That would be having your cake and eating it too.
If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding!
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.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Gauging interest in affordable bullet-pointing die??
- Thread starter JasonT
- Start date
That would be having your cake and eating it too.
If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding!
We recommend you do not trim meplats... Just giving a heads up.
The problem with that, is that assumption that the inconsistencies in the meplat actually effect the bullet, but they do not. However the jacket is balanced at the time the bullet is formed. So do you want to take the chance of un-balancing the bullet? Remember these bullets already perform really well with the tips they have. Those inconsistencies are not really hurtful, but damaging the meplat can be. Simply closing the air gap a tiny bit is all you need to do. http://www.abmediaresources.com/BulletPointing.pdf
Doc I trust you with ballistics, so I'll take your word for it - I definitely agree that bullets (and bergers in particular) perform exceptionally as they come. My idea for the pointing die is based around your (and Litz's) research with bullet consistency and BC improvements. So I'm hoping, once the patent goes through, that I can send you guys at Applied Ballistics a sample for review.
Do you think there's ever a case where meplat trimming would be useful?
Do you think there's ever a case where meplat trimming would be useful?
Doc I trust you with ballistics, so I'll take your word for it - I definitely agree that bullets (and bergers in particular) perform exceptionally as they come. My idea for the pointing die is based around your (and Litz's) research with bullet consistency and BC improvements. So I'm hoping, once the patent goes through, that I can send you guys at Applied Ballistics a sample for review.
Do you think there's ever a case where meplat trimming would be useful?
No, I would never bother with trimming them. Even pointing should be taken with great care. Any damage to the meplat that goes unseen and you have ruined the bullet. If you are wanting to send some samples, email me at doc.beech@appliedballisticsllc.com and I will get you setup.
I think Kevin Cram does. If not it is a separate operation. He has a little drill with a chamfer built in. It would remove some metal from inside the hole to close them without so much pressure. MattWhy can't someone make a meplat trimmer that trims and deburs the hole at the same time? Cutters with different sized deburring points on them for each caliber would need to be experimented with but seems very doable. I hate doing it anyway, no way I'm doing two steps.
I was referring to after trimming or before pointing.Titan/Dk - to which concept are you referring? Pointing or trimming?
It would make them close easier without stressing the bullet so much. Matt
DocBII
Gold $$ Contributor
Good day,
I'd like to respectfully disagree with DocUSMC. I started trimming bullets a couple of years before Whidden came out with his pointing die, and it works. Pointing may or may not make a difference, it depends upon the bullets as well as your process for pointing them. Like all endeavors, your preparation and process usually determines your result. If you don't sort by ogive length before trimming and length before pointing, you won't get good results. I'd rather bullet manufacturers didn't attempt to point bullets, their results are too inconsistent.
The reduction in bullet length is usually 0.010" to 0.025", and I cannot measure the before/after weight difference after trimming with my scale. Even if you assume all that mass was located at the extreme edge of a 0.020" circle, the effect would be small compared to the mass outside the circle.
Respectfully,
DocB
I'd like to respectfully disagree with DocUSMC. I started trimming bullets a couple of years before Whidden came out with his pointing die, and it works. Pointing may or may not make a difference, it depends upon the bullets as well as your process for pointing them. Like all endeavors, your preparation and process usually determines your result. If you don't sort by ogive length before trimming and length before pointing, you won't get good results. I'd rather bullet manufacturers didn't attempt to point bullets, their results are too inconsistent.
The reduction in bullet length is usually 0.010" to 0.025", and I cannot measure the before/after weight difference after trimming with my scale. Even if you assume all that mass was located at the extreme edge of a 0.020" circle, the effect would be small compared to the mass outside the circle.
Respectfully,
DocB
Jason T.:Ok, I can definitely try to work the concept in somehow. I'd like it to be one step, but it may have to be 2.
I have stayed out of your discussions on this board and Bench Rest Central for reasons that I have personal, business corporate, legal and client conflicts with the subject matter -- and way to much history on the subjects in question since 2002. I can tell you this. If you don't have the PASSION and the KNOWLEDGE, you will fail. Price point is NOT the answer. Everyone who shoots in competition -- from the beginners to the elite -- have various measuring tools. They will judge you and your product before they ever fire a round down range. If you cant make a GREAT product that gives better waterline vertical at long range than anything else on the market or better than any custom one-off precision instrument guarded with pride in a shooter's shop, you will not be able to GIVE the product away.
Respectfully,
Jim Hardy
To all, I appreciate the input!
DocB that's a good point. If the change were closer to edge of the bullet's diameter, the difference would be bigger than where it is now. In addition, the amount of mass seems negligible from your account.
