Lead poisoning

[ElPollo]

So I think lead is actually sorta like windmills in some sense. I mean that it is a documented problem in some areas, but in others it likely isn’t. Planting a windmill in a mountain pass is significantly different from siting it in a sea of cropland. As such, applying one size fits all solutions for all locations is not likely to be effective or popular. Non-lead bullets maybe one solution, packing out or burying gut piles may be another. Lead is only documented as an issue for avian scavengers. To my knowledge there is no documentation of lead biomagnification in mammalian scavengers or related to human consumption of game meat. If you can reduce the potential for avian scavengers to use gut piles from animals shot with lead, it’s worth a little time to bury or conceal what you leave behind.

And finally, as someone who has used non-lead rifle ammunition for hunting for a couple of decades, I will tell you that anyone who thinks there are no drawbacks to its use for hunting hasn’t used it or seriously evaluated it’s effectiveness. Every solution you propose to a given problem will have drawbacks. Non-lead ammunition results in smaller wound cavities and more wounded and lost game.

 

[Gargoyle]

I am not the person that cares about emotion or bias. I am correcting what you stated. Bias or not, what PredatorSlayer stated about the BC error being enough to cause issues at 500 yards on an elk is correct.




Don’t use fallacies and immaturity here, I’m not doing it with you. Doing so only furthers the view people have of Hammer bullets and those who use/push them. I am stating facts, not I like/I think/I feel.




On most of the Hammers I’ve seen measured there has been a .04-.06 G1 BC difference.




Again, stop being immature. I have no bias, nor do I care about Steve, Hammer bullets, or anything else to do with this on a personal level. Hammer bullet BC’s are incorrect enough that it is problem. There is no excuse for.

Ah, you're one of those ex post facto editing posters! Forums are really nice for providing rearview mirror responses.

You are calling immature, yet you sat back with you known variance of .06 and let me use .110. knowing I would be even further proving my point using .06. and being right. Weird, with you saying you are not biased.

 

[Formidilosus]

Ah, you're one of those ex post facto editing posters! Forums are really nice for providing rearview mirror responses.

I edited to be more clear.

You are calling immature, yet you sat back with you known variance of .06 and let me use .110. knowing I would be even further proving my point using .06. and being right. Weird, with you saying you are not biased.

Anyone that seeks to understand why people talk the way they do about Hammers only has to look at your behavior now.
I have not been rude or dismissive, have not tried to argue with you or “prove a point”. I didn’t say the “known variance was .06”. I said “On most of the Hammers I’ve seen measured there has been a .04-.06 G1 BC difference”. I was addressing the numbers you used for the size of an elk, the vital zone, and the fallacy of saying a “hit” anywhere from top back to bottom of chest is what PredatorSlayer was speaking to. Anyone that read what he wrote knows what he meant.
I do not believe his behavior is conducive to an objective discussion about it either, however he isn’t going around and fighting with anyone that correct what he stated, or saying things that are untrue. His frustration with Hammers seems to be that nearly every time Hammers are brought up on forums there are people doing what you are doing: only seem to be around to promote them, argue incessantly with anyone that objects or points out their issues, and responds and behaves as if the forum is twitter or Facebook.

 

[Ucsdryder]

I edited to be more clear.




Anyone that seeks to understand why people talk the way they do about Hammers only has to look at your behavior now.
I have not been rude or dismissive, have not tried to argue with you or “prove a point”. I didn’t say the “known variance was .06”. I said “On most of the Hammers I’ve seen measured there has been a .04-.06 G1 BC difference”. I was addressing the numbers you used for the size of an elk, the vital zone, and the fallacy of saying a “hit” anywhere from top back to bottom of chest is what PredatorSlayer was speaking to. Anyone that read what he wrote knows what he meant.
I do not believe his behavior is conducive to an objective discussion about it either, however he isn’t going around and fighting with anyone that correct what he stated, or saying things that are untrue. His frustration with Hammers seems to be that nearly every time Hammers are brought up on forums there are people doing what you are doing: only seem to be around to promote them, argue incessantly with anyone that objects or points out their issues, and responds and behaves as if the forum is twitter or Facebook.

This about sums it up and the reason that so many people dislike hammer and their bullets. I’m convinced nobody does more damage to the brand than the owner of hammer and it’s supporters.

