Do Certain Members of the Shooting Industry Owe Fiduciary Duty?
- Thread starter hogan
- Start date
The answer is no.
For the most part firearms manufacturers are not part of the hand loading industry. For most people if you want to shoot you buy factory ammo or you stay home.
If you buy in to the notion of hand loading you are taking on some degree of personal responsibility and obligation to exercise your own initiative.
My friend Medhi near Teheran (yes that Teheran) wanted to shoot an autoloading pistol which are illegal in Iran. Medhi was able to scrounge an 8X57 barrel stub make his .32 barrel. He turned cases from solid brass. He designed and machined his own pistol. He made his own bullets. He got the powder from shotgun shells. He dug a tunnel out of the back of his house to shoot in. Hogan you seem to already have more than you deserve. Stay home.
For the most part firearms manufacturers are not part of the hand loading industry. For most people if you want to shoot you buy factory ammo or you stay home.
If you buy in to the notion of hand loading you are taking on some degree of personal responsibility and obligation to exercise your own initiative.
My friend Medhi near Teheran (yes that Teheran) wanted to shoot an autoloading pistol which are illegal in Iran. Medhi was able to scrounge an 8X57 barrel stub make his .32 barrel. He turned cases from solid brass. He designed and machined his own pistol. He made his own bullets. He got the powder from shotgun shells. He dug a tunnel out of the back of his house to shoot in. Hogan you seem to already have more than you deserve. Stay home.
Keith Glasscock
Gold $$ Contributor
Hogan,
I've read your arguments and can answer your question this way:
No, they have no more duty to you than an egg farmer does. The product need only be what is represented and free of harmful defects.
Your argument would make one believe that egg farmers should provide you with a cookbook and teach you how to cook. Likewise automobile manufacturers must teach you how to drive, and the list goes on.
I think you are confusing courtesy instructions that you receive with other products with a duty.
My argument ends this way:
You, and only you, are responsible for how you use any product you buy. If you are concerned that you cannot safely use a product, by all means, don't use it!
If we keep saving everyone from themselves, what is that going to do to us as a human race? Fearless fools multiplying is not a future I want to see.
I've read your arguments and can answer your question this way:
No, they have no more duty to you than an egg farmer does. The product need only be what is represented and free of harmful defects.
Your argument would make one believe that egg farmers should provide you with a cookbook and teach you how to cook. Likewise automobile manufacturers must teach you how to drive, and the list goes on.
I think you are confusing courtesy instructions that you receive with other products with a duty.
My argument ends this way:
You, and only you, are responsible for how you use any product you buy. If you are concerned that you cannot safely use a product, by all means, don't use it!
If we keep saving everyone from themselves, what is that going to do to us as a human race? Fearless fools multiplying is not a future I want to see.
Keith,
The egg farmer is liable for all sorts of "duties" under the FDA and the Ag dept. The "duty" that the major bulletmakers and the powder sellers have is not "fiduciary" under the strict definition, powder sellers, (how many actually manufacture their product?), have a similar duty to the farmer or rancher; their product must be strictly controlled for quality.
As to "courtesy instructions", there would be no handloading industry without the data which every large bulletmaker has budgeted for in the pricing of their product. Perhaps these manufacturers no longer do the research they once did? Only an insider would know.... Would Sierra gain any prestige by admitting they no longer do the testing that so many relied upon since the company's inception?
When you question the premise I have postulated here, might want to consider that Owners Of This Forum PROHIBIT the sale of assembled handloaded ammunition . Perhaps even prohibit the sale of factory loaded ammunition; I don't know, as I don't buy ammo on any forums. The concern is that members selling ammo they put together here are a risk to other members. If that is the case, then Owners must feel that the members are inept or ignorant and unable to produce reliable ammunition.
If you got no bonafide data, are your loads "reliable"? Not really, not in any rifle other than what you have fired them in; and then, only to the degree that you had no mishap the last time out, or with the loads you have fired up until now....
