Tipped Bullet Photo Array

[ENCORE50A]

..........I have concerns that some tests are flawed..........

If some tests are flawed, it follows that every test is flawed. You see, an effort was made to do every shooting the exact same way, thus every test is flawed. Every test is flawed.......

That could be the case, even though you do shoot each bullet through the same media.

No bullet manufacturer or bullet tester shoots a hunting bullet through a thick weave of carpet, through a board, then into jugs of water, and determines rather a bullet "fails" or "passes". I've discussed these tests with three of them, who will remain anonymous. Barnes own testing done to simulate a 100yd charge, is done through the industry standard, gelatin. Bob Parker doesn't use carpet and a board to develop bullets, as everyone can well see in the Black Max post, he used electricians putty.

BuckDoeHunter stated that he felt one of your tests was flawed in another "just lately" post. Others have disagreed with the posted results, so boys and girls, its not just me.

Then with an estimated velocity, much less than any likely normal hunting charge, the bullets are claimed to "fail or pass" by some. If the ballistics charts were included, especially showing the range, that with a normal hunting charge velocity, those guests reading these test posts might understand that their bullet wouldn't slow to that speed until after 200yds and in some cases almost 300yds.

Not trying to be an enemy, just don't believe these tests actually represent a bullets function on animals.

 

[ENCORE50A]

..........I have concerns that some tests are flawed..........

If some tests are flawed, it follows that every test is flawed. You see, an effort was made to do every shooting the exact same way, thus every test is flawed. Every test is flawed.......

Continue doing what you do Ron :yeah: Majority of folks that Disagree are doing so because their “Beloved Bullet Failed”

When others have used a bullet on game, with completely opposit results, I wouldn't say its because of their "Beloved Bullet Failed". They're disagreeing because their real world experience on game proves different.

 

[52Bore]

This post Ron started is about Tipped bullets... his test proved overwhelmingly and it's been stated many times that TIPS (and small HP) are detrimental to bullet performance.
Since I've tabulated the results - I just recalled he did a test with a Barnes TEZ with and without a tip.




Although Ron chronographed this at approx 1250fps - we DO NOT know at what Velocity it stops expanding..

See next post...

 

[52Bore]

Previous post shows photo with tip.
Here is the test & results without the tip..
Now looks like a large HP.

 

[52Bore]

I shall add, I did an actual test with my 50/475 bullet that Ron tested the HP diameters in this 50grV test.
1) no change in Velocity to 200 yards - Labrador Chronograph
2) No change in elevation on the target at 200yards.
The tip added no advantage at all with this bullet.



After all the work Ron put into this - What reason would anyone hunt with a Tipped or Small HP bullet past 150yards or so?
There are so many better choices.

 

[ENCORE50A]

Rick, testing with 80grs shows the bullets "PASSED". Others who have already indicated their opinions about the Barnes bullet low velocity (50grsV) tests, have disagreed with the results.
ALL those bullets are tested at speeds that would be a minimum for most hunting charges at 200yds or with the heavier bullets, 300yds. So unless it is specified at what range the bullet tested would slow to, some might think that the bullet would react that way at all ranges. Which is not the case.
I've shot so many whitetail with Barnes bullets, I highly doubt many have even harvested that many animals. The Expander, the TMZ and the T-EZ. EVERY bullet, including EVERY tipped bullet that I recovered, functioned perfectly and at ranges to 250yds. Others have posted photos of tipped bullets that expanded perfectly in these Barnes tests.

FYI...………. I haven't shot Barnes bullets hunting in 4 years. So I'm not crying because my favorite bullet is being bashed.

 

[ronlaughlin]

It is not logical that one 'capture' is flawed, and the rest are not; it follows then, that all these 'capture' are flawed. This doesn't surprise me, having never done anything perfect in my life.

Because one has killed several deer using one of these bullets does not mean the results of these 'capture' is flawed. Saying that since the bullet kills deer, the 'capture' is flawed is not logical. Logically, the results of the bullet on deer, and the capture results can coexist .

Over the years there have been several 'stories' about a bullet that 'pencils' through deer at long range.

When ever i have shot a bullet into the contraption used to capture bullets, i am always disappointed when i walk up to find the bullet didn't work. It is so much more fun when i find the bullet worked as designed.

It was revealing the other day when i found the 250g TEZ performed the same as it had three years ago. Three years ago i used a different rifle, different carpet, different 3/8" plywood, different, and a different powder lot. Back then 50 grain Blackhorn weighed 35 grain. Last week the 50 grain of Blackhorn weighed 37.5 grain. It was kind of a miracle to find the bullet both times, three years apart, because they both bounced away into the tall grass. It was interesting the bullets looked the same when found.

It is fun to find bullets after they have been captured. There is zero doubt that some bullets work better than others whilst being captured, especially at slower speeds.

Seems kinda weird how posting a few photo of captured bullets brings the type of response seen in this thread. Folks sure get wound up; have opinions; make them seem important.

It is fun to try to capture bullets, but super fun to actually do so.

It is not fun to be criticized for doing what one was asked to do.

Myself, i use the knowledge learned along the way whilst capturing all of those bullets, to decide which bullet to use hunting. Last year i used a bullet never used before; it worked good. Once again this year, will use a bullet never used before; wish i could start tomorrow.

 

[BuckDoeHunter]

We all have our favorite bullets. What we’ve used. What we’ve heard will work. What we think will work. I’ve only used one bullet that failed me, I will never use it again, I didn’t know better at the time, I was new to muzzleloading.

I’ve recently started using the BCB 285gr BallPoint bullet, not because the Barnes TEZs failed Ron’s 50gr test twice, but because they seem to be a tad more accurate in some of my rifles. Some of my rifles will still be loaded with Barnes TEZs because they are accurate in those rifles and I know the bullet will work.

Ron, I enjoy reading your tests and seeing the outcome. No, I don’t agree with your test media but nonetheless, I will still send you bullets and form my own opinions and still enjoy your tests.

Some people here swear by heavy, slow bullets. Some swear by light, fast bullets. I still prefer my shiny, lead free, pointed bullets. Someday, I will try heavy and slow just because I want too and it’s fun for me to experiment.

I posted some of my opinions on the TEZs, and it’s just that, my opinion. If I read something that seems contrary to what I think, I will post my opinion, this is an open forum for all to see, take it for what it’s worth and discard the rest. Discussions are good, bickering is not.

 

[Lee 9]

We all know nothing duplicates exact hunting conditions, as I remember Ron said something about that way back, The idea is to get an honest comparison between bullets and educate those who need it some what. Those of us who appreciate all the effort and time put into these tests and understand them for what they are not thrilled with the situation.

 

[ENCORE50A]

It is not logical that one 'capture' is flawed, and the rest are not; it follows then, that all these 'capture' are flawed...……...

Because one has killed several deer using one of these bullets does not mean the results of these 'capture' is flawed. Saying that since the bullet kills deer, the 'capture' is flawed is not logical. Logically, the results of the bullet on deer, and the capture results can coexist ……..


It is fun to find bullets after they have been captured. There is zero doubt that some bullets work better than others whilst being captured, especially at slower speeds.

Seems kinda weird how posting a few photo of captured bullets brings the type of response seen in this thread. Folks sure get wound up; have opinions; make them seem important.

It is fun to try to capture bullets, but super fun to actually do so.

It is not fun to be criticized for doing what one was asked to do...…...

Ron I'm not critizing you personally in any way. If you think that's the intent, then you are very wrong. I'm not criticizing you for doing what others have asked you to do. NOTHING about my concerns or posts is personal.

I fully understand what you do is fun. We all love shooting and we all love having goals, some being different than others. No one is disrespecting or criticizing you personally for the fun you're having.

