Apex afterburner a few impact resistance results

[Petey308]

Current…..I like the way you think.


Can't make one,,, or haven't figured out how to make one …..yet.
Never quit.
It's hard to beat a man who never stops working

Perhaps I should have said "you can't CURRENTLY make a bullet…"

Never say never, I know lol.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

We have yet to find a velocity too high. We do not have bullets that break to pieces. I'm sure there is a limit, but impacts above 4000 fps still yield nearly the same weight retention as 1800 fps impacts. We have been able to make 100g 30 cal Shock Hammer squish too much, at 4200 fps, for it to penetrate to our satisfaction.

This week we had a film crew here to conduct a gel test. We tested our 199g 30cal Hammer Hunter against another bullet. Prior to the video getting done, I will only say the Hammer worked perfectly with a velocity range of 1400 fps impacts. Retained weight varies by 5g.

Not all coppers are equal. Not even close.

 

[mcdil]

@mcdil I personally know that you know why this thread was started and and it has taken the same turn as all the as of late so with all due respect can I ask you a question please Sir,
Did you design and build your bullet just to same thing every other bullet has already done or are you pushing the envelope ?

Definitely not intended to be the same thing as every other bullet. You're right on that. We're trying to push the envelope to broaden the operating window for bullet performance, and fordy found a specific point of interest, no doubt. He's really good at testing the limits as many of us know, actually probably the best I've ever met by a substantial margin. Like I said, everything we threw at them with the means we had available, they actually just continued to perform better the higher the velocity got, and those results replicated on cattle, not small animals for sure, and some of those impacts were big (double shoulder at relatively close range with the 144gr and a mv of 3350 fps). The cattle count is north of 20 now with continued outstanding results. Due to these initial observations, we were pretty confident in our operating windows.

So, the reason we were massaging our future formulation, was only to improve the meplat of the lower velocity results in the future, but I believe it will significantly elevate the velocity of or eliminate what fordy saw as an additional benefit. The original reason for the future formulation change isn't critical, but I felt it desirable since the base is the most important component during terminal performance, hence the move in that direction. It will reduce the overall trauma some under most conditions, but not by a lot. The current formulation under all conditions really accentuates trauma, and that can be seen in the results we have so far, barring near side, knuckle joint hits at 3600+ fps.

As far as some of the back and forth (only saying this in reference to the purpose of the post as part of your question). Personally, I will always stay out of any of that. I'd just say that regardless of the words written, just remember, people interpret things from their own points of view and in their own contexts, and the delivery is always important in formulating those interpretations. I know fordy very well, so while it could be interpreted as a bit of tough love from him, for me personally, I'm fine, and if anything, I'm glad he found what he found. It's better than a "non-testing" customer finding out on his own. That would bother me a lot, and that result was totally unanticipated. Nonetheless, it's easy to get sideways with each other whether there's ill intent or not, and I hate to see it happen, but at the same time, everyone is their own person and can do as they please within the confines of the rules of this forum. I believe there to be valid points from both sides. Usually, almost always, there are.

 

[RockyMtnUT]

We have yet to find a velocity too high. We do not have bullets that break to pieces. I'm sure there is a limit, but impacts above 4000 fps still yield nearly the same weight retention as 1800 fps impacts. We have been able to make 100g 30 cal Shock Hammer squish too much, at 4200 fps, for it to penetrate to our satisfaction.

This week we had a film crew here to conduct a gel test. We tested our 199g 30cal Hammer Hunter against another bullet. Prior to the video getting done, I will only say the Hammer worked perfectly with a velocity range of 1400 fps impacts. Retained weight varies by 5g.

Not all coppers are equal. Not even close.

This is great news! Thank-you.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

I'll add that last month my wife shot a golden wildebeest quartering to, dead center on the knuckle joint, with a 6.5mm 85g Hammer Hunter fired from a creedmoor at a muzzle vel of 3540 fps. Shot was 150y, put a hole through the knuckle that you could put your index finger through. Bullet went through onside lung and stopped in the offside lung. Penetration about 18". There are few bullets that would hold up to this shot, let alone an 85g .264 caliber at this high of impact velocity.