The shooting industry is close-knit, but very competitive. This is most true in the handloading sector. I did find Barnes data for the .375 Ruger, but they list only 2 powders per bullet weight. While this might be useful for the advanced loader who understands that load extrapolation is very risky, it is not sufficient to provide a viable working formulation. As Barnes is a Freeedom Arms company, are the powders they endorse only chosen to augment the powder sellers that Remington buys from to assemble their ammunition?
Business under any circumstances seems condoned by m any repliers here, but none of the powders Barnes lists are among those I have ever even thought of purchasing. In comparison, Nosler lists about 8 powders each for their .375 dia bullets, and of these I routinely keep or buy about six powder formulations. Nosler chambers and loads .375 H&H yet their spokesperson, Phil Shoemaker, famous Alaskan trophy bear guide, states that the .375 Ruger for many reasons simply outperforms the H&H in all respects. This from Nosler #7, published in 2010. Would think Sierra might grow aware of this cartridge after 10yrs? Nosler did, way back when...
But this would correlate with Sierra's evidently intended goal of being The Old Folks Home for handloaders.
I don't buy Berger Bullets, but they do have a great following and reportedly a great loading manual. If Berger, the Modern Success Story in the mass produced bullet world, took great pains to do an extensive loading manual; it tells me there remains great validity to the perspective than handloaders need comprehensive and in-depth data to be their most effective.
If Berger and Nosler see the need to be cutting edge, it seems recognition of the importance that their management places on providing the best data available to their customers. Berger is now a Lapua group company; things may change. Maybe Berger's influence will generate more brass from Lapua and more powder from Vihta Vouri?
The egg farmer is liable for all sorts of "duties" under the FDA and the Ag dept. The "duty" that the major bulletmakers and the powder sellers have is not "fiduciary" under the strict definition, powder sellers, (how many actually manufacture their product?), have a similar duty to the farmer or rancher; their product must be strictly controlled for quality.
As to "courtesy instructions", there would be no handloading industry without the data which every large bulletmaker has budgeted for in the pricing of their product. Perhaps these manufacturers no longer do the research they once did? Only an insider would know.... Would Sierra gain any prestige by admitting they no longer do the testing that so many relied upon since the company's inception?
When you question the premise I have postulated here, might want to consider that Owners Of This Forum PROHIBIT the sale of assembled handloaded ammunition . Perhaps even prohibit the sale of factory loaded ammunition; I don't know, as I don't buy ammo on any forums. The concern is that members selling ammo they put together here are a risk to other members. If that is the case, then Owners must feel that the members are inept or ignorant and unable to produce reliable ammunition.
If you got no bonafide data, are your loads "reliable"? Not really, not in any rifle other than what you have fired them in; and then, only to the degree that you had no mishap the last time out, or with the loads you have fired up until now....
The shooting industry is close-knit, but very competitive. This is most true in the handloading sector. I did find Barnes data for the .375 Ruger, but they list only 2 powders per bullet weight. While this might be useful for the advanced loader who understands that load extrapolation is very risky, it is not sufficient to provide a viable working formulation. As Barnes is a Freeedom Arms company, are the powders they endorse only chosen to augment the powder sellers that Remington buys from to assemble their ammunition?
Business under any circumstances seems condoned by m any repliers here, but none of the powders Barnes lists are among those I have ever even thought of purchasing. In comparison, Nosler lists about 8 powders each for their .375 dia bullets, and of these I routinely keep or buy about six powder formulations. Nosler chambers and loads .375 H&H yet their spokesperson, Phil Shoemaker, famous Alaskan trophy bear guide, states that the .375 Ruger for many reasons simply outperforms the H&H in all respects. This from Nosler #7, published in 2010. Would think Sierra might grow aware of this cartridge after 10yrs? Nosler did, way back when...
But this would correlate with Sierra's evidently intended goal of being The Old Folks Home for handloaders.
