Author Topic: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test  (Read 8679 times)

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2018, 02:02:18 AM »
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.
Not if its placed right. And if you hit the humerus on a grown elk penetration WILL suffer since a lot of energy will be expended there with a lead ball. If the shot is 100 yards expansion will not be all that great anyway even with pure lead.  I once shot a mule deer with a low powered "38" brass suppository rifle, rifle dated to the 1880s, BP and a fairly hard bullet (tube magazine) punched a little hole through the lungs. Deer made it about 40-50 yards and piled. I have had them run 200 when shot with 50-54 RBs at close range and good placement. I don't see energy counting for much, though large wound channels are good. I shot a MD doe with a .662 ball at about 40 yards, 1600 at the muzzle. She was facing me and the ball struck just to one side of the windpipe. Turned the top 3/4 of the heart and the arteries to jello. Deer ran almost exactly as far as the MB buck shot with the anemic brass suppository gun. So..... Place the shot.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Daryl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15846
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #26 on: June 16, 2018, 08:42:48 AM »
I've shot completely through a couple elk with .45cal. cast bullets, One went 70yards, and the other dropped at the shot. No expansion on either.  Now, I kind of like a hole out the off side. If the animal decides to run, he's going to leak a bit of red.  Without an exit wound, there is rarely a blood trail.

The do no run far with a .69 ball, non-expanding or soft lead, that makes it across the animal and they all do, leg bones or not. The animal might stagger 20 yards, or simply lay down.

I have also had expanding bullets stop inside moose.  Most drop at the shot, while Taylor and I spend a couple hours tracking one moose, probably 1/2 mile, just by the way he was "throwing" a leg - by the tracks only - no blood - that was not fun.

If shooting a small ball - stay away form any bone on large bodied game.  If shooting a larger ball, ribs are no problem, like a .54 or larger. I found pure or hardened .682" lead to work well on moose leg bones & the lungs before or after hitting the lungs - smashing good calibre!
Daryl

"a gun without hammers is like a spaniel without ears" King George V

Offline hanshi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5335
  • My passion is longrifles!
    • martialartsusa.com
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #27 on: June 17, 2018, 12:26:47 AM »
While I've never killed anything larger than a deer, I'll go ahead and say my piece.  I see good use for alloy lead - WW for example - in the squirrel calibers.  Expansion isn't needed and usually not wanted.  For deer calibers, in this case I'll just list .40 through .54 and maybe .58, soft lead works best as expansion occurs and does more damage...usually.  But certainly when one gets to the big fellers, .62 & up, anything from soft lead to brass will do just fine.   
!Jozai Senjo! "always present on the battlefield"
Young guys should hang out with old guys; old guys know stuff.

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #28 on: June 17, 2018, 02:21:56 AM »
 The only thing I can think of in the lower 48 that might possibly need a hard alloy ball, would be a big old boar.

 Hungry Horse

Offline Old Ford2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1102
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #29 on: June 18, 2018, 03:53:55 PM »
The only thing I can think of in the lower 48 that might possibly need a hard alloy ball, would be a big old boar.

 Hungry Horse
It would be an interesting read on someone hunting hog with a muzzle loader.
I have watched several videos on "You Tube" where hunters are shooting wild hog in various states.
All of these videos were hunters using modern weapons.
Fred
Never surrender, always take a few with you.
Let the Lord pick the good from the bad!

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2018, 06:21:45 PM »
There are more than a few guys out here in California that hunt hogs with muzzleloaders, they just don’t make YouTube videos of the event. Now I would’nt recommend jumping on one over about a hundred and fifty pounds without back up. Big calibers, heavy loads, and short range, along with shooting them in the vitals, all adds up to a successful hunt.
 If you’re a hunter, and don’t realize the  threat to your hunting of anything other than hogs, is hogs. You need to get educated. Hogs are taking over literally all the habitat used by other species, including us. So go hog hunting.

  Hungry Horse

Iktomi

  • Guest
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #31 on: June 18, 2018, 06:27:43 PM »
The only thing I can think of in the lower 48 that might possibly need a hard alloy ball, would be a big old boar.

