Re: System Insight
To Noel:
Thanks for the update, but I was on to it...as I said, the fast twister, is the Bartlein barrel Later and I have spoke about. It just looks like it has a sleeve over it, as I have seen Mike do before. And yes, I know it was specified for your experimentation, but why is it not being used for it then? You didn't really need to jump in and give a speech, but thanks anyways. Fact is, it's a really fast twist and isn't necessary, but sure, why not right?
And thanks for telling me Louis's rifle will be a good platform to test the bullets, just what I needed. Fact is, there are now some 4 rifles built up and ready to test the bullets, which has already been done. I like how you take the opportunity to throw in that little "only flawed component" bit. Just like I though you would; predictable. You then even, once again, name our bullets under your own classification system; why? It's called the 414 grain .375SP. Like most people, we just name the bullet by weight and caliber-simple. Then you go on to sell us on your bullets, talking about how this isn't experimental, yet the thread is about the system from DTA and includes a complete cartridge/bullet combination, so yes, it's still experimental until the rifle is complete. So if your 420 grain bullet is proven, and you can get 3,200+fps out of a standard CT case, then what are we all waiting for? Chey-Tac would be out-classed already and everyone would be shooting your stuff. Why aren't you winning competitions with it, and selling them to the military? Honestly, not and attack at all; get them into the hands of our soldiers! And why do you keep changing? What about your powdered tungsten core bullets? Have you had the chance to see that 4, yes 4, companies already have patents on that technology? Solid you say? Two more have patents, even have one right next to me, as I have made tungsten bullets for 3 years now, but they are not good (as you say) for your intentions. You called me to give me some good advice, so let me return the favor: spare yourself the trouble and call around to see what patent you can use to make those bullets. Oh, and I do really hope they work out, because it would be great to see anything better then the 1+MOA these other companies can get.
Why am I bothering with this, I don't know. I'm just upset that you constantly follow GS Custom around trying to walk in our shoes, use our ideas and creations, preach about our concepts, spout lies and slither in degrading comments in some silly attempt to make us look band and drum-up business for yourself. You even go so far as to send us on a wild goose chase with the ATF, spouting false accusations! Yes, great idea. Yes it bothers me. You try to "Obama" you way around, even calling me to try and get information from me, insulting me, talking down to me, and have a very nice way to justify it as a gesture of kindness. I'm sure you will even have a well-worded rebuttle to this post, but the fact is you are full of hot air. You are careful with exposing yourself with these details, but you should lay off before you do, or is it too late I wonder? We produce load data, you claim it as your own. We spec a long case neck, you take it as your own notion. We start a project, you claim the very same thing the second you hear about what we are doing. You bring Terry in to back you up or throw out some claims and throw further insults, but where are the results from others shooting it? Surely if it was such a spectacular system, you would be showing us all up with Medals and trophys, contracts and sales, not on the various forums thowing in your misguided comments. You say stuff like "Oh, you don't know how to make a bullet for my purpose. No, no, no you don't! You have no idea..." Listen, this isn't our first day on the job, if you recall.
You even try to make some silly sideline notion that we are using or stealing your ideas. Well, the weight is just that, because we were asked to fix what you broke. The bullets you made did not perform as you stated, so we were asked to replace them. That is what we did, and it turns out the bullets were 414 grains instead of 420. Point is, the number of customers who asked us for these bullets are getting just what they asked for, and it takes more then one design to fill those needs. Yes, we tried using our original version for this application and it started to turn at 535 yards, so we fixed it. Not bad for only spending such a short amount of time on it (Jan? where did you get that?) I did not prove them past 3,400, but rather said they would be good up to 3400, and I was mistaken. Not GS, but me, and I take responsibility for that. The private firm we made them for is happy with what we sent them, and that is all I got, as I stated. And we did have successful testing even here, but it was preliminary and was intended as such. We said they were being tested and we held off selling even a single bullet until we got the results we wanted. It turns out Gerard pushed the design past where he knew it was good just to prove where the limits are, and the test functioned superbly for that cause. But Extreme Long Range Bullets are not new to us, so we know what we are doing, and you cannot deny that.
If you feel the need to pedal your bullets here, so be it, but stop trying to get everyone to purchase a barrel specific to your bullet so you can con them into buying some and testing them for you, then coming up with an excuse why they don't work; and trust me, I've heard quite a few of them. Is this an attempt at exclusivity? I'm sure it's not the supply of barrels. I know of two companies that have your "test barrels" standing by because they did not have a buyer. So how are you taking care of that yourself? Planning on making some barrels and custom brass (thought you were using standard CT cases to get your results)? If you are fronting the money, then good for you. We all have had to do that for our work, so glad you could join us. Taking deposits on bullets that have not been tested or proven is not good business, and you have been doing just that (yes, I can quote you on that one). As I recall, you are still working on getting the machines, right? Offering upgrades for those that have been waiting for such a long time. But you know what, I don't think anyone here who reads this should refrain from purchasing Noel's bullets. I am actually a huge supporter of anyone trying to improve the sport and it's military application, so please do test them. I don't think your bullets are bad Noel, just you. If you make a spectacular ELR, then I will buy them myself, just as I have offered to you. We are all simply trying to build a better long range system, so more power to you, but please refrain from the rubbish you bring to the table where we eat.
P.S. I still hold that gain twist has no advantages, and may be worse. Only need for it is if you are stripping your bands. If so, the design is flawed, not the barrel. And the stuff about constantly re-aligning the bullet axis in the bore doesn't add up. The bullet should be aligned to begin with, by design, and gain twisting it isn't going to fix that flaw. If your bullet is constantly moving in the bore, then it's too late. And the torque the gain twist puts on the bands will always cause excessive striping of a portion of the bands: you cannot change angle and not strip. This causes gas to slip by and accuracy potential to diminish, not to mention excessive copper fouling (or plasma copper deposits, as you say, and your bullets do not work well in such a place). But again, if it works for you, then don't listen to me, just my opinion. Shoot what you want.
![url]](http://[IMG][url="http://i844.photobucket.com/albums/ab5/noelcarlson/175.jpg"]http://i844.photobucket.com/albums/ab5/noelcarlson/175.jpg[/url])
).
