- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
I doubt it. It was the first question I asked them. It's actually why I called them, but since they didn't know we went on to talk about how they did their tests.
Federal 50 caliber Muzzleloading Bullet Captured
- Thread starter ronlaughlin
- Start date
Help Support Modern Muzzleloading Forum:
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
- Messages
- 7,587
- Reaction score
- 8,289
Muley Hunter said:
Sounds unlike a major ammunition manufacturer but..... their testing most likely was limited and they wanted to get the bullet to market during this year's season.
- Joined
- May 17, 2013
- Messages
- 918
- Reaction score
- 559
Muley Hunter said:
Pete. I'm probably just making this up according to some people but when the Fusion ML bullets made by Fed came out I called for ballistics & was told that they don't test them. The best I could do was call Speer & get the ballistics for a 260 Uni Core
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
Frankly, I was surprised that a bullet that they claim is a 200yd bullet wasn't tested at that distance. Oh well.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,957
- Reaction score
- 3,149
GregK said:
Because folks can purchase the bullet i tested at a store. Apparently Dave's test was done with pre-production bullets? Chances are, no matter how the bullets are tested in the future, the results will the same as the results in my test, because the tests will be done using a bullet purchased at a store.
OK guys here are my 2 cents worth, and to reply to bdog who quoted " where are the nay sayers now" well here is one.
First of all to come and make a post like this and basically stated that the DLETCHOE, and GREG were not telling the truth about the Trophy Copper, it is totally unacceptable and shows a lack of responsibility, and respect on any body's part and I don't really care who you are, specially when you did not have all the facts. No is not myth that the Trophy Copper bullets that DLetchoe shot at 200 yrds and I shot at 200 yrds into milk jugs full of water did not open up at all, and this is a fact. I did not post my results since he posted his. So lets get the facts straight:
FACT ONE: the bullets that Dave shot and I shot were the ones that the FEDERAL REP brought to me back in MAY before they were even made available to the public. After we shot them and got the results we did, I contacted him and he came to the store, and I showed him, the one 100 yrds one which open just perfect and the 200 yrds which it did not. He call FED from the store and explained to them what had happen and took both bullets with him. The next thing we knew FEd halted distribution of the bullet for about three month or longer due to technical difficulties which they would not ell me what it was. After a few month went by they finally go them out to the public. Whether or not they did anything to them I can only guess, and my guess would be they some how soften the copper in order for the bullet to fully expand at 200 yrds.
FACT TWO: There is no question in my mind what so ever, that the test that is posted here was done as explain, but there is no way to actually duplicate what this bullet that was use would do at 200 yrds. with out actually shooting it at that distance into some water jugs. I do not care whether it was shot at 2000 fps, or 1358 fps as FED claims or1338 fps as it was shot here to simulated the bullet traveling that fast at 200 yrds and the key word here is SIMULATE, the fact was it was shot at 12 feet away from the muzzle, which does not mean really anything. You can take the same bullet and shoot at 1200, 1100 or 1000 fps at 12 feet from the muzzle into some water jugs and get the same results. You might not get the same penetration, but will get the same expansion. If you are going to do a test to check something out do it correctly and shoot at 200 yrds, and don't simulated.
FACT THREE: It was also stated that the test which Dave did could not be duplicated since it might be a new bullet out for sale instead of the one he got back in may. This is not entirely true. It can be done since there is still some of the ones that we got back in May available, but since the new ones and I hope they have been improved have not really been tested correctly, I will not send any more to Dave to test again since he already did what I ask him to do with the samples we got. I might send him some of the ones out for sale to try and see, since I know he will not simulated, he will actually shoot them at 200yrds.
Ron you know who I am, and you know where to find me in case you want to discuss this, just remember you are not talking to a rookie. I probably had more experience with munitions and explosive then you will ever dream about or play with, and yes I do have respect for others.
First of all to come and make a post like this and basically stated that the DLETCHOE, and GREG were not telling the truth about the Trophy Copper, it is totally unacceptable and shows a lack of responsibility, and respect on any body's part and I don't really care who you are, specially when you did not have all the facts. No is not myth that the Trophy Copper bullets that DLetchoe shot at 200 yrds and I shot at 200 yrds into milk jugs full of water did not open up at all, and this is a fact. I did not post my results since he posted his. So lets get the facts straight:
FACT ONE: the bullets that Dave shot and I shot were the ones that the FEDERAL REP brought to me back in MAY before they were even made available to the public. After we shot them and got the results we did, I contacted him and he came to the store, and I showed him, the one 100 yrds one which open just perfect and the 200 yrds which it did not. He call FED from the store and explained to them what had happen and took both bullets with him. The next thing we knew FEd halted distribution of the bullet for about three month or longer due to technical difficulties which they would not ell me what it was. After a few month went by they finally go them out to the public. Whether or not they did anything to them I can only guess, and my guess would be they some how soften the copper in order for the bullet to fully expand at 200 yrds.
FACT TWO: There is no question in my mind what so ever, that the test that is posted here was done as explain, but there is no way to actually duplicate what this bullet that was use would do at 200 yrds. with out actually shooting it at that distance into some water jugs. I do not care whether it was shot at 2000 fps, or 1358 fps as FED claims or1338 fps as it was shot here to simulated the bullet traveling that fast at 200 yrds and the key word here is SIMULATE, the fact was it was shot at 12 feet away from the muzzle, which does not mean really anything. You can take the same bullet and shoot at 1200, 1100 or 1000 fps at 12 feet from the muzzle into some water jugs and get the same results. You might not get the same penetration, but will get the same expansion. If you are going to do a test to check something out do it correctly and shoot at 200 yrds, and don't simulated.
FACT THREE: It was also stated that the test which Dave did could not be duplicated since it might be a new bullet out for sale instead of the one he got back in may. This is not entirely true. It can be done since there is still some of the ones that we got back in May available, but since the new ones and I hope they have been improved have not really been tested correctly, I will not send any more to Dave to test again since he already did what I ask him to do with the samples we got. I might send him some of the ones out for sale to try and see, since I know he will not simulated, he will actually shoot them at 200yrds.
Ron you know who I am, and you know where to find me in case you want to discuss this, just remember you are not talking to a rookie. I probably had more experience with munitions and explosive then you will ever dream about or play with, and yes I do have respect for others.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,957
- Reaction score
- 3,149
Carlos,
You are incorrect when you write that a test made at 12 yard cannot duplicate an actual shoot at 200 yard. The only thing really relevant is the speed of the bullet when it impacts the jugs filled with water. To be perfectly clear, i have no dog in this fight, and only did my test as a favor to Muley.
My test shows that the bullet i used, will expand perfectly at 200 yard. The test you and the other did apparently showed the bullets you tested wouldn't. My presumption is, you contacted the manufacturer, and informed them of issues with their bullet, and they have since corrected it. Never, ever, did i consider that you folks were not telling the truth, and never did i suggest anyone wasn't being truthful.
Most of my life was spent building, as i am a retired carpenter. My current avocation is hunting. Never have i ever claimed to be an expert in munitions. No monies, or favors, do i receive from any manufacturer of bullets nor rifles. Everything i have written is my honest opinion. Mostly, i don't know much. However, i do know the bullet i tested will expand reliably at 200 yard if fired from my rifle using my standard hunting load, but so what. It makes no difference to me.
You may be an expert about munitions, but you obviously don't understand physics, because physics understands the actual range at which the bullet strikes the jugs is not the important thing; the important parameter, is the speed at which the bullet strikes the jugs.
If you wish, i will be more than happy to test the original bullet, and verify it won't expand at the 200 yard velocity. Also i will be very willing to pay for the postage to send them to me. If you need my address let me know; i will send it to you in PM, but you should know what it is already, from when i sent you them vent liner free of charge.
You are incorrect when you write that a test made at 12 yard cannot duplicate an actual shoot at 200 yard. The only thing really relevant is the speed of the bullet when it impacts the jugs filled with water. To be perfectly clear, i have no dog in this fight, and only did my test as a favor to Muley.
My test shows that the bullet i used, will expand perfectly at 200 yard. The test you and the other did apparently showed the bullets you tested wouldn't. My presumption is, you contacted the manufacturer, and informed them of issues with their bullet, and they have since corrected it. Never, ever, did i consider that you folks were not telling the truth, and never did i suggest anyone wasn't being truthful.
Most of my life was spent building, as i am a retired carpenter. My current avocation is hunting. Never have i ever claimed to be an expert in munitions. No monies, or favors, do i receive from any manufacturer of bullets nor rifles. Everything i have written is my honest opinion. Mostly, i don't know much. However, i do know the bullet i tested will expand reliably at 200 yard if fired from my rifle using my standard hunting load, but so what. It makes no difference to me.
You may be an expert about munitions, but you obviously don't understand physics, because physics understands the actual range at which the bullet strikes the jugs is not the important thing; the important parameter, is the speed at which the bullet strikes the jugs.
If you wish, i will be more than happy to test the original bullet, and verify it won't expand at the 200 yard velocity. Also i will be very willing to pay for the postage to send them to me. If you need my address let me know; i will send it to you in PM, but you should know what it is already, from when i sent you them vent liner free of charge.
When the testing of this bullet was done in June, yes it was a new bullet, as they say, newer is better, I hope that they did improve it so it does open up as it is suppose to at that distance. As far as my testing and where I did it, I did it at the gun club that I belong to, Which means that I had to have the permission from the board to do the test at 100 and 200 yards using the water filled milk jugs. I had to have a Range master from the club to over see it, and I had another person to help set up and help clean up after I finished, This way I would have 2 PEOPLE to verify the testing that I did, just in case some one wanted to question my testing. If some one wants the Names and numbers of them, PM me and I will get them for you.
If you want to read the story about the testing and see the pictures of it. TROPHY COPPER BULLET WATER JUG TEST. you can google it to find it. If you do read it, you will see that there is 2 parts to the 200 yard test, part 1, into the milk jugs, and part 2, was into my back stop that I was using to see if it would open up hitting something solid, this way you could see it both ways .
Until some one does the actual testing at 200 yards, and prove my testing wrong of the bullet that we are talking about, more power to them. and I will tip my hat and say great job. As I said in my report, at that time THEY ARE A VERY ACCURATE BULLET and would do a great job, and I still feel the same way for the bullet. And I hoped that they have corrected the problem.
Dave
If you want to read the story about the testing and see the pictures of it. TROPHY COPPER BULLET WATER JUG TEST. you can google it to find it. If you do read it, you will see that there is 2 parts to the 200 yard test, part 1, into the milk jugs, and part 2, was into my back stop that I was using to see if it would open up hitting something solid, this way you could see it both ways .
Until some one does the actual testing at 200 yards, and prove my testing wrong of the bullet that we are talking about, more power to them. and I will tip my hat and say great job. As I said in my report, at that time THEY ARE A VERY ACCURATE BULLET and would do a great job, and I still feel the same way for the bullet. And I hoped that they have corrected the problem.
Dave
- Joined
- May 17, 2013
- Messages
- 918
- Reaction score
- 559
"never did i suggest anyone wasn't being truthful."
Ron you need to read what you posted more carefully. When you accused Dave & I both of perpetuating a myth that is exactly what you were saying. I even questioned you about that very thing on this forum. Your own words expose the truth about you. I am now done with both you & this matter - Greg
Ron you need to read what you posted more carefully. When you accused Dave & I both of perpetuating a myth that is exactly what you were saying. I even questioned you about that very thing on this forum. Your own words expose the truth about you. I am now done with both you & this matter - Greg
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,957
- Reaction score
- 3,149
Dave,
Thank you for posting. Right now, i wish i could test some of the same bullets you tested. Never have i ever questioned your honesty, and i certainly don't need names to verify your methods.
What i now believe, is the bullet i tested is different than the bullet you tested. Yes, i truly do believe it is a myth that the bullets i have, don't expand at 200 yards. My guess is all the bullets being sold in stores will expand at 200 yards, and it is a myth they won't.
It seems to me the testing you did was harder to accomplish than the test i did, and i commend you for your work. However, the testing i did at only 12 yard, is scientifically valid. The only thing the the jugs know is what happens at the moment of impact. At the moment of impact, the bullet, and the jugs experience only the impact. The relevant parameter, is the speed of the bullet at impact; the distance the bullet traveled to get there is irrelevant.
Thank you for posting. Right now, i wish i could test some of the same bullets you tested. Never have i ever questioned your honesty, and i certainly don't need names to verify your methods.
What i now believe, is the bullet i tested is different than the bullet you tested. Yes, i truly do believe it is a myth that the bullets i have, don't expand at 200 yards. My guess is all the bullets being sold in stores will expand at 200 yards, and it is a myth they won't.
It seems to me the testing you did was harder to accomplish than the test i did, and i commend you for your work. However, the testing i did at only 12 yard, is scientifically valid. The only thing the the jugs know is what happens at the moment of impact. At the moment of impact, the bullet, and the jugs experience only the impact. The relevant parameter, is the speed of the bullet at impact; the distance the bullet traveled to get there is irrelevant.
Ron
I have been following the testing and shooting that you and a few others on this forum and a couple other forums have done, and my hat is off to you guys. The whole idea of our testing was not to create a problem but to solve it and to help others to get info, Any body can go out and do a test at 25, 50, or at 100 yards and show what the bullet will look like and say it will do the same at 200 yards, In my test along with the Hornady 458/ 250 gr Monoflex and the Barnes T-EZ/250, I wanted to do it and show what they would really do and look like at that range. I do not say at any time, that a hunter should at any time try and take an animal at that distance, but if they have an idea of what a bullet will do, and if they do there part and go to the range and practise, so be it.
with my test and shooting, I try to show what can be done by the avg person and what to expect from there set up.
If you are happy with your testing the scientifcally way ( and the bullet does looks great ) I'm glad. I hope that they have improved on it.
With me, I will do it the hard way to prove a point and do it the way it should be done with no short cuts. That is the way I am.
The one thing that made me happy was that I went out to do the test with 6 bullets and came home with 3.
Dave
I have been following the testing and shooting that you and a few others on this forum and a couple other forums have done, and my hat is off to you guys. The whole idea of our testing was not to create a problem but to solve it and to help others to get info, Any body can go out and do a test at 25, 50, or at 100 yards and show what the bullet will look like and say it will do the same at 200 yards, In my test along with the Hornady 458/ 250 gr Monoflex and the Barnes T-EZ/250, I wanted to do it and show what they would really do and look like at that range. I do not say at any time, that a hunter should at any time try and take an animal at that distance, but if they have an idea of what a bullet will do, and if they do there part and go to the range and practise, so be it.
with my test and shooting, I try to show what can be done by the avg person and what to expect from there set up.
If you are happy with your testing the scientifcally way ( and the bullet does looks great ) I'm glad. I hope that they have improved on it.
With me, I will do it the hard way to prove a point and do it the way it should be done with no short cuts. That is the way I am.
The one thing that made me happy was that I went out to do the test with 6 bullets and came home with 3.
Dave
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,957
- Reaction score
- 3,149
Coming home with bullets would have made me happy too. You did a nice job, and your test was successful. You seem to take the time, and the study necessary to make a good experiment, and have the ability to pull it off. Hats off; i admire your determination. Hopefully, you will one day, do the same test using the bullets now in production, at the actual 200 yard distance.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,957
- Reaction score
- 3,149
GregK said:
The reason i suggested you were perpetuating a myth is because you were. It turns out Dave' test was done with a prototype. Hopefully, one day he will repeat his test using a bullet we all can purchase. Then you will see, the bullet available for purchase, will expand at 200 yard.
Myself, i would also like to be done with this thread, so i don't blame you for quitting. Had i known i would have to endure this abuse, i would have informed Muley of our results privately. The memory of the time wife, and i spent testing this bullet, would be warm and fuzzy.
Never ever, did i suggest you or Dave were being untruthful. However, in my opinion, you, yourself, are trying to perpetuate a myth.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
Slow down boys. I think we're all on the same page here. Meaning we'd like to know how the bullet performs at 200yds.
Ron....You're making two assumptions that might not be true. The first one is that the bullets tested by Dave were different than the ones you tested. That may be true, and it would certainly explains a lot. However, it might no to true too, and the delay in production might have been for something else.
