>>64621568
It's a hard sell because of cost but also ballistics. Getting lead free ammunition that actually groups worth a damn is hard. I've seen the absolute suffering that CA hunters have to endure trying in vain to get a load that doesn't completely shotgun pattern out of their deer rifle.

>>64621632
.308 lead free is a mature technology but anything more esoteric is harder to find

>>64621632
>>64621644
I know ron spomer was shilling some copper round

>>64621568
Show me lead free .22rimfire, which has killed more animals and men than any other round!

>>64621659
.22 wmr

>>64621568
improving the offerings of lead free ammo would be great for our health but right now >>64621632 is on the money, the industry hasn't been motivated to make much good lead free ammo

File: 1749941315054622.png (884 KB, 1024x794)

884 KB PNG

Do you think these would be fine for durr? it's still like a .70 cal 300+ grain chunk of metal going 800 fps at 100 yards (1450 fps at the muzzle). I wonder if they are fine through improved cylinder chokes considering most rifled lead slugs are safe through full and modified chokes

crazy how much more active the /pol/ thread on this was

>>64621900
You need Euro input for this because it's a much bigger thing here, but it's 8 am and I'm shitposting at work

File: this stuff is trash.jpg (59 KB, 700x560)

59 KB JPG

>>64621659
This shit, which absolutely sucks.

>>64621665
Jacketed lead, try again.

>>64622278
Haven't seen it. Won't buy it.

We shouldn't put lead in our food.

>>64621632
In france, lead based shotgun ammo are banned in wetland area now. They want to extended this to all. But rifle cartridge ? Nothing (for now).

At a european level, for rifle and handgun ammo, It's only in talk at the eu commission as of right now.
On the latest draft, there will be a 5 year transitional period and there exemption if used within a range and muzzle loader.

>>64622278
Not the best but they are ok, good enough for basic plinking at 50m.

>>64621568
Torn on this. Yes, lead free ammo is ass currently, but I'd also be very happy about less lead in our food, and potentially ground water

File: oar2[1].jpg (61 KB, 405x720)

61 KB JPG

>>64621632
The military has used lead free 5.56mm since 2010, actually. It's called the M855A1 round, and it's made with copper and steel. Compared to older lead rounds, it's more accurate, wounds more consistently and has superior barrier penetration.

>>64622377
.308 lead free is also accurate as fuck, but that leaves us with two usable calibres out of thousands

>>64622278
This stuff isn't bad at closer ranges out of a revolver or single shot/bolt 22. It doesn't the job that its designed for, which is taking care of smaller animals without contaminating the meat with lead.

>>64622362
This has been the case in the U.S. for awhile now too. Steel shot only over bodies of water/wetlands has been nationally mandated for some time now(with a lot of states already having it in place even longer)

>>64622377
But it's not allowed for civilians because armor piercing materials.

>>64622561
Well anon, we're at a difficult crossroads in world today. Save the baby duckies or save the feds? Hmmm.

>>64622377
>>64622503
>>64622561
It's nasty for magazines and feed ramps. Hardened steel nose? Use your brain.

>>64622569
Sorry best lawmakers can do is ban hunting for everyone but those that can afford pure copper rounds.

>>64622574
.308 are typically polymer nosed (like that's environmentally friendly)

They can kiss my ass, I'll buy lead as long as it's available. And they can't stop me from casting bullets out of tire weights

>>64622368
They keep bringing up lead to distract us from the microplastics, notice how no one is talking about that any more? Now it's about lead

>>64621568
>They are coming for your lead
oh no, they're coming for your brain damage

I'm shooting lead free for years now (now it's by law in Germany in my state, but wasn't when I started)
mostly with RWS, they have everything in a lead-free version
it's almost no difference
and I can hunt anything (in German forests) just fine

not touching lead with a 10m pole
literally makes you an aggressive brainlet
lead fumes are toxic
touching lead is toxic
if someone told me looking at lead is toxic, I'd believe it

>>64621644
you can get almost anything lead free
you're just to lazy to look

>>64622681
95% of the risk of lead exposure comes from the primers aerosolizing lead into the air. You don't really absorb lead through your skin you have to ingest it or inhale it.

>>64622698
>used to chew on fishing weights as a kid and cast my own pellets by melting down regular .177 pellets
I'm probably going to get cancer

>>64622698
>lead exposure comes from the primers aerosolizing lead into the air
yes that's the REALLY bad part

but hand to mouth action leads to ingestion
just touching the lead part is enough

dermal absorption is less worrisome for inorganic lead
but still not zero
and you should try to avoid ALL lead exposure
you can literally measure the brain damage even for small amounts

>>64622704
>I'm probably going to get cancer
maybe
but the main problem with lead is that you literally get retarded
like 10% of all mentally disabled people are retarded because of lead

also infertility, aggression, irritability (emotional instability), headaches, ADHD, neuropathy, anxiety and more
biggest risk factor is being young and high exposure
>used to chew on fishing weights as a kid
oh...

>>64622734
Chellating soap exists. Brain damage also occurs when you shoot higher pressure rounds.

>>64622704
You should definitely get a blood test for lead levels.

>>64622545
>>64622362
They're covered in green snot, don't feed reliably in a bolt action, are somehow dirtier than Aguila, and their groups can best be described as more of "patterning" akin to shot. They're shit and I regret buying a case of them.

