PDA

View Full Version : Going unleaded



1984
04-23-2012, 07:09 PM
For my PM9 at the indoor range I am interested in going with lead free ammo/primers.

Anyone had problems with the win clean? Its only a 105 grain bullet.

If so is there something else that works well?

MikeG
04-23-2012, 07:38 PM
WinClean was the only ammo that ever gave me issues in my 4513, except for a stripped aluminum blazer case one time. Failed to feed almost every round. But that's .45 and a truncated cone bullet. Never tried it again. Sorry, probably didn't help you much...

Rubb
04-23-2012, 09:41 PM
I have a feeling we could start a “fill in the blank” thread with this one.

WinClean was the only ammo that ever gave me issues in my_______

CZ75 and 3 of Dad's 1911's....I used it once...so did Dad.

mr surveyor
04-23-2012, 10:01 PM
why "lead free"???? Aren't fully jacket bullets good enough.... and a heck of a lot cheaper....and reliable? As for primers, I don't think there's enough "lead" to create a disturbance in the force. I think we're allowing the "other side" to make a bit of a mountain out of a molehill on this whole lead issue.. in general.

1984
04-23-2012, 10:51 PM
Does not sound so good for the Win clean so far.

Re: lead, to each his or her own. If I lived alone it would be different, with family and especially children it pays to minimize all exposure. I've not perceived much push about this at all, this is more self selected. Honestly I don't even like dental x-rays or sunny days.

A little bit of lead is like a little bit of cancer or a little bit of radiation or a little bit of Michael Moore- there just is absolutely no positive spin that can be put on it once it gets to you.

Unfortunately reliability is a big issue- I assume its the primers? Unreliable ammo would lead to more concerns with the gun and could spiral off in all sorts of directions.

1984
04-24-2012, 04:15 PM
I used these and out of 150, had one that was a dud versus light strike.

I see lawman makes a leadless primer TMJ and will try that next.

DKD
04-24-2012, 04:35 PM
For the life of me I just can't see the hubub about lead. I've worked with the stuff in the commercial roofing / construction business for over 34 years. Been reloading and casting lead bullets for even longer with absolutley no ill effects what ever. As long as you have ventilation when casting and your not breathing in the fumes or suckinh or eating the dang bullets it can't harm you. Hell it is a naturally occurring element in nature and its on the periodic charts, listed as PB. The only other way it can harm you is if you allow yourself to be a backstop by someone perforating your person with bullets....now that can leave a mark. Now let us all hold hands and sing ***-ba-ya. :rolleyes:

Planedude
04-25-2012, 08:41 AM
As with any new tech, there are issues with the Winclean. I was underwelmed with it shooting a mag full from a buddies Glock. He had his first ever lite strike/dud at the range that day, in his most reliable pistol.
The "regular leaded" ammo has about 150 years of development behind it. Winclean is what, five years or so on the market? That's simple math. Use it on the range as required, just don't bet your buns on it for carry ammo. Find what your pistol likes to eat for SD and feed it only that.

dkmatthews
04-25-2012, 08:49 AM
IMHO -- if you're shooting indoors and your range doesn't have good ventilation, then you've got more to be worried about from your neighbors than from yourself. If you're shooting outdoors, it probably won't be an issue at all.

bapple
04-25-2012, 08:50 AM
Have you thought of trying Corbons? They are all-copper (made by Barnes I believe) and expand consistently. Besides the fierce and popular Gold Dot, I know a lot of people who like Corbons.

As for shooting a 100gr bullet... as long as there's enough powder behind it, I don't see a problem occurring. I loaded up some 100gr .380 bullets (just a .356 100gr bullet) in 9mm cases with a hot dose of powder. Besides the giant fireball leaping out the barrel of my tiny CM9, it cycled and fired all of them. Just test your defense load before you trust your life with it.

Oh, and get some Corbons... :cool:

http://38super.net/Images/factory%20expansion/CORBON%20DPX.jpg

1984
04-25-2012, 09:16 AM
Hi all and thanks

@DKD- again to each his or her own. I am not trying to soapbox here or imply it is a pandemic. Having said that there is data from the US and Germany that casual high school shooting teams in indoor ranges easily demonstrate elevations in lead levels and they certainly are not casting etc etc.

