Fragmenting bullets versus controlled expanding bullets

[FredH]

So it seems "fragmenting" is a good thing and little is said about controlled expansion in hunting bullets here. I can see a fragmenting bullet having an edge when the bullet is of small diameter and 2x expansion would only mean .44 and you only have less than 80 grains of bullet to start with. The term controlled expanding and "hard bullets" is misleading as most bullets are designed to expand quickly but hold onto a percentage of weight. That is the controlled part. Leaving Mono bullets out of this argument it appears bullets that fragment to a great degree are going to throw lead particles around freely. Unless you like that wild lead metal taste occasionally not a good thing. In fact many lead cored bullets fragment to some degree, the Partition is a serious offender and yes is a good killer because of it. For years the standard thought on bullet construction was 2x expansion and 60-70% weight retention. Meaning 30-40% of the bullet turned into fragments. Today using smaller calibers that percentage has grown to 50% or more. Many of todays match style hunting bullets fragment a lot and destroy a lot of tissue, killing well. Many boat tailed hunting bullets are constructed to expand at lower velocities because the idea was to use them at longer ranges. I am a big fan of fragmenting bullets for use on things I am not planning on eating like coyotes but prefer to limit the spread of lead in the deer meat. I truly dislike mono's because of crappy performance from early Barnes designs, possibly the newer designs would be ok. This all being opined upon in a rambling manner I never had any real problems getting quick kills using standard cup and core controlled expanding bullets in diameters from 6.5 up. Had a few sketchy results with 6MM's when using them like I would a 30-06. I always considered using the .224 rounds on deer as reliable under easy shot conditions at medium ranges. Not as 400 yard wonders.

 

[HandgunHTR]

I always considered using the .224 rounds on deer as reliable under easy shot conditions at medium ranges. Not as 400 yard wonders.

Serious question. What do you consider "medium ranges"? I am asking because it seem that you are saying that 400 yards is past "medium" range.

 

[hereinaz]

Lots to unpack there.

Basically, don’t shoot meat and it’s all good.

Most I know shooting highly fragmenting bullets of any size choose to shoot behind the shoulder where no meat is spoiled. No lead in the meat.

I haven’t personally spoiled a single quarter intentionally, and maybe one or two because of another factor. I haven’t hunted long and came into it shooting intentionally and fairly well practiced.

Highly fragmenting bullets destroy the lungs and the animal doesn’t travel far, so the “break down the shoulder to avoid tracking” doesn’t apply. Similarly, no exit is required, though it happens regularly.

Smaller calibers make for better shots over all, so lower probability of meat damage with them. And the carnage is less so less lead in the perimeter of the wound channel.

Velocity is the key driver to expansion, fragmentation and death, which is 1800 fps. So, 400 yards with a 22 Creedmoor, the bullet is still going plenty fast enough to kill, and could be lethal out to 800 yards. My 22 BR with 80 grain VLD is above 1800 fps at 650 yards.

Yardage means nothing in this context, because it is velocity that expands a bullet.

 

[FredH]

Serious question. What do you consider "medium ranges"? I am asking because it seem that you are saying that 400 yards is past "medium" range.

200 yards is medium range. Yes to the vast majority of hunters 400 yards is long range.

 

[FredH]

Lots to unpack there.

Basically, don’t shoot meat and it’s all good.

Most I know shooting highly fragmenting bullets of any size choose to shoot behind the shoulder where no meat is spoiled. No lead in the meat.

I haven’t personally spoiled a single quarter intentionally, and maybe one or two because of another factor. I haven’t hunted long and came into it shooting intentionally and fairly well practiced.

Highly fragmenting bullets destroy the lungs and the animal doesn’t travel far, so the “break down the shoulder to avoid tracking” doesn’t apply. Similarly, no exit is required, though it happens regularly.

Smaller calibers make for better shots over all, so lower probability of meat damage with them. And the carnage is less so less lead in the perimeter of the wound channel.