>>64622742
>Chellating soap exists
yes
but also
for hand to mouth "transmission" the main problem is before you wash your hands
or stuff that you touch with unwashed hands then again after washing your hands

if you're careful lead rounds are relatively safe

but I'm not always careful
nor do I WANT to be always careful
i rather use lead-free equipment and not risk any lead exposure in the first place

>Brain damage also occurs when you shoot higher pressure rounds
i thought that was for heavy weapons?

and even if
why would you want double brain damage

>>64622786
Any round that you can feel in your face or chest from the pressure is rattling your brain. You also can eliminate lead entirely by shooting airguns if you're that worried about it.

>>64622788
>feel in your face or chest from the pressure is rattling your brain
the brain is pretty well insulated from shocks
so I doubt just because you feel it in your face you get brain damage
and haven't seen any research regarding this either

I mostly shoot .22 hornet or .308 win anyway

>You also can eliminate lead entirely by shooting airguns if you're that worried about it.
what???
retarded argument

you can literally just shoot lead free and eliminate a big risk factor
I like shooting & hunting and am willing to take some risk
but obviously I still want to (reasonably) minimize the risk...

>>64622810
If you shoot .308 you're exposing yourself to brain damage. You sound like you want something to feel superior about but refuse to accept the logical conclusions that exclude you from participating in much of the hobby outside of single shot 22s.

>>64622819
you clearly inhaled too much lead already
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

>>64622831
Fallacy fallacy, either you care about damage or you accept a level of damage.

I thought Trump axed EPA.

>>64621568
Bro, they have been for like 30 or more years, it's the same story as them banning 7n6 and then all cheap Russian ammo as soon as they got an excuse to. The more expensive ammo is the fewer people who will shoot, the easier it is to demonize firearms.

>>64622788
>Do a bunny hop
>Feel my bones and shit jiggle
>BRAINDMG.EXE
I think you're gonna need a source past trust me bro on that

>>64622850
You're right. It's not because lead poisoning is a concern. Send your children to the mines.

>>64622286
https://www.cci-ammunition.com/rimfire/cci/tnt-green/6-60.html
>THERES ONLY ONE KIND OF PROJECTILE AAAGGGHHHHH

>>64622854
You have a high pressure wave supersonic explosion going off next to your head my guy.

>>64622547
>>64622362
federally 1991. states probably the mid 1980s since lead was only "proven to bad" in like 1973 even though there are documents dating back to benjaman franklin where they identify lead poisoning as coming from lead

>>64622640
because most microplastics leach into the water when you wash your clothes because almost every fiber is synthetic. no one uses wool or cotton

>>64622884
I'm glad we're in agreement. I mean, what other conclusion could somebody reasonably reach if they are aware of the effectively non-existent risk of lead poisoning from bullets, where the only real risk actually comes from lead acetate primers? That the hew and cry for this was initiated by west coast gun grabber groups back in the 90s, starting at state level politics before being popularized and spread? Truly, it is the obviously correct conclusion, and I'm glad we're on the same page.

Why don't they make copper jacket bullets filled ith something other than lead?

>>64622681
you aren't really absorbing lead via touch through jacketed bullets and even if they aren't jacketed the primers probably give you more exposure since they are inhaled than touching a solid piece of lead

>>64622810
>>64622788
jew york times did a study about this
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/11/03/us/gun-ranges-brain-injuries.html
concussion from harder recoiling guns gives you brain damage

>>64621568
Hard to argue with this one when it comes to non-range usage. It's not the typical gun grabbing bullshit, it's legit not good to have a lot of lead in your blood nor to sprinkle it around the environment. On the scale of things it's hardly the most pressing issue but it's not a non-issue either. And even the cost irritation frankly bs, you shouldn't be magdumping for hunting anyway and nice ammo costs a real premium regardless of whether it uses lead or not.

>>64621632
>Getting lead free ammunition that actually groups worth a damn is hard
What? I've had zero issues doing 1.2 moa groups with relatively inexpensive (~144cpr) 180gr monolithic copper 300wm at a few hundred yards. And for hunting 2-3moa is plenty unless you're doing something really, really unusual like big horn at long ranges. I think 90%+ of the white tail or other game I've ever shot or anyone I know has ever shot around here we took at 100yd or less, and I've never gone beyond 200yd. It'd be hard to even get a good safe shot beyond that. At those kinds of ranges minor differences in bullets just really don't make that much of a difference to a vital shot given the uncertainties.

People get really weird about how much accuracy they imagine they need for hunting. Everything we have nowadays it's a fucking laser cannon vs the guns our ancestors conquered America with.

>>64622810
>you can literally just shoot lead free
isn't the primer still leaded in lead free?

>>64623007
It should be, the cheaper primers still use lead but nicer primers are phasing it out.

>>64623006
>Relatively inexpensive
>$1.44 projectile cost
>.30 cal
Uhhhh

>>64623002
>concussion from harder recoiling guns gives you brain damage
You fucking retard. That article is talking about the muzzle blast, not the gun recoil. That's why indoor vs outdoors matters, because hard flat surfaces around you increases the pressure waves (ie, sound) reflected back at you. The article states the proper answer, without mentioning that New York itself is a shit state that forces people to risk illness:
>Attaching a suppressor or blast regulator to the muzzle to direct the blast forward and away from the shooter can also make a big difference. In The Times testing, the blast from firing an AR-15 rifle indoors measured as high as 1.7 P.S.I. When a blast regulator was added, the measurement fell to less than 0.5 P.S.I.
>Suppressors and regulators are often used by law enforcement and the military, but they’re pricey, and suppressors are tightly regulated in some states and illegal in others.
YEAH LIKE FUCKING NEW YORK.

