whiskey three precision

[Michael Courtney]

Yeah.

Let me put on my tutu, get my pom poms and give a cheer for you. You won the pedantic battle and lost the war..

It's odd that you agree with the principle that bullet makers should publish accurate BCs, but you disagree and criticize with the practical steps necessary for consumer advocates to get that to happen.

Berger had over 5 years to measure and publish accurate BCs for their flat base bullets. They chose not to until customers pointed out the discrepancies.

W3P has had 4-5 months now since customers and informed parties at LRH begin asking for clarification and pointing out inaccuracies. W3P (so far) has chosen not to publish accurate BCs.

Let me rephrase that.......we don't care for the drama created by the last huge thread that many of you contributed to and was shut down accordingly. This time let's play nice and a game of intellect , instead of mud slinging and useless side bar. We all have a common goal.....to see projectiles fly accurately at long range.

Knowing how bullets fly at long range requires accurate BCs. If W3P and their fans really cared about that, they would be working to get those BCs measured and provide accurate technical information, instead of slinging mud on the forums.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

It's odd that you agree with the principle that bullet makers should publish accurate BCs, but you disagree and criticize with the practical steps necessary for consumer advocates to get that to happen.

It's not odd.

What is odd is that you believe your bullying and pedantic tactics would have a positive result. Your not a consumer advocate because you will never use the W3P product. You never gave them a chance, started off negative same as you always have.

Beat your puffed out chest. You MADE Berger capitulate to your view of the world. Good for you. I'll get out my pom poms and tutu and cheer because I know as a result of your tactics being exposed you have even less chance of getting paying work.

Your message was lost in your method.

Berger had over 5 years to measure and publish accurate BCs for their flat base bullets. They chose not to until customers pointed out the discrepancies.

While you might be a consumer you are not the "comsumers". You whipped up a frenzy where non existed on flat base bullets that have nothing to do with long range. I call BS.

W3P has had 4-5 months now since customers and informed parties at LRH begin asking for clarification and pointing out inaccuracies. W3P (so far) has chosen not to publish accurate BCs.

Keep beating the drum. Your war chant does not make a producer want to go public so you can sling mud.

Knowing how bullets fly at long range requires accurate BCs. If W3P and their fans really cared about that, they would be working to get those BCs measured and provide accurate technical information, instead of slinging mud on the forums.

If I remember, it all started with negative comentary regarding the veracity of the BC numbers. In other words someone else started slinging mud. W3P reacted.

 

[azsugarbear]

Every time I get an email telling me there is a new post on the W3P thread, I am hopeful that it is something new. Something from a member that had recently tested some bullets. Instead, it is more of the same back and forth between a few individuals. More of the same tit for tat. Do you realize that you have completely hijacked this thread??

Maybe it is just me, or maybe I am one of the few still following this thread, but I would really like to have those few members caught up in this personal debate to take it somewhere else. Start your own thread and have at each other. Am I the only one with a low threshold for pain, or are there others who have had enough?

 

[bigngreen]

Got some W3P 200 grainers today when got home from work, measured sorted and loaded three at the same specs I load the 215 Berger (.020 in the lands) and three loaded .010 of the lands, 42 grains of Varget in 308 Lapua Palma brass. COAL is around 3.180 for the Bergers and 3.130 for the W3P's. This rifle has shot nearly everything under 1/2 MOA and when it likes something 1/4 moa is expected so it should provide some info quickly!

 

[gohring3006]

Got some W3P 200 grainers today when got home from work, measured sorted and loaded three at the same specs I load the 215 Berger (.020 in the lands) and three loaded .010 of the lands, 42 grains of Varget in 308 Lapua Palma brass. COAL is around 3.180 for the Bergers and 3.130 for the W3P's. This rifle has shot nearly everything under 1/2 MOA and when it likes something 1/4 moa is expected so it should provide some info quickly!

thanks BnG looking forward to your results.

 

[Michael Courtney]

Your not a consumer advocate because you will never use the W3P product. You never gave them a chance, started off negative same as you always have.

We've published honest assessments about many bullets: Nosler, Sierra, Hornady, Berger, Barnes, Triton, Winchester, Lehigh Defense, Speer, etc. We've provided published and private assessments of a much broader array of products: primers, brass, powder, armor, firearms, etc.

We consistently apply the principle that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Without any support for such high BCs, we don't really need to test the W3P bullets to express a healthy skepticism, any more than we would need to test the armor to express skepticism about a new SAPI armor at half the weight of the currently fielded armor, but no test data to back it up. Do you need to buy a truck claiming 300 HP and 40 MPG to have doubts?

Over the years, we've bought and used many of the bullet brands we've published assessments of, even negative assessments. We've published lots of negative information on Nosler bullets not meeting their BCs, but over the years, we've bought lots of Nosler bullets. We've bought lots of Berger bullets too.

We're currently looking for several models of aluminum tipped bullets to test our new stability formula for them. I've long been an advocate for tipped bullets, especially aluminum, because they hold the greatest promise for consistent shot to shot ballistic coefficients. You may remember that two of the longest sniper kills ever were with the aluminum tipped 50 cal AMAX. Plastic runs a risk of distortion during firing and melting in flight. Aluminum does not. However, before we invest in a bunch of bullets for experimental work, we like to have accurate BCs as well as other insights regarding product quality. High quality bullets like Berger, Nosler, and Hornady are ideal for precise experimental work because of excellent uniformity and accuracy. Inaccurate BCs are a nuisance that delays good experimental work, because we have to measure the BCs ourselves and sometimes redesign experiments to work around the inaccurate BC. We've had excellent results with tipped Hornady bullets meeting their BC specs.

