Non toxic, is .22 the new .177

[johnnytheboy]

Looking at the options some of the .22 pellets are 10 grains, this is similar to a heavy .177 pellet, does this mean that we will be using more .22 for hunting and having to crack the power up on these guns?

Does this mean that .25 becomes a real hunting option in sub 12ftlbs if the pellets are lighter

[angrybear]

JSB .25 Pb free 16.54gn, my Scorpion sub 12 loves them,
the problem is they're still way too hard & hardly deform at all on impact with a hard target, there's zero expansion on prey, they just punch straight through without pausing.

[bezza xl]

Interesting thought, I'm just about to buy a new fac air rifle, is .25 the way to go?

[Geezer]

Stands to reason that if ammo becomes less efficient, the more efficient calibres will become more attractive.

Unfortunately, making non-lead ammo that performs adequately in typical pellet designs and airgun barrel twists, or at all, is problematic.

[ballisticboy]

The studies I carried out comparing lead and lead free pellets of identical design suggested that, for the same group sizes, the lead free pellets needed to be made more accurately and be a better match to your barrel. When the same errors were modelled for lead and lead free, the group sizes were bigger for the lead free, suggesting the error sources needed to be reduced. The effects of winds and the longer range problems with spiral flight etc. were not considered.

[Geezer]

The effects of winds and the longer range problems with spiral flight etc. were not considered.

But the working assumption would be that those issues are likely to be worse with tin, zinc, etc, compared with lead?

Not to mention the challenge in a - hopefully long? - transition period in the U.K. in which unlicensed guns must stay below the 12/6 limit with the most efficient lead ammunition, and would therefore be carrying less energy (or shedding it more quickly over distance) with non-lead, affecting effective hunting ranges.

And, setting accuracy aside, this would be with a less deformable projectile. Personally, I think projectile deformation at, at least, subsonic velocities without complex design (eg Hydra-Shocks and other clever pistol-range JHPs) is often over-estimated as a factor across small arms, and is largely irrelevant to head shots on typical airgun quarry, because they are head shots, but others differ.

So, sub-12, and at “normal” distances, you appear to be looking at less precision, lower impact energy, and lower potential wound ballistics. And use of a larger calibre, reducing effective range, both by loopier trajectory and reduced precision.

A sensible approach would be to consider the impacts on public health, safety, animal welfare etc of less effective airguns versus more poison, trapping, shotguns, rimfire and so on.

[angrybear]

But the working assumption would be that those issues are likely to be worse with tin, zinc, etc, compared with lead?

Not to mention the challenge in a - hopefully long? - transition period in the U.K. in which unlicensed guns must stay below the 12/6 limit with the most efficient lead ammunition, and would therefore be carrying less energy (or shedding it more quickly over distance) with non-lead, affecting effective hunting ranges.

And, setting accuracy aside, this would be with a less deformable projectile. Personally, I think projectile deformation at, at least, subsonic velocities without complex design (eg Hydra-Shocks and other clever pistol-range JHPs) is often over-estimated as a factor across small arms, and is largely irrelevant to head shots on typical airgun quarry, because they are head shots, but others differ.

So, sub-12, and at “normal” distances, you appear to be looking at less precision, lower impact energy, and lower potential wound ballistics. And use of a larger calibre, reducing effective range, both by loopier trajectory and reduced precision.

A sensible approach would be to consider the impacts on public health, safety, animal welfare etc of less effective airguns versus more poison, trapping, shotguns, rimfire and so on.

The report (I don't know if you have actually read it) is ONLY interested in the impact of lead/lead poisoning on nature & the environment, according to their figures 2000 tonnes of lead is shot in to the UK environment every year & i'm not sure they even included airguns in those figures because they're from ammunition sales & pellets aren't recorded, as I've already said they have no data for airgun hunting with lead free, so that is exactly the type of point you need to make on the consultation form I've already had my say on it.

Re head shots, you can hit the head & still not cause significant damage to the brain, any benefit that pellet expansion/deformation gives to energy transfer, can only be of benefit.

[johnnytheboy]

Basc website is stating air rifle pellets are included and the ban will happen 2024!

If I were buying a new gun I’d be considering the caliber, if the power can be professionally recalibrated to 12ftLbs for the lighter pellets and if the barrel is chrome lined to deal with extra wear from harder pellets.

[Targetman83]

Basc website is stating air rifle pellets are included and the ban will happen 2024!

If I were buying a new gun I’d be considering the caliber, if the power can be professionally recalibrated to 12ftLbs for the lighter pellets and if the barrel is chrome lined to deal with extra wear from harder pellets.

Is the ban definitely happening then?

[johnnytheboy]

[IMG][/IMG]

[angrybear]

Is the ban definitely happening then?

Yes, in some form or another, had this in an email today.

https://basc.org.uk/lead-ammunition-...-happens-next/

by the time the review is done & goes through parliament, expect the new law in 2025,
it's proposed there will be 18 months change over time for shot-shells & large bore cartridges, with 5 years for small bore & airgun pellets to allow further development.

So at best a complete ban on the use of lead projectiles by 2030.

[HW777]

Yes, in some form or another, had this in an email today.

https://basc.org.uk/lead-ammunition-...-happens-next/

By the time the review is done & goes through parliament, expect the new law in 2025,

5 years for small bore & airgun pellets to allow further development.

A softer metal than tin is in order and if pellets are to be made using a firing process

A mix of tin, copper and zinc using an annealing process is going to make for expensive pellets

[Targetman83]

Yes, in some form or another, had this in an email today.

https://basc.org.uk/lead-ammunition-...-happens-next/

by the time the review is done & goes through parliament, expect the new law in 2025,
it's proposed there will be 18 months change over time for shot-shells & large bore cartridges, with 5 years for small bore & airgun pellets to allow further development.

So at best a complete ban on the use of lead projectiles by 2030.

Well we have a bit of time left to enjoy with the lead pellets atleast, who knows maybe this evolution of pellets may end up better?

[keith66]

A softer metal than tin is in order and if pellets are to be made using a firing process

A mix of tin, copper and zinc using an annealing process is going to make for expensive pellets

A mixture of light metals as suggested is an alloy of bronze or naval brass. Harder than copper on its own. No advantage for our purposes & still relatively light.
The problem we have is that most heavy metals are toxic to some degree, Lead is toxic, copper & zinc much less so, but they are not totally non toxic.
Tin is very light so not a lot of use.
There are only so many metals available on the periodic table to choose from.
Bismuth is often touted as an alternative but anyone who has ever used it in the field will know that it is extremely brittle & will crumble to bits under shock loads. This was often a factor with large shot sizes in early bismuth shotgun loads, you stuck a shell containing 3's up the pipe but when it crunched through the heavy choke many people were acustomed to using the shot turned into 12's or less.
Its a rare metal & heavily used in the nuclear industry so never going to be available in the quantities needed for ammunition.
same with Molybdenum, Its rare & horrendously expensive.

Being realistic the only real alternatives that are available in quantity are Soft iron, Tungsten & maybe Nickel (though that also has some toxicity issues)
So the only viable alternatives to lead will be a sintered Iron,Tungsten/ Nickel head & plastic body (remember Titan black?) Or a Tungsten powder polymer mix, these were used in shotun ammo with success.
Cheap & affordable they are not.

[TonyL]

BC, cost and potential bore wear would be my main concerns. Will we see re-designs to improve the BC and cross-sectional densities? Will we see / would we need different barrel steels / finishing processes? The higher cost may well see the committed enthusiasts shooting far less, but will certainly deter newcomers / those entering and attracted to the sport by low ammunition prices. Doesn't exactly bode well for future prospects, does it, especially when you take into account the current pressures on people's spending power, commodity availability, rising costs etc.