The whole article is basically yet another argument for why suppressors should be completely unregulated nationwide as basic safety devices. At least the stamp tax is going away in another few weeks.

>>64622993
like what?

>>64623018
Yes kid, there is a big world out there beyond your AR15 and the Fiocchi M193 you dump through it. Not that there is anything wrong with having fun doing cheap plinking either, though if you really want cheap fun get a nice 22lr.

>>64623006
why do you have a .300 winmag for shooting white tail at 100 yards?

>>64623023
I'm not the one who was saying recoil you gay retarded nazi

>>64623034
If yo I actually shot guns you'd realize why people enjoy more than shooting 22lr and one 300 Winmag a year you wannabe fudd.

>>64623007
>isn't the primer still leaded in lead free?
1: You can get lead free primers too and they work fine, though last I checked the non-ec storage lifetime is more like 7 years instead of "basically forever". Maybe that's improved but I burn through my ammo quicker than that.

2: Primers are a tiny, tiny contribution to lead. FMJ base vaporization is an order of magnitude more, or of course fragments that get eaten. If you're not hunting and were purely interested in protecting yourself you don't need to get rid of all lead, just going to TMJ is going to deal with most of it.

>>64623047
Primers are the main vector of lead poisoning...

>>64621568
I mean lead is very toxic. I dont get why we kept using it when copper and steel became cheaper to use. Its like insisting on using lead pipes for water.

>>64623047
>2: Primers are a tiny, tiny contribution to lead.
primers are the main cause of lead poisoning for shooters and it isn't particularly close

>>64623038
Because that's what I have and like using? I enjoy prs nowadays for recreational shooting more than plink personally, and I see no reason to buy a separate 308 or 6.5 gun for the hunting I'm doing right now. If I wanted to do a different lighter style I'd probably drop out of 30cal entirely. The difference of 30 cents or even 80cents for an entire game animal is absolutely irrelevant.
>>64623043
>goalpost shifting
You claimed 144cpr was unreasonable for 300wm anon.

>>64623068
Its unreasonable for anyone interested in shooting. Fudd advice from someone who doesn't even shoot a box of centerfire a year is shit.

>>64623051
>>64623055
This is literally fuddlore mixed with industry bullshit pushed by ammo manufacturers. It's not some mystery cause either: boiling point of lead is 3180F, smokeless powder burns at 3200-3700F. If you have an exposed pure lead base it's going to vaporize.

>>64623079
Yeah retard what do you think happens to the lead powders in the primer that are even more easily vaporized? Dunning Kruger ass post.

>>64623077
Oh I see, you're mentally retarded and you think copper 308 or 6.5 costs the same as 300wm lol.
>in shooting
Neither the topic, nor my posts, are about shooting at the range child. They're about hunting. Use whatever you like at the range. I replied to the tripfag to point out that you don't need fancy factory match loads or handloads to hunt. That's true regardless of the cartridge.

>>64621568
>oh no, not the leaderino
Are you retarded?

>>64621632
LOL, lmao, no. Atleast not for quality hunting ammo shot through my rifles. There is no measureable difference between lead and non-lead for any of the brands i have tried (RWS, Brenneke, Norma, not even GECO).
Calibers tested were .308 and 7x65r. I have also personally seen others do tests with 30-06, 8x57IS and 7x64. Same results.

>>64623093
Uh no child. You referenced magdumping trash with ARs. You clearly knew what was going on child. Try to not trip over yourself kiddo.

>>64621568
Isn't lead already banned for waterfowl? I don't see why we shouldn't have a similar rule in place for other game with the possible exception of invasive/ pest animals like hogs and coyotes (because who the hell actually eats hog?), seems like a no brainer to not want to inject lead into something you plan to eat. So long as they don't outright ban its sale and production entirely because I'd sooner give myself lead poisoning than shoot copper and bismuth on the range

>>64623082
Uh, do you think that the primer is 100% pure lead by volume now? Lead styphnate is C6HN3O8Pb, less than half the weight is lead, and the full weight of a primer is that inside a metal cup with an anvil. Even for a magnum primer like a CCI 200 there's maybe a grain or two worth of actual lead styphnate in it.
>Dunning Kruger
uh huh.

>>64623113
>You referenced magdumping trash with ARs
Really? Point to where in my post in the reply talking about 300wm: >>64623006
>What? I've had zero issues doing 1.2 moa groups with relatively inexpensive (~144cpr) 180gr monolithic copper 300wm at a few hundred yards. And for hunting 2-3moa is plenty unless you're doing something really, really unusual like big horn at long ranges. I think 90%+ of the white tail or other game I've ever shot or anyone I know has ever shot around here we took at 100yd or less, and I've never gone beyond 200yd. It'd be hard to even get a good safe shot beyond that. At those kinds of ranges minor differences in bullets just really don't make that much of a difference to a vital shot given the uncertainties.
>People get really weird about how much accuracy they imagine they need for hunting. Everything we have nowadays it's a fucking laser cannon vs the guns our ancestors conquered America with.

>>64623132
You're the one who think a few layers of atoms vaporizing is more lead than that, don't start this bullshit.

>>64622640
Both are very bad, one is significantly easier to address without completely uprooting modern society

>>64623079
yeah, that's what happens with the primers. the primers vaporize and blow lead back at you

>>64623101
what are bullets made out of, fag boi?

