The distance is irrelevant. Zee wanted to discount the bullet I recovered from SIMTEST because it was 3' from the muzzle.
No I didn?t. The impact velocity retained at 3 feet is not applicable to my purposes for that bullet and my intended game. Try not to put words in my mouth. Please.
We already discussed how the retained velocity was my implied concern.
I have always been one to show interest in the muzzle and impact velocity. I think I?ve made that relatively clear.
Thanks.
Yes, you did and you did that before I even shared its retained weight. Its relevance depends on what cartridge you plan on using it in and you never shared that. You discounted it due to the distance saying, "I'm not likely to shoot an animal at 3 feet. That's a little unrealistic for my application." You said you had shot them in the .338WinMag. Well, if you shoot anything at 100yds, you'll get what I got at the muzzle. I see you never bothered to answer my question about going afield with a bullet you know will fragment and lose half its ass inside 100yds. None of which really matters, as we all quantify "failure" differently.
The horse named opinion here is way too tall. And facts are skewed with very little data to come to a accurate and reasonable conclusion.
The only one I have ever seen post complete data gathered from any bullet is zee. He post pictures through the entire post shot process. Details range, load data, estimated impact velocity and so on. The only way I know Anything about him is through reading the forum posts.
Someone?s background doesn?t make up for lack of evidence in a scientific discussion. If you don?t look at this as a scientific discussion your more than likely missing a lot of facts.
You can?t have a quarter, half, 3/4 the data and draw a complete conclusion. You need every piece of data otherwise your stating opinion......and opinions are worth about zero.
People desire facts to help them make decisions on their hunting equipment....opinions you can get from the rookie at the gun counter...
Whether it?s cup and core, lead, bonded, solid or whatever all the major bullet makers produce an acceptable product if used within its limitations....and they all have limitations.
I would suggest settling down on the opinion and beef up on the fact finding....produce complete data....then you?ll have a leg worth standing on in an argument.
All you have offered is criticism. The above is no different. We all know what Theodore Roosevelt said about critics. What do you bring to the table besides criticism? Sorry but your opinion of our opinion isn't really much at all. You speak in broad sweeping generalities. Whose information on what example is lacking? Maybe you just don't know enough to properly interpret what's being presented?
