Oregon legal non-toxic?

Hello, extremely new to this site an muzzleloading as well. I acquired a knight DISC extreme western last fall, and used it on an unsuccessful December elk hunt. I had a blast and am really enjoying shooting with a ML. I'm still working with knight on a too short breech plug problem, but my question is about Oregon's new rules about non toxic bullets. In the past, we were only allowed lead, no sabots, no plastic, not longer than twice the diameter bullets.
Now, we 're allowed comparable bullets including lead alloy or federally approved non toxic.
I'm looking for directions to research and experiences killing with these supposed oregon legal non toxic bullets. Thor, non ballistic tip, I think may be the only ones?
Hopefully I'll be hunting pronghorn and elk. So far the hornady 348 gr conical a shoot excellently, but if there's better performers that don't leave me cutting leaded meat off the carcass, that could be a plus.
Thanks!

Since your shooting a Knight.. might I suggest a Knight Bloodline bullet. They are brass so that would be non toxic. Although most of them are shot from a sabot. But you might want to talk to Sabotloader as he as done some testing with them as a conical. Barnes are also all copper.

I was unaware of the change in Oregon Muzzleloader regulations. I will be following this thread to see where it goes.

Do a search on here for tests some have done shooting the .50 Barnes XPB pistol bullet... It should be a viable all copper option.

Hornady makes a full bore muzzleloading bullet but i don't think it's lead free

Hmmm... I was hoping for purpose made conicals rather than bullets for sabots being used without, or pistol bullets, etc.
Stevenm2, you're an oregon hunter, right?

Yes I am ... I am planning on going with some 460 gr. no excuses or 460 gr. bull shop Conicals. Unless I find info available to make me change that line of reasoning. These have proven to be pretty accurate in my MK-85.
I have a MK-85 unfired in .54 I want to try some No Excuses 535 gr. Conicals I bought but just not have had time.
My plan for now is to shoot the .50

Hey Steve.

Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk

mattphillips18 said:

Hmmm... I was hoping for purpose made conicals rather than bullets for sabots being used without, or pistol bullets, etc.
Stevenm2, you're an oregon hunter, right?

Click to expand...

I'm just curious as to why?

To my knowledge, the only full bore non toxic projectile labeled "muzzleloader bullet" is the THOR, The Barnes XPB .500 do work very well, you just have to knurl them & find the right fit, use a wad or a sub base, & once you do, they become a "muzzleloader bullet" You can also do the same with the Lehigh .500/350. They may be listed as "pistol bullets" but they are also shot out of .500 cal rifles, so I don't really see the difference- Greg

Mostly the difference is my supreme amatuer status and the disinterest in using something that is not "off the shelf" ready and endorsed by the manufacturer for muzzleloading. Unfortunately, as stated, I'm quite new to this world and haven't broadened my horizons yet to the cutting edge of experimentation with explosives and their projectiles.
While my reading has led me to believe that large heavy lead conicals kill great within muzzleloading velocities, the theory behind non toxic shot and bullets in game that I and my family eat being even minimally safer is appealing.
Given that California is a non toxic state now (not sure about for ML) I'm sure bullet makers will be and are addressing this. Oregon appears to be heading this way in the future, as I bet many states will.
So my interest is in any new experiences or knowledge of what products have been released to deal with said issue.
Steven, while I'm interested in non toxic, I'm also interested the no excuses and bullshops should the off the shelf non toxic route not work as well on game or not be accurate enough from my rifle. Have you shot elk with those slugs?

Tainted meat from lead projectiles is not something I have ever worried about. Is there new evidence to support this?

When my son was about 2 years old he swallowed a 50 cal round lead ball. I immediately started to worry about lead poisoning and rushed him to the emergency room. The doctor examined him quietly for just a moment and then told me that he is/was ( this was about 28 years ago) an avid duck hunter. He explained to me that I had nothing to worry about and that swallowing a lead ball was nothing like eating lead paint. If I remember correctly he didn't believe in any need for lead free shot at the time. I know there is some danger in shooting at indoor ranges because sometimes under the right conditions the lead actually starts to melt and burn in the barrel and produces a smoke that can be toxic, but never heard or thought about lead tainting the meat.

I always thought is was just the "environmental" groups that started all this hype. Am I completely wrong?

I am new to this board, but have been a lover of muzzle loading for about 35 years. I hope I am not being controversial in my first post on this board, but honestly want to know more about this and all ML subjects. I just found this site and love it! Thanks to everyone here!

KYTim said:

Tainted meat from lead projectiles is not something I have ever worried about. Is there new evidence to support this?

When my son was about 2 years old he swallowed a 50 cal round lead ball. I immediately started to worry about lead poisoning and rushed him to the emergency room. The doctor examined him quietly for just a moment and then told me that he is/was ( this was about 28 years ago) an avid duck hunter. He explained to me that I had nothing to worry about and that swallowing a lead ball was nothing like eating lead paint. If I remember correctly he didn't believe in any need for lead free shot at the time. I know there is some danger in shooting at indoor ranges because sometimes under the right conditions the lead actually starts to melt and burn in the barrel and produces a smoke that can be toxic, but never heard or thought about lead tainting the meat.

