Why is it called a "Boattail"?

[Webster]

I was hoping for a reply that might sway my opinion, sadly still waiting.

I don’t know if this bullet was designed intentionally for 300 Blackout, but here is where the lab and life part ways.

A 145 grain copper solid will be around 1.400” long, with the longer boattail it’s just a good guess. But that length makes the math easy. 1.4” bullet + 1.36” case = 2.76”- 2.260” max cartridge length and you have .500” bullet in a case only about 1.160” (1.360-.200”) deep, you’ve lost better than 30% case capacity.

Load data and ballistic tables are on the op’s Website. Max velocity is about what I thought, 1800 Fps. I hope it was a 16” barrel, but it’s not disclosed.

As I stated earlier,(had to answer my own post), normal velocity for a 150 grain bullet would be closer to 2000 fps, with a flatbase 2200 fps is not uncommon.

The Arrow spike bullet better have some very cutting edge design to make up for 400 fps when it comes to drop.

Published data from Aerospike

View attachment 1565588

Berger 150 flatbase using JBM and Speer Gold Dot at the same velocity. These numbers are close enough to my own verified drops to work for this conversation.

View attachment 1565586
View attachment 1565587

What happens when we load the Berger and Speer to max velocities

View attachment 1565589

View attachment 1565592

Again most will be familiar with JBM, it will be off by a couple inches at 300 yards, unless you really fine tune the data, compared to using defaults.

But the difference of a radical new design vs a cupped base Gold Dot at the same velocity, or worse max velocities in the same cartridge. This is the difference about .250” of lost case capacity makes.

Edit to add
I need to be fair to the OP, this isn’t so much to say his bullet is no good, but that his thinking is off. Lab vs Life. There’s almost no legitimate reason for a boattail inside 500 yards, certainly not 200. So why put it in a cartridge that is limited to that range?

You have indicated the bullet has some stability issues below Mach 2, so why use it in a cartridge that isn’t much above 1.6 at the muzzle?

You need data beginning at 500 yards

Sounds like the wrong cartridge for shooting beyond 100 yards. If so who cares what the efficiancy is. The drop is still massive no matter what you compare it to. How about wind drift looks extremly big. What would the bullet do in a 308 compared to lead jacketed bullets? Maybe ok for deer hunting, target shooting?

 

[boltfluter]

Just went to the website. Too funny! Why would you "extensively test a bullet", designed to give the shooter an advantage at long range, in a .300 Blackout. Outstanding work! Surely this whole thing is a joke as I am lmao!! No group pics on the website or anything at all really to backup the claims you are making about your superior bullets. I am really wondering if you have ever fired a real weapon at this point, based on some of your answers. Lol! Thanks for the laugh though, it has been very entertaining.
Paul

 

[Dgd6mm]

This guy's a clown and we're all his props.

 

[joshb]

Reminds me of the other hot thread on here titled “not a hunter”. OP is a non-hunter making outlandish comments and statements about hunting when he really doesn’t have any experience with hunting at all.

Here it appears we have an engineer designing bullets with no shooting experience. I run into this in the electrical field quite often. You can always tell the difference in device and lighting design concepts that come from engineers who have worked in the field, and thru trial and error, devised devices and solutions to making installations easier and more efficient. Then you have the desk jockey engineers who design things with no forethought on how difficult installation and servicing might be because they’ve never actually installed anything themselves

Add architects to the list of desk jockeys. I’ve seen a few “unbuildable plans” in my career.
I wonder how those expensive aluminum tipped bullets performed? Does any competitor use them?

 

[dellet]

I sure am trying. Sometimes it's difficult to filter out the good feedback from the vitriol.

What I have so far:
Work with a competitive shooter
Win some competitions
Provide long range grouping data.

Anything else?

You really think I should give away ten thousand dollars worth of bullets?

Some friendly advice, give away some bullets.

My post #79 should make it clear, you don’t have a complete understanding of using what you’ve created. I’m a Blackout fan, and not really much of a long range shooter. Any design that will help a ballistically limited cartridge catches my attention. I shoot mostly antiques, and mostly to 200 yards. I know enough about Ballistics to show the holes in your your line of thinking, and use of your product. I’m not one of the big boys by any stretch of the imagination.
With that said....

Why should you give away $10,000 worth of product?
At this point there is no need to, but here’s what investing/giving away $1000 would return you.

100 bullets to 10 different shooters.

$250,000 worth of rifles
$100,000 worth of test equipment
500+ years of experience
Access to ranges allowing bullet testing out to 1 mile
Honest feedback from some of the top shooters in the world who have experience with product testing
The ability to test your bullets with 20-30 different powders if needed.

The list could go on, hopefully you get the point.

You won’t need to test your bullet in a $400 Blackout because it’s all you could afford that had a fast twist.

For encouragement, now that I’ve knocked your product roll out, here’s something I helped with a few years ago.

A friend was given a partial box of the old G9 match bullets. A custom brass 154 grain bullet. Probably around 50-60 total. He gave me 10 to develop a load. Because I know the cartridge, and had the components in hand, I was able to come up with a good potential load with that few bullets.

My friend took that load, tweaked it a bit for his rifle, and went to the range. He had the shooting skills and access to 1000 yards plus. Some short range drop confirmations and then it was first round hits on half size silhouettes from 100-800 yards. Rifle was 9” AR off a field type bipod. All that was needed to prove potential for the bullet and intended use and decide if the bullets were worth purchasing.

This is why a very small investment on your side, could return 10,000 fold for your product. Then again it could send you back to the drawing board.

For what it’s worth @HappyHellfire according to his website will be at a gunshow in Pensacola this weekend. Might be a chance to at least get an eyeball on the product.

 

[Iowa Fox]

Anyone here remember the Herters wasp waist?

 

[Ledd Slinger]

I agree with giving out bullets for testing, but I don’t think the 10 bullet sample packs currently offered will produce any conclusions. I would think a sample pack should have a minimum of 25 bullets. At least then that might be enough to help a person decide if they want to continue testing

 

[WSnyder]

This guy's a clown and we're all his props.

Probably not really a clown. He is a real guy with a real degree with a real job doing real research and teaching. Now maybe (as I’ve already said before) he’s a little naive about the “real” shooting world.

 

[okie]

Has Mr. Guffey made a return?
Maybe to seek revenge?

LMFAO

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Probably not really a clown. He is a real guy with a real degree with a real job doing real research and teaching. Now maybe (as I’ve already said before) he’s a little naive about the “real” shooting world.

Agree. Some people don’t understand that in the shooting world, you can’t go putting the cart that far in front of the horse. Generally shooters who get into custom bullet design and production have decades of shooting experience and fully understand all the sporting and competitive disciplines. So he just doesn’t know any better and thought he could make a splash and swim away happy.

But what upsets me is that it appears to be blatant lies about fully testing these bullets on his website. There’s NO excuse for that. Best to be quiet and humble about a new design on any type of product until it has actually been proven in real world applications

 

[1911nut]

Yep, he is who he says he is:

Faculty | Mechanical Engineering | University of West Florida

maybe we could cut him some slack, he knows stuff but seemingly not a lot about rifles.

 

[TTE]

Yep, he is who he says he is:

Faculty | Mechanical Engineering | University of West Florida

maybe we could cut him some slack, he knows stuff but seemingly not a lot about rifles.

IMO .... not a confirmation that they are one in the same.

 

[HappyHellfire]

When you find yourself in a hole, stop di

IMO .... not a confirmation that they are one in the sam

That's me.

 

[Ledd Slinger]

Tom Mousel spent countless hours testing thousands of prototype bullets for Roy Hunter until they finally decided on a design that worked. I’m sure many others helped in testing as well. Alex Wheeler does the same with his reamer designs, barrels, and action/stock modifications. These guys spend a ton of money for testing designs that might make a shooters edge just a little bit sharper, but they do it all behind the curtains to make sure it’s proven before they release information or products to the general public.

New design concepts are always welcome and sometimes even exciting, but everyone in the shooting world is gonna keep their reins pulled tight until they see evidence of proven results from shooters with some level of renown.

 

[TTE]

Not sure this guy is serious.

I don't know Dave M. personally, but I do think he is a serious shooter/competitor.
He offered to do some testing for him. Didn't ask for compensation for brass, primers, powder, reloading or range time.

If he wants to actually break into the accuracy bullet biz, that is an offer he should jump on.

Anyone that is shooting .0's or 1's already will have a hard time abandoning their current load to test for someone else's unproven/unknown bullet or component, as overall their time is very limited as it is.

JMO

 

[Bill Norris]

Not sure this guy is serious.

I don't know Dave M. personally, but I do think he is a serious shooter/competitor.
He offered to do some testing for him. Didn't ask for compensation for brass, primers, powder, reloading or range time.

If he wants to actually break into the accuracy bullet biz, that is an offer he should jump on.

Anyone that is shooting .0's or 1's already will have a hard time abandoning their current load to test for someone else's unproven/unknown bullet or component, as overall their time is very limited as it is.

JMO

And added components otherwise are expensive these days. Not many shooters will use their supply on a "maybe so" bullet that has no clout among them. Just plain common sense.

 

[HappyHellfire]

Not sure this guy is serious.

I don't know Dave M. personally, but I do think he is a serious shooter/competitor.
He offered to do some testing for him. Didn't ask for compensation for brass, primers, powder, reloading or range time.

If he wants to actually break into the accuracy bullet biz, that is an offer he should jump on.

Anyone that is shooting .0's or 1's already will have a hard time abandoning their current load to test for someone else's unproven/unknown bullet or component, as overall their time is very limited as it is.

JMO

I've had a couple of shooters PM me and they have agreed to testing. I'm pretty serious.

 

[TTE]

I've had a couple of shooters PM me and they have agreed to testing. I'm pretty serious.

Who are they ?

 

[Dave M.]

That's me.

How can you prove to us that you are a real person? Again, I’m happy to do some testing on your bullets free of charge, just supply me with 50 bullets and I’ll do several comparison tests and provide you the data to use. I’m not sure why you are so resistant to provide some willing high quality credentialed shooters a few of your bullets?? I’m fairly certain you don’t have the equipment to judge the accuracy of your own bullets. Do you shout off a front rest? Do you own a back rest? Have you ever fired 5 shots from any rifle at 100 yards that measured under 0.100”? I seriously doubt it. Therefore, I don’t believe you possess the ability to test your own bullets in real life, any more than I have the ability to test my own theories on rocket shapes.
Stop being so stubborn and beating around the bush and let’s test your theories.
Dave

 

[jelenko]

I've had a couple of shooters PM me and they have agreed to testing. I'm pretty serious.

Congrats! Very cool.