Possible New Bullet Venture

What great feedback! I want to address the question of Cost/Price. It's not my intention to get rich at the expense of a few. Pricing will be more than reasonable. I will try to provide Military Discounts to Retired and Active Duty members of our Armed Forces. I'll even do Firefighter and Law Enforcement too. But, I'm not up to that point yet. Right now I'm at the stage known as Due Diligence.

Yes, I think there is room for another bullet maker. I will make bullets that are unlike anything on the market currently. And, I will offer them at a reasonable price. I will start out producing a dozen or so key items where there appears to be demand and go from there.

All Copper - No Problem; Partitions - No Problem; Plastic Nose Tips - no problem; Consistent Metplats - no problem; Bonded Bullets - no problem; Secant Ogives - no problem; Tangent Ogives - no problem ... Combinations of the above - no problem. Am I going to select a price point that allows me to recoup my investment in machines and dies - of course, I am a capitalist - It's my intent to produce excellent bullets at a reasonable price for you guys - the consumer/customer so we both win.

I will also produce bullets in small quantities for selected folks to try the bullets out - and get them "right" before I start cranking out projectiles.

I'm using my own money to fund this venture so I need to get the business model right the first time :)

Peter,

First off, I am willing to pay a reasonable price for a premium LR hunting bullet and by reasonable I know you need to make a profit. That's why you're in business, or going to be in business. The simplicity or complexity, cost of materials (i.e. copper, tungsten) lathe turnd vs swaged, etc are all going to determine your costs which you have to pass along and I think most will understand that.

The most popular cals in this forum are probably going to be 243, 264, 284, 308 and 338. If 1 was going to start with a dozen of what i thought was going to be the best sellers. It would in the already existing range of weights as that is where the market demand is because that's what common twist rates are available. You can expand from there.

We'll assume that the design of the bullets will give the best possible BC for weight, for LR reach.

Starting with the 243, a 115-120 gr bullet that will stabilize in an 7 twist (not really a common twist). Then something that will stabilize in an 8 twist, like maybe a 105 give or take.

In the 264, a 140-150 give or take to stabilize in an 8 twist and something lighter to stabilize in a 9 twist.

In the 284, there is a demand for something heavier than the 180 hybrid, like a 195 which Berger is desinging, but that would require a non-standard twist of 8 or tighter. Not really sure how much of a demand that is?

In the 308, the 215 and 230 Hybrids are very popular, both stabilizing in 10 twists. Something lighter that stabilizes in an 11 twist and shootable in a 308 or 30-06, like a 200 give or take.

In the 338, the 300 gr bullets that stabilize in a 10 twist seem to be the most popular for the big 338's. Something lighter that stabilizes in an 11 or 12 twist might do well for the more moderate chamberings.

In the 25 and 277 cals, the hottest common chamberings are the 25-06 and 270 WSM followed by the lesser common Weatherby chamberings with the common twist being 10. This limits the weight of high BC bullets. I would start by offering the heaviest high BC bullet for a 10 twist in these cals and develop other offerings in 9, and 8 twists.

Being an old AF guy myself and having spent some time at AMC HQ as the functional manger for a computer flight planning system, I understand the process of stating and defining user requirements. I liked flying a whole lot better :D

The users are LR hunters.

The requirements are for a LR hunting bullet.

The bullet deign should maximize BC/weight ratio. Currently, the Berger Hybrids do this best.

The bullet should give effective terminal performance at short, mid and long ranges. This is the Long Range Hunting site but that said, the vast majority of game taken by members here is at ranges less than 400 yds. I want the ability to effectively take game at any range out 1000 or more yds. so far there are bullets that are good for LR and others that are better for short and mid ranges.

The bullet should be reliable for any type of shot, i.e., shoulder shot, lung shot, heavy bone, soft tissue.

The bullets should work in common twist barrels for the most part with offerings in custom twist barrels as well.

The bullets should be reasonably priced.

As I previously mentioned, I think the best design would incorporate outside dimensions along the lines of a hybrid type bullet with the internal construction similar to a partition type bullet. Another idea might be to place a tungsten core in the tail and body with a frangible jacketed HP lead core nose. The frangible lead core nose would be good for soft lung tissue while the tungsten or partiton shank and tail for penetrating bone muscle.

Tungsten is an interesting idea. It will boost specific gravity which will increase the BC to weight ratio and also help to maintain SD integrity.

Cheers
 
@Mark - Great Feedback and it's Spot On! My last assignment was at the AF Space and Missile System Center (ret '96). Talk about learning about defining requirements! Finally took a two week course on systems engineering and tutoring from the Aerospace Corp guys - At least I learned and the knowledge gained is exceptionally useful...especially in situations like this...

BTW, $60 - $70 for a box of bullets - that's just plain crazy

-- Peter
 
What great feedback! I want to address the question of Cost/Price. It's not my intention to get rich at the expense of a few. Pricing will be more than reasonable. I will try to provide Military Discounts to Retired and Active Duty members of our Armed Forces. I'll even do Firefighter and Law Enforcement too. But, I'm not up to that point yet. Right now I'm at the stage known as Due Diligence.

