Non lead ammo and the future of ammunition development: A inside look/review.
06-02-2016, 08:17 AM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 105
Non lead ammo and the future of ammunition development: A inside look/review.
A quick background: This is a review I have been working on for the forums for a few months now. One of many of my professional shooting responsibilities these days is that I work as a R&D for a Ammunition Laboratory. We develop every kind of ammunition mainly for LE and Military application. I had to ask permission to do this review and it had to be released as not to give away any sensitive or proprietary information. Good news is that with all the R&D for LE and Military, there will also be similar consumer lines closely mirroring the Pro stuff. Obviously the consumer wont get the very specialty stuff directly designed for the Military but from evaluating both, the consumer gets a very similar product. Here is the review:
Non lead ammo and the future of ammunition development:
The future of ammunition isnt that hard to predict. The EPA as well as other outside forces have imposed their concerns on the ammunition industry for awhile now. The outrageous expense of lead clean up at public and private ranges have close many. A lot of this depends on which state you live in. That said, my concerns about my ammo are that it is reliable and accurate. I don’t want to seem insensitive to the environment but my heart is all about performance. I am all for non-lead bullets providing they equal or better the current high performance lead based ammo. I think those days are here. I have been involved with testing some very interesting ammunition for Law Enforcement and Military application over the last few months. There is also a consumer line that mirrors most of the LE/ Military version and this makes sense because of all the R&D in this kind of ammunition is expensive. I was allowed to do this review through the Ammunition Laboratory as long as I did not give any proprietary secrets so I will give a general review and most of all the ammo pictured is from the consumer line. LE and Military have certain specs they require for the bullets of tomorrow. What this means is that their specs will become the standard of ammo for the general public.
The Test Firearms and Caliber: As with most LE and Military testing, there are certain platforms that are required. I am testing with the required firearms as well as others not on the list.
My test firearms are: Sig Sauer P226, P229, P220, P227 Glock 17,19, 23, M&P 45, 380, Walther PPQ 9mm, PPQ 45, PPK, HK USP, HK USP Compact, LWRC M6 iC, HK416. The Calibers being evaluated are 380, 9mm, 38spl, 357 Sig, 40S&W, 45acp, 5.56, 7.62, 300 BLK.
The AMMO:
There are two non lead bullets being tested. A Zinc general range and mil spec bullet to replace the lead based fmj. This would be used as a range and mil-spec duty round. It is currently called “Zclean” in its consumer name. Its main component is zinc as well as other proprietary compositions.
The next is a compressed copper Frangible. It is currently labeled as a “Alchemist C3 round” for non-LE sale. This is used as training rounds for CQB, door breaching, hostage rescue, etc. Some may know these training areas as the “kill house”. These enclosed areas have hard walls such as cinder blocks and other real world hard surfaces where ricochets and “bounce backs” are extremely dangerous with conventional ammo. Air quality is also a factor and there are guidelines that must be met. Cheaper alternative frangible ammo was known to create a high content of airborne silica. The Alchemist are engineered to stay well within the guidelines. The last performance factor that has been associated with frangible bullets are the content of iron. These older types of frangible bullets have been known to spark when hitting steel plates and cause range fires. The Alchemist and their LE counter parts have eliminated the spark issues with not having any iron in them. As you can see there are a lot of factors that go into a modern frangible. Both types of ammo use a sealed non lead primer that does not absorb moisture. This gives them a very long shelf life that most military ammo is known for.
Zclean (non lead bullet) testing:
I will first start with the Zclean ammo since this will be the most popular for myself and most shooters. I quickly found many benefits of this kind of bullet for the average shooter. First, as the name implies, it is actually very clean to shoot. Shockingly so that after 500 rounds of shooting through many different platforms of firearms, all remain cleaner than what they would have been with a quality lead fmj.
Obviously cleaner ammo means less cleaning for the LE or soldier in the field as well as the serious shooter that takes extended tactical classes. Next is the inherent accuracy. Groups are as good or better than what I typically get with premium ammunition like HST or Gold Dot. I actually used several calibers of HST as the control round to compare against.
Because it is not a lead round, bullet weights of the Zinc bullets are different than their lead counter parts but poa/poi are the same. For example 9mm ='s 100 grain, 40S&W='s 125 grain, 45acp='s 155 grain, etc.... I tested the rifle zinc rounds but at this time only the pistol calibers are ready for prime time release.
