Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment > Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics


Reply

Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 04-17-2005, 05:32 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 186
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

Matt27, that was a good posting! It is real hard to come up with very accurate BC's, unless you are Arberdene Proving Gounds!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-17-2005, 05:49 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 2,539
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

If anything, I see that you have went out of your way, practically in every post I might add, to state how you feel about Richard and his bullets, and is obvious it was to avoid any misinterpretation that might result from your desire to completely verify the computer generated predictions his die maker sites for his bullets.

As you did not assume Richard was pulling the wool over the public's eyes with inflated BC's, and stated essentially the opposite, Richard should also not assume you are out to betray him for some reason. I take someone's intentions at their word unless their intent is proven opposite, but in the past have been guilty of this too, maybe Richard will give you the benifit of the doubt with some more thought. I tend to make friends and value relationships where this respect is mutually understood and gravitate away from people who are not this way. Everyone makes mistakes and this is a trap people often realize they have fallen into with issues close to them are scrutinized etc.

This for some odd reason seems a sensitive issue to many and in reality it should only be if the numbers Richard gives as guestimates were actually given as wrighten in stone/tested and verified, which he plainly states are NOT.

Fact is, I and many others... probably the majority of posters on this board would like to see a few people dual chrono test these bullets to calculate an accurate sea level BC in which we could compare to any other bullet we might select. This helps everyone and in no way hurts anyone.

I know Jimmy Knox has had people test the JLK's and this is why he gives the BC's he does on the order form. If I were making bullets, I would not give ANY predicted BC's for my bullets for fear that it would be turned around on me as a marketing ploy if they were found to fall short of the predicted numbers. I know who I am and would never do anything of the sort, but I still know what people will say reguardles of that, people are people and this is what many do, and my reputation I value entirely too much. If my custom bullet's BC predictions were the astronomical numbers I see for Richards bullets I would be even more leary of this, way more so. Richard has the high road in any event, because they are just computer generated predictions and not guaranteed accurate, still he faces severe skepticism due to the extremely high BC numbers in those predictions.

I am skeptical. Anyone in their right mind would be.
I am also somewhat perplexed and frustrated that there are few real BC numbers for the real popular bullets, even after being made for quite some time now. Oh well, the same approach I've taken so far, use what I have been and test them myself whan I get the chance to. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
__________________
Brent Moffitt
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-17-2005, 05:52 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yakima, Washington
Posts: 3,833
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

abinok and whoever may be interested:

Normally I wouldnít say anything about stuff like this but sometimes you just have to say it like it is.

First of all it has been my opinion from what Iíve read since the inception of the threads of any kind concerning Wildcat bullets that all the majority of the people responding want to do is prove Richard wrong. I just canít understand that because in case you havenít read everything very well you need to know, ďTHEREíS NOTHING TO PROVE WRONG!Ē

Richard Graves never promised anything, he never made any outlandish statements. All he did was to tell us what he had found from computer modeling and nothing else. He gave us a starting point for testing. I have seen it stated repeatedly that the BCís were estimates only, but nobody seems to understand what was said.

One of the few people that I have seen on here that actually shoot the Wildcat bullets and have compared them in the field to other bullets has been Kirby Allen. He never questioned or doubted because it was just understood that the BCís were estimates. A starting place, if you will, for the testing and comparing to begin. He found that, for him, they are a better choice but Iíve also seen Kirby questioned for stating what he found, and again, I donít understand. All he did was state what he found and, in deed, did tell everyone to do their own testing and draw their own conclusions. But, rather than do that for themselves everyone seems to just want to jump on the ďDoubt the WildcatsĒ bandwagon. WeirdÖÖÖÖ.

It amazes me that people would like to have bullets sent to them for testing. Try asking Sierra, Hornady, Speer or any other bullet manufacturer to send bullets for testing and see what they say.

Iíve never heard as many people questioning any of the major manufacturers about their BCís as what Iíve seen about the Wildcat Bullets. When, in fact, most of them quote and put in print their BCís as if they are gospel. We all know that they arenít and canít be because so many things can affect BCís.