>>64623121
it's banned for water fowl because it gets into the water, not because you hit the birds with it

>>64623138
>You're the one who think a few layers of atoms vaporizing is more lead than that, don't start this bullshit.
Yes, I do, though 100% serious anon: if you have articles with serious air measurements on TMJ vs lead bullets I'd love to read them. There's a dearth of modern measurements on it, but from articles I've read lead exposure at ranges is not an insignificant problem, ie:
>https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5379568/
and from the few measurements I've seen the difference between TMJ and lead is very significant. For a 45acp one that OSHA measured back in the 90s I found it was 17 micrograms of lead in the air vs 43 micrograms for exposed. I've never ever been able to find any actual lab air measurements to backup "primers are the source of lead" just endless forum posts of "common sense". So my conclusion is that exposed lead vs not makes a bigger difference then the primer.

Not that you shouldn't get lead free primers too if they match your needs and budget, but I don't see why perfect should be the enemy of good either. And all this is putting aside the separate matter of what's in your meat or in scavenger meat. If you're hunting outdoors the airborne emissions are basically irrelevant whether it's FMJ and lead primers or not.

>>64623168
>the primers vaporize and blow lead back at you
Sure, though it goes out the muzzle with the rest of the gas anon, it's only indoors that it's a significant concern not hunting. The question though is the relative amount vs base vaporization, and vs what gets into the ecosystem (or you) from misses and meat.

>>64623211
>Sure, though it goes out the muzzle with the rest of the gas anon
do you not have a semi auto? gas absolutely comes out of the action too. hell, gas comes out of the action on my lever action when I open the bolt to cycle it
lead primers cause more lead poisoning in shooters than the bullets do.

>>64623203
Mount stupid: the post. Lead containing primers are the primary source of aersosolized lead. Your conclusion is based on being a contrarian, that should have been a massive red flag if you were thinking with your brain and not acting on self inflated ego.

>>64623215
>do you not have a semi auto?
For hunting? No, I just use a bolt for that. Though I don't live in hog country either though, I didn't mean to put down people using semis at all for vermin of any size, or even if they just like to. I have zero against hunting with an AR.

>>64623219
>I have absolutely zero numbers whatsoever but very strong feelings
Well, it's good that we have women on /k/ too I guess.

>>64623211
>>64623236
So according to >>64623203 the amount from the base is 43 micrograms.
The large primer in a 45 is 3 grains of primer compound which comes to .2 grams. Assuming only 50% is lead styphnate still gives .1 gram of lead compound.
We are talking whole magnitudes of order higher from the primer.

Thread appears to be an antigun poster and needs to be deleted

File: short-barrel-5-56-ar-15-b(...).png (108 KB, 1080x486)

108 KB PNG

>muh blast pressure
Hey check this out someone did actual measurements instead of just writing an article with no provided evidence and talking about the worst case scenario.
>0.6psi unsupressed, 10.3inch barrel
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>64622810
https://rdusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06

Mk18s and 13 inch 308s expose the user to more pressure than M2s do

>>64621568
>lead bad
watch me hunt with fucking tungsten core with plastic sabot, greenigs

>>64623177
And where, pray tell, do the bullets go if you miss a deer or it goes straight through? No matter how you slice it, it's hardly a bad idea to limit the amount of toxic materials introduced into hunting grounds

>>64623301
>caring about the environment and wanting healthy game animals is liberal nonsense
I hope you die of lead ingestion, nigger

>>64623293
https://rdusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Blast-Overpressure-White-Paper-01-14-2025.pdf
GJNMM
Sorry bad link

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10248048/
>a motherfucking
>TAC-50
>produces 2.2PSI
5.56 doesn't dump 1.6PSI into your head.
Not even .308 is doing that.
50BMG is 9 times the muzzle energy of .308.

You people are god damned clowns.

>>64623315
From the outset, two glaring tells with this publication:
>we've spent millions of dollars funding suppressors and stuff
Motive
>blast overpressure is instantaneous
A direct false claim of the physics involved.
Impulse time is a critical metric of pressure effects.
It doesn't matter if the entire scientific aspect of the publication is sound. They defeated their own credibility with two short statements and I will not entertain the rest.

>>64623328
Always remember that concern trolls are still just trolls.

>>64623236
>For hunting? No, I just use a bolt for that.
bolts are gay. so you only shoot when hunting and you never see any gas coming out of the action when you cycle the bolt?

>>64623268
>thread about hunting ammo is anti gun
what?

>>64623307
it goes in the dirt. it doesn't leach into the dirt like it leaches into the water

>>64623047
> FMJ base vaporization

Ah. I was gonna ask how lead particulates from the bullet’s core find themselves in the gunsmoke, but there it is.

>>64623385
Look at the numbers that were posted in >64623203
The amount is so small it would be a rounding error when calculating air quality.

>>64623031
Iron?? Idk

>>64623412
it won't deform, iron is lighter and more expensive than lead and there are concerns about making AP ammo that the government doesn't want you to have and iron and steel can cause sparks and star fires
>muh water fowl
shot is different since it's so small deformation isn't really an expected part of the killing mechanism, it isn't going fast enough to AP and the spark risk is lower due to the lower velos

>>64623255
>So according to >>64623203 the amount from the base is 43 micrograms.
no looks like according to that a tmj bullet put 17 into the air and fmj put 43 so amount from primer would presumably be 17 and amount from bullet would be 43-17=26. but base area has to be a factor so gonna be different for a rifle bullet and hg primers are much smaller. so ratio of .223 to rifle primer gonna be different right? but we need some real numbers here. not like air sampling is some big deal has gotta be some lab out there that has a shot a gun in a box then measured it.

