Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet Testing

[Lightvarmint]

P.S.,

Even scientific professionals are adversly influenced on occasion... that is why forums, such as this, are valuable.

Best,
Noel Carlson

Noel,

Almost as valuable as a paycheck and that is the point I have been making... Specifically, POTENTIAL conflicts of interest..................Thanks for the confirmation.

James

 

[Lightvarmint]

"I think that this is all very interesting ..... specifically the only ballistics experts that have commented are the ones that either own another company, or are employed by another company....."... I actually think this is actually all very predictable.

We are competing for a similar consumer market niche, and any publicized competitive advantage will be quickly identified, and swiftly discounted if not credible, or emulated in the event a given modification is not legally protected.

For example, your two upcoming heavyweights have already been pre-empted, and you will not become aware of it until published claims run smack into field data.

But this is your thread, so I will not hijack it with competing information. My point is this, the time for speculation is prior to release of a product, not after.

Noel,

Like I have said before, this is not the first generation or first design of Henson's bullets. This current model is the improvement over the original design. We had very good BC numbers based on both trajectory and instrumental velocities at both close and distant ranges..... We even validated the testing process by using some control samples from another company to verify our testing process.

Manufacturing the individual pieces is quite simple.... It is even simple to make some "special" ones that have so much tender loving care that it cannot be duplicated in a production environment. The devil is in the details to get the production line products to work, fit and ultimately perform as designed.

We should have some "field data" shortly on the larger ones. The testing specimens are in shipping as I write this. We do not sort them to test them. We just load them straight out of the box.

All of our 265 models that we ran data on was based on a BC of .910. We figured that .910 in a 265 would do well. We were suprised that the trajectories were better than the anticipated BC of .910.

Even if the true BC is what we predicted, it is still better than any other lead core copper cupped 338 in that weight. I would consider predicable and repeatable lift to be an added benefit. We already know they group well.

Again this is the smaller version and we will be getting some data on the 280s and 300 shortly.

James

 

[noel carlson]

"Even if the true BC is (closer to) what we predicted, it is still better than any other lead core copper cupped 338 in that weight."... Now that is much more tenable.

-Noel

 

[Lightvarmint]

"Even if the true BC is (closer to) what we predicted, it is still better than any other lead core copper cupped 338 in that weight."... Now that is much more tenable.

-Noel

I agree. That is specifically whey we did not advertise BC numbers and only published raw trajectory data.

As an end user, I have to admit that I really like the trajectory characteristics that we and others have seen. It keeps the target in the reticle of the NP1RR out to 900+ yards without any knob turning or "fudging" the holdover.

James

 

[Pdvdh]

Noel or James,

Does Noel manufacture bullets? Sorry for the ignorance, or if I didn't catch it in an earlier post. I'm trying to understand these posts and I'm getting a subliminal message that Noel manufactures, or works for a company that manufactures, bullets? Could one of you clarify this matter?

Thanks.

 

[noel carlson]

James,

If Bryan's theory is correct, you do realize that the benefit of added lift, in early trajectory, comes at a penalty of premature long range instability... correct?

In physics, there is no free lunch. (That is the exclusive reserve of current Democratic economic policy.)

 

[noel carlson]

Phorwath,

The answer is yes, and it would be poor form to hijack this thread.

Sorry, but keep an eye out.

Best,
Noel

 

[Lightvarmint]

Noel or James,

Does Noel manufacture bullets? Sorry for the ignorance, or if I didn't catch it in an earlier post. I'm trying to understand these posts and I'm getting a subliminal message that Noel manufactures, or works for a company that manufactures, bullets? Could one of you clarify this matter?

Thanks.

Paul,

Yes, he does. Some expensive ones (I am told) in tidy individual packaging I believe.

James

 

[Pdvdh]

Paul,

Yes, he does. Some expensive ones (I am told) in tidy individual packaging I believe.

James

10-4. Fair enough and thanks to you as well as Noel for clarifying that background information.

 

[Lightvarmint]

James,

In physics, there is no free lunch. (That is the exclusive reserve of current Democratic economic policy.)

Noel,

I beg to differ.....

You can sacrifice one neutron and get 2.43 in return in a reactor core......