Try calling any of the major manufacturers of bullets and see if they will allow you to choose the design of the bullet, the jacket thickness, the point style and the weight and allow you to do it in almost any combination. Then, if you arenít happy with their answer, ask them to build you something that hasnít been built yet. And then, on top of that, see if theyíll take them back just because you donít like them. Theyíll just laugh at you but I know from experience that Richard wonít. If you donít like them, heíll take them back and as near as I know heís only taken one box back and admittedly it was an order that was exactly what the customer wanted, they just were very wrong in what they ordered. He took them back anyway. He does whatever he can to give us exactly what we want and need.

I have been, and am, a small business operator and fully understand the time and effort that Richard takes to answer all of our questions and e-mails. Itís time he doesnít get paid for but he does it. I for one can say that if I was in his shoes, just knowing what Iíve read, and not all of the other stuff that goes one, that I would not be as casual and considerate in talking to individuals that I didnít really want to do business with. We used to be able to get an estimated BC from Richard as a point to start our testing but now he wonít give that info out and I fully understand why.

Iíve got a couple of boxes of Richardís bullets here now that Iíll be testing in a couple of different guns. I expect nothing of them except that they be what they are, and that is a hand made, custom bullet, that was built to my specifications and are what I ordered. If I like them, and Iím sure I will, then I will use them exclusively. If, on the very small chance, I donít like them, I wonít send them back and I wonít badmouth them. Iíve tried a lot of different bullets from a lot of different manufacturers that I didnít like. I just simply never use them again. I donít try to say that the manufacturer misrepresented them or said anything false or misleading. I can tell you that Richardís bullets are very boring to measure and compare because they are so consistent. You can fall asleep reading the same number over and over again.

None of what Iíve said is pointed to anyone in particular just to everyone in general. Cut Richard some slack and use his bullets like you would any other bullets. Load them, shoot them, and compare them, if you have anything to compare them to and then do what ya gota do. And remember when and if anyone of you come up with a BC for the bullet you are testing that itís not exact and you are probably wrong even though you may be very close.

I for one am very glad to see what Richard has done and will continue to support him and use his products as long as they are the quality they are now. I will even test them to see what I come up with for BCís but more than likely Iíll probably just test and compare to what Iíve used before and decide which is best.

And Matt27: Right on and I agree completely.
__________________
ss7mm
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-17-2005, 06:05 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 2,539
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

Kirby,

I can't say that I agree with you here but, I do want to say I appreciate the testing and valuable information you have provided on these bullets thus far. My worst fear was that Richard's bullets would fall far short of his predictions and it appears from your testing they will not fall that bad, or any. However, I hope you understand my desire to attach a number to a few of them that has been calculated to standard sea level conditions via dual chrono's as well.
__________________
Brent Moffitt
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-17-2005, 06:21 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 878
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

[ QUOTE ]
I also have to agree with Matt on this one. What other purpose does your post serve but to say Richard does not want to send you bullets because you offended him.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, this post serves 5 purposes.
1. It seeks to inform those who were interestd in testing the bullets I was willing to donate for testing that I will be unable to donate them, and why.
2. It seeks to inform those members (and lurkers for that matter) who read the origional thread that they will not be seeing that information.
3. It seeks to further solidify the fact that your impression of me, and those that think I am antiwildcat bullets, is wrong.
4. To try and figure out what it is that makes those who have misinterpited my previous posts the way they did.
5. To remind members who read the origional thread, that richards BCs are estimates, generated by his die makers. Richard specifically cited answering questions about the accuracy, or process of determining his BCs from members of this board as being one of the reasons he was pissed of at me.

[ QUOTE ]
My very first and still current impression is that you were out to prove that the Wildcat Bullets would not meet the standards that had been spoked of reguarding B.C.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you take the time to review the origional thread, you will see that this is not, and was not my intention in the least. I have tried to tell you and others this since my very first post on the other thread. Maybe im inarticulate... maybe youre dense.... but I tend to get offended when people call me an [censored] and a liar.

[ QUOTE ]
If a future customer of mine posted on a public chat room basically stating that he was out to prove that my produce was no better then anyone elses then I would probably recommend that customer go else where as well.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, I believe that entire mentality is a misunderstanding. I think the only member who recognized it as that was 4kedhorn. I was never interested in proving that Richard makes an inferior product. If you read over the origional thread you will see numerous statements that I have made that speciffically referance that I expect richard's bullets to be of high quality. I commented, if you recall, that you, being a respected riflesmith would not be likley to be building rifles around specific bullets that were of inferior quality.

