Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Berger Bullets Announces Launch of a New Ammo Company
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Eric Stecker" data-source="post: 984003" data-attributes="member: 8908"><p>Phorwath,</p><p></p><p>Do you not regard the following statements from Michael as various forms of personal attacks?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Struck a nerve as we've been here with Michael before.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then you get the following.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So he is a capable scientist with all brands but Berger?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This implies that we are lying or that Bryan doesn't know what he is doing. He lists four bullets in his post. Do you regard that amount as "a number of"? We list 90 different bullets on our website.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Really!? Debacle!? We found conflicting results in a later test and changed our data to match the facts. This is a debacle?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is not a personal attack? My last name may not be Berger but I take this very personally. Where are the facts? Oh, that's right, they're classified.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>ABM's ballistician is Bryan. Berger's ballistician is Bryan. I don't even know how to process this statement.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So again does Bryan have it wrong or is he a liar?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Is this an attack if it isn't true? We have data. He claims he has data. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Bryan is not suggesting you lose BC in our recommended twist rates but rather have the potential to improve BC. This is a misleading statement.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Can anyone show me evidence of the inaccuracy of the BC Michael is claiming? We don't see it. Other's who use this bullet don't see it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Based on what? He said he'd be "surprised if". Are we that capable of getting it wrong?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know what you do for a living Phorwath, but if someone said something like this about what you do would you take it personally. I sure did. This is pure ********.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Maybe I'm a hot head. I'll admit it. I'm also the guy in charge of manufacturing. A guy who has never made a bullet is telling me that I have a problem doing my job. I am taking this very personally.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I need Michael Courtney to tell me that I need to do a better job making bullets like I need a hole in the head. How many championships are won by shooters who used Berger? How many records are held by shooters who used Berger? So I can make good bullets but I can't meet our specs. Seriously!?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is the vast majority of them obviously. I won't say that we don't have a few FB bullets that need closer review but the varmint bullets are not our priority. Anything with a BT has been thoroughly tested.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Coming from an admitted non-participant. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See?</p><p></p><p>All of these are quotes from Michael's posts. At what point is it appropriate for me to say enough is enough and get ****ed. I did get personal in my last post but I'll offer that it was in defense of mine and Bryan's work rather than some unfounded personal attack on Michael. What we do is very important to us. It is not an academic pursuit but a real world blood, sweat and toil effort. What level of quality and consistency would bullets made by Michael achieve? Maybe he should try it and see how easy it is. I suspect the tone of his posts would change. </p><p></p><p>We do work very hard to get it right. In spite of what Michael suggests.</p><p></p><p>Is it clear that Michael is blameless in where this conversation has progressed? If it is then I apologize for my passionate and irrational behavior. Seemingly, I have no factual justification for my position. </p><p></p><p>Regards,</p><p>Eric</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Eric Stecker, post: 984003, member: 8908"] Phorwath, Do you not regard the following statements from Michael as various forms of personal attacks? Struck a nerve as we've been here with Michael before. Then you get the following. So he is a capable scientist with all brands but Berger? This implies that we are lying or that Bryan doesn't know what he is doing. He lists four bullets in his post. Do you regard that amount as "a number of"? We list 90 different bullets on our website. Really!? Debacle!? We found conflicting results in a later test and changed our data to match the facts. This is a debacle? This is not a personal attack? My last name may not be Berger but I take this very personally. Where are the facts? Oh, that's right, they're classified. ABM's ballistician is Bryan. Berger's ballistician is Bryan. I don't even know how to process this statement. So again does Bryan have it wrong or is he a liar? Is this an attack if it isn't true? We have data. He claims he has data. Bryan is not suggesting you lose BC in our recommended twist rates but rather have the potential to improve BC. This is a misleading statement. Can anyone show me evidence of the inaccuracy of the BC Michael is claiming? We don't see it. Other's who use this bullet don't see it. Based on what? He said he'd be "surprised if". Are we that capable of getting it wrong? I don't know what you do for a living Phorwath, but if someone said something like this about what you do would you take it personally. I sure did. This is pure ********. Maybe I'm a hot head. I'll admit it. I'm also the guy in charge of manufacturing. A guy who has never made a bullet is telling me that I have a problem doing my job. I am taking this very personally. I need Michael Courtney to tell me that I need to do a better job making bullets like I need a hole in the head. How many championships are won by shooters who used Berger? How many records are held by shooters who used Berger? So I can make good bullets but I can't meet our specs. Seriously!? Which is the vast majority of them obviously. I won't say that we don't have a few FB bullets that need closer review but the varmint bullets are not our priority. Anything with a BT has been thoroughly tested. Coming from an admitted non-participant. See? All of these are quotes from Michael's posts. At what point is it appropriate for me to say enough is enough and get ****ed. I did get personal in my last post but I'll offer that it was in defense of mine and Bryan's work rather than some unfounded personal attack on Michael. What we do is very important to us. It is not an academic pursuit but a real world blood, sweat and toil effort. What level of quality and consistency would bullets made by Michael achieve? Maybe he should try it and see how easy it is. I suspect the tone of his posts would change. We do work very hard to get it right. In spite of what Michael suggests. Is it clear that Michael is blameless in where this conversation has progressed? If it is then I apologize for my passionate and irrational behavior. Seemingly, I have no factual justification for my position. Regards, Eric [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Berger Bullets Announces Launch of a New Ammo Company
Top