One Copper Bullet One Kill…

[Jason Snyder]

How does a non expanding bullet “fully expand”?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How is a Hammer non expanding?

 

[Jason Snyder]

So a copper bullet performs just as well at long distance and at velocities below say 2000fps?

He didn’t say that.

 

[bmart2622]

I know, it was a clarifying question which is why there is a ? at the end of the sentence.

 

[bmart2622]

In what way has a copper work worse than a lead projectile for you?

Horrible BCs, narrow expansion windows, small wound channels

 

[BjornF16]

Horrible BCs, narrow expansion windows, small wound channels

I agree with 33% of that statement; the other 67% is velocity dependent

 

[bmart2622]

MV cant change the minimum expansion needed for reliable expanison and MV cant overcome poor BCs and well a small hole is just a small hole

 

[amassi]

How is a Hammer non expanding?

They don’t expand, they’re a non expanding bullet by design
They shed some petals and the shank stays caliber sized neither function can be classified as expansion
That’s under ideal conditions if the hollow points aren’t too small and if the copper metallurgy for your batch is acceptably soft.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jason Snyder]

a small hole is just a small hole

And dead is dead.

 

[ljalberta]

I used TTSX and LRX for years. The advantage is absolutely less meat loss. I won’t use them anymore though. Tiny wound channels, very high impact velocity required for full expansion, low bc, and often longer death times compared to other options.

For Copper options, I’m experimenting with CE bullets at the moment as I didn’t love the Hammers in my rifles. Only one bear killed at 415yds so far so really can’t make any judgments. But I’ll likely use these for a couple years (along with TMKs) and see if I can get some decent reports.

But, it seems extremely clear to me based on my experience that lead bullets are significantly more efficient in terms of terminal performance.

 

[Jason Snyder]

They don’t expand, they’re a non expanding bullet by design
They shed some petals and the shank stays caliber sized neither function can be classified as expansion
That’s under ideal conditions if the hollow points aren’t too small and if the copper metallurgy for your batch is acceptably soft.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess I consider a non expanding bullet to be one that stays the same shape through the entirety of terminal impact.

Expanding the nose and shedding the expanded petals seems like expansion to me, but YMMV.

 

[bmart2622]

I dont recall anyone saying you cant kill with copper, the claim was made that terminal performance between copper and lead was equal which is clearly not true

 

[Jason Snyder]

I dont recall anyone saying you cant kill with copper, the claim was made that terminal performance between copper and lead was equal which is clearly not true

You guys must be using the wrong copper bullets if you think that the terminal performance is inferior to lead.
They operate differently and thrive in different circumstances. Neither are bad or inferior just different.

I still don’t see the claim you are referring to.

 

[bmart2622]

How about the part where he states that the terminal performance is equal?!?! Or the part where is says neither is inferior? But I guess if you want to nit pick he could be right...worse is in fact different

 

[Jason Snyder]

How about the part where he states that the terminal performance is equal?!?! Or the part where is says neither is inferior? But I guess if you want to nit pick he could be right...worse is in fact different

You appear to have an emotional investment in this. I don’t. I’ve successfully used copper for 25 years now and never lost an animal I hit with a rifle. If I was a long range hunter I probably wouldn’t choose copper because of the limitations in this arena, unless I wanted a rifle that could drive them really fast. As it is, I don’t so it’s irrelevant to me.

Fortunately, it’s America and we don’t have to agree, and dead really is dead.

 

[bmart2622]

I could care less what people use but also dont think people should be making false claims either

 

[SDHNTR]

Debate and BS aside, copper works just fine out to any reasonable range one should be hunting. It’s only inferior for the computer based number crunchers.

 

[bmart2622]

Or its inferior to people who put in the time and effort to obtain the skill necessary to shoot past 400yds and want a reliably expanding to do it with

 

[atmat]

If I was a long range hunter I probably wouldn’t choose copper because of the limitations in this arena

This is where folks are getting hung up: many of us would call that inferior ballistics, because distance/velocity is much more limiting in copper than lead.

It doesn’t mean they won’t kill at the velocities needed.

But in general, copper bullets leave smaller wound channels and limit distance/velocity for a shooter. That’s why people say “inferior ballistics.”

Edit: I don’t care whether folks use lead or copper, I’m just trying to clear up the conversation.

 

[bmart2622]

^^^^Well said

 

[SDHNTR]

Small hole? This was 2 days ago. Hammer 124. Lungs were shredded.