[ QUOTE ]
Weither you ment to or not you came off as biased against the Wildcat Bullets. THis is just what I got from reading your posts.

[/ QUOTE ]
Looking back at the origional thread, I could understand how my 1st post could be misunderstood as being malicious. What I don't understand is after repeated statements to the contrary, why it is that many have such dificulty not reading into my posts about wildcats. In all the other threads I have posted to, and included a referance to regaurding my anxously awaiting my wildcats, there was no misunderstanding. Why here?

[ QUOTE ]
TO be honest if you want to work with a bullet maker to help him provide ballistic data you may be better served to go to the source and do the testing in private and then produce the results after the testing instead of going about it the way you did.

[/ QUOTE ]
I am not especially interested in "working with a bullet maker" I was interested in getting accurate data about the bullets I was planning to use. If that data were not avalable, I was willing to extrapolate data from other caliber bullets with simular designs. If you recall, in the origional thread, you stated that I should not expect richard to supply there bullets for testing. My reasons for "going about it the way I did" has been explained a couple of times. Here it is one last time.
Iwas interested in bullets. these bullets were estimated to have superior ballistic qualities that lend them to long range shooting. One of these is a high BC. Since I did not have access to equipment to measure BC, I asked for help from fellow LR shooters with that equipment. My posts were misunderstood as an attack on Richard personally, and his bullets in general. I explained that this was not my intention at all. The discussion settled down, and I waited for my bullets to arrive. When I inquired as to whether I should be expecting bullets anytime soon, I was told I was no longer welcome as a customer because some shooters misunderstood my origional posts. Some of these happened to
be friends of the gentleman who was going to make my bullets. When I learned that I was no longer welcome as a customer, I responded to richard directly with both an explination, and an apology. When neither were returned, I attempted to rectify one of his major complaints (see #5 above) I was then flamed again as trying to cause problems for Mr Graves.
As I have said before, I don't understand what it is that is being misunderstood.

[ QUOTE ]
Again, I just feel that you came off like you were out to prove a point that these Wildcat Bullets could not possibly produce the b.c. values listed by some.


[/ QUOTE ]
Others on this site, and some others have said that. I didn't. Period. After seeing the success that you and others were having, I decided to try some. When I found that there was no accurate data, I asked my fellow LR shooters for help.

[ QUOTE ]
I will tell you for a fact that every b.c. I have printed on Richards bullets are a direct product of actual field shooting and tracking bullet trajectories, not over one distance or even over two different distances but at at least three different ranges, generally 100, 500 and either 800 or 1000.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know that you have shot a lot of richards bullets, but I also know that you have posted several times with BCs for bullets that richard was planning to build. These numbers had to be estimates, since the bullets don't exist yet.



[ QUOTE ]
Never once have I printed a B.C. that was not a result of this testing.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please see above.

[ QUOTE ]
And if you held no ill will we would not be having this discussion as you would have nothing to type about.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have outlined 5 specific reasons above.
Before you post back with your "abinok is an [censored] who is out to get richard" hat on. ask yourself this.
What possible reason could abinok have for talking bad about richard or his bullets, especially bullets he was interested in shooting/buying?

No matter how many times I go over all of this, I just can't see what it is that got you and others deflected away from the intention of my origional post.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-17-2005, 07:30 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 878
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

[ QUOTE ]
ss7mm
It amazes me that people would like to have bullets sent to them for testing. Try asking Sierra, Hornady, Speer or any other bullet manufacturer to send bullets for testing and see what they say.........We used to be able to get an estimated BC from Richard as a point to start our testing but now he wonít give that info out and I fully understand why.

