quote:

Originally posted by michael458:

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Killartist:
Doc M, Again, you have plainly demonstrated that life is real and NOT necessarily scientific and certainly not theoretical. 'Some 'people think / believe that science is always required and/ or the answer.
Ask a honest (non global warming whore) scientist to 'Scientifically ' or in 'scientific terms '
to explain how a bumble bee can fly. There will NOT be a 'Scientific ' answer or any answer for that matter, but I swear AND will testify under oath that I have seen a bumble bee fly --- more than once.
We have unfortunately never met. I want to let you know how much I appreciate, respect and enjoy all the work you do and have done. Thank you .

TX...........

I have seen your support..... Thanks so much, very appreciated. As many know we have been in some of the same old "Discussions" as we were involved in over 5 plus years ago. Same, nothing changes from the "Other" side. One can go back and see the same Bull Shit from years ago, right up until the last week or even the last few days. We did not falter in our course of action, but remained resolute in our goals. We did not listen nor pay any attention to the BS, and stayed our course. We took what was required and factual from those same people, what little there was, and used that in addition to far more to get to this point.

The test medium has been attacked over and over again, yet, the results we see in the field, behavior of all the bullets tested here, are the same in the field, as the test work done. What works in the test medium, what is successful in the test medium, is also successful in the field, on real animal tissue. I have said this a 1000 times that no test medium duplicates exactly animal tissue, and one cannot test in animal tissue as there is no consistency, and one cannot compare exact results. The test medium I use, no big secret, wet print. This test medium is boosted a bit by my insertion of layers of magazines/catalogs, I get stacks of these things in the mail every week. Instead of tossing 100s of #s of this per year, decided some years ago to put it to use. I try to be as consistent as possible with it, 1.5-2 inches of mag/cat inserted, and 6 inches or so of news print. By accident, I found that this mix was far more dense, and tougher on bullets than just wet newsprint alone. Very simply by depth of penetration, and more stress put on the bullet.......

When I built my indoor range, I had a drain installed at the rear of the range. Any test medium absolutely has to be aqueous to get proper comparisons. Animal tissue is not made of "dry material", so what would be the point of testing in any dry material? Animals are not made of "Steel", so what would be the purpose of testing steel plate penetration, since most animals I have hunted seem to have no "armor" plating, I see where that has no value. It was always my intention to put stress on the bullets, but "reasonable" stress. I never believed that ballistic gel put enough stress on the bullets, and still believe that today. If I can detect a failure of something, I want as much reasonable stress on the bullet as possible, I rather discover that failure here, than in the field. Failures in the field are not good! Failures in the field, very best scenario, cost $$..... Failures in the field can cost lost and suffering animals! Worst case, failures in the field when hunting dangerous game can cost lives. Should it not be our goal to discover problems or issues on the test range before we go to the field? If we find a bullet that consistently performs as we desire it to, and it consistently out performs other similar bullets designed for the task at hand, regardless of what that task is, does it not make sense that we would choose the best bullet tested for our related task? Would we choose the poorest performance because of nostalgia, or other reasons? I have been involved in many areas of shooting since I was a kid, more than 30 years ago.... I learned a long time ago that one does not learn from the individual that comes in dead last, but one learns from the front runners. This same analogy can be applied to many areas of life as well, business for instance, one does not try and pattern your business from the competition that is dead last, or the poorest, but from the very best in that particular business. And once again we refer to literally 100s of bullets dug out of animal flesh, compared to our bullets tested in our test medium, and what we find is that we actually get deeper penetration in all cases in animal tissue, we find that the behavior of a particular bullet, soft, nonconventional, flat nose solid is damn near exactly the same behavior in animal tissue and test medium, taking into account the many variables encountered in the field, such as bones, hitting sticks or trees, or other 100s if not 1000s of variables that can be introduced in the field, that we cannot possibly test for each and every one. Round Nose solids, not created equal, however, we contend that what has 100% consistently failed in the test work, has the potential to fail in the field. One may indeed the vast majority of the time, get enough performance out of a bullet that it can be successful the vast majority of the time. However, I for one, WILL NOT ACCEPT anything that cannot prove itself in the test work. I am just not going to do it period. Now, many of you are free to do as you please, whether for nostalgic reasons, or reasons of your own, and that is fine, it has no effect on what I will do. I wish you the best in your endeavors regardless. My goals may be far different than others.

