Bullet Construction vs Lethality

[asd9055]

When we began our journey into making bullets, we knew that we wanted to open the nose of the bullet like a banana and shed those petals to achieve a flat front retained shank. Like shooting a flat based bullet backward. Again based on the Rathcoombe physics paper showing this form to create the largest wound channel and longest penetration. In the beginning we gave no thought to the process of shedding weight or what that shed weight did. Animal testing showed us that there was something to the shedding. Several things actually. 1st, there is a shock that happens that moment of opening and shedding. Much greater than a bullet that opens but retains all of it's weight. I'll come back to this. 2nd, without shedding the frontal area of the bullet becomes too large causing it to slow down too rapidly robbing it of its ability to make a large permanent wound channel. Remember vital tissue is elastic and the faster an object goes through it the more permanent disruption it makes. As a bullet slows the wound that it makes becomes smaller until it stops where is no longer makes any wound. Too large a frontal area and a rounded shape lessen the wounding. 3rd, the shed weight increases the stability of the retained shank aiding in longer straight line, meplat forward, penetration. 4th, a flat front retained shank is less likely to deflect off angled bone impacts. Whether it is edge of bone or angled shots. Again, better straight line penetration. 5th, the wounding that happens from the shed pieces as they pass through the animal. Yep, that's right. the shed petals from our bullet often exit the far side around the exit from the retained shank. Radiating at a very slight angle. This greatly increases the total area of the permanent wound channel.

Back to number 1. We control the amount of shed weight based on how deep we make the hollow point. This shed weight will remain the same with high or low velocity impacts. This is due to the raw material that we use, not any kind of scoring or broaching done to the bullet. @nralifer is correct about the brittle coppers breaking and tearing too much. We used that copper in the beginning because we could get it to shed but it is very velocity dependent on how much bullet weight would be retained. Too deep a HP and it would come undone to several pieces at low vel. Too shallow and it would not lose enough weight and would break the nose off into a newly pointed bullet. Not good, but all we could find at the time and other big companies used it. High vel is easy with almost all copper. Back to our copper. If this shedding weight is a good thing, then shedding more is a better thing. Right? Well, that turns out not to be true. There is a dwell time that takes place during the moment that the bullet opens and sheds. If not shedding enough it lessens the shock and the extra wounding done by the shed pieces. If shedding too much, it takes longer for it to happen and too much bullet vel is lost to the process of shedding, lessening the size of the permanent wound channel due to lack of vel and lack of penetration. Over the years we have made some of our hollow points deeper and now in some cases coming nearly full circle to where we started. Not quite, still shedding more than what we started out doing. As a formula guy, this frustrating because there is no formula to it. Depends on nose length, and caliber, along with sectional density and other things. Over time it has become more of a feeling when looking at a new bullet design and determining how much of it to shed to get the most out of it.

Tips are another thing. I swore that Hammer Bullets would never have a tip. The tip is just a plug in the hole that has to be evacuated in order to get fluid into the hollow point to expand the bullet from the inside out. We tried aluminum tips and copper tips. They inhibited low vel performance and would break out to the side, causing irregular deformation and deflecting, along with changing direction of travel. Unpredictable straight line penetration. We had pretty well written off tips. As long range guys we wanted them to work in the worst way but there was no way we could market a bullet that had a lesser terminal performance than our current line of bullets. Consistent terminal performance matters more than anything else. Now we have a line of tipped bullets. Our good buddy @pickens72 came out to visit a bit over a year ago and pushed us to make a tipped bullet. We gave in, mostly to prove to him that it wouldn't work. This time we designed around a particular tip design of poly. Dang if it didn't work. I don't want to give him too much credit, it'll go to his head! So we set out testing on animals for the next year and tweaking as we went. We were personally part of over 100 animal tests and we also got them into the hands of others that shot more animals than we did. Particularly @fordy who set out to make it fail and couldn't. I know he pushed something close 1000 animals in his testing. He can verify the numbers. This design does not deflect like other tipped bullets on angled bone shots and we are actually seeing better terminal results at low to mid range impact velocity. 2800 fps down the wound channel stays the same. Defying common knowledge that the wound will get smaller with less vel. Has to do with tip material, bullet material, and how the two are married together. Again no broaching or scoring of the bullet to encourage deformation, maintaining the proper amount of force and time needed for full deformation and shedding, maximizing the initial shock from deformation and keeping the shed petals on the same straight line penetration of the retained shank.

