Making the switch to Copper, Advice Needed

AvidIndoorsman

AvidIndoorsman

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2015
Messages
18,411
I have been wanting to switch to copper bullets in my .264 win mag for several seasons now, not really interested in discussing the efficacy of lead versus copper here, but I am having a time finding bullets for my rifle and I was wondering if one of the copper evangelists out there can point me in the right direction.

Currently I'm shooting a 140 grain swift A-frame in my .264 win mag, my only rifle (probably not going to get another anytime soon, and don't particularly want to re-barrel to a new caliber (it's shooting well and I like the setup). I like that this bullet is tough and doesn't explode in the animal.

I can't seem to find any 140 grain copper bullets in .264:
Barnes only makes 120 grain all copper .264 bullets same with Hornady and Nosler... frustrating because all of these companies make 140 grain lead ammo and 140 grain copper match grade (which I tried and although accurate I did not like the results on game... barnes match grade exploded on the hide of a deer and I got frighteningly little penetration.)

As this is my one quiver rifle for elk, black bear, mule deer, ect. I would like to load the heaviest bullet possible.

Are there some little known companies that I'm missing or a bullet line I have overlooked?
 
I've explored some all copper bullets in other calibers but not the 6.5. Unfortunately I think 120 is about as high as you're going to find. I think with the higher weight retention of the all copper you may like the penetration and performance. Might give them a try to see what you get for accuracy. Maybe some of the California guys know of some other company making them in a heavier weight?
 
Barnes offers both the 127gr LRX and a 130gr TSX (non tipped), FWIW. Also, since copper is less dense than lead, a mono bullet will be much longer than a same weight lead cored bullet. Thus, you can run into twist issues with the heavier weight mono bullets. A 20gr difference is not going to matter all that much, IMO. Heck, that's only 1/2 the weight of a typical 22lr bullet! Mono/copper bullets often times penetrate deeper than like weight lead cored counter parts due in to generally higher weight retention and smaller frontal area. I can't think of a critter that I'd poke with a 140gr A-Frame that I wouldn't poke with a 120gr mono/copper from any of the makers you listed. I'd even put money on the lighter one penetrating farther! My suggestion would be to find the 120gr mono/copper your rifle likes and just get to filling tags.
 
1_pointer said:
Barnes offers both the 127gr LRX and a 130gr TSX (non tipped), FWIW. Also, since copper is less dense than lead, a mono bullet will be much longer than a same weight lead cored bullet. Thus, you can run into twist issues with the heavier weight mono bullets. A 20gr difference is not going to matter all that much, IMO. Heck, that's only 1/2 the weight of a typical 22lr bullet! Mono/copper bullets often times penetrate deeper than like weight lead cored counter parts due in to generally higher weight retention and smaller frontal area. I can't think of a critter that I'd poke with a 140gr A-Frame that I wouldn't poke with a 120gr mono/copper from any of the makers you listed. I'd even put money on the lighter one penetrating farther! My suggestion would be to find the 120gr mono/copper your rifle likes and just get to filling tags.
Click to expand...

Really appreciate this comment, I'm a reloading novice so length versus density isn't something I had even considered.
I just looked up Swift 140 verus Barnes TSX 120 length the 120 is actually longer than the 140... you would have thought I failed chemistry for not catching that fact.
 
Last edited:
1 Pointer hit it, the copper bullets are longer. Also, the monolithic bullets like to be driven a little faster so you also benefit from going lighter. I shoot 85 grain TSX bullets out of my .243, and it zips right through elk.

I'd look at the LRX if your rifle is throated long enough for the bullet. As an aside, I have had the best luck seating the bullets to where they are just touching the last cannelure ring. I've tried seating them out further and never found accuracy to benefit from it. Best loads were seated deeper.
 
I am interested in this, if anyone has more info on switching to copper I'd like to be informed. As a falconer, it alarms me the number of raptors that have lead in their system (source is debatable) and if I can do more I'd like to.
 
So before I go doing something dumb... does copper effect the amount of powder you should use/velocity. Specifically my Nosler reloading guide says the most accurate load is going 3202 fps but a box of 120 Etips says the muzzle velocity is 3050. Seems weird to see such a huge discrepancy for one company?

