Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Lead Poisoning
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mike Matteson" data-source="post: 2840427" data-attributes="member: 101791"><p>It's better for tractions, and stopping. Plus wear better. Costs are still to high. People are looking at it, trying to figure out way to use it and cheaper. Part of it is getting the steel out of it. It has to be cost effective, not like solor and wind generation, that isn't cost effective. We get to pay for in the form of income taxes, and cost of powder. Atomic powder is by far cheaper, and less pollution. </p><p>Far to many people with their head stuck in the mud, and think they can see clearly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mike Matteson, post: 2840427, member: 101791"] It's better for tractions, and stopping. Plus wear better. Costs are still to high. People are looking at it, trying to figure out way to use it and cheaper. Part of it is getting the steel out of it. It has to be cost effective, not like solor and wind generation, that isn't cost effective. We get to pay for in the form of income taxes, and cost of powder. Atomic powder is by far cheaper, and less pollution. Far to many people with their head stuck in the mud, and think they can see clearly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Lead Poisoning
Top