I am not trying to P in anyone's cheerios. I think @nralifer is making a fine product and he looks at this from a different angle than I do. I do like talking about material and design to reach the end goal of the best possible product. I think we all (in the business) strive to make better. This is just some of the evolution of how we got to this point so far.

Thank you for the detailed explanation

 

[nralifer]

No doubt Hammers are reliable expanders. Plastic tips can behave erratically and not clear completely from the hollow. Also there are different plastics used which can behave differently. We have noted that all tips increase the impact velocity needed to achieve expansion that decreases dramatically when gel tested without the tip.

 

[fordy]

Gday
I see a few more pages since I was last on here & thought the op heading was going to get into what was what but maybe hope

So

Tips & construction of them & how they are married to the pill has been extremely important to get a consistent result then add the alloys that are used from c&c to monos & it's a Pandora's box as so many variables & a lot of times you see one covered & another shows up
& I'll back nrailer upto a point on how these tip material's behave once in critters
From caps , ball bearings , aluminium, brass ,copper ,polymer etc
But I'm going to need time which I am struggling with so here is what I've got for now

Tips that plug the hp from a shatter / snap of the tip material are basically useless & when they do this they are creating a pill that is is for all intensive purposes a true solid yes the hp becomes plugged yep get that so moving on

@Nrailer please please take the following as constructive criticism as aluminium tips have their strengths yep totally agree but you already have that part covered so why not look @ where improvements can be made & I DO believe you can improve on yours as was shown with the afterburner as this aluminium tip is the best aluminium tip on the market imo ( well the design is as I don't know if different aluminium is used in tips ) & this is where you get a way better pill if the ejection or wedge system can work across many resistances /angles/ velocities but the tip is only part of the equation & im leaving that alone as if you don't get the design that can operate under a wider range of circumstances it don't matter what's behind the tip it will fail more than a well designed tip

I'll back up this with your own pictures & look here ( I've also got my own & multiple companies )


The read arrows are part of where your issues are now please nrailer or people don't get on the bandwagon of im causing problems as if this information is addressed in the same manner as hammer & apex have taken it you will get a better pill & that raises the bar as has been proven with aluminium tips in the apex & also the polymer in the hammer ( I'm staying clear of hammers while trying to compare apples with apples ) so isn't that better for us hunters imo yes
Ea take the information as one wishes but please don't assume
Now add angles /resistances to the above picture & you'll understand why a pill behaves like it does on a pretty regular basis

Also think of how a mechanical broadhead works as this will broaden one's knowledge of what a tip pill or a hp does under some situations
This broadhead comparison is not from me & took me ages to understand what was meant by it & it was from one of the great minds I'm lucky to have discussions with who have been able to show what I find in the field as the why's but to understand the above clear one's mind is the hardest part well was for me


Side thought for gel testers to potentially consider can you not do gel tests @ angles ( say have a 45degree front of the gel block while it still retains its normal rectangle length ) to see how this effects the actuals of what a pill ACTUALLY does sometimes in a critter
Just a thought & don't know if it is possible or would work

Cheers

 

[Northkill]

Hmmm. And angled impact face on the gel...never thought of that. Isn't gel too soft for that to even have an effect? Be interesting to hear if you've tried it and have some insights, @fordy

 

[nralifer]

Gday
I see a few more pages since I was last on here & thought the op heading was going to get into what was what but maybe hope

So

Tips & construction of them & how they are married to the pill has been extremely important to get a consistent result then add the alloys that are used from c&c to monos & it's a Pandora's box as so many variables & a lot of times you see one covered & another shows up
& I'll back nrailer upto a point on how these tip material's behave once in critters
From caps , ball bearings , aluminium, brass ,copper ,polymer etc
But I'm going to need time which I am struggling with so here is what I've got for now

