Have we hit the wall?

[CoryT]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

DH, I just did not have any loaded rounds on hand at the time, but we will do the 300 Scenar at the next opportunity. As of right now, it's one of my two personal favorites, the 285 Hornady being the other. I'm still working on getting good groups with the Berger. The 250 Scenar is very accurate from my rifles, but loses out in the BC/velocity trade to the 285 and 300.

 

[Dark Horse]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Thanks Cory, looking forward to hearing about it.

 

[Gerard Schultz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

My bad. In my reply to the field report from a year and a half ago, at the link below, I 'should' have said "overspun/overdriven", instead of just "overspun". Sorry about that.

Please don't click on the link if soaps do not interest you.

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...rue#Post1905237

 

[Noel Carlson]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

OK Gerard,

That constitutes progress of a sort.

Will you submit properly spun, and driven 295's for BC verification?

 

[Gerard Schultz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

The 338309SP has superseded the 338295SP. You have been told this before. That is real progress in less than the 5 years it takes some other <span style="text-decoration: line-through">wannabe</span> manufacturers to produce something.

Also see paragraph 3 of #3009785, 15 posts up from here.

 

[goober]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gerard Schultz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The 338309SP has superseded the 338295SP. You have been told this before. That is real progress in less than the 5 years it takes some other <span style="text-decoration: line-through">wannabe</span> manufacturers to produce something.

Also see paragraph 3 of #3009785, 15 posts up from here. </div></div>Gerard are you going to submit some projectiles or not , lets put this to be bed -yes or no .

 

[XL Mammal]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Does anyone know how to send a bitchslap using UBBCode? I'm tired of having to sift through the bickering to get anything meaningful out of these threads. That 2 shot group did make me chuckle, though.

Thanks to Bryan Litz for one of the few informative posts.

 

[Gerard Schultz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

ch'e,
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gerard are you going to submit some projectiles or not , lets put this to be bed -yes or no .</div></div>

From this thread alone:
<span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">
"The main reason why I declined participation, is that it does not suit GSC to do so at the moment. I am mystified why this is not accepted."
"It does not suit GSC to participate in a test at this moment"
"Thanks for the thought but GSC will not be participating. We are involved in a number of projects that is eating all the available time and there is no way we can make the deadline I see for this exercise."
"You can throw your toys as much as you like, we have no time available to participate. It is unfortunate but it is reality and the way it is."
"....we have equipment arriving shortly and preparation is already falling behind."
"We are waiting for a rifle to be completed but the development is shelved, pending the completion of other projects."
"However, I chose to skip the SH test in Las Vegas because GSC is involved in activities that will keep us busy to about mid year. Gina and Anthony were hoping to get to the SHOT show but that is now also cancelled."
"Also see paragraph 3 of #3009785, 15 posts up from here."</span></span></span>

I would say it is a no.

 

[goober]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

viola !! Laca Brew ,Questioned answered -thank you Gerard .
I personally think it is a mistake and will be seen as a negative to your brand as others read this but its your ball .It cant be hard for someone just to order 10-20 projectiles and do it without Gerard ??? Its just a test and it would be great for all those interested in this to see the "true"bc and stability results

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ch'e</div><div class="ubbcode-body">viola !! Laca Brew ,Questioned answered -thank you Gerard .
I personally think it is a mistake and will be seen as a negative to your brand as others read this but its your ball .It cant be hard for someone just to order 10-20 projectiles and do it without Gerard ??? Its just a test and it would be great for all those interested in this to see the "true"bc and stability results </div></div>

Che'

If you read more into Gerald's response throughout this thread, when I said SH would simply buy some GSC projectiles to include for the test either personally or through a 3rd party he said he was shutting down sales to individuals at least until after any accuracy tests were finished to prevent anyone from including the GSC bullets .

This speaks volumes.

So not only does he not want to provide any support, he doesn't want anyone who buys them checking either and if you plan on using them for that, forget about it.

 

[Gerard Schultz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

 

[PeterPHWS]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Gerard, if you are not willing to get involved so be it ... but like Che I think it is a mistake ... and will only damage your business ... there are many shooters who are going to think that if you are not prepared to stand by your product then there is something wrong with it or at least with the figures ... which is a shame if the bullets do work.

Anyway ... on to other matters which are interesting -

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stephen Damron</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just for some comparison, lets look at some balistic drop numbers with the Dynamic Research Predator with a 338 lapua with a 100 yrd zero.

Bullet weight: 236 grains,

BC .556, 3130 FPS BC .820, 2950 FPS

Range Drop in MOA Range Drop in MOA
100 -0- 100 -0-
500 6.37 500 7.05
1000 17.25 1000 18.33
1500 30.53 1500 31.24
2000 46.88 2000 46.03



As you can see by the calculated numbers, the difference in drop is an MOA or less as you look at the two charts. This is all calculated and gives a good guesstemation of the predicted drop. One calculation that has not been taken into account is form factor, or how aerodynamic the bullet is. As I have said before, we get wrapped around the axle with BC's. </div></div>

Stephen,

I have been looking at the .338 results and note your figures above and have to agree that the elevation drop seems wholly out of sinc and far better than could be expected for the BC given.

I also have a glimmer of understanding on your point about aero-dynamics being something which is'nt factored wholly into the BC ... as evidenced by these results.

However, what sort of ballistic programme could be used to work with your bullets for shooting unknown distances ? By this I mean ranging the distance but not necessarily being able to just let "sighters" go to get on target. What could be used if the shooter wanted to try for a first round cold bore hit ? Don't we still need to work with a BC and a velocity and wind speed and barometric conditions in the normal way ?

If so ... would the BC's on your bullets work ? Or do they perform better than the BC dictates ?

I ask this because I note you don't supply BC's for your bullets on your web site and wondered why ...

 

[DaveV]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So not only does he not want to provide any support, he doesn't want anyone who buys them checking either</div></div>

...which only leaves the conclusion that he is a techno-troll.

 

[QRE23]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Put into simple redneck terms "you either put up or you shut up" or another oldie but goodie that certainly fits the bill "you can talk the talk but you can't walk the walk"

Do you have ANY idea how RIDICULOUS it makes you to say you not only aren't going to participate but you will not sell anyone bullets that wants to buy them so they can be included in SH test/s? It really does make you and ALL your claims look like complete BS.

That would be like GM claiming the new Vette to have a top speed of X but when and independant source tries to substantiate their claims GM says no and they are going to not sell anymore Vette's so they can't be tested. Come on, that's beyond laughable!!!

 

[Gerard Schultz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

See how easy it is for Frank and Noel to get you guys worked up?

<span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="font-weight: bold">"The main reason why I declined participation, is that it does not suit GSC to do so at the moment. I am mystified why this is not accepted."
"It does not suit GSC to participate in a test at this moment"
"Thanks for the thought but GSC will not be participating. We are involved in a number of projects that is eating all the available time and there is no way we can make the deadline I see for this exercise."
"You can throw your toys as much as you like, we have no time available to participate. It is unfortunate but it is reality and the way it is."
"....we have equipment arriving shortly and preparation is already falling behind."
"We are waiting for a rifle to be completed but the development is shelved, pending the completion of other projects."
"However, I chose to skip the SH test in Las Vegas because GSC is involved in activities that will keep us busy to about mid year. Gina and Anthony were hoping to get to the SHOT show but that is now also cancelled."
"Also see paragraph 3 of #3009785, 15 posts up from here."</span></span>

We are unable to drop everything, push out our expansion projects, delay training of new staff, work harder or alter our time line. We are bound by deliveries of equipment in the USA and expansion in SA. We cannot participate and we have seen the results when old GSC bullets are misused (but still do not do badly). When Frank threatened to apply more pressure, the easy route for GSC became to continue supply to bulk customers, rather than sell 10 or 20 at a time. We are looking after our HV, FN and HP lines first. Does that not make sense? Later, when we are able, we will participate.

I wonder what the reaction would have been if a different manufacturer said "sorry guys, we are relocating/putting in new systems/automating/whatever, cannot spare the people/resouces and will only be able to participate after mid year."

 

[QRE23]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

So if I understand this correctly you are/were making them and selling them bulk but you can't make a few extra to make available for the SH test/s??? Really?!?!

 

[Mod Adahy]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

I think I have some the 295's and will verify later. I will send you a pm LL.

 

[ELR researcher]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Azprc:

The 295 is not a current offering. The current offerings are:

SP (solid), 200 gr, #338200SP164 - Mag/Single feed. .338" - Lapua Magnum and smaller cases - http://www.gsgroup.co.za/338200SP164.html

SP (solid), 232 gr, #338232SP150 - Single feed. .338" - Lapua Magnum and smaller cases - http://www.gsgroup.co.za/338232SP150.html

SP (solid), 267 gr, #338267SP250 - Single feed. .338" - Lapua Magnum and smaller cases - http://www.gsgroup.co.za/338267SP250.html

SP (solid), 309 gr, #338309SP142 - Single feed. .338" Calibres - http://www.gsgroup.co.za/338309SP142.html

 

[Kiwi Greg]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mammal</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Does anyone know how to send a bitchslap using UBBCode? I'm tired of having to sift through the bickering to get anything meaningful out of these threads. That 2 shot group did make me chuckle, though.

Thanks to Bryan Litz for one of the few informative posts. </div></div>

+1 I couldn't agree more !!!

I cannot believe that a company could build a projectile & say it has BC X.
From what I gather it is very clear that they haven't even bothered to spend enough money on R&D to acquire a rifle to test them properly with.
It is very frustrating as an enthusiast to see all these products out there knowing full well that the BCs are most likely over inflated.
As has been mentioned they are hard to get & cost alot money.
When starting out with a new projectile I think I need to get at least 50-100 to try to get any useful results.
Posting information on 2 shot groups is rediculous at best.
The platforms that are possibly cabable of shooting them to their fullest potential are expensive to run & have a finite barrel life.

I'm getting very tired of all the bickering & the constant pissing competitions that result from it.

Thank you very much to the guys that went to the great effort of doing the recent testing & posting the results so we as consumers can have a better chance of making an informed decision on how best to spend our resources including time & barrel life

 

[Noel Carlson]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Brad,

I was hoping someone like you would come forward, thanks.


Peter,

Now that we have all been treated to another "popcorn" moment, perhaps you and I can move onto "other matters that are interesting".

You prefaced your involvement in this thread with two assumptions that are in need of closer scrutiny. The first was that jacketed projectiles are somehow "safer" than banded solids. In what sense did you mean this?

Second, you stated that your interpretation of the Las Vegas BC test implied Sierra, and Berger to be the clear favorites. I think that you understand exterior ballistics well enough to know the role that velocity potential plays in this calculus, but let's ignore that for the present. You undoubtedly realize mass, and form factor also figure prominently in the determination... but let's push that aside also.

The innovation that will remove any ambiguity from the question "have we hit the wall" deals primarily with the barrel/projectile interface.

You will learn more about the mechanics of the solution in a reasonably short time... along with other ELR shooters. What you can be certain of is that the jacketed bullet/saboted flechette paradigms are ridiculously, and misleadingly

 

[Noel Carlson]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

... simplistic as alternative choices (damn phone wouldn't let me finish with an edit).

 

[dynamic research]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Peter,
We are currently using three different programs. We cross check the results with each other to come up with a starting point. The programs are JBM ballistics, I Snipe, and the Nomad with the ballistic and gps programs. This is the same system used by our snipers. Once we get the numbers from all the programs, we compare them and come with an average. That number is then used to shoot at range. We can usually get a first round hit if we have read the wind right. We do not shoot "sighters" to confirm anything. All shots are recorded in our dope books. If we miss, we look at the wind and enviornmental conditions, and adjust from there. The more trigger time, the better you will get at judging the conditions right, Consistant and honest pratice give an accurate account for the rifle, projectile and load. When I was in the Army, I never saw a BC on any load. All our data was done at the range. When issued a different rifle, it started over. This is just one reason we dont use the BC's. In the end, there is no ballistic program that will give you a 100 % first shot hit every time. The Nomad system is as close as I can get, and thats not 100%, but its as close as it gets.
I hope I was able to answer your questions.

 

[PeterPHWS]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Stephen,

The info you have to hand regarding your bullets would be helpful if it could be shared. It would cut short some of the lengthy process of having to work out a BC for a bullet. It is'nt just the cost of doing this but saying it simple ... "it's nice to have a starting point" ...

I appreciate that each load for each bullet in each barrel will be individually tailored for final maximum effectiveness ... but a "heads up" on the info needed to start working with ballistic software is always welcome.

Noel,

As far as I am aware my use of the word "safe" has only been used in the context of a "safe bet" ... meaning that my choice of a barrel twist/bore has been done in .375 CT to give me the most flexibility for different types of bullets which could be shot through it. In my case both jacketed and solids.

The other points you raise are in fairness not easily understood by me.

My comments on the .338 LM bullet test by SH's are based on the BC results which were shown. The Berger and Sierra 300g bullets came highest on tested BC and because they are jacketed and are likely to be a lot cheaper than a solid I think they will dominate the market for that calibre.

No great revelation there as far as I can see. Until the cost of a solid could be justified by a proportionate increase in performance I don't think the average ELR shooter will spend more on them if they can do as well with a cheaper jacketed bullet.

 

[dynamic research]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Peter,
I will be more than happy to give you the BC we have come up with any of our projectiles. Our BC's are not a secret, we just dont publish them on our site. I know that we all like a place to start, and anything can help, especialy with the turned solid projectiles, they are not cheap. Let me know and I would be more than happy to give you the numbers.

 

[cali_tz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Stephen, you should try Shooter as one of your data points. I find it uncannily accurate with 308 175SMK and 338LM Scenar 250 and 300.

 

[PeterPHWS]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Cheers Stephen, I will get in touch in due course.

 

[dynamic research]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

I will have to try the Shooter. We will see if we come up with the same numbers. Thanks for the sugestion. Steve

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

If you tune the software, any of them are all pretty accurate. They just need to be tuned to your rifle shooting that specific load as well you have to calibrate the scope along with it.

I have found most are within a .1 mils at distances, the bad ones are .2 mils which still is not bad. Most of them are using pretty similar engines.

As I posted in another thread, here is a Patagonia LB3 and actual Doppler Radar data using a 250gr Scenar with both G1 and G7 run through the software. As you can see it's all relatively accurate and matches up the Doppler very well. LB3 has a good engine and is a nice desktop package that can help flush out data.

This is what is possible when you tune your ballistic calculator to the "system"

 

[cali_tz]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Lowlight can you provide insight into what tuning your software to your rifle and scope...?

 

[Noel Carlson]

Re: Have we hit the wall?

Peter,

A solid projectile designer has complete control of form, and mass. If a problem is encountered, it can be addressed with no additional investment in tooling. Is there really any doubt in your mind as to where the next ZA will place in BC rank? The writing was on the wall from the results of the three year old version.

Jacketed bullets will always dominate, in terms of market share, for the reason that you stated... they are cheap. I doubt that the 338s cost more than $.15-.20 each to produce... but they have "hit the wall" in both form factor, and velocity potential. Jacketed lead will no longer dominate in the upper performance tiers in *any* caliber.

The most interesting developments are yet to be demonstrated,