I don't buy Berger Bullets, but they do have a great following and reportedly a great loading manual. If Berger, the Modern Success Story in the mass produced bullet world, took great pains to do an extensive loading manual; it tells me there remains great validity to the perspective than handloaders need comprehensive and in-depth data to be their most effective.
If Berger and Nosler see the need to be cutting edge, it seems recognition of the importance that their management places on providing the best data available to their customers. Berger is now a Lapua group company; things may change. Maybe Berger's influence will generate more brass from Lapua and more powder from Vihta Vouri?
jds holler
Gold $$ Contributor
This thread brings to mind, one of my favorite mottos; "If you can't make your point quickly and with few words, you probably don't have a very good point".
And no, I don't always take my own advice. jd
And no, I don't always take my own advice. jd
Time for the Liberal Pacifier!
Keith Glasscock
Gold $$ Contributor
That is a truly odd argument.
Let me try to paraphrase what I just read:
I have this cartridge that I like. Some other people like it too. It uses powders and bullets that also fit other cartridges. There is some published data available from one or more bullet manufacturers, but I'm unhappy with the amount of data available to me.
As a result, I claim that handloaded ammunition is unreliable because the forum owner prohibits selling it on this site (of course, I failed to note federal law in that argument). I also suppose that factory ammunition may not be sold, although the whole prior argument is voided by this concept.
So, I haven't looked into other manufacturers of bullets and whether they provide data for my favored cartridge, but I condemn them for being willing to sell me multi-fit bullets that I might use in my favored cartridge because they might not have provided me data for every cartridge in existence that could use that bullet with the powder I want to use.
At the same time, I like cast bullets, for which there definitely is little to no valid data, and like it that way...
My turn:
I'm sketchy on one thing though. If you have data, have the appropriate powder, primer, case, and bullet, what is the problem really? Don't like how dinner tastes after your follow the recipe?
I'll tell you what, I'm not going to change your mind, and you are far unlikely to change mine with your arguments. Let's just call it a day.
Better yet, give Berger a call. Ask them how they derive their data!
I leave the last word to you -
Let me try to paraphrase what I just read:
I have this cartridge that I like. Some other people like it too. It uses powders and bullets that also fit other cartridges. There is some published data available from one or more bullet manufacturers, but I'm unhappy with the amount of data available to me.
As a result, I claim that handloaded ammunition is unreliable because the forum owner prohibits selling it on this site (of course, I failed to note federal law in that argument). I also suppose that factory ammunition may not be sold, although the whole prior argument is voided by this concept.
So, I haven't looked into other manufacturers of bullets and whether they provide data for my favored cartridge, but I condemn them for being willing to sell me multi-fit bullets that I might use in my favored cartridge because they might not have provided me data for every cartridge in existence that could use that bullet with the powder I want to use.
At the same time, I like cast bullets, for which there definitely is little to no valid data, and like it that way...
My turn:
I'm sketchy on one thing though. If you have data, have the appropriate powder, primer, case, and bullet, what is the problem really? Don't like how dinner tastes after your follow the recipe?
I'll tell you what, I'm not going to change your mind, and you are far unlikely to change mine with your arguments. Let's just call it a day.
Better yet, give Berger a call. Ask them how they derive their data!
I leave the last word to you -
Buy a few reloading manuals and you will find the info often is changed from one volume to the next to stay with current powder burn rates, newly available bullet designs, newly available brass casing manufacturers, and newly available primers, and even newly available firearms used in testing. Comparing a 1971 Sierra manual to the current Sierra will show 71 powders listed in their burn rate chart. Today there is upwards of 150 smokeless powders available.
Perhaps = assume....and you know the rest.
I haven't hit the ignore button, because like a gruesome car wreck, I just can't look away
Smith,
Yeah, I have a number of loading manuals. About 12 or 15 at present. Several are current, others just recent. Some are fairly old.
Point is, there are probably about 200 powders marketed now, not just the 150 from 2003 when Sierra did their #5 book. When Reloader 17 was introduced, I finally found some about 2yrs later. Called Sierra and their tech told me they had no intention of testing new powders. I have 4 bottles of the stuff with seals never broken on the shelf. RL-17 was heralded to produce much improved velocity in .30-06 size cases with much lower pressures. What's not to like?
Well, you might ask Sierra why they ain't getting with the program....
I was just non-googling Precision Shooting. They abruptly closed down in Oct 2012. 56yrs of advancing the cause. They shut down overnite and gave no thought to the rich harvest that their back issues had to offer. They could have put back issues on DVD's and done a website. But, they saw themselves in the magazine business rather than the shooting information business.
Sierra touts themselves as The Bulletsmiths, but they don't give a damn about the emerging market and its exciting cartridges. Guys do adapt and make do; but.... hell, we're all envious of them guys with the falling block Martini and Stevens, and them lever actioned Bees. Who would want a 6.5 Grendel or 6mm AR Turbo, much less a Dasher, XC, or Creedmoor when you can be shooting a Zipper or a Donaldson? Then there's that fantastic .256win in the single shot Ruger western configuration or Marlin's hot looking lever job....
The fact that these powder sellers can't get the bulletmakers on board before they intro a new powder just shows how poorly they regard their market and their customers. There ain't no need for powder if you got no bullets to load.... The bulletmakers that show no interest in the new ctgs are simply disinterested in their customers.
Lots of the guys who come here, and frankly mouth-off proving they are know-nothings, are also stuck in the horse and buggy age when comes to precision rifle platforms. Bolt-Actions do harken back to the 1870s, whether pinfire or centerfire. The 6.5 Grendel essentially moved the 6PPC into the modern age.
There is a great deal of discussion on the forums that deal with Big Bore Rifles about Hornady's very poor quality dangerous game bullets and ammunition. At one time they were reknowned for fine quality heavy solids and softpoints. Not anymore, except maybe as practice rounds; so the shooters of .458win, Lott, and other traditional African large game rifles report.
It's interesting. The biggest bunch of repliers here are willing to accept whatever crap their favorite manufacturers sell them; even if that crap is only a BS excuse for why they aren't giving us data to use their products with the newest and best. Most replying here would gladly pay double for their dose of whatever mediocrity they think they have to buy.
Berger and Nosler, evidently see that there is Gold to be had in the market by developing data for their products which their customers want to buy.
Sierra seems to be going the way of Speer and Hornady is letting their product slip in some areas.
I say this about Sierra and Barnes, unless they just don't care about continuing to have customer demand, all they need do is neglect their markets. Every bullet these guys make ought to have data for whatever application a customer wants to apply it, even if that data is only available on the website or by call-in request.
Yeah, I have a number of loading manuals. About 12 or 15 at present. Several are current, others just recent. Some are fairly old.
Point is, there are probably about 200 powders marketed now, not just the 150 from 2003 when Sierra did their #5 book. When Reloader 17 was introduced, I finally found some about 2yrs later. Called Sierra and their tech told me they had no intention of testing new powders. I have 4 bottles of the stuff with seals never broken on the shelf. RL-17 was heralded to produce much improved velocity in .30-06 size cases with much lower pressures. What's not to like?
Well, you might ask Sierra why they ain't getting with the program....
I was just non-googling Precision Shooting. They abruptly closed down in Oct 2012. 56yrs of advancing the cause. They shut down overnite and gave no thought to the rich harvest that their back issues had to offer. They could have put back issues on DVD's and done a website. But, they saw themselves in the magazine business rather than the shooting information business.
Sierra touts themselves as The Bulletsmiths, but they don't give a damn about the emerging market and its exciting cartridges. Guys do adapt and make do; but.... hell, we're all envious of them guys with the falling block Martini and Stevens, and them lever actioned Bees. Who would want a 6.5 Grendel or 6mm AR Turbo, much less a Dasher, XC, or Creedmoor when you can be shooting a Zipper or a Donaldson? Then there's that fantastic .256win in the single shot Ruger western configuration or Marlin's hot looking lever job....
