View Single Post
Old 1st September 2015, 12:21 PM
cloverleaf cloverleaf is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 117

Originally Posted by NeilM View Post
I'm puzzled by your comment about quality. I have two tins from the same batch (which I suspect all sniper medium's in the UK are from) that I have been testing, and the quality is excellent, both visually and over the chrono. This is matched by down range accuracy and consistency.

You're right though, it is a bit of a dodgy name.
Absolutely - H&N seem to have a talent for questionable pellet monikers!

The quality comment was really from two directions; firstly as others have pointed out there are instances of split skirts; personally the ones I had were pretty good but I've seen tins with a much larger proportion of such damage.

Secondly a bit of assumption crept in that since I'd tested them in a number of rifles and found them to be acceptable but not stellar in all, that this might be due more to a quality issue than one of barrel suitability.

Also from looking at the pellet (and from what Bob says about a single-piece die) I suspect that the head and waist are formed in one operation with the skirt being flaired as a secondary operation.

I think this could potentially introduce quality problems due to the increased variability of using two separate processes, as well as the chance of variable skirt geometry due to the method (Apparently) employed to form them.

So far we've split the pellets into "good" (skirt intact) and "bad" (split skirt). What about those where the material has thinned out locally but not split? What about variations in skirt shape?

FWIW I think the way forward is for a pellet with a decent hemispherical (or even ogive) shaped head and a more traditional skirt, made in a more conventional three-piece, split die..
Reply With Quote