Also as you know all sorts of toxins on that periodic chart- mercury, arsenic, radon... nature can be unforgiving. The fact is, and its not in dispute, there is no safe level of lead in the body and its simply not easy to get out of the body.

If the government school lunch program decided to allow a little more lead in the food for cost containment reasons I'd raise heck. So I'm trying to impose the same standards on myself when and where it is reasonable. Ammo may or may not be one of those areas is all.

If for no other reason than practical concerns, consider the most common manifestation of chronic toxicity is peripheral nerve damage which will slow conduction and thus reaction speed. This is also not in dispute. And its pretty much the opposite effect I want my training for self defense to have on me.

As for 34 years, who knows- everyone is different. You can sunbath sans sunscreen for decades without problem either, but when and if the skin cancers show up, its the next 34 years you struggle with.

@dk- I am sure my range is ventilated but every bit helps. I am lucky that I rarely shoot when anyone else is shooting, if you are referring to inhalation of others lead. And I don't sweep up the dust and wash well after picking up after myself.

@Plane/bapple- My carry is currently gold dot +p and I won't be changing that just yet (although I like what I read about the DPX) - I am just referring to practice rounds.

I did pick up some Corbon DPX to try out in the Kahr, I think they seem to give reasonable testing statistics and would be lighter as well. Again every bit helps. But they are hard to find around here. I actually found some old 9mm 80 grain (!) Corbon DPX. I'd love for that weight in that caliber to work (1300 fps advertised) but they are more of a novelty for now since I am pretty sure they were discontinued.

HDoc
04-25-2012, 02:47 PM
A little bit of lead is like a little bit of cancer or a little bit of radiation or a little bit of Michael Moore- there just is absolutely no positive spin that can be put on it once it gets to you.
.

Lead exposure from your weapon at an indoor range will not impact your personal exposure at all. The lead is from all the other folks at the range bullets fragmenting on impact on the backstop. You get ZERO lead exposure from firing FMJ bullets in your personal weapon. If you are that concerned about lead, you need to avoid indoor ranges completely.

1984
04-25-2012, 04:32 PM
Hi HDoc

Inhalation is also (if not primarily in my case) derived from lead sheared from the barrel and lead styphnate in priming compounds as well as heated gas vaporizing the base (if not using TMJ).

FMJ ammo reduces the first.

Lead free primers are required to reduce the second.

TMJ ammo is required to eliminate #3 and any lead from the base of the bullet being left behind in the gun when you return home to clean it.

Every little bit helps. Again I have no interest in bringing lead home with me, on my gun or elsewhere, if I can help it.

NY State heavy metal registry showed individuals with nonoccupational exposures to lead were more likely than individuals with occupational exposures to have been reported with blood lead levels of 60 μg/dL or above.

The number one source or non occupational exposure was shooting. So however we as shooters want to decide exposure occurs, its clearly there for shooters as a group.

Again, whether on considers it a big deal or not- I say to each his own. Lead has absolutely no biological value whatsoever, though, so if my opinion is being asked, I'd say take steps to minimize it.

In the NY registry study, among those studied, 21 percent participated in shooting less than once per week, 54 percent shot for 10 or more years, whereas 13 percent shot for less than 1 year. 30 percent did not reload their casings.

NY state data is consistent with national data from CDC if I am not mistaken.

Avoiding indoor range use may or may not help- probably it would but where I shoot the indoor range is seldom in use, the outdoor range is much more popular. This exposes shooters to other shooters who may be using higher power, larger surface area, non jacketed ammo. You aren't going to test the air itself and so you really don't know.

A study in Virginia on lead exposure of firearm instructors at an outdoor firing range showed breathing zone air for lead exceeded the OSHA standards when people were using non- FMJ bullets outside as well. This absolutely did correlate with blood lead levels in the study.

So even outdoors air exposure can be very high and really depends a lot on what others are shooting.

