Non lead bullets and performance at distance

[rcook10]

The summary of my entire point in responding is monos can absolutely deliver quick/effective kills if you deploy them in a certain manner.

Still kind of a cop out no? Hey guy these bullets are sick but only shoot the animal in the heart or shoulders or they don't work so well. Also make sure you only shoot high velocity cartridges or the bullets also don't work.

 

[z987k]

Still kind of a cop out no? Hey guy these bullets are sick but only shoot the animal in the heart or shoulders or they don't work so well. Also make sure you only shoot high velocity cartridges or the bullets also don't work.

Cup and core don't work well when you shoot them in the rear hams. Does that mean the bullet is a failure?
They also don't work super well when you shoot a really big animal in a leg bone. Is that a failure?
Monos do not work very well in lungs. That's true. Cup and core don't work very well with really crappy shot angles where you need to put it through 30+ inches of animal. That's not the bullet's fault. It's the shooters.


All bullets have to be used as designed. Also high velocity isn't always required. There are high BC monos, just for some reason they get little attention. Higher BC monos can keep those speeds up above 2000fps on impact out to 500 with pretty low recoil cartridges. Even less recoil since the weights are generally lower for the same or higher BC as a lead bullet of the same weight.

 

[rcook10]

Cup and core don't work well when you shoot them in the rear hams. Does that mean the bullet is a failure?
They also don't work super well when you shoot a really big animal in a leg bone. Is that a failure?
Monos do not work very well in lungs. That's true. Cup and core don't work very well with really crappy shot angles where you need to put it through 30+ inches of animal. That's not the bullet's fault. It's the shooters.


All bullets have to be used as designed. Also high velocity isn't always required. There are high BC monos, just for some reason they get little attention. Higher BC monos can keep those speeds up above 2000fps on impact out to 500 with pretty low recoil cartridges. Even less recoil since the weights are generally lower for the same or higher BC as a lead bullet of the same weight.

Would you call an ass shot optimal bullet placement? The vast majority of hunters I know would not. Would you call a double lung shot optimal bullet placement? The vast majority of hunters I know absolutely would.

I don't know what your point is about cup and cores; there is a wealth of information on this site about how well heavy for caliber cup and core's kill. Historically i hunted with a lot of sierra and hornady bullets and killed all sorts of animals in the mountain west with them. I stopped because I don't like wasting a shoulder if I can only get a quartering shot not because they don't kill well. I had one bad experience with Hornady spire points with an elk but in retrospect the hits were higher than they should have been with the hill angle. Ultimately a better placed round when the elk turned resulted in full penetration of the cow of about 28-30" and a perfect mushroom.

With the number of animals I have killed and or necropsied using coppers getting in the high teens I don't think your statement about 2000fps is all that accurate.

I won't ever disagree that there are softer recoiling fast cartridges out there but I'm not going to go out and buy the hottest new 6 because folks on rokslide say it'll fix all my problems. If you want to donate one to my hunter mentor group they will happily shoot all the 6mm monos you can afford to send me.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Still kind of a cop out no? Hey guy these bullets are sick but only shoot the animal in the heart or shoulders or they don't work so well. Also make sure you only shoot high velocity cartridges or the bullets also don't work.

Not really, I’ve repeatedly said if you don’t want to use monos then don’t… I’m not preaching you should. I have merely stated how I have consistently good results with Barnes, for those that want to use them, which is completely feasible if one chooses to do so. Based on your preferences they don’t seem to be the right fit though.

 

[Tmac]

The 7mm 139 or 145 lrx in a decent powered cartridge does pretty well. Barnes only loads that in factory for 7mag (places like unknown munitions load it in other calibers) but if reloading 284, 280, 280ai and any of the magnums should deliver.

My 280 Rem sends the 145 LRX at 3,013 fps. It has worked very well and carries it’s velocity well enough for me to be lethal to 600. I like the LRX quite a bit and use it when in open/semi open country. In thick stuff I go with a heavy for caliber cup and core most of the time.