>>64623423
>it won't deform, iron is lighter and more expensive
Less dense yeah, but iron is WAY cheaper than lead anon wtf are you talking about? Holy shit is iron and steel cheap.
>AP ammo
FWIW anon pretty sure the AP ammo laws are exclusively about handgun rounds, not rifle.
>fire
Sparking/fire risk isn't irrelevant but definitely situational, you can buy tracer and incendiary ammo perfectly legally but not legally use it in a fire hazard area (and some ranges will ban you if you do it when they tell you not to).

Probably the main issue for using steel or iron core in mass produced consumer stuff that while the material is cheap the density is even lower than copper and there probably isn't as much existing tooling for making bulk reasonably good cored ammo. There just hasn't been much motivation when lead has been fine. Probably solvable with enough investment I guess but dunno if a market will materialize unless EU or some place big banned lead entirely for everything, not just for hunting. Otherwise might as well use cheap stuff for practice and rangefun and copper or tungsten for hunting. Or if you're doing something exotic can do whatever.

>>64623543
how the fuck is iron cheaper than lead?

>>64621568
tbdesu I think it's probably for the best. The amount of geese and ducks I've seen all fucked up and disorientated from ingesting lead buckshot as gizzard stones is pretty depressing

>>64623556
>how the fuck is iron cheaper than lead?
It's a really common element and the backbone of modern civilization so there are absolutely ginormous operations based around mining and smelting it I guess? But just go look at any metal price tracking site, there are tons since they are widely traded and used commodities. Like:
>https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=pb&u=kg&d=1200
Basic steel (rebar, hot rolled coil etc, not fancier alloys) is literally 5-10x cheaper.

>>64623543
>Probably the main issue for using steel or iron core
I thought of another one, it's gotta be a little more expensive to make it expand due to being harder. I assume you'd have to do something like with copper mono where you pre-cut petals.

>>64623558
lead shot has been banned for waterfowl for 35 years

>>64623586
that's so weird. it must be because they got rid of all the lead smelteries in the US

>>64623604
Doesn't stop dipshits who like skeet shooting from using lead buckshot over water

>>64623632
who the fuck hunts with buckshot?

>>64623488
Just read the study.
They are measuring blood lead levels. From other peoples published work.
It's just another garbage metastudy.

>>64623006
>1.2 moa groups with relatively inexpensive (~144cpr) 180gr monolithic copper 300wm at a few hundred yards
Just to put some specific numbers and brands on this: maybe it's because the brand isn't well known in America, but I've been able to reliably get S&B exergy rounds for around that price. Clocking with a Garmin C1 radar, they've averaged around 2700fps out a 22.5" barrel over a few hundred rounds, and within a single box have generally have a spread around 50-90fps. Worst case was I tried shooting a string of 32 rounds from 3 different boxes bought at different times, deliberate fire but no long cool downs either, and had a couple of outliers that increased the spread to 170fps (min 2677fps, avg 2738fps, max 2847fps, spread 170, stdev 51.8). Looking at the list of numbers it was really obvious where the line was of a box switch so they aren't very consistent over multiple factory runs. Barrel heating probably didn't help. Not the worst I've ever seen by any means but meh.

However, even in the worst case that's only a 0.54moa drop spread, 1.13" at 200yd. So not a big deal for a single cold bore shot hunting, the gun and hunter are more likely to be the limiting factors and certainly are for me. Fine to use nice stuff but I think it's clearly fine to be cheap too.

>>64623657
no the micrograms in air seem to be referencing something separate by osha? but not linked. can't find any live link to it myself just a dead link to a manufacturer web from 2002 lol. fucking google faggots fucking hate how they hide everything more than a few years old

i just wish lead free ammo was more available
i don't mind paying a premium so i don't have to worry about lead exposure for my kids

>>64623693
Do you not live in a place where you're allowed to order online? If you do just go over to ammoseek and search for terms like "copper" or "lead-free" in whatever caliber you're after and just buy the cheapest. Or take up reloading, you can buy bags of copper bullets of all sorts of varieties from a ton of places.

>>64622681
hard to take anything from your post seriously knowing you Germans are subjugated bootlicking sperg faggots that mindlessly defend unjust laws just for being the law

As someone already mentioned lead exposure from jacketed ammunition is nonexistent to the shooter, it's blatantly obvious the motivations for pushing legislation regulating rifle ammunition containing lead is not out of environmental concern but as a form of indirect gun restriction targetting not the arms themselves but the availability and affordability of ammunition

>>64623255
>43 micrograms.
>.1 gram
>whole magnitudes of order higher
Anon .1 gram is 100 micrograms. You're working in a system with convertible units, please use it as such.

>>64623423
Iron is soft as hell. It's not AP. You can use powdered/sintered iron to make it even more weaker.

>>64622681
>almost anything
How about no. Lead free .270? Lead free .284? Rimfire ammo that doesn't suck donkey dick?