The ammo with its truncated design inherently feeds better and has functioned flawlessly with all firearms tested.
The Zink bullets has not created any issue with any build up in either conventional or polygonal rifling. They also have a lubed characteristic between the bullet and barrel from the zinc. This is kind of a added benefit not foreseen at the beginning of the testing. At this point with 1000s of rounds I have shot, I see no down sides to this bullet. There was only one issue brought up to me and its either a positive or negative quality depending if you are using this as a practice round or NATO military replacement. It penetrates better than the conventional FMJ. This means it may ricochet (or penetrate) with poorly designed steel bullet traps. Some may see a tactical advantage for these characteristics, especially the military. Both of the “Alchemist” frangible and “Zclean” zinc ammo ran flawlessly in full auto weapons that they were tested. I can confirm there were many more than the ones mentioned above.
Alchemest (copper frangible) testing:
That brings us to the Frangible ammo. It was currently labeled as “Alchemist” for the consumer. This is a compressed copper bullet with non lead primers. These are also in different weight bullets than we are use to seeing with their lead counter parts. 380='s 75gr, 9mm='s 90gr, 38spl='s 100gr, 357sig='s 100gr, 40s&w='s 105gr, 45acp='s 145gr, 5.56='s 45gr, 300blk='s 125gr, 7.62='s 112gr, 308='s 125gr, 50BMG='s 640gr.
These frangible bullets are already being used all over the world by the military. As mentioned above they have no iron or silica in them. I watched a 30 round full magazine of 5.56 be walked disturbingly close to a steel plate under full auto fire.
As long as the steel plates are at a 90 degree of the bullet impact, the small fragments travel along the steel and are dispersed in that direction. There is a standard on how small the fragments have to break up in size. The energy has to go somewhere so it is directed away from the path of the bullet.
This includes 380 all the way up to 50BMG. (Have to enclose a “do not attempt unless you are a professional” disclosure). Accuracy of the copper frangible were outstanding. Certainly well within the specs required and most rival match grade in accuracy. They have to be because they have to accurately simulate the duty round in every way.
I found their recoil pleasant to shoot and would function reliably even with a fresh/new recoil spring in every caliber. The 5.56 frangible turned out to be one of the most accurate rounds out of my M6. 200 yard groups were outstanding considering I only was using a 6x VX6 optic. It out shot the typical mill spec xm193 and xm 855.
So in closing, the non-lead future of ammunition is nothing to curse or be fearful of. Technology is developing better bullets in every way. You can accurately say you are saving the planet every time you go to the range even if your main priority for your ammo is accuracy and reliability.
Non lead ammo and the future of ammunition development:
The future of ammunition isnt that hard to predict. The EPA as well as other outside forces have imposed their concerns on the ammunition industry for awhile now. The outrageous expense of lead clean up at public and private ranges have close many. A lot of this depends on which state you live in. That said, my concerns about my ammo are that it is reliable and accurate. I don’t want to seem insensitive to the environment but my heart is all about performance. I am all for non-lead bullets providing they equal or better the current high performance lead based ammo. I think those days are here. I have been involved with testing some very interesting ammunition for Law Enforcement and Military application over the last few months. There is also a consumer line that mirrors most of the LE/ Military version and this makes sense because of all the R&D in this kind of ammunition is expensive. I was allowed to do this review through the Ammunition Laboratory as long as I did not give any proprietary secrets so I will give a general review and most of all the ammo pictured is from the consumer line. LE and Military have certain specs they require for the bullets of tomorrow. What this means is that their specs will become the standard of ammo for the general public.
The Test Firearms and Caliber: As with most LE and Military testing, there are certain platforms that are required. I am testing with the required firearms as well as others not on the list.
My test firearms are: Sig Sauer P226, P229, P220, P227 Glock 17,19, 23, M&P 45, 380, Walther PPQ 9mm, PPQ 45, PPK, HK USP, HK USP Compact, LWRC M6 iC, HK416. The Calibers being evaluated are 380, 9mm, 38spl, 357 Sig, 40S&W, 45acp, 5.56, 7.62, 300 BLK.
The AMMO:
There are two non lead bullets being tested. A Zinc general range and mil spec bullet to replace the lead based fmj. This would be used as a range and mil-spec duty round. It is currently called “Zclean” in its consumer name. Its main component is zinc as well as other proprietary compositions.
