Layman's question about materials for reloading ammunition

Let me stipulate right up front that although I am a machinist with 40 years' experience I'm neither a shooter nor a gunsmith. I was taught to fire and field-strip an M14 half a century ago, and that the rounds were inserted in the magazine with the sharp end toward the front, but that was the extent of the training. Anything beyond pulling the trigger was higher-echelon responsibility. So I am without expertise, and to some of you this will perhaps seem a dumb question.

Lately I have been hearing about government efforts to ban, or at least establish obstacles to the manufacture of, lead. Assuming that the projectile part of the cartridge is not recoverable, the reloading of used brass has to involve buying or making new projectiles. I gather that ammunition could become scarce fairly rapidly if those weren't available and that that is, or ought to be, of some concern. So, is there any reason other than weight that bullets are made of lead? I'm assuming part of it is cheap and rapid production via forming. If they became scarce, would bullets machined from steel, brass or aluminum be viable substitutes? Please go easy, I'd really like a professional answer.

Here in KommiFornia lead projectiles for hunting are illegal. So they are now made of copper, brass, or other.

Check up on the term "sectional density".

There are good reasons to use a heavy material . Form factor is one, but ballistic performance is another.

Then there is "obturation" ......

Just lots of very good reasons. Lead being abundant and inexpensive makes the selection obvious.

Oldwrench said:

Let me stipulate right up front that although I am a machinist with 40 years' experience I'm neither a shooter nor a gunsmith. I was taught to fire and field-strip an M14 half a century ago, and that the rounds were inserted in the magazine with the sharp end toward the front, but that was the extent of the training. Anything beyond pulling the trigger was higher-echelon responsibility. So I am without expertise, and to some of you this will perhaps seem a dumb question.

Lately I have been hearing about government efforts to ban, or at least establish obstacles to the manufacture of, lead. Assuming that the projectile part of the cartridge is not recoverable, the reloading of used brass has to involve buying or making new projectiles. I gather that ammunition could become scarce fairly rapidly if those weren't available and that that is, or ought to be, of some concern. So, is there any reason other than weight that bullets are made of lead? I'm assuming part of it is cheap and rapid production via forming. If they became scarce, would bullets machined from steel, brass or aluminum be viable substitutes? Please go easy, I'd really like a professional answer.

Click to expand...

I'd suggest you can 'future proof' more easily with a stash of good-quality fully-made-up cartridges than with components.

- Projectiles (bullets) can be made.

- Only a few types of cartridge cases are not recyclable at least 2 to 4 times.

- Propellant can be stored safely for long periods - some more stable than others. A little goes a loong way.

The nut to crack shortage-wise is none of that list.

It is the PRIMER. Those are right hard to DIY.

And before I'd worry overmuch about hoarding ANY components? Typical proven / well understood rate of deterioration for most of them?

In the fully-assembled state, with decent environmental, temperature & humidity stability.

Good for twenty years and longer.

Estimate your remaining lifetime needs. Hardly 'infinite' if you trained on an M-14 while it was still 'Standard A' issue.

Buy plenty of ready-made ammunition and store it safely.

Done. Oh.. superb 'trading material' ammo can become if we've been pushed back to the edge of the stone age. Add a common calibre or two others usually have, even if you do not.

Might want to put by a really good sword, coupla effective spears, crossbow, various knives, and an axe or two as well.

'bout the same age here. I think I'll just save that sort of investment and pre-pay a funeral..



Bill

PS: I DID put-buy those needfuls, 1961. Not expecting clintongeddon, then or now.

Just that two of mine were chamberings rare already or expected to go scarcer-yet every year.
Considerable stash of primed 'Norma' virgin brass, top of RCBS's line as to dies.

Never-fired brass of that quality should still be good. But .. it bears confirmation... and I'd probably be wise to shed those primers and use fresh ones fifty-five years on.. already.

'Insurance' of a sort, all that. But so far, wasted. .300 Savage didn't go away, after all. I don't shoot enough 7.95 X 57 JR to use up even the boxed rounds, let alone the brass.

I didn't fact check all this:

Monolithic bullet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lead "was" cheap, easy to form, low melting point useful in some bullet construction, heavy for volume, etc.

