cart SHOPPING CART You have 0 items

Discussion Forums

Search forums
Forum Index > Rifles general discussion > The Cult of the All Copper Projectile

The Cult of the All Copper Projectile

24 Jun 2017
@ 11:59 am (GMT)

Lane Salvato

I suppose during heat of summer I've got too much idle time on my hands and spend it unwisely discussing projectiles with friends and neighbors. It's amazing how many people have bought hook line and sinker into the myth that monolithic copper projectiles are some type of death rays.

Maybe it's the never ending gel block videos on YouTube, or the marketing in gun magazines, but there are folks who have an almost religious attachment to all copper. No slight on them at all but they do have their place.

I say this with a bit of humor but I've learned that in a group of guys talking, if I say that a bullet which will shed weight makes more sense than monolithic projectiles in most cases, I'd better be ready to run for my life!

All I know is that I've killed so many deer I've lost count with soft point projectiles, and if hit correctly they don't take a step. I've watched animals dead run for a good ways when hit with monolith projectiles, in some cases after being hit twice. Proof is in the pudding. Monolithic has it's place, but it's not any death ray.


25 Jun 2017
@ 05:10 am (GMT)

Bryan Webster

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
It is not always the case that kills are slow with the Barnes Tipped TSX.
My oldest son has shot 9 elk and 4 moose now with his 300WSM using the 180 grain TTSX Barnes loaded to a muzzle velocity of 3050fps. They shoot into 1/2 MOA off of the bench.
Along with a freind who shoots the same bullet/in his 300 WSM who has shot more than him.

Suprisingly they have both been adamant that given all the shots were under 250 yards, all those animals dropped right on the spot. Bullet placement was precise.

I do not doubt at all that many foiled shots at game result from shooting too far out when velocity slows. Those bullets need high speeds to work right.

As for myself I do not normally use them, but did take a big old bull moose one time with his rifle with the 180 gr Barnes ttsx and it did indeed drop right where it had stood with a head shot at 175 yards....but then I do not doubt nearly any well-constructed big game bullet would have shown the same result.
25 Jun 2017
@ 09:05 am (GMT)

Lane Salvato

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Bryan, it seems what you're describing is a large, fast projectile hitting very heavy animals at high speed. If you're going to use all copper, this would seem to be the ideal scenario.

What I think is wrong/inaccurate is that they're suitable for every situation in every caliber. That's what a lot of guys think.

26 Jun 2017
@ 02:59 am (GMT)

Bryan Webster

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Like I said above, I do not use them for my own rifles at all because for the few shots out a long ways I may want/need to do, I sincerely doubt they are going to be effective at other than doing a poor job. At least that is what I observed personally after helping hunters track game on which Barnes bullets were used out beyong 450 to 500 yards, and it mattered little as to the bullet weight out that far..mostly in a 30/06 or .308 rifle where I knew my bullet choice would have done the job.

I have observed a few times where a 120 grain ttsx hit whitetail deer in the shoulder and neck areas and did a decent job, but those guys that were using them were shooting from a stand and the ranges were all within 100 to 200 yards.

I have shot a pile of big game over the years with the Speer Hot Cor and BTSP bullets as well as the Nosler Partitions and I have recently added the new Hornady ELD-X and ELD-M bullets to my preferred bullet list.
26 Jun 2017
@ 03:06 am (GMT)

Bryan Webster

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
We found another reason I do not like to shoot Barnes bullets in that to obtain accuracy for the Barnes one in our rifles one must first totally clean all the present copper alloty from the bore then use up 5 to 20 rounds (depending on the rifle bore) fouling it with the Barnes alloy.

Then when and if you choose to go on a hunt where shots will be more likely a long way out, you must clean the barnes copper out and refoul the bore with what your long range bullet shoice wil be, like the Hornady ELD-M bullets.