 

[Macintosh]

Not sure what the big deal is. Keep velocity above recommended minimum for reliable expansion, give yourself a little wiggle room so you arent pushing the ragged edge of what they are capable of, and they work fine. That holds true with all bullets. If the range at which velocity drops too much is shorter than what you want…then its not the right combination of bullet and cartridge. If it is, then it’s a perfectly viable option and you add it to the mix when you weigh the pluses and minuses and decide what your personal priorities are when choosing a bullet . Traditional copper is often not the best choice if you want to shoot past 400 yards without carefully selecting the right cartridge, etc to do it with. Inside that range it seems to work just fine for me. Why is this so hard?

 

[S.Clancy]

We've shot elk with impact velocities 2050~2100 fps with 270 Win, 126 Hammer Hunters. Damage was sufficient, much much better than Barnes. I have no problem with those shots, given the right conditions

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Here’s a barns 127 LRX pushed past its limits. Around 1850 FPS. The buck was already mortally wounded and this was the second quartering away shot. Never found the other bullet. Won’t take that long a shot again with that load. They advertise 1600-1800 minimums.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Here’s a barns 127 LRX pushed past its limits. Around 1850 FPS. The buck was already mortally wounded and this was the second quartering away shot. Never found the other bullet. Won’t take that long a shot again with that load. They advertise 1600-1800 minimums.


View attachment 641573

Great photo. This is what I was touching on with minimum vs full expansion and why I personally try to keep the velocity higher than the minimums. When I started using barnes heavily a decade ago I searched out photos like this and often ~1800fps this is the level of expansion you'd see. Technically speaking it has expanded. But not to the degree I desire, the expansion photos of 2200+fps is deeper peeling resulting in a larger diameter than this minimum so that's why I use that personally and recommend that to achieve more consistent results.

IIRC the 139LRX in 7mm is supposed to expand a bit better so I might consider a bit slower than 2200fps for a self imposed minimum but again that'll be with more fringe distances in mind. For my personal usage I want 2200+fps out to 400yd at 5500' elevation for a gun/cartridge pairing ideally for a general use gun. Higher velocity for something I want to be able to use a barnes out further.

Other monos are a different case, this is mainly talking about petal peeling barnes.

 

[Macintosh]

Here’s a barns 127 LRX pushed past its limits. Around 1850 FPS. The buck was already mortally wounded and this was the second quartering away shot. Never found the other bullet. Won’t take that long a shot again with that load. They advertise 1600-1800 minimums.


View attachment 641573

That IS a great image. Just using a ruler on the image, it appears that bullet has expanded to about 1.5x bullet diameter. And Im fairly certain Barnes advertises 1600fps as min expansion velocity for the 127gr 6.5 lrx, so 1850 is already 15% higher than that. In my head “1.5x” sounds like it ought to be more expanded, huh? Anyway, I wonder how many of the stories of monos “penciling” are actually this^? My guess is a lot of them, especially when you consider how low impact velocity gets past 350-400 yards with a normal-for-caliber bullet weight, but in copper.

 

[Formidilosus]

That IS a great image. Just using a ruler on the image, it appears that bullet has expanded to about 1.5x bullet diameter. And Im fairly certain Barnes advertises 1600fps as min expansion velocity for the 127gr 6.5 lrx, so 1850 is already 15% higher than that. In my head “1.5x” sounds like it ought to be more expanded, huh? Anyway, I wonder how many of the stories of monos “penciling” are actually this^? My guess is a lot of them, especially when you consider how low impact velocity gets past 350-400 yards with a normal-for-caliber bullet weight, but in copper.

That’s exactly what they do at lower impact velocities- if the upse. You can math it all you want, but the reality is that below 2,000’ish fps impact, that bullet is creating 9mm pistol bullet wounds.

 

[Pacific_Fork]

Agreed. I have had lots of excellent results with the LRX above 2000 FPS on impact.

However, after a ton of reflection and my new found love of the 140 berger out of my 6.5x284 I am shooting lead now.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

That’s exactly what they do at lower impact velocities- if the upse. You can math it all you want, but the reality is that below 2,000’ish fps impact, that bullet is creating 9mm pistol bullet wounds.