Tips that plug the hp from a shatter / snap of the tip material are basically useless & when they do this they are creating a pill that is is for all intensive purposes a true solid yes the hp becomes plugged yep get that so moving on

@Nrailer please please take the following as constructive criticism as aluminium tips have their strengths yep totally agree but you already have that part covered so why not look @ where improvements can be made & I DO believe you can improve on yours as was shown with the afterburner as this aluminium tip is the best aluminium tip on the market imo ( well the design is as I don't know if different aluminium is used in tips ) & this is where you get a way better pill if the ejection or wedge system can work across many resistances /angles/ velocities but the tip is only part of the equation & im leaving that alone as if you don't get the design that can operate under a wider range of circumstances it don't matter what's behind the tip it will fail more than a well designed tip

I'll back up this with your own pictures & look here ( I've also got my own & multiple companies )

View attachment 494324
The read arrows are part of where your issues are now please nrailer or people don't get on the bandwagon of im causing problems as if this information is addressed in the same manner as hammer & apex have taken it you will get a better pill & that raises the bar as has been proven with aluminium tips in the apex & also the polymer in the hammer ( I'm staying clear of hammers while trying to compare apples with apples ) so isn't that better for us hunters imo yes
Ea take the information as one wishes but please don't assume
Now add angles /resistances to the above picture & you'll understand why a pill behaves like it does on a pretty regular basis

Also think of how a mechanical broadhead works as this will broaden one's knowledge of what a tip pill or a hp does under some situations
This broadhead comparison is not from me & took me ages to understand what was meant by it & it was from one of the great minds I'm lucky to have discussions with who have been able to show what I find in the field as the why's but to understand the above clear one's mind is the hardest part well was for me


Side thought for gel testers to potentially consider can you not do gel tests @ angles ( say have a 45degree front of the gel block while it still retains its normal rectangle length ) to see how this effects the actuals of what a pill ACTUALLY does sometimes in a critter
Just a thought & don't know if it is possible or would work

Cheers

I don't take offense to your criticisms, but those pics are from an experiment of very low impact velocity designed to show what happens in the early stages of tip ejection. I forget now what the speeds of impact were, but they were far lower than we recommend for consistent expansion (1400 fps or so). Also we used the first generation of bullet which required a 1900 fps impact velocity for adequate expansion. In the BD2 series we changed the hollow point shape and lengthened the ogive some as well as made the ogive a bit thinner, with the result that we can see very adequate expansion down below 1700. See photos of .284 160 gr BD2. The first is the bullet impacting at a very low speed without the tip, a first generation bullet as it has 6 petals, just to illustrate the point about tips inhibiting hollow point expansion. The tips, though, are useful in improving BC and long range accuracy. A compromise, of course, has to be found between low impact velocity and long range accuracy. This is achieved by modifying the internal hollow point structure that eventually required custom tooling. Those refinements improved the lower speed impact behavior of the BD2 design which has 5 petals each with a larger base to improve retention.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

This .308 Cal-166gr Shock Hammer was just recovered from a giraffe this week. Heart/lung shot fired from 300wm. Giraffe traveled 15-20y and piled up. This is exactly the bullet form we want to see after impact.

 

[fordy]

Gday Steve

When we began our journey into making bullets, we knew that we wanted to open the nose of the bullet like a banana and shed those petals to achieve a flat front retained shank. Like shooting a flat based bullet backward. Again based on the Rathcoombe physics paper showing this form to create the largest wound channel and longest penetration. In the beginning we gave no thought to the process of shedding weight or what that shed weight did. Animal testing showed us that there was something to the shedding. Several things actually. 1st, there is a shock that happens that moment of opening and shedding. Much greater than a bullet that opens but retains all of it's weight. I'll come back to this. 2nd, without shedding the frontal area of the bullet becomes too large causing it to slow down too rapidly robbing it of its ability to make a large permanent wound channel. Remember vital tissue is elastic and the faster an object goes through it the more permanent disruption it makes. As a bullet slows the wound that it makes becomes smaller until it stops where is no longer makes any wound. Too large a frontal area and a rounded shape lessen the wounding. 3rd, the shed weight increases the stability of the retained shank aiding in longer straight line, meplat forward, penetration. 4th, a flat front retained shank is less likely to deflect off angled bone impacts. Whether it is edge of bone or angled shots. Again, better straight line penetration. 5th, the wounding that happens from the shed pieces as they pass through the animal. Yep, that's right. the shed petals from our bullet often exit the far side around the exit from the retained shank. Radiating at a very slight angle. This greatly increases the total area of the permanent wound channel.

