Best 223 copper mono lead free bullets for deer

[h2so4]

How have these performed on game?

I personally don’t have any pics or animals to reference, sorry.

But to TheG, yes these are designed to shed the petals. They’re not designed to explode / fragment, but the petals will detach and make their own channel / path. As I understand it.

 

[TheGDog]

I personally don’t have any pics or animals to reference, sorry.

But to TheG, yes these are designed to shed the petals. They’re not designed to explode / fragment, but the petals will detach and make their own channel / path. As I understand it.

From Lehigh's website :

"Once fluid is impacted, they shed the front portion of the bullet into multiple petals that radiate outward away from the bullets initial trajectory path resulting in a massive energy spike. The bore diameter base of the bullet continues and penetrates deeply in a straight line."

I would think that since they are engineered to shed some petals initially, that this would then equate to a little less inertia to drive in deeper with whats left-over, when it comes to a more dense critter like a bear. I would *think* the preferred desire for a creature like a bear would be to have the mass of the entire projectile remain together in order to provide more inertia/momentum for the tissues to have to try to overcome, better gauranteeing that the bullet continues to freight-train on thru to the other side, especially if presented with a bone in the way.

Bears can have some reDONKulously thick bones! I have a Bear Humerus (upper arm bone) I found out in D13 that is 4" diameter AT IT'S THINNEST!!! Not that you'd be intentionally shooting at a bear humerus but if it were to move after the shot was fired, ya know, it'd be nice to know it had the maximum chance of pile-driving on thru such an obstacle by retaining ALL it's weight to do so, in order to retain maximum inertia/momentum to fight against the tissues trying to stop it. Yes?

 

[eLightfoot]

Not a 223 but I’ve whacked a few bigger critters with the 73 grain Absolute Hammer out a 22creed with a mv of 3575. They do the job. the hollow point on the the hammers is substantial, much bigger cavity than the Barnes tsx

 

[Formidilosus]

From Lehigh's website :

"Once fluid is impacted, they shed the front portion of the bullet into multiple petals that radiate outward away from the bullets initial trajectory path resulting in a massive energy spike. The bore diameter base of the bullet continues and penetrates deeply in a straight line."

I would think that since they are engineered to shed some petals initially, that this would then equate to a little less inertia to drive in deeper with whats left-over, when it comes to a more dense critter like a bear. I would *think* the preferred desire for a creature like a bear would be to have the mass of the entire projectile remain together in order to provide more inertia/momentum for the tissues to have to try to overcome, better gauranteeing that the bullet continues to freight-train on thru to the other side, especially if presented with a bone in the way.

Bears can have some reDONKulously thick bones! I have a Bear Humerus (upper arm bone) I found out in D13 that is 4" diameter AT IT'S THINNEST!!! Not that you'd be intentionally shooting at a bear humerus but if it were to move after the shot was fired, ya know, it'd be nice to know it had the maximum chance of pile-driving on thru such an obstacle by retaining ALL it's weight to do so, in order to retain maximum inertia/momentum to fight against the tissues trying to stop it. Yes?

Bears, like all predators feature thin, fragile bones. If you have a 4” thick leg bone it’s more likely from bovine than a bear.

 

[Trackselk]

the predators don't have thick hide either. I'm after 200lb or smaller bears myself.

 

[TheGDog]

Bears, like all predators feature thin, fragile bones. If you have a 4” thick leg bone it’s more likely from bovine than a bear.

Hrmm... I suppose it's possible one managed to scavenge it from some Human home/encampment. But that area (near-ish to Frazier Park in CA) doesn't have any places with Cow that I'm aware of, at least not on that side of the 5 Fwy. I suppose it's possible it could be from either a Horse or a Burro though.

Although.. when I googled the skeletal anatomy of a bear, I'll be damned if it didn't look exactly like what I saw. Although I'm sure there's a lot of similarity in that bone among similarly sized quadripeds I suppose.

Well shoot, now ya got me wondering just what it's from! Thanks for the heads up though.

 

[Castle Rock]

I would think that since they are engineered to shed some petals initially, that this would then equate to a little less inertia to drive in deeper with whats left-over, when it comes to a more dense critter like a bear. I would *think* the preferred desire for a creature like a bear would be to have the mass of the entire projectile remain together in order to provide more inertia/momentum for the tissues to have to try to overcome, better gauranteeing that the bullet continues to freight-train on thru to the other side, especially if presented with a bone in the way.