 

[Bluefish]

Having looked at real velocity loss in the first 100yrds on my LabRadar, I found the published Hammer BC numbers ranged from a little high to a lot high. by comparison the Hornady BC’s were right on. My guess is the bc is calculated on shape and the hollow point adds more drag than expected. on some big hollow points the bc is low enough that it limits range due to loss of velocity. The ones that are a little off would still be perfectly acceptable.
even with the bc being off I still had good short range performance. no long range shots where I hunt.
I am going to be testing some more this week for someone who wants to know the real velocity loss with distance.

 

[ButterBean]

I edited to be more clear.




Anyone that seeks to understand why people talk the way they do about Hammers only has to look at your behavior now.
I have not been rude or dismissive, have not tried to argue with you or “prove a point”. I didn’t say the “known variance was .06”. I said “On most of the Hammers I’ve seen measured there has been a .04-.06 G1 BC difference”. I was addressing the numbers you used for the size of an elk, the vital zone, and the fallacy of saying a “hit” anywhere from top back to bottom of chest is what PredatorSlayer was speaking to. Anyone that read what he wrote knows what he meant.
I do not believe his behavior is conducive to an objective discussion about it either, however he isn’t going around and fighting with anyone that correct what he stated, or saying things that are untrue. His frustration with Hammers seems to be that nearly every time Hammers are brought up on forums there are people doing what you are doing: only seem to be around to promote them, argue incessantly with anyone that objects or points out their issues, and responds and behaves as if the forum is twitter or Facebook.

So here's the dilemma, There are 2 of you so far that have found the BC's to be "inflated" while the other thousands of folks have found them to be really close. So you tell me, I'm all ears

 

[Bubblehide]

So here's the dilemma, There are 2 of you so far that have found the BC's to be "inflated" while the other thousands of folks have found them to be really close. So you tell me, I'm all ears

How did those "thousands" test them?

 

[ButterBean]

How did those "thousands" test them?

Killing critters by the thousands, and I'm not exaggerating in the least

 

[fngTony]

When this thread isn’t on the verge of breaking the rules it’s going in circles. I haven’t seen any evidence of anyone changing their mind on the subject, maybe give this a rest for a day.

 

[Bubblehide]

Killing critters by the thousands, and I'm not exaggerating in the least

I am sure you know very well that that is not testing BC's. So what is your point?

 

[ButterBean]

I am sure you know very well that that is not testing BC's. So what is your point?

So Verified load work up resulting in dead critters don't count ? I guess I've been doing it wrong all these years

 

[Bubblehide]

So Verified load work up resulting in dead critters don't count ? I guess I've been doing it wrong all these years

So you know thousands that actually test BC's.

 

[ButterBean]

So you know thousands that actually test BC's.

This is gonna be a waste of time and effort so I'm just gonna let you have this to yourself, have a good evening

 

[RockyMtnUt.]

Killing critters by the thousands, and I'm not exaggerating in the least

Fordy doesn’t count

 

[sndmn11]

Wow…

First of all, I’m not sure who my hero is

We very specifically had this conversation about me being your hero.

 

[Gargoyle]

I edited to be more clear.




Anyone that seeks to understand why people talk the way they do about Hammers only has to look at your behavior now.
I have not been rude or dismissive, have not tried to argue with you or “prove a point”. I didn’t say the “known variance was .06”. I said “On most of the Hammers I’ve seen measured there has been a .04-.06 G1 BC difference”. I was addressing the numbers you used for the size of an elk, the vital zone, and the fallacy of saying a “hit” anywhere from top back to bottom of chest is what PredatorSlayer was speaking to. Anyone that read what he wrote knows what he meant.
I do not believe his behavior is conducive to an objective discussion about it either, however he isn’t going around and fighting with anyone that correct what he stated, or saying things that are untrue. His frustration with Hammers seems to be that nearly every time Hammers are brought up on forums there are people doing what you are doing: only seem to be around to promote them, argue incessantly with anyone that objects or points out their issues, and responds and behaves as if the forum is twitter or Facebook.