DKD
04-25-2012, 04:48 PM
Two each their own... Personally many so called experts and studies are seriously flauded and have questionable control methods. many are conducted with a preconcieved end game result so don't beleieve everything you read especially from the so called academmia types.
Personally I feel much of this is way over the top and just alot of propaganda to ultimately eliminate our sport...but be that as it may I am not trying to start a riot non am I trying to change anyones mind on the topic. Obviuously lead can be a carsinegen, thats a given, but anything in moderation and add the practical use of applied common sense minimal exposure with good hygene in our shooting sports, simply won't hurt you.
I will now take my soap box and go home. ;)

muggsy
04-25-2012, 04:58 PM
During my 65 years on earth I can't tell you how many lead sinkers and bullets that I have cast, but they have to number in the ten of thousands. When I was a kid my father gave me a bottle of mercury to play with. Every home had a coal fired furnace and the Cuyahoga river caught fire. I turned out alright, didn't I. Don't worry about it. The whole freakin world is going soft.

1984
04-25-2012, 05:20 PM
Hi DKD

I personally couldn't care less about the sport side of things so I have a very narrow viewpoint but agree to each their own.

My parents and my brothers and sisters all grew up without those annoying plastic things they stick into outlets now and none of us fried ourselves. That said, those annoying plastic things are still a good way to prevent something that never happened to me or anyone I know. The only arguments against them are they cost a little and are a pain in the bum.

For me lead free ammo is the exact same argument. I am just trying to reduce the pain in the bum part by gathering data on brands that stink.

Win clean seems suboptimal. Anyone use the Speer Lawman variety?

JFootin
04-25-2012, 05:34 PM
During my 65 years on earth I can't tell you how many lead sinkers and bullets that I have cast, but they have to number in the ten of thousands. When I was a kid my father gave me a bottle of mercury to play with. Every home had a coal fired furnace and the Cuyahoga river caught fire. I turned out alright, didn't I.

The jury is still out on that, Muggsy! :boink:

HDoc
04-25-2012, 07:21 PM
Hi HDoc

NY State heavy metal registry showed individuals with nonoccupational exposures to lead were more likely than individuals with occupational exposures to have been reported with blood lead levels of 60 μg/dL or above.
.
I find this statistic very hard to believe other than it might be in the upper 0.5% of a population. In many years of dealing with occupational exposures for heavy metals only a few dozen designated lead workers reached those levels. And those workers spent their days cutting and pouring lead or grit blasting old paint.
Unless these folks were casting their own bullets or shot in an unventilated room, or eating lunch with lead forks, I just don't think that data is accurate.
Do you have the reference?

1984
04-25-2012, 11:11 PM
Hi Hdoc

It makes perfect sense that the non occupational shooters had higher levels when you consider that adults are not routinely tested unless they:
1- have symptoms or
2- occupational exposure- and those tested for occupational exposure should be identified earlier and addressed.

That leaves those with nonoccupational exposure who only get tested if they present with symptoms and someone, presume their doctor, suspects the diagnosis.

Which is pretty unlikely. I've never had a doctor ask about firearms, much less the specifics of what leads to lead exposure that have been brought up here.

More likely, in the majority of cases in this study in fact, I think the shooter asks for the test. So these were shooters at minimum concerned about their exposure- and some of them were right to be concerned.

My point was that there is a correlation between shooting and lead levels in this registry. Its not causation (but common sense tells me its pretty darn likely) and anyway as shooters, its information on our health we should at minimum be aware of. What one does with it is up to them.

Some of the interventions such as better ventilation have probably already been put into place passively as well. I know one of the reasons the range I use is less popular is that it costs quite a bit more than the outdoor range.

I don't think the correlations in a registry study like this one - which covered a long period of time - can account for changes over time such as modernization of ventilation, etc- but those changes were a result of recognition of exposure (first studied among police officers I believe) I am willing to bet.


Arch Environ Occup Health. 2009 Summer;64(2):115-20.
Lead exposure among target shooters.
Gelberg KH, Depersis R.
Source
New York State Department of Health, Bureau of Occupational Health, Troy, New York, USA.
Abstract
The New York State Heavy Metals Registry receives reports on all New Yorkers tested for lead. The Registry was reviewed for information on individuals who had lead exposure from target shooting. Overall, 598 individuals have been reported with exposures from target shooting. Over one-half had nonoccupational exposures. These individuals were reported more frequently with elevated blood lead levels (over 40 microg/dL) than those with occupational exposures. Hobby target shooters are at significant risk of having elevated blood lead levels. Because of the potential for serious lead exposure as a result of target shooting, efforts should be made to inform target shooters of the health risks and methods that can reduce exposure to themselves, other range users, and their families.
PMID: 19395342 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I cannot reproduce it but table 2 shows the majority of those shooters with levels >60 were non-occ exposure.

