New "to me" made in Montana monolithic bullets ...

[FEENIX]

No I have not. And I'm not claiming anything but it hard to believe that it would do much of any good except in the examples I gave which seems to be his goal maybe re room for powder in a gas gun which is a huge plus.
But for a case that I don't need the extra room I can't see taking out more weight when every other mono is trying to add as much weight as they can.
I may be wrong and will gladly admit it if the bullets tune out to be what they claim. Just as I have in the past for other bullets. I'm just looking at it skeptically is all.
Not trying to throw shade as the kids say.

You are a lot smarter than this average hunter to determine it sounds like crap when you have not tried them yet.

 

[snox801]

I like Hammers both Absolute and Hammer Hunters but am not closed minded and will try some of these new to me bullets.
The proof is in the pudding!If I can squeeze more velocity out of the 6.5 Grendel I will be impressed.
They are about 1 hour from my home so the wife and I may just go down there and visit them.
The weather here is not conducive to shooting right now as the weather is so bad it may be a while before I get to look at data to make a final decision but its so hard to get away from Hammers as Steve and Brian is always there ready to help in any way they can and Hammers are so easy to get shooting right that the data will have to be overwhelming to me.

Let me know how the Grendel goes I could see it being very good in those. Whether I would need more rom for powder using the absolute is debatable now but would be worth a try for sure

 

[ButterBean]

That wasn't the point of my comment. The comment was made on people complaining about price of bullets. I was simply illustrating why people wouldnt shoot an expensive bullet. And also, my comment is 100% relevant. I practice to make myself a better shooter. I enjoy the challenge, and I owe it to the game Im shooting at. Are you saying practice is irrelevant?

I practice with the bullets I'm hunting with as this is the Long Range Hunting site,
As BFD said
"Heard this once. "So, the only piece of gear that is actually going to touch the animal is what you choose to cheap out on? Nice Swarovski!"

 

[FEENIX]

Yep, anytime I feel like bitching about a shortage of something I have to remind myself we have a greater variety of guns, ammo, and all components combined the rest of the world can only dream of.

Yes Sir!

 

[snox801]

You are a lot smarter than this average hunter to determine it sounds like crap when you have not tried them yet.

I think you missed my point it "sounds like" which as stated I may be wrong but how would it do anything different than what I stated in giving more room for powder? It doesn't go into that. For instance if someone told me about absolute hammers I'd say sounds like crap. But they give a good breakdown of what and why they get more speed which made me say ok I'll bite and try them.
I will indeed be trying these but still can't see your point. But maybe I'm not as smart as you think. I'm just smart enough to not run out and buy everything because the company claims it is the best. I take a look and if to me it looks like it fills my need I try it. Simple as that.

 

[xsn10s]

As per the website the back cavity gives more room for powder. https://www.cavitybackbullets.com/category-s/103.htm

IMO it would increase the available volume since the rear section would have a void. I don't have a problem with that. Seems related to Ideal Gas Law or maybe Boyle's Law. Been way too long since I was in school learning that stuff.

 

[FEENIX]

I think you missed my point it "sounds like" which as stated I may be wrong but how would it do anything different than what I stated in giving more room for powder? It doesn't go into that. For instance if someone told me about absolute hammers I'd say sounds like crap. But they give a good breakdown of what and why they get more speed which made me say ok I'll bite and try them.
I will indeed be trying these but still can't see your point. But maybe I'm not as smart as you think. I'm just smart enough to not run out and buy everything because the company claims it is the best. I take a look and if to me it looks like it fills my need I try it. Simple as that.

You responded and agreed on a quote that was a response to my post. If you have read all the posts pertaining to it, you will understand why.

If you want an explanation, why not go directly to CBB? I am sure CBB will be more than happy to answer your question, just like your claim with Hammer.

 

[WildRose]

In artillery they can act as a primary gas seal to give better consistency in velocity but I'm scratching my head on their use here

Addition, I see this in some Mini Balls as well and again, the cited purpose was to act as a gas seal.... .

 

[FEENIX]

@xsn10s, I think I have a new bias brewing.

 

[WildRose]

My understanding is shaped charge is molten metal focused into a small area

Not necessarily. A shaped charge is simply that, one shaped that generally has a bullet shaped cavity in the side you put towards what you want to blow up.

Small shape charges are used in things like armor piercing rounds to create a jet of molten copper or other metal to burn through the armor at near insane speeds.

Same type of charge, different purposes.

We used to use some large cratering charges that would do more damage to an asphalt or concrete runway, bridge etc than a WWII 500lbs bomb and weighted less than 1/10th ad much.

 

[WildRose]

No I have not. And I'm not claiming anything but it hard to believe that it would do much of any good except in the examples I gave which seems to be his goal maybe re room for powder in a gas gun which is a huge plus.
But for a case that I don't need the extra room I can't see taking out more weight when every other mono is trying to add as much weight as they can.
I may be wrong and will gladly admit it if the bullets tune out to be what they claim. Just as I have in the past for other bullets. I'm just looking at it skeptically is all.
Not trying to throw shade as the kids say.

No I have not. And I'm not claiming anything but it hard to believe that it would do much of any good except in the examples I gave which seems to be his goal maybe re room for powder in a gas gun which is a huge plus.
But for a case that I don't need the extra room I can't see taking out more weight when every other mono is trying to add as much weight as they can.
I may be wrong and will gladly admit it if the bullets tune out to be what they claim. Just as I have in the past for other bullets. I'm just looking at it skeptically is all.
Not trying to throw shade as the kids say.

Nothing wrong with being skeptical of anything new, science is predicated on it

 

[WildRose]

As per the website the back cavity gives more room for powder. https://www.cavitybackbullets.com/category-s/103.htm

IMO it would increase the available volume since the rear section would have a void. I don't have a problem with that. Seems related to Ideal Gas Law or maybe Boyle's Law. Been way too long since I was in school learning that stuff.

Interesting. One would I think need to be careful and mindful then of using too light of a charge. I've seen people including myself make that mistake trying to use a faster burning powder than a given round is really designed for.

Those rounds can give you a funny delay before full ignition and when full ignition is achieved there can be serious consequences because insane pressures are achieved that can to really bad things.

I'd probably want to stick with loads at or above 95% case capacity with these. I'd rather have a slightly compressed load than a "loose load".

 

[DoneNOut]

Hmmmm

 

[xsn10s]

Interesting. One would I think need to be careful and mindful then of using too light of a charge. I've seen people including myself make that mistake trying to use a faster burning powder than a given round is really designed for.

Those rounds can give you a funny delay before full ignition and when full ignition is achieved there can be serious consequences because insane pressures are achieved that can to really bad things.

I'd probably want to stick with loads at or above 95% case capacity with these. I'd rather have a slightly compressed load than a "loose load".

They explain it in the link I provided. Solid copper bullets are longer than cup and core, as I'm sure we all know. They cover that in the link. The cavity helps give back capacity that the longer bullet would occupied.