The second assumption is that what you saw at your distance would be the same at 200 yds. You're basing this on the ballistics providing by Federal who didn't shoot at 200 yds either. At least that's what they said. We know the BC of the bullet is .164, and we can figure out what the fps should be at 200yds. Is it though? Many things effect this. Temp, humidity, altitude, barrel length etc. With that plastic sleeve on the bullet, and that plastic base does the bullet perform the same as another bullet that's all metal? Is a .164 BC really accurate for this style of bullet? What if the bullet is only going 1200 fps at 200yds? Would that make the difference?
We'll only know if it's tested at 200 yds, and a 120gr load is more than what the majority use. 110gr might be more useful.
Ron....You're making two assumptions that might not be true. The first one is that the bullets tested by Dave were different than the ones you tested. That may be true, and it would certainly explains a lot. However, it might no to true too, and the delay in production might have been for something else.
The second assumption is that what you saw at your distance would be the same at 200 yds. You're basing this on the ballistics providing by Federal who didn't shoot at 200 yds either. At least that's what they said. We know the BC of the bullet is .164, and we can figure out what the fps should be at 200yds. Is it though? Many things effect this. Temp, humidity, altitude, barrel length etc. With that plastic sleeve on the bullet, and that plastic base does the bullet perform the same as another bullet that's all metal? Is a .164 BC really accurate for this style of bullet? What if the bullet is only going 1200 fps at 200yds? Would that make the difference?
We'll only know if it's tested at 200 yds, and a 120gr load is more than what the majority use. 110gr might be more useful.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2007
- Messages
- 4,957
- Reaction score
- 3,149
Mulely, Yes, i can relate to your reservations. However, even though we can't know for sure that the speed at 12 yards is what it would be at 200 yard, i am confident it is 'close enough'. My assumption that the speed of the bullet at 12 yard is the same as the speed of the bullet Dave tested at 200 yard is most certainly wrong, however i have no doubt it is 'close enough'. Keep in mind, the science of physics, which is used to calculate bullet trajectory, successfully placed men on the moon, and a space traveler on a comet. Calculating the speed of a bullet at 200 yard would seem to be quite trivial.. um, not really.
Yes, i assume the bullet Dave tested was different than the one i tested. Actually, it is almost certain it was different, because had it been the same, it would have expanded very much the same as ours did, when he shot it at 200 yard in his test.
At any rate, hopefully we will see even more, and better verification, of 200 yard results, when the bullet becomes more, and more available in stores.
Actually, what is really relevant is how the bullet works on critters, and hopefully we will see more and more reports of 'hair tests'.
Yes, i assume the bullet Dave tested was different than the one i tested. Actually, it is almost certain it was different, because had it been the same, it would have expanded very much the same as ours did, when he shot it at 200 yard in his test.
At any rate, hopefully we will see even more, and better verification, of 200 yard results, when the bullet becomes more, and more available in stores.
Actually, what is really relevant is how the bullet works on critters, and hopefully we will see more and more reports of 'hair tests'.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
I'm guessing that nobody would want to shoot through their chrono at 200 yds to see for sure, but doing it through the chrono at 100 yds is doable. Then we could see how accurate the ballistics are that Federal posted. Instead of just knowing the BC, and MV of the bullet, and assuming that is what it's doing at 200 yds.
I'm suspicious of saying the Federal bullet acts as a true .164 BC with all that plastic hanging on it.
I'm suspicious of saying the Federal bullet acts as a true .164 BC with all that plastic hanging on it.
I have a sugestion, that would put this to bed,
why not test it at 200 yards with the NEW bullets and then EVERYONE would have THE answer TO THIS NIGHTMARE, where nobody will win until it is done.
thank you,
Good night
Dave
why not test it at 200 yards with the NEW bullets and then EVERYONE would have THE answer TO THIS NIGHTMARE, where nobody will win until it is done.
thank you,
Good night
Dave
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 915
You go first. 
Before you say it. I'm using open sights, so 200 yds is out of the question.
Before you say it. I'm using open sights, so 200 yds is out of the question.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2009
- Messages
- 7,587
- Reaction score
- 8,289
Kodiak2 said:
I have no dog in this fight. I couldn't shoot these bullets anyway from my rifle without reducing charges...
I'm in full agreement with the above statement. There's no chronograph needed at any range, just use the most common hunting load for the specific propellant (not one's own load) and do the testing, shooting at 200yds. However..... I'm not in favor of a single bullet test.
Similar threads
