Introducing the Absolute Hammer

[ButterBean]

Honestly I can't imagine this came out of a modern CNC lathe. I'm not making accusations but it seems to me that this was chucked into some sort of hobbyist lathe and modified. The tool that created the face is obviously way below centre. The bevel sucks hard as well. That being said a bad part can slip through the best qc process.

I know for a fact that Steve inspects and packs the bullets himself and I know he would not let this get out of his sight ,it doesn't look like a Hammer Bullet to me

 

[ButterBean]

Not all but the are obviously a few to watch for.

Are those Hammer's ?

 

[codyadams]

Honestly I can't imagine this came out of a modern CNC lathe. I'm not making accusations but it seems to me that this was chucked into some sort of hobbyist lathe and modified. The tool that created the face is obviously way below centre. The bevel sucks hard as well. That being said a bad part can slip through the best qc process.

I personally know him, and can vouch for him. If he says it came to him like that from Hammer, it did.

Things like this happen, even with the best machines. The bullets still worked great, he dumped an elk on a hunt with me this year at 987 using hammers

 

[codyadams]

I know for a fact that Steve inspects and packs the bullets himself and I know he would not let this get out of his sight l,it doesn't look like a Hammer Bullet to me

It is a hammer.

 

[Wedgy]

Are those Hammer's ?

Yes, 227 grain .308 Hunter. I told my friend Cody I was getting some odd numbers when measuring to the lands when I switched bullets and realized why. You can see the parabola of a Hammer in the 2nd photo, there's no way to add a nipple to it.
Edit; I just saw Cody's post... ..LOL
It doesn't affect the bullets performance, just the measurements when using a specific gauge. I didn't mention it to Steve as I didn't think it to be significant. I did however thank him for making great bullets and sent him a photo of the exit and discussed the possible causes of another brand bullets poor performance.

 

[ButterBean]

Yes, 227 grain .308 Hunter. I told my friend Cody I was getting some odd numbers when measuring to the lands when I switched bullets and realized why. You can see the parabola of a Hammer in the 2nd photo, there's no way to add a nipple to it.
Edit; I just saw Cody's post... ..LOL
It doesn't affect the bullets performance, just the measurements when using a specific gauge. I didn't mention it to Steve as I didn't think it to be significant. I did however thank him for making great bullets and sent him a photo of the exit and discussed the possible causes of another brand bullets poor performance.View attachment 222734

That's Freaking awesome

 

[mtwood24]

Congratulations on the fine bull! Any idea what BC that bullet is running?

I just used the projected BC on the site, which was .277 G7 I believe. I have shot it out to 650 and seems to be accurate

 

[GLTaylor]

If some slipped through, Steve will gladly replace them. I know he or Brian touch every single bullet before shipping. They have to blow off oil left from the cutting process. Call Steve and let him know what you found.

 

[snox801]

I'm really liking what I see with this new bullet. Who doesn't like extra speed. A 215ish weight in my 30 Sherman with a 26" tube should be a great hunting setup for all ranges I intend to use it say 1200 and in. After that I'd prefer a larger round.

 

[Hand Skills]

I just used the projected BC on the site, which was .277 G7 I believe. I have shot it out to 650 and seems to be accurate

Awesome! Thanks for following up. Some of the absolutes seem to run a lower than projected BC, so that is fairly encouraging.

 

[snox801]

Awesome! Thanks for following up. Some of the absolutes seem to run a lower than projected BC, so that is fairly encouraging.

Until we have something like applied we won't have a true solid bc. Just like every other bullet. I was lucky and the 124 hh in my creed was right on with what the site had for bc. But I know that not always the case.

 

[seekoutside]

Until we have something like applied we won't have a true solid bc. Just like every other bullet. I was lucky and the 124 hh in my creed was right on with what the site had for bc. But I know that not always the case.

Be awesome if the hammer bullet guys would pay AB to do most of their bullets so customers know what they're getting up front. The bullets AB has done show g7s way below what is advertised. That creates more work for us customers. Not bashing hammer at all...I use and like their stuff...but I wish that data could be more accurate to make my life a tad easier. I'm busy and don't have time to shoot as much as I'd like. It sucks having to go and try to get correct data.

 

[Hand Skills]

Until we have something like applied we won't have a true solid bc. Just like every other bullet. I was lucky and the 124 hh in my creed was right on with what the site had for bc. But I know that not always the case.

I'm not sure I understand. Is there such thing as a 'true solid BC'? If applied as taught me anything, it's that BC is dynamic. It changes through flight. Not only that, it's 'twist' dependant from the get go. This also doesn't account for variations in bore dimensions, which can influence drag coefficient - the very problem that brought about the Absolute Hammer design.

A lot of guys get uppity about BC, but it is misunderstood (and somewhat outdated as a concept). Drag models seem to be the way forward for those looking to accurately predict a flight path, but that's a whole other subject.

Personally, I expect to have to 'true' any BC to my equipment. It's great to hear from people like yourself who have actually shot bullets to distance and can confirm that the published values work with their particular firing solution.

It's also great to know when published numbers DO NOT work out in the real world.

Hammer is a small company, and they make a LOT of different bullets. I'm glad that they are putting new products out, and I'm happy to crowdsource preliminary data. Testing is a great idea, but please try to be realistic about what is possible. Consider the cost implications - where would the funds for testing come from? How much more would each bullet cost? How much longer would it take to bring a new design to market?

@seekoutside I gotta disagree. Going out and collecting data is what long range is ALL ABOUT! If you don't have the time to put in, consider teaming up with someone who does. It takes a lot of DOPE to make first round hits at extended ranges. I dont think it's reasonable to expect a ballistic computer to do all the work.

To me, the issue is more about having a new fast twist barrel spun on and investing hundreds in components to find out 'oh, this does not offer me any advantage '.

 

[ButterBean]

I'm not sure I understand. Is there such thing as a 'true solid BC'? If applied as taught me anything, it's that BC is dynamic. It changes through flight. Not only that, it's 'twist' dependant from the get go. This also doesn't account for variations in bore dimensions, which can influence drag coefficient - the very problem that brought about the Absolute Hammer design.

A lot of guys get uppity about BC, but it is misunderstood (and somewhat outdated as a concept). Drag models seem to be the way forward for those looking to accurately predict a flight path, but that's a whole other subject.

Personally, I expect to have to 'true' any BC to my equipment. It's great to hear from people like yourself who have actually shot bullets to distance and can confirm that the published values work with their particular firing solution.

It's also great to know when published numbers DO NOT work out in the real world.

Hammer is a small company, and they make a LOT of different bullets. I'm glad that they are putting new products out, and I'm happy to crowdsource preliminary data. Testing is a great idea, but please try to be realistic about what is possible. Consider the cost implications - where would the funds for testing come from? How much more would each bullet cost? How much longer would it take to bring a new design to market?

@seekoutside I gotta disagree. Going out and collecting data is what long range is ALL ABOUT! If you don't have the time to put in, consider teaming up with someone who does. It takes a lot of DOPE to make first round hits at extended ranges. I dont think it's reasonable to expect a ballistic computer to do all the work.

To me, the issue is more about having a new fast twist barrel spun on and investing hundreds in components to find out 'oh, this does not offer me any advantage '.

I agree 100%