When hunters have used a bullet for years and had exceptional results from said bullet, there very well will be differences of opinions. Some folks present their concerns, others keep their concerns to themselves and do so for different reasons. Maybe they don't want to go against the status quo, maybe its just not in their nature to raise concerns. On the other side, there are those who will question the status quo. Evidently I'm in the latter group.

As for the number of whitetail I've personally (not others) taken with Barnes bullets, Ron its been way more than several. Before retirement and moving to our current location, we harvested an average of 30 whitetail off the farm for over 20 years. My hunting partner kept detailed records of our harvests, which with an average of 30 over 20 years, amounts to 600 whitetail taken off the farm in that timeframe. Harvests were split right down the middle between my partner and myself. Granted, most were does and the DNR allowed a doe permit a day purchase beginning in Sept. Our farm was one of the first few to also practice antler point practices (I hate the word restrictions). I imposed an 8pt or better suggestion, but take the does out. Except for a few guests, ALL hunting, regardless of rather it be a general season or the dedicated muzzleloader season, was done with muzzleloaders. Except for a few when trying new or different bullets, my harvests were completed with Barnes bullets. So its been way more than several whitetail harvested with Barnes.

I also agree that there are bullets that will perform better at lower velocities than bullets that perform better at higher velocities. Its a well proven fact in hunting, long range shooting and self defense.

That said, I still have concerns remaining, not of you, not of the fun you're having, nor has it anything to do with your type of testing being consistent with bullet to bullet.
On the side, I've contacted one bullet manufacturer and two people who test bullets. They WILL remain anonymous.
Although they all three agree that your methods are consistent from bullet to bullet, they do not agree with the media used. Not one of them agree that shooting through a weave of nylon carpet, then through a glued board into water, represents proper bullet function for hunting. They know of no bullet manufacturer that uses that media for testing. However one bullet tester reminded me that the FBI does do testing through different media, including carpet, wood, walls, clothing and other media involved in testing.

There's rarely a comparison of the reduced charge testing compared to the most common hunting charges. Which IMO only, with BH would be very close to 110grs VOLUME for the highest percentage of hunters. Others assume the bullet "FAILED or PASSED" with no data indicating at what range and velocity it might compare to their actual hunting charge. It didn't expand, its a worthless bullet??

Again, I'm in no way criticizing you. I just have a different opinion of some things than you or others may have. My opinions are based on extensive harvests, in this case with Barnes bullets, along with consulting with a bullet manufacturer and two bullet testers. It doesn't make either one of us right or wrong, its only a difference of opinions.

 

[MrTom]

I sure appreciate what Ron has done and continues to do. Its apparent that he goes out of his way make certain his testing is done is done consistently and uniformly. I haven't found anyone else here who has put the effort into doing anything similar to what Ron has done. I find his posted results pretty informative. It may just be me but I feel that as long as I'm not taking the time to replicate his studies with bullets I use [or any that he has in his study for that matter] its not my place to nit-pick his findings. Ron has always answered questions regarding any of his testing clearly and as it may pertain to the test in question.

To me that's as good as it can get outside of looking at the bullet itself and Lewis brings to great point to light with his observation...."Majority of folks that Disagree are doing so because their “Beloved Bullet Failed”. The fail pertaining to actual hunting situations. Bullets fail for any number of reasons but two stick out most to me: manufacturing flaw or user error/assumption. Ron's testing has no control over either.

I hunt with XTP bullets and have zero issues with the way they work on deer. The deer die and don't have softball sized exit holes or bone/bullet fragments run thru the animal. I also have Swift A-Frame and Deep Curl bullets that are great on paper and based on what Ron has shown will function much like the XTPs except I haven't opted to use those two in hunting situations yet. I'll stand on this until and unless someone else decides to run tests like Ron has so there is something for me to actually compare Ron's results to. Maybe one of ya'll would volunteer to do some testing using block of ballistic gel instead of carpet/plywood, water jugs and then phone books....for free mind you.

Ron's work is straight forward, very well documented both statistically and video [usually] and unbiased since most bullets are sent to him for testing and he reports only what he has in hand at the end of the shoot. Its done in two formats: 50 grains of a known powder and 80 grains of the same powder. As a novel idea here......instead of sitting on your bullet biases and arguments go out and do your own testing just as Ron does, same equipment, then do things your way and come back with an actual comparison to argue with. Can't any of you appreciate what you have in front of you without arguing about what he has done and how he has done it? Ron doesn't have a dog in this fight and if you have an issue with how a bullet performed for him in a uniform test situation don't take him to the carpet. He's offering information to help you find a bullet that works so use it.

 

[ronlaughlin]

Gee Tom, you sure put some thought into your well written post.

 

[ronlaughlin]

.............It doesn't make either one of us right or wrong, its only a difference of opinions.

Actually i have no opinion. What i do is collect information as accurately as i can, and share it with forum members. Whereas you are biased. Your bias is revealed by your user name on the other forum...BarnesAddict

 

[ronlaughlin]

.........I've contacted one bullet manufacturer and two people who test bullets. They WILL remain anonymous.
Although they all three agree that your methods are consistent from bullet to bullet, they do not agree with the media used.........

Mom would have been so proud of me dreaming up a way to accurately compare bullets, just using junk laying around the house.

 

[ENCORE50A]

.............It doesn't make either one of us right or wrong, its only a difference of opinions.

Actually i have no opinion. What i do is collect information as accurately as i can, and share it with forum members. Whereas you are biased. Your bias is revealed by your user name on the other forum...BarnesAddict

Well Ron, that user name has been used for years. It was used for the same reason ENCORE50A was used here........ someone already was using ENCORE, which I prefer. That certainly doesn't make one biased. However calling one biased when you state, "Actually i have no opinion", is making a biased opinion.
I agree with you and your testing each bullet the same identical way and as accurately as you can for your method of testing. I'll say it again, I don't agree with shooting through a piece of nylon carpet, a piece of glued board and into water jugs to determine rather a hunting bullet will fail or pass. No one in the bullet industry, anywhere, tests bullets as such (short of the FBI).
Keep up the testing. I enjoy reading and watching them myself. A couple think the test results are scriptue.

 

[52Bore]

Does anyone know of any ML bullet manufacturer that have public videos of their bullet performance testing around 12-1300fps?
I’d be interested in which ones pass and fail.

It would be ok to start it in a new thread as well.

 

[BuckDoeHunter]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wOOAqOS99kc

The petals on the bullet in the video are bent back in a similar fashion to the tip-less 250 T-EZ bullet 50 gr capture, so I’m guessing the bullet has a similar speed, the video mentions a reduced load.

 

[ronlaughlin]

........calling one biased when you state, "Actually i have no opinion", is making a biased opinion........

You are taking my statement out of context. If you recall we were discussing bullets. When shooting, and examining the results of the bullet capture, i want no opinion; i have no opinion. Information is collected, and shared without me having an opinion about the bullet.

Your user name BarnesAddict more or less proves you are indeed biased.

 

[ronlaughlin]

...........I’ve recently started using the BCB 285gr BallPoint bullet...............

That sure is an interesting bullet.

 

[ENCORE50A]

........calling one biased when you state, "Actually i have no opinion", is making a biased opinion........

You are taking my statement out of context. If you recall we were discussing bullets. When shooting, and examining the results of the bullet capture, i want no opinion; i have no opinion. Information is collected, and shared without me having an opinion about the bullet.

Your user name BarnesAddict more or less proves you are indeed biased.

Ok Ron, you're right, again. I understand you're bias towards your tests and I fully understand how it feels to have your baby called ugly. Keep up the testing, its interesting.