,
As previously advertised and stated, they have been tested in media and on live game as well.
However, the 1000 yard phone book test we will conduct will be to verify the validity one that was done by GG at 100 yards at reduced velocity and spin. If the 100 yard test and the theory of the test conducted in Utah was valid, then the 1000 yard one I will do should indicate the same penetration and expansion characteristics.
Lightvarmint, we should then assume that the HAT bullets that you will be testing will include the phase I 265 HAT with the original Jackets so you can truely compare them to the results GG found ?? Does the phase II 265 use the same jacket ?? Same thickness ?? If there have been changes made in those areas it would be good to know.
Thanks , RHB
Hello guys,
Time to set the hook on this issue of low velocity/low gyro spin testing................ Do you REALLY want us to perform a test and publish the results of said test of the Gen I bullets at 1000 yards through the test media from a full velocity launch? Be careful what you ask for and really think about your answer(s)............
Initially, we had not intened to conduct any testing with superceded bullet designs. This is due to a two fold reason:
--First our one and only interest in this matter is to ascertain the accuracy of reduced velocity short-range testing as compared to the longer range method at full velocity for the bullets that will be sold on the open market. Nothing else.......... We have asked and have not been given any PROOF that the "theory" of the 100 yard test was proven at 1000 yards from a full velocity launch. We cannot fathom (since it is so easy to conduct such a rudimentary testing session) as to why the "theory" has not been proven so we can use it as a theorem or a rule of thumb............ So since no one else is stepping up to the plate to do it at the longer distances, we will even though the theory is not our idea. In reality, we hope that it does work as it would really make our testing process much easier........ But until it is PROVEN by a credible source, we cannot use it as a basis one way or the other.....
Basically what we have here is a persons idea of how something should work (to them) and not any actual verified hard evidence that it does or even evidence of a failed attempt at performing the test or collecting the data and/or information. We do not care who holds the theory we just have to prove that it is ACCURATE before WE use the results for either a design modification or as a basis to advertise the bullet expansion. Mr Henson cannot stand behind expansion testing from either a financial standpoint or a standpoint of his credibility as a bulletsmith if the testing method is not accurate and proven.
Secondly, since the Gen I bullets are not scheduled to be produced again, we thought that testing them would be for the wrong reason. We are not trying to poke someone in the eye about their testing process, we are just trying to validate it for either future use or to allow us to forget about it as an option for testing........ The Gen I bullets present a much more abrupt frontal profile and since the jacket, core and tip of the bullet are the same, it would tend to expand easier. Additionally, we thought that by not testing the Gen I bullets, that would give someone (and their band of merry men) an opportunity to bow out gracefully and focus on something else that is more important........ Remember, these are just bullets and the only person who's livelihood could depend on them is Mr Henson. It just seems as though there is a very strong concerted effort to prevent his project from being successful. And, we think it is sort of interesting given the current state of affairs of the high BC custom bullet business.
We can get this testing accomplished if NOBODY else is willing to do it. Or, even better one of you guys could step up to the plate and do it. With as much hot air blowing around about it, one would think that someone supporting the theory by this time would have applied themselves and conducted the testing at the longer ranges and proved the theory...... Tilley, for instance was shipped enough bullets to conduct such a test and we don't know why he has not posted his test results as of yet......... Interesting to say the least.
Finally, we are really trying to focus on what IS and what AIN'T. Not who is and who ain't. From our standpoint, the WHATS are significant and the who's aint!
Lightvarmint