Back to number 1. We control the amount of shed weight based on how deep we make the hollow point. This shed weight will remain the same with high or low velocity impacts. This is due to the raw material that we use, not any kind of scoring or broaching done to the bullet. @nralifer is correct about the brittle coppers breaking and tearing too much. We used that copper in the beginning because we could get it to shed but it is very velocity dependent on how much bullet weight would be retained. Too deep a HP and it would come undone to several pieces at low vel. Too shallow and it would not lose enough weight and would break the nose off into a newly pointed bullet. Not good, but all we could find at the time and other big companies used it. High vel is easy with almost all copper. Back to our copper. If this shedding weight is a good thing, then shedding more is a better thing. Right? Well, that turns out not to be true. There is a dwell time that takes place during the moment that the bullet opens and sheds. If not shedding enough it lessens the shock and the extra wounding done by the shed pieces. If shedding too much, it takes longer for it to happen and too much bullet vel is lost to the process of shedding, lessening the size of the permanent wound channel due to lack of vel and lack of penetration. Over the years we have made some of our hollow points deeper and now in some cases coming nearly full circle to where we started. Not quite, still shedding more than what we started out doing. As a formula guy, this frustrating because there is no formula to it. Depends on nose length, and caliber, along with sectional density and other things. Over time it has become more of a feeling when looking at a new bullet design and determining how much of it to shed to get the most out of it.

Tips are another thing. I swore that Hammer Bullets would never have a tip. The tip is just a plug in the hole that has to be evacuated in order to get fluid into the hollow point to expand the bullet from the inside out. We tried aluminum tips and copper tips. They inhibited low vel performance and would break out to the side, causing irregular deformation and deflecting, along with changing direction of travel. Unpredictable straight line penetration. We had pretty well written off tips. As long range guys we wanted them to work in the worst way but there was no way we could market a bullet that had a lesser terminal performance than our current line of bullets. Consistent terminal performance matters more than anything else. Now we have a line of tipped bullets. Our good buddy @pickens72 came out to visit a bit over a year ago and pushed us to make a tipped bullet. We gave in, mostly to prove to him that it wouldn't work. This time we designed around a particular tip design of poly. Dang if it didn't work. I don't want to give him too much credit, it'll go to his head! So we set out testing on animals for the next year and tweaking as we went. We were personally part of over 100 animal tests and we also got them into the hands of others that shot more animals than we did. Particularly @fordy who set out to make it fail and couldn't. I know he pushed something close 1000 animals in his testing. He can verify the numbers. This design does not deflect like other tipped bullets on angled bone shots and we are actually seeing better terminal results at low to mid range impact velocity. 2800 fps down the wound channel stays the same. Defying common knowledge that the wound will get smaller with less vel. Has to do with tip material, bullet material, and how the two are married together. Again no broaching or scoring of the bullet to encourage deformation, maintaining the proper amount of force and time needed for full deformation and shedding, maximizing the initial shock from deformation and keeping the shed petals on the same straight line penetration of the retained shank.

I am not trying to P in anyone's cheerios. I think @nralifer is making a fine product and he looks at this from a different angle than I do. I do like talking about material and design to reach the end goal of the best possible product. I think we all (in the business) strive to make better. This is just some of the evolution of how we got to this point so far.

