BASC testing of non-lead centrefire rifle ammunition
Terry Behan
Terry Behan reports on the effectiveness of currently available non-lead centrefire rifle ammunition, and what this means in the context of UK REACH proposals to ban all outdoor use of lead ammunition in England, Scotland and Wales.
The UK REACH consultation on lead in ammunition has proposed a total ban on outdoor uses of all forms of lead ammunition. Centrefire calibres greater than or equal to 5.6mm would be subject to an 18-month transition period before an outright ban comes into force.
There are concerns within the shooting community about the current viability of lead-free centrefire ammunition, particularly for those smaller rifles caught up in the proposal. This includes the widely used .243 Win.
With an estimated 60,000 users in the UK, the .243 Win is the most common centrefire rifle and the one that would suffer the most from the current proposals.
Considering the known concerns of the end user, BASC undertook some technical field testing comparing the current set of alternatives. The findings of our testing, and recommendations in light of it, were submitted to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), which is in charge of the UK REACH process.
Testing of non-lead .243 ammunition
The testing was formed by a series of range-based accuracy and penetration tests, with a variety of non-lead and lead ammunition in .243 calibre.
Six brands of expanding non-lead .243 calibre ammunition were tried, alongside one expanding lead brand. Rounds were fired through six different models of .243 Win-chambered rifles from a variety of manufacturers.
Accuracy
For accuracy testing, the ammunition and rifle combinations were assessed at 100m and 200m. For the purposes of penetration testing, the ammunition and rifle combinations were fired at 100m, plus a small sample at 200m.
Penetration testing
Penetration tests were undertaken with the use of ballistic soap. On average, the wound cavities created from the lead-free ammunition were smaller than their lead counterparts.
While our testing does not infer that the smaller wound channels would not cause instant incapacitation and death of a quarry animal, they do show that the tested non-lead options did not perform as well as lead.
Conclusions
Our testing provided evidence to support the concerns raised by the shooting community that:
- Non-lead ammunition weighing more than 85grains does not universally stabilise in all rifles to achieve 100mm groups at 100m.
- Non-lead ammunition weighing more than 80grains does not universally stabilise in all rifles to achieve 100mm groups at 200m.
BASC’s technical report raised the importance of using a rifle and ammunition that is capable of consistently achieving shot groups smaller than 100mm. As it stands, not all of the non-lead options would be suitable for the humane shooting of deer at ranges commonly encountered by practitioners (i.e. out to 200m).
The report showed that further development is required to ensure that a variety of technically suitable products in calibres of <6.5mm can be made available.
Four of the tested non-lead options are not legal for shooting of deer (other than roe deer) in Scotland as they are below the 100grain bullet weight requirement. One of the tested non-lead options is not legal for shooting deer in England, Wales and Scotland as it does not meet 1,700 ft/lbs muzzle energy requirement.
The technical and legal limitations of using currently available lead-free ammunition mean that there is just one option that is potentially suitable for legal shooting of all deer species across the UK.
Recommendations
In light of this evidence, it is unacceptable for the HSE to call for an 18-month transition for centrefire calibres greater than or equal to 5.6mm, with only one viable option available.
BASC’s submission to the UK REACH consultation called for the boundary for defining large calibre ammunition to be greater than or equal to 6.5mm. This would ensure that smaller calibre centrefires, including .243 Win calibre, benefit from a longer, potentially undefined, transition period to which research and development can be explored.
You can read more on our submission to the UK REACH proposals here. You’ll also find our technical report in full below.
Want to read more blogs?
Head to our Offbeat pages here.