To me that looks like 1.43 free neutrons for each neutron sacrificed......

There are so many free lunches to go around, that you have to get Mr Hafnium to invite his clan of scavengers to come eat up the extras.

Nuclear Physics..... Home of the free lunch.

James

 

[Lightvarmint]

James,

If Bryan's theory is correct, you do realize that the benefit of added lift, in early trajectory, comes at a penalty of premature long range instability... correct?

In physics, there is no free lunch. (That is the exclusive reserve of current Democratic economic policy.)

Noel,

Almost forgot, they (265s) worked good when tested at 1400 yards by a customer on a private range. They work very well and are solid performers at 1400 yards..........

FWIW, all bullets become unstable at some time, but I would suspect that most of the long range hunters on here will limit themselves to 1400 yards and less yards for a kill attempt.

James

 

[AJ Peacock]

AJ,

They (bullets) have spoken loud and clear.

I do not have negative expectations...

As far as you making selections for consuming products, that is your perogative but if you did not see the humor in my bumble bee comment, then you probably have your belt too tight and it is constricting blood flow and that is probably what is turning your stomach......

Nothing is absolute in this business and that includes both products and evaluations........ Everything is reviewable by other sources......
...
James

I saw the humor in the first part of the statement, but found none in the last part which appeared to question Bryan's integrity.

"I don't know if you realize it or not, but you did choose all the colors of a bumble bee for the model...... Is this a fore shadowing of expectations?"
...
James

Maybe my belt WAS too tight?

Sorry if I mistook your bumble bee comment as something other than pure humor.

Back on topic:

Can you please post some of your wind drift findings (similar to the drop data you posted)? You said that "They move way less laterally than the 300 SMK." Some simple wind drift numbers for a direct cross wind would really help us in comparing your offering to those bullets we are more familiar with. I've always found the hardest thing to do was dope the wind. Drops are easy to adjust for with the advent of the laser range finder.

One other question I have that I don't believe has been discussed. If the higher perceived BC and drops are due to a higher than normal nose attitude, how will this attitude affect spin drift? I seem to remember that attitude and over stabilization can both contribute to a higher measured spin drift in artillery shells. I was curious how a slightly higher nose attitude would affect (positively or negatively) any spin drift?

Also, can you expound a little on how a bullet can 'sneak' through a chronograph at longer distances? I'd be interested in a little more info regarding what Dr. Ken Oehler told you about this phenomenon. The downrange velocity would be very interesting and insightful. If I get a handful of these bullets, I'll see if they can indeed 'sneak' through my chronograph at longer distances.


AJ "looser belt in place" Peacock

PS: FWIW, I hope that your bullets are indeed everything that the testers believe them to be.

 

[Lightvarmint]

I saw the humor in the first part of the statement, but found none in the last part which appeared to question Bryan's integrity.



Maybe my belt WAS too tight?

Sorry if I mistook your bumble bee comment as something other than pure humor.

Back on topic:

Can you please post some of your wind drift findings (similar to the drop data you posted)? You said that "They move way less laterally than the 300 SMK." Some simple wind drift numbers for a direct cross wind would really help us in comparing your offering to those bullets we are more familiar with. I've always found the hardest thing to do was dope the wind. Drops are easy to adjust for with the advent of the laser range finder.

One other question I have that I don't believe has been discussed. If the higher perceived BC and drops are due to a higher than normal nose attitude, how will this attitude affect spin drift? I seem to remember that attitude and over stabilization can both contribute to a higher measured spin drift in artillery shells. I was curious how a slightly higher nose attitude would affect (positively or negatively) any spin drift?

Also, can you expound a little on how a bullet can 'sneak' through a chronograph at longer distances? I'd be interested in a little more info regarding what Dr. Ken Oehler told you about this phenomenon. The downrange velocity would be very interesting and insightful. If I get a handful of these bullets, I'll see if they can indeed 'sneak' through my chronograph at longer distances.


AJ "looser belt in place" Peacock

PS: FWIW, I hope that your bullets are indeed everything that the testers believe them to be.

