Apex afterburner a few impact resistance results

[Petey308]

You don't have the first clue about what's going on or what this post is even about, I doubt that you and several others ever will
SMH

Care to enlighten him, or the "several others"? I was going to just leave it alone, but you've truly peaked my interest. Are you implying there's some hidden meaning here?

 

[Jeremyc]

I do like that @mcdil wants to now find the velocity threshold to update literature to give a "effective" velocity range for these bullets. I do think that is responsible to do. I've heard many bullet companies publish minimum effective velocity and now we know that a maximum effective velocity for this bullet does indeed exist. It may be a "failure" in this instance, but if/when literature is updated and I chose to exceed maximum effective velocity and had similar results, it would no longer be a failure imho.

 

[ButterBean]

Care to enlighten him, or the "several others"? I was going to just leave it alone, but you've truly peaked my interest. Are you implying there's some hidden meaning here?

Petey I'm being as respectful as I can be but I really wish you would stop with the games, You know exactly what I'm talking about, I'm not gonna derail this thread as this is important information that needs to be shared and discussed

 

[NorthRiverGuide]

I do like that @mcdil wants to now find the velocity threshold to update literature to give a "effective" velocity range for these bullets. I do think that is responsible to do. I've heard many bullet companies publish minimum effective velocity and now we know that a maximum effective velocity for this bullet does indeed exist. It may be a "failure" in this instance, but if/when literature is updated and I chose to exceed maximum effective velocity and had similar results, it would no longer be a failure imho.

All bullets have a minimum and maximum impact velocity based on construction. Most people never need to worry about the maximum because they never push them that hard. For long range hunting the minimum is the higher priority. I do like mark is absorbing information and looking to apply it. His ability to take negative feedback and stay professional is refreshing. Hopefully his company does well.

 

[Petey308]

Petey I'm being as respectful as I can be but I really wish you would stop with the games, You know exactly what I'm talking about, I'm not gonna derail this thread as this is important information that needs to be shared and discussed

That's my point, sir. I care not to play games and I'd like there to be transparency. This is an open forum and thread. Anyone reading through all this deserves to know if there's something else not being said so that the important information isn't misunderstood or misrepresented. Is that not fair? You brought it up, after all.

If there's nothing else behind this, then let's drop and move on, but when you made that comment it made me wonder. Surely I'm not the only one. I'm trying to be as respectful as I can be too and as hard as it might be to accept, I'm not trying to stir any pot here. I'm just curious is all.

 

[Petey308]

I do like that @mcdil wants to now find the velocity threshold to update literature to give a "effective" velocity range for these bullets. I do think that is responsible to do. I've heard many bullet companies publish minimum effective velocity and now we know that a maximum effective velocity for this bullet does indeed exist. It may be a "failure" in this instance, but if/when literature is updated and I chose to exceed maximum effective velocity and had similar results, it would no longer be a failure imho.

I agree. Knowing the limitations, both on the high end and the low end, are very important for any bullet. Seeing that as a priority to Mark is great, and also that he's publishing that with the bullet info. That sort of thing is extremely useful to the end user.

 

[Jeremyc]

All bullets have a minimum and maximum impact velocity based on construction. Most people never need to worry about the maximum because they never push them that hard. For long range hunting the minimum is the higher priority. I do like mark is absorbing information and looking to apply it. His ability to take negative feedback and stay professional is refreshing. Hopefully his company does well.

I agree, although I wouldn't feel that fordy's provided negative feedback, but instead constructive criticism

 

[NorthRiverGuide]

Petey I'm being as respectful as I can be but I really wish you would stop with the games, You know exactly what I'm talking about, I'm not gonna derail this thread as this is important information that needs to be shared and discussed

You post a comment on here saying we don't have a clue. Then you're asked for clarification and now we know exactly what you're talking about and it's a game. If you're not going to clarify when asked then why comment? All you have done is say something then contradict yourself when asked for clarification. Then say that people are playing games. We have been having a discussion on the post and the data presented. The only person going off track is you. I'm pretty sure 300prc is right and it's simply because it's me that commented. Because others are saying the same exact thing yet you only singled me out. You can do whatever with these comments I'll get back to discussing the testing with everyone else.

 

[NorthRiverGuide]

I agree, although I wouldn't feel that fordy's provided negative feedback, but instead constructive criticism

Whatever you want to call the feedback either way at least he's being professional. I've seen people with businesses that only took positive feedback and only positive. Anything else constructive or negative they would flat out ignore or even go after the person. It's always nice when a small business owner can take in all feedback and be professional.

 

[mcdil]

Hey, everyone. I don't have much time to post here just now, but fordy and I did discuss where that threshold most likely lies, and I will set it at 3300 fps for heavy bone hits like knuckle joints on large animals. I will have that updated across the website by this weekend. That's not from a physical observation of success at that velocity, at least not yet. It's derived from the just over 3000 fps results when compared against the 3600+ and 3700+ results, leaning on a lot of past experience, a little from me, but mostly from him and trying to be a little conservative for margin of safety.