Yes, I think there is room for another bullet maker. I will make bullets that are unlike anything on the market currently. And, I will offer them at a reasonable price. I will start out producing a dozen or so key items where there appears to be demand and go from there.

All Copper - No Problem; Partitions - No Problem; Plastic Nose Tips - no problem; Consistent Metplats - no problem; Bonded Bullets - no problem; Secant Ogives - no problem; Tangent Ogives - no problem ... Combinations of the above - no problem. Am I going to select a price point that allows me to recoup my investment in machines and dies - of course, I am a capitalist - It's my intent to produce excellent bullets at a reasonable price for you guys - the consumer/customer so we both win.

I will also produce bullets in small quantities for selected folks to try the bullets out - and get them "right" before I start cranking out projectiles.

I'm using my own money to fund this venture so I need to get the business model right the first time :)

Great idea to get feed back first.
As a business owner I understand where you are coming from.
I believe you will struggle to turn a profit.
The market is already pretty well catered for, except for the current panic buying.
To make speciality projectiles takes time, money & plenty of R&D.
Over here the average Kiwi hunter is constantly being accused of being tight & very reluctant to spend $$$ on quality products, I see from this thread we are not alone...
I'm all for products that advance the shooting sports.
Look at how the 375 is currently advancing now we have great projectiles like those offered by Cutting Edge.

The CE 375s cost us approx $4-5 Kiwi each, the GSC are about another $1 when/if you can get them, 91 octane petrol is currently $8.33 Kiwi for a US gallon....:rolleyes:

Good luck with your venture :)
 
@Mark - Great Feedback and it's Spot On! My last assignment was at the AF Space and Missile System Center (ret '96). Talk about learning about defining requirements! Finally took a two week course on systems engineering and tutoring from the Aerospace Corp guys - At least I learned and the knowledge gained is exceptionally useful...especially in situations like this...

BTW, $60 - $70 for a box of bullets - that's just plain crazy

-- Peter


I think you're on to something. I'd love to see a competative brand in the bullet game, that's bringing fresh products never before seen, for reasonable prices that everyone can afford.

Like I said before, when you get some .257 130 grainers done, let me know. I'd love to test some in my Accumark.

I think that a longer bearing surface will really help to stabilize these longer heavier bullets, because that is more surface touching the rifling in more places.
 
True...But loading down would help with that, wouldn't it?



I'm not a bullet builder/designer/manufacturer so maybe i'm way off but....
Increased Bearing surface increases pressure & fouling right? If pressure goes up quicker than normal, you're not going to achieve the amount of velocity you can with a bullet of shorter bearing length (all other variables being the same). As long as the velocity loss isn't substantial, ok, I guess. If it is, say, just unreasonably long, you're going to fowl the crap out of your barrel quickly while dropping velocity to a useless state. Bore riders have far less bearing surface that conventionals & work just fine, why increase the contact surface at all?

I understand that velocity isn't everything but it is still quite necessary, at least in my eyes.'



t
 
Last edited:
I'm not a bullet builder/designer/manufacturer so maybe i'm way off but....
Increased Bearing surface increases pressure & fouling right? If pressure goes up quicker than normal, you're not going to achieve the amount of velocity you can with a bullet of shorter bearing length (all other variables being the same). As long as the velocity loss isn't substantial, ok, I guess. If it is, say, just unreasonably long, you're going to fowl the crap out of your barrel quickly while dropping velocity to a useless state. Bore riders have far less bearing surface that conventionals & work just fine, why increase the contact surface at all?

I understand that velocity isn't everything but it is still quite necessary, at least in my eyes.'



t
This is true, but I figured a longer bearing might help with stability. I'm far from a bullet expert, as well.
 
@Mark - Great Feedback and it's Spot On! My last assignment was at the AF Space and Missile System Center (ret '96). Talk about learning about defining requirements! Finally took a two week course on systems engineering and tutoring from the Aerospace Corp guys - At least I learned and the knowledge gained is exceptionally useful...especially in situations like this...

BTW, $60 - $70 for a box of bullets - that's just plain crazy

-- Peter

Peter,

I learned a heck of a lot in my time in the AF.

$60-$70 per box is spendy, but if it provides me with an accurate and effective LR hunting bullet, I'll buy them. I won't buy many, just enough for my needs, For other types of shooting I might develop a load of less expensive bullets or use a dedicated rifles for LR hunting and other shooting using less expensive bullets for the majority of my shooting.

The CE bullets are in that price range, but they offer a lot of benefit. They are cnc machined (part of the high cost) and so each one is identical to the other. Virtually no variance in dimension or weight. In larger cals, they are very effective at ALL ranges and can be used for for any type of shot. In the smaller cals, their ability to expand at longer ranges seems to dimish, but are at least excellent in the short and mid ranges. With the development of the tipped Lazer bullets, the lighter bullets will likely expand more reliably but that remains to be seen. Plastic tips will reduce their BC slightly and introduce some bullet to bullet variance - not much, but some. There are other issues with plastic tips. They do not always act the way they are supposed to.