Jim, thanks for your input. To clarify, I don't intend to usurp the existing pointing die design. The whidden/hoover/pindell design (all vaguely similar) works excellently. I've used it and seen it used and it makes great results. But I definitely think there's room for improvement while also reducing complexity. I feel that my design can cost less and be made to a similarly high standard at the same time.
Best wishes - Jason
DocB that's a good point. If the change were closer to edge of the bullet's diameter, the difference would be bigger than where it is now. In addition, the amount of mass seems negligible from your account.
Jim, thanks for your input. To clarify, I don't intend to usurp the existing pointing die design. The whidden/hoover/pindell design (all vaguely similar) works excellently. I've used it and seen it used and it makes great results. But I definitely think there's room for improvement while also reducing complexity. I feel that my design can cost less and be made to a similarly high standard at the same time.
Best wishes - Jason
J............ snip........... If you cant make a GREAT product that gives better waterline vertical at long range than anything else on the market or better than any custom one-off precision instrument guarded with pride in a shooter's shop, you will not be able to GIVE the product away.
Respectfully,
Jim Hardy
I wonder why you would say such a thing. Marketing just doesn't work that way.
There is usually only a single item on the market at any one time which is the absolute best and usually most people don't buy it even knowing full well that it's the best. Bullet pointing dies are no different from any other consumer product.
Nearly everything I own, and I'll bet nearly everything you own, is not "better than any custom one-off" product. And last time I checked, they weren't giving these products away either.
I have bought many custom made shirts, but the vast majority of the shirts I've bought are off the rack, and pretty ordinary at that. Likewise, I've had some fancy cars in the past, including one Ferrari, but at the moment I drive a bone stock BMW which is far from their best model and not even close to the best car on the market. I shoot Berger bullets. They aren't the best and they're far from custom, but they are affordable and they're good enough to win where I compete. When my current supply runs low, I'm gonna' purchase some more and I don't expect Berger to give them away just because they're not the best.
Interestingly, it's the defective meplat on my Burger bullets that has me interested in trying bullet pointing.
If someone makes a functional bullet pointing die which works as well as the products on the existing market, but which costs $125 instead of $250 (or more), then it will sell.
I wonder why you would say such a thing. Marketing just doesn't work that way.
There is usually only a single item on the market at any one time which is the absolute best and usually most people don't buy it even knowing full well that it's the best. Bullet pointing dies are no different from any other consumer product.
Nearly everything I own, and I'll bet nearly everything you own, is not "better than any custom one-off" product. And last time I checked, they weren't giving these products away either.
I have bought many custom made shirts, but the vast majority of the shirts I've bought are off the rack, and pretty ordinary at that. Likewise, I've had some fancy cars in the past, including one Ferrari, but at the moment I drive a bone stock BMW which is far from their best model and not even close to the best car on the market. I shoot Berger bullets. They aren't the best and they're far from custom, but they are affordable and they're good enough to win where I compete. When my current supply runs low, I'm gonna' purchase some more and I don't expect Berger to give them away just because they're not the best.
Interestingly, it's the defective meplat on my Burger bullets that has me interested in trying bullet pointing.
If someone makes a functional bullet pointing die which works as well as the products on the existing market, but which costs $125 instead of $250 (or more), then it will sell.
Mozella:
I appreciate your position, but I know how marketing works, although I have often failed to follow new trends in the marketing arena despite the fact that I have represented well known marketing icons on a national and international level. My name, my reputation and my brand have always been at the head of any marketing I have done.
I believe that I can speak with knowledge on the meplat closing dies and and process. Speedy may have made the first meplat closing die back in the 70's for himself and a few friends. Corbin appears to have had the concept as well. Both unknown to Ferris Pindell and I when we developed the meplat closing die, as you know it today, in 2002 This was a 22 day and night project that cost me $6,750. I did all of the testing. During that testing, I developed the details in the actual pointing -- that is to say -- I developed a process to close the meplats smaller than a custom bullet making die. Ferris consulted with his former employer, Sierra, for some data having to do with ogive dims. I have the first, best and only meplat closing die with certain one-off features developed by me. That die has produced many records and championships. I also sorted and closed the meplats on 25,000 Sierra 2156 Palma bullets for the 2011 Nationals at Camp Perry and the 2011 World Palma Championships. The Pindell die and my process has been greatly refined, especially in the last few years. Counting the bullets that are in my shop at this time, I will have processed and closed the meplats on over 280,000 bullets from commercial to custom -- from 6mm to 338.
My dear friend John Whidden was the first to make a meplat closing die user friendly to the public with his micrometer top. Hoover followed the concept with a little different take. There are others out there. The Whidden and Hoover dies have their very devoted followings -- based on BRAND AND PERFORMANCE and not just marketing.
