Comment by kokanator | Hacker News Reader

Comment by kokanator | Hacker News Reader

It is interesting how many obviously non-hunter and/or non-shooters are weighing in here.

Having hunted nearly 40 years for all types of game and in a large number of different settings I wanted to provide a few observations from experience to help the conversation:

- Lead tends superior ballistically to alternatives

- Lead induces less damage to the firearm

- To use non-lead alternatives you typically either have increase the size of the projectile( (s) in the case of shotgun shot ) and/or increase the powder charge. This typically means an individual will need to purchase different firearms. For instance, to get close to the ballistic performance of lead shot in a 12 ga shotgun you will need a 3.5 inch shot shells. The vast majority of shotguns accept 2.75 or 3 inch shells.

- Steel shot in shotguns is more likely to wound game by creating bleed tunnels causing the animal/bird to bleed out much later and not be retrievable. Lead creates more catastrophic immediately fatal wounds.

- When I took hunters education we were taught about lead and how to prepare game to minimize the risk of exposure. When my children took hunters education 15 years ago they were provided the same education. Not to mention the education they received from me.

- Damaged meat can be identified and cut away. I was taught to cut at least 3 inches outside of the wound margin. From the xrays I have seen this seems appropriate. This doesn't just include the entry wound but also other areas of impacted meat. Process your own meat and take pride in the result.

- Copper bullets do not expand as quickly and as effectively as lead bullets leading to more wounded game.

> Lead induces less damage to the firearm

Over here when lead was prohibited for hunting waterfowl, there was lots of heated debating about the issue. People hunting with grandpa's old shotgun had to either get a new gun for use with steel, or use the hideously expensive Bismuth shells. Seems most active hunters switched to newer guns. I haven't heard anything about modern guns wearing out prematurely due to shooting steel.

> To use non-lead alternatives you typically either have increase the size of the projectile( (s) in the case of shotgun shot ) and/or increase the powder charge. This typically means an individual will need to purchase different firearms. For instance, to get close to the ballistic performance of lead shot in a 12 ga shotgun you will need a 3.5 inch shot shells. The vast majority of shotguns accept 2.75 or 3 inch shells.

Or, you know, if your gun can't take those spiffier shells, slightly limit your shot distances?

> Steel shot in shotguns is more likely to wound game by creating bleed tunnels causing the animal/bird to bleed out much later and not be retrievable. Lead creates more catastrophic immediately fatal wounds.

IIRC there was some research from Denmark suggesting the opposite, namely that the significantly harder steel pellets would have a higher probability of punching through bone and hit vital organs rather than deforming and lodging in the bone. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> Copper bullets do not expand as quickly and as effectively as lead bullets leading to more wounded game.

I think this is a relatively newer development, and it seems every year manufacturers are introducing newer copper bullets with more ductile alloys, precut grooves and whatnot to make them expand faster. I don't think it will take long, to the extent it hasn't already happened, that copper bullets will be good enough for the vast majority of usage. Sure, if you want to hit a rodent at 800m or some other extreme form of long-range marksmanship, you really want the density of lead, but most rifle hunting is done at significantly shorter ranges.

> IIRC there was some research from Denmark suggesting the opposite, namely that the significantly harder steel pellets would have a higher probability of punching through bone and hit vital organs rather than deforming and lodging in the bone.

Great point and one I tend to agree with. But this actually causes an issue. At issue here is that the steel keeps its shape and does penetrate deeper without expanding creating shot size holes through those organs which do ultimately cause death after the bird has flown away and later dies. Unless you hit the heart directly the organs will take time to fail.

Lead on the other hand causes more catastrophic injuries which makes the game more retrievable resulting in less wasted game.

Another thing to consider is penetration of the projectile for safety considerations. There are already hunting zones where rifle is not allowed for safety considerations, if you were forced to use steel slugs in a shotgun it would also reduce safe hunting opportunities.

I grew up in one of these game units. It was a shotgun only unit. Unfortunately, a steel slug in a shotgun would permanently damage the shotgun because steel does not give the way lead does. A shotgun has a choke which reduces the barrel diameter toward the end of the barrel. There are sophisticated ways around this problem such a sabot loads but this begins to make the shotgun perform more like a rifle defeating the entire purpose.

I was persuaded enough by the research that I decided to move away from lead slugs a few years ago. I currently use these steel slugs for deer when required to use a shotgun, and find them extremely effective: https://www.ddupleks-usa.com/broadhead-hexolit-32. I'd recommend checking them out. Like most ammo, availability is spotty right now, but cost is reasonable when they can be found.

This is an interesting ammunition. A sabot for sure but the flat/concave face keeps it out of the shotgun acting like a rifle scenario. Thank you for directing me to this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com