Recently, I sent an email to Winchester requesting a listing of the bulk densities of their reloading powders and a listing of the lengths of the bullets they market for reloaders. The purpose of this request was to obtain the most accurate information available to update the data in our reloading software databases. Sort of "from the horse's mouth". Instead of receiving the requested information, I received the following email:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Winchester Technical Dept" <WinTechDept@olin.com>
To: <ereynolds30@comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 2:43 PM
Subject: Winchester

Ed,

Thank you very much for taking the time to contact us here at
Winchester
Ammunition. We are always glad to hear from our many friends and
customers
who share in the shooting sport.

Winchester does not release the information you requested, sorry
for the
inconvenience.

Thank you again for contacting us here at Winchester Ammunition.
If you
should require additional information, do not hesitate to contact
us.

Sincerely,
Winchester Technical Department

My opinion could be slightly skewed, but I see nothing secret about the length of a bullet or the bulk density of a powder. Accurate Powder Company supplied me with the bulk density of every powder they make, and did so very quickly. So, it can't be bulk density. Must be the bullet length.
Normally, I'm pretty easy to get along with, but this just rubbed the cat in the wrong direction. It looks suspiciously like a form letter and the easy, "no work for me" way out. Did I just hit them on a bad day, or do they treat all of their customers this way?

Ed

I would not expect their ballisticians to be the ones answering the e-mail; you probably got an employee who just doesn't know (or care to know) how to find the information.

Call them, and ask to speak to one of the ballisticians. At worst, write a letter on company letterhead requesting the information, and mention that other companies have already provided their data.

George

HockeyPuck

The fellow who responded to your request must have stuck his head up in his starfish

Who does he think the is I hope this missguided car salesman to get another job really fast. I hate this kind of jumbo dumbo answers.

I think the ballisticians would have given you a entierly different answer.

Perhaps we shall send a link to them from this forum
/ JOHAN

[ 08-22-2002, 04:05: Message edited by: JOHAN ]

Sounds about like the answer I got from Remington a few years back when I requested the BC of a 6.5mm component bullet. I was told that Remington never offered this bullet in "factory ammunition" but added that if I got the "correct" information, they could help me.

Ed _ Are you sure you didn't ask them for the FORMULA for their powders or something? That response they sent you is a world class "blow-off" and everyone can say all the bad things they want about the dork at Winchester who sent you that email...but I think the guy is REALLY talented!

How could we sum that letter best?
"Dear Ed, thank you for your query but we are not telling you anything. Please write again when you would like to be ignored." Does that catch the flavor here?

Think how much BETTER the Winchester reply would have been if they used Graemlins and tossed in a couple of and in their reply.

Anyway, I hope you'll follow up on this with a phone call to them and tell the highest ranking guy you can talk to that you just got such a STUPID reply to a simple/innocent question that you and the rest of the world feel it just HAD to be a mistake.

Keep us posted. We'll rally the troops if necessary.
Pecos45

HockyPuck

That looks like a automated response. Nowhere in their response did they indicate that someone acutally read your request. Everything is extremely vague.

HP,Feel lucky you even got a e-mail back from them......I've e-mailed Starke 3 time's over the past month with a few ?'s on their 30cal RPV bullet's.And I have not heard a peep out of them.

Sounds like he answered it at 5min to five on a Friday afternoon. Either that or some lawyer told him not to answer anything he didn't understand.

GeorgeS,No I would'nt do that......Heck,that's what MatchKing's are for.....

I have a feeling it is not "some guy", but company policy. I recieved a very similar reply from a query about a rifle chamber dimension over a year ago. "...all our products conform to SAAMI specs...thank you and call again...blah, blah, blah..." I think the lawyers have over run and taken over all aspects of the company. Anyone who has the remote chance of asking for information that could be used in any way that could get them sued, is brushed off. It's just the impression I got from my 'bout with them.

HockeyPuck,

Although I think there is a very good chance that BigBores may be correct, you might consider investing $.37 in writing another letter to Winchester, perhaps addressed to CEO, asking why you got such a rude letter from (name of person on bottom of letter). DON'T explain what was rude; let him research it himself. DO include a phone number he can reach you at, because if he's actually interested, there will need to be some back and forth that I don't think you will want to do by mail.

The theory behind this approach is that

(a) when he hears that someone was rude, it may get his attention. Even if, on first examination, he thinks the person was not, he will probably want to hear your side, or at least try to make you feel better. If he tries this by phone, that's your opportunity to have him hear your side.

(b) it puts a piece of paper on that employee, and may make him or her think twice about doing that again, unless it is truly company policy.

Good luck!

P.S. Just noticed that (name of person on bottom of letter) = Winchester Technical Department. I still think there's a reasonable chance that this approach will produce something.