Velocity is the key driver to expansion, fragmentation and death, which is 1800 fps. So, 400 yards with a 22 Creedmoor, the bullet is still going plenty fast enough to kill, and could be lethal out to 800 yards. My 22 BR with 80 grain VLD is above 1800 fps at 650 yards.

Yardage means nothing in this context, because it is velocity that expands a bullet.

1800 fps is not some magic number for bullet expansion or fragmentation. In fact a bullet is in general not going to make a large wound if it hits at a speed where it is on the margin of expanding or fragmenting. Smaller calibers are easier to shoot for sure but any experienced rifleman with a 308, 270, 30-06 etc familiar with his rifle has zero problems making his bullets go where they should. A behind the shoulder shot does not predict wherever random lead and jacketed material end up. To say a 223 is better than a 7-08 is insanity. Just because a bullet has 1800 fps at 800 yards doesn't mean you should shoot that far. Time of flight is 3/4 of a second giving the animal plenty of time to move a foot or so after the trigger is pulled. The wind will affect your bullet by pushing it 4.8 inches per MPH. Can you figure the wind speed within 2mph over 800 yards? No I can see that at 400 yards it would work nicely and 1.4 inches of drift per MPH of wind is probably going to allow an error of 4mph in misreading the wind.

 

[Macintosh]

I think functional choice of bullet type depends on the give and take between cartridge, range, and how big/deep a hole you want to make. I think its pretty easy to land in both directions depending on what youre hunting, cartridge you’re shooting and where. I dont think a one-size-fits-all solution makes much sense.

 

[hereinaz]

1800 fps is not some magic number for bullet expansion or fragmentation. In fact a bullet is in general not going to make a large wound if it hits at a speed where it is on the margin of expanding or fragmenting. Smaller calibers are easier to shoot for sure but any experienced rifleman with a 308, 270, 30-06 etc familiar with his rifle has zero problems making his bullets go where they should. A behind the shoulder shot does not predict wherever random lead and jacketed material end up. To say a 223 is better than a 7-08 is insanity. Just because a bullet has 1800 fps at 800 yards doesn't mean you should shoot that far. Time of flight is 3/4 of a second giving the animal plenty of time to move a foot or so after the trigger is pulled. The wind will affect your bullet by pushing it 4.8 inches per MPH. Can you figure the wind speed within 2mph over 800 yards? No I can see that at 400 yards it would work nicely and 1.4 inches of drift per MPH of wind is probably going to allow an error of 4mph in misreading the wind.

You are incorrect, 1800 fps is a velocity at which 99% of highly fragmenting bullets will break apart and create lethal would channel. It is not on the margin if 99% will open. It’s the number given by many manufacturers and proven by experience.

It’s not insane to say a .223 is as lethal as a 7mm bullet, because the size of the wound channel is effectively the same when it comes to damage necessary to be lethal. The wound channels have been shown to be nearly as large in circumference and penetration.

At about equal impact speeds, I could not really tell any meaningful difference between a 133 .257 and 180 7mm Berger. At 100 yards with both I had exit holes larger than a tennis ball. Does it matter that the 7mm blew a larger sized hole? Both actually pulled lung tissue out of the exit.

The same thing holds true for internal damage of .223 vs .308. The difference in damage is not directly proportional to the bullet diameter. It is more on a logarithmic or exponential scale.

Doubling the weight of a highly fragmenting bullet doesn’t double the diameter of damage or double the penetration. It might double the total damage, but the wound channel isn’t that much larger. It only adds and inch or two to the diameter and a couple inches to the penetration.

The difference with higher weight retention bullets (after a much smaller fragmentation wound channel) is much more related to the size of the bullet because of the way they cause damage. Like archery, the damage is more directly related to the cutting diameter of the blades.

And, the .223 fragmenting bullet objectively damages more total tissue than a larger mono metal with a narrow wound channel.

Now, higher velocity changes dynamics of all bullets, so monos can create devestating wounds at higher velocity bands.

