Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test

[Larry Pletcher]

Steve Chapman and I have often planned to test penetration of a pure lead ball, and we normally shoot, with a harder alloy ball.  We kicked around a number of ways and settled on a row of one-gallon water jugs.

Eric, another friend, and I managed three cameras and Steve did the shooting. The rifle is a .58 flint gun Steve made for me a couple of years ago. Here is a link to the rifle:  https://www.blackpowdermag.com/flint-elk-rifle/

The soft lead ball was a .570 swaged ball – nothing unusual.  The alloy ball was cast from a batch of “hard cast” pistol bullets that I had left over from handloading for a pistol.  Reading Lyman made me think it was around 15 Brinell, slightly harder than wheel weights.

Our load was discussed in the link above:  90 gr of fffg Swiss.  Steve commented that it was not hard to load.  This load was chronographed earlier at almost 1700 fps.

We set up 10 jugs on a bench and began with the soft ball.  It was found in the 4th water jug.  The first 3 were destroyed.  The second ball surprised us.  While we didn’t know, we would have guessed at maybe 5 or 6 jugs, and we planned to recover it.  But, the hard cast ball went through all 10 jugs and ended up in the woods down range.  We never did recover it.

We have video and a batch of stills of the test.  The pic below is the first shot showing the jugs being hit.  The same shot shows water from the  tenth jug. You can see fragments of the jugs and blue bottle caps in the air.



Summing up, we think this rifle and the hard cast ball is real elk medicine.
Regards,
Pletch
PS:
After Friendship I will finish up an article (including video) for this test on www.blackpowdermag.com

[Daryl]

Good test, Larry - the results are quite demonstrative!

Samuel Baker noted that "a ball of that size" (meaning 15 bore for 14 bore rifle) if hardened with mercury or a bit of tin would pass through and through an elephant's head with only 4 1/2 drachms of powder and that  5 drachms could be used without hurting the accuracy not producing any very unpleasant recoil .
 
We are quite certain Baker was referring to drams with his choice of the "drachms" wording, as 4 1/2 or 5 drachms does produce quite unpleasant recoil in a 9 1/2 pound rifle.

Considering the intended target is honey-combed bone, this is quite a feat, but definitely shows the potential of hardened balls for deeply penetrating purposes.

[T*O*F]

I think if you make a thru shot on an elk that you're going to be chasing him for a few miles.  You need that round ball to flatten out and create a wound channel so it bleeds out quickly, as well as any secondary channels if the ball hits bone and comes apart.

[stubshaft]

The issue that I have found with hard lead is that the patch does not grip the ball and accuracy suffers.  My groups went from 1" @ 50 yds to 5 1/2" @ the same range.

[Flint62Smoothie]

I think if you make a thru shot on an elk that you're going to be chasing him for a few miles.  You need that round ball to flatten out and create a wound channel so it bleeds out quickly, as well as any secondary channels if the ball hits bone and comes apart.

That’s what 1st came to my mind too ... as I know of more than a few cases where people used a (errr .... ‘modern’) heavier bonded or interlock-type bullet of heavy weight on medium sized critters ... and the rounds merely punched a clean hole right through BUT DUMPED NO ENERGY into the animal. Chased one big buck for miles we did ...

Penetration by itself ... is NOT everything.

[Larry Pletcher]

Dave,
I did this test for the soft vs hard cast, but also because  of a friend who hunts elk with a center fire.  My unexpanded .57 is larger than his expanded center fire bullet. You may very well be right though; with my total lack of elk hunting experience, I would not presume to argue.  I haven't shot anything larger than a white tail deer and with nothing bigger than .50 roundball.

I'm looking forward to seeing you at Friendship.  Taking spark photos in #112.
Regards,
Pletch

[Don Steele]

My experience hunting with non-expanding projectiles has been going after very large critters who can kill me if I fail to get sufficient penetration to break big bones or get deep into thick skulls ( Cape Buffalo and Elephant). Never thought they might be necessary for big “deer”.
I’ve read of people using wheel weight round balls for Elk and Moose to get more penetration than they could get with dead soft lead. Your test provides some quantitative measure. Thanks.
Look forward to chatting with you this weekend.

[Larry Pletcher]

Don,
I hope you stop by the booth.  I have a new fixture that will handle your left hand lock easily.
Regards,
Pletch

[axelp]

Back in 2008, I did a penetration test for ITX roundball, a harder than lead, non-lead projectile. I noticed right off the bat that harder projectiles penetrated much deeper into my test backstop, which consisted of a thick tightly bundled block of wet newspapers.

Actually Steve Chapman did accuracy tests with ITX very soon after my penetration tests, and Larry Pletcher published the results on his internet magazine. The harder than lead ITX did suffer from reduced accuracy but managed to achieve hunting accuracy at 100 yards or less. But it does penetrate better than lead. One of the concerns that was brought up by several hunters was the lack of any expansion from a harder than lead projectile. It was suggested that for a harder than lead projectile, you use a bigger caliber so as to get as big a wound channel as possible?