The next is a compressed copper Frangible. It is currently labeled as a “Alchemist C3 round” for non-LE sale. This is used as training rounds for CQB, door breaching, hostage rescue, etc. Some may know these training areas as the “kill house”. These enclosed areas have hard walls such as cinder blocks and other real world hard surfaces where ricochets and “bounce backs” are extremely dangerous with conventional ammo. Air quality is also a factor and there are guidelines that must be met. Cheaper alternative frangible ammo was known to create a high content of airborne silica. The Alchemist are engineered to stay well within the guidelines. The last performance factor that has been associated with frangible bullets are the content of iron. These older types of frangible bullets have been known to spark when hitting steel plates and cause range fires. The Alchemist and their LE counter parts have eliminated the spark issues with not having any iron in them. As you can see there are a lot of factors that go into a modern frangible. Both types of ammo use a sealed non lead primer that does not absorb moisture. This gives them a very long shelf life that most military ammo is known for.
Zclean (non lead bullet) testing:
I will first start with the Zclean ammo since this will be the most popular for myself and most shooters. I quickly found many benefits of this kind of bullet for the average shooter. First, as the name implies, it is actually very clean to shoot. Shockingly so that after 500 rounds of shooting through many different platforms of firearms, all remain cleaner than what they would have been with a quality lead fmj.
Obviously cleaner ammo means less cleaning for the LE or soldier in the field as well as the serious shooter that takes extended tactical classes. Next is the inherent accuracy. Groups are as good or better than what I typically get with premium ammunition like HST or Gold Dot. I actually used several calibers of HST as the control round to compare against.
Because it is not a lead round, bullet weights of the Zinc bullets are different than their lead counter parts but poa/poi are the same. For example 9mm ='s 100 grain, 40S&W='s 125 grain, 45acp='s 155 grain, etc.... I tested the rifle zinc rounds but at this time only the pistol calibers are ready for prime time release.
The ammo with its truncated design inherently feeds better and has functioned flawlessly with all firearms tested.
The Zink bullets has not created any issue with any build up in either conventional or polygonal rifling. They also have a lubed characteristic between the bullet and barrel from the zinc. This is kind of a added benefit not foreseen at the beginning of the testing. At this point with 1000s of rounds I have shot, I see no down sides to this bullet. There was only one issue brought up to me and its either a positive or negative quality depending if you are using this as a practice round or NATO military replacement. It penetrates better than the conventional FMJ. This means it may ricochet (or penetrate) with poorly designed steel bullet traps. Some may see a tactical advantage for these characteristics, especially the military. Both of the “Alchemist” frangible and “Zclean” zinc ammo ran flawlessly in full auto weapons that they were tested. I can confirm there were many more than the ones mentioned above.
Alchemest (copper frangible) testing:
That brings us to the Frangible ammo. It was currently labeled as “Alchemist” for the consumer. This is a compressed copper bullet with non lead primers. These are also in different weight bullets than we are use to seeing with their lead counter parts. 380='s 75gr, 9mm='s 90gr, 38spl='s 100gr, 357sig='s 100gr, 40s&w='s 105gr, 45acp='s 145gr, 5.56='s 45gr, 300blk='s 125gr, 7.62='s 112gr, 308='s 125gr, 50BMG='s 640gr.
These frangible bullets are already being used all over the world by the military. As mentioned above they have no iron or silica in them. I watched a 30 round full magazine of 5.56 be walked disturbingly close to a steel plate under full auto fire.
As long as the steel plates are at a 90 degree of the bullet impact, the small fragments travel along the steel and are dispersed in that direction. There is a standard on how small the fragments have to break up in size. The energy has to go somewhere so it is directed away from the path of the bullet.
This includes 380 all the way up to 50BMG. (Have to enclose a “do not attempt unless you are a professional” disclosure). Accuracy of the copper frangible were outstanding. Certainly well within the specs required and most rival match grade in accuracy. They have to be because they have to accurately simulate the duty round in every way.
I found their recoil pleasant to shoot and would function reliably even with a fresh/new recoil spring in every caliber. The 5.56 frangible turned out to be one of the most accurate rounds out of my M6. 200 yard groups were outstanding considering I only was using a 6x VX6 optic. It out shot the typical mill spec xm193 and xm 855.