Tell me more about how lead disperses into meat outside of the visible wound channel and bloodshot. I don’t believe it can physically travel through tissue much beyond the bloodshot meat, because the particles are so small it takes little meat to stop it.

Perhaps there is something I don’t know or an error. In my logic.

That said, the minimal amount of lead that travels, doesn’t appear to be outside of the wound channel enough to bother me. Sure, I can’t predict everything, but I have not seen anything travel in a weird trajectory. Once a bullet starts to break apart, it spreads out in a vector consistent with the trajectory and substance it is traveling through. Physics seems to limit the trajectory.

In lung/rib shots how unpredictable do you think lead will spread?

I said nothing about ethics or advisability of shooting to 800, except to point out that your 400 yard number has nothing to do with bullet performance as identified above.

I understand and agree that distance adds variables. That doesn’t create worse probabilities for all “long range” shots. I agree that an animal with reasonable potential to take a step makes a less ethical shot. I very likely won’t take that shot.

Question: If you knew with high confidence that you could put a bullet into a 4” spot on a bedded buck who is relaxed and chewing his cud, so you know he isn’t moving, would you factor time of flight to determine if the shot is ethical?

Hunting ethics are necessarily dependent on all the variables. I can create hundreds of scenarios where even a 50 yard shot is unethical, but that speaks nothing of 50 yard shots.

It’s Ok for you to draw a line where you feel comfortable, or even ethical. But, many will disagree, including me. You can even call me unethical, and I am OK with it.

As for the line at which lead contamination begins, I want to understand how far you think it travels beyond blood shot meat. And, why. I honestly don’t know.

 

[hereinaz]

I think functional choice of bullet type depends on the give and take between cartridge, range, and how big/deep a hole you want to make. I think its pretty easy to land in both directions depending on what youre hunting, cartridge you’re shooting and where. I dont think a one-size-fits-all solution makes much sense.

This is the way… lay out the facts/reasons and leave others to make a choice. All the bullets I have ever seen a Rokslider promote will kill.

What I see wrong are people who prefer one thing then go on to attack contrary opinions and justify with generalizations, errors or misunderstanding.

 

[FredH]

You are incorrect, 1800 fps is a velocity at which 99% of highly fragmenting bullets will break apart and create lethal would channel. It is not on the margin if 99% will open. It’s the number given by many manufacturers and proven by experience.

It’s not insane to say a .223 is as lethal as a 7mm bullet, because the size of the wound channel is effectively the same when it comes to damage necessary to be lethal. The wound channels have been shown to be nearly as large in circumference and penetration.

At about equal impact speeds, I could not really tell any meaningful difference between a 133 .257 and 180 7mm Berger. At 100 yards with both I had exit holes larger than a tennis ball. Does it matter that the 7mm blew a larger sized hole? Both actually pulled lung tissue out of the exit.

The same thing holds true for internal damage of .223 vs .308. The difference in damage is not directly proportional to the bullet diameter. It is more on a logarithmic or exponential scale.

Doubling the weight of a highly fragmenting bullet doesn’t double the diameter of damage or double the penetration. It might double the total damage, but the wound channel isn’t that much larger. It only adds and inch or two to the diameter and a couple inches to the penetration.

The difference with higher weight retention bullets (after a much smaller fragmentation wound channel) is much more related to the size of the bullet because of the way they cause damage. Like archery, the damage is more directly related to the cutting diameter of the blades.

And, the .223 fragmenting bullet objectively damages more total tissue than a larger mono metal with a narrow wound channel.

Now, higher velocity changes dynamics of all bullets, so monos can create devestating wounds at higher velocity bands.

Tell me more about how lead disperses into meat outside of the visible wound channel and bloodshot. I don’t believe it can physically travel through tissue much beyond the bloodshot meat, because the particles are so small it takes little meat to stop it.

Perhaps there is something I don’t know or an error. In my logic.

That said, the minimal amount of lead that travels, doesn’t appear to be outside of the wound channel enough to bother me. Sure, I can’t predict everything, but I have not seen anything travel in a weird trajectory. Once a bullet starts to break apart, it spreads out in a vector consistent with the trajectory and substance it is traveling through. Physics seems to limit the trajectory.