I'm used to loading way past manuals with my .264 win mag as I'm getting 3100-3200 with 140 grains while the manual recommends a max of 2950 but it seems weird for a company to use the minimum load tested in their factory loads, especially since they show the max load as the most accurate tested.
 
wllm1313 said:
So before I go doing something dumb... does copper effect the amount of powder you should use/velocity. Specifically my Nosler reloading guide says the most accurate load is going 3202 fps but a box of 120 Etips says the muzzle velocity is 3050. Seems weird to see such a huge discrepancy for one company?

I'm used to loading way past manuals with my .264 win mag as I'm getting 3100-3200 with 140 grains while the manual recommends a max of 2950 but it seems weird for a company to use the minimum load tested in their factory loads, especially since they show the max load as the most accurate tested.
Click to expand...

Remember, they have to account for all rifles, not just yours. One rifle blows up and they've got a huge law suit on their hands.
 
yes...you will find that you will hit max at a lower powder charge because there is a larger bearing surface on copper bullets because they are longer (which also affect case capacity). In my experience with my 7mm-08 and 140grain E-tips, your load will likely reflect something that is 10-20 grains heavier in weight
 
Do you know what the twist rate on your rifle is? That 127 LRX would be sweet, but Barnes recommends a 1:8 twist, and a lot of the older 6.5mms use 1:9, so it might not stabilize in your rifle. As far as the 120s go, I use the 120 TTSX in my 260 Rem, and am happy with it. I would have tried the Nosler E-tip, as it has the best B.C., but due to the bullet length I was afraid it wouldn't stabilize in my 1:9 twist barrel. You'd probably be alright with it in your 264 WM.

Go buy a box each of 127 LRX, 120 TTSX, 120 GMX, and 120 E-tip. Hunt with which ever shoots the best.
 
A couple of things to think about:

1. A monolithic bullet is roughly going to perform a class higher when compared with lead cores. This primarily comes from the fact that copper is less malleable, and requires more resistance to open. They also retain significantly more weight. That 120grn TTSX may weight more than your 140grn A-frame once it is done with its business.

2. When considering the LRX, keep in mind that it is not just a higher BC version of the TTSX or Etip, it is actually designed to open at lower velocities. Where the average premium bullet (Accubond, Interbond, TTSX, Etip, Trophy Bonded Bear claw) is designed to perform down to 1800 FPS, the LRX (Accubond LR, ELD-x, etc) are designed to perform down to 1300 fps. Because of this the longrange category of bullets is going to deform incredibly fast at closer ranges, and if you hit a big bone at high speed you could likely expect to sacrifice some weight retention; which in the LRX could mean the petals breaking off and being left with a copper plug the rest of the way through.

All that being said, I think a 120grn E-tip or TTSX is probably going to perform almost identically to your current 140 A frame.
 
Biscuit Hunter said:
Do you know what the twist rate on your rifle is? That 127 LRX would be sweet, but Barnes recommends a 1:8 twist, and a lot of the older 6.5mms use 1:9, so it might not stabilize in your rifle. As far as the 120s go, I use the 120 TTSX in my 260 Rem, and am happy with it. I would have tried the Nosler E-tip, as it has the best B.C., but due to the bullet length I was afraid it wouldn't stabilize in my 1:9 twist barrel. You'd probably be alright with it in your 264 WM.

Go buy a box each of 127 LRX, 120 TTSX, 120 GMX, and 120 E-tip. Hunt with which ever shoots the best.
Click to expand...

I do not... is there a easy way for a novice to figure that out? It's a 1962 Remington 700 BDL

Sounds like this is going to be a great excuse to buy a bunch of bullets and head to the range... I love it.
 
MinnesotaHunter,

Curious where you got 1300 fps minimum for the LRX. For some reason I thought it was 1600 fps. Do you have a link? I can't find it on Barnes website.
 
wllm1313 said:
So before I go doing something dumb... does copper effect the amount of powder you should use/velocity. Specifically my Nosler reloading guide says the most accurate load is going 3202 fps but a box of 120 Etips says the muzzle velocity is 3050. Seems weird to see such a huge discrepancy for one company?

