New bullet: "hypercav"

[Double Naught Spy]

Interesting, the Jan 14 water jug tests show contrary results to what was on They1's web site. Now the ammo is reported to have greater penetration than unmodified ammo where as on the web site, it was the other way around. So somehow magically, the hypercav rounds open sooner, open more, and and now penetrate deeper.

I don't mean to sound skeptical, but something just isn't right. If they are opening sooner and opening more, then how are they now getting better penetration? Do they also fly faster through the air?

Although neither bullet showed significant expansion, tester reported that the Hypercav round produced a "significantly more violent" entry, virtually destroying the first two water jugs.

More violent entry despite no significant expansion? It just keeps getting better and better. Of course I am sure that water jugs are made to exacting standards of uniform thickness, free of variation, free of defects or impurities.

I'm a little disappointed too by some of the comments on this thread. New ideas should be encouraged.

They should be encouraged, but They1's presentation of information seems rickety. I fail to see why a person developing a modified round and claiming great things isn't able to come up with actual ballistic gel tests and instead relies on non-standardized materials testing apparently performed by others. It may be all on the up and up and They1 may have freaky circumstances in his life that results in all these things happening, but either they are somewhat fabricated, or things are just so bizarre that I don't think I would put much credibility into the product until after extensive 3rd party testing.

 

[crasen]

I believe he has been in the process of getting these tested in ballistic gel. He has indicated that this whole thing is a pretty slow process and it may take some time until all tests are done and manufacturers mcan incorporate his design into their prooduct.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Pretty slow process for ballistic gel? If that is the case, then that is just another bizarre aspect. He could have ordered the materials on Monday, have them arrive by Friday, mixed and set overnight, and be shooting on Saturday.

People here have been asking for ballistic gel tests for two months. Ballistic gel is something of an industry standard for testing, so I fail to see why this hasn't been done sooner.

 

[They1]

Made it back from SHOT Show this morning. It was my first time to this event. Quite an experience...way cool!

This show was good for Hypercav, bad for my feet.

First of all, Brassfetcher has my test rounds, and is working up gel-blocks for tests this week.

To those who've criticized why I've not shot/posted my own tests, it's because, as I've said many times, independent tests will tell the story, without ANY bias.

The project was well recieved by literally all who I shared this concept with. Including manufacturers and press. (You should start to see mentions from several well-known media sources in the near future.)

I met Massad Ayoob while there. He really liked the concept, and agreed to test some HC ammo for review. A very knowledgable guy, and unquestioned in the industry.

R. Lee Ermy also wants some. After I showed him samples and explained the project, he said, 'that makes perfect sense!" Then he asked; "why someone didn't think of this a long time ago" (he also threw in a "Hoo-Rah!). While, I don't have that answer, and never will, I know it has now... (Nice guy too.)

One NRA guy said; "shooters are going to eat this up!"

Ted Nugent wants some.
"Stone Cold" Steve Austin want to try some.

One of the manufacturers I've been talking to told me they have already test fired samples I sent them some time ago, and he told me 'they did exactly what I said they would do." (I was unaware of this test-set before I met w/them at the show) These tests were in standard gel-block medium. He also mentioned that they did not record the data, so unfortunatly, I have no photos to share here. Besides, due to corporate confidentiality issues, I doubt that I could anyway. However, I will post Brassfetchers' results when they become available.

In all, there are at least three manufacturers are seriously looking at this project. Others have entered the 'pipeline' for consideration, but nothing specific was mentioned of commitment at the show. I cannot give details of the conversations, nor will I, until a mutual agreement is struck. Also note that future details may not be disclosed if the end-licensee stipulates such restrictions, and of course, I will respect their wishes.

Machinery is being designed to automate the 'porting' process for mass-manufacture of HC-class bullets.

I hope everyone understands that this project isn't "perfect". There is still much work to be done in creating the best port configuration for all calibers, ultimate port diameters, count and positions must be calibrated to provide the best performance in relation to each type of round. As you can imagine, handgun and rifle ammo will have different criteria.
These aspects will be addressed by the licensee's R&D.

In the end, those who understand the endless complexities in any new product development will know what I've been saying all along; this is a slow process at best, but necessary to create the best-performing product possible.

For those who would rather make knee-jerk conclusions and assumptions before all the data is in (you know who you are...), there's nothing I can say or do other than offer the proof as it comes in. After that, I can't help you.

I have no idea what the ultimate 'evolution' of Hypercav will become...many possibilities exist. Only time, design and testing will tell the story. There is still much to learn and exploring the possibilities, as this is a brand new entity being introduced into the ballistics industry. Having said that, I can quote one person of "note" in the industry; this could be a game-changer."