CrazyLarry
04-25-2012, 11:46 PM
To the original question, Sinterfire components are what I have loaded successfully with Win brass & PMC lead free primers. (when I could find them) Nowadays I just use normal primers and nobody is the wiser.

The only commercial ammo that has proven to be 100% reliable in all my guns is either Speer TMJ and ICC/sinterfire.

I bought some Remington frangible recently and it appears to feed just fine.

muggsy
04-26-2012, 06:05 AM
Hi Hdoc

It makes perfect sense that the non occupational shooters had higher levels when you consider that adults are not routinely tested unless they:
1- have symptoms or
2- occupational exposure- and those tested for occupational exposure should be identified earlier and addressed.

That leaves those with nonoccupational exposure who only get tested if they present with symptoms and someone, presume their doctor, suspects the diagnosis.

Which is pretty unlikely. I've never had a doctor ask about firearms, much less the specifics of what leads to lead exposure that have been brought up here.

More likely, in the majority of cases in this study in fact, I think the shooter asks for the test. So these were shooters at minimum concerned about their exposure- and some of them were right to be concerned.

My point was that there is a correlation between shooting and lead levels in this registry. Its not causation (but common sense tells me its pretty darn likely) and anyway as shooters, its information on our health we should at minimum be aware of. What one does with it is up to them.

Some of the interventions such as better ventilation have probably already been put into place passively as well. I know one of the reasons the range I use is less popular is that it costs quite a bit more than the outdoor range.

I don't think the correlations in a registry study like this one - which covered a long period of time - can account for changes over time such as modernization of ventilation, etc- but those changes were a result of recognition of exposure (first studied among police officers I believe) I am willing to bet.



I cannot reproduce it but table 2 shows the majority of those shooters with levels >60 were non-occ exposure.

I'd be more concerned about dying of lead poisoning if I didn't go to the range and practice. There are lies, damn lies and statistics. They told me that I'd go deaf if I didn't use ear protection. Another lie. I only became hard of hearing, which is a blessing since my wife retired. :) Whatever turns you on.

DKD
04-26-2012, 08:55 AM
Hi back at ya 1984. I hope you find what your searching for in the way of lead free ammo. Everyone has their own ideas on the subject and so be it...I'm OK with that...the only thing I don't understand is your comment on not being interested in the sport side of things. You know your pistol without ammo is just a paper weight or door stop. I would reconsider your position and think about the long term ramifications of such thinking. There are many out there that have alternative agendas that are nibling away at our rights and if left unchecked will do waway with all of our second ammendament rights. Be ever vigilent, that is the price of our liberty and freedoms.

TheTman
04-26-2012, 11:36 AM
1984, if you are that worried about lead, I'd also be very concerned about amalagram fillings which you may have in your teeth, they are known to leech mercury into the body, which is far more dangerous than lead at small concentrations. This is not a joke, I'm not having fun at your expense. This is serious stuff. Some folks are having their amalagram fillings removed. Other folks are showing symptoms of mercury poisoning. Before the ADA came about mercury was sctrictly forbidden in dental work, but the ADA changed the rules to allow amalagram fillings, which contain a great deal of mercury, and called them "silver" fillings.
Did you know lead poisoning from drinking wine from lead cups has been attributed to the madness that some ancient kings experienced? One author actually attributes this to the decline of Rome as the leaders slowly succumbed to lead poisoning.

1984
04-26-2012, 11:44 AM
Hi CrazyLarry and thanks

I am going to give the lawman TMJ lead free primers a try and get back to you all.

1984
04-26-2012, 11:50 AM
@Themanski- thanks

I didn't have a choice as to what was put into me when I was younger and I'm not sure disrupting them is safer now than leaving them alone in the long run.

But in either case mercury in my fillings, whether or not its leeching into me, isn't something completely optional to me now, the mercury won't get into my home and isn't going to find its way into my family, and so its a much different scenario.