You are obviously @PredatorSlayer 's "Second" in this thread. You like painting narratives, that is evident. You try to paint a false narrative against me, however I was not the one saying these words, rather your boy Predator: "Steve is a liar, arrogant, goons, clowns, parachutes past 300yds, miss an elk" I deem that pretty immature stuff, but somehow you use labeling words for me like "immature" for merely seeking Preds to quantify and qualify his statements. He couldn't. So I tried and I do believe it is very evident the inflated BCs of Hammer Bullets are not that inflated he would miss an elk. (Preds even replied, YES, to having "tested" BCs. Well, we see how that played out. Nice interference tactic, BTW. Ol Preds was on the ropes and here I find myself in discourse with you.

Never mind the fact this thread was created by @uscdryder to summon all the Hammer haters to converge into a thread to participate in hate speech against Hammer Bullets. This could be a thread about Bob's Bombastic Bullets and if I saw the same "talking out the butt" about Bob's bullets I would reply the same. It has been a common theme for the Hammer haters to form a thread, talk smack, and then cry victim when Hammer supporters defend and want the thread locked. Heck, I see that strategy. Get all the hate out, lock up the thread when reason and rationale enter and the opposition is silenced. I am willing to wager there have been a few requests already to do so.

BCs:

Hornady BC claims are .010-020. You put their claimed data in 4Doff and the dot appears right at the cross hairs most times. Berger bullets was a complete surprise with .055 off the box BC claims and even more variance from the Litz book. That will throw a guy in a loop. Haven't tested Hammers yet because I really haven't felt the need to until now. They are my 600 in bullet and they kill like no other. So, with that said. Why all the hate for Hammer BC claims variance which are on par with Berger BC claims? Don't see the Berger hate squad trolling the forums.

Why Hammer bullets for me?

1. Kill like no other pill I've used to kill critters

2. Always in stock

3. Fastest load developments, not jump sensitive.

4. Extremely accurate. Same hole shooting bullets. Again, load development a breeze.

5. Outstanding customer support.

6. Grassroots company and I like seeing others become successful

7. Drama free Hammer Time forum. Show up as a truth seeker and you are home.

 

[ButterBean]

Fordy doesn’t count

Say it aint so

 

[ButterBean]

You are obviously @PredatorSlayer 's "Second" in this thread. You like painting narratives, that is evident. You try to paint a false narrative against me, however I was not the one saying these words, rather your boy Predator: "Steve is a liar, arrogant, goons, clowns, parachutes past 300yds, miss an elk" I deem that pretty immature stuff, but somehow you use labeling words for me like "immature" for merely seeking Preds to quantify and qualify his statements. He couldn't. So I tried and I do believe it is very evident the inflated BCs of Hammer Bullets are not that inflated he would miss an elk. (Preds even replied, YES, to having "tested" BCs. Well, we see how that played out. Nice interference tactic, BTW. Ol Preds was on the ropes and here I find myself in discourse with you.

Never mind the fact this thread was created by @uscdryder to summon all the Hammer haters to converge into a thread to participate in hate speech against Hammer Bullets. This could be a thread about Bob's Bombastic Bullets and if I saw the same "talking out the butt" about Bob's bullets I would reply the same. It has been a common theme for the Hammer haters to form a thread, talk smack, and then cry victim when Hammer supporters defend and want the thread locked. Heck, I see that strategy. Get all the hate out, lock up the thread when reason and rationale enter and the opposition is silenced. I am willing to wager there have been a few requests already to do so.

BCs:

Hornady BC claims are .010-020. You put their claimed data in 4Doff and the dot appears right at the cross hairs most times. Berger bullets was a complete surprise with .055 off the box BC claims and even more variance from the Litz book. That will throw a guy in a loop. Haven't tested Hammers yet because I really haven't felt the need to until now. They are my 600 in bullet and they kill like no other. So, with that said. Why all the hate for Hammer BC claims variance which are on par with Berger BC claims? Don't see the Berger hate squad trolling the forums.

Why Hammer bullets for me?

1. Kill like no other pill I've used to kill critters

2. Always in stock

3. Fastest load developments, not jump sensitive.

4. Extremely accurate. Same hole shooting bullets. Again, load development a breeze.

5. Outstanding customer support.

6. Grassroots company and I like seeing others become successful

7. Drama free Hammer Time forum. Show up as a truth seeker and you are home.

X-2, I'm just waiting for Ole Petey to show up with some bullets cut in two to stir the posse up a bit

 

[fngTony]

I’m done. Maybe I’ll open it up tomorrow, maybe I won’t.