 

[Tim the student]

Sounds like it went well for you. Good job.

I'm looking forward to seeing the test results.

 

[They1]

Hypercav test results!

Well, a lot of folks have been waiting for this...and the results came in this morning.

Some very interesting results...beyond our expectations considering the S&B product.

Hypercav Bullet Test


Commentary:

Gelatin Block test results from Brass Fetcher.



Rounds tested: S&B 9mm, 115gr JHP (Un-bonded Jacket)

Shots #1, #3: JHP-HC

Shot #2: JHP (Control)



Note that HC rounds expanded with enough energy to literally shear the Jacket into 3 and 4 separate pieces respectively, vs. 1 piece for the control round.



You’ll also see the triangular shape of the HC bullets, with six “knife-edges”.



HC rounds also tumbled/rotated with notable force without loss of penetration. (Potentially 2~3 times wound channel tissue damage)



*Further test analysis pending.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/26109301


Nothing like a 9mm bullet turning into an almost 60cal. three-headed 'anvil' with six cutting edges, that tumbles, rotates and spins to give a bad guy a bad day!

 

[ClayInTX]

They1,

Please post some pics in jpeg. I couldn’t access the site you gave because I run XP and am not going to download Super Flash Rocket Science Adobe Wonderkin Sprocket Drive, or drop out of XP and reboot in Vista.

As I said before, I was skeptical, and might still be a little, but am certainly glad you got the response you did and I always pull for the little guy.

I can well understand your limitations on getting publishable results. I served as peer review for a friend of mine who just got his patent after over ten years of work. He now has over twenty thousand dollars in that patent for just the legal work.

Hang in there! I’m very, very pleased for what you now have going for you.

 

[ljnowell]

Interesting I guess. Can you post pictures of the control shot and the others side by side, so that the differences can be looked at closely? I think that would help in presentation some. I was always under the impression that shedding the jacket was a bad thing, less weight retention, etc? Can you comment on this? Was it expected or desired?

 

[They1]

They1,

Please post some pics in jpeg. I couldn’t access the site you gave because I run XP and am not going to download Super Flash Rocket Science Adobe Wonderkin Sprocket Drive, or drop out of XP and reboot in Vista.

As I said before, I was skeptical, and might still be a little, but am certainly glad you got the response you did and I always pull for the little guy.

I can well understand your limitations on getting publishable results. I served as peer review for a friend of mine who just got his patent after over ten years of work. He now has over twenty thousand dollars in that patent for just the legal work.

Hang in there! I’m very, very pleased for what you now have going for you.

Clay, the file came in in .pdf format. I don't seem to find a way to convert them. It also includes the data sheets.

What about Adobe reader? It's free, and as I recall worked on XP as well.

Perhaps there's an expert here who could share the "how-to"?

 

[They1]

Interesting I guess. Can you post pictures of the control shot and the others side by side, so that the differences can be looked at closely? I think that would help in presentation some. I was always under the impression that shedding the jacket was a bad thing, less weight retention, etc? Can you comment on this? Was it expected or desired?

Actually, it WAS expected, as the S&B round jacket is not bonded to the core. (Notice the control round)
Same thing happened, but instead of just peeling off, the HC's blew the jackets into pieces.
Also note the 'retained bullet weight' stats, showing no significant loss of weight, and the HC's penetrated equal to and a little more, than the control round.

 

[ontargetstl]

Please post some pics in jpeg. I couldn’t access the site you gave because I run XP and am not going to download Super Flash Rocket Science Adobe Wonderkin Sprocket Drive, or drop out of XP and reboot in Vista.

As I said before, I was skeptical, and might still be a little, but am certainly glad you got the response you did and I always pull for the little guy.

I can well understand your limitations on getting publishable results. I served as peer review for a friend of mine who just got his patent after over ten years of work. He now has over twenty thousand dollars in that patent for just the legal work.

Hang in there! I’m very, very pleased for what you now have going for you.

i also run xp, and it came up fine for me.

they, that is very impressive, indeed.

 

[Sam Cade]

Whoa.


Ive been following this thread with considerable interest and have been firmly in the skeptical "its-prolly-just-a-gimmick", but those brassfetcher report has nearly convinced me. This seems to have considerable promise!

 

[They1]

i also run xp, and it came up fine for me.

they, that is very impressive, indeed.

Thanks ontarget, I appreciate that.

