4.7 Article

Weight retention and expansion of popular lead-based and lead-free hunting bullets

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 904, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166288

Keywords

Ammunition; Ballistics; Copper bullets; Lead; Simulants; Wildlife

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article examines the impact of bullet construction on animal tissues. The study found that copper bullets can retain over 98% of their weight, while lead bullets only retain between 13-55%. Furthermore, copper bullets demonstrate more consistent expansion, while lead bullets can experience separation between their copper alloy jacket and lead core.
Hunting bullets are often comprised of a lead core covered with a copper alloy jacket. When the bullet collides with an animal, particles-sometimes millions-can shed from the projectile and embed in animal tissues. Those lead fragments can persist in game meat and remain in the discarded viscera that many wildlife species scavenge. Bullets often differ in design, so it is vital to assess their weight retention and expansion, which affects how much metal they deposit in tissue and how effectively they kill animals. We fired 12 types of hunting bullets into water to measure their weight retention and expansion at 91 m and 238 m (100 and 260 yards). Bullet constructions included copper, tin, bonded lead, partitioned lead, and cup-and-core lead. On average, copper bullets retained >98 % of their weight, whereas cup-and-core lead bullets retained <13-55 %, depending on the brand and shot distance. One brand of bonded lead bullet retained mass (>= 96 %) nearly as well as copper bullets, while another brand retained much less (similar to 71 %). Two types of copper bullets expanded similarly between test distances, while a third expanded less at 238 m. Cup-and-core lead bullets often experienced a separation between their copper alloy jacket and lead core. Our data emphasize that lead-based bullets of similar construction can drastically differ in weight retention and expansion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available