Are there performance differences between lead and lead-free ammunition?
According to this article (full disclosure: I wrote it) lead-based ammunition is a well-known threat to Condors and other scavengers, and may have negative effects on humans who unknowingly ingest bullet fragments.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that lead-free ammunition performs just as well as lead-based ammunition, without the potential side-effects, and lack of adoption is largely due to habit (we like to use what we have always used).
So, my question is two-part:
- Are there documented performance differences between lead-based vs lead-free ammunition?
- Have any hunters who have used both noticed a marked difference in performance?
This post was sourced from https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/q/908. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
1 answer
The density (weight) affects ballistics.
Less dense shot will slow down at a faster rate.
Lead is a relatively cheap high density metal but is has negative health consequences.
Tungsten is dense but it is expensive.
Steel is commonly used now and is less dense than lead.
Wind resistance is only dependent on size and velocity. A heavier shot has more inertia so the same wind resistance will slow it less.
the equation is drag = mass * acceleration
acceleration = drag / mass
Lead is also relatively soft. There is concern gun barrels designed for lead may be scratched by steel.
This post was sourced from https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/a/14543. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads