Do Certain Members of the Shooting Industry Owe Fiduciary Duty?

[hogan]

Alright hogan. I have a question or two that can e

ither help or hurt..depending on your response.

If you can't find data for the cartridge and bullet you want use, what will you do?

If you load for it, without data and blow s%!t up, who's fault is it?

Specifically, the issue of Wildcats is not addressed here. I have used data from several ctgs and interpolated it to my personal satisfaction and fired the subsequent ctgs at near max loading with full confidence. I hope this answers your question... Clearly, the circumstances are different and wildcat shooters understand and accept the risks.


But for standard and popular mainstream cartridges which are factory chambered by more than one gunmaker, or used by large percentage of match shooters, why no data? Why no new data in 15yrs, in case of Sierra? Speer is another company that no longer strives to be cutting edge. They sell a lot of gold dots and some good hunting bullets and no one on this board likely expects them to reinvent themselves. They do put out loading manuals on a very regular basis though.

 

[dkhunt14]

J

Specifically, the issue of Wildcats is not addressed here. I have used data from several ctgs and interpolated it to my personal satisfaction and fired the subsequent ctgs at near max loading with full confidence. I hope this answers your question... Clearly, the circumstances are different and wildcat shooters understand and accept the risks.


But for standard and popular mainstream cartridges which are factory chambered by more than one gunmaker, or used by large percentage of match shooters, why no data? Why no new data in 15yrs, in case of Sierra? Speer is another company that no longer strives to be cutting edge. They sell a lot of gold dots and some good hunting bullets and no one on this board likely expects them to reinvent themselves. They do put out loading manuals on a very regular basis though.

Just because a company produces something doesn't mean it sold. There have been lots of failures over the years. Like I said I know lots of guys that own 200 or more rifles and not one has a 375 Ruger. Some were only made a year or two and dropped. But you are wrong on the 300 RUM. There were a lot sold and alot of custom ones. The Sendero alone sold lots of them. Look at the 244, wrong twist and it died. Reintroduced as a 6mm and lots of them sold. Matt

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Specifically, the issue of Wildcats is not addressed here. I have used data from several ctgs and interpolated it to my personal satisfaction and fired the subsequent ctgs at near max loading with full confidence. I hope this answers your question... Clearly, the circumstances are different and wildcat shooters understand and accept the risks.


But for standard and popular mainstream cartridges which are factory chambered by more than one gunmaker, or used by large percentage of match shooters, why no data? Why no new data in 15yrs, in case of Sierra? Speer is another company that no longer strives to be cutting edge. They sell a lot of gold dots and some good hunting bullets and no one on this board likely expects them to reinvent themselves. They do put out loading manuals on a very regular basis though.

Unfortunately, you didn't answer either of my questions. That's OK with me. Good night!

 

[hogan]

J

Just because a company produces something doesn't mean it sold. There have been lots of failures over the years. Like I said I know lots of guys that own 200 or more rifles and not one has a 375 Ruger. Some were only made a year or two and dropped. But you are wrong on the 300 RUM.here were a lot sold and alot of custom ones. The Sendero alone sold lots of them. Look at the 244, wrong twist and it died. Reintroduced as a 6mm and lots of them sold. Matt

Do you even read what you post? "know lots of guys who own 200 rifles", i guess that may be true, but....; So What?

If you hunt big game, shoot cast boolits, or just like powerful rifles; there are plenty reasons to own a Ruger Magnum in .375 or .416 calibers. The cartridge design is superior in many respects to the Remington RUM. It's basically a .300win mag w/o rim with standard .534 boltface dimension as the full diameter. No rebated head, no action rail to alter, no long action necessary.

Weatherby magnums are no longer very popular. Why didn't the .338 Norma magnum catch on? Probably the .588 bolt face. Why is the Lapua Magnum popular? Probably because of ammunition and rifles chambered. The .338 Norma is a better round. OOPS! There's that Lapua brass magic so many believe in...

