LFP Comment Thread

[drykilned]

Send me some along with your load data and i will test them in my rifle!

[Caser]

The Cavity Back 118 grain will get you to 450 yards with double caliber expansion, holding near 1000 lb-ft of energy. It stays sub .7 MOA to 1000 yards as tested by PredatorDown at supersonic speeds.
I dont understand what else you gents could want in a hunting bullet. That's also capable of ringing steel to 1000+ yards.

Can you put an IR seeker in the nose?

Either way, imma buy some. Thanks for making them.

[Bigs28]

I dont understand what else you gents could want in a hunting bullet.

A lead free sub moa hunting bullet for under 40 cents a piece. Oh wait they have them. Lehigh defense 110g controlled chaos. Never used your bullets. I'm sure they are a great product. But their are less expensive options that do the same. I'm not hunting to 1k yards.

[CavityBackBullets]

A lead free sub moa hunting bullet for under 40 cents a piece. Oh wait they have them. Lehigh defense 110g controlled chaos. Never used your bullets. I'm sure they are a great product. But their are less expensive options that do the same. I'm not hunting to 1k yards.

I appreciate the different choices a shooter has. However our bullets and theirs are not the same thing.
We have 99% weight retention. A fracturing bullet is easier and cheaper to make.
There are less machining operations in the construction. Copper structure is less critical.
The performance in game is different. The wound channel is different. The associated blood trail is different.
The statement and testing about 1000 yard accuracy is to show that when the shooter does their job so will the bullet. Well beyond the hunting ranges the caliber is capable of.

Expansion at high speed and low speed (high speed is on the left)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11670[/ATTACH]

User submitted group showing accuracy.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11671[/ATTACH]

[Bigs28]

By doing the same, I'm taking about killing the deer and hogs i shoot. Yes your bullet is designed to maintain mass. Theirs is designed to fracture. Again you probably have a good product but at the end of the day the controlled chaos does the same thing (kills the deer or hog) and i buy for 0.32 each. You asked the question what we wanted and I told you what I wanted. Again you probably have a good product but I'm achieving my results with a much less expensive bullet.

[Klem]

Klem, respectfully.
Many of our projectiles have the capability to stay sub .7 MOA to 1000 yards. Of course provided the shooter and their equipment are up to the task.
I go to my friends at Long Range Shooters of Utah for exactly that reason for long range testing.
I'm very sorry to hear your AR's are not capable of sub MOA performance. All of mine are, even my 7.62x39.
Our projectiles will never be the limiting factor for accuracy of someone's loads.
I personally have to be able to shoot a projectile sub MOA before I will release it to the public. In fact not just me but multiple trusted testers before a projectiles release.

Our projectiles also open up at the longest distance of any LFP tested by rickOshay. You can say I'm advertising our products. However I''m stating facts I can prove. No BS involved, no offense intended.

My point is, no-one can guarantee sub MOA from their bullets without all other shooting variables being equal to or better than the task. Your bullets are only one factor in final group sizes. Others are;

• Shooter
  
• Environment (e.g. weather, wind, mirage).
  
• Gun
  
• Shooting platform (offhand, bipod, light rested, heavy rested).
  
• Ammunition (powder, case, neck tension, PROJECTILE).
  

Implying your bullets will produce 0.7MOA is what I was concerned about. Especially in the context that many, if not most forum members use light-weight AR's with what is a relatively low velocity calibre. Sure, you can shoot a Grendel and still have it wobbling around in the sky by the time it gets to 1,000 (relative to larger cases and calibres), but you will never be competitive. My experience of shooting 1,000yards in F-Class competition over a number of years punctuates why we zero at 100 and not 200 or 300 or a 1,000...and that is wind. Even on a still day there is movement of the air body that the bullet is traversing. 0.7MOA at 100yds never translates to 0.7 at 1,000. Notwithstanding, as the bullet slows down its ability to buck the wind diminishes. The ability to group downrange represents the cross-sectional diameters of a blunderbuss, from tight at the breech to wider at the muzzle.

As for what MOA my guns are capable of is an assumption designed to discredit my input. A cheap shot that I will not dignify with a response. I get that you are sensitive about your revenue stream but be careful not to cross the line into ad hominem. Let's keep this discussion factual please.



.

[grayfox]

I'll chime in that it's probably a good bullet but too expensive for my tastes. I shoot often enough that cost is a factor. I like to shoot the bullets I'll take with me into the woods so "plinking" for me doesn't do that much, I tend to stick with my "duty-designated" rounds.
But then again I'm probably not your target market, anyway this is my $0.02 as well.
If it flies true and kills what it hits and is affordable, then I can use it. At this point I'm not really using 93 octane premium-grade bullets so to speak when 87-octane works so well.
But for those who do, good shootin' and stay safe.

