Joined:
Oct 2024
Posts:
10
EE: 0% (0)
WA, USA
Posted: 11/19/2025 8:00:00 AM EDT
|
In the context of monolithic lead bullets, monolithic copper bullets, and jacketed bullets What are the pro's and con's of a bullet weighing more for less space? is small and heavy better for bullets and ballistics overall? what do you guys think? thanks |
|
Pro: if you have extra space (think a heavier than lead bullet) would allow you to seat shallower and increase case space. This would lower pressure in case (same powder charge), OR keep same pressure by increasing powder charge. You cant lengthen a 9mm from 9x19 to 9x21 and just add more powder though, because you cant fit in magazine now, AND you are well above the pressure of the firearm. THe relationship is NOT linear and NOT something I'm messing with but that is the basics. (I'm pretty sure we have an engineer here who works for one of the powder/ammo makers on here who could whip out a fancy forumula and put us to sleep). Con: expensive as heck, lead commonly used because it is cheap, moldable easily, and grips rifling easily, also it doesn't really need much strength it does better if it deforms into say a mushroom shape.... The next step up density wise from lead would be tungsten (about 1.5X weight fo lead). BUT tungsten is STUPID expensive vs lead (lead is about 2000 bucks per ton, while tungsten is about 8000 per ton), and as you are literally throwing it away each shot, and your box of ammo just quadrupled in price(at a minimum). Additionally It is basically unusable in pure form, most uses alloy called tungsten carbide incredibly hard, and strong. Industrially used for lathe and mill tools are only tool use I can think of. It was also used in some WWII AP rounds, using early sabot tech. Tungsten carbide is also hard to work with needing 5500 ish degrees F to melt, so NOT easily done, and tools towork it need either diamond (grinding) , or tungsten of stronger alloy to scratch it. Pro of tungsten though is you gotta sabot it, so you have a smaller frontal section to create drag while firing so retains speed better and with less side surface area it will buck wind better.(though i dunno how cross wind effets finned projectiles like APFFDS) Con of tungsten in particular, since it is significantly harder than your barrel you gotta have undersize and a sabot, no true to caliber stuff unless you are going smooth bore, thus reduced effect on target via a smaller hole overall (but you will likely go through it). They do use tungsten for some shotgun applications now in areas that banned lead shot but the price a box of those shells....(80-90 bucks for a box of 25), while a box of similar lead would run 10-20 bucks a box. The other side would be copper alloy bullets, most of hte good stuff of lead(grips rifling, softish for deform on impact, workable), and MAYBE depending on alloy affordable, if you allow with zinc, nickle, silver, even you have a fairly cheap alloy, that is lighter than lead. Now if you use tungsten and it isnt really "cheap" any more. but strong and heavier than lead. ( approx 10% heavier for 90% copper 10% tungsten by volume to 60% heavier for 90% tungsten 10% copper. Problem is working it economically, NOT easy, cheap, or demanded. There are a couple high end hunting rounds that are alloyed copper for hunting ammo I want to say Barnes made them, i don't recall the alloy but they got in trouble because bullets by law cannot be certain alloys or they become "armor piercing " ammo and that is not legal for production to us mere civilians (yes I know m193 will go right through a vest) |
|
I will take a swing and say...better retained velocity is a pro. This is probably less important in handguns since generally expected range is limited. I guess a con could be recoil vs a lighter bullet. Back in the days of muzzle loaders, they used lead for this reason but it still had to use fairly LARGE calibers to achieve the desired result: penetration and destruction of the target. |
|
Originally Posted By FredMan: F=M*V Actually F=MA. Force equals Mass times Acceleration Acceleration is the change in Velocity A=V1-V2. So F=V1-V2. Space or volume has little to do with it . Thank you Isaac Newton. The M193 (55 grains) has about 1,250 foot pounds of energy. 45 APC ball (230 grains) has about 400 foot pounds of energy. The difference is largely accounted for by the speed of the bullet. Energy is not linear however. Thank you Albert Einstein. For handguns, in the old days we said bigger was better. A heavier bullet would deliver more energy down range at comparable speeds. For ball ammo, that still holds true. However as the first poster pointed out, there is a lot more that goes into modern bullet design today, including materials and sectional density. As for case volume, different powders have different density and different burn rates. That effects pressure. You could practically fill to the brim some pistol calibers with Unique and get away with it. If you filled the same case with Bullseye, you would probably blow up the gun. Don't try either. Seating depth also matters. More or less free space in the case, changes the pressure, which changes the ballistics. Again there could be catastrophic consequences. All other things being equal you could in theory load a longer and thus heavier bullet deeper into a case with a more dense powder. That doesn't mean you should. All other things are never equal. Real world ballistics are a lot more complex than the Newtonian physics you learned in high school. Still, it is a start. |
[NO TEXT]