1984
04-26-2012, 11:56 AM
Hi muggsy

Good point about practice, and to my point.

In researching this I came across this article: http://dfuse.us/lead.html

Its not peer reviewed but the writer indicates they are a lifelong hunter and claims to have done his own testing.

I thought it was a fair and reasonable article overall and certainly not written from some sort of anti gun agenda.

The upshot:

For those of you who shoot a lot indoors, I am talking like more than 200 rounds a month, consider using lead safe, plated or FMJ bullets and be extra cautious. Jacketed bullets with the lead base exposed are no better for airborne lead than lead bullets and some are actually worse.

I do not know about any of you but I feel I need at least 200 rounds a month practice. That is only 50 rounds a week. And where I live that's going to be indoors probably 6 months a year.

1984
04-26-2012, 12:31 PM
Hi DKD

I understand what you are saying. I suspect if we had a beer we'd find we agree on just about 99% of these rights issues. But I think the pro gun movement in this country has done a disservice to shooters in this arena. Too much is guised as "hunting rights" because they are afraid to be honest.

If you read the NRA position on lead ammunition and hunting they will quote the exact same databases of lead levels, the exact same data, in Dakota and Colorado hunters and claim that the low levels in hunters indicates lead ammo for hunting is safe.

Ok, so if that measurement is sound enough platform to say leaded ammo for hunting is safe, then what about the high levels in hobby shooting? Not much out of the NRA on that. Cannot have it both ways.

I'd go on but it just becomes political opinions at this point, not on topic at all. Again we probably agree on most of this stuff anyway.

dkmatthews
04-26-2012, 12:42 PM
Interesting discussion, but I'm not any more in favor of forced conversion to lead-free ammo than I am in favor of forced conversion to electric vehicles.

It shouldn't be up to a government to tell you or me or anyone which one we can use.


There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences.

1984
04-26-2012, 01:00 PM
Hi DK

Agreed to a large extent. I'm certainly not trying to push my opinion on others.

But I do feel that sometimes shooters are so twice shy about "lost rights" that everything anyone ever says that implies something about the status quo is not great is met with resistance for the sake of it.

Sometimes the status quo is outdated. And if change is needed its better for those impacted to do their own research and fixes.

Otherwise if you get mandated change via the government or, dreadfully worse, de facto change via lawyers and lawsuit induced bankruptcies and fines (the cost of which is always passed on), then things are even more murky and often the solution is devoid of improvement.

dkmatthews
04-26-2012, 01:05 PM
If, through education, the market becomes aware of the drawbacks to lead ammo, then it stands to reason that producers will develop a means of meeting the demand for an alternative. This can be applied to any product, not just ammo.

1984
04-26-2012, 01:22 PM
Here's another account of someone shooting outdoors and testing for lead.

http://www.chuckkleinauthor.com/lead_poisoning.html


Before firing any ammo a HybriVet lead check swab was run over the bench paper, gun barrel, the shooter's hands and face. This preliminary checking done, about 75 rounds of the Super Unleaded was then fired over the paper.

Following this initial shooting the barrel was again tested, as was the bench paper and shooter for residual lead. The results yielded no evidence of lead - these Winchester Super-X, Super Unleaded rounds are truly lead free.

For comparison, and to observe if lead does settle on shooting benches and human body parts, 10 rounds of Winchester 9mm 115 grain "regular" cartridges were fired over the same paper. Running the lead check swab over the bench paper, and the shooter's hands and face most assuredly indicated the presence of lead - and that after only 10 rounds and with a 5-10 MPH tail wind!

mr surveyor
04-26-2012, 02:51 PM
I don't like unleaded gasoline either....especially the ethanol garbage. Don't like steel shot in my shotguns.

Before I got too anal about lead poisoning from the shooting sports, I'd check around the circles of old timers that have been handloading and shooting (hundreds of thousands of rounds) for 50 or more years of their lives and see how many suffered from lead poisoning. Should lead be "controlled" in an indoor environment.....sure. Does it need to be totally eliminated from the scene, and a big stink made to scare everyone into "feeling" the need to go "lead free"..... hell no.

Just my opinions.... your's may vary!