A couple of the big challenges with monolithic bullets is their BC to weight ratio is lower than the more dense lead core bullets. In order for a mono to achieve the same BC as a lead core bullet, it must be at least as heavy, maybe heavier which means it must also be longer which means it will require a greater twist rate. It would be virtually impossible to construct a mono with the same BC as a 284 180 gr hybrid or 308 230 gr hybrid. It would be just too long to stabilize.

The advantages are, it's lighter weight can be propelled to greater velocities. Monos can be constructed with minimal bearing surface with the use of bore riding surfaces and driving bands to further increase velocities. So the velocity to weight ratio can be greater than lead core bullets. In the long run, way down range, the higher BC lead core will usually trump, but not by much.

In the larger cals, 338 and up, the Monos start to even the score and pull ahead in the LR category, or any category. Heavy, long slender, high BC lead core bullets become more challenging to make.

In the 300 RUM I can propel a CEB 200 gr C22 with a BC of about .6 to about 3300 fps. I can propel the 230 gr Hybrid with a BC of .743 to about 3100 fps. The 200 gr CEB gets me to about 1200 yds or farther with 1800 fps of velocity and the 230 Hybrid to about 1300 yds, at the elevations I hunt.

The 230 has a slight advantage in range and also an advantage in energy and momentum. The CEB is more predictable at all ranges which is very important to me and it brings more than enough energy and momentum. Also, I am more comfortable making the shoulder or heavy bone shot with the CEB at any range. Always tradeoffs, at least so far.

The 230 costs $55/100 while the CEB's cost $136/100.

So, if the CEBs prove to be more accurate down range than the 230's, I'll buy them. If they are equally accurate... tough call... I like the attributes of the CEB better.

Although the CEB's cost 2 1/2 times as much per bullet, it's small when you factor in all the other costs each time you pull the trigger. But like I said, I wouldn't be buying them just for plinking.
 
Last edited:
This is true, but I figured a longer bearing might help with stability. I'm far from a bullet expert, as well.

Longer bearing surface would help with stability but shorter bearing surfaces can be stabilized. If we look at the 215 Hybrid with a bearing surface of .419 vs the 210 VLD withe a BS of .540, it's not that big of deal. The 215 stabilizes very well and from what I've read is easier to develop accurate loads and get higher velocities not to mention a significantly higher BC.
 
You can get a higher BC with a shorter bearing surface and a hybrid ogive?

I would have figured the higher wind resistant ogive shape and longer BS on the VLD would have put it in the lead, or evened it out, despite the 5gr weight difference...

Guess you learn something new everyday.

I'm gonna let the man decide how he wants to design his bullets' bearing surface, but a 130gr .257 would be awesome for my 1:10 twist Accumark. Those would be some heavy-hitting & fast whitetail bullets.
 
I'm not a bullet builder/designer/manufacturer so maybe i'm way off but....
Increased Bearing surface increases pressure & fouling right? If pressure goes up quicker than normal, you're not going to achieve the amount of velocity you can with a bullet of shorter bearing length (all other variables being the same). As long as the velocity loss isn't substantial, ok, I guess. If it is, say, just unreasonably long, you're going to fowl the crap out of your barrel quickly while dropping velocity to a useless state. Bore riders have far less bearing surface that conventionals & work just fine, why increase the contact surface at all?

I understand that velocity isn't everything but it is still quite necessary, at least in my eyes.'



t

I agree, Broz was able to get the same velocity or maybe even a little more from the 215 berger with its really short bearing surface than the 210 berger with the longer bearing surface from his 300 win.
 
You can get a higher BC with a shorter bearing surface and a hybrid ogive?

I would have figured the higher wind resistant ogive shape and longer BS on the VLD would have put it in the lead, or evened it out, despite the 5gr weight difference...

Guess you learn something new everyday.

I'm gonna let the man decide how he wants to design his bullets' bearing surface, but a 130gr .257 would be awesome for my 1:10 twist Accumark. Those would be some heavy-hitting & fast whitetail bullets.

The general rule of thumb is shorter bearing surface and longer nose = higher BC. There is a point, depending on cal and bullet length where you can only go so short before problems follow. The hybrids are close to that point. ATM, the Hybrid design is the most efficient BC design out there. I don't see that changing but I could be wrong.
 
There is a heck of a lot of work involved for each bullet you bring to the market. In the volumes that will likely be viable, I think it is going to be really tough to be under $ 1 / each.

While technically you "can" bring to market many sizes, versions, and constructions, the economy of scale will not really kick in until you have produced 5-10 K of each version.

That being said, I have given serious thought to the idea of making custom bullets, although mostly for family / friend use, where price is not really a factor.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top