FYI: among everything else, we're working up some rifle rounds, and on request from two manufacturers, we're starting to look at Copper, and Frangibles (they're sending samples for conversion/testing)

Currently, we're working up some .45's. I can't wait to see what these monsters do )

 

[They1]

Whoa.


Ive been following this thread with considerable interest and have been firmly in the skeptical "its-prolly-just-a-gimmick", but those brassfetcher report has nearly convinced me. This seems to have considerable promise!

It's a healthy thing to be skeptical. I am. That's why I've always suggested to wait until tests are completed and posted, and THEN draw conclusions.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

Thanks ontarget, I appreciate that.

FYI: among everything else, we're working up some rifle rounds, and on request from two manufacturers, we're starting to look at Copper, and Frangibles (they're sending samples for conversion/testing)

Currently, we're working up some .45's. I can't wait to see what these monsters do )

That is just what I wanted to hear

 

[They1]

That is just what I wanted to hear

You should have said something sooner David...I would have started working Copper a long time ago!

)

 

[Sam Cade]

Copper, as in solid copper like a DPX/Barnes? Nifty.


I wonder if there would be a market for a "hyper-cav" hole drilling fixture for the home reloader?

 

[Millwright]

All "neat stuff" as they say.....But the real "bottom line" will be how your ammo performs in pistols. Terminal performance, penetration, etc don't mean squat if it "won't run" reliably !! Given the plethora of pistols and various iterations thereof with manifold "tweaks" by various designers, yours is a formidable task, IMO !! >MW

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Note that HC rounds expanded with enough energy to literally shear the Jacket into 3 and 4 separate pieces respectively, vs. 1 piece for the control round.

You’ll also see the triangular shape of the HC bullets, with six “knife-edges”.



HC rounds also tumbled/rotated with notable force without loss of penetration. (Potentially 2~3 times wound channel tissue damage)



*Further test analysis pending.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/26109301


Nothing like a 9mm bullet turning into an almost 60cal. three-headed 'anvil' with six cutting edges, that tumbles, rotates and spins to give a bad guy a bad day!

Losing the jacket is usually considered an undesirable result. Seeing the pieces sheared off and left at shallower depths indicates that those amazing knife edges aren't performing to their potential.

 

[Balog]

In all fairness the control shed the jacket as well. Interesting test. Not conclusive, but certainly promising.

 

[DeepSouth]

I've been following this for a while and waiting for these results. I'm not really a technical kind of guy so tell me if I have the test results right.

In summary

Shot 1 was a HC bullet that penetrated to 10.8 in and had an expansion of .597


Shot 2 was a standard bullet that penetrated 10.8in with an expansion of 5.53


Shot 3 was a HC bullet that penetrated 11.6 in with an expansion of .582


I understand there is much more info in the test results but the major factors in a defensive round are penetration and expansion. If the "Maximum Crack Diameter" is a reference to the size of a wound channel they were 2in, 2.1in, and 2.1in so, little to no difference.

With that said if the above info is correct what advantage is the HC bullet suppose to have? I am getting confused.

 

[ontargetstl]

Copper, as in solid copper like a DPX/Barnes? Nifty.


I wonder if there would be a market for a "hyper-cav" hole drilling fixture for the home reloader?

there may be a market for it, but the hypercav is patented. so there may be royalties owed if you make your own bullets.

 

[DAVIDSDIVAD]

I've been following this for a while and waiting for these results. I'm not really a technical kind of guy so tell me if I have the test results right.

In summary

Shot 1 was a HC bullet that penetrated to 10.8 in and had an expansion of .597


Shot 2 was a standard bullet that penetrated 10.8in with an expansion of 5.53


Shot 3 was a HC bullet that penetrated 11.6 in with an expansion of .582


I understand there is much more info in the test results but the major factors in a defensive round are penetration and expansion. If the "Maximum Crack Diameter" is a reference to the size of a wound channel they were 2in, 2.1in, and 2.1in so, little to no difference.

With that said if the above info is correct what advantage is the HC bullet suppose to have? I am getting confused.

I think some data on how much the bullets expanded in relation to how deeply they'd penetrated would be very useful.

I believe that it would show the HC bullets expanding much ealier, but still penetrating just as deeply, creating a more effective permanent wound channel.

 

[youngda9]

Running the test with a bonded bullet would be a good idea, IMHO. This would allow only the depth, diameter, and weight retention to be the important factors. Depth of shedding will be eliminated.

 

[TX1911fan]

From looking at the photos, I'm not sure any of the rounds were standard bullets. They each said HC, so I thought they were all Hypercav. I'd be interested to know if that's the case, and if so, what the control group did.

Navy_Guns, nice High Road attitude.