(HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

[GREYGHOSTt]

Ok here is the bottom line..

These bullets have a money back guarentee; just follow the enclosed instrucions for developing loads.. If they don't work as advertised just return the unused portion for a refund ...

Find that some where else in the industry........

 

[eddybo]

Bryan, as much as I respect your work and your integrity, that number sounds a little off to me. When you told me they were modeled in the .86 range I would have guessed that your actual testing would have found them to be a little higher than your modeling. I will continue to use .893 as the functioning G1 BC of these bullets at the velocity that I am pushing them. I could see it being .86 but .6 something......but I defer to your knowledge, which is vastly more advanced than my own. I would be interested in hearing what others are using for the BC. Are you sure you did not transpose a number? Maybe I am the only one with ADD that does stuff like that, but I just cannot see a BC less than .7 on these.

The absolute furthest I have shot one of these bullets was 2200 yards the absolute closest shot has been one hundred yards. In between those ranges I have shot at 3,4,5,6,8 14 and 18 hundred yards at targets and always found exbal has given me very accurate results using .893 as my BC and 3400 as my velocity. We have shot animals from 500 to nearly 1200 yards with those bullets I just cannot see the BC being that far off from my jerry rigged BC.

When yall gonna get on the ball and get some bergers out there for us to try? By the time yall get those things out I am going to be switched over .375. You have not happened to have done any testing on the rocky mountain 370gr 375s have you? We have not shot them much and no further than 1400 but .91 is working well.

Maybe the G7 BC that you gave would make everything jive, but I am not planning on switching to G7 yet. I still use exbal and I do not think it will take the G7 BCs. Anybody know if exbal now allows for this, may be time to upgrade.

Sorry for rambling, kinda of beat down from long hours right now.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Ok here is the bottom line..

These bullets have a money back guarentee; just follow the enclosed instrucions for developing loads.. If they don't work as advertised just return the unused portion for a refund ...

Find that some where else in the industry........

Mr Henson,

With all due respect, that's not good enough for me. Before I commit the time and resources to testing and developing a load for a bullet, I would like a reasonable assurance of of it performce expectations. I have limited time and resources and prefer to have good information going in. I think that you as a responsible bullet maker should take the steps to provide that information to your potential customers. It would not be a difficult thing to provide a tester such as Bryan Litz a sampling of your bullets to verify their BC's. That fact that you would not even sell any to him for testing erodes trust in you and your product. Mr. Litz' work is well known and respected. Whether you choose him or someone else, you should have it done.

Regards,

Mark

 

[BryanLitz]

eddybo,

I understand your observations are working for you and I don't question that they do. Many times in ballistics there is uncertainty in several variables which offset and make things look different than they are. Consider what elkregulator uses for his multiple BC's for these same bullets:

exbal multi-bc
2500fps - .89
2300fps - .6
2000fps - .35
0fps - .25

Those numbers average .613 from 2000 to 2500 fps and they work as well for him as your constant BC of .893 works for you. Clearly there is something different about your systems to produce such different perceived BC's for the same bullet. If I had to guess, I would suggest that you may not be accounting for the effects of altitude properly in exbal, and/or your scope adjustment may not be true.

In the end if you have a number that you can use with your system to make useful trajectory predictions, then there's no need for you to change what you're doing. But unless you've verified the accuracy of every other measurement that goes into that calculation, it's not a universally 'true' BC that others can use in their system.

Thanks for sharing your results. If you're interested in having a more involved discussion about the variables in your system that are leading you to that BC, I'll be happy to discuss it with you here or offline.

-Bryan

 

[Topshot]

Hey, send me a handfull of these bullets. I have just the spot to give them a try. Could try them out side by side with the 300gn SMK.

2285 yards of good clean Aussie fresh air.

 

[GREYGHOSTt]

Well sir only a fool would expect GM to endorse a Ford product... All the information
Everyone needs is already posted on long range hunting..

The reason brian didnot get any bullets from me was because I didnot have any ready.. But eddy bo did...

Mr Henson,

With all due respect, that's not good enough for me. Before I commit the time and resources to testing and developing a load for a bullet, I would like a reasonable assurance of of it performce expectations. I have limited time and resources and prefer to have good information going in. I think that you as a responsible bullet maker should take the steps to provide that information to your potential customers. It would not be a difficult thing to provide a tester such as Bryan Litz a sampling of your bullets to verify their BC's. That fact that you would not even sell any to him for testing erodes trust in you and your product. Mr. Litz' work is well known and respected. Whether you choose him or someone else, you should have it done.

Regards,

Mark

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Well sir only a fool would expect GM to endorse a Ford product... All the information
Everyone needs is already posted on long range hunting..

The reason brian didnot get any bullets from me was because I didnot have any ready.. But eddy bo did...

Mr Henson,

I can understand why you might have some reservations about a competitor testing your bullets, but the opinion of myself and a lot of other LRH members, Mr Litz is a man of integrity who has published his results to full public scrutiny on which his reputation stands. Many shooters use his information with a wide variety of bullets to successfully shoot at long range. Let me refer you to this recent thread of a member shooting at a target od 2285 distance. The memeber used Bryan's BC for the 300 SMK (not a Berger bullet) to calculate the elevation correction to within 2 MOA (less than 2%) of actual observed drops.

http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f17/need-help-2285-yard-shot-51859/

If you dont want to use Mr litz' services, then pick someone else or both. Using Lightvarmint to advertise your apparantly much exagerated claims amounts to false advertising IMO.

Sorry, but I do not agree that all the information that anyone needs is posted. Anyone can say they have a bullet with a BC of .9 I would like to see some sort of proof.

I asked Lightvarint to provide some measurements and pictures of the bullets and he would not. Can you provide those measurements? I'm one of those people who likes to know a little something about what they purchase before putting the money down.

Thanks,

Mark

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Eddybo,

If you have any of the HATs left, would you mind measuring their OAL, nose and tail? And if you have any 300 SMK's, could you do the same for them. A 265 gr bullet that has a BC of .9 would have to have a MUCH longer OAL and nose than a 300 gr with a BC of .76 and would also require a greater twist.

I have nothing against HAT bullets. Being a LR shooter, I hope they are all they are advertised to be. But after following this drama on this site for quite a while I have lost all confidence in Lightvarmint's and Mr Henson's claims. I'm looking for as many facts and real data as I can get to come to a more informed inteligent conclusion.

Thanks,

Mark

 

[edge]

I think that I found a better bullet!

I shot my rifle the other day and the bullet actually hit ABOVE my point of aim @ 100 yards!
As fantastic as that BC seemed, the accuracy was even more amazing!
When I went to the target the group measured the exact diameter as the bullet!

With a group like that I really hesitated to take a SECOND shot and blow the group

Now I know why LV doesn't bother to get exited about 0.100 groups!

edge.

 

[elkregulator]

If you have any of the HATs left, would you mind measuring their OAL, nose and tail? And if you have any 300 SMK's, could you do the same for them.

Thanks,

Mark

Mark, I don't have them in front of me, but is I remember correctly the 265 HAT's are 1.77" and the 300 SMK's are 1.7".

 

[jmason]

I think LV and RG Henson are the same guy. It's hard to image to people this abrasive knowing one another and being able to get along.

 

[Chas1]

Jmason, one in the same person...you might be on to something???

 

[jmason]

Jmason, one in the same person...you might be on to something???

Maybe I am, but after reading this stuff for well over a year now it sure seems to be curious not to be confused with bi-curious!

 

[RockyMtnMT]

There is also one other alias, remember Charlston. I think that may be the same guy as well.

Steve