 Hungry Horse
It would be an interesting read on someone hunting hog with a muzzle loader.
I have watched several videos on "You Tube" where hunters are shooting wild hog in various states.
All of these videos were hunters using modern weapons.
Fred

  I've killed a pretty large pile of hogs over the years with modern guns, primitive bows, and a few with a muzzleloader.  I've also killed a fair number of elk, though only one with a muzzleloader, a nice fat cow. I'll happily shoot hogs with a gun that I would never consider hunting elk with, they just aren't that hard to kill. An elk is a pretty tough critter, and quite tenacious of life.

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #32 on: July 10, 2018, 07:54:51 AM »
There was a reason that people shooting heavy game in Africa and India. The soft lead ball on  a "hard target" suffers from limited penetration 20" of penetration on a deer is usually plenty and most will do 30". However, on and animal the size of an elk if a large bone is encountered, like the humerus, penetration can be curtailed with a 54 caliber ball. This from making the shot some years back and breaking the humerus on a large cow at about 80-100 yards. Had the ball not gotten the aorta it might have taken some tracking. It never penetrated the off side chest wall. Here is a photo of a boned out front leg/shoulder of an Alaska-Yukon moose decent sized bull shot by a friend on place I used to own in AK. Note size of the bones, very dense and hard. I would shoot hard lead even with the 16 bore. Would use hard lead on large bears as well.
Dan

He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #33 on: July 10, 2018, 07:57:29 AM »
I've shot completely through a couple elk with .45cal. cast bullets, One went 70yards, and the other dropped at the shot. No expansion on either.  Now, I kind of like a hole out the off side. If the animal decides to run, he's going to leak a bit of red.  Without an exit wound, there is rarely a blood trail.

<snip>

I like exit wounds too. Much better blood trail.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Daryl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15846
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2018, 08:14:29 PM »
I also like an exit.
Daryl

"a gun without hammers is like a spaniel without ears" King George V

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #35 on: July 17, 2018, 12:33:25 AM »
I think we are confusing bullet performance with just plain old poor shot placement. If you encounter a large bone, its not a good shot. A moderately large caliber muzzleloader shot at a reasonable range ( 100 yards or less) will usually shoot clear through the chest cavity of an average size elk, and leave the ball under the hide on the off side. I’ve seen this happen even when the shot encounters a rib on the entrance side. Long tracking adventures, that require a heavy blood trail, are usually an indication of a poor shot, or an angleing shot, that takes the ball out of the target zone.
 Wild hogs can be very hard to kill, in my experience. On a hunt several years ago one of the group shot a large boar right behind the shoulder, with a .54 cal. Tryon plains rifle. The shot flipped the boar completely over, but he righted himself and started looking for revenge. After three of us shot him he finally went down. The first bullet had gone through the back edge of his very thick shoulder plate, and one lung, and stopped. He even tore up a fair amount of real estate after being shot in the spine.

  Hungry Horse

Offline Daryl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15846
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2018, 09:39:17 PM »
Hogs are kinda like goats and Buffalo, aren't they? That is, living in the bottom third of the body. As well, not far behind the shoulder

is the diaphragm then guts. I suspect this would make 'proper shot placement' a little more difficult as well as slight angles would make

hitting both lungs, problematic.
Daryl

"a gun without hammers is like a spaniel without ears" King George V

Offline B.Habermehl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #37 on: July 18, 2018, 04:35:59 PM »
Most of the deer I have shot with my .58 were complete pass throughs. Resulting in short easy tracking jobs and easy recovery. The only ball I ever recovered, traveled from one shoulder to stop inside of the opposite ham. Traveling the entire length of the deer. The deer traveled 27 yds. The alloy balls I used was 5 percent antimony, even though it would pass the fingernail test. After measuring the ball would have been shootable. My primary lead supply is intercell connectors from the large commercial forklift batteries I work on. I have no doubt that this combo will badly mess up any critters day. After harvesting a bunch of deer with this gun I’ve never had more than a 30 yd tracking job. By choice all my shooting has been within archery range. BJH
BJH

Offline trentOH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 591
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #38 on: July 21, 2018, 01:43:34 AM »

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.

https://www.apothecariesweights.com/

This is from a pharmacist web site which explains in short order the difference and non-difference between dram and drachm. The English language can be confusing, especially when time and different continents are involved.