I notice that the new Sierra 107s and 183s are now produced with closed meplats out of the box -- as a product of their bullet making dies. The meplats are exactly like the primary fixture that has done so much winning. In testing, the 107 and the 183 are shooting very nicely indeed. Sierra is selling bullets and not dies.
Now, if the meplat closing dies on the market are aimed at long range BR where .001 can make the difference between a champion and a record, the elite shooter who has thousands of dollars tied up in his shooting package wants the best. If the long range prone shooter requires waterline vertical to win championships and set records, he wants the best. If the F-Class shooter wants to eat the 5" X ring out of the target at 1000 yards, he wants the best. The elite shooter or the shooter who strives to be elite will pay what it takes to acquire the best because there can be no corner cutting in your precision shooting package that helps you stay small and in the center. If you can out shoot your shooting package, you need to upgrade your package.
If you look at your stated position closely, a keen observer will see that you have agreed with me. My position is basically that if you cannot make a precision meplat closing die that does a better job than the Whidden and Hoover -- or the Pindell, you will not be able to give the product away. Why would anyone with a $7500 custom rifle and high end scope leave the proven meplat closing dies on the market to shoot bullets closed with a cheaper die that does not out perform the others? Simply put, they will not. The cost of a maplat closing die is a drop in bucket in your shooting package of custom gun and gear. Why would any Champion say "this die does not perform as well, but it is cheaper so I think will purchase it." In your final analysis, you said "If someone makes a functional bullet pointing die WHICH WORKS AS WELL as the products on the existing market, which costs $125 instead of $250 (or more) then it will sell." Therefore, sound reasoning says that if it does not, it will not sell. BTW, mere "functional" has no place in precision shooting. The cold hard truth -- Will elite shooters give up their Whidden or Hoover to spend more money on a product that under performs just because it is cheaper?
BTW, no meplat closing die is perfect. There is much more involved in precision modification of the meplat than the die. Much more. You stated "Interestingly, it's the defective meplats on my . . . bullets THAT HAS ME INTERESTED in trying bullet pointing." So, I take it that you have NEVER closed a meplat on a bullet. How can you know the answers when you don't know the questions. You also stated that certain bullets were "good enough" to win where I shoot." You will never hear a Champion say that anything is ever "good enough" -- never.
Enjoy your shooting, and meplat closing will help your game at long range. Associating with champions gives you the best chance to become one yourself. Above all things, just have a good time. Is everything I have propounded in this post gospel? Heck no. Just the opinion of a passionate old man that loves no-comprise precision. Opinions on being "good enough" will vary.
Favor Center,
Jim Hardy
Last edited:
Thanks guys for the comments - a few of my own follow:
Jim - Your point is well received, and I definitely do understand that a product that doesn't do as good a job won't sell to the "ultra-precision" shooter. First, and just to correct any misconceptions, I believe that my current pointing product represents 95%+ of the functionality of any bullet-pointing die. Once I get a custom CNC plan set in place, the finishes will improve, along with overall consistency. At the moment, I'm making all of the samples, by hand, on my own 11x26 bench lathe. So while everything currently fits together with 0.0005" precision, the consistency and final finishing involved in CNC production will bump up the performance to 99-100%. Second, all of the best long-range shooters in the world already own everything they need to win consistently. The designs that you, speedy, pindell, whidden, and hoover all came up with/sell are great - I've used the whidden myself several times and it provides good results. But speaking as an engineer, I analyzed the process and found room for simplification without losing the primary function (swaging/pushing the tip closed). As such, I feel that I can provide a good product that will allow more aspiring long-range shooters to up their games up a bit without spending $250+ for a single caliber solution. The key here is that increased simplicity and lower price means that more people can afford to buy-in to the idea of pointing their bullets.
Bob - That shirt analogy is really good! I definitely think that makes the point clear. Yes, people can spend a lot of money getting a custom shirt from Louis Vuitton (pointing die), but most people who want to look good can't afford to have all custom shirts. So I'm providing a shirt (my die) that serves the same purpose, but doesn't have "Louis Vuitton" printed on it. Maybe it has "Guess" written on it? Who knows... And a Ferrari? We need to talk about that!
Just for common knowledge - Some elements of my design will surpass the precision of current designs. A few elements are purely functional, and thus require less precision. By increasing the precision of only the important surfaces/parts, I'm able to achieve very good results while keeping the price down. I'm almost done (a few days) with the provisional patent, so I'll be sending samples to 3 or 4 trusted shooters very soon to provide feedback and suggest tweaks. In addition, I'll be meeting with a few machine shops in the next week or two to see what the final cost-structure would look like, depending on demand of course. So I'll be updating everybody about the general pricing setup soon.
