-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
New bullet maker that looks interesting
- Thread starter slickyboyboo
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
- Status
chrishatley
Well-Known Member
...
Last edited:
chrishatley
Well-Known Member
Dang swamplord, those are nasty lookin'!
Michael Eichele
Well-Known Member
Ain't that the truth....**** it. I'm on the road tomorrow. Will be out of town for the next two weeks
Michael Eichele
Well-Known Member
My wife texted me a little while ago and said I got a package from Sun City AZ. I'm assuming this is from you?
I can't wait till I get to give them the look over! I should be home by Saturday
but have to hit the road in another direction Monday be gone another week. This weekend I'll get these measured and weighed along with some loads made up. The 308 I'll be testing these in is not very finicky so I'm sure I'll have a load grouping well early on leaving me enough for some near and far velocity tests. Drop tests, time and 1000 yard range status permitting to follow.
The near and far velocity tests will happen simultaneously with the 155 amax at as close to matching velocities as possible. Both loads will be shot over the same set of cronies in the same air density and light one after the other. That way, regardless of whether or not my gear is set up perfectly or not (I assure you it will be scary close), it can at least be determined what percentage higher or lower a BC is compared to a widely accepted BC value of an established bullet. The 155 amax is pretty low and I expect the W3P to be higher. How much higher remains to be seen. The other good thing about shooting a test subject next to an established bullet is that if there is an error in the set up or math, it becomes evident really fast if the numbers aren't in line with what has previously been established.
M
Whiskey 3 Precision
Well-Known Member
My wife texted me a little while ago and said I got a package from Sun City AZ. I'm assuming this is from you?
I can't wait till I get to give them the look over! I should be home by Saturday
Drop tests, time and 1000 yard range status permitting to follow.
The near and far velocity tests will happen simultaneously with the 155 amax at as close to matching velocities as possible. Both loads will be shot over the same set of cronies in the same air density and light one after the other. That way, regardless of whether or not my gear is set up perfectly or not (I assure you it will be scary close), it can at least be determined what percentage higher or lower a BC is compared to a widely accepted BC value of an established bullet. The 155 amax is pretty low and I expect the W3P to be higher. How much higher remains to be seen. The other good thing about shooting a test subject next to an established bullet is that if there is an error in the set up or math, it becomes evident really fast if the numbers aren't in line with what has previously been established.
M
Good deal.....we look forward to it and welcome the results!!
Yeah, back to the subject, the 230 looks awesome.
(sorry, my horse got away from there for a bit but sometimes ya gotta let the wild things run)
Kennibear
Well-Known Member
Elk Coast
Suggestion: Back off your sarcasm. You are new to this site and are unaware of past threads and efforts by people like phorath and Micheal. They have contributed much. You quickly descended into ridicule. Not a good idea.
phorath was reminding everybody of past failures and quite frankly ripoffs that other makers have done to members here. The laws of physics are immutable and large increases in BC's compared to other known quantities (re: bullets) are not possible. The photos by swamplord comparing the W3P's to Berger VLD's indicates very little difference in shape. The rebated boat tail is the largest difference. As Micheal pointed out it is not enough of an improvement to justify the increase in BC. The sharpness of the steel point will also improve the BC but questionably not enough to meet the claim. But both features are an improvement.
There is a theoretical upper limit to BC's for a given set of bullet parameters. If you made a bullet with a secant ogive that terminated at the base with a bore riding waist only 0.002" long that would probably be the upper limit of BC's. But it would tumble as there is no way it would travel strait down the bore. Berger has been balancing the high BC/shootability equation for decades and they are the gold standard. Can W3P knock them off the pedestal? Maybe. Would personally like to see incremental improvements made across the board. But as phorath pointed out, 'aint likely.
That being said prorath, M.E.,and others have said that a better BC is acceptable even if it is not as high as advertised. W3P has stepped up and Micheal will test their product. Even if the BC is inflated, if it is better everyone will be plenty happy, myself included. But when even a giant like Speer backs off their published BC's (375 caliber 270gr SpBT dropped from 0.473 to 0.423) the idea that BC's are inflated is not outrageous. I read RIDER magazine and they only publish the tested rear wheel horsepower of the motorcycles they test. Want to guess how many are as high as published by the maker?
The Nosler 260gr 375 caliber AB and the Speer 270gr 375 caliber bullets are the same length. The jammed length of the Speer is 0.10" longer than the AB. A 357 Mag pistol case also seats further onto the Speer. That makes the Speer a sharper pointed bullet. There is no material difference in the BT's. Speer lists the BC @ 0.423 and Nosler 0.473 for the 260 AB. That is why there is a healthy dose of skepticism here.
My reason for not ordering 300gr 375 W3P's? With a 1-14 twist my 375 Ruger may not stabilize the bullet. I have to have the measurments to run the numbers. You should take some math courses, like Calculus, and then you would better understand why there is a question about W3P's claim. But everybody here wants W3P to succeed. It's better for all of us.