Offline Old Ford2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1102
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #39 on: July 23, 2018, 03:48:11 AM »
Hi,
I really hope that we, or someone can come up with a resolve on an alternative to lead real soon.
Our wise Ontario fish and game dept. are working on a ban on lead in all avenues of outdoor shooting. Cartridge guns can and do well with non lead projectiles.
Traditional muzzleloaders will have a hard time passing, using corn meal, nylon, or styrofoam balls for projectiles.
Fred
Never surrender, always take a few with you.
Let the Lord pick the good from the bad!

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #40 on: July 23, 2018, 03:54:38 PM »
California did just that. They banned lead projectiles, even though the muzzleloading community petitioned them heavily to make an exception. They argued that it endangered the California Condor. But, we are three hundred miles from condor habitat, so that argument is just plain bogus.

  Hungry Horse

Iktomi

  • Guest
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #41 on: July 23, 2018, 07:20:23 PM »
California did just that. They banned lead projectiles, even though the muzzleloading community petitioned them heavily to make an exception. They argued that it endangered the California Condor. But, we are three hundred miles from condor habitat, so that argument is just plain bogus.

  Hungry Horse

 And they have banned all lead projectiles within the condor habitat for a number of year, the ban will be state wide next year. Interestingly, they haven't found in reduction in the lead levels in the condors as a result. But without stepping on forum rules and swerving into politics, let me say that the lead ban isn't about saving wildlife, it is simply an element of a different agenda.

Offline Daryl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15846
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #42 on: July 23, 2018, 07:58:11 PM »
Rick - you are absolutely right. The birds, whether condors, geese or ducks are merely an excuse.
Daryl

"a gun without hammers is like a spaniel without ears" King George V

Offline alacran

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2260
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #43 on: July 24, 2018, 03:35:25 PM »
I am wondering if anyone has cast balls from Bismuth. It has a melting temperature of 520f. It goes for about $10.00 per pound. It is already approved as non toxic for use in shot. I believe it is slightly harder than lead.
A man's rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.  Frederick Douglass

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #44 on: July 24, 2018, 06:05:48 PM »
Yes, Bismuth balls are pretty much the only option if you shoot a caliber that isn’t common. It is quite a bit harder than pure lead.

  Hungry Horse

Offline Daryl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15846
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2018, 07:37:22 PM »
I understood bismuth was brittle  - if so, it would likely shatter on bone.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2018, 07:37:46 PM by Daryl »
Daryl

"a gun without hammers is like a spaniel without ears" King George V

Iktomi

  • Guest
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2018, 08:12:07 PM »
  It is my understanding that per California regs any lead free ammunition must be tested, certified, and approved by the State. This pretty much eliminates rollin' yer own.

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2018, 09:54:47 PM »
I was told by a fish and game enforcement officer that they have a field test that reacts to any lead presence on the entry or exit wound. Otherwise how could they tell if your bullets are factory, or home grown? Other wise you could carry the proper packaging for a certified product, and shoot one you rolled up at home.

  Hungry Horse

Offline Waksupi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 358
  • Ric Carter, Somers, Montana
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #48 on: July 25, 2018, 03:25:29 PM »
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.

I've shot enough elk to appreciate a pass through. Put a hole through both lungs, they are down in 30 yards.
Ric Carter
Somers, Montana

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5565
Re: Lead vs Alloy Penetration Test
« Reply #49 on: July 26, 2018, 04:36:37 AM »
Daryl if you’re hitting bones big enough to shatter a bismuth ball, you’re shooting them in the wrong end. The heads on the other end.

 Hungry Horse