Ken Prather

[Arcturus]

Bullets and balls don't kill by "dumping energy"....the energy is used to push the projectile through tissue and destroy it.  Expanding balls make a wider, but much shallower wound.   Sure, an expanded bullet that nearly, but not quite, exits will do more damage than one doesn't expand, all other factors equal.  And temporary cavitation at high velocities can cause animals to drop if it affects the spinal column.  But with big caliber, heavy hardcast projectiles you start with a large wound channel to begin with, and can shoot THROUGH bone and penetrate vitals completely under less than ideal conditions where expanding bullets may fail.  And if you break upper front legs and shoulders, you can drop game just like expanding high velocity rounds do through the ribs.  Plus complete penetration gives a bloodtrail if needed, where bullets that don't exit often don't.  More than one way to skin a cat (or drop an ungulate)...

[smylee grouch]

I have been thinking of using a smaller amount of hard in the mix for an up coming fall bear hunt. I would still like my .610 ball to expand and mushroom but have pass through. I had planed on using about 10% tin/90% pure lead. Has anyone else used a combination like that and if so how did it work out?

[Flint62Smoothie]

Bullets and balls don't kill by "dumping energy"....

I take it you never heard of hydrostatic shock then ... ?

[Arcturus]

Bullets and balls don't kill by "dumping energy"....

I take it you never heard of hydrostatic shock then ... ?

 

Until projectiles get north of 3000 fps, (which muzzleloaders don't do), it's effects are negligible.  What is often assumed to be the effects of hydrostatic shock is usually expanding lead fragments doing the damage.  Most tissue is very elastic and temporary cavitation is, well, temporary.  Two places I will grant you where damage from hydrostatic shock can be very effective at putting down animals and causing damage beyond the permanent wound channel, are the lungs and liver.  But I've seen hardcast bullets make large permanent wounds in lung tissue as well while having a caliber-sized entrance and exit wound.  Generally, projectiles kill by putting a large hole through vitals, causing rapid blood loss that leads to unconsciousness and death, not because of some magic amount of energy "dumped" into the animal.  While it's true that sometimes a non-expanding bullet passes straight through an animal and it runs a long way, it's also true that sometimes an expanding bullet fails to penetrate enough...and the animal runs a long way!  This time without a bloodtrail...

If I had a smaller caliber gun shooting a roundball pretty fast at medium game, surely I would want a soft lead, expanding ball.  But a large caliber ball against a much larger animal?... I may choose a harder ball for much better penetration.  And I never worry about bullets exiting because they "wasted" energy...I'm much more worried about a bullet that fails to penetrate enough. 

[Arcturus]

Larry, thanks for posting this.  I have a favorite .58 caliber flintlock for hunting also.  I look forward to seeing the full report of your testing.  Was the hardcast ball .570 also, and how thick were your patches? 

[Larry Pletcher]

Larry, thanks for posting this.  I have a favorite .58 caliber flintlock for hunting also.  I look forward to seeing the full report of your testing.  Was the hardcast ball .570 also, and how thick were your patches?

The hardcast balls came from a Lyman .570 mould.  They measured a little over.  Steve uses pocket drill for patch.  I didn't measure it, but believe it to be around .022". I'll see him Friday at Friendship and will ask him. He told me it didn't load any harder than the swaged soft lead ball.

Regards,
Pletch

[alacran]

I have killed 4 elk using ,54 caliber swaged soft lead round balls. All but one  passed through. The one I recovered was a quartering shot. It went through a rib both lungs, the heart, through a shoulder blade and lodged under the skin.
It was not flattened and it retained 90% of its weight.
 I helped a good friend on a bull elk hunt last September. He was using a .54 with patched soft lead round ball. He killed a 330" Bull at 108 yards, complete pass through. He was using the same load I use, 100 grains 2f Goex.
Unless you are planning exclusively on Texas Heart shots I don't think hard lead balls are necessary.

[Pukka Bundook]

Larry,

Thanks for your work on this.
For a long time I have been thinking of trying a harder ball to see if it Improved accuracy in a smoothbore. (Musket)
A normal .750" ball shortens somewhat on discharge, and expands to fill the bore of .760".  (My specific musket)
(Recovered balls show a belt or equator where they have expanded to fit the bore when fired with full charges of powder)
A hard ball would not expand in this way, so in Theory, should shoot better at longer range.
As in, Any projectile wider than it is long is going to plane off in some direction as range increases, so your hard ball should make an interesting test.

Thanks again,
Richard.

[Daryl]

The issue that I have found with hard lead is that the patch does not grip the ball and accuracy suffers.  My groups went from 1" @ 50 yds to 5 1/2" @ the same range.

