TexasCHLforum.com

Would y'all buy this? I probably wouldn't, IMO it's kind of like reinventing the wheel but I'm just curious what everyone else thinks about it. http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/30/smallbu ... ct-bullet/

BigBangSmallBucks wrote:Would y'all buy this? I probably wouldn't, IMO it's kind of like reinventing the wheel but I'm just curious what everyone else thinks about it.

I think Batman once had this in his utility belt.

What is up with all these gimmicky loads lately?

Is the "Barkinator" frangible wood round next?
"The bark comes off, leaving the core of the branch to penetrate"

WildBill wrote:

BigBangSmallBucks wrote:Would y'all buy this? I probably wouldn't, IMO it's kind of like reinventing the wheel but I'm just curious what everyone else thinks about it.

I think Batman once had this in his utility belt.

Except his bullets were shaped like bats

The Marshal wrote:What is up with all these gimmicky loads lately?

Is the "Barkinator" frangible wood round next?
"The bark comes off, leaving the core of the branch to penetrate"

I'd buy that since I've gone all green as my new years resolution, but only if the wood is made from re-purposed dinning room tables.

OK... the chase for a "magic bullet" is just getting stupid. Who buys into this garbage????

I want a round that fires bacon out the barrel. When the BG stops to eat the bacon, I will run away.

03Lightningrocks wrote:OK... the chase for a "magic bullet" is just getting stupid. Who buys into this garbage????

I want a round that fires bacon out the barrel. When the BG stops to eat the bacon, I will run away.

Mmmmmm Bacon...

I can't imagine it being all that effective. First of all you are dividing a projectile that's already light to begin with, into four pieces. Even assuming a negligible mass for the "string" you now have four much lighter projectiles whirling around on the way down range. The first one to strike anything will pull the rest off target unless they all strike at virtually the same time (and we know this because "chain shot" has been used in naval warfare, and bolos are used on the Pampas.)

So you divide your typical 9mm round into four chunks and then there is the big jump in wind resistance, and suddenly you can see the thing fly through the air and duck it. Well, maybe that's overstating things a little, but this sure looks like a solution looking far a problem to me.

OTOH, in a 3" magnum 12 ga shotgun shell . . .

Completely ridiculous. Some youtube channel interviewed the creator of this "bullet" and it was pretty comical listening to them go on and on about how this is the future of ammunition. There are so many faults with this, where do you start. So you aim for a COM vitals shot and the bullets hit around the periphery of the vitals (it has a 14" radius) with an odd shaped projectile that may or may not penetrate well at all. What if you have to take a precise shot at a very specific location ie the head?

It's hard to take anything this the host says seriously after listening to this "review".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6FYr0N3xt8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BACON!

03Lightningrocks wrote:OK... the chase for a "magic bullet" is just getting stupid. Who buys into this garbage????

I want a round that fires bacon out the barrel. When the BG stops to eat the bacon, I will run away.

Load the bacon into a 12 gauge and the dove hunters would be all over it.

On the other hand, I am grateful that we have a free market and a robust variety of manufacturers competing for our ammo dollars. We are truly blessed, especially when compared to how this is commonly handled in other countries.

Squirrel!

BigBangSmallBucks wrote:IMO it's kind of like reinventing the wheel

Indeed there is nothing new under the sun. The buck and ball load was popular 200 years ago.

If somebody used this on the CHL test, should we count three misses for a peripheral hit?

I like the idea for a bacon bullet. (I'm currently developing an attachment for my gun that launches pancakes and maple syrup)