If we failed to follow this regime we found in our rifles the groups were not precise enough for long range, but were resolved by following what we discovered, which is quite a bother in my opinion.
26 Jun 2017
@ 10:09 am (GMT)

john feyereisn

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
I shake my head at the marketing that promotes these, and i had abad experiance with one and went away from them, that being said i think in certain situations they could be a viable option. Hopefully terminal performance is improved in the next few years, because like it or not there will come a day that Lead will not be an option, i just hope the progress continues, because like i said, lead will not be legal forever.
27 Jun 2017
@ 07:32 am (GMT)

mark korte

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
I shot 2 cow elk and 2 whitetails with one shot each from a 7x57 and 120 grn Barnes TTSX. None of them took more than another step. But all were under 200 yards and the load was pretty hot. I went thru a pretty drawn out discussion with some of you a few years ago on all this and my take away (thanks to your help) was that copper works fine if you keep the velocities humming and limit your range based on velocity as Bryan said. I shoot it because I do believe lead is an issue for scavengers, but I also except that copper has limitations that you had better be prepared to work within or you will probably regret it at some point. As in all things shooting - don't do anything stupid.
27 Jun 2017
@ 10:20 am (GMT)

Lane Salvato

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile

Here's the thing though. There's not much research to support lead projectiles hurting carrion eating birds. Lead based paint from fire control observation towers was never considered in studies regarding the California Condor. However, if we grant that lead projectiles MAY cause issues, and want to avoid them out of an abundance of caution, we still have better options than solid copper.

The best option for zero-lead is DRT Ammunition. They're a small manufacturer from Missouri, who is doing great work with compressed metal powder. A mixture of copper and tungsten from what I remember. People won't accept it because it's new, and I'll guarantee you it kills faster than anything on the market. It's so fast killing given proper shot placement that they've used 243's to kill elk, 223's to kill very large boar in Texas, and as a statement of confidence, even used them in 223's to kill Nilgai, which are tougher than elk by a country mile. That's not supposed to happen with frangible ammunition. However, it does and by a lot.

He's killed grizzly with them with 1 shot from a 300 Winchester Magnum, and I've killed large axis deer with 1 shot from my 270, dead as a doornail with a marginal shot (my fault).

The deal is that hunters have options, and if you believe as I do that lead isn't a big deal, you have a LOT of options. If you believe as others do that lead is a problem, then DRT is a much better answer, with proper caliber selection than solid copper. Solid copper, in general, is going to kill slower than soft point lead bullets, or bonded lead bullets like nobler partitions and definitely the DRT's. Bottom line, there are better options and we owe it to the game we shoot to make the fastest kills possible.

Also, the video herein posted gives a "from the horse's mouth perspective in the telling:

You've got a guy here with an all copper bullet stating that in general, solid copper doesn't kill as fast as lead, so he's pre-fragmented the bullet, so it will break up.

I would challenge anyone, anywhere, with proper shot placement to see if solid copper lead free bullets can even come close to the terminal performance of DRT Ammunition in the same caliber, and with the same shot placement. Most guys won't even consider it. That's not logical, and it ties nicely back to the title of the original post, The Cult of the All Copper Projectile.
28 Jun 2017
@ 02:15 am (GMT)

Bryan Webster

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
And just to add something few persons loving copper bullets may not think about. How about the Corvids? THe crows, magpies, ravens, the meat scavengers you are wanting to save...they are the reservoir for the spreading issue called the West Nile disease that infects blood sucking insects and who then pass that on to people.

Google West Nile disease for more information.

In my observations in Northern BC I would rank the issue as a weight on the rest of us from wise business people wanting to sell a new product. Granted the likes of Barnes bullets do have their benefits in accuracy as well as close range kills with good shot placement. I am one of those types who dislike being forced into something I see as not totally needed.
28 Jun 2017
@ 08:25 am (GMT)

mark korte

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Actually there is info out there on lead and raptors. And though I'm no expert I am a bird guy and I guess I have seen nothing out there concerning condors eating paint chips. They will eat gut piles though and we all know certain lead bullets are prone to breaking up inside an animals body cavity. Fragments end up in muscle tissue as well and that part's for me!
As to corvids - they are among my favorite bird group, so that example struck a cord. While they may well be carriers of West Nile, a far greater issue with this disease is standing water that mosquitoes use as breeding grounds. We have West Nile around here annually and I only know of a very few cases over the years of infections in humans. You are in far more peril every time you get behind the wheel and head out to the range. Yet we take the dangers of vehicles for granted.
In the end we all make choices in what we consider acceptable, whether its copper vs lead or taking that 600 yard shot vs. trying to get closer. There are always going to be those that over react and those that ignore what is in front of them because its inconvenient to what they want. For me, I'll take the limitations of copper if thats what it takes to ensure a healthy population of raptors, corvids and other carrion eaters. They have a job and occupy an important niche that has been around since long before we humans figured out we could melt lead into projectiles and fire them from a tube. And besides, why give the anti-hunting folks more fuel for the fire?
28 Jun 2017
@ 02:59 pm (GMT)

Lane Salvato

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile

Let's recognize that my original post was about fast killing soft projectiles versus slow killing copper projectiles, and the cult-like following of said homogeneous projectiles.

If a projectile that sheds weight, or produces violent wounding is available, and all other things being equal, then my belief is that they should be given due consideration. This doubly goes for DRT ammunition for folks who really are intent on having effective, fast killing lead-free ammo.

If we move to the lead-free argument for the sake of the birds, and the children, (because it's always for the children and the birds right?) then we'd like to know if studies that support mass banning of all lead containing ammunition are based upon well documented science, following wherever the evidence goes, or something else. We would also want to know if the results of the lead ban point to a reduction in lead levels of animals studied. If the results show that lead bans are ineffective then it doesn't matter how noble the intentions. In the case of the AB 821 Lead Ban, published studies show us what most hunters expected, and that is the following:

When quantifying the blood lead levels in California Condors before and after the lead ban, there is no statistically significant difference. The lead levels actually went up slightly in the study population after the lead ban (Source - USFWS and NPS).

Condor lead deaths before and after AB 821 showed one condor lead death before AB 821 and five condor lead deaths after AB 821. (Source - Necropsies from FWS and studbook from SDZ).

After the lead ban, hunter compliance was 99% (Source - memo from CADFG law enforcement division).

This begins to show that AB 821 is ineffective in reducing condor lead exposure and death, and that lead ammunition is not the case of condor lead exposure and death.

It would be interesting to see the studies that came up with the proposed lead bans in the first place, because chances are they made some assumptions that allowed them to get the results they wanted.

The point is that you've now got an entire state where hunters have no choices and at least a very high suspicion that the entire enterprise was aimed at restricting access to ammunition rather than saving some hapless birds with a low reproductive rate.

We need not give up freedom to enjoy the entire abundance of wildlife because the entire premise of those decrying the use of lead ammunition is flawed and based upon a political agenda rather than going where the evidence leads in relation to conservation.

I think I'm done.
28 Jun 2017
@ 11:51 pm (GMT)

mark korte

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
I guess I don't remember children entering into this discussion or "other things being equal" - I thought that was the problem.
Using copper forces some folks into changing the way they hunt/shoot. Its a choice and many don't want to change. We went thru it in the 80s with steel shot and waterfowl hunting. Somehow the industry, duck hunters and more importantly, more ducks, survived.

I'm done too. And unfortunately that "hapless bird" may be done for good.
29 Jun 2017
@ 08:50 am (GMT)

Greg Quick

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Mark, the waterfowl hunting world is far different than the big game world. there is massive amount of bird shot in the water from shotguns due generous daily bag limits and long hunting seasons, massive amounts of lead accumulated in the wetlands. One Shotgun shell had roughly 1-1 3/8 ounces of lead in it which translates to 430-600 grains. With a daily limit of 7 ducks and a hunter that's a shitty shot, he could easily burn through a box of 25 shotgun shells in one hunt trying to fill his limit. And a duck hunt season last roughly 3 months in many states in the U.S. one hunter in the wetlands could spread more lead in a hunting season than all big game hunters in the same area combined, easily. that's a shit ton of lead in waterways along with ducks feeding in the vegetation the lead was embedding in. Something obviously had to be done about that. I don't think having lead bullets hunting big game is anywhere near that point yet. The great salt lake (where I love) is a major habitat site for migrating waterfowl and other birds and its mercury that's posioning the birds now. Get rid of lead and people will find a new way to dick up the environment.
29 Jun 2017
@ 07:44 pm (GMT)

Mike Davis

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Mark...the waterfowl thing is still a very touchy causes much agro still.
PERSONALLY I have got used to using steel and kill ducks just as well as before...if not better as we have changed the way we hunt
word on street is that some places are thinking of reversing the lead shot ban.

