leatherface_y2k wrote:If lead from spent rounds was leaching into the groundwater at dangerous levels I'd expect that most everyone living in or near Gettysburg, Verdun, Leningrad, Berlin, all of Vietnam, shooting ranges that have been operating for 50+ years, they'd all be poisoned by now. There would be a huge population of lead-poisoned civilians. It just doesn't work that way. Yes lead is a problem with waterfowl who will EAT pellets for grist. So now we have steel shot for waterfowl. Very few, if any, humans will eat lead.
Now lead, and mercury from primers, in enclosed ranges, that's a real concern but only because it's in vapor that can be inhaled.
I'm not arguing whether there is or isn't a need for "greener" bullets. That's for the EPA and anywhere that's not ZS, since there's so much politics involved there that it makes me queezy. I was merely stating that the EPA is making their ruling, and since a number of ranges and range areas fall in nationally protected areas, the EPA has a big say in things. Now, if we happen to make a better bullet whilst we go green, why not?
Anyway, the feed ramps aren't showing any more wear than usual so far. The tips are coated to ease any wear issues, and I doubt that they used a harder steel in the tip than they did in the feed ramp. I could be wrong though.