I am a swichbarreler. I have several rifles that I can configure for 4 different ctgs. Anyone who owns 200 rifles and don't have a gun store is kind of a sap from my perspective. But whatever...


Do you own any handloading manuals, Matt? Been around the shooting world before all the craziness began in the early 00's?


Just as with every other aspect of American Business, the gun firms are run to pay management the big money and to pay their investors a decent return . If anything, i think the investors are getting fleeced just like the customers. Of course, Sierra isn't a public company (that I know of), so they can run their business however they see fit. Evidently, they chose to ignore the future.

You can damn well bet that more than half the cost of a box of bullets is earmarked for data research and development, because without it (until recently) a bulletmaker would not have customers. So, a bulletmaker grosses $20 on a box of bullets that the wholesaler gets $30 for; and half of that $20 in the past was earmarked for research & development of load data, with the other $10 going to cover material costs, marketing, and profit; How much more profitable is it to pocket the other $10 and not spend it on load R&D? Kind of makes you a ton of money over 15yrs, don't it???/

No reason to speculate further, but... at $40 for a box of 100 match bullets, with a net material cost of maybe $2; there is a boxcar load of money floating around, and while the other companies ARE developing data etc, some aren't. I'd say that company has cheated their customers.

 

[hogan]

Unfortunately, you didn't answer either of my questions. That's OK with me. Good night!

Never done any wildcat load development of you own? I answered your questions.

If you were informed enough to see the answers, they're there... I never discussed any aspect of a liability claim in this topic. I will not get specific as to the variables of wildcat load development because that is not the topic. The subject is "duty" not "liability".... If you make bullets and market a loading manual for $30 or more, your customer has a right to reasonably expect that when they ask for data on a popular cartridge, that you can deliver what they need....

Your post was kind of sketchy. I don't really care if you understand my perspective or not. Seems like you don't understand the answer I gave either.


I certainly could never have guessed that Sierra would not have totally abandoned load development for so many years. Blaming the idiot that was put in the Whitehouse in 2008 is just lamer than lame. If the can't be sure of the quality of the bullets they make; they need new machines and dies; but the money is probably long gone that might have paid for that...

 

[johnfred1965]

Hogan, where did you get your incredible business acumen?

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

Never done any wildcat load development of you own? I answered your questions.

If you were informed enough to see the answers, they're there... I never discussed any aspect of a liability claim in this topic. I will not get specific as to the variables of wildcat load development because that is not the topic. The subject is "duty" not "liability".... If you make bullets and market a loading manual for $30 or more, your customer has a right to reasonably expect that when they ask for data on a popular cartridge, that you can deliver what they need....

Your post was kind of sketchy. I don't really care if you understand my perspective or not. Seems like you don't understand the answer I gave either.


I certainly could never have guessed that Sierra would not have totally abandoned load development for so many years. Blaming the idiot that was put in the Whitehouse in 2008 is just lamer than lame. If the can't be sure of the quality of the bullets they make; they need new machines and dies; but the money is probably long gone that might have paid for that...

I already said good night. You should do the same...You're just rambling now.

 

[dogdude]

Asking Matt Kline if he has any reloading manuals?! HAAA. He has more world records than you have 375's!! He also shoots at a club that has 2 indoor bathrooms and 2 showers. Hogan your ignorance of the shooting world is showing. (feeding the troll)

 

[hogan]

Nosler, Berger, Hornady, and to lesser degree Barnes and Speer have innovated many new designs for the precision shooter in the past 15yrs.

Sierra has done a matchking in .277/6.8, added a 135 matcking in .308, and added plastic tips to some matchking bullets. They also added the 6.5 142gr SMK and the 300gr .338 SMK, and the 350gr .375 SMK. Oh, they also went with a new plastic box, and came up with Pro-Hunter and GameKing names for their hunting bullet line.

While the 142gr SMK might be the best bullet of all time, so what? At one time Sierra was IT, but evidently they've chosen to stand still and competitors have passed them by. They still make great bullets; but so do the other Big 3, and they make many more varieties and fulfill many more purposes. I am cool with using match bullets on large game, and still buy their roundnose hunting bullets and SPBT.

There is no other bulletmaker that has gone 14yrs without updating their published load data.


One Knee-Jerker asks about my "business acumen" ... If have ever been in business and analyzed income and costs, it's pretty plain that every cost of production has to be recouped in the sales price. Don't matter what you're selling, even if it is a consultant job. To test individual loads with about 12 or more powders for every bullet you make and almost every ctg ever designed that can be used with that bullet is a HUGE Expense. HUGE. For sure it takes an equally Huge amount of time to generate the data, and then to interpret it.

Well, no reason to gripe about Sierra. They are their own worst enemy. I recall in the late 70s when Nosler introed their Ballistic Tip bullet; before all they made were Partitions. Look at them now.... Nosler has kept up with their data generation and introduced 6 or 8 new designs, each in many multiple bore sizes. Hornady A-Max, V-Max, and many more new specialty lines, plus their standby Interbond, match bthp, and their famous standard lines. Lots of handgun bullets too; plus they now make a huge line of brass.

Berger is the real amazing success story. Small operation devoted fully to precision, now regarded as about the best.

But damn! Why you boys want to shoot the messenger?

The case can be made that any component seller ought to provide data. They ought have a resource at their retailer, like the auto filter and spark plug sellers do at discount and parts stores. What powders with which ctgs are most suitable, What load range and powder suitable for this bullet. Brass seller ought include a printed sheet of data. When you go to the retailer, usually the loading manuals are plastic sealed. Those little shelf-clip computers can't cost all that much...

The Sierra thing is a real scandal though. For sure, its customers paid so they could keep data current and develop it for new cartridges. They simply chose not to.

What is really pathetic is the bullshit excuses these gun related companies come up with that they think we're dumb enough to believe....
OOPS! From reading here, I guess they have not underestimated their customers...

 

[hogan]

Asking Matt Kline if he has any reloading manuals?! HAAA. He has more world records than you have 375's!! He also shoots at a club that has 2 indoor bathrooms and 2 showers. Hogan your ignorance of the shooting world is showing. (feeding the troll)

There is an F-Class shooter that was a police sniper out in Sacramento (iirc) and probably an XC shooter. Mike something, and he began making tactical slings in the early 00s. This guy did not shoot handloads. He shot Federal Gold Medal. He was captain of the F-Class team a few years back when they shot in England or maybe an Olympics? No interest in handloading. Maybe that changed with his style of shooting; but not every world class shooter is a handloader.

I used to buy Gold Medal .300win match, bo h loaded rounds and the match brass; almost 20yrs ago. A good shooter could likely be ranked if they shot the Fed GM in .300win at 1000yds. Being a ranked shooter don't make you an ace handloader; but likely it could. Who can guess from a terse response that was likely just knee-jerked?

I am happy you guys can take a leak in heated comfort and in a gender specific bathroom (with showers!). Kind of a pansified to even talk about bathrooms on a gun thread, but I didn't bring it up...


I still find it amazing that This Forum & The Boss(es?) won't allow sale of assembled ammunition (between consenting adults, presumably) but will allow the posting of "Can I Get A Load" topics... Seems you could blow yourself up quicker by using data from a dufus, as opposed to waiting for Fed-X to deliver some meticulously fashioned handloaded ammunition.

Pretty amazing that guys who are interested in becoming "Accurate Shooters" (by coming here and registering) aren't savvy enough to own a loading manual. And then there's them guys who want somebody to check QuickLoad for them...

Like they guy from here who bought a .223 Sako Vixen barrel from me, and when he got it emailed me griping about having borescoped the barrel and was dissatisfied... I told him the bore had been greased and to patch it out. Never heard another word about how poor the barrel was, after he got the barrel patched out.

Many "shooters" seem to have both feet in that Luke Wilson world, or they are so used to "texting" their immediate thoughts, they no longer think before they write down their thoughts. Oh well.....