Terminal performance is and has always been our number one priority. Anyone who's spent one minute on our homepage will see that. Just to reiterate, we tried to destroy them in our testing. We just couldn't. Now that we are aware of a series of things that can create a certain output, even though it may be outside the bounds of what most people would experience with their equipment and respective quarry, we will see if we can address that without creating a detriment to other areas of the Afterburner's performance, which has been outstanding so far, to include some heavy bone hits at high speed on large animals, surprisingly, just not the knuckle itself. We actually think we have that plan already in motion that addresses a completely separate item (we want to reduce or remove the "chippy" look to the shank's meplat we see at the lower velocities), but I feel the effort will solve both that issue and this one. Time will tell.

 

[NorthRiverGuide]

Hey, everyone. I don't have much time to post here just now, but fordy and I did discuss where that threshold most likely lies, and I will set it at 3300 fps for heavy bone hits like knuckle joints on large animals. I will have that updated across the website by this weekend. That's not from a physical observation of success at that velocity, at least not yet. It's derived from the just over 3000 fps results when compared against the 3600+ and 3700+ results, leaning on a lot of past experience, a little from me, but mostly from him and trying to be a little conservative for margin of safety.

Terminal performance is and has always been our number one priority. Anyone who's spent one minute on our homepage will see that. Just to reiterate, we tried to destroy them in our testing. We just couldn't. Now that we are aware of a series of things that can create a certain output, even though it may be outside the bounds of what most people would experience with their equipment and respective quarry, we will see if we can address that without creating a detriment to other areas of the Afterburner's performance, which has been outstanding so far, to include some heavy bone hits at high speed on large animals, surprisingly, just not the knuckle itself. We actually think we have that plan already in motion that addresses a completely separate item (we want to reduce or remove the "chippy" look to the shank's meplat we see at the lower velocities), but I feel the effort will solve both that issue and this one. Time will tell.

Good luck looking forward to seeing more from you and your bullets.

 

[Petey308]

Hey, everyone. I don't have much time to post here just now, but fordy and I did discuss where that threshold most likely lies, and I will set it at 3300 fps for heavy bone hits like knuckle joints on large animals. I will have that updated across the website by this weekend. That's not from a physical observation of success at that velocity, at least not yet. It's derived from the just over 3000 fps results when compared against the 3600+ and 3700+ results, leaning on a lot of past experience, a little from me, but mostly from him and trying to be a little conservative for margin of safety.

Terminal performance is and has always been our number one priority. Anyone who's spent one minute on our homepage will see that. Just to reiterate, we tried to destroy them in our testing. We just couldn't. Now that we are aware of a series of things that can create a certain output, even though it may be outside the bounds of what most people would experience with their equipment and respective quarry, we will see if we can address that without creating a detriment to other areas of the Afterburner's performance, which has been outstanding so far, to include some heavy bone hits at high speed on large animals, surprisingly, just not the knuckle itself. We actually think we have that plan already in motion that addresses a completely separate item (we want to reduce or remove the "chippy" look to the shank's meplat we see at the lower velocities), but I feel the effort will solve both that issue and this one. Time will tell.

Very good, Mark! I think it's safe to say this post did have a positive effect, which is great, and I really appreciate you putting that information on the website and keeping the figures conservative. I've seen some manufacturers publish the exact number that there's any sort of expansion, for example, and publish that as the minimum. When I asked one company in particular about that, I was told they just post that figure and let the customer decide what it means to them. I feel like that's not very helpful and could invite the chance of errors and very poor results, and that in turn could result in bad publicity to the company. So it's not doing either any favors in the long run.

Anyway, thanks for the reply and the way you're doing things. I appreciate it.

 

[lyle2231]

Load gun, pull trigger, boom/flop.
All I need to know.
Best regards L

 

[wilkup]

Very interesting. We've pushed them as hard as we can but haven't been able to demonstrate what you've been able to do at the extremes (our extremes were just not as severe as you've been able to conduct). Some of that work is even into dry, compacted leather from a RUM. Results were strikingly similar to those seen on the cattle. We haven't even bothered to post those results, because they're consistent with other testing.

It's always great to find the limits. Normally, most would prefer to have that happen in private testing, not on an open forum, but such is the beauty of the internet sometimes for everyone's knowledge. This is incredibly useful for us here too, even though we may not like seeing it.

Now the work you've done is the extreme of extremes, but at Apex, we want to ensure all our customers experience the best possible results in the field, at least for the things we can control, and as I've always mentioned, we want to provide full disclosure in our literature. I'd like to take a conversation with you offline to understand where the boundaries may be that you've observed. Maybe you don't have a handle on that just yet, or maybe you do, but we will adjust our performance window for the Afterburner on our literature to not exceed the velocities you've experienced that started to deconstruct the shank section when hitting large bone.

Taken in stride Respect for keeping it classy, sir.