Scientific? Never claimed any science here, nor is that my goal. I am not looking to be published in any "peer publication"...... This is not my goal. I am a forester by profession, as a forester, then I am very familiar with "Peer Reviewed Publications ", as in many professions there are related publications, medical, wildlife biology, and so forth and so on. What is a shooters "Peer Publication"... Guns and Ammo? Shooting Times? Rifle Magazine, or perhaps Handloader Magazine....... Or some other rag tag magazine? I know, African Hunting Gazette, or maybe SCI Magazine? I don't think so to be honest, and not putting down those particular rag magazines by any stretch, while I have never written an article about anything, nor have any desire to, there have been several articles done on various things concerning some of the things I have done here in many of those same magazines, and even more, but I don't consider those anymore than entertainment value at best, most of the time............. In fact, I have a friend that has written several articles and been published in some of those same magazines, and he knows far less about most things than "Joe Dick" on the sidewalk..... I keep telling him it will not make him famous to write about himself.... LOL....................... I continue to tease him all in good nature of course........ And without any doubt whatsoever in my mind, the work done here would never pass any sort of government review or test validations. But, I have nothing to sell the government, nor any Peer Reviewed Publication, nor a book, nor even a damned bullet. Not my goal. Very simply, my goal in ALL OF THIS was to find a better mousetrap, so that I would be more successful in the field, so that I could perhaps avoid failures in the field, avoid costs in $$, costs of lost animals, sleep better at night knowing I was using the best that could possibly be had, and perhaps save the cost of failure in the field from becoming a more serious problem that could cost injury, or worse. In any endeavor in which I embark upon, it is my wish to be successful regardless of what that endeavor is. Silly me, I would think that would be the wish of all hunters or shooters as well..........

Of course I made observations concerning performance. How stupid. What is the point if you do not make observations of what you are doing? Where these observations always understood, and were they always 100% correct? Of course they were not. Many times, I would see performance in the test work here, but not fully understand exactly what I was seeing until I saw what happened in the field in animal tissue. Point of fact, our Non-Conventional bullets. While I saw and observed the behavior of the blades, when I first took them to the field on animal tissue, I began to understand what was actually going on and how those blades worked from the point of shear, to the end of their penetration. Then, coming back to the test work afterwards, it was plain as day to me, and then further tests in the clear ballistic gel from CEB told the story in a visual way that I could never do here............. What I did learn, was that the behavior of the Non-Conventionals was EXACTLY the same in my test medium, ballistic gel, and in animal tissue! Behavior mind you, they worked the same way. Depth of penetration is different in all three mediums, but behavior is EXACTLY the same, the way they work..........

The things we learned about flat nose solids could not be learned any other way.... Some of the factors are large, some not so large. For instance, sharp edge of the meplat as opposed to a radius or smoother edge on the meplat making a difference is a small factor in the end, but none the less, a factor. Nose Projection above the bands actually became a large factor in the depth of penetration, and was the very last factor discovered. Meplat size in my opinion the most important factor really could not be studied any other way with precision. And we did get a fairly precise study on that, from round nose to 50% meplat, and I believe ending in 80%, and seeing behavior of the bullet all the way through the process. Nose profiles, to me the second most important factor, could not have been understood any other way. Twist rate, velocity, construction/materials, could not have been studied any other way, at least not as efficiently.
If there was another way, that was more efficient I did not know of it. But what we did got us to where we are, and this has brought nothing but success in the field.

Has everything been absolutely perfect? Of course not, there have been many variables that had to be addressed. At any time, if something did not appear to be correct, it was retested to find out what the issue was, and that goes beyond terminals to other areas as well. And event today, doing much of the pressure testing I do here, if something does not appear logical, then it gets retested........

Once again, it is only my wish to share what I have done, what I have found works for me, if it works for you, well and good. If not, then sorry, doing the best I can do. In the end, the goal is, and has remained, and will be forever more so that I personally can be more successful in my endeavors in the field. It is my belief that if I am more successful, then the "Potential" for you to be more successful is there and exists as well. Maybe I am wrong, and if so, my apologies, but I will continue to do what I do, and the rest can go their own way if they wish, and that is just dandy with me..... I have nothing to sell you, I have nothing to profit from................ What I have gained from all these endeavors that I put the most value on is the wonderful friendships that have been made during the last several years with a hell of a lot of great guys, good shooters, good hunters, and so many of us of like mind, and that has more value to me than anything we have done................

Michael

quote:

Amen from me too, for the latest sermon from Mount McCourry.

quote:

FIDO

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

FIDO

Had to google that one:

FIDO means "F*** It, Drive On."

Until Doc M responds, I would say, to Texas Killartist, you are a well adjusted individual if you go FIDO.

To those who cling bitterly to round nose solids and live-animal test media: AMFYOYO
This one I learned over 30 years ago, as in:
"The discharge status of the patient was AMFYOYO."
Adios "My Friend" You Are On Your Own, or something like that.

Jim
"Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid"
John Wayne

quote:

Originally posted by Texas Killartist:
Am I to interpret that as AMF(yes, something like that)---- Yoyo ?

Jim
"Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid"
John Wayne

quote:

I know what the urban dictionary or mixed company definition of AMF means. The Texas definition(among men) is a little different.

Jim
"Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid"
John Wayne

quote:

I made it back to Africa this year after all. August 2013 found me in Zimbabwe with two buff bulls on licence so once again, I took my .458 Winchester Mag. for a walk in the mopane.

I got our mutual friend Ken Kempa to put a mad rush on some bullets because I wanted to try the .458 caliber 420 grain Safari Raptor on a Cape buffalo. As it turned out, I shot the first bull just on the front edge of the right shoulder from sitting at about 80 yards. He went straight down. I have not seen a buffalo do that before. He tried to run with the rest of them but his front legs folded and he went right on his nose. Before I could even work the bolt for a follow up, the PH was clapping me on the back and yelling that he's down. I mean man oh man he was done and DRT. The shank was a pass through just in front of the off side shoulder.

The second bull was shot at about 40 yards on the left shoulder with a 450 grain TSX. It penetrated both shoulders and was balled up under the hyde on the far shoulder. Opinions may vary but I think the Safari Raptor and the Barnes TSX are the two best bullets available for buffalo.

All in all I had a great time again this year. There are bigger and more powerful choices but the .458 as it has done a great job so far on Cape buffalo. The last three buffalo have fallen to a single hit each.

The photo of the second buffalo's heart that I sent illustrates what a good expanding bullet can do and still penetrate thick muscle and heavy bone.

The second bull was hit on the shoulder and the way he hunched up I was pretty sure it was a heart shot. Even with his heart destroyed he turned and ran with two other bulls and still made it about 60 yards. Pretty amazing. They are one tough animal.

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
.. However, with last weeks ice storm, and lots of cleanup work .

Sounds like Chip is going to be busy! Any damage to house or vehicles?

But this cleanup has to come first, plus I have actual work type meetings here this week.........


Finally discussing the opening of the VA office here in Winchester. Great let me know start dates.


What are you planning on in Zim this year?

quote:

Sounds like Chip is going to be busy! Any damage to house or vehicles?

But this cleanup has to come first, plus I have actual work type meetings here this week.........


Finally discussing the opening of the VA office here in Winchester. Great let me know start dates.


What are you planning on in Zim this year?

quote:

Now, I REALLY LIKE the looks of the LabRadar!!!!!!!!!! This is very very interesting, I sent them a request this morning for more info, and especially more info on PRICE, which I did not see anywhere...... If price is reasonable, I can see where this might be excellent............... And, be more efficient than current operations........

quote:

Originally posted by michael458:
RIP

If this unit works as advertised it will save a lot of time and effort on my part... I think? It seems to sit closer to the firing line, and possibly hook up as well to one of the computers, this would put info at the bench and not 18 feet downrange.... Also I am interested in some things, it states velocity can be read from muzzle to target out to 100 yards...... I wonder how that works? Press the range at which you want to look at the velocity and get that?..... Or beginning and end? That could be excellent............ Price is reasonable if it actually works?????/ I suppose we are going to find out...........

Michael

Jim
"Life's hard; it's harder if you're stupid"
John Wayne

quote:

Some giants do learn new tricks.Some midgets don't.