Lead is has been used in making projectiles from the beginning for many good reasons as you know.
Lead has been banned for some kinds of hunting, waterfowl probably being the first that I know of.
Steel shot ammunition has been available for several years. Likewise solid copper alloy bullets have become available on the market in recent years. These lead replacements have become effective for some purposes and our knowledge of how to use them to best advantage continues to develop.
What material can be used for bullets depends on the purpose it is designed for. generally speaking we want a dense material that doesn't loose velocity from drag in flight too quickly. The material also has to remain intact during its violent trip through the barrel. Not many common materials can make good replacements for copper/lead in high velocity projectiles in the same gun. The technology required to make it work is generally way beyond what most of us possess.
But then there is paint ball, potato guns, etc. so if you want to design the system around the limits of the projectile then anything goes.

Oldwrench,
When steel shot came out for shotguns, the steel damaged many barrels that were designed to shoot lead shot. Today guns are made specifically for steel shot.
For a typical hunting rifle, that was designed to shoot copper/lead bullets in a specific weight range, a different projectile requires load testing and maybe a different barrel. Bullet manufacturers do a lot of testing before they release a solid copper bullet AND they provide us with the SAFE load recipes to use.

I personally do not see the average reloader having any success by simply changing to a homemade bullet of a different metal in the same gun. There is much more to it than meets the eye.

Tozguy said:

Oldwrench,
When steel shot came out for shotguns, the steel damaged many barrels that were designed to shoot lead shot. Today guns are made specifically for steel shot.
For a typical hunting rifle, that was designed to shoot copper/lead bullets in a specific weight range, a different projectile requires load testing and maybe a different barrel. Bullet manufacturers do a lot of testing before they release a solid copper bullet AND they provide us with the SAFE load recipes to use.

I personally do not see the average reloader having any success by simply changing to a homemade bullet of a different metal in the same gun. There is much more to it than meets the eye.

Click to expand...

Your last statement is not true, myself and many others shoot rifles that easily can hold 1/2 MOA accuracy at 1,000 yards and well beyond. Some of the world records at 1,000 yards were shot with CNC turned brass bullets.

If any information available online can be considered to be accurate, the last lead smelting plant in the US was shut down a while back, probably due to environmental concerns, but some folks wondered if it was just one more step in the current administration's effort to diminish the shooting sports by making lead more expensive. Lead ore is now shipped overseas and the finished lead shipped back at an increased cost of course. Lead projectiles can be cast or swaged fairly easily. Usable bullet molds can be machined.
Lead has been readily available for centuries and easily used for shooting and became the standard material until the last 50 - 75 years. The lure of reloading years ago was cost savings and personal satisfaction of producing ammo that could not be purchased. With the rising costs of components, cost saving is not as lucrative as it once was but there is still the satisfaction of developing ammunition that your firearm likes and shoots well. I have been casting lead bullets and reloading for over 50 years and it is still fun and rewarding.

Bob
WB8NQW

Thank you for the informative replies. So CNC turned brass bullets work, steel will probably ruin a barrel, aluminum has too little mass to go very far...but the primer is the real non-DIY part of the technology, which hadn't occurred to me. Figured there had to be a reason you never hear of people being busted for the clandestine manufacture of ammunition. Crack uses simpler tools.

So ultimately, the true Heinleinesque self-sufficiency model is not realistic, absent a mercury-fulminate mine in your back yard, or the resources of a Dr. Evil. Makes sense. Damn. Guess I had better abandon my plans for resisting the juggernaut. I'm probably doomed anyway; these days they don't need to send Lon Horiuchi, they'll send a miniature drone with a death ray...

Old lead is everywhere. Parts of Boston and other old cities still have some lead pipes and many plumbers, particularly if they are sportsmen, will gladly give it to those who cast projectiles. Likewise, many older buildings are flashed with lead and roofers are glad to be rid of it when replaced.

Pure lead is only suitable for low velocity projectiles such as black powder but it can be alloyed with tin and antimony to increase its hardness. Many cars are still carrying lead wheel weights which are an alloy well suited to pistol and revolver rounds.

