S1

"What? Martin Fackler's research found that the 'theory' (as in not a LAW) of hydrostatic shock was disproven, and that any sort of pressure wave that may be created by a bullet does nothing to aid in incapacitation or injury. Moreover, it is a commonly known fact amoung people who study terminal ballistics (which is really a fairly new field of reseach) that shockwaves do not occur, nor pass through incompressable fluids (water)."

...Deleted by CalHunter...You believe that shockwaves do not pass through incompressable fluids (water)? There are a lot of dead Germans that wish that BS was true.... please explain how a Depth charge actually works?

Marty Fackler worked on the research and development of this technology, I never mentioned 'hydrostatic shock' in any of my posts. I specifically referred to "tissue damage" some like to call the "permanent wound".

Getting back to what is real, the bullet engineer can use core compression to tailor the round to the penetration profile he desires with this technology. For example:




There is no truth to the statement that these bullets are designed to 'disintegrate on impact'. Tungsten is much harder than lead, and about 25 percent denser than lead in these type of bullets. Even the lightest compressed cores that I have tested easily penetrate the front shoulder bone of the largest North American Big Game. I specifically look for a quartering towards me shot opportunity so I can blow bone fragments into the lung area when using this bullet technology.

...Deleted by CalHunter...

SwampCollie

A depth charge works by rapidly displacing water, not by dumping energy into a submarine. That is called Hydrodynamic shock. It is not a"shock" wave, its a rapdi pressure change. It effects objects immersed in the water.... not the water itself. You bought up using a bullets energy to 'create tissure damage'. The issuewith energyis... whats that law about being created and destroyed again....

He might want to consider going back and editing a few articles his name is on then...among them "The Shockwave Myth." Hey if you know the guy... good for you. You brought him up, I pulled your card. One way or another, if there are people writing articles under his name, including those in encyclopedias, you may want to bring it to his attention. You are the self proclaimed expert in all things ballistical. If you have all the facts... by all means....

I don't want a 200 grain 30 cal bullet to enter the chest of a grown man. I asked you a question about the bullet's resistance to bone.

Diesel gives me the runs. I don't care what your bullets do to metal....


I understand what tungsten is and its advantages and practical uses in the hunting field. I've been using it for several years.

It seems to me, with your views on quartering to shots, that you are treating this new bullet design very much like a solid bullet, using the bone fragments as a weapon of their own making.

The part that I do not understand is how you are going to make a bullet going over 3000 fps completely stop inside a whitetail deer without having that bullet break up? Without having it crater. If all this is fairly new technology, than you'll have to pardon my ignorance about it. But it seems to me that this sort of thing is typically what hunters seek to avoid in bullet performance. Not having an animal drop to the shot, but rather having a bullet break up in the animal.

Of course it is. Why you feel the need to insult someone to prove your ponit is beyond me. Unless you are a mere child posing as an adult, or simply too ignorant on the topic at hand to support your claims with simple concise facts. I asked you a simple question about how your bullets performed on bone. It took you half a dozen slanderous insults and a bunch of crap about diesel engine blocks to finally get around to it.

I get the odd suspiction that you probably won't be around that long.

JagMagMan

"Dead Right There" is a pure myth, unless you hit the perfect head/spine shot! You are better off using the proper expanding bullet for the size of game, and the velocities that your cartridge is producing, than to rely on "DRT" performance!
And, I can't believe that a bullet maker would propose a "Gut Shot" as an effective form of hunting! ...Deleted by CalHunter...

longrifle1000

Well for starters, my question still remains unanswered. I am not saying these things don't work. Just explain to me how the company can make the claim it turns to powder in the target, yet is able to penetrate heavy bone. Making one or the other is easy, how on earth can they do both.


I decided to go back to the DRT website and look around. I found it odd that they still really don't have a website. There is some info, but not very much. I was reading through there "building a better bullet" and almost burst out laughing. I found this section on the second page.





7.62mm NATO is the bullet fired from the AK-47?????????????????