 

[alinwa]

boy did i learn something from this thread........

but anyway's.... just can't let this go.......

it's IMPORTANT, verbiage is IMPORTANT in today's world and this is just to important to let slip. in the prior post to the prior post the word "huge" is used thrice't IN ONE LINE.....and this just aint right in the New America.

the word is 'yuge.......as in "YUGE!"


jus' sayin'



(the other babble....TLDR....this 'boy' jus' weren't feelin' it...)

But It's 'YUGE!!

 

[rogn]

Been reading this thread and now my head is hurting. Cold winter weather followed by warm spells cause narcissus to bloom! I think that sums a lot of this up.
A short time ago thanks to the stimulation of the shooting sports by the "Bobo" regime we had a lot of people p&m over the shortage of components. Importers, distributors, manufacturers tried the best they could to fill the voids. A lot of new to us powders were imported after,Im sure reams of red tape. There was not a lot of time available to develop dat for these powders. I know in my own case, and Im not as good as I once was, it may take me several hours to work up a load for a known cartridge and whatever primer and bullet. I only walk 30 steps from the kitchen door to the shooting bench, so I dont loose too much time there. My internal ballistician doesnt spend troo much time recording pressure , velocity etc. Any ballistic lab worth its salt may take days to do the same work up with all the pertinent data for increments of powder. If they include primer influences, COL influences and any of a laundry lst of variables it takes time. Although many of those personnel love their work- I know I would- they have the damnable habit of eating and requiring shelter, health insurance etc. What I have discovered although I havent gotten involved with many of the new imports, is that there is data to be found often produced by the manufacturer, or others such as Lapua, Norma, RUAG. It just takes a bit of effort and some diligence. To paraphrase "Capt John Smith-dont work,. dont eat".
So the way I read it, suppliers went to extremes to supply we the handloaders and have developed limited data in limited time. With some effort we can develop safe loads for many weapons with a bit of diligence. Doesnt sound like a situation warranting a bunch of impuneing (sp?) of those who attempt to satisfy our addictions.
If I remember when I started reloading, the cost of powder and primers was listed in cents, not too often dollars.
Pardon me for running on.

 

[johnfred1965]

It isn't so much that Hogan is ignorant. It's just that he knows so many things that aren't so.
I answered this thread to satisfy this person's curiosity. I stayed with it for a few laughs, and I am only answering now because I am genuinely concerned about this individual.
Someone like this that lacks the basic understanding of the business and practice of handloading, should only shoot factory ammo. I in no way advocate gun control, but after reading the ramblings from this person, showing a lack of understanding of numerous issues on numerous levels, I believe this person may be a danger to himself if he attempts to reload, and may be a danger to others if he operates a firearm. I do truly worry about the safety of this individual and the public he interacts with. Some people on here can be huge, sorry "YUGE" A-holes, but I get the feeling this person is truly is as clueless as he seems, and without intervention from the nanny state, a tragedy is only a step away. Please get yourself some help and consult a local professional for your firearms also.

 

[hogan]

The laughs have been all mine. This topic was not meant to provoke the ignorant; but wow! If I didn't already have proof, by the email received, of how reticent Sierra Bullets is to spend any corporate income; I might think most of you replying to this topic were paid corporate shills...

Until this occasion which prompted me to contact the makers of bullets which I have purchased to ask for loading data and maybe some guidance or tips, if they had any to offer; I had no idea that Barnes and Sierra were in such disregard of their customers' needs.


Getting back to the ISSUE at hand, if there is going to be a Handloading Segment of the shooting sports industry; don't those who aim their merchandise at the handloader owe the handloader enough basic information to enable to use of their product safely?

That there are forum members who consider this concern to be "at odds" with their creed and beliefs simply shows they are ignorant.

It is interesting to see that Hornady lists a great many of the ctgs I refer to from Sierra #5 on their Obsolete Ctgs webpage: http://www.hornady.com/data
Hornady also offers data for their new 147gr ELD 6.5mm match bullet which has a .697 Ballistic Coefficient. I looked at the data on their site for this bullet and the .260rem (http://www.hornady.com/assets/files/reloading-manual-data/260Rem147grELDMatch.pdf) Hornady lists 11 powders and as many as 5 loads per powder.