[ 08-22-2002, 20:15: Message edited by: Recono ]

I tell you a true story that happened to me about letters.

A couple of years ago I was looking at the CNN weather radar on the internet. The had a proud banner above the radar image that it was updated HOURLY!!! Problem was the image I was looking at was about 3 DAYS OLD.

Down at the bottom of the page I noticed a little "contact us" button. I clicked on this and sent a terse little letter pointing out the "quality" of their weather page.

The NEXT DAY I got an email from some Vice President at CNN profusely thanking me for pointing out this issue to them and promising me it would never happen again. Last time I used their weather service the data was current! I got the feeling someone's head rolled over the issue.

My point Ed is maybe on the Winchester website there is some contact list of people where you can start dropping email bombs on them asking for a little more satisfaction than a professional blow-off. Their response was ridiculous.

Hey'
Because of the information highway,most big companies are very aware of what the forums,are talking about.They don't like to see negative things,about their companies.The problem is getting to the right people to address,the issues,and to respond in a kindly and intelligent manner.Unfortunately,the labor force today,doesn't meet those requirements.However,every now and then,you may get a hold of someone,who truely tries to help you with your requests,or problems.
1geejay
www.shooting-hunting.com

HP - This is a little off topic, but how is the Beta Testing for the new Version 2.0 Acculoader coming along?

To me, the response sounds like it might have come from the equivalent of the telephone "call centers". Some companies contract out email to be answered by an independent service.

I'd definitely be on the phone to the "real" company after this. JMO, Dutch.

VERY interesting. I had a similar experience with both of the same companies Ed referred to !

I wrote (emailed) Winchester for some basic bullet info and photo's of their bullets if available. Got an email back - "this information is not available to the public." Unbelievable - then who the hell IS it available to?? I CALLED them - my dime. Was then told they do not have any pictures of their products and was told to work through one of their resellers (Midway, Midsouth, etc. - who by the way do not have pictures of the Winchester bullets either) if I wanted any info on their products. They had no interest in helping me. So guess what - I said "F" you Winchester (in my mind - not on the phone), I thanked him for NO help and assured him I will now use any products
in the world - EXCEPT Winchester.

Conversely, I had a spot of trouble with some AA#7 powder. I contacted Accurate Arms and within a couple emails back and forth explaining and detailing the problem they, ON THEIR OWN VOLITION - sent me 4 pounds of powder and their large reloading manual - FREE ! Didn't ask - but got. WOW !

I've had mostly sub-par responses from Hodgdon (Phil personally), so Winchester isn't the only ones alienating their customers. Thompson Center, RCBS, Lee, Lyman, Accurate, Midsouth, Brownells, Ken Light have all been SUPER in the area's of support, information and warranty (when needed). I've got some questions (IMR) and problems (BSA) into IMR and BSA now. I'll be interested on how those turn out.

So - it ain't everybody. I think Winchester has a muzzle on their people - or - could be they're really just a bunch of arrogant a**holes.

Recono,
I took your advice and sent a letter to Winchester, on company letterhead, requesting the same information. I mentioned that I had sent a requesting email earlier, but had a "less than positive" response and let it go at that. We'll see what happens.
Pecos45,
AccuLoad V2 beta is just finishing up it's fourth week of testing. So far, things have been going pretty well. We've had a few "growing pains" as we integrated CalcuLoader into the main program, but think we have those whipped now. Very positive responses on the firearms database and the integration of it's data into the loading process, such as weight for recoil calculations, barrel length for CalcuLoader estimations, etc. The unlimited photo file for the firearms seems to be a hit! Still have a few isolated problems with Windows dll files, Big Al is all over that one. Should have beta issue 'B' going out next week. Depends on what we hear from the testers this weekend.
'puck

Dino, Would you write Accurate Arms and get a keg of free powder for me? I'd like Blue Dot. Thanks.

By the way, this week I amazed myself and topped your story with the company HON. They make office equipment. I called their customer service dept and told them we had 7 new big filing cabinets we have been having trouble with the damn doors closing properly for several months and we were sick of it, i.e. WHAT is HON going to do about it?

The super nice lady said, "We're sorry. We have improved that model filing cabinet and we will send you 7 sew ones for free."

Wow! I thought that was nice but then she said, "You can keep the other ones and do what you want with them."

That's over $1,000 of new filing cabinets plus we get to keep the OLD $1,000 worth and all we have to do to get some good use out of them is not fill the drawers but about 3/4 full.

This has nothing to do with anything but I think good companies should get all the praise they can. There are enough outfits like Winchester!

Shocking Service

Their response comes under the heading of ARROGANT B.S.!!! This attitude deserves boycott by serious reloaders! There are plenty of other sources to fill our needs. I believe we could get along totally without ANY of their components!!