>>64623804
nta but jesus dude how are you so bad at finding common ammo and why are you expecting a niche for snowflake rounds too?
common:
>Lead free .270?
https://fastammo.com/hornady-805294-outfitter-cx-copper-alloy-expanding-cs-130-grain-270-winchester/
https://miwallcorp.com/federal-copper-ammunition-270-winchester-130-grain-copper-hollow-point-20-rounds-brass-case/
or a thousand other options that shit ain't rare.

snowflake:
>Lead free .284?
lol basically fucking nobody does 284win for anything at all lead free or not. you're handloading that shit or else paying like 400+cpr or some ludicrous number

>rimfire
if u want 22lr specifically than yeah nada cartridge just doesn't work for lower density metals. think everyone gave up on it. 17hmr, 22wmr etc have decent options tho. maybe winchester's 21sharp thing

>>64623778
.1 gram is 100,000 micrograms
Several orders of magnitude higher.

File: IMG_20251211_133118_971.jpg (116 KB, 1044x1280)

116 KB JPG

>this entire thread or what's become of it
You all know me and what I want to post. I won't say it.

>>64623614
Nah. Metal prices are almost entirely about how abundant they are, how well the concentrate into deposits, how hard they are to refine, and how much mass production there is (and in turn how much gets invested both directly and in terms of R&D/infrastructure making things more efficient) vs how useful and in demand they are. Iron is the 4th most common element in the Earth's crust (~5.5% of the total by mass) after oxygen, silicon and aluminum and it's easy to extract and work with. And we extract more of it than almost anything, over 1.15 billion tons per year (the next highest after that, sodium and phosphorous, are "only" around 250 million tons per year in comparison, aluminum is 58 million tons). Lead is only 0.0014% of the crust (about 4000x less abundant) and we pull like 4.8 million tons (240x less). Shouldn't be surprising iron is cheaper.

File: IMG_20251211_151244210~2.jpg (1.51 MB, 4096x1931)

1.51 MB JPG

P.O. Ackley would have been a big fan of all the solid copper expanding bullets available today. He was one of the first to advocate for and produce them, although he used a lead tip instead of the more advanced polymer tips of today. He wasn't concerned with saving the birds or anything, just terminal ballistic performance. He and his colleagues were also big advocates of 22 caliber or smaller cartridges for hunting medium-large game, citing dozens and dozens of kills that dropped the animals on the spot.
Most people who think you need at least 30 caliber to kill a deer are the same type to shun solid copper bullets. They're almost always bad shots and too cheap to afford another $10 for a box of ammo.
Picrel is from the 1962 handbook for shooters and reloaders

>>64621568
Good. There's very little justification for continuing to use lead to hunt when we know how incredibly fucking bad it is for you and any other animals that come into contact with it.
For target shooting we'll continue with it simply because of the cost savings, no getting around that, but pumping something full of lead and then putting that something in your stomach is loony tunes tier retardation.

>>64621632
skill issue

Dang, looks like I'm going to have to start buying those teflon-coated, steel core, Kop Killers™

There are a depressing number of people who think that copper monolithics are an insidious liberal plot to "make hunting and shooting too expensive" just because c*lifornia mandated them.

It's all so tiresome.

>>64624543
Meant for >>64624269

>>64624031
I don't care about finding anything, I just wish smarmy German cucks would fuck off

>>64624169
> how hard they are to refine

This one’s a bitch. If the ease of extraction and refinement were equal for all elements, everything that isn’t aluminum could have been made of titanium, and for cheap. Its abundance is something like 6500ppm by mass.

I’m also mad that tungsten is so scarce. We could have had 150gr .224 bullets with infinite BCs bros, we were just born on the wrong planet.

>>64622810
>mostly shoot .22 hornet
Based. Still common in Europe? It's completely dead here in the states.

>>64621568
It's honestly the same for leas fishing weights, over the years it builds up.

>>64622362
it sounds good but the definition of wetland is absolute garbage in the directive: its any pool of water over 1 square meter including ones that form only during spring rains. There are entire EU countries that are nothing but "wetland" by that definition. They also included shooting ranges in the ban even if they are already collecting all lead in backstop. Im glad nobody actually follows it the letter

>>64622278
To be fair modern Norma absolutely sucks.

>>64622786
you arent touching the lead on the vast majority of bullets dumbass, they're jacketed in copper
again the only meaningful lead exposure from shooting is the aerosolized lead from primers

>>64625608
>Still common in Europe?
not really
but also not dead
and if I'm the last person to keep it alive
i just love my weihrauch HW 66

not sure if any new rifles are produced though
at least the ammo is relatively easy to get

>>64624543
Then open up more copper mines...
Reducing supply and increasing demand due to panic buying is anti 2A

>>64624554
Based

File: bullet-control-1639149173.jpg (38 KB, 780x438)

38 KB JPG

>>64623744
Leftists stole the idea from Chris Rock
(wall of text is the joke)
>You don’t need no gun control, you know what you need? We need some bullet control. Men, we need to control the bullets, that’s right. I think all bullets should cost five thousand dollars… five thousand dollars per bullet… You know why? Cause if a bullet cost five thousand dollars there would be no more innocent bystanders.Yeah! Every time somebody get shut we’d say, ‘Damn, he must have done something ... Shit, he’s got fifty thousand dollars worth of bullets in his ass.’ And people would think before they killed somebody if a bullet cost five thousand dollars. ‘Man I would blow your fucking head off…if I could afford it.’ ‘I’m gonna get me another job, I’m going to start saving some money, and you’re a dead man. You’d better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway.’ So even if you get shot by a stray bullet, you wouldn't have to go to no doctor to get it taken out. Whoever shot you would take their bullet back, like "I believe you got my property."

>>64622574
It was a minor problem that was immediately fixed by issuing the blue follower magazines. That's not a thing anymore and was only a thing very briefly. >>64621568
Fuck bullets, where are my lead free primers?
>>64623006
>1.2 moa groups
There are people who honestly believe that anything over 1 moa is bad. Mostly because they're stupid and think that their gun is actually 1 moa, but yeah.

>>64626560
>There are people who honestly believe that anything over 1 moa is bad. Mostly because they're stupid and think that their gun is actually 1 moa, but yeah.
They've been meme'd into OPTIMIZE NUMBERS without considering context (or reality). Also if you dig into where they're getting these ideas you often end up with dumb shit fags claiming
>oh yeah im totally submoa (cherry pick 3 round "group", never cold bore)
>oh yeah im totally submoa (those 2 flyers were "just me" which doesn't count (!?))
etc etc.

>>64626632
Min-max fags have ruined the market, or at least made it harder to find non larperators to befriend.
Just faggots applying videogame logic to real life

>>64626560
>it was a minor problem
Losing your magazine unexpectedly is not a minor problem
>it was fixed
It was improved.
They still wreck mags.

>>64626696
Part of my own personal anger at it is that I think it's been genuinely discouraging to people trying to get into the hobby for the first time and that sucks. Guy I knew from school moved back to the area from a noguns suburb and we became neighbors, decent dude and he got into rifles, mentioned wanting to hunt, invited him hunting a few times but he politely said not yet, ask him next time. Didn't want to push but after a few years asked him what was up, wasn't offended or anything just curious if he was busy with settling in or whatever. And he was all embarrassed and said he didn't want to "hold me back", after a few years of practice
>"I'm sorry anon I was doing 20 shot strings standing earlier today and I was only doing 2.3moa and the youtubers said I should be doing sub moa do I need to buy a carbon barrel?"
DUDE. 20 shot standing and you're doing 2.3 that's GREAT, you don't need more on that front or any of that fucking bullshit they're getting paid to shill you, just to study a bit of basic deer anatomy and let's go I'll show you about scents and hides etc let's have a good time. And we did. I wish I'd asked him earlier, god damn there is "advice" all over the internet from people who have never even shot a fucking groundhog or rabbit let alone anything else saying people must have a $10k 33cal sub-moa superdildo-9000 with nods and lasers or they suck and some perfectly nice people don't know any better and think their efforts are no good.

Sorry for the blogpost rant but reeeeee

>>64621568
who is?

Authorities: Lead is bad for your health and everything really
4channers: Fuck you mom, you can't tell me what to do! I'm going to go and drink lead right now!

>>64630380
you know who

>>64630392
In our defense, as has often been the case with /k/ there seem to be plenty of reasonable adults itt too who can recognize that lead is just fundamentally really shitty stuff from a health pov both for humans and animals, while simultaneously it's got an mix of properties and economics that make it non-trivial to replace. Yeah of course there are folks (mix of retards, copium snorters and trolls) like you describe too, always have been and always will be, but they aren't the only ones which is always nice.

>>64630392
Several historical firearms turn unshootable the second lead core is banned

>>64632592
nta, but I don't see much chance of lead getting banned completely in the US ever for that reason, plus there's the matter of diminishing returns. If you solve 99% of the issue and the last 1% would cause 1000x more trouble and there are good reasons for it then that's more than good enough. And we already have a history of grandfathering and historical use exceptions in laws anyway. If someone wants to cast their own bullets for actual historical guns that's fine, though it'd be reasonable to say "you still can't shoot waterfowl with them though". There just isn't enough volume in that to be a serious issue.

I think restrictions on using lead for hunting with modern guns, and significantly more pollution scrutiny around ranges that allow lead and how they're dealing with air pollution if indoors and contaminated backing disposal, would be gudenuf and potentially actually passable. People doing reenactments or occasionally bringing out family heirlooms or collectors items for fun should be able to continue to do so.

>>64632592
Okay? Why are you hunting with historical guns? What kind of retard are you to hunt with say an AG-42? And yes, this only affects hunting laws and regulations, no effect on target or defensive ammo laws
>but the libz r gunna go fer all da lead
Didn't ban all lead shotgun ammo despite banning it for birds. Last I checked Cali hasn't banned all lead ammo for anything but hunting. There is more than enough precedent to say that ammunition restraints for hunting have little effect on ammo meant for and used in other types of shooting

>>64632638
>>64632635
people hunt with flintlocks and other bp guns. even gay ass modern "black powder" guns. idk if they would get rid of bp season

>>64630392
I kind of agree but you phrased this post in the faggiest way possible.
>Authorities
really?

>>64627868
Jesus, I had no idea it's that bad. I guess I don't shoot enough to notice. I wonder if kids even like to shoot anymore, it appears as though 9mm and CC and its associated tacticool baggage in adulthood is how most people first get exposed to guns now.

>>64632658
Do BP guns need lead balls? Honest question, I've never messed with BP despite wanting to take my Jezail out to bag a hog. Does the soft metal provide better obturarion over say steel or copper? I figured the wad handled all of that

>>64632688
My youngest brother does but that's because I never stress shit like groups or splits but simply blasting produce and clays in the woods. In the words of Reggie, if its not fun, why bother?

>>64632689
I know modern faggot ass muzzle loaders can use 100% copper/polymer tip copper rounds. I would assume actual antiques require a soft metal.
Lead is crazy soft. like unalloyed lead is like silly putty

>>64632658
>people hunt with flintlocks and other bp guns.
But it's a small fraction of those who hunt with even modern muzzleloaders let alone conventional smokeless rifles or surprisingly even vs bow. If someone has a legit historical gun and are taking deer for purely personal use I don't see why that's important to restrict. I guess an argument could be made that that's still more a luxury choice, but it's such a minuscule fraction of lead use I don't see any reason to make a stink about it. And it almost by definition can't really be abused either.
>even gay ass modern "black powder" guns. idk if they would get rid of bp season
>>64632689
Modern muzzleloaders can work with solid copper just fine, and there is plenty available in a variety of styles like
>https://www.federalpremium.com/muzzleloading/11-PMZ50TC1.html
or
>https://cuttingedgebullets.com/collections/muzzleloader-bullets
or wherever. Muzzleloader season isn't going anywhere thankfully.

>>64632720
>I would assume actual antiques require a soft metal.
Honestly I'm not sure even that's true, though wouldn't be surprised either. But the typical issue with antiques is how they handle pressure, not the simple hardness of the steel in the barrel. Copper is harder then lead sure but even old steel is still steel. And for just doing a softer lubricating/sealing coating around a bullet there are more options then lead as well, where lead is trickier to replace is the core if you don't have something designed for it. And if bullets just aren't made at all for a given old gun then obviously being able to cast your own is pretty important. I don't believe it's reasonable at this point to require someone to put together their own metal CNC setup or some shit to create custom copper ones.

But again I also don't think it's a serious issue. Just grandfathering all antiques would be the right approach.

>>64632763
You can probably use tin if you're willing to tolerate slightly inferior ballistic performance, tin oxide is still slightly toxic but nowhere near as lead and its a bit more convenient for casting and such. Zinc is probably more feasible for factory ammo, but would require different technique and is more expensive.

I don't have strong opinions about hunting laws, but muzzleloader hunting is so low volume that it shouldn't necessitate new regulation. Muzzleloader hunters as a group likely contribute more pollution by leaving trash in the woods, and lead is a significant part of the hobby. Honestly, this applies to all hunting. California only banned lead because they have an endangered carrion feeder (the condor), the supposed health benefits for everyone else are mostly for the end-user.

>>64632826
>all hunting
Except maybe bird hunting*

>>64621568
full metal jacket ammo let alone solid copper bullets is banned in my state for hunting because it overpenetrates
going lead free might save a few coyotes or something but it'll result in far more suffering for all the deer that gets shot with them instead of a normal bullet

>>64632689
It's not even just BP, some guns the projectile can't be made in dimensions that would have workable ballistics

wouldnt jacketed ammo just be fine enough? as long as its completely covered in copper the lead shouldnt get exposed nearly enough to hurt the environment

>>64632864
Barnes and Sako make very good copper solids that don't overpenetrate, it's true that older ones tend to mushroom a bit too slowly

>>64632869
Doesn't matter if it's exposed.
Metallic lead and regular lead oxide are fairly inert and tend not to move.
Organic leads are the dangerous ones.

>>64623034
>AR15 and the Fiocchi M193
I resemble that statement

>>64632878
actually yea, we already get lead from the natural world around us
but is there any threat from slow erosion of solid lead? i imagine that could eventually get mixed into dust

>>64632688
Yes, it has to be a soft metal. Steel or copper is far too hard.

>>64622752
I was like 7 at the time, it's been the better part of 30 years since the gnawing (I never just put it in my mouth like gum lol). I have to imagine that's enough time since
>>64622734
Yeah, really old school family, we didn't know about that shit. Casting and swaging the .177 pellets into new ones was legitimately fun though

>>64632869
Anon jacketing (even bonded TMJ) doesn't stop the lead from getting exposed in the slightest after you shoot it, it just reduces what the shooter is directly exposed to and fouling in the gun. When you cut a conventional bullet out of a deer instead of just tossing it clean it, bring it back and measure it, you'll find that it's all petaled open as designed and you probably get maybe 70% weight retention at most. The rest of it (mostly lead) is in what you shot. That's actually a significant technical argument in favor of hunting with copper once the design problems to get reliable petaling/expansion were solved, much much higher weight retention and damage, less ruined meat. They definitely had problems initially but like >>64632872 says that's long since solved.

Range use is different but in the context specifically of general hunting there isn't really much good reason to use lead at this point. Lead free performs well at hunting ranges and the cost difference is irrelevant when you're only talking a single round or two per animal. There are 100% edge cases where lead can be argued for, but they're the exceptions these days. I dunno if it's actually a big enough deal to really add up in the scheme of things, but it's also not a burden.

>>64632924
On the geological scale

>>64632957
>when you're only talking a single round or two per animal.
probably more like 5 per animal if you include zeroing

>>64626560
>It was a minor problem that was immediately fixed by issuing the blue follower magazines.
I have never seen one of these.

>>64632971
What. A gun shouldn't need to be rezeroed nearly ever unless you've rebarreled it, change the optic, or have a really cheap optic mount you swap around or something like that. And are you seriously taking 4 rifle rounds for a deer or whatever at <100yd?

>>64632984
>I don't confirm my zero literally ever

>>64633008
I effectively do though when I shoot it regularly, but I don't count that towards hunting usage. I guess if you have a hunting gun you literally only use once per year then sure doesn't hurt, though even then with a quality setup the zero shouldn't shift to any significant degree at the kind of ranges and accuracy we're talking for hunting.

But sure, if you take an extra 3 bullets each year to double check and refamiliarize yourself then sure, no problem.

>>64633031
do you shoot your hunting ammo all year? if you're using expensive nonlead hunting ammo it's likely going to have a different zero than leaded stuff