhaps we could somehow devise a 'steel shell around a lead pellet' -- that would allow 1) killing power 2) protection for lead leakage and 3) loads of time to use magnets to recover it from pretty much anywhere... I realise a good part of the energy of lead hitting a target it when it splatters, and the steel shot won't do that, but it ought to be better...?

Anyway, that evening we had duck, and we toasted the duck; unsuitable apology as it is.

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#13

Post by heelix »

slacka wrote: post #10
harimau777 wrote: post #2

It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…

Hunter here. For big game like deer and moose, I actually prefer copper ammo. With lead shot, if I hit the shoulders or haunches and my family or I eat that meat, there's a very good chance we're eating bits of lead. Most Lead bullets disintegrate on impact, while copper bullets rarely fragment and penetrate deeper. If I wasn't eating the meat, I could see the argument for lead, but it's a weak one at best. In my own…

Deer hunter as well, who eats the meat. I really don't think the large game rounds are a factor. I think I've shot 5 round in the last 8 years, and there are no edible bits in the chest cavity. The lead bullets mushroom out, but...a non-factor for a deer. 270, 30-06, and 300 mag lead ammunition will liquify the chest cavity, but does not go through it.

Shotgun rounds are a different thing. Here in Minnesota, they eliminated lead for waterfowl hunting -- which is a fair thing to do. I'll shoot many, many more rounds at birds - and cleaning the shot out can be tricky. Best not to be spraying the land and/or lakes with lead bbs.

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#14

Post by StacyRoberts »

harimau777 wrote: post #2

It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…

Steel shot is required by law to hunt water fowl in U.S.A. The lead shot falls in the water. It's eaten by fish then eaten by eagles or waterfowl that are then eaten by people, so it's easy to find in any gun sport shop.

Rifle bullets are mostly either lead, which leaves lead residue on the machines parts and causes jams as the tolerances decline. Thus lead coated with copper is superior technology and more reliable but more expensive to boot. It doesn't mushroom as much but the velocities are higher. Plus rifles aren't used around water do they are much less likely to end up in the food supply and this legal for hunting.

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#16

Post by PeterisP »

gregimba wrote: post #3
harimau777 wrote: post #2

It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…

In regards to steel shot having less stopping power its due to the density differential between steel and lead. Generally when people say stopping power they are describing the amount of force exerted and more mass equals more force (assuming the same velocity). Lead Free ammunition exists in various forms and the terminal ballistics can be different than lead ammunition. So many compositions are possible and this is…

For shot the problem is that each piece is very small, so air resistance slows it down meaningfully if the density isn't there (e.g. steel vs lead); so the exact same power at the muzzle will have very different power when hitting the bird if a less dense material is used.

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#17

Post by brudgers »

nraynaud wrote: post #5
harimau777 wrote: post #2

It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…

my bullet is not murderous enough :( I guess the Condor is done in the US.

Just about with roughly five hundred total. Though up from a handful three decades ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_condor

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#18

Post by m4rtink »

buserror wrote: post #12

Lead or "non toxic" ammunition is a big problem. I only do shotgunning, but for these the empirical evidence is that the lead is a better tool to "kill humanely" than for example, steel. Steel doesn't have that "stopping power" that lead has, and requires a lot more, and bigger, shots, and will also have a shorter range than lead... Also, one of the biggest improvement in hunting cartridges are the 'wads' which used…

Maybe tungsten ? If it works for tanks, it should also work for ducks. ;-)

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#19

Post by eternauta3k »

buserror wrote: post #12

Lead or "non toxic" ammunition is a big problem. I only do shotgunning, but for these the empirical evidence is that the lead is a better tool to "kill humanely" than for example, steel. Steel doesn't have that "stopping power" that lead has, and requires a lot more, and bigger, shots, and will also have a shorter range than lead... Also, one of the biggest improvement in hunting cartridges are the 'wads' which used…

If you're concerned about suffering, don't you have access to free-range chicken in the US?

Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)

#20

Post by dfsegoat »

slacka wrote: post #10
harimau777 wrote: post #2

It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…

Hunter here. For big game like deer and moose, I actually prefer copper ammo. With lead shot, if I hit the shoulders or haunches and my family or I eat that meat, there's a very good chance we're eating bits of lead. Most Lead bullets disintegrate on impact, while copper bullets rarely fragment and penetrate deeper. If I wasn't eating the meat, I could see the argument for lead, but it's a weak one at best. In my own…

No input on the article - I’m just stoked to see the hunting public well represented here on HN.

That is very cool to me as a fellow outdoorsman.

Post reply on HN