What a ride it's been & still some way to go well apart from one pill you lot shut me up on but I see now you & brian are looking to potentially improve that pill hmmmm
I will make a exemption on coming out of retirement ( once my final testing is completed) to test if you've succeeded when you lot make it
I await that pill so let me know when it's ready

I'm sorry Steve I'm not verifying any numbers anymore as it just causes issues here as some just get their knickers in a knot over these & other things

But I'm glad you now know how many can be taken in a day let alone a year ( for those that don't know I invited Steve & Brian out here to Aussie to see what actually happens in critters ( & not the only bullet company or business / importers that supplies different bullets I've done this with ) & more importantly to see with their own eyes how such little differences DO make a huge difference & I will cut those results there as to not derail even though it's important imo ) a& Steve you didn't get to see the good numbers

Also what's funny is I'm pigeon holed as only shooting hammers for which little do people know what I test although a group of mates know ( only 2 local taswegians with a bunch of yanks also while I was waiting for the hht to turn up in the various tweaks I still have to shoot so a testing I went on various brands ( I think it was 8 -10 brands im unsure so I would need to look that up ) & guess what they were all put to the same tests as the hht but I'll leave those results alone along with the numbers but the hht was on the smaller number side of critters compared to those other brands ( yes all other brands put in one basket) & then I just shoot & not record any data on top of that
So a few critters ea year are shot but I can't get data on all of them as some are just shot & left to lay /rot where they are
& don't get up in arms people as it's a fact of life here & until you walk a mile in my shoes don't tell me my feet hurt & I have a massive dead pit for the ones I do pick up

That aside
the funny thing for me was the look on your face when I told you your bullets were $-it I wish I had of taken a picture of that look ( this is factual once autopsies were being conducted) & more than once )
Yes people I don't hold back & in person I'm no different I call a spade a spade but I will praise when it's good & your acceptance Steve & Brian of ok let's fix it & improve is exceptional along with the transparency you've shown to the public & I wish more companies would take that attitude but they have their reasons no doubt.& maybe a better option as look how the antis attack & lengths some go to it's actually sad but also jealousy imo

here is a pic of what the hammer boys started to do to tweak a pill in the field as it wasn't quite right ( for those who think such subtle differences can't make that much difference keep a ticking & clear your head as 20 tho on some pills is huge others 40 or 80 but

Steve's tip design once it was found ( one prototypes was crap & I failed that but that's not the tip design it was other things playing out ) is very very good yep no plugging of the hp was observed on the few tests I carried out along with the other situations where tips fail yes I failed to fail it but still working on doing it & all within ( all my tests are ) within the companies parameters & all in critters no gel here but those who use it by all means go for it , learning how to interpret it is one that fascinates me personally


Cheers

 

[fordy]

I don't take offense to your criticisms, but those pics are from an experiment of very low impact velocity designed to show what happens in the early stages of tip ejection. I forget now what the speeds of impact were, but they were far lower than we recommend for consistent expansion (1400 fps or so). Also we used the first generation of bullet which required a 1900 fps impact velocity for adequate expansion. In the BD2 series we changed the hollow point shape and lengthened the ogive some as well as made the ogive a bit thinner, with the result that we can see very adequate expansion down below 1700. See photos of .284 160 gr BD2. The first is the bullet impacting at a very low speed without the tip, a first generation bullet as it has 6 petals, just to illustrate the point about tips inhibiting hollow point expansion. The tips, though, are useful in improving BC and long range accuracy. A compromise, of course, has to be found between low impact velocity and long range accuracy. This is achieved by modifying the internal hollow point structure that eventually required custom tooling. Those refinements improved the lower speed impact behavior of the BD2 design which has 5 petals each with a larger base to improve retention.

Gday nrailer
Thankyou
I will reply to this but I've got to go
Thankyou once again & look @ those pictures you supplied it's still there & why you are getting the odd results you are getting
I'll reply as soon as I can
Cheers

 

[nralifer]

Gday nrailer
Thankyou
I will reply to this but I've got to go
Thankyou once again & look @ those pictures you supplied it's still there & why you are getting the odd results you are getting
I'll reply as soon as I can
Cheers

They are not odd results. They illustrate the mechanism by way the tip gets out of the way and allow the hollow point to expand. Every time we gel test our bullets we find tips with bent stems.