I always thought is was just the "environmental" groups that started all this hype. Am I completely wrong?

I am new to this board, but have been a lover of muzzle loading for about 35 years. I hope I am not being controversial in my first post on this board, but honestly want to know more about this and all ML subjects. I just found this site and love it! Thanks to everyone here!

Click to expand...

Your fine KYTim...Good post and welcome to the site!

mattphillips18 said:

Mostly the difference is my supreme amatuer status and the disinterest in using something that is not "off the shelf" ready and endorsed by the manufacturer for muzzleloading. Unfortunately, as stated, I'm quite new to this world and haven't broadened my horizons yet to the cutting edge of experimentation with explosives and their projectiles.
While my reading has led me to believe that large heavy lead conicals kill great within muzzleloading velocities, the theory behind non toxic shot and bullets in game that I and my family eat being even minimally safer is appealing.
Given that California is a non toxic state now (not sure about for ML) I'm sure bullet makers will be and are addressing this. Oregon appears to be heading this way in the future, as I bet many states will.
So my interest is in any new experiences or knowledge of what products have been released to deal with said issue.
Steven, while I'm interested in non toxic, I'm also interested the no excuses and bullshops should the off the shelf non toxic route not work as well on game or not be accurate enough from my rifle. Have you shot elk with those slugs?

Click to expand...

Ok, that clears things up a little. I can tell you that pre packaged M/L bullets will always cost you more than putting together your own loads. There are also instances where you buy a pre packaged M/L bullet & it is a pistol bullet that costs a lot less if you buy them separate & the sabots as well. I am assuming however that you cannot use sabots yet, even though they may have relaxed some of the laws. I will tell you that the THOR bullet will kill anything you want to shoot & do an excellent job of it. If you go with lead conicals, remember that they tend to shoot better at lower charges, say 60-80 grains (by volume) When you are ready to do some experimenting, there are very knowledgeable people on this site that can & will give you all of the answers you will need. Good luck with your new experiences, but beware......it is addicting!!!

mattphillips18 said:

Mostly the difference is my supreme amatuer status and the disinterest in using something that is not "off the shelf" ready and endorsed by the manufacturer for muzzleloading. Unfortunately, as stated, I'm quite new to this world and haven't broadened my horizons yet to the cutting edge of experimentation with explosives and their projectiles.
While my reading has led me to believe that large heavy lead conicals kill great within muzzleloading velocities, the theory behind non toxic shot and bullets in game that I and my family eat being even minimally safer is appealing.
Given that California is a non toxic state now (not sure about for ML) I'm sure bullet makers will be and are addressing this. Oregon appears to be heading this way in the future, as I bet many states will.
So my interest is in any new experiences or knowledge of what products have been released to deal with said issue.
Steven, while I'm interested in non toxic, I'm also interested the no excuses and bullshops should the off the shelf non toxic route not work as well on game or not be accurate enough from my rifle. Have you shot elk with those slugs?

Click to expand...

No I have not shot Elk with these slugs. We were not successful drawing ML Elk tags last year. I thought I was at first but it was due to my excitement over my Bighorn Sheep tag. I did shoot an Antelope a few years back with a 385 gr. HB HP Buffalo Bullet. It did exactly what it was supposed to do. I have enough of these 385s to sink a small boat but I worry about the HP with Elk.
The N.E.460 gr. Bullets come highly recommended. Check the No Excuses website for photos and reviews. Sabotloader has a ton of experience with this load as well.
They are accurate enough from my MK-85 loaded with 80 gr. 777 and a wad (actually with or without the wad) I would not hesitate a broadside shot on a Bull. At 50 yards this load is amazingly accurate. At 100 yards I am thinking it is more me and open sights than the rifle causing the groups to open up. I would limit my range to 100 yards
Matt send me a pm about your location maybe we can get together and go shoot.

GregK said:

mattphillips18 said:

Hmmm... I was hoping for purpose made conicals rather than bullets for sabots being used without, or pistol bullets, etc.
Stevenm2, you're an oregon hunter, right?

Click to expand...

I'm just curious as to why?

To my knowledge, the only full bore non toxic projectile labeled "muzzleloader bullet" is the THOR, The Barnes XPB .500 do work very well, you just have to knurl them & find the right fit, use a wad or a sub base, & once you do, they become a "muzzleloader bullet" You can also do the same with the Lehigh .500/350. They may be listed as "pistol bullets" but they are also shot out of .500 cal rifles, so I don't really see the difference- Greg

Click to expand...

As near as I can tell Thor Bullets will not be legal in Oregon because of the plastic tip.

mattphillips18

I am wondering if you should check with your game department on their definition of an Oregon Legal ML bullet, if you haven't already.

This statement from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife provides the definition.