KB
Suggestion: Back off your sarcasm. You are new to this site and are unaware of past threads and efforts by people like phorath and Micheal. They have contributed much. You quickly descended into ridicule. Not a good idea.
phorath was reminding everybody of past failures and quite frankly ripoffs that other makers have done to members here. The laws of physics are immutable and large increases in BC's compared to other known quantities (re: bullets) are not possible. The photos by swamplord comparing the W3P's to Berger VLD's indicates very little difference in shape. The rebated boat tail is the largest difference. As Micheal pointed out it is not enough of an improvement to justify the increase in BC. The sharpness of the steel point will also improve the BC but questionably not enough to meet the claim. But both features are an improvement.
There is a theoretical upper limit to BC's for a given set of bullet parameters. If you made a bullet with a secant ogive that terminated at the base with a bore riding waist only 0.002" long that would probably be the upper limit of BC's. But it would tumble as there is no way it would travel strait down the bore. Berger has been balancing the high BC/shootability equation for decades and they are the gold standard. Can W3P knock them off the pedestal? Maybe. Would personally like to see incremental improvements made across the board. But as phorath pointed out, 'aint likely.
That being said prorath, M.E.,and others have said that a better BC is acceptable even if it is not as high as advertised. W3P has stepped up and Micheal will test their product. Even if the BC is inflated, if it is better everyone will be plenty happy, myself included. But when even a giant like Speer backs off their published BC's (375 caliber 270gr SpBT dropped from 0.473 to 0.423) the idea that BC's are inflated is not outrageous. I read RIDER magazine and they only publish the tested rear wheel horsepower of the motorcycles they test. Want to guess how many are as high as published by the maker?
The Nosler 260gr 375 caliber AB and the Speer 270gr 375 caliber bullets are the same length. The jammed length of the Speer is 0.10" longer than the AB. A 357 Mag pistol case also seats further onto the Speer. That makes the Speer a sharper pointed bullet. There is no material difference in the BT's. Speer lists the BC @ 0.423 and Nosler 0.473 for the 260 AB. That is why there is a healthy dose of skepticism here.
My reason for not ordering 300gr 375 W3P's? With a 1-14 twist my 375 Ruger may not stabilize the bullet. I have to have the measurments to run the numbers. You should take some math courses, like Calculus, and then you would better understand why there is a question about W3P's claim. But everybody here wants W3P to succeed. It's better for all of us.
KB
Last edited:
cohunter14
Well-Known Member
KB, I think elkcoast was quoting jfseaman, it just didn't come through correct. He was standing up for Phorwath. Either way though, everyone should just chill and wait for some real numbers to come out. Arguing via the internet isn't doing anything for this thread except making it ridiculously long. And KB, that is not intended towards you. Posts like your last one are very helpful and informative!
elkaholic
Well-Known Member
I don't know what it is about bullets that seems to bring out the strongest opinions by everyone, but it does! It seems like what always happens is, having a different opinion than someone else gives one a license to attack or criticize. It's almost like we have turned into a bunch of politicians I have learned a lot since I have been on this forum, and I hope have been able to contribute in some small way as well. So far, I can't remember a single time when attacking or criticizing have been useful (maybe with the possible exception of trolls). Positive debate about differing opinions is where it's at. There have been times when I have had to re think things because of knowledgeable people on this forum. I think when all is said and done, regarding this thread, shooters will like the long range capabilities of these bullets, even though the advertised b.c. is considerably lower. (It will still be a little higher b.c. than a Berger simply because of the sharper point). That is my opinion! Let's wait and see what field testing proves out, and in the meantime, realize that none of us knows it all and keep the debate civil.........Rich
I have learned a lot since I have been on this forum, and I hope have been able to contribute in some small way as well. So far, I can't remember a single time when attacking or criticizing have been useful (maybe with the possible exception of trolls). Positive debate about differing opinions is where it's at. There have been times when I have had to re think things because of knowledgeable people on this forum. I think when all is said and done, regarding this thread, shooters will like the long range capabilities of these bullets, even though the advertised b.c. is considerably lower. (It will still be a little higher b.c. than a Berger simply because of the sharper point). That is my opinion! Let's wait and see what field testing proves out, and in the meantime, realize that none of us knows it all and keep the debate civil.........Richchrishatley
Well-Known Member
I don't know what it is about bullets that seems to bring out the strongest opinions by everyone, but it does! It seems like what always happens is, having a different opinion than someone else gives one a license to attack or criticize. It's almost like we have turned into a bunch of politicians
+1. Heck, even if the advertised bc's aren't as high as published, if they best the AMAX I'm in. Gradual improvement is good enough for me. At least someone is trying to improve on the offerings we already have. If the 155's are good, I can't wait for some 7mm's! Me, I'm rooting FOR W3P. I hope the test goes well.
- Status