The fact that these powder sellers can't get the bulletmakers on board before they intro a new powder just shows how poorly they regard their market and their customers. There ain't no need for powder if you got no bullets to load.... The bulletmakers that show no interest in the new ctgs are simply disinterested in their customers.
Lots of the guys who come here, and frankly mouth-off proving they are know-nothings, are also stuck in the horse and buggy age when comes to precision rifle platforms. Bolt-Actions do harken back to the 1870s, whether pinfire or centerfire. The 6.5 Grendel essentially moved the 6PPC into the modern age.
There is a great deal of discussion on the forums that deal with Big Bore Rifles about Hornady's very poor quality dangerous game bullets and ammunition. At one time they were reknowned for fine quality heavy solids and softpoints. Not anymore, except maybe as practice rounds; so the shooters of .458win, Lott, and other traditional African large game rifles report.
It's interesting. The biggest bunch of repliers here are willing to accept whatever crap their favorite manufacturers sell them; even if that crap is only a BS excuse for why they aren't giving us data to use their products with the newest and best. Most replying here would gladly pay double for their dose of whatever mediocrity they think they have to buy.
Berger and Nosler, evidently see that there is Gold to be had in the market by developing data for their products which their customers want to buy.
Sierra seems to be going the way of Speer and Hornady is letting their product slip in some areas.
I say this about Sierra and Barnes, unless they just don't care about continuing to have customer demand, all they need do is neglect their markets. Every bullet these guys make ought to have data for whatever application a customer wants to apply it, even if that data is only available on the website or by call-in request.
butchlambert
Site $$ Sponsor
Ok, do yourself and all of us a favor and print your book.
Well ya know opinions are like azzholes, everybody's got one... and some of them are perfect!
dedogs
dedogsriverwolf1
Silver $$ Contributor
Common sense is a flower that doesn't grow in everyone's garden! I can feel the ignore button sensor going off any time now!
Could it be that this cartridge just isn't as popular as you think?
According to Chuck Hawks
"Only time will tell if the .375 Ruger will be successful. Dangerous game cartridges obviously don't see the use or sales that medium game cartridges do."
That would explain why there is not alot a data out there, and why bullet manufacturers may not be falling all over themselves to do testing for your favorite .375 cartridge.
Maybe this is your opportunity to hit your burn charts, start with a base .375 H&H load, and share your load data with the world.
MQ1
According to Chuck Hawks
"Only time will tell if the .375 Ruger will be successful. Dangerous game cartridges obviously don't see the use or sales that medium game cartridges do."
That would explain why there is not alot a data out there, and why bullet manufacturers may not be falling all over themselves to do testing for your favorite .375 cartridge.
Maybe this is your opportunity to hit your burn charts, start with a base .375 H&H load, and share your load data with the world.
MQ1
Note to self.
1. Order some Sierra bullets tomorrow.
2. Break out the old Winchester lever gun and grab a box of 25-20 and shoot away.
3. Return to thread to see myself getting warning about my unsafe reloads in a 2 year old 257 ai because it loves sierra bullets. But my berger and nosler loads might be ok. And that I am a fool to shoot an antique round like 25-20 in a gun over 100 years old because I don't know if the manufacture thinks it is still safe but I do.
Or at least that is what I am getting out of this.
1. Order some Sierra bullets tomorrow.
2. Break out the old Winchester lever gun and grab a box of 25-20 and shoot away.
3. Return to thread to see myself getting warning about my unsafe reloads in a 2 year old 257 ai because it loves sierra bullets. But my berger and nosler loads might be ok. And that I am a fool to shoot an antique round like 25-20 in a gun over 100 years old because I don't know if the manufacture thinks it is still safe but I do.
Or at least that is what I am getting out of this.
Similar threads
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.