In lung/rib shots how unpredictable do you think lead will spread?

I said nothing about ethics or advisability of shooting to 800, except to point out that your 400 yard number has nothing to do with bullet performance as identified above.

I understand and agree that distance adds variables. That doesn’t create worse probabilities for all “long range” shots. I agree that an animal with reasonable potential to take a step makes a less ethical shot. I very likely won’t take that shot.

Question: If you knew with high confidence that you could put a bullet into a 4” spot on a bedded buck who is relaxed and chewing his cud, so you know he isn’t moving, would you factor time of flight to determine if the shot is ethical?

Hunting ethics are necessarily dependent on all the variables. I can create hundreds of scenarios where even a 50 yard shot is unethical, but that speaks nothing of 50 yard shots.

It’s Ok for you to draw a line where you feel comfortable, or even ethical. But, many will disagree, including me. You can even call me unethical, and I am OK with it.

As for the line at which lead contamination begins, I want to understand how far you think it travels beyond blood shot meat. And, why. I honestly don’t know.

You do realize 1800 fps is slow right? Would you bet your truck that an 88 gr. ELDM will fragment at 1800 fps? "Minimal amount that lead travels" You can't predict the size of the fragments so they may go farther and in odd directions due to their shape. Here is an interesting article.

Fragmentation of hunting bullets observed with synchrotron radiation: Lighting up the source of a lesser-known lead exposure pathway - PMC

Bullet fragments have been previously observed in the remains and edible portions of big game animals that were harvested using rifles. The fragmentation issue has attracted attention because traditional hunting bullets are more than 70% lead, which ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[KHntr]

"Minimal amount that lead travels" You can't predict the size of the fragments so they may go farther and in odd directions due to their shape.

So what? If you don’t want to use lead bullets, don’t use them. Seems pretty simple.

 

[hereinaz]

You do realize 1800 fps is slow right? Would you bet your truck that an 88 gr. ELDM will fragment at 1800 fps?

Would you bet your truck that it won’t? Let’s meet up and do it. I will load cartridges in front of you and prove they are loaded to impact at 1800 fps by a chronograph and then shoot one into ballistic gel for score.

Slow is a relative descriptor. 1800 fps is blinding fast compared to a desert tortoise. Slow doesn’t tell us anything.

You make straight assertions and I don’t know how or what makes you believe it. You called it magic and slow, and asked if I would bet my truck.

I am using factory numbers and documented experience.

Hornady says that the ELDx expands reliably down to 1800 fps. The fragmentation of the X is initiated from the tip and would be relatively indistinguishable from the ELDm.

 

[Lou270]

Would you bet your truck that it won’t? Let’s meet up and do it. I will load cartridges in front of you and prove they are loaded to impact at 1800 fps by a chronograph and then shoot one into ballistic gel for score.

Slow is a relative descriptor. 1800 fps is blinding fast compared to a desert tortoise. Slow doesn’t tell us anything.

You make straight assertions and I don’t know how or what makes you believe it. You called it magic and slow, and asked if I would bet my truck.

I am using factory numbers and documented experience.

Hornady says that the ELDx expands reliably down to 1800 fps. The fragmentation of the X is initiated from the tip and would be relatively indistinguishable from the ELDm.

I don’t know about smaller cals but on the sectioned 6.5/7/30 cal I have seen pics of the eldx/eldm the meplat/tip behind the polymer on the eldx is wider and has a deeper hollow point behind the tip to promote expansion at longer ranges. I don’t think can assume an eldm would behave the same as eldx in terms of expansion threshold. About the only thing the same is they both have a tip. If anything the tip on the eldm is smaller/tougher though the jacket is not. That said Hornady advertises the eldx to expand down to 1600 fps. Maybe that is why folks are saying 1800 for eldm

Lou

 

[PNWGATOR]

Would you bet your truck that it won’t? Let’s meet up and do it. I will load cartridges in front of you and prove they are loaded to impact at 1800 fps by a chronograph and then shoot one into ballistic gel for score.