So in closing, the non-lead future of ammunition is nothing to curse or be fearful of. Technology is developing better bullets in every way. You can accurately say you are saving the planet every time you go to the range even if your main priority for your ammo is accuracy and reliability.
06-02-2016, 09:08 AM
#3
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 105
Very close in cost. There is actually one distributor that has the consumer line up for sale now. I am told most all pro ammo suppliers will eventually be carrying it. I teach a CCW class as well and I will probably shoot the Zink in every caliber. Its really clean ammo.
Leadlessammo:
http://leadlessammo.com/
Leadlessammo:
http://leadlessammo.com/
Last edited by Mystro; 06-02-2016 at 10:50 AM.
06-02-2016, 11:11 AM
#4
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Knee Deep in FL Muck
Posts: 286
Interesting read. I still think it is not the wave of the future. And if it is that future is a long ways off. First off the demand. Second is sustainability. Third is is functionality. You may have had good results but I have tried GMX in every weight available to me and none of it shot worth a crap out of the three hunting calibers I have tried. I did pass on your review an another forum I am on, because I think it is an interesting read.
06-02-2016, 11:28 AM
#5
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: south eastern PA
Posts: 15,436
I will not change to a non lead substitute for rifle and handgun ammo unless there is no choice. I have no choice for shotgun for waterfowl and some folks must use nontox shot on various state and federal land for small game. The prohibitive cost of nontox shotgun ammo is outrageous and I expect it will be the same for factory nontox rifle and handgun ammo. While the review here was interesting and thorough I would not expect a bad review from someone who works in the industry of making the lead substitute ammo. I am not saying it is not the truth, I am saying if something sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
06-02-2016, 12:01 PM
#6
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 105
I understand your skepticism.
A quick background:
I am a engineer and work with all kinds of ammo, not just leadless ammo. I work in all areas of the shooting industry these day.
I get pre production firearms as well as all kinds of industry gear to R&D. I was a professional IPSC shooter years ago, been to many tactical schools. I am a instructor and teach many CCW classes and advise LE in tactical gear. As a hardcore bow/handgun hunter, I have been all around the country on hunts. I am about as well rounded as it gets in the industry.
A quick background:
I am a engineer and work with all kinds of ammo, not just leadless ammo. I work in all areas of the shooting industry these day.
I get pre production firearms as well as all kinds of industry gear to R&D. I was a professional IPSC shooter years ago, been to many tactical schools. I am a instructor and teach many CCW classes and advise LE in tactical gear. As a hardcore bow/handgun hunter, I have been all around the country on hunts. I am about as well rounded as it gets in the industry.
I will not change to a non lead substitute for rifle and handgun ammo unless there is no choice. I have no choice for shotgun for waterfowl and some folks must use nontox shot on various state and federal land for small game. The prohibitive cost of nontox shotgun ammo is outrageous and I expect it will be the same for factory nontox rifle and handgun ammo. While the review here was interesting and thorough I would not expect a bad review from someone who works in the industry of making the lead substitute ammo. I am not saying it is not the truth, I am saying if something sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
06-02-2016, 05:42 PM
#7
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 12,746
That is a fine write up showing accuracy and reliability. But I don't see anything on terminal effectiveness. How about expansion and penetration performance. I'm with Oldtimr. No non-lead for me unless its mandatory. Even then I will fight it tooth and nail.
There is no legitimate reason to ban lead rifle/pistol ammo. Just more liberal BS being shoved down our throats.
There is no legitimate reason to ban lead rifle/pistol ammo. Just more liberal BS being shoved down our throats.
06-02-2016, 05:45 PM
#8
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 105
These are FMJ/NATO replacements and frangible training rounds. Terminal effectiveness is not a criteria for such ammo. Penetration on the Zink bullet has been shown to be greater than the standard 9mm 124fmj nato round. Enough so that it has created its own tactical niche. That's all I can say regarding that topic.
That is a fine write up showing accuracy and reliability. But I don't see anything on terminal effectiveness. How about expansion and penetration performance. I'm with Oldtimr. No non-lead for me unless its mandatory. Even then I will fight it tooth and nail.
There is no legitimate reason to ban lead rifle/pistol ammo. Just more liberal BS being shoved down our throats.
There is no legitimate reason to ban lead rifle/pistol ammo. Just more liberal BS being shoved down our throats.
Last edited by Mystro; 06-02-2016 at 06:11 PM.