Eldeguello, you have a point there. It would be a lot harder to take if we did not have another 120 other powders and 10 or more bullet makers out there --- bending over backwards for their end-users.

I called Hodgdon and Ramshot last Thursday. Hodgdon's tech couldn't answer my question (data on Benchmark in 35Whelen), but faxed me a stack of related data in about 10 minutes. Western Powders never called me back....... Guess what powder I loaded up that day?

Called Sierra last Friday. I was treated like the most important person in the world. Guess who's bullet I'm loading up this afternoon? JMO, Dutch.

Not all big companies do not care. Some really try to help. I spent quite a few minutes on the phone with Chris Hodgon the other day discussing a load for my .38-55. I don't want to sound like an advertisment but anytime i have talked to Hodgdon on their tech line they genuinely take the time and help me out.

Dutch, it's a shame about Winchester powders. It seems these people would be just as happy to be out of the reloading component business. Just like back when DuPont decided to dump the primary product that put them in business - gunpowder!! We're probably lucky someone created IMR to continue making the DuPont powders!!

I read your request and their reply and found it totally sensable on their part. You asked for two measurements that are not ones that they may wish to be forced (by being published) to have to conform to. In bullets they must adhier to weight and diamiter these are critical constants, If they choose to change the shape of the nose and therefore the length they would have to issue a new stock number and spec and these things do cost money and for what? Powder is the same. they hold to burn rate and weight. as a constant. If they publish volume then if you kept the same setting for 2 lots of powder and never checked weight and pressure problem arose their A... is grass and why should they put themselves in that position? Everything made has a plus or minus variance. They make a batch of Unique to produce a specific pressure when some constant weight is burned in a test chamber. Of course they strive for consistant volume but you are talking about adding another "liability" to their QC not information. I don't want to pay 25% more because they have to work a third factor into their QC Liability critical measurements. They are correct in telling you to measure it yourself. I am glad. I want them around a long time and not sued out of existance because some lawyers need asource of income. It's all about self preservation and cost of goods. My .02 and now I set down from my soap box and return you to your normal channel. JB

JBM - I think there are a couple of big holes in your argument.

First - Whether Winchester gives AEM any information/data or not will not protect them one bit from lawsuits. There already are, always have been and always WILL BE subtle variations in production runs. This is nothing new. This is why companies use "Lot Numbers."
But it doesn't much matter because, if someone blows their gun up using WW products...guess what...they will sue WW. Actually the only increased liability at stake here IMHO is for AEM! By using Winchester data in their loading program, AEM has just invited itself into the lawsuit arena! (Think about THAT one.)

I think you fail to grasp how low product liability and personal injury lawyers will dip the net when filling law suits. These lawyers have a very simple philosophy - "If the company or individual has money...sue them." They will name everyone who has a nickle in a lawsuit, regardless how innocent or removed their involvement. I've seen it first hand.

Second - Realizing the above facts, the other companies out there have been totally open and forth coming with THEIR data. So why is Winchester being a jerk?

My theory is that the main reason companies refuse to be helpful is for purely selfish and monetary reasons. They think denying anyone information about their products somehow strengthens their hold on the market and technology. And also some companies just have jerks as department heads. I think Ed just found one.

JBMauser,
Not to be argumentative, but Winchester's market for reloading components is the same as Accurate's or Ramshot, for example. The last time I bought gun powder (2 days ago) the retail price for Winchester powder was exactly the same as Accurate, Alliant and Hodgdon's: $19.95. With the same market-driven costs and liabilities, these other companies have not raised their prices above Winchester, yet still made available the bulk densities of their powders. So did VhitaVuori, ADI, SomChem and others.
As for bullet length, companies that manufacture bullets do so to specifications just as critical as if they were making cartridge cases according to SAAMI specs. If they change the length, weight, nose or base shape, they do issue a new stock number and usually announce it with great fanfare. Woodleigh of Australia makes, arguably, the best hunting bullets in the world. They have gone out of their way to provide us with photographs of each of their bullets, weight, length, ballistic coefficients, etc.
If bullet manufacturers varied the length of their bullets at will, even commercially available cartridges would have to be changed, again at will, to compensate for the change in the usable case capacity. If they failed to do so, then their published ballistic data would be out to lunch and the possibility of lawsuits would again arise.
I don't feel that Winchester is playing their cards close to the vest to avoid lawsuits or to enable them to vary the attributes of their reloading products. I tend to agree with some of the others, in retrospect, that I was blown off by someone who just didn't feel like looking up the answer. Who pays for poor customer service, real or assumed? The company itself. Their products don't sell. Profits fall and suddenly someone is out of work. We learned early on that solid, positive customer support creates good will and that is more valuable than any advertisement could ever be.
I think I'll join you and climb down off of my soap box as well.
'puck

