(HAT) Henson Aluminum Tipped Bullet 338 Rum Test

[Oliveralan]

GG,

I have to give Bryan credit, the conditions, drop and results are exactly like in that document hs linked. Why did you say you shot it today? I was just out shooting and it's 17degrees here, unless your in southern florida or Texas, it's not 69.6 degrees, again.

The information looks for credible that anything LV has posted that I've seen, but I don't like how you say you shot it today.

You say Byran lacks attention to detail... He's a Ballistician for BERGER... I think that disproved your claim. Not to mention he remembered or ha written down LV's claims from months ago and recalled them just like that.

IMO, rather than fight over the net, make a few 50rd sample packs and sell them at like a max of 2per customer at a little over production costs, and then have a thread made with all the results. If the BCs are what you claim, and independant parties and trusted members of this forum say they work, they'll sell. Simple as that.

I think your a good guy and hope these bullets work, just hate to see all this fighting on here. The point of this website is to share experiences, information, test results, and most importantly have a good time, or am I completely off?

Oliver

 

[BryanLitz]

The real procedure is the same..

What does that mean? Does it mean the conditions today really were the same as last year within 0.1 degrees and 0.01 inHg?

And no i still do not want to hire you for a ballistician.

Good, my offer no longer stands. I offered to test your bullets for a fee. When you declined, I tested them anyway for the sake of your to-be-disappointed 'would be' customers. That service is provided for no charge.

YOU showed you lack of detail in your earlier post and i quote( i didnot work up a accurate load)..

Does that mean that because I didn't buy more of your bullets to work up a load that my BC testing results are invalid? Are you saying that a non-precise load shoots bullets with a different BC than a precise load?

Well sir a accurate load is essential for doing correct drop for bc's.

That's true, if you derive BC from drop. My method uses time of flight (not drop) so I don't have to work up each load to be 'accurate'.

All companies that use declining velocity shoot hundreds of rounds that you didnot have..

I'm not sure what you're saying here. My measured BC's are repeatable within +/- 1% using my method and equipment. It doesn't take 100's of rounds.

According to you all the longrange animals that were shot with the hats using our bc's were misses.

1) What are your BC's? You've never posted anything, only performance that implies a BC for your particular testing.
2) A BC that's off by 30% results in the POI being off by about 10" at 1000 yards for this class of bullet at the speeds you're at. You can miss the aimpoint by 10" and still kill an animal.

You might want to check your equiment since Eddybo has hit his intended targets..

He's hit his intended targets using a BC that's lower than what you're supporting.

And on a nother note i am still not going to pay you for the modeling you did that i didnot request.

I never asked you for payment. As I said above, the work I've done modeling and testing your bullets was done for the benefit of the shooting community at no charge. You're welcome.

But any day you want to come out to the range and prove your verbose claims bring it on!!!!!!!!!

My testing procedure has proven to be accurate and produce results which many shooters have used to hit targets at long range. I don't need your personal approval.

(We put the large flat end on the HAT in the case first)

I don't know what that has to do with anything?

The question i thought was how we derived the bc's not the actual rum shooting conditions .

Shooting conditions have a lot to do with the derived BC. You claimed that you tested the bullets just 'today', and the test conditions are exactly the same as those reported last year. Now if you simply copied and pasted the performance data from last year, OK, say that. But your last post leads everyone to think you've tested the bullets today. Did you? Or did you just copy and paste the same claims that started the sh!tstorm last year?

-Bryan

 

[Michael Eichele]

Deleted.........

 

[7mmSendaro]

GG,

LV made a point early in this thread that you are controlling the neck ID to within .000002 (2 millionths). What type of equipent\measuring system are you using to accomplish this? Are you doing it in a temperature controlled environment? I know this is off the BC debate, but I'm curious.

 

[GREYGHOSTt]

Gentlemen reading is fundamental..
Nowhere in this article page 1 is there any mention of a bc test.
This was a informational article on the accuracy of a factory remington
parted together from internet bought parts... Using the hat bullets..




7mm sendero i will get the information for you as soon as i can on the name of the instrument he was using.

PS bryan you are spending way too much time on longrange hunting you should be at berger
getting those 338 berger bullets out the door. So we can test them against the hats on video with lotts of witness...........

 

[noel carlson]

GG,

"But any day you want to come out to the range and prove your verbose claims bring it on!!!!!!!!... So we can test them against the hats on video with lotts of witnesses "... Bryan, and I, talked briefly last week about testing a new line of magazine compatible ZA hunt projectiles in both 30, and 338 caliber. Would you be interested in extending your invitation to me?

As a footnote; Bryan is anything but verbose.

 

[Jon A]

Nobody makes this many waves about the 177 grain 30 cal GS bullet advertised at over .620 That seems like it is too good to be true right?

Some were made:

I know it's not what you want to hear, but don't hold your breath. It should be a lot higher than the 173's, that's for sure, but then again that's not saying much. Comparing to the 210 Berger and SMK it's nose is about .08 longer which should be an improvement ~5% form factor but it still has a big open hollow point and the others have 19% more mass. It doesn't add up. There's simply no reason it would have a BC to match the 210's.

Unfortunately, this is only more bad news for the 177. That means its nose (easily the biggest portion of form factor) is likely no better than the Berger, maybe even worse if it has a larger HP. And it's down 19% in mass. This puts it in the low-mid .5's as I don't see the boattail or any of the rest of it making up for that in a significant way. But like I said, that's not all that bad, it's still usable and a huge improvement over the 173. It's just not really any better than the 180 class Scirocco, Interbond, A-Max, etc, not to mention the 185 Berger.

More HERE.

The biggest difference is the matter of degree. A small or medium exaggeration is easier to get by with and more difficult for users using highly inaccurate measures to disprove than big, gigantic, fantasy-land exaggerations.

 

[X3MHunter]

...PS bryan you are spending way too much time on longrange hunting you should be at berger
getting those 338 berger bullets out the door. So we can test them against the hats on video with lotts of witness...........

Yeah, I'm sure you think he's spending too much time here disproving your claims! That would upset me too!

-X3M

P.S. Bryan, keep up the good work!

 

[Topshot]

Although I have been known to take the odd long shot at targets, it is hunting that I am mostly interested in..

It is the long range terminal performance of these HAT's bullets on game that I would like to know more about. How do they go when the velocity is way down? To have an advantage over existing bullets they need to expand when others will not.
I would like to see some pictures of game shot and reports of how the bullet performed.

 

[Oliveralan]

I agree with topshot, the terminal performance is what has to set them apart, high ballistics coefficient is a given, for the price of these.

I think testing them vs the future 338 Bergers isn't too smart because ballisticly, they may win by a bit, but the Berger int as likely to come out with a gen IIII requiring new load work up, and doesn't cost near as much. I think the bergers will be rather tough competition.

And if you want to video that with witnesses, why not just have a few guys test them and post results here. Like I said, offer sample boxes of around 50 bullets to people for a reduced price and then if your bullets are as good as your convinced, the good publicity will flow right in.

 

[Michael Eichele]

Instead of choosing a side (Bryan's or GG's) why dont you all just try them. GG has offered to give you your money back if youre not happy with them and you can be on your own side. If youre not willing to give them a try why contribute to the bashing? Shoot them first, then bash. Nobody here has asked Bryan to get third party testing to prove his BC numbers. Why? Because we buy Berger bullets and we find the BC's to be very close if not spot on. Of the shooters who have used HATs, how many have claimed that HATs are bogus bullets that are not worth the lead that is in them? They made a choice to buy them, try them and so far have had some measure of success with them. If you dont have the b@!!s to try them and offer an educated and valid opinion then shut the he!! up and hold your peace.

It would be really sad if Bryan was spot on with his BC and GG was spot on with the drop values due to some other unknown variable. If that was the case, they would both in a sense be right. Granted, if they had a given BC and drops that didnt corrospond that would lead to other issues but that is not the point here. The point here is that we are running GG down with NO proof of our own to back it up. We are all taking Bryan's figures as concrete evidence that GG is phony and has no credibility when none of us have all the facts. Bryan admitted he shot them using TOF insturments and never shot them for drops. He may be qualified to offer a BC figure but cannot be qualified for offering drop values. Drop values are very predictable using accurate BCs. That is using KNOWN variables such as jacketed lead be it hollow point or soft point. Has anybody ever tested a 338 or 308 caliber bullet with a large portion of aluminum in the nose? Who is to say that the aluminum doesnt offer another variable that affects or alters the way the bullet flies that we have not yet predicted or discovered? Bryan's BC is probably very close to what he claims. That doesnt meen that is all there is to it especially with materials that are not typical.

if it comes out that the HATs drop as advertised regardless of the BC, GG's name is still mud around here and that is sad. Who is going to have the b@!!s to offer an appology if that turnes out to be the case? Most likely not very many. If we cannot give GG the benefit of the doubt and declare him guilty before proven inoccent than who would have the charecter to appologize for running him down?

My point here is not to take sides or say that HATs work or do not work as advertised. I have not yet tried them and have no opinion on them yet. Just want to remind everybody that your words may come back to you where you may have to eat them. Make sure they taste good.

All the bashing and finger pointing in this thread brings nothing positive to this site. Try them or leave the mud and flame out of your posts.

 

[GREYGHOSTt]

GG,

"But any day you want to come out to the range and prove your verbose claims bring it on!!!!!!!!... So we can test them against the hats on video with lotts of witnesses "... Bryan, and I, talked briefly last week about testing a new line of magazine compatible ZA hunt projectiles in both 30, and 338 caliber. Would you be interested in extending your invitation to me?

As a footnote; Bryan is anything but verbose.

Sure bring your 338 expandables. Mr. Carlson or Litz come down here as we have a new 85 pound 340 Weatherby Improved smithed by Kelbly in Ohio. 1.450" diameter Lilja barrel, barrel block, McMillan lead-filled 50 BMG stock, with a Big Bore Panda action.(Free recoil is a wonderful thing) We also have a spanking new Squires 1K rest as well. If you do not like that one, we have several other custom bench guns in 338-378 Weatherby, 338 Lapua Improved, 338 Edge and unfortunately, the 338 RUM that has raised such a big stink is at Kevin Wyatt for a magazine extension.
But just in case these don't fit your hand bring your test guns.

 

[GREYGHOSTt]

Although I have been known to take the odd long shot at targets, it is hunting that I am mostly interested in..

It is the long range terminal performance of these HAT's bullets on game that I would like to know more about. How do they go when the velocity is way down? To have an advantage over existing bullets they need to expand when others will not.
I would like to see some pictures of game shot and reports of how the bullet performed.

You need to look at Eddybo's post on the 7 elk fall to the Allen magnum.

 

[noel carlson]

Michael,

I agree with you that "taking sides", on something like this, is a silly thing to do. I disagree that this thread is devoid of facts.

GG has actually proposed a very effective way to put this one to bed. If he is serious about a joint demonstration, I am in.

We could include some impact testing while we are at it.

GG,

I will coordinate the logistics on my side, and inform you of the details.