Yep. I personally hunt monos nearly exclusively as I've stated but I keep the velocity up and decide where I want that wound channel to be. As I am sure you're very well aware, I'm just speaking it outloud:

The extra velocity is two fold, both to peel them out more but also the faster its going the larger the diameter of the hydrostatic wound channel being pushed outwardly by the frontal area. I'm not a forensic scientist but seems quite logical to me to concentrate that wound channel where there is both lots of fluid to push and either the heart or major blood vessels to damage with that wound. Lungs are gonna have alot more airspace and limit that effect it would seem to me so less stuff that bleeds out massively is damaged. Obviously a bullet through the lungs is gonna kill a critter eventually but can make the difference in consistent quick kills.

Bow hunters don't send an arrow through lungs and then just expect the animal to drop nearly instantly. Highly fragmenting bullets to the lung will do that but that isn't what something like a barnes is. Its a high speed arrow that can go through bone, if you shoot the heart you can expect a quicker kill, if you shoot the lungs you can expect it'll take a little longer till death and my thoughts.

 

[Macintosh]

That’s exactly what they do at lower impact velocities- if the upse. You can math it all you want, but the reality is that below 2,000’ish fps impact, that bullet is creating 9mm pistol bullet wounds.

No math—we’re saying the same thing.

 

[Formidilosus]

No math—we’re saying the same thing.

I didn’t mean it towards you proper. I meant it towards Barnes saying “1.5x expansion”- which is just a blunt tipped arrow.

 

[Jfjfrye]

Not sure what the big deal is. Keep velocity above recommended minimum for reliable expansion, give yourself a little wiggle room so you arent pushing the ragged edge of what they are capable of, and they work fine. That holds true with all bullets. If the range at which velocity drops too much is shorter than what you want…then it’s not the right combination of bullet and cartridge. If it is, then it’s a perfectly viable option and you add it to the mix when you weigh the pluses and minuses and decide what your personal priorities are when choosing a bullet . Traditional copper is often not the best choice if you want to shoot past 400 yards without carefully selecting the right cartridge, etc to do it with. Inside that range it seems to work just fine for me. Why is this so hard?

Yes as far as doing everything according to the book and recommendations as far as velocity need for the projectile to perform. The problem is when you exceed the recommended velocity and have poor performance. I know it’s case by case basis but damn it sucks having that lack of confidence in a bullet.

 

[Macintosh]

Yes as far as doing everything according to the book and recommendations as far as velocity need for the projectile to perform. The problem is when you exceed the recommended velocity and have poor performance. I know it’s case by case basis but damn it sucks having that lack of confidence in a bullet.

Im not sure what bullets you are referring to with regard to exceeding a velocity threshold. I am not aware of any problems with copper bullets traveling really fast. Ive seen a couple animals hit with ttsx’s at over or very near 3000fps impact and they worked fine—deer dropped in its tracks with your average boiler-room hit. If youre referring to lead, then Ive never used a bullet that didnt kill fine at extremely close range, they just tear the heck out of the critter—my solution was to go to copper because I WANTED a smaller wound channel, but I also dont need performance past moderate range.

 

[Sled]

I'm fortunate to have the option of both. In one of my rifles I get same POI with a mono and berger out to 400. I carry both and shoot monos up close and berger at distance. It sounds complicated but it's not. In reality both have worked fine at my hunting distances. I just want the option for less meat damage occasionally.

 

[Huntr]

Attached is a pic of a 7mm 139gr LRX pulled out in of an Alaskan moose- impact velocity was 1,950fps. Not what I would call ideal.

 

[Axlrod]

Attached is a pic of a 7mm 139gr LRX pulled out in of an Alaskan moose- impact velocity was 1,950fps. Not what I would call ideal.

Well you pulled it out of the moose- so he's probably dead. But smart ass comments aside, that is exactly how a Barnes is going to look at that impact velo. Their design gives you lots of penetration, high weight retention, and relatively small wound channels.