![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
Many thanks, Tusker
That's a BIG negatory, Bear. Later .45-70s, especially the lightweight 1886s and the ORIGINAL and ONLY Marlin 1895 were built for high velocity jacketed bullets. I seldom use lead in my .45 caliber rifles and when I do it is ONLY those that are hard cast and can be driven in excess of 2000FPS. Old, slow, rainbow trajectory cartridges don't really interest me. My 1910s to '30s original .45-70 and .45-90 Winchesters thrive on a diet of exclusively jacketed bullets, especially the Barnes 350 RN. Mulies at over 300 yds have fallen to the puny little 300 grain Barnes Original.Bear 45/70 wrote:The 45/70 was designed for lead bullets. That jacketed stuff is for noobees to the 45/70.
Mike D. wrote:That's a BIG negatory, Bear. Later .45-70s, especially the lightweight 1886s and the ORIGINAL and ONLY Marlin 1895 were built for high velocity jacketed bullets. I seldom use lead in my .45 caliber rifles and when I do it is ONLY those that are hard cast and can be driven in excess of 2000FPS. Old, slow, rainbow trajectory cartridges don't really interest me. My 1910s to '30s original .45-70 and .45-90 Winchesters thrive on a diet of exclusively jacketed bullets, especially the Barnes 350 RN. Mulies at over 300 yds have fallen to the puny little 300 grain Barnes Original.Bear 45/70 wrote:The 45/70 was designed for lead bullets. That jacketed stuff is for noobees to the 45/70.
HEAD0001 wrote:I swore myself off of Barnes bullets 5 or 6 times over the years. Each time I went back to try them again, and was disappointed every time. The X-bullets were not very accurate in any of my rifles. And now their newer bullets are extremely overpriced. I have noticed that some people are getting some good results from the newer bullets----but at what price!! They are just too overpriced for me, and I truly have lost confidence in them. I do not think I will go back to them again?? But you never know??
And yes I did shoot their 45-70 bullets. I have one of their loading manuals if you have any questions(e-mail me), however last time I checked they did publish their data. But that has been a while ago. The 45-70 bullets performed alright, but not exceptional. But then how much does it take to kill a deer with a 45-70. Tom.
Mike D. wrote:Where I live and hunt, lead is outlawed , so my hundreds of fine, Oregon Trail bullets will have to rest in their boxes. I shoot jacketed copper bullets out of necessity, therefore remaining ahead of the curve, as it were. It won't be more than a couple of years before lead is banned nationwide, so y'all had better stock up on those overpriced CU pills while you can.
Mike D. wrote:Where I live and hunt, lead is outlawed , so my hundreds of fine, Oregon Trail bullets will have to rest in their boxes. I shoot jacketed copper bullets out of necessity, therefore remaining ahead of the curve, as it were. It won't be more than a couple of years before lead is banned nationwide, so y'all had better stock up on those overpriced CU pills while you can.
What is the improvement if the condors are shot with non-lead as opposed to lead? The lead ban was to keep them from eating it, not being shot by it.Now that two of the Pinnacles flock of Condors have been found wounded with shotgun pellets, I fear that no-lead shot will also be required for bird hunting.
El Chivo wrote:What is the improvement if the condors are shot with non-lead as opposed to lead? The lead ban was to keep them from eating it, not being shot by it.Now that two of the Pinnacles flock of Condors have been found wounded with shotgun pellets, I fear that no-lead shot will also be required for bird hunting.
I believe that the Barnes are expensive because each one is CNC'd to its final shape; they're not cast in multiple molds. I don't think competition will reduce the price all that much. There are some other makers doing lead-free but they use pressed composite materials, and are just doing rimfire. I don't think that will work for a big game bullet. All the other ammo makers are just buying the bullets from Barnes and loading them in their ammo.
Sure, it sounds bad to pay $1 a bullet, or $3.00 a round for factory. But lots of bolt guns have had $3.00 ammo for years. If you just use those for hunting, how many rounds is that? I've fired 3 shots in 3 seasons, and only one at a deer. Considering gas, time, hiking boots, trail mix, Gatorade, it's pretty cheap to go with the best in bullets.
I used about 20 rounds to develop a load and sight in. I will have to sight again this year because I'm removing my scope, but once I'm done, I'm done.
What you should do is come up with a load using jacketed bullets of the same weight that strikes close to the Barnes. Then you can practice with that, and save your Barnes for the field.
Mike D. wrote:I'm sorry, but the situation will soon worsen to the point that wheel weights will join the non-lead parade. Now that two of the Pinnacles flock of Condors have been found wounded with shotgun pellets, I fear that no-lead shot will also be required for bird hunting. It has been many years since the Feds banned lead in the waterfowl blinds, so it stands to reason that lead bullets will be next to be prohibited nationwide.
Mike D. wrote:I'm sorry, but the situation will soon worsen to the point that wheel weights will join the non-lead parade. Now that two of the Pinnacles flock of Condors have been found wounded with shotgun pellets, I fear that no-lead shot will also be required for bird hunting. It has been many years since the Feds banned lead in the waterfowl blinds, so it stands to reason that lead bullets will be next to be prohibited nationwide.
Sorry, but as a prior NC machinist I can tell you that the fallacy in that remark is uninformed. It is much cheaper to operate a small NC lathe than it is to operate a small foundry. The cost difference is in the cost of copper, verses the cost of lead cores. Once a high speed NC machine is set, it can crank out hundreds of bullets an hour, with minimal input from the machinist, and using copper, tooling lasts indefinitely. One talented machinist can operate up to 3 or 4 machines simultaneously (I know, I did) Initial cost of the equipment keeps the small time guy from taking over. Once you've seen the operation of a High Speed NC machine like the Fadals or the Makino's you would understand. The whole "CNC" game is just a gimmick for advertising. If it were really driven by quality instead of cost, no company would have them. Companies have them because they are cheaper to operate and give more return for the investment.El Chivo wrote:I believe that the Barnes are expensive because each one is CNC'd to its final shape; they're not cast in multiple molds. I don't think competition will reduce the price all that much. There are some other makers doing lead-free but they use pressed composite materials, and are just doing rimfire. I don't think that will work for a big game bullet. All the other ammo makers are just buying the bullets from Barnes and loading them in their ammo.Now that two of the Pinnacles flock of Condors have been found wounded with shotgun pellets, I fear that no-lead shot will also be required for bird hunting.
Or sticks in the mud that refuse to recognise a far superior product. Is your last name "O'Conner"?Bear 45/70 wrote:The 45/70 was designed for lead bullets. That jacketed stuff is for noobees to the 45/70.
If they'd have use steel or plated shot, they probably wouldn't have found those darned birds! Some idiot hippie probably would still found lead shot, though!El Chivo wrote:What is the improvement if the condors are shot with non-lead as opposed to lead? The lead ban was to keep them from eating it, not being shot by it.Now that two of the Pinnacles flock of Condors have been found wounded with shotgun pellets, I fear that no-lead shot will also be required for bird hunting.
I saw a show on the National Geographic channel the other day. They found a dead condor. The wildlife biologist said it was probably due to lead poisoning. They later found out that the bird had choked on a coin (a quarter to be exact)! Hopefully, they won't ban quarters! All the "Darwinians" in California should know that "natural selection" is not a big fan of birds that go around eating coins.handyrandyrc wrote:Nobody shot a condor, from what I understand. The condor ate game containing lead pellets, and ingested them.
Travis Morgan wrote:Or sticks in the mud that refuse to recognise a far superior product. Is your last name "O'Conner"?Bear 45/70 wrote:The 45/70 was designed for lead bullets. That jacketed stuff is for noobees to the 45/70.
Travis Morgan wrote:Yeah, a .45-70 never ruins meat, huh?
You're also forgetting that a better bullet can be used with less power.
El Chivo wrote:The Barnes XPB pistol bullets will expand at only 800 fps.
Ty at Barnes is very helpful if you have questions.
Oh, f@#$ it; I'm not gonna bother.Bear 45/70 wrote:El Chivo wrote:The Barnes XPB pistol bullets will expand at only 800 fps.
Ty at Barnes is very helpful if you have questions.
But the question still remains, "Why?" It sure doesn't kill quicker or better than a cast lead bullet. Oh yeah and I doubt very much if a bullet will expand properly at 2000+ fps then it will expand properly at 800 fps regardless of what the manufacturer claims. It pretty much flies in the face of physics.