The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 28, 2009, 09:14 PM   #76
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,715
Quote:
In due course, many aspects of "reality-based" test platforms should be performed. This will ultimately tell the story of HC performance. This will also end the debate as to the design...Talk is cheap, proof is absolute.
Which is what is lacking with your advertising. However, when it comes to terminal ballistic results, proof is quite variable.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old November 28, 2009, 09:24 PM   #77
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 9,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose33
I can't imagine this would have any change to the outcome in a SD scenario except in less than 1 percent of all times used. And I can think of many things that *would* influence that outcome to the better, such as practicing shot placement and followup shots.
What if you were that "less than 1% statistic? I can understand we all go from this world one way or another. But if it provides one person in even 1,000 a net advantage, don't you think it's worth having this option available to you? What's the wrong in that?
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old November 29, 2009, 11:14 PM   #78
mongoose33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 23, 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 228
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose33
I can't imagine this would have any change to the outcome in a SD scenario except in less than 1 percent of all times used. And I can think of many things that *would* influence that outcome to the better, such as practicing shot placement and followup shots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttle8
What if you were that "less than 1% statistic? I can understand we all go from this world one way or another. But if it provides one person in even 1,000 a net advantage, don't you think it's worth having this option available to you? What's the wrong in that?
What if I was? I doubt--very much--it'll ever matter. I don't believe that I'll ever be in a circumstance where having expansion initiated just a bit earlier will make any difference at all.

Is there anything wrong with it? No. We're in America, where we can both buy what we want, and say what we want (within limits). I just think it's much ado over nothing.

I've been making custom golf clubs for years. I get people who want to "buy a game" by getting new equipment and hoping it will suddenly transform them into good golfers.

Equipment--once you're past terribly ill-fitting clubs--doesn't matter all that much. What would matter far more to scores is practicing putting and the short game. Far more. Like 10 times more. (with all the "advances" in equipment over the last 20 years, know how much the average handicap has dropped? Not at all.)

That's the same as this bullet thing--would it matter more if people spent time practicing, doing double taps, doing dry-firing, learning trigger control? Absolutely.

A Speer Gold-Dot is already a formidable round, and at this point, IMO, the value (if any, which is still to be determined) of these new rounds is dwarfed by the value of practice.

In other words (and again IMO) this is more about people trying to "buy a game" than learning to do what they need to do.

Now, I will admit that the argument and idea is interesting, and I'm sure some of the interest here is just an engineering interest. I have that too. But I doubt very many of those really believe it'll matter much.

My 2 cents.
mongoose33 is offline  
Old November 29, 2009, 11:23 PM   #79
Kyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Posts: 897
They1 take a look at my questions in my previous post. Thanks
__________________
1. The gun is always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger unless you are ready to shoot.
4. Be be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
Kyo is offline  
Old December 2, 2009, 03:05 PM   #80
xd1984
Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 2009
Location: garland tx
Posts: 22
they 1

first of i want to give they1 props for the time and effort he has put into this idea. my question/ commit is will the holes in the bullet have a negative effect on the barrel of the guns or the riffleing? Over time would these holes have any adverse effect on accuracy of other bullets that might be used?
xd1984 is offline  
Old December 2, 2009, 11:32 PM   #81
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 9,442
I wouldn't forsee any problems regarding the barrel or rifling thereof. It wouldn't make contact with the rifling and even if it did, I'm willing to bet nothing adverse would happen even in the long run.

Am I right, They1?
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old December 3, 2009, 12:28 AM   #82
freakshow10mm
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 1,398
Interesting concept, but it looks to me like you are retarding penetration for sake of expansion and that is a bad thing.

Good luck to you.
freakshow10mm is offline  
Old January 24, 2010, 06:12 PM   #83
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
Sorry for the delay in response, I've been out for a while.

Made it back from SHOT Show this morning. It was my first time to this event. Quite an experience...way cool!

This show was good for Hypercav, bad for my feet.

First of all, Brassfetcher has my test rounds, and is working up gel-blocks for tests this week.

To those who've criticized why I've not shot/posted my own tests, it's because, as I've said many times, independent tests will tell the story, without ANY bias.

The project was well recieved by literally all who I shared this concept with. Including manufacturers and press. (You should start to see mentions from several well-known media sources in the near future.)

I met Massad Ayoob while there. He really liked the concept, and agreed to test some HC ammo for review. A very knowledgable guy, and unquestioned in the industry.

R. Lee Ermy also wants some. After I showed him samples and explained the project, he said, 'that makes perfect sense!" Then he asked; "why someone didn't think of this a long time ago" (he also threw in a "Hoo-Rah!). While, I don't have that answer, and never will, I know it has now... (Nice guy too.)

One NRA guy said; "shooters are going to eat this up!"

Ted Nugent wants some.
"Stone Cold" Steve Austin want to try some.