 

[fordy]

Gday northkill

Hmmm. And angled impact face on the gel...never thought of that. Isn't gel too soft for that to even have an effect? Be interesting to hear if you've tried it and have some insights, @fordy

I haven't got a clue if this would work just trying to get a better simulation as had some different results on what was shown in the gel vrs critters
Never used gel ( & im fairly new to the watching gel as I'd seen it in a couple magazines 10 or so years ago but only last 5 or so I've worked out you can search these things up lol yep I'm technically challenged ) only tried a few different test media systems but it simply the major difference is gel or other systems don't run so your only getting part of the equation as the bubble is something that can't be underestimated just like someone said about lions on here you get the correct bubble /shock from a pill & watch it shut them down quicker it's no different with any critter & impact velocity along with pills characteristics are key but how that translates from gel to critters
( lions seem to need around 2250/2350 of impact & a shedding or fragmentation works the best but hides are often wanted so a lot of people settle for expanding but imo advised to stick to the minimum velocity above plus a touch imo I've never shot lions only witnessed & only canned but I believe the muscle density is the same )
Time get back to the tip or what's under it but firstly I need to milk my cows hope that answers your questions

Cheers

 

[fordy]

Gday nrailer

They are not odd results. They illustrate the mechanism by way the tip gets out of the way and allow the hollow point to expand. Every time we gel test our bullets we find tips with bent stems.

A interesting comment
I'd suggest you step back & clear your head for a minute & wouldn't it have been better to ask for clarification first
Just a observation & how I would have tackled it

I will give the clarification soon

Cheers

 

[fordy]

Gday
Tips on how they work in a reliable manner is one that has been improving over the years as the company's have seen their weaknesses & improved on that design over the years & that's all I'm trying to do in the following here & get a even better pill hopefully

Now here's where it gets interesting every tip has something that can be improved on imo as if you take the best attributes from ea of them & could possibly even do it , you would have a system that is fool proof
So to every company i await for that day with open arms

I'll come back to the issue that nrailer has & to be fair it is not only badlands but we need to break these down to tip material first
Aluminium
Polymer
Ball bearings to name a few & let's work with aluminium as it's where this particular topic partially started, it's easier to segregate & work on one part a time well imo of course

Side note I'm not saying some of The polymer dosent show the similar traits as the harder materials or have some other flaws & some will often snap the stem on a higher % it has one downfall of plugging of the hp , you get that & it's pretty well going to fail on a very consistent basis so hope that clears up I'm not trying to push one over the other as I am just trying to get a better outcome & really I shouldn't have to justify this stance but I don't like the white noise brigade who have their own agenda & assume I have a one sided outlook but then again if my one sided outlook is to point out the best pills on the market for that purpose I'm guilty as charged , so with the following I wonder what supporter club I'm going to be labeled under after this
So moving on

The harder material ( aluminium) will push / breakout the side of the pills hp on a more regular basis than a more forgiving polymer & once we get to angles the problem becomes more apparent ( think mechanical broadhead operation )
Now mark @ apex has nearly fixed this by his design as it is more uniform on the way it behaves on angles & then you enter bones & angles /resistances /velocity impacts that they present to us in the field & this is the key to why we sometimes get weird $h-t & if we can get enough data on this we eventually see the issues as it's replicated become reality & we as individuals can choose to use or avoid depending on our circumstances & can also relay this information to the company if they are not already aware of it
Well that's how I look @ it

I'll post some various pills of where these pills are failing but no time now so I need to work with what we have now & nrailer was kind to put up those pictures
Look @ where I put the red arrows & look @ the form it created from the tip ejection
Yes it broke out the side
Now look @ the next series of pics nrailer put forward on the new design you still have a non uniform petal pattern so this can be from only 3 things ?
1/ the consistency of the alloy ( plus I'll leave the metallurgy alone ( planes & slip ) as that's a whole new chapter ) eg a while back barnes had different consistency of the alloys in the same box let alone from batch to batch & it's something that has no doubt effected all companies to say not would be foolish
2/a angle impact ( mechanical broadhead system )
3 / breakout of the pills hp from the tip due to the more ridged tip material or it's design ( it's different to number 2 )