AJ,

On the wind drift, we saw roughly .5 moa less wind drift on the HATS versus the SMK 300 grain bullets.... Remember some of that is time of flight.... Less flight time for the 265s versus the 300 grainers. With respect to spin drift, I was hitting the dead center of the 400 yard target, 600 yard target and then I was about 1.5" off the vertical aiming point at 928. The SMKs also shoot well in both our guns, but since I do not crank the knobs due the very short exposure periods of our hunting targets, I like the HATS due to less wind drift and trajectory arc. It is just easier for me to range, hold and shoot. I do not have time to input data, crank knobs and then aim and shoot.....

When Brian first mentioned his theory, I thought that they would be apt to tumble (I had just seen the M-16 special on the History Channel and noticed the nose down of that bullet) and he indicated that what he is expecting is less than 2 degrees (I believe that is what he said) and that it would not affect it. I told him that a deer accidentially walked in front of some 2 x4s and when shot the bullets left their "mark" in the 2x4s and it was not tumbling or in an unstable gyrating motion. The holes indicated expansion had taken place and as the bullet pass through each succeeding 2x4, it got bigger and bigger.... The bullet actually went through the deer and then through 3 2x4s. The last 2x4 was really torn up and will have to be replaced. The boards were on a supplemental feeder sitting out in the clover patch...... They looked like they had been "drilled" systematically with a larger drill bit every time they went through the board. I could not have hit it again if I tried (probably), but maybe. Bullet exit wound was bigger than a $100 bill.

He did not expound on the "sneak" but came up with it very quickly. I supsect it has something to do with the design of the eyes on the chronograph..... When I told him what the ogive value was he immediately went to the "sneak" explanation..... He also said that I could color them and that might help.... But after he told me that what I wanted was really time of flight at long distances and suggested the drop board, I went with the recommendation..... Followed immediately by an apology to Kirby for giving him a hard time about it earlier in his testing.....

Kirby probably has a wealth of information on his testing that would be germain to this topic. I know the he was getting some very unexpected trajectory results with the Wildcat bullets. But if I am not mistaken, his results were predictable and systematic as his testing continued..... I can tell you that the bullets with the same exact zero are hitting in the same places now as they were in December. As far as a hunting instrument, the rifle is more of a tool and I tend to only use the tools for legitimate work. For me, target rifles are toys that get used and abused but since they can be tweaked at the matches, I consider their zeros less important from one month to the other.... I was very impressed with the consistency throughout the range of air densities that we have here close to the east coast (20 miles).

I am sort of with Kirby on the Aluminum tipped rebated boat tails... When you expect the .910 range of BC and hold for that at 928 yards and the bullets are flying over the target, that will get your attention quickly. But once you adjust the hold for the top of the aiming point on the board they fall right into the group....

Please realize that I am anally retentive about load developement and zeroing at the mid ranges..... I develop and test loads until I have them shooting tiny little bug holes at less than 10fps ES. Next I zero and zero and zero until the gun is shooting withing the ability of the scope to adjust the point of impact.... I also shoot between each scope adjustment so that it will take a "set".

Once all that is done, I go to the intermediate ranges and beyond.

If you have a larger case than the .338 Lapua, you will probably have a significant BC advantage by going to the 280s or the 300s. The HAT 300s are .225" longer than the 300 SMKs..... I suspect he BC advantage will be significant. RG and I develped some homegrown rules of thumb for predicting the BCs when he was producing the Generation Is. We were very close to our predictions.... Now we can't use the same rules of thumb because the noses are much more sleekly profiled than the Gerneration I bullets.

Back to the spin drift.... When I shoot the Accubonds, I see a lot of it as compared to anything else. So it is not that I cannot detect it, it is just that we see a minimum of it. Remember I am basically shooting throu a 1000 yard tunnel that is very well protected from the elements and wind conditions.

James

 

[noel carlson]

James,

"Nuclear physics.... home of the free lunch."... O.K., you just raised the red flag. Has our "Nuclear Navy" suspended conservation laws?

Are you, by inference, saying that your bullet generates lift without commensurate increase in drag?

-What was the "customer" group size at 1,400 yards?

-How many shots in the group?

-How many total groups produced? (I will not be interested in milk jug kills)