Best,
Jason
Jim - Your point is well received, and I definitely do understand that a product that doesn't do as good a job won't sell to the "ultra-precision" shooter. First, and just to correct any misconceptions, I believe that my current pointing product represents 95%+ of the functionality of any bullet-pointing die. Once I get a custom CNC plan set in place, the finishes will improve, along with overall consistency. At the moment, I'm making all of the samples, by hand, on my own 11x26 bench lathe. So while everything currently fits together with 0.0005" precision, the consistency and final finishing involved in CNC production will bump up the performance to 99-100%. Second, all of the best long-range shooters in the world already own everything they need to win consistently. The designs that you, speedy, pindell, whidden, and hoover all came up with/sell are great - I've used the whidden myself several times and it provides good results. But speaking as an engineer, I analyzed the process and found room for simplification without losing the primary function (swaging/pushing the tip closed). As such, I feel that I can provide a good product that will allow more aspiring long-range shooters to up their games up a bit without spending $250+ for a single caliber solution. The key here is that increased simplicity and lower price means that more people can afford to buy-in to the idea of pointing their bullets.
Bob - That shirt analogy is really good! I definitely think that makes the point clear. Yes, people can spend a lot of money getting a custom shirt from Louis Vuitton (pointing die), but most people who want to look good can't afford to have all custom shirts. So I'm providing a shirt (my die) that serves the same purpose, but doesn't have "Louis Vuitton" printed on it. Maybe it has "Guess" written on it? Who knows... And a Ferrari? We need to talk about that!
Just for common knowledge - Some elements of my design will surpass the precision of current designs. A few elements are purely functional, and thus require less precision. By increasing the precision of only the important surfaces/parts, I'm able to achieve very good results while keeping the price down. I'm almost done (a few days) with the provisional patent, so I'll be sending samples to 3 or 4 trusted shooters very soon to provide feedback and suggest tweaks. In addition, I'll be meeting with a few machine shops in the next week or two to see what the final cost-structure would look like, depending on demand of course. So I'll be updating everybody about the general pricing setup soon.
Best,
Jason
Thanks guys for the comments - a few of my own follow:
Jim - Your point is well received, and I definitely do understand that a product that doesn't do as good a job won't sell to the "ultra-precision" shooter. First, and just to correct any misconceptions, I believe that my current pointing product represents 95%+ of the functionality of any bullet-pointing die. Once I get a custom CNC plan set in place, the finishes will improve, along with overall consistency. At the moment, I'm making all of the samples, by hand, on my own 11x26 bench lathe. So while everything currently fits together with 0.0005" precision, the consistency and final finishing involved in CNC production will bump up the performance to 99-100%. Second, all of the best long-range shooters in the world already own everything they need to win consistently. The designs that you, speedy, pindell, whidden, and hoover all came up with/sell are great - I've used the whidden myself several times and it provides good results. But speaking as an engineer, I analyzed the process and found room for simplification without losing the primary function (swaging/pushing the tip closed). As such, I feel that I can provide a good product that will allow more aspiring long-range shooters to up their games up a bit without spending $250+ for a single caliber solution. The key here is that increased simplicity and lower price means that more people can afford to buy-in to the idea of pointing their bullets.
Bob - That shirt analogy is really good! I definitely think that makes the point clear. Yes, people can spend a lot of money getting a custom shirt from Louis Vuitton (pointing die), but most people who want to look good can't afford to have all custom shirts. So I'm providing a shirt (my die) that serves the same purpose, but doesn't have "Louis Vuitton" printed on it. Maybe it has "Guess" written on it? Who knows... And a Ferrari? We need to talk about that!
Just for common knowledge - Some elements of my design will surpass the precision of current designs. A few elements are purely functional, and thus require less precision. By increasing the precision of only the important surfaces/parts, I'm able to achieve very good results while keeping the price down. I'm almost done (a few days) with the provisional patent, so I'll be sending samples to 3 or 4 trusted shooters very soon to provide feedback and suggest tweaks. In addition, I'll be meeting with a few machine shops in the next week or two to see what the final cost-structure would look like, depending on demand of course. So I'll be updating everybody about the general pricing setup soon.
Best,
Jason
Jason:
When all is said and done, just have fun.
Jim Hardy
Hardy Custom Bullets, Inc.
Passion + Precision = Perfection
Shop: 770-781-1997
Cell: 770-855-8960
....... snip............
If you look at your stated position closely, a keen observer will see that you have agreed with me. ....... snip..........
Jim Hardy
Au contraire; a keen observer or anyone with even minimum reading comprehension skills will see no such thing. My position on the subject under discussion is exactly the opposite from yours.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.