It's interesting... Some firms are really serving their customers. I mean Hornady has data on the web for the 6mm Creedmoor with their new 108gr ELD bullet. They seem to continue pioneering the highest BC bullets... and Gee! They're publishing
wildcat data! They're also using mostly long established powders for the data generated. Not requiring payment for new data either... Take note of that Lee-Precision...




It is easy to read this thread and see who has posted information related to the topic and who has no awareness, much less understanding of the concerns voiced here. As for all those bandying around the terms "narcissism" and "narcissist"; those who interrupt discussion with remarks, some mean spirited and threatening, in no way related or referencing to the topic of the discussion, these repliers fit the classic psychological definition of the narcissist as they only want to be heard or seen by others.


It is unfortunate that the originator of a thread is unable to remove the off-topic or mean-spirited remarks that could find their way onto the discussion pages.

 

[ryanjay11]

It is unfortunate that the originator of a thread is unable to remove the off-topic or mean-spirited remarks that could find their way onto the discussion pages.

Would you remove your completely obnoxious posts as well? If you did this, would there be anything left?

 

[boltman13]

Folks, regarding Hogan, "You just can't fix stupid".

 

[Darrel Martin]

I think it is impossible for any component manufacturer to supply all possible data that could be applied to their product.The mathematical permutations are daunting.
You may be angry that your pet chambering is not included, but when you consider how many chambertings X different bullet weights X different bullet shapes X bullet brands X different powders X barrel twists that work X different powder loads that apply for each powder X different primers X different brass X different throats etc ,I would dare say that there are millions of combinations that apply.
Think of all the expense to be able to test just one chambering such as 308 Win from 115 to 230 grain bullets . Each bullet has an ideal twist barrel, different throating requirements, several powders, multiple powder charges per powder. Just buying the barrels and components would be expensive , not to mention the people to do the testing , record keeping and so forth.
Reason says that a company will have to decide where to concentrate their effort. You may disagree with their choice about what data to supply. They may lose your business, but I think that their obligation is to be sure that the data they do supply is accurate. My responsibility is to research and plan such that my testing of loads outside their data is safe.I know when I am pushing the envelope. If you don't know when you are on the edge then stop.I think that the shooting community , as represented here, is a valuable research tool.There are people here who probably know how to hot rod a 308 Win to near 300 WSM performance ( at least in that 24" hunting barrel WSM ) or get a 223 to push a 90 grain bullet to good velocities better than the component manufacturers do.
Personal responsibility does not mean that Walmart is supposed to prevent me from falling, it means that I am to prevent me from falling.

 

[hogan]

D. Martin,

While I agree that the permutations are extreme when considered as "possibilities", the data provided historically has been confined to the best application powders. Thanks for taking some analytical effort at considering the points I have made. While you consider all the variables, I'm sure you understand that no bulletmaker has ever produced data considering them all. 90gr .224 bullets, .300gr .338 bullets, and 240gr .308 bullets; yes, the makers did specify faster than standard twist rates. None other instances that I know of, and really only Sierra produced these.

As far as a "pet chambering", with Ruger, Stevens, and Mossberg chambering for .375 Ruger and the fact that it will function in any .30-06/.300win length action while outperforming the old H&H and likely Wby magnums, lots of these rifles sold in recent years. Nosler has not neglected data development and publishes their findings to the public on the web. There are a great many shooters pursuing the large calibers these days, especially with cast boolits. Cast are much easier to get accurate results at high velocities when using a large diameter boolit. Just saying, that using large diameter rifles is very popular for many reasons, and even hog hunters are interested in more power.

I think though, that your effort to dissuade my position has exaggerated perspective. There is such a thing as common sense. Funny how Hornady sees this and has classified most of the Sierra ctgs I object to for being outdated as OBSOLETE.