[CavityBackBullets]

My point is, no-one can guarantee sub MOA from their bullets without all other shooting variables being equal to or better than the task. Your bullets are only one factor in final group sizes. Others are;

• Shooter
  
• Environment (e.g. weather, wind, mirage).
  
• Gun
  
• Shooting platform (offhand, bipod, light rested, heavy rested).
  
• Ammunition (powder, case, neck tension, PROJECTILE).
  

Implying your bullets will produce 0.7MOA is what I was concerned about. Especially in the context that many, if not most forum members use light-weight AR's with what is a relatively low velocity calibre. Sure, you can shoot a Grendel and still have it wobbling around in the sky by the time it gets to 1,000 (relative to larger cases and calibres), but you will never be competitive. My experience of shooting 1,000yards in F-Class competition over a number of years punctuates why we zero at 100 and not 200 or 300 or a 1,000...and that is wind. Even on a still day there is movement of the air body that the bullet is traversing. 0.7MOA at 100yds never translates to 0.7 at 1,000. Notwithstanding, as the bullet slows down its ability to buck the wind diminishes. The ability to group downrange represents the cross-sectional diameters of a blunderbuss, from tight at the breech to wider at the muzzle.

As for what MOA my guns are capable of is an assumption designed to discredit my input. A cheap shot that I will not dignify with a response. I get that you are sensitive about your revenue stream but be careful not to cross the line into ad hominem. Let's keep this discussion factual please.

"Of course provided the shooter and their equipment are up to the task."

I never stated they would turn a 2 MOA weapon into a .7 MOA weapon. Nor did I in any way elude to it.
In no way did I guarantee it, nor did I state we guarantee it. Your putting words in my mouth.
I simply said they are capable of that performance as tested by a respected member of this community.
His load at 1000 was from a 22in barrel at a low 2450 at the muzzle, at an OAL of 2.24.
The performance was also from a barrel with well over a 5000 round count and at a low velocity.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11674[/ATTACH]

Its apparent though that some members here are not looking for a high performance product such as ours, or Cutting Edge or Warner Tool (which are more expansive).
As well this is good to know. I certainly do not want to focus where there is no market.
By producing LFP projectiles that could be loaded to SAAMI lengths in a 118gr that perform at Grendel speeds I thought we were bringing something to the table that would help the community. I guess I was mistaken.
My apologies for wasting your time.

[Drillboss]

The Cavity Back 118 grain will get you to 450 yards with double caliber expansion, holding near 1000 lb-ft of energy. It stays sub .7 MOA to 1000 yards as tested by PredatorDown at supersonic speeds.
I dont understand what else you gents could want in a hunting bullet. That's also capable of ringing steel to 1000+ yards.

Having dealt with a lot of vendors for a lot of products and services over a lot of years, the sales pitch (and I'm paraphrasing) of "Why aren't you smart enough to understand that this is what you need?" has never done much for me. And I never responded very well to "You get what you pay for." as a justification for the price.

[CavityBackBullets]

Having dealt with a lot of vendors for a lot of products and services over a lot of years, the sales pitch (and I'm paraphrasing) of "Why aren't you smart enough to understand that this is what you need?" has never done much for me. And I never responded very well to "You get what you pay for." as a justification for the price.

Neither thing did I say or imply.
I'm at a loss for the hostilities I'm getting from a few of you that are reading way more into it than I stated.

If you like our projectiles and see the value in them try them out. If you dont I wouldnt expect you to.

[RockWarrior]

I really don't get it either. We were hopping for companies to start producing LFP bullets weighing less than the 120 gmx with a lower expansion threshold. Cavityback goes through the trouble of producing said bullet for around the same cost as Barnes bullets and some of you shit on it.

I understand that cavityback is trying to promote their products and some of you aren't interested. Their product and price may not meet your needs but that doesn't mean that it doesn't meet other forum member's needs. I really don't see the point in being so hostile towards them.

Seems to me the only point that cavityback is trying to get across is that their bullets are capable of submoa performance in certain reloading environments and weapons platforms.

I have not shot their bullets but I for one welcome their contributions to the Grendel community and will be ordering a box to try out against the 100gr ttsx.

[Klem]

Neither thing did I say or imply.
I'm at a loss for the hostilities I'm getting from a few of you that are reading way more into it than I stated.

If you like our projectiles and see the value in them try them out. If you dont I wouldnt expect you to.

For goodness sake...If you are precious about how your advertising gets processed on social media then you need to develop a thicker skin. This forum is social banter and you don't get to control every aspect of it. Some people might not like your posts and some people might not agree with what you are saying. For the rest of us it's just social banter. Unlike you we don't have a revenue stream at stake and unfortunately I don't feel obligated to protect yours.