One of the manufacturers I've been talking to told me they have already test fired samples I sent them some time ago, and he told me 'they did exactly what I said they would do." (I was unaware of this test-set before I met w/them at the show) These tests were in standard gel-block medium. He also mentioned that they did not record the data, so unfortunatly, I have no photos to share here. Besides, due to corporate confidentiality issues, I doubt that I could anyway. However, I will post Brassfetchers' results when they become available.

In all, there are at least three manufacturers are seriously looking at this project. Others have entered the 'pipeline' for consideration, but nothing specific was mentioned of commitment at the show. I cannot give details of the conversations, nor will I, until a mutual agreement is struck. Also note that future details may not be disclosed if the end-licensee stipulates such restrictions, and of course, I will respect their wishes.

Machinery is being designed to automate the 'porting' process for mass-manufacture of HC-class bullets.

I hope everyone understands that this project isn't "perfect". There is still much work to be done in creating the best port configuration for all calibers, ultimate port diameters, count and positions must be calibrated to provide the best performance in relation to each type of round. As you can imagine, handgun and rifle ammo will have different criteria.
These aspects will be addressed by the licensee's R&D.

In the end, those who understand the endless complexities in any new product development will know what I've been saying all along; this is a slow process at best, but necessary to create the best-performing product possible.

For those who would rather make knee-jerk conclusions and assumptions before all the data is in (you know who you are...), there's nothing I can say or do other than offer the proof as it comes in. After that, I can't help you.

I have no idea what the ultimate 'evolution' of Hypercav will become...many possibilities exist. Only time, design and testing will tell the story. There is still much to learn and exploring the possibilities, as this is a brand new entity being introduced into the ballistics industry. Having said that, I can quote one person of "note" in the industry; this could be a game-changer."
They1 is offline  
Old January 24, 2010, 07:31 PM   #84
Al Norris
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
Thanks for coming back with an update.

I know I would be interested in the final results, especially if they are to be marketed as components.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 24, 2010, 08:42 PM   #85
RBrush
Member
 
Join Date: January 12, 2010
Location: middle of michigan
Posts: 30
Interesting theory's. Out of curiosity with all of the hype about the good and bad aspects of drilling bullets there hasn't been any change in ballistic coefficient. There has definitely been a decrease in mass which will add to accelaration. Out of a brain fart I had to dust my old chemical engineer's handbook off and push the pencil. I did a few calculations on hydraulic versus pneumatic pressure. I then came to the conclusion that I'm unable to come to any numbers to substantiate an improvement in a hollow point bullets design. That is unless there is a shape change in the bullet to deviate the resistance incurred during flight and expansinon. Just a thought but, I was thinking Cor-Bon had already conqured this with the powerBall. It's a hollow point embedded with a polymer ball. I haven't checked but Cor-Bon has to have some info that might help your cause. Good luck on your path to infinite wealth in the world of ammo!
__________________
NRA Life Member,
Michigan Trappers and Predator Callers Association Life Member, BS and Story Tellers CEO Life Member
RBrush is offline  
Old January 24, 2010, 09:55 PM   #86
IEDmagnet
Member
 
Join Date: February 17, 2007
Posts: 73
Does Speer know about this?

I'm confused... can you patent someone else's bullet just because you are drilling holes in them?
__________________
"If you try to do it that way, your working against time and gravity, both of which have pretty consistent track records" - Former Co-Worker

"Anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice"- Unknown
IEDmagnet is offline  
Old January 25, 2010, 09:30 AM   #87
Uncle Buck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,592
They patented hollow points... They were someone elses bullet before someone drilled a hole in it.

They1: Thanks for the update. I was afraid something had happened to you.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.
Uncle Buck is offline  
Old January 25, 2010, 10:22 AM   #88
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
RBrush,
You obviously have a scientific-based background, and a worthy thought-set.

Note that much more is going on when considering the effect of a compressible gas interaction in this instance.

Powerball does indeed have a Polymer insert, but note, that is still an "intermediate' medium that MUST react during the expansion process. (Steps 1,2,3.)

Simple porting eliminates step 2.
They1 is offline  
Old January 25, 2010, 10:27 AM   #89
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
IEDmagnet,

You 'could' patent an HP bullet, but it would likely be limited to a "Design Patent", specific to a given shape or design. Not worth too much in the end.

My patent (Utility) covers any type of porting or venting related to the idea of exchanging the gasses in any HP round.
They1 is offline  
Old January 25, 2010, 10:28 AM   #90
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
Thanks Uncle Buck...I'm still kickin'...just real busy lately.
They1 is offline  
Old January 25, 2010, 10:44 AM   #91
Chaz88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 4, 2010
Posts: 1,243
Quote:
Note that much more is going on when considering the effect of a compressible gas interaction in this instance.
I might be off base but I tend to think of this kind of thing along the same lines of introducing ultrasonic sound into different materials, because that is familiar to me. Introducing a particular frequency (mass and velocity of bullet) into a medium of different acoustical velocity (air and ballistic medium) produces a new refraction angel and velocity change (expansion and direction of travel) If it were possible to account for all the velocity and angel of refraction changes for a "natural ballistic medium" results could be predicted fairly consistently. For practical purposes acoustic velocity is constant and changes traveling from one material to another is mathematically predictable. Can the same kind of thing be applied to ballistics?
__________________
Seams like once we the people give what, at the time, seams like a reasonable inch and "they" take the unreasonable mile we can only get that mile back one inch at a time.