What is really amazing is that a Sierra employee would state in an email that the company chose not to do any load development or testing of new powders or cartridges from 2008 on. When you consider Sierra #5 was copyrighted in 2003; it means the date is likely years older if it takes so long to gather and organize. Seems like data production would be an ongoing, regular; if not everyday, part of a bulletmakers business?

I was very impressed with Barnes #3. Lots of new ctgs covered there, and no fewer than 8 powders for each bullet. I found their internet posting with only 2 powders for the .375 Ruger application of their bullets. Being told that I needed to "contact Hodgdon" by the disinterested tech guy was less than inspiring, although it played some motivation in the ideas I wrote about earlier in this topic.

Sierra s even more "disinterested". Maybe these 2 companies have just decided they have a built-in cash buffer they can harvest because they don't owe their customers the duty of providing data??? Maybe...

Perhaps the company lawyers see that providing data is just a pathway for lawsuits? Maybe there will be no data production efforts, that will be shared with the public? The Big Customer of the past 15yrs has been The US Govt and its agencies. Ain't that true? Not like govt does any reloading; they got factories on contract... But the factories don't make bullets or powder. So why should these businesses give a damn about piddling customers they don't need and support systems they don't need to provide???

To claim that I ever posted in expectation of ctg load data for every primer, powder, twist rate and barrel length (forgot that one, didn't you?) is just disingenuous.

 

[dkhunt14]

D. Martin,

While I agree that the permutations are extreme when considered as "possibilities", the data provided historically has been confined to the best application powders. Thanks for taking some analytical effort at considering the points I have made. While you consider all the variables, I'm sure you understand that no bulletmaker has ever produced data considering them all. 90gr .224 bullets, .300gr .338 bullets, and 240gr .308 bullets; yes, the makers did specify faster than standard twist rates. None other instances that I know of, and really only Sierra produced these.


What is really amazing is that a Sierra employee would state in an email that the
I was very impressed with Barnes #3. Lots of new ctgs covered there, and no fewer than 8 powders for each bullet. I found their internet posting with only 2 powders for the .375 Ruger application of their bullets. Being told that I needed to "contact Hodgdon" by the disinterested tech guy was less than inspiring, although it played some motivation in the ideas I wrote about earlier in this topierra s even more "disinterested". Maybe these 2 companies have just decided they have a built-in cash buffer they can harvest because they don't owe their customers the duty of providing data??? Maybe...

Perhaps the company lawyers see that providing data is just a pathway for lawsuits? Maybe there will be no data production efforts, that will be shared with the public? The Big Customer of the past 15yrs has been The US Govt and its agencies. Ain't that true? Not like govt does any reloading; they got factories on contract... But the factories don't make bullets or powder. So why should these businesses give a damn about piddling customers they don't need and support systems they don't need to provide???

To claim that I ever posted in expectation of data for every primer, powder, twist rate and barrel length (forgot that one, didn't you?) is just disingenuous.

D. Martin,

While I agree that the permutations are extreme when considered as "possibilities", the data provided historically has been confined to the best application powders. Thanks for taking some analytical effort at considering the points I have made. While you consider all the variables, I'm sure you understand that no bulletmaker has ever produced data considering them all. 90gr .224 bullets, .300gr .338 bullets, and 240gr .308 bullets; yes, the makers did specify faster than standard twist rates. None other instances that I know of, and really only Sierra produced these.

This is not true Berger makes a 90 grain 224 bullet and two different 300 grain .338 bullets. Matt

 

[dkhunt14]

Perhaps the company lawyers see that providing data is just a pathway for lawsuits? Maybe there will be no data production efforts, that will be shared with the public? The Big Customer of the past 15yrs has been The US Govt and its agencies. Ain't that true? Not like govt does any reloading; they got factories on contract... But the factories don't make bullets or powder. So why should these businesses give a damn about piddling customers they don't need and support systems they don't need to provide???

This is not true. Quantico has many full time gunsmiths on duty. They chamber lots of custom barrels. Their snipers handhold lots of ammo. So does some of their shooting teams. Matt