[/ QUOTE ]
since you said your post wasn't pointed towards in particular, ill just address these two slivers...
I can't speak for Speer, But Sierra, Hornady and others reguraly provide bullets, especially new bullets for testing. The much talked about 300SMK is a prime example. 320s were made first, then revised to 300 after testing by private individuals. Even Sierra only has access to abourdene (sp) once a year. Im sorry to hear that Richard is no longer providing BC estimates. In my reply to richard, I offered to supply contact info for those who volunteered to test some of his bullets. I hope he follows through. I told richard that many would be interested in this data, including myself despite the fact that I was no longer welcome as a customer. I suppose its up to richard now.....
[ QUOTE ]
brent moffitt
If anything, I see that you have went out of your way, practically in every post I might add, to state how you feel about Richard and his bullets, and is obvious it was to avoid any misinterpretation that might result from your desire to completely verify the computer generated predictions his die maker sites for his bullets.

As you did not assume Richard was pulling the wool over the public's eyes with inflated BC's, and stated essentially the opposite, Richard should also not assume you are out to betray him for some reason. I take someone's intentions at their word unless their intent is proven opposite, but in the past have been guilty of this too, maybe Richard will give you the benifit of the doubt with some more thought. I tend to make friends and value relationships where this respect is mutually understood and gravitate away from people who are not this way. Everyone makes mistakes and this is a trap people often realize they have fallen into with issues close to them are scrutinized etc.

This for some odd reason seems a sensitive issue to many and in reality it should only be if the numbers Richard gives as guestimates were actually given as wrighten in stone/tested and verified, which he plainly states are NOT.

Fact is, I and many others... probably the majority of posters on this board would like to see a few people dual chrono test these bullets to calculate an accurate sea level BC in which we could compare to any other bullet we might select. This helps everyone and in no way hurts anyone.

I know Jimmy Knox has had people test the JLK's and this is why he gives the BC's he does on the order form. If I were making bullets, I would not give ANY predicted BC's for my bullets for fear that it would be turned around on me as a marketing ploy if they were found to fall short of the predicted numbers. I know who I am and would never do anything of the sort, but I still know what people will say reguardles of that, people are people and this is what many do, and my reputation I value entirely too much. If my custom bullet's BC predictions were the astronomical numbers I see for Richards bullets I would be even more leary of this, way more so. Richard has the high road in any event, because they are just computer generated predictions and not guaranteed accurate, still he faces severe skepticism due to the extremely high BC numbers in those predictions.

[/ QUOTE ]
Brent,
Thanks, im glad im making sense to somebody out there!
I doubt he will change his mind though, its already been 5 days and I haven't heard anything. I don't think it ever took him more than 3 hours to respond before...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-17-2005, 08:26 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yakima, Washington
Posts: 3,833
Re: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs

abinok:

If, as you say, you meant no ill will then fine and good. Could you have found a better way to word your posts? Probably, but what is done is done. How your typed words come across sometimes can be confusing.

See the quotes below from your previous posts. I personally believe that something that's between you and Richard should stay just that. Between you and Richard and not posted for everyone to see and possibly twist. Richard has his reasons and you have yours. I doubt that when he made the statements to you that he would have thought he would be making them to the world. He kept it private and I just thought you should have kept it private also.

[ QUOTE ]
Richard informed me that due to posts I had made on this board, he would not be filling my order. Richard expressed that he felt betrayed by my posts, and that he thought I had taken a position that was "he will do anything to sell you bullets" I presume refering to the claimed high BC that was estimated by his die makers.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have emailed richard since his reply attempting to explain that I believe that all of this is a misunderstanding, and that, as I mentioned in my origional posts, i have no ill will toward Mr. Graves.
All of this to no avail. I have not heard anything from Richard since my reply 4 days ago.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just my $.02 worth. Have a nice day.
__________________
ss7mm
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads for: Testing Wildcat bullet BCs
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Barnes bullet testing..... Fiftydriver Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 51 03-05-2013 07:19 PM
More bullet testing with video ss7mm Long Range Hunting & Shooting 31 10-03-2010 10:54 PM
My take on bullet bc testing goodgrouper Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 2 04-08-2009 06:33 AM
bullet testing....... chucksniper Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 14 07-14-2008 03:48 PM
More on my Wildcat bullet testing. 4ked Horn Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 9 02-15-2006 02:02 PM

Current Poll
Spot & Stalk or Ambush For Western Deer?
MOSTLY - Spot & Stalk - 73.77%
1,021 Vote
MOSTLY - Ambush - 26.23%
363 Votes
Total Votes: 1,384
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC