The Great Outdoors Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who love outdoor activities, excursions, and outdoorsmanship. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

According to this article (full disclosure: I wrote it) lead-based ammunition is a well-known threat to Condors and other scavengers, and may have negative effects on humans who unknowingly ingest bullet fragments.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that lead-free ammunition performs just as well as lead-based ammunition, without the potential side-effects, and lack of adoption is largely due to habit (we like to use what we have always used).

So, my question is two-part:

  1. Are there documented performance differences between lead-based vs lead-free ammunition?
  2. Have any hunters who have used both noticed a marked difference in performance?

NOTE: I re-posted this technical question for the firearms experts at - if you have an answer, join in.

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by Graham, Russell Steen, bmike, Kevin, studiohack Feb 4 '12 at 21:46

Questions on The Great Outdoors Stack Exchange are expected to relate to outdoor activities within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Migrate to – Graham Feb 4 '12 at 9:17
I'm wondering if in essence this is about firearm performance and only tangentially related to the outdoors since it seems a given that leaving lead shot in the environment is the only tie to the outdoors and not really in question. – bmike Feb 4 '12 at 18:22
@bmike -- I think this is about hunting, which is directly (not tangentially) "great outdoors", but that it's even more appropriately on firearms... (hence my vote to close). Lead vs. Other shot is a huge hunting debate and not so much a general firearms question. Also however a sometimes hotly argued topic which may be a bad question in general. – Russell Steen Feb 4 '12 at 18:50
Controversy only makes this a bad question if there are no objective arguments. SE makes a fine platform for presenting (NOT DISCUSSING!) such arguments for and against... BTW: I'm reluctant to migrate this, as the focus seems to be primarily on hunting and environmental effects - while that doesn't make it off-topic on Firearms, it does potentially make it on-topic here... And therefore a good scope-defining question, which migration subverts. – Shog9 Feb 4 '12 at 19:19
+1 if nothing else to counteract the -1. This is not a bad question. This is a good question which has served a useful purpose in helping decide scope. – Russell Steen Feb 5 '12 at 1:33

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.