Your understanding of that bit about petals staying attached for more penetration is wrong, the petals would work like a parachute slowing the bullet for less penetration

 

[TheGDog]

Your understanding of that bit about petals staying attached for more penetration is wrong, the petals would work like a parachute slowing the bullet for less penetration

You might want to read what I wrote again. What I said was.... if he INSTEAD did NOT use a round like that Controlled Chaos... (for example a TSX or TTSX by Barnes) That since they are not designed shed any part of the projectile.. that would mean ALL the mass stays together and therefore the maximum amount of inertia would remain to help continue to drive that projectile on thru.

I had said that with a projectile like the Controlled Chaos.. that is designed to shed piece-parts off... that would reduce the overall mass of the remaining projectile thus resulting in less inertia in motion, potentially resulting in less penetration overall, were it to encounter a tougher critter with denser tissues.

I'm sorry if my word choice or something else caused some confusion, could've sworn it was clear what I was saying.

NOTE: I do get what you are saying about the mushrooming effect POTENTIALLY creating more resistance to the projectiles flight-path passing thru the tissue, potentially having an effect on how deeply it might penetrate. However I'm of the opinion that retaining that mass together in a single entity would lead to greater interia that must be overcome in order to slow or stop the projectiles path thru the tissues. Obviously I get that it's a mixture of both phenomenons (and others) working all together that dictates ultimately how deeply it penetrates though.

 

[Raghornjp]

I really like the Barnes 62 TSX
They are rough on bears

 

[Macintosh]

OP, hope this doesn't take your thread off topic, it seems you have the twist-rate question answered already? I have no experience with .223 sized bullets for hunting, but ttsx or lrx in a grain-weight that retains enough velocity to expand reliably past your maximum range is certainly the answer with the most votes whenever this question comes up asking which mono.

As I read it, the whole takeaway point of the “223 for critters” thread was to show that a small fragmenting bullet will create an as-large or larger wound channel and kill as-fast or faster than a much bigger bullet that stays together, regardless of whether it penetrates deeper—as long as it penetrates to vitals, which if the photo evidence means anything they seem to do that just fine. My summation of that entire thread is “It’s the bullet, not the caliber”. Interesting that in the weekly thread on this topic I dont recall those controlled chaos bullets ever coming up. Anyone have any actual first-hand experience with them?

 

[Dude270]

I really like the Barnes 62 TSX
They are rough on bears

Hey 'horn.

Do you prefer the 62x even to the 75 amax? I know you really like those for deer.

 

[TheGDog]

I really like the Barnes 62 TSX
They are rough on bears

Oh hey, would you happen to have pics of what that 62 TSX did to the bear?

 

[Raghornjp]

Hey 'horn.

Do you prefer the 62x even to the 75 amax? I know you really like those for deer.

No, I love and prefer the 75 Amax for deer.
If I was forced to shoot coppers at deer the 62 would be my choice.
They are brutal and dig deep !

 

[Trackselk]

@ macintosh.
I did decide on a 1:8 twist for the new barrel, as the biggest bullets I'm interested in have a 1:9 minimum, and it's only a 16" barrel. I'd go 1:7, but contenders have some pressure issues with the cartridge, so I don't want to push my luck. It will also have a tight chamber upping pressures a touch.
I'm also curious about the controlled chaos, and if they are the same as the Dual performance.
My next rabbit hole will be following up on the reports that the TTSX expand faster than the TSX. It makes sense, but hoping to hear if anyone has any info on this??

The only source I currently see for ttsx that actually has any in stock, is buffalo bore, and that means big $$. Copper creek also rolls ttsx rounds, but they are out of stock, and likewise spendy.

Lastly: 55gr TSX vs 62gr tsx. Opinions? Seems like most prefer the lighter for more speed/expansion insurance.

 

[Raghornjp]

The bear couldn’t catch it !

 

[Trackselk]

The bear couldn’t catch it !

That was .223 tsx? How far?

 

[Raghornjp]

223 AI with a 62 tsx at maybe 125 yards

 

[JohnDough]

 

[RussDXT]

What angle was it standing at?

 

[JohnDough]

What angle was it standing at?

About 5* off from dead-on toward me. Whole body in line with the head. I shot him in the chest pretty frontally.