as for copper in centrefire..... I use it in my .223 with good results its plurry weird how it seems to work.....the damage inside the animal is very similar but completely OPPOSITE to what I see with the .270 with a cup n core the likes of coreloct eg not too hard or too soft (not as good as a partition)

the onside shoulder has big hole in it and the lungs have good sized hole through them,the farside shoulder has small amount of similar but backwards
so yes Im happy to use them in thier place...I dont have fast twist barrel to handle heavy for calibre .224 pill (and if wanted to fire 80grn pill at 3000fps would use a .243) they give me confidence the projectile will penertrate well enough,for the few times the wee rifle gets used on deer or pigs
also got some 110grn copper for the .270 as swapped them for ballistic tips just cause I could.....I have better pills for big gun and use them where required,the barnes are there and rifle seems to like them so they will get used up .
30 Jun 2017
@ 03:38 am (GMT)

mark korte

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile

Link to USGS info synopsis and many related research/peer reviewed publication links. For those unfamiliar the USGS is the natural science arm of the US government. It is pretty well accepted as apolitical and respected for its long history of research into natural resource and wildlife issues in the US.

Still a personal choice if you are not in condor country......
30 Jun 2017
@ 11:09 am (GMT)

Steph Foster

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
I am sorry guys, this is a very long post however I think that this is such a big subject that the length is justified.

I have to admit that I am really not convinced or sold on the idea that lead projectiles are responsible for environmental lead toxicity. I think it is a very limited and narrow view point. Rather like having a house that is suffering from sinking foundations, dry rot and termites but deciding that the front door needs replacing.

Just a quick note on the subject of lead toxicity in the environment.
Here are the common pollutants that make up smog in the US:

Criteria air pollutants are common throughout the United States. These pollutants can injure health, harm the environment and cause property damage. U.S. EPA has identified six criteria pollutants:
Carbon Monoxide
Nitrogen Dioxide (one of several Nitrogen Oxides)
Ozone (formed from precursor Volatile Organic Compounds)
Particulate Matter
Sulfur Dioxide

How do these things get into our environment I hear you ask?

Lead (Pb) is an elemental heavy metal found naturally in the environment as well as in manufactured products. Lead can be released directly into the air, as suspended particles.
Historic major sources of lead air emissions were motor vehicles and industrial sources. Motor-vehicle emissions have been reduced by the phasing out of leaded gasoline, but lead is still used in general-aviation gasoline for piston-engine aircraft. Lead that is emitted into the air can be inhaled or can be ingested, primarily through contact with contaminated soils or other surfaces.
• Primary stationary sources of lead today include:
o lead smelters
o waste incinerators
o utilities
o lead-acid battery manufacturers and recyclers
• Other industrial sources of lead emissions can include:
o metals processing
o iron and steel foundries
o copper smelters
o industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers
o glass manufacturers
o cement manufacturers

Thankfully since the early 90’s responsible forwards thinking Countries such as the United States have been lowering their emissions and doing sensible things like getting rid of the lead in their gasoline. Also, manufacturers have very sensibly shut up shop in their own country and sent all the dirty stuff off to other places. This is a process called shitting in someone else’s nest. So this must mean that the environment in the US is now cleaner than it has ever been.

Sadly there is this weird thing where everything on this planet is interconnected. Here is how it works:

The U.S. is producing less air pollution, but smog levels are still rising in the western U.S. because of pollutants released in Asian countries that then drift over the Pacific Ocean. Researchers say their findings show the importance of a global approach to preserving air quality.
"Scientists found Asian air pollution contributed as much as 65 percent of an increase in Western ozone in recent years," NPR's Rob Schmitz reports from Shanghai. "China and India, where many consumer products are manufactured, are the worst offenders."
The problem, scientists say, is that Asian countries' emissions of nitrogen oxides — which sunlight then breaks down in reactions that produce ozone — have tripled since 1990.

Oh look, here is another article excerpt:

This isn’t the first time China has been identified as the source of U.S. air pollution. Last year, a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that pollution blown across the ocean from China can account for 12 to 24 percent of sulfate concentrations on the West Coast. In 2006, the study found, pollution blown in from China caused Los Angeles, California to experience an extra day of unhealthy smog levels.


Scientists measured ozone levels recorded at springtime for the past 25 years in 16 national parks in the western U.S., including Yellowstone, Yosemite and Grand Canyon. The parks' locations farther away from cities, where smog is typically expected, made them ideal spots for the study.
The team looked at levels in the spring when wind and weather patterns push Asian pollution across the Pacific Ocean, said Meiyun Lin, a scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who led the study. In the summer, when those weather patterns subside, ozone levels in the national parks remained well above normal.
Asian air pollution was, by far, the biggest contributor to smog in the West, the researchers found. The team also looked at other factors, such as wildfires and methane from livestock. Asian air pollution contributed as much as 65% of the western U.S. ozone increase, while wildfire emissions supplied less than 10% and methane about 15%.