Not the same cartridge, not even the same caliber!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is chambered in 7.62X39, NOT 7.62X51 NATO. And the caliber is .311", not .308.

I seriously doubt ANY information from company that could make such a rookie mistake.

And as for the "wound that is about the dimensions of a size 5 soccer ball", I didn't know soccer balls came in different sizes. And where is the proof of this claim? Show me a slab of balistics gel, that shows wound dimensions and penetration depths.

Until then, I see this nothing more than a big steamy pile of BS.

statjunk

S1,

I think the part that really turns "real" hunters off about your product is advocating gut shots. Even if this did work no one wants to clean a gut shot animal. The tenderloins are shot and it just a messy job even if this kind of thing doesn't bother you.

So talking about gut shooting a deer was a bad move. Even being associated with that sentiment is a bad move.

Folks here have asked you about a shoulder bone and you haven't answered. You should even if it won't which we already know.

Also I would be concerned about a bullet that disintegrates on impact from a what's in the meat perspective. Does the disintegrating bullet leave the chest cavity in most cases?


Swamp,

He hasn't talked about hydrostatic shock. He's talking about imparting all the energy behind the bullet into the animal. I believe these are two different subjects. One is kind of like an energy wave trasmitted by the bullet. He's saying his bullet doesn't leave so the energy must be transferred.


Overall I think a bullet of this design could work. I bet it still needs refinement but I could see it working with a really hard tip to break through bone and holding together enough so as not to get into the meat. Also as part of the marketing campaign leave out the part about the gut shot. I could see a picture of deer walking near a road with it's entrails hanging out making the PETA paper and CNN with your companies logo right there. One last thing the price is disturbing.

Tom

oldsmellhound

"Show me a slab of balistics gel, that shows wound dimensions and penetration depths.

Until then, I see this nothing more than a big steamy pile of BS."

Ditto to that. Also, I find it seriously doubtful that the Secret Service counter-sniper squad uses frangible ammo. I'd really like to see the proof of that. Imagine a counter-sniper taking a shot at a wannabe presidential assassin who happens to be standing behind a car door, or wearing body armor for that matter. I'm sure that whatever loads they use are designed to penetrate structures and body armor and still reach a potential assassin, not bullets that disintigrate on impact.

ipscshooter

There's been plenty of "attitude" going both ways.

To be fair to S1, he is not the one who advocated taking gut shots, and specifically said he did not approve taking them.

I'm still having some problem with the concept that these bullets will hold together well enough to penetrate a shoulder bone, but then create this massive wound channel, disbursing all of the bullet's energy inside the game, and not exit.

mello_collins

I saw these on futureweapons tv show last year. The binder holds them together and gives the structural integrity. Think of picking up a dirt clog off of the ground. It is kind of hard but brittle. You can throw it very hard and it will stay together until impact when it basically explodes. The high velocity of the rifle round carries the energy into the target. On the show they shot two large beef roast. The regular round did what we are familiar with. Made a hole and kind of blew out some of the back of the roast. The frangible round blew the roast into shreds. In slow motion, it looked like a small grenade went off inside, like and old M-80 and an anthill. The secret service uses them to protect bystanders, no ricochets and no over penetration. They are against the Hauge(edit) convention. I for one would not eat an animal that had been shot by one. I don’t need any more metal powder in my diet. If all you want is the horns then it is your decision, you just are not going to hunt with me. I think I’ll give the Berger VLD bullets a try instead.

mello

longrifle1000

That would be the Hauge Convention, which does not permit the use of bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body. I'm not being knit-picky, just being accurate.



I couldn't agree any more.


I still find it highly suspect that there website still says "coming soon". Either bad business practices, or they don't have any real proof to back up there claims.

Pawildman

I guess what ticks me off the most about the man's posts is that he seems to get a bit of an "attitude" about things, and just because we don't fall to our knees and thank him for saving us from our errant ways of lead and copper, we are basically addle-pated idiots for even questioning these things.
That's just not gonna cut it on here. He's done stepped in a big pile, and probably alienated a bunch of us already. Not exactly what I would want as a spokesperson for the company.