Slow is a relative descriptor. 1800 fps is blinding fast compared to a desert tortoise. Slow doesn’t tell us anything.

You make straight assertions and I don’t know how or what makes you believe it. You called it magic and slow, and asked if I would bet my truck.

I am using factory numbers and documented experience.

Hornady says that the ELDx expands reliably down to 1800 fps. The fragmentation of the X is initiated from the tip and would be relatively indistinguishable from the ELDm.

This would make a great Rokslide event and I bet @Ryan Avery could arrange the meeting, live stream, video and title and key exchange.

 

[Axlrod]

This would make a great Rokslide event and I bet @Ryan Avery could arrange the meeting, live stream, video and title and key exchange.

For sure. But be aware the Dessert Tortoise is protected in the U.S. Fines are $50,000 and 1 year in prison.

 

[hereinaz]

I don’t know about smaller cals but on the sectioned 6.5/7/30 cal I have seen pics of the eldx/eldm the meplat/tip behind the polymer on the eldx is wider and has a deeper hollow point behind the tip to promote expansion at longer ranges. I don’t think can assume an eldm would behave the same as eldx in terms of expansion threshold. About the only thing the same is they both have a tip. If anything the tip on the eldm is smaller/tougher though the jacket is not. That said Hornady advertises the eldx to expand down to 1600 fps. Maybe that is why folks are saying 1800 for eldm

Lou

True.

The comparison holds true for me. It’s the jacket thickness that determines reliability of fragmentation in this case.

First point. Berger hunting jackets are thinner than target jackets and mixed results come from using target but the hunters are reliable to expand.

Second, the m has a much larger open tip than the Berger and a thinner jacket than the x.

It’s the tip deforming that then initiates the jacket tearing apart. Jacket thickness and tip strength affect that.

Find some comparisons of the ELDm vs ELDx wound channels.

 

[hereinaz]

For sure. But be aware the Dessert Tortoise is protected in the U.S. Fines are $50,000 and 1 year in prison.

Fortunately the tortoise couldn’t catch me to identify me.

 

[hereinaz]

You do realize 1800 fps is slow right? Would you bet your truck that an 88 gr. ELDM will fragment at 1800 fps? "Minimal amount that lead travels" You can't predict the size of the fragments so they may go farther and in odd directions due to their shape. Here is an interesting article.

Fragmentation of hunting bullets observed with synchrotron radiation: Lighting up the source of a lesser-known lead exposure pathway - PMC

Bullet fragments have been previously observed in the remains and edible portions of big game animals that were harvested using rifles. The fragmentation issue has attracted attention because traditional hunting bullets are more than 70% lead, which ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Thanks for the article. It has good information.

I did a quick read and scan. Here is a picture of the x-ray they did of a .308 “lead core” bullet into ballistic gel containing a deer humerus.

Doesn’t look like the lead spread out very much even hitting bone.

The study doesn’t provide anything that would dispute my hypothesis that lead does not spread beyond the wound channel. And microscopic lead cannot travel further than visible lead pieces because it has less mass—so how could it physically pass through meat?

Can you point me to a specific passage that would help me understand your position?

 

[BCsteve]

Here's some ELD-X and ELD-M's at 1800 fps.

 

[TaperPin]

I tend to think way too much optimism is placed on operating at the absolute slowest velocity. At least on this ballistics gel test at 1770 fps the 108 ELD-M didn’t open up at all. To say, “Yeah but it wasn’t 1,800 fps, blah, blah, blah,” is to assume there is some sort of laboratory exactness, which of course there isn’t. Operate near an extreme and expecting ideal results is just wishful thinking.

 

[TaperPin]

There must be 100 mentions of how reliable this bullet is at 1,800 fps, so when the very first gel test I’ve ever seen shows two bullets with a complete failure to open up, it makes me wonder what other people are basing their trust on.