Hmmm, could I possibly be suggesting that the lead poisoning found in birds that have their main habitats in the Western US states could possibly be acquiring lead from sources other than lead projectiles?

But isn’t it so much easier to just point the finger at one little minority group - hunters using lead projectiles, and say they are the ones doing all this damage! There’s not enough of them to actually fight back and they are basically quiet, law abiding citizens who just want to enjoy their weekends.

Because let’s face it the REAL problem is our ridiculous consumerism! It’s funny how Mark said in his last post that people don’t want to change. I absolutely agree with him in this, however his context is completely wrong. Today people don’t want to lose their choice of 5000 pointless hair products, air fresheners, fabric softeners, deodorants, plastic frikkin bags – how many variations of zip lock, string tie, snaplock, snack size, sandwich size fucking bags does the population need! McDonalds god damn kids toys! WTF! Yes, .002% of the US population using solid copper projectiles will totally save the environment. Good call.

The truth is that while, yes we do care for our environment, in a casual, you know I’d miss it if it wasn’t there kind of way, really we don’t actually want to look too closely at our environmental problems in case we have to make real changes. We don’t want to go back to simpler times, we don’t want to sacrifice our comforts and indulgences. So the easiest thing to do is find a red herring, feed people enough information so that they feel like something can be done about the problem but not so much information that it upsets the comfortable complacency of our gross and wasteful consumerism. And business goes on as usual. Copper bullet syndrome is actually a very clever way of being seen to do something positive while making no actual difference at all and even making money on the deal.

[b]I have to say that the one thing on this whole thread that I really take exception too is the inference that only with close up shots can there never be any mistakes. Recently, forum member Andrew Murray posted results with his factory rifle, out of the box. This rifle grouped around 4 MOA following its break in with Andrew employing good form. This is the reality of how many rifles shoot out of the box. Without a good barrel break (copper allowed to continue to build up) and with less than ideal form, expected groups can be around 6” at 100 yards. We have just finished studying yet another rifle which produced identical performance out of the box. At just 200 yards, the potential group size is 12”. Add to this a ‘traditional’ type mono bullet moving at low speeds for the recoil sensitive generation (and / or their ultra light light rifles), and the result is a risk of narrow gut shots wounds. It is amazing how quickly a poor close range shot can become a 600 yard follow up for a hunting guide. There is something arrogant about suggesting that close up shots never go badly. There is as much scope for a poor close shot as there is for a poor medium range or long range shot. In fact at very close ranges, animals may become aware of us at the moment we are about to fire (the typical bush snap shot), resulting in some degree of shot placement error if the animal moves as the trigger breaks, plus offhand error. There are many references in this knowledge base to using soft and fast expanding yet heavy bullets for bush hunting as a means to overcome such errors. The information contained within the .35 Whelen article is one such example.
How unfortunate that it is the animals we hunt that end up paying the price for our convictions. The reality of past mono copper projectile designs is that in many instances, as long as everything is absolutely ideal they are adequate to OK. Personally, I prefer to use something that allows me some margin of error because interestingly enough things don’t go the way I plan fairly regularly.

At the end of the day substituting one form of cruelty for another is not progress and will not save the environment.

There are some interesting new bullet designs coming along now. But as Nathan has stated in his copper bullet article (Cartridge research section), the technology is still very new. It may be decades before we have wide spread and readily available access to non-lead based bullets that can outperform current designs throughout the velocity spectrum.

We are a wasteful, greedy species and we have over populated this planet. We manufacture excessive amounts of unnecessary junk to satisfy our need for instant gratification, what we don't use we dump and now that the consequences of our behaviour as a global society are being felt we start finger pointing. Finger pointing at one very small group of people and making them the scapegoats for all environmental problems is utterly ridiculous.
30 Jun 2017
@ 11:47 am (GMT)

Dan Keene

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Hi Steph,
Man I enjoyed that. Very well put and absoferkinlutely on the button.
I will vote for you.
30 Jun 2017
@ 04:55 pm (GMT)

Andrew Murray

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Reading the reloading book one of the this that stuck out for me was the line something along the lines of

" 'I don't have the time to handload'. Try swapping time/money/whatever for compassion. Suddenly I don't have the compassion to handload has much more impact."

I think if we are truly on the train to take care and steward our worlds then taking the time to do things right no longer becomes a burden or another option but the only way things can be done.

A little off touch but still very much in the same vein is a documentary called "(Dis)Honesty". In it a long running experiment shows that rather than the typical idea of a outright dishonest person taking a large sum of money or whatever the case may be, it's the everyday person taking little shortcuts here and there that actually lead to long term problems. The cumulative effect of everyone's little shortcuts does way way way more damage than one person's big act of dishonesty. The same can be said for all aspects of our lives. We will get away with whatever we let ourselves believe is close enough to being right.

I know a little off topic but hopefully you can connect the dots in regards to game and projectile selection for the ranges/rifles/calibres we are using.
30 Jun 2017
@ 04:58 pm (GMT)

Andrew Murray

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
I should add that I recently purchased some winchester factory ammo that really highlighted the importance of hand loading. Each cartridge has its projectile seated to a different height and quite a lot of brass is dinged and dented. The primers all look seated at the same depth which is nice. But I imagine they aren't going to perform very consistently because each cartridge is its own unique individual.
30 Jun 2017
@ 07:08 pm (GMT)

Andy Hrelja

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Steph, that was an brilliant post. And I couldn't agree more on every point you made.
30 Jun 2017
@ 09:31 pm (GMT)

Bob Mavin

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Good on yah Steph, the world is stuffed. I wish I could turn the clock back 100yrs or so and start again. But the money focused arseholes would probably stuff it up worse the second time.

01 Jul 2017
@ 01:45 am (GMT)

Lane Salvato

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile

I agree with most of your argument. Especially the notion of targeting a group small in numbers ins some feel good attempt to show that something's being done when we all know it isn't. Red herring indeed.

Your points about consumerism strike a nerve too. Hunters are the true conservationists, and we should take every opportunity to make purchasing decisions, and voting decisions that show good stewardship to this world in which we've been entrusted. So many great examples exist of individuals helping conservations efforts for cleaner air, water, etc. We should all be examples of responsible consumers, and conservationists.

01 Jul 2017
@ 04:04 am (GMT)

Joshua Mayfield

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
This is a wonderful discussion. As opposed to most online debates, we have intelligent, experienced people articulating the rationale for their viewpoints with both reason and passion. If only the politicians (and dare I say, more of us clergy) would study this example and follow suit.

I've nothing to add to the actual issue of copper/lead. That's been commented on by people with much more insight than I have. I would submit that both compassion and responsibility require one another to achieve their full potential.

If you're in a corner of the world where it's too hot/cold/rainy/sunny or whatever to spend many of your waking hours in the outdoors and you are interested in reading a book that artfully illustrates the principle Andrew brings up, try The Winter of Our Discontent by John Steinbeck.
01 Jul 2017
@ 11:46 am (GMT)

Brian Vickerman

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
It is nice reading a discussion that doesn't develop into name calling. Must be a bunch of hunters.

I've not posted in a long time due to a negative experience in last year's moose hunt. (I may discuss that on a different post.)

There was a good study out of one of the southern states that referenced deer hunting and the effects of shot distance, placement, type of bullet, calibre etc.

One of the points that does stand out is that more game was lost with all copper vs lead fill. The break up of the lead bullet, caused more "life ending damage". ( Placement, velocity, calibre etc. would all play into this.)

To me that would suggest that the DRT would make a better environmentally friendly replacement for the lead bullet.

Copper has its place. In my 30-06 I use a 165 gr. Federal copper for moose and for deer hunt I use 168 gr. Winchester Ballistic Silver Tip

In my 308 I use 150 gr. Federal Copper for moose and for deer the 150 gr. Winchester BST.

I hunt the same area for both. A northern bush area of Ontario which is a blend of hardwoods and pines. A long shot would be 150 yds.


01 Jul 2017
@ 03:12 pm (GMT)

Lane Salvato

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
I like this discussion too. I'm done making points, but it is nice to be able to disagree and have a cordial debate. I appreciate the courtesy of those with differing viewpoints very much.
04 Jul 2017
@ 07:06 am (GMT)

mark korte

Re: The Cult of the All Copper Projectile
Couldn't agree more.


We are a small, family run business, based out of Taranaki, New Zealand, who specialize in cartridge research and testing, and rifle accurizing.