No spelun and grammar is not my specialty. So please don't hurt my sensitive little feelings by teasing me about it.
Chaz88 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 03:01 PM   #92
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
That's an interesting theory to say the least, but my limited background in ultrasonics doesn't warrant a valid opinion to compare to ballistic interactions.

My primaries are in mechanical engineering and fluid dynamics.
They1 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 05:00 PM   #93
dakotashooter2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2005
Posts: 498
Ok I just skimmed over the posts but do you know for a fact the venting is responsible for the bullets performance and not the fact that you have altered the interior dynamics of the bullet by generating "weak spots" in it's core? In other words if you drilled 3 holes in a bullet then wrapped a jacket around it (so the holes couldn't vent) what is the likelyhood it would perform the same. I'm thinking very high. Any weakness in the core of the bullet is bound to change the dynamics of how it expands.
dakotashooter2 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 07:04 PM   #94
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
Evrything gathered to date soundly suggests the ports and venting of the air is causing the effect on the round' expansion.

You pose a valid question though. It would be logical to think that 'internal' drilling would have at least "some" effect (scoring for example), but I've never considered doing so, and mass manufacturing would likely be a nightmare.
They1 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 08:27 PM   #95
olddav
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2008
Location: Lower Alabama
Posts: 727
They1
I'm not well educated, and have no real opinion on your new design, but I am a firm believer in trying something new. I find this new desing very interesting and am looking forward to hearing more after the independent testing is complete. Many a new idea is not well received by experts, I guess thats because everyone has different ideas about how a thing should work. Again looking forward to hearing more!
__________________
Never beat your head against the wall with out a helmet
olddav is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 08:40 PM   #96
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
Thanks olddav, i really appreciate your support!

Actually, independent testing has been done. You can find the results on the Hypercav.com website, or this link: http://www.hypercavbullets.com/brassfetchertest.pdf

On a personal note, you mention "not well educated". That may be, but you strike me as having plenty of common sense. And if I ever have to choose common sense or education, I'll take common sense EVERYTIME.

Last edited by They1; February 5, 2010 at 08:52 PM.
They1 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 08:56 PM   #97
mongoose33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 23, 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 228
Quote:
Thanks olddav, i really appreciate your support!

Actually, independent testing has been done. You can find the results on the Hypercav.com website, or this link: http://www.hypercavbullets.com/brassfetchertest.pdf
I'm rather shocked, frankly, that you'd use the tests of THREE bullets--and THREE only--as "evidence" of anything at all.

You want to test a bullet or *anything* for effectiveness? Then you test a large sample, of BOTH the modified bullet AS WELL AS the unmodified bullet.

I'm trained as a scientist, and you've got nothing here. It looks impressive, but all it has is looks. It's unconvincing in the extreme.
mongoose33 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 09:15 PM   #98
They1
Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 44
mongoose33,

You must 'shock' easily...

If I posted tests that I've done personally, I'd be accused of "bias". So I get an independent test-set done, and it's "not enough".

I agree, more testing should be done, and they are pending as you read this.
These will include multiple calibers, and brands of currently available ammunition.

In addition, one manufacturer has already tested many HC samples. They have reported "the bullets did exactly what I said they would do."

Two others are testing them now.

I cannot post any further information of their results, due to confidentiality issues.

Massad Ayoob has just received samples (at his request) today. His review should be forthcoming in the near future.

I would like to believe that as a "trained scientist", you would reserve 'conclusions' until AFTER the data comes in. (Unless of course, you really enjoy the taste of Crow )

Query: What is your primary field of study?

Last edited by They1; February 5, 2010 at 09:30 PM.
They1 is offline  
Old February 5, 2010, 11:59 PM   #99
SKULLANDCROSSBONES65
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 19, 2008
Location: Far Nth Wst QLD Australia
Posts: 992
G'day. This has been an interesting read.
I have a few questions. I assume that the holes are in line with the axis of the projectile. Have you tried drilling the hole to match the twist rate of the gun? or even in the oposite direction of twist?
If the hole was drilled at a rate other then that of the twist would that work to increase, maintain or decreast the rotation of the prolectile?
__________________
If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough!
When you're confused, I'll try to use smaller words!!!
SKULLANDCROSSBONES65 is offline  
Old February 6, 2010, 09:11 AM   #100
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
They1

Although I have read several interesting observations and thoughts by others on your hollowpoint idea I am all for your creativity.

What do we as a group have to loose by being open to what may well be a better mouse trap? Like the "Field of Dreams" movie, if you build it they will buy it.

Many will test it and at some point it will either become the latest rage based on its merit or it will become just another round giving us yet one more round to have some fun with at the range.

I wish you all the luck in the world because in the end a little creativity is almost never bad.

__________________
Molon Labe
BGutzman is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.08248 seconds with 8 queries