I must re-mount my soapbox and hold forth further. Here goes... Is not Winchester the same company that makes guns? I thought they were? Am I missing something? Does Ramshot make guns as well? Are you not aware of the small gun companies that have been driven out of business by lawsuits? Do you not think that these people have been dragged threw courts like Ruger and Colt & others have been? Not the powder companies! If you are used to working in a constant legal windstorm don't you think they double batten down their hatches! I hope they cover their A..s. very well thank you. I want them to survive and thrive. I will measure my own bullets it that is what it takes thank you. They have a name that draws fire. It would be a feather in the cap of that loathsome crowd to take down such an icon. For them to take down Winchester or Remington or Colt and yes even Smith & Wesson would be a huge victory for them. To stab at the very heart of the American Guns and gun makers. It is their name that makes them a target it�s not about customer service. I say to them " Remain paranoid. They do want to sue you into oblivion. Don�t give them an inch" And I hope they have sharp lawyers watching their back as well. And I am sure the lawyers tell them to put out only what they have to and nothing more even if they want to. I feel you have to agree with me on this, that company lives in much greater peril then does Hogdon or Speer or Sierra. And maybe the stock number issue for a new bullet may not have much legal liability but I have to believe that they live under a cloud of fear of being sued for anything and everything. I ask you all not to damn them, buy their goods I for one want them in the game! They give me all the info I need to get my job done. I hope they are around another hundred years. JB

JBMauser, NO!! Winchester is not (ANY MORE!!) the same company that makes guns!! Guns are made by U.S. Repeating Arms Corporation (USRAC), which is owned by the same multinational conglomerate that owns Browning. Ammo (and powder, bullets, primers & brass) is made by the Winchester Division of the Olin Chemical Corporation, that also owns the Winchester trademark, which they allow U.S.R.A.C. to use under a licensing agreement. There haven't been any real Winchester guns for many years!!!

JB, no, I don't agree, at all. Bulk density is an essential item for the reloader, most especially with shot gun and progressive loaders (who happen to be the volume users). For anyone using bushings in loading, a consistent bulk density is essential.

As far as changing bullet lengths willy-nilly, maybe Olin thinks that's a good idea, but I don't. For example, Barnes has changed it's bullet shape a couple of times without changing stock numbers. Any time shape changes, as a reloader, I want to know! It requires changing die settings, new load workup, the whole thing. I would take the position that not telling me is a bigger legal risk than to tell me. JMO, Dutch.

Gentlemen

I gave winchester ammo a call and it's clear that Beavis and Butthead is in control of getting the customers the service and information from that company.

I called and got no info, soo I ended the phone call with "ok, when I must thank you for absolutely nothing"

I were in contact with Nosler and they sent me a reloading book free of charge. The nosler fellow called back to see that it got to Sweden.

A friend of mine sent in some ballistic tip bullets and pictures of performance on game. Their ballistic guy called back and wanted to know more about the rifle, barrel and what velocity they were loaded to etc. He sent my friend ten boxes of bullets as a gift.

First class service

/ JOHAN

eldeguello, of course you are correct and as I read your response I knew Winchester components was an Olin company but I forgot the rifle manufacturer. Dutch, what you say is true, but why is it not the users responsibility to measure each new lot of bullets or powder? I was taught that you did not mix powder from one lot to another because there will be/may be a difference. You use up one and then start another. My earlier point is still the fact that their name is a target, They are part of a huge company with deep pockets and that they choose what they put out for specs knowing that they will be held to it. They put out what they must not what they would like to and we can make do. Others may put out more data they may be bold or naive. Or they are not in anyone�s sights. I just wanted to make the point that a spec is a liability and if they feel it is not another liability they wish to take on it is probably a business decision and not poor customer service. It may not be a stock number thing, it could be that they run high speed for bulk production and they have multiple dies that could make bullets that vary from on to another machine and they control by weight and dia. And they don�t want to publish length because every box is different. Who knows? Not me. I know that it matters what you put out and they have to decide what is best for them. I�ll buy their products. JB

JOHAN!! I'm amazed and pleased to hear that Nosler has been so "user-friendly".

I wrote Winchester a while back and asked them to sell 9.3x62 ammo in the US, since they already sell it overseas. I also asked them to make the M-70 in 9.3x62. I stated several specific reasons I wanted that cartridge: bullets over 250 grains readily available, more diameter, five-shot magazine,etc.

The reply thanked me for my interest and said they did not plan to sell either rifles or ammo in 9.3x62 anytime soon. They also tried to sell me a 300 WSM.

As soon as my CZ 550 American in 9.3x62 comes in, I'm going to send them a photocopy of the reciept.

Okie John