I'm used to loading way past manuals with my .264 win mag as I'm getting 3100-3200 with 140 grains while the manual recommends a max of 2950 but it seems weird for a company to use the minimum load tested in their factory loads, especially since they show the max load as the most accurate tested.
Click to expand...

The Barnes loads are usually hotter than other manuals. The cannelures on the bullets reduce the bearing surface and allow you to use higher powder charges than normal. As always, use the manual and work up in an intelligent manner. I've found best accuracy at about 95% of max loads.
 
MinnesotaHunter said:
A couple of things to think about:

1. A monolithic bullet is roughly going to perform a class higher when compared with lead cores. This primarily comes from the fact that copper is less malleable, and requires more resistance to open. They also retain significantly more weight. That 120grn TTSX may weight more than your 140grn A-frame once it is done with its business.

2. When considering the LRX, keep in mind that it is not just a higher BC version of the TTSX or Etip, it is actually designed to open at lower velocities. Where the average premium bullet (Accubond, Interbond, TTSX, Etip, Trophy Bonded Bear claw) is designed to perform down to 1800 FPS, the LRX (Accubond LR, ELD-x, etc) are designed to perform down to 1300 fps. Because of this the longrange category of bullets is going to deform incredibly fast at closer ranges, and if you hit a big bone at high speed you could likely expect to sacrifice some weight retention; which in the LRX could mean the petals breaking off and being left with a copper plug the rest of the way through.

All that being said, I think a 120grn E-tip or TTSX is probably going to perform almost identically to your current 140 A frame.
Click to expand...
Small quibble with #1... ;) I will agree if by "perform" you mean penetrate. Some tests done by a writer concluded that a Barnes penetrates like a Partition that weighs 1.2X as much.

To the OP. I'd clean your bore down to bare metal before you start, especially if you are using an all copper bullet like the Barnes (eTips are made of guilding metal IIRC). You may get some weird fouling issues if you don't.
 
Last edited:
I actually called Barnes to ask about this.... I'm a huge fan of their 140gr TTSX rounds which is all I shoot in 7mm-08 and the (TSX) in .270. They are impressive performers. Like you, I wanted to find a heavier copper in 6.5 (though mine is for a 26 Nosler) for penetration and weight retention, or whatever magical juju Barnes puts in their cannelured marvels.

The issue explained to me is stabilization due to bullet length. A monolithic copper 140gr 6.5 it is just too difficult to stabilize due to the extended length that would be necessary to obtain the extra weight.

So I'll be sticking with the Accubonds or ELD-X bullets for the 6.5....
 
1_pointer said:
Small quibble with #1... ;) I will agree if by "perform" you mean penetrate. Some tests done by a writer concluded that a Barnes penetrates like a Partition that weighs 1.2X as much.

To the OP. I'd clean your bore down to bare metal before you start, especially if you are using an all copper bullet like the Barnes (eTips are made of guilding metal IIRC). You may get some weird fouling issues if you don't.
Click to expand...

Agree......perform is a very hard/controversial term to quantify in this context ;).

When I wrote perform I was referring to: opening effectively, retaining mass, penetrating deeply.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

samuel_284Win
Favorite 100% copper bullets for 300 Win Mag handloads?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
1K
shannerdrake
S
nhenry
a trendy little project
2 3
Replies
45
Views
3K
std7mag
S
Brian in Montana
FS: 30-06 Improved Rem/Age barrel, Preferred Barrel Blanks
Replies
6
Views
543
Brian in Montana
Brian in Montana
M
Can the 280AI Really Be this good! What is your experience with it?
2
Replies
31
Views
7K
old roper 42
O
nastynate
trying to make muzzleloader shooting experience more enjoyable/hard to seat bullets
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
CowboyLeroy
CowboyLeroy
PEAX Trekking Poles

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,048
Messages
1,944,961
Members
34,990
Latest member
hotdeals

Share this page

Back
Top