Honest assessments and calls for accurate specifications is not bullying. The way we've approached customer advocacy in bullet specs is actually softball compared with how customer advocates approach other fields like automobile safety, medication safety, etc.

While you might be a consumer you are not the "comsumers". You whipped up a frenzy where non existed on flat base bullets that have nothing to do with long range.

Look at some issues of Varmint Hunting Magazine from 1998-2010. A lot of hunters joined the 500 yard club shooting flat base bullets from slower twist .223s, 22-250s, and .243s. I won my first long range precision rifle competition several years back shooting flat base bullets. Until we ran out, several family members regularly shot the 62 grain Berger Flat Base in 600 yard F class.

The fact is that Berger advertises their 60-64 grain flat base bullets in .224 just a few BC points behind the 69 grain SMK that requires a faster twist to stabilize. This suggests that these bullets should be attractive for varminting and target work out to 600 yards.

If I remember, it all started with negative comentary regarding the veracity of the BC numbers. In other words someone else started slinging mud. W3P reacted.

Companies that aspire to DoD contracts should put on their big boy pants and respond to skepticism about their specs with respectful responses providing accurate specs.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

We've published...

Who is this "we" you keep referring to.

Is that You/Phorwath? One and the same? There is a PM from Phorwath at the same moment you respond with the same old same old. Both on line together or both in one person.

Did any of those companies pay you for your assessment?

As for big boy panties and W3PS DoD aspirations, you seem intent on protecting us from something that hasn't happened yet. Basically mud slinging to prevent them from having DoD aspirations. Similar tactics to the Anti crowd.

Since you live in the world of publish or perish, can you provide a document in your professional career where a college cites your work?

 

[Michael Courtney]

However, one need not have an extensive resume in ballistics to recognize Michael Eichele got it right when he wrote:

Let me be the first to call bs on those BC numbers.

I should go on record with predictions on what the actual BCs will be when measured by Michael Eichele, Mr. Litz, or another independent party using a standard near and far velocity or near velocity and time of flight method. It's hard to say how accurate these predictions may be, but 10% would be a fair estimate, and I best most of my predictions are closer to the eventual measurements than W3P's published claims. Here goes (all G1 BCs for the TAC-PM RBT line in .308 at a velocity of 2800 fps):

155 grain: 0.450
168 grain: 0.500
175 grain: 0.540
200 grain: 0.600
210 grain: 0.630
220 grain: 0.660
230 grain: 0.690

BCs will be lower than expected if the bullets are poorly formed, have surface defects, or a poor match (noticeable seam) between tip and body.

 

[IdahoRedneck]

Got some W3P 200 grainers today when got home from work, measured sorted and loaded three at the same specs I load the 215 Berger (.020 in the lands) and three loaded .010 of the lands, 42 grains of Varget in 308 Lapua Palma brass. COAL is around 3.180 for the Bergers and 3.130 for the W3P's. This rifle has shot nearly everything under 1/2 MOA and when it likes something 1/4 moa is expected so it should provide some info quickly!

Atta boy, what a crock this thread has turned into.

My ladder will get shot Saturday and ill report my findings. Im looking first at how fast the 230 w3p rbbt builds pressure in my gun, with its significantly longer bearing surface it will pressure out sooner than the berger 230 hybrid ill be testing at the same time, thats a given, my goal is to see where the pressure starts.

Im using re33 for this test on both bullets. Al from w3p has told me numerous times that the 210 w3p bullet has been shot to 1400 yards against the 230 berger and is dang near beating it...... My suspicion is the 210 dont build the pressure as fast, and can be pushed fast enough to make up for the difference, therefore comparing it to a 230 berger may look good out around 1400 or so............

Im going apples to apples here. I know the W3p 230 bullet will not run with the berger 230 simply because of the bearing surface, its going to pressure out sooner and therfore be shot at slower velocitys..........not my issue.

The W3p bullet has the potential to be an excellent mid to long range hunting bullet for sale to Joe blow like me at a resonable price.

Folks need to get off the but,but,but, there Bcs are inflated......for hells sakes we know..........i dont think John understands how important that number is to a hunter or long range shooter for that matter, hence the mistake claiming bc of 1.7 for a 6.5mm bullet. Anybody who knows anything about what the BC number represents would know that was a whoops before he pushed the enter button.

Brian Litz has offered to test the bullets for him free of charge, the ball us in his court, let it be.

As for me ill not be responding in this thread anymore and would encourage Bigngreen to do the same, lets put the actual shooting of W3P pills in another thread, and all you fackers who want to sit and hash out an issue that has really no more concern at this point, as John and Al havent weighed in since you took over the thread again.......... And dont seem to have a desire to get the numbers corrected, this remains to be seen however.

Ill say it again, We know the Bcs are high, we think there may still be potential for a good long range bullet here, available for sale commercially to Joe Blow. Rich has used his successfully for years.

To the good Dr, Courtney, if someone wants to hire you to test the BC on W3P bullets they will get ahold of ya, me I aint interested in your frickin scientific arguements that degrade a thread to the point of if it aint been published it aint so......... Ill put my stock in the folks shooting these bullets at long range, not a scientist shooting reduced loads over 100 yards and 2 chronographs with standard twist barrels sheez...........ya wanna know what the bullets doing way out there, go shoot it way out there........then report back.

Sheez. Anyway Rhian if you start a new thread with your results ill post mine there, if not ill start a new thread and would ask that all the shenanigans stay over on this one untill its locked.

 

[azsugarbear]

I'm with IdahoRedneck on this one. New thread....new data. And since some of us seem either unwilling or unable to tone down the rhetoric and simply must respond to every counter punch thrown by your antagonist - this thread is now yours. But please stay away from this new thread.