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
More Bullet Performance Tests - The Media
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="royinidaho" data-source="post: 226143" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>Jon A,</p><p></p><p>I must of misread "the other posts". Typical for me, though.</p><p></p><p>Someone, maybe you, posted reports from years ago. I concluded from a brief read, that spin made little difference. I'll retract the statement though the results are the results.</p><p></p><p>Dirty: Conditioning and drying result in a creation of fines or dust. This stuff is designed for treatment of oil/chemical spills which it is very good at. It soaks up 800 times its own weight.</p><p></p><p>It would be best described by two year old, very dry buffalo/cow chips run through a blender.</p><p></p><p>However, its the preparation for the oil spill that seems to make it unique for the bullet expansion tests.</p><p></p><p>I used water. Oil would have been too messy and would be tried only as a last resort.</p><p></p><p>Density is hard for me to describe. The density will very from where water is 100% covering it resulting in a very loose slurry that isn't much different than water only.</p><p></p><p>I wet it first, then placed a large garbage bag in the box then scooped the media to fill the box. I pressed it down a bit by hand and added water until only the bottom inch or so was 100% saturated leaving kind of firm yet loose material. Water can be squeezed out of a hand full and be less than 30% moisture.</p><p></p><p>A better idea would be to use several smaller plastic bags stacked like milk jugs. All bullets went pretty much straight. THe widest deviation was the HAT that drifted to the right about 3" which may be a box misalignment.</p><p></p><p>The next time you gut a deer dig into the stomach to see what its been eatin'. The media is on that order but then again way different.</p><p></p><p>As far as hitting the box at 1K, I'm not the guy for that. Even if I could hit it regularly, a 2K hike or drive for each shot gets really burdensome.</p><p></p><p>I think that this stuff, in a proper container, for the caliber/weight and velocity of the bullet would put a reasonably useable tool in the hands of most LR shooters. Compared to a real animal though it's may well be like having a Oehler vs a Chrony.</p><p></p><p>From what I'm seeing with so many new bullets becoming available I definitely want to get as good of a feel for terminal characteristics as I do for velocity and accuracy.</p><p></p><p>Bergers that have been tested closely duplicate published performance.</p><p></p><p>We have perfromance indication of the WC 338 285 or was it a 265 from Kirby's elk.</p><p></p><p>Proof of terminal effectiveness of the 7mm WC 200gr was demonstrated on Buffalobob's 964 yd elk.</p><p></p><p>GG has demonstrated effectiveness of the 225 NAB time and time again.</p><p></p><p>Many are shooting the 300 SMK and getting dead anmials but further investigation leaves some wondering if they can be trusted in all situations.</p><p></p><p>LRH shooters are pushing things well beyond what has been generally accepted for years. Remington Core Loks and Winchester Silvertips are some of the best performing bullets for their intended use. However their BC isn't for squat leaving them out as an LRH selection.</p><p></p><p>Thus the quest continues........</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="royinidaho, post: 226143, member: 2011"] Jon A, I must of misread "the other posts". Typical for me, though. Someone, maybe you, posted reports from years ago. I concluded from a brief read, that spin made little difference. I'll retract the statement though the results are the results. Dirty: Conditioning and drying result in a creation of fines or dust. This stuff is designed for treatment of oil/chemical spills which it is very good at. It soaks up 800 times its own weight. It would be best described by two year old, very dry buffalo/cow chips run through a blender. However, its the preparation for the oil spill that seems to make it unique for the bullet expansion tests. I used water. Oil would have been too messy and would be tried only as a last resort. Density is hard for me to describe. The density will very from where water is 100% covering it resulting in a very loose slurry that isn't much different than water only. I wet it first, then placed a large garbage bag in the box then scooped the media to fill the box. I pressed it down a bit by hand and added water until only the bottom inch or so was 100% saturated leaving kind of firm yet loose material. Water can be squeezed out of a hand full and be less than 30% moisture. A better idea would be to use several smaller plastic bags stacked like milk jugs. All bullets went pretty much straight. THe widest deviation was the HAT that drifted to the right about 3" which may be a box misalignment. The next time you gut a deer dig into the stomach to see what its been eatin'. The media is on that order but then again way different. As far as hitting the box at 1K, I'm not the guy for that. Even if I could hit it regularly, a 2K hike or drive for each shot gets really burdensome. I think that this stuff, in a proper container, for the caliber/weight and velocity of the bullet would put a reasonably useable tool in the hands of most LR shooters. Compared to a real animal though it's may well be like having a Oehler vs a Chrony. From what I'm seeing with so many new bullets becoming available I definitely want to get as good of a feel for terminal characteristics as I do for velocity and accuracy. Bergers that have been tested closely duplicate published performance. We have perfromance indication of the WC 338 285 or was it a 265 from Kirby's elk. Proof of terminal effectiveness of the 7mm WC 200gr was demonstrated on Buffalobob's 964 yd elk. GG has demonstrated effectiveness of the 225 NAB time and time again. Many are shooting the 300 SMK and getting dead anmials but further investigation leaves some wondering if they can be trusted in all situations. LRH shooters are pushing things well beyond what has been generally accepted for years. Remington Core Loks and Winchester Silvertips are some of the best performing bullets for their intended use. However their BC isn't for squat leaving them out as an LRH selection. Thus the quest continues........ [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
More Bullet Performance Tests - The Media
Top