Lead is an extremely recyclable material and most shooting ranges periodically dig out and screen their backstops to reduce "hot spots" that can cause ricochets. The only real threat to the availability of lead for projectiles is legislative and or bureaucratic.

Oldwrench, the best way to resist the juggernaut is to participate in the political process. I don't just mean voting but also giving feedback when needed and contributing to re-election campaigns for good people. The House of Representatives is the people's house and if like me you live in an area where the control freaks always win it is always possible to support good candidates in other states who can help counterbalance against the nanny state crowd. In recent years I've contributed more money out of state than in. I and other gun owners supported Scott Brown and he betrayed us big time. That is why we let him lose to Elizabeth Warren.

Edit: And should you ever find yourself in need of a hunting and survival weapon during the Zombie Apocalypse don't forget that guns evolved from matchlocks, through a couple early stone ignition systems to flintlocks and even some early air rifles in the eighteenth century. Lewis and Clark had at least one on their expedition to take game quietly without alerting nearby Indians to their presence. These had a hollow iron butt stock that functioned as an air tank and were capable of taking deer sized game.

A project I haven't yet got around to is a modern wheel lock based on an old magazine article. The author used welding flints against a serrated steel drum and simplified the lockwork by using a miniature drive chain and a coil extension spring. A rifle version could easily take rabbit and even deer with patched round balls of pure lead.

paracongo308 said:

Your last statement is not true, myself and many others shoot rifles that easily can hold 1/2 MOA accuracy at 1,000 yards and well beyond. Some of the world records at 1,000 yards were shot with CNC turned brass bullets.

Click to expand...

Paracongo, would you please specify which of my statements you think is not true? Do you consider the people who are doing what you mentioned to be average reloaders?

I am perfectly willing to edit my post to remove any misinformation.

Tozguy said:

Paracongo, would you please specify which of my statements you think is not true? Do you consider the people who are doing what you mentioned to be average reloaders?

Click to expand...

In your post where you mentioned the average loader not having success with a homemade bullet of different metal. Another note many bench rest world records were set by people shooting homemade bullets. They either made themselves or bought them from another shooter who makes the bullets in his spare time one at a time. They prefer not to use store bought bullets because their not good enough for serious competitors. Spend a few thousand for the dies, then buy the press, jackets, and core wire and make your own. Homemade 22 cal bullets were once made from spent 22 rimfire cases for the jackets.

Tozguy said:

Likewise solid copper alloy bullets have become available on the market in recent years. These lead replacements are not quite as effective but our knowledge of how to use them to best advantage might not be as advanced as for traditional lead bullets.

Click to expand...

I don't know what Paracongo is objecting to, but I'll take issue with copper bullets being less effective. Copper bullets have been a commercial success for several decades, because in some circumstances, they are superior to most, if not all, lead cored bullets. Specifically, the Barnes X bullet, which has evolved to a design which easily achieves sub MOA accuracy in many guns, and is tough enough to survive almost anything. Nothing is ideal for all situations. The guy who has a stand where deer walk up and stand broadside will often prefer a soft lead cored bullet. Some of us wanting to be prepared for whatever chance we may get, choose the option of a tough bullet delivering maximum penetration. When I pull the trigger, I want two holes: One in, and one out.

gnadoc said:

When I pull the trigger, I want two holes: One in, and one out.

Click to expand...

From most reading I've done, gun writers, that are out standing in their field, consider a bullet just under the hide on the opposite side, the optimal terminal ballistics. makes sense to me.

Oldwrench said:

Thank you for the informative replies. So CNC turned brass bullets work, steel will probably ruin a barrel, aluminum has too little mass to go very far...but the primer is the real non-DIY part of the technology, which hadn't occurred to me. Figured there had to be a reason you never hear of people being busted for the clandestine manufacture of ammunition. Crack uses simpler tools.

So ultimately, the true Heinleinesque self-sufficiency model is not realistic, absent a mercury-fulminate mine in your back yard, or the resources of a Dr. Evil.

Click to expand...

Potassium Perchlorate rather than Mercury, actually. And, no, primer production is not impossible, just agonizingly TEDIOUS. After all, cap-and-ball era to the present day, they HAVE been produced in their brazillions in many countries. That said, the chemistry is heavily skewed towards uber-reliability and avoiding sensitivity to degrading influences. Primer has to be uber-safe and ultra-reliable. Cheap as well. Long learning-curve.

Similar to a fellow building a CAR 'from scratch', patting himself on the back for how independent he is. Before you ever have to ASK him if he could have made the engine or transmission 'from scratch', just look at whose name is on..... the sidewall of the tires.

'Self sufficiency' as-in live off the land rather than preparing to take-on a SWAT team a week for the next 50 years, is better served with a crossbow. Or even a longbow. Plus nets, snares, and fish hooks.

Recover 'most' bolts or arrows. Repair many that need that, perhaps make a few new. Even so, all more easily done with local materials than reloading smokeless powder or DIY'ing black powder.

And you don't upset the neighbours - human or otherwise - nor advertise your presence as dramatically as when touching-off a cousin to a cannon.

History, that. Long, wide, and quite a lot of it, not mere theory.

Bill

paracongo308 said:

In your post where you mentioned the average loader not having success with a homemade bullet of different metal. Another note many bench rest world records were set by people shooting homemade bullets. They either made themselves or bought them from another shooter who makes the bullets in his spare time one at a time. They prefer not to use store bought bullets because their not good enough for serious competitors. Spend a few thousand for the dies, then buy the press, jackets, and core wire and make your own. Homemade 22 cal bullets were once made from spent 22 rimfire cases for the jackets.

Click to expand...

I do not have an issue with homemade copper/lead bullets, I use them myself for target work. The point I am trying to make is that a homemade bullet CNC'd from brass would require some careful load testing because you could not get load data from any other source. Yes it may be done by some but a tremendous amount of ability and testing is required for success.
Also, I have no issue with purchased monolithic bullets such as the Barnes because of the load data available along with the barrel twist and length that was used for testing.
My perspective on the 'average reloader' comes from working behind the counter of a gun shop. Top level competitors regardless of the discipline are far beyond being average reloaders in my books.

gnadoc said:

I don't know what Paracongo is objecting to, but I'll take issue with copper bullets being less effective. Copper bullets have been a commercial success for several decades, because in some circumstances, they are superior to most, if not all, lead cored bullets. Specifically, the Barnes X bullet, which has evolved to a design which easily achieves sub MOA accuracy in many guns, and is tough enough to survive almost anything. Nothing is ideal for all situations.

Click to expand...

Point well taken, along with the comments on 1000 yd results from another post, my comment about monolithic bullets being less effective is unwarranted. The objectionable statement has been modified. Thanks for your help.

Scottl said:

...the best way to resist the juggernaut is to participate in the political process. I don't just mean voting but also giving feedback when needed and contributing to re-election campaigns for good people...if like me you live in an area where the control freaks always win it is always possible to support good candidates in other states...

Click to expand...

Well, in 1993 I voted with my feet. I threw my support, in the form of my company's presence, its payroll, and its positive balance of trade, to somewhere other than the People's Republic of Maryland. That was all that was in my power to do to Barbara Mikulski, Paul Sarbanes and their accomplices. It didn't tip the political balance of Wyoming, but it helped Wyoming's economy at the expense of Maryland's, to the tune of an aggregate 30 million dollars which did NOT pass through any hands in that state in any form. The control freaks and the corrupt are still in charge back there but I'm beyond their reach.

Oldwrench said:

Well, in 1993 I voted with my feet. I threw my support, in the form of my company's presence, its payroll, and its positive balance of trade, to somewhere other than the People's Republic of Maryland. That was all that was in my power to do to Barbara Mikulski, Paul Sarbanes and their accomplices. It didn't tip the political balance of Wyoming, but it helped Wyoming's economy at the expense of Maryland's, to the tune of an aggregate 30 million dollars which did NOT pass through any hands in that state in any form. The control freaks and the corrupt are still in charge back there but I'm beyond their reach.

Click to expand...

ROFL!

Well you'd grok why Nawthun' Virginians consider The American Legion Bridge at Cabin John the longest in the world, reaching all the way from America to...



Bill