Hey, if the forum owner is happy with you embedding advertising in our social banter then knock yourself out. Like Rockwarrior says, it does contain interesting information if you can just filter out the promotional bias.

I have no idea how well your bullets shoot but I do know a bit about long-range shooting. If you omit important information in order to imply your bullets are more of the reason the group is 0.7MOA at 1,000yards then don't be surprised or upset if someone like me corrects the record.

At least in your case you are up front about it being product promotion.

[CavityBackBullets]

Ahhh Klem,

I'm just starting to figure out the personalities on this site.
Please accept my apology for responding in a thread where our products are being mentioned by other members.

I was under the weird impression that an open tipped 118gr high expansion LFP that could run neck and neck with an Amax to 1000 yards and expand double caliber to 450 yards from a Grendel was something.

Perhaps you would prefer we stay out of your forum all together.
I have been told on numerous occasions its a fairly unfriendly place and until now had found those accusations groundless.
In fact I had found quite the contrary.

[Klem]

For implying your bullet has more influence in the result on the target, I accept your apology.

Don't forget, you are part of the equation as to how you find the forum. I responded to your exaggerated claim and you have taken umbrage. We have different reasons for being here and like I said, your commercial interests are not my concern. If you want to make a storm out of a tea cup because you have a commercial stake in this discussion, be my guest.

[CavityBackBullets]

For implying your bullet has more influence in the result on the target, I accept your apology.

Don't forget, you are part of the equation as to how you find the forum. I responded to your exaggerated claim and you have taken umbrage. We have different reasons for being here and like I said, your commercial interests are not my concern. If you want to make a storm out of a tea cup because you have a commercial stake in this discussion, be my guest.

Well you took what I said wrong again. Perhaps its me not being clear enough.
I feel the performance does indeed in part have an influence on the result on target.
I was not going to release this proprietary information however you leave me no choice.
Its Pixie Dust, you know the kind Peter Pan uses. It greatly improves BC......

[Kswhitetails]

I e heard that stuff is pretty expensive to harvest. Explains why some may find the CBB projectile slightly less cost effective. Wait, was that banter?

[Klem]

That your apology was insincere was clear enough, so I responded by accepting it. We can both play the sarcasm game if that's what you want.

I'll make the point once again...If you did not have a commercial interest in how your posts are received you wouldn't have thrown down your toys at someone having the temerity to question you, by adding more (helpful) information. You need to separate promotional marketing from social media banter. The latter is free however you don't get to control it. Now, before the Mods step in to stop this useless diatribe let me reiterate again. Your bullet, indeed any bullet is only one small part of why a group is of a particular shape and size at 1,000. You implied your products are more than one small part is what I had issue with...That's all, not worth getting upset about.

As for selling your bullets, good luck to you and all the best. This is my last post on this thread so feel free to have the last word.

[HuntTXhogs]

Blah blah blah

Back to the topic!

I haven’t tried cavity back bullets due to cost AND that they could possibly shear petals during their passage through a medium to large bodied animal.

My personal feelings are that bonded bullets may be slightly more effective at distance versus lead free projectiles in 6.5 Grendel BUT recently my experiences with the 120 grain Fusions left me questioning that as well (I sheared a Fusion bullet on a medium sized boar at 170 yards).

I’m perplexed with the 6.5mm in that the SST continues to be the bullet to beat for consistent game killing performance and I seek alternatives in that price range.

Lead free projectiles are what they are in cost but this thread would be helpful with expansion measurements added going forward.

And pardon my blah blah blah but dang Klem let the mods handle the questioning of persons with possible vendor intent - it is one thing to poke somebody in the eye and when they hit back claim it was “social banter” when you are constantly doing this in many threads.

Now can we move this along ...

[thedudeabides]

Is RickOShay (the thread starter) MIA? His last post seems to be from 4 months ago. Wondering if he is still around and pursuing the project and if anyone else is planning to carry the torch or shoulder the load(s). pun intended
Its great work he's done and an amazing reference for Grendel shooters.

[IescapedCali]

As one who hunts in a lead-free state, and who would prefer not to eat lead, I’m thankful that I have a lot of options. I would like to see some discussions surrounding reloading for them. There’s not always Published data, so I would like to see the manufacturers publish that sort of information, to help us out. Without that, I feel like I am completely on my own. Supporting one’s products means more than vigorously supporting it on social media and discussion threads. Tell me where to start, and how to go about it. Give me useful dats. Don’t get into needless arguments that don’t provide useful data to the user. Rolling around in the dust doesn’t help me use a product. For hunting, I’ll pay a little more for a good bullet; it might put meat in my freezer. Just help me use it.