I'll now stop before I get called mean.

 

[RockyMtnUT]

I'll add that last month my wife shot a golden wildebeest quartering to, dead center on the knuckle joint, with a 6.5mm 85g Hammer Hunter fired from a creedmoor at a muzzle vel of 3540 fps. Shot was 150y, put a hole through the knuckle that you could put your index finger through. Bullet went through onside lung and stopped in the offside lung. Penetration about 18". There are few bullets that would hold up to this shot, let alone an 85g .264 caliber at this high of impact velocity.

I'll now stop before I get called mean.

Your not mean, just a
But that's fine it reflects your company.

 

[mcdil]

I'm not worried one way or the other, ive seen terminal ballistics and i know some designs have min and max limitations-- just wondering about it's construction--- is it solid copper ( just a softer alloy that tears)-- or is it similar to a sintered copper construction?

Sorry, missed this one. It's a solid copper. Thanks.

 

[jsthntn247]

I tried a couple mono's earlier this year and they all fouled my barrels so **** bad it took several hours to get the copper out. None shot worth a crap compared to Berger's. None were Apex or Hammers as a side note.

 

[mcdil]

I tried a couple mono's earlier this year and they all fouled my barrels so **** bad it took several hours to get the copper out. None shot worth a crap compared to Berger's. None were Apex or Hammers as a side note.

Interestingly enough, on that specifically. On one of my rifles with 80+ Apex bullets down it since the last cleaning, I just cleaned it last weekend. This is about double the bullet count it normally gets between cleanings and was the first time only Apex bullets were shot in it since the last cleaning, so I was curious what I'd find.

When cleaning for carbon, only about two shots worth, if that, was present in the bore. I thought that was bizarre. I took everything out and looked down the chamber, because I didn't believe it. Some of those shots were with Re-16 too, a powder known for a little carbon build up. It was clean.

I then switched to copper cleaning, and the first patch shrouded brush showed a very faint turquoise, only perceivable in decent lighting. The next patch on the brush was pure white. I've never seen anything like this before. Yes, this was on a Douglas barrel, but all cleanings before this one, were somewhat typical. I then repeated the copper cleaning distrusting what I was observing, and the effort squeaked all the way down the barrel from chamber to muzzle. It was bare as a bone.

So, at least in my particular case, 80+ shots yielded less fouling than what I would normally consider a freshly cleaned barrel that just got fouled in.

 

[Petey308]

I think all bullets, Hammers included since they have been compared in this thread, have had their share of less than ideal performance and especially as they are young and starting out. It's to be expected.

What's important is what is learned along the way and the improvements made. I do not believe these results have been just accepted by Mark and I'm sure he has intentions to make improvements based on this.

I know Hammer has had their own share of less than ideal results when starting out and even still, and there have been improvements made along the way. So to imply Hammer or others just haven't had any poor performance or never have is a bit unfair perhaps. Just food for thought.

 

[ButterBean]

You would see different behavior from the metal at lower impact velocities and with less stress put on it. So we also need to see that performance as well, especially before any permanent changes to alloy are made.

Unfortunately you can't make a bullet that will excel under ANY scenario, ANY animal, ANY shot placement, etc, etc so you have to just find the best balance and then the end user needs to know the limits and what results to expect, that way they can adjust shot placement as necessary, pick a cartridge for it as necessary, pick a particular bullet weight as necessary, etc and be setup for success.

I know that's what will be taken away from this test by Mark and he'll use the information as such. You can take that information and make a version that is best suited for certain scenarios, animals, velocities, etc too or at least extrapolate from it how to build yourself the right combo for your needs (rifle, cartridge, particular bullet, etc).

Well yes we have

 

[RockyMtnUT]

Ballistics are important

 

[ButterBean]

Not in ballistics. So…No you haven't
And your statement is subjective.

Subjective to you, not to me

 

[bamban]

Well yes we have

Curiosity. I guess after reading about and buying Hammer Bullets, I didnt reslize that you part owner, as in "we"