Interesting - my hard ball groups mirror my soft ball groups.  I shoot a .682" pure lead round ball and a .677" hardened ball using the same .030" to .034" patch.

Accuracy to 200yards is identical. If using a hardened ball, reduce the ball's diameter and use a thick patch. If tight enough - it cannot-but follow the grooves.

Even a VERY tight fitting paper ctg. showed identical accuracy, with both cast from the same .682" mould.

A .682" HARD ball, fired from a paper ctg. made a 3" diameter hole through both lungs of a large bull moose. I suggest, that an expanding ball is not necessary, as the shock-wave/cavitation in

front of the ball MUST be what caused the holes so large. The recovered ball was only expanded slightly, to .70 cal. An exit hole would have allowed bleeding for a blood trail, but was not needed -

 the moose went no where but down.

I do not know what sized hole a .58 ball might make, but do know, "a properly fitted paper ctg." (as-in around the ball) will shoot as well as a cloth patched ball, down to about .54 calibre.

A few other guys on this site have done these tests as well, with similar to identical results.

[bob in the woods]

When hunting bears , my gun of choice is my 10 bore with balls cast from wheel weights. These pass through from any angle.  8 bears , one shot each. None travelled far .  If I remember correctly, 25 yards was about the furthest .   I get the same result from my 20 bore using soft lead, but since I've got a lot of the WW stuff, it's nice to have a use for it.  When hunting, I use paper cartridges , and haven't noticed any decrease in accuracy with the ww balls. 

[hanshi]

Arcturus, I agree with your description of how lead prb kills game.  That has been my experience and training.

[smylee grouch]

Bob in the woods, did you get pass through on the bears with the pure lead 20 bore? I have only shot three bears with my 20 bore with pure lead .610 balls but have not had any pass through. The bears only went 9-12 and 30 yds. after being hit but there was a lot of internal damage from pushing the ball along with 110 gr. of 1&1/2 swiss. I would still like to get just a little harder mix so as to get pass through.

[bob in the woods]

I've only shot 2 black bears with my 20 bore. One was 24 feet away , [ the length of my shop at the time ] and the soft lead ball over 110 gr of FFg went through both lungs and exited , the bear spinning around and spraying the wall , then dropping.  He was a 2 year old male who was very very hungry, and had tried to eat my dog. He woofed at me, shook his head, and was extremely aggressive when I interrupted his attempt at a meal.  I was alerted by my dog's howl of terror. Luckily, paper cartridges load quickly.
The other bear was shot at about 30 yards, and the round ball went through both lungs and nicked the top of the heart, but did not exit. The bear went about 20 yards and dropped. I have cast some WW .600 balls, but haven't hunted with them as yet, preferring the 10 bore for most of this kind of work.  I've no doubt that a WW ball in the 20 would pass through a bear, and do a good job but since I have the 10.....
For interest's sake, I have used foster type slugs in my 12 g pump in the past, and had them break apart on heavy bone . I took some shells apart and switched the slugs for  .690 WW balls with excellent results.  I really believe that a large round ball ,soft or hardened, depending on the game, is about the best hunting projectile there is within practical range limits. 

[stubshaft]

The issue that I have found with hard lead is that the patch does not grip the ball and accuracy suffers.  My groups went from 1" @ 50 yds to 5 1/2" @ the same range.

Interesting - my hard ball groups mirror my soft ball groups.  I shoot a .682" pure lead round ball and a .677" hardened ball using the same .030" to .034" patch.

Accuracy to 200yards is identical. If using a hardened ball, reduce the ball's diameter and use a thick patch. If tight enough - it cannot-but follow the grooves.

Even a VERY tight fitting paper ctg. showed identical accuracy, with both cast from the same .682" mould.

A .682" HARD ball, fired from a paper ctg. made a 3" diameter hole through both lungs of a large bull moose. I suggest, that an expanding ball is not necessary, as the shock-wave/cavitation in

front of the ball MUST be what caused the holes so large. The recovered ball was only expanded slightly, to .70 cal. An exit hole would have allowed bleeding for a blood trail, but was not needed -

 the moose went no where but down.

I do not know what sized hole a .58 ball might make, but do know, "a properly fitted paper ctg." (as-in around the ball) will shoot as well as a cloth patched ball, down to about .54 calibre.

A few other guys on this site have done these tests as well, with similar to identical results.

I'll have to retry it in my .58.  I have a .570" mold on order from Jeff Tanner and a .562" mold already. 

[Daryl]

Stubshaft - I would try the .562" mould for my .58's WW balls, along with a nice thick patch.
The .570's or even .575" in WW would work in paper ctgs.
I make mine tapered, to make them easier to handle and little to zero waste of powder when tearing off the end.







delete my

[stubshaft]

Thanks Daryl.  I'll give it a try.