I'm also no guru so that's all I've been able to work out so definitely would love to chat if someone knows anything else or disagree I'm cool with that also as chat

Nrailer you cannot imo get a bent tip without number 3 occurring with the alloy your using & either need to go to a different alloy or tweak your design to overcome that Or I guess just live with what you have
.
it can be improved on as apex has proven ( you won't be able to copy 100% his system & expect the same results as his alloy behaves differently to yours & hence you would need to tweak your tip design as you have slightly done from gen 1 to gen 2 but it's not as consistent as the apex & hence room for improvement oh & mark can also improve just to keep things on a level playing field like every company

Now that is your issue & if you don't believe me why do you get the results you do & I haven't even got into the depths of what's going on & even in your words " the paths of the wound channels are in a straight line unless a bone has been struck deforming the bullet "
This statement is true for your pills yep totally agree but not true when you balance a pill correctly & please revert to the best true solids in the world of why this occurs & look @ my pictures previously on angled meplats from a shedding pill or mushroom mono as it's the same principle with the added part of the planes & slip becoming even more important!!!!!!! On these designs along with shoulder stabilisation & SD although the later in a perfectly balanced pill SD isn't as important as one once thought ( I have proven time after time this is possible but what if you balance the bigger SD pill hmmm that's intriguing what would happen )

Now this information is put forward to hopefully give you & the hunting community in general a overall better future pill in the mushroom mono world as I get some will not be upto speed with what's happening with the shedding monos or just like the thought of that mushroom better so isn't it better to have a better mushroom mono than what we already have ??? imo yes
Hmm then you have the hard headed guys like memtb ( please memtb I mean nothing personal with this as I do believe you have understood a lot on the advancements in projectiles & it's not to belittle you or single out in anyway so accept my apologies in advance if you take it as criticism to you personally as I think you may have a wide enough sense of humour to laugh @ that comment as it was only a joke ) my intention is if someone wants to choose a mushroom mono & get even better results than he already gets you might as well use the best mushroom mono possible & I'll leave alone which I believe it is as I seem to get in the crap over recommending the best product/s but once again look @ those meplats & how they preform over various resistances & velocity impacts & straight line penetration is a key to consistency

Always room for improvement imo

Nrailer I do hope you take this on board & no harm in saying ok I'm working on it or whatever but silence to your customers ( not me because I can find out in under a week where your pills sit terminally with gen 2as I've already done gen 1 ) when they ask you questions is one that they seem to shy away from your product & I'd suggest just say the truth & work with them as that's when they will spread the word as some of those guys really know their stuff but if you keep on the track your going & then they find out x & you say oh but it's great preformance you will loose in the long run as once bitten twice shy
I'm not telling you what to do with your company or how you should approach things just pointing out what I've seen & has also been relayed to me & would love to see a even better mushroom mono in the market tomorrow for those who wish to use them

Finding someone who can test different theories in critters is one I'd suggest or you maybe able to interpret gel to critters that's a hard one & don't know anyone yet so I'd love for those who know how to come forward but it's a good visual I'll give gel that & we can take parts away from those tests no doubt
& no I'm not volunteering my services as I'm DONE !!!! Let alone even get a gig off you & I've got to try & finish what I started some years ago before I finally hang up my knife , saw , ruler & metal detector for good

Wishing you the best & look forward if you reply
If clarification is needed on some part I put up as I know I'm hard to understand just ask away & I'll do my best to come from a different angle to explain
But be prepared as hammer & apex know I will call BS when it is

No hard feelings either way

Sorry for my delay in reply & lack of pictures

Cheers

 

[Samantha-CEB]

Yup she does a great job.

Thanks guys, I appreciate that.

 

[Goldengun]

Perhaps, but with the OP's parameters, it complicates things ...

True, but if we get a big enough caliber......