■ Only conical bullets made of lead, lead alloy, or federally-approved nontoxic shot material, with a length that does not exceed twice the diameter, and round balls made of lead, lead alloy, or federally-approved nontoxic material, used with cloth, paper or felt patches are allowed during muzzleloader-only seasons and 600 series hunts where there is a weapon restriction of shotgun/muzzleloader only or archery/muzzleloader only. It is illegal to hunt with non-lead bullets except for those made of federally-approved nontoxic shot material, jacketed bullets, sabots, and bullets with plastic or synthetic tips or bases during muzzleloader only seasons and 600 series hunts where there is a weapon restriction of shotgun/muzzleloader only.

federally-approved nontoxic shot material does this statement apply to Shot not rifle projectiles.

This site will provide you with California approved lead free bullets.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/hunting/ ... dammo.html

Again i would urge you to contact the right people in Oregon for the correct information, as still appears to me that you are restricted to lead full bore.

If they give you the go-ahead you could make things work with either the Thor, removing the tip, or Barnes 50 cal XPB bullets. I have shot quite a few XPB's from a couple of my Knights. But to do so you will need to do hand work on the bullet.

Check this post as a reference.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=24055&p=182012&hilit=xpb#p182012

Thanks Mike, Oregon Fish and Game has a way of talking a lot without really saying anything at all. I would not had picked up on the federally approved non toxic "shot " material. Maybe we should cast some bismuth bullets!
What is weird is they are pushing the lead free ammunition in all other aspects and hunts but with Muzzleloaders restrict us to using lead.
It would not be so weird except there are lead free saboted projectiles that are available. What is the ecological difference between a sabot and a shotgun wad? A guy could get rich designing "green" sabots and shotgun wads that worked. And really how much more accurate is a saboted bullet than a lead conical? Would the use of sabots tip the balance from primitive methods?
I think IdahoRon's idea of paper patching of the Barnes seems like a reasonable alternative but difficult to master.
Given my current supply, I think I will stick with heavy lead conical bullets until such time as a practical alternative is found.

stevenm2 said:

Thanks Mike, Oregon Fish and Game has a way of talking a lot without really saying anything at all. I would not had picked up on the federally approved non toxic "shot " material. Maybe we should cast some bismuth bullets!
What is weird is they are pushing the lead free ammunition in all other aspects and hunts but with Muzzleloaders restrict us to using lead.

Click to expand...

There is a big push for 'lead free' but it is really limited right now to a very few States. Oregon and Washington were on the threshold last year but it did not make it through. I think it will be difficult in both states for awhile to come.

Idaho, Oregon, and a few other states are heavily lobbied by traditional ML shooters to keep the ML hunts more along the the line of traditional hunting. In doing so the have lobbied very hard and successfully to maintain the lead projectile portion of the regulations. Washington has been able to break away on that aspect and does allow many different projectiles. I keep hoping that Idaho will be able to step away from that pressure of the Traditional hunters. They are well formed cluds and do represent themselves to the fish and game. On the other hand us inline toating, renegade ML shooters have never formed a large united group to get anything done. I beleive we are like many farmers across the country in that we represent ourselves without belonging..

It would not be so weird except there are lead free saboted projectiles are available. What is the ecological difference between a sabot and a shotgun wad? A guy could get rich designing "green" sabots and shotgun wads that worked. And really how much more accurate is a saboted bullet than a lead conical? Would the use of sabots tip the balance from primitive methods?

Click to expand...

In many ways it would not tip a balance - but it would not be Traditional

I think IdahoRon's idea of paper patching of the Barnes seems like a reasonable alternative but difficult to master.
Given my current supply, I think I will stick with heavy lead conical bullets until such time as a practical alternative is found.

Click to expand...

For myself only it is so much easier just to knurl a bullet or push a slip fit conical down the bore.

For a year or so lehigh Dave and I worked on a 'slip fit' full bore bullet, something to match Colorado's rules, but the interest is so small because so few States require full bore...

This is pilot run of the full bore Lehigh was working on...

Thanks again Mike for your input...
ODFW if you are reading this please explain how switching to the approval of "Non Toxic" bullets conforms to traditional methods. There are some very knowledgeable people here and no one can figure out the intent of the rule change since there are no "non-toxic" projectiles available on the Market.
The question remains is it non toxic or traditional methods that is most important? It would seem the efforts the state of Orygun has made to date were to ONLY appease certain groups not to work towards the conservation of our game animals and natural resources.
Sad but true.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ition-ban/
First article that came up. My personal viewpoint, which I'd like to not push on anyone else, is that if, for arguments sake, a slow lead projectile killed deer were 99.8% safe to eat, and there were an alternative which required nothing more than reaching 6" left at the store shelf yet offered 99.9% safe venison, why wouldn't I do that?
Sabot loader, great call on the regs and how they read, I'll have to call ODFW.
Stevem2, when I'm on a regular computer and not my phone, I'll check in and see if we're close enough to kill some clays.