Custom and Group Buy Flops

[KVO]

We all know that the old standbys have been around because they just tend to work... at least well enough. Some got there by being well designed for a specific application and I'll bet many were more luck than skill on the maker's part.

I've been extremely happy with many of the group buy runs on this site. That being said, sometimes the best plans on paper don't work out as we had envisioned. What are some custom boolit designs and group buys that just didn't live up to the hype?

[dragon813gt]

I wouldn’t say hype. Because it’s not from a group buy. And I don’t think many have the mold. But there’s a modified version of the RCBS 35-200-FN w/ a wider meplat. Sounds like a great idea on paper. Not so much in reality. It’s not nearly as accurate. I guess it can be considered a flop.

[KVO]

That's exactly I meant to confer, I think "hype" wasn't the best choice of words. I had a similar experience with the NOE 357 160gr WFN. I've only gotten it to shoot well at top end magnum loads. I envisioned it doing double duty but it shoots awful with most light loads for me. Funny how a bullet that's almost a wadcutter hates WC loads.

[reddog81]

I’ve got that same NOE 160 WFN and couldn’t get it to shoot well in any .38 Specials. I had all but given up on it until I tried it in my S&W 929 and it shoots better than a dozen or more different bullets that I’ve tried. At 850 FPS it does great even out to 100 yards.

The first thing that comes to mind for “hype” is the non-lube groove bullets for powder coating. You can PC any bullet!

[dragon813gt]

The first thing that comes to mind for “hype” is the non-lube groove bullets for powder coating. You can PC any bullet!

The advantage to them should be mold release. I don’t powdercoat so I don’t know if this is actually the case. But there should be less chance the bullet gets hung up in the mold.

[JBinMN]

I always wondered if folks doing the group buys would share if what they had hoped for was a good thing as an idea to try, but turned out to be more of a "flop" than was expected.

Have not heard of that much here. Folks like to talk about the successes of them, but rarely the ones that just don't turn out as expected for them.

Thanks! to the OP for the topic, & Thanks! to any who are willing to let others know what they think of their investments that did not turn out to be what they expected...

[MT Gianni]

I see a join date of 2017. I remember far too many group buys that you paid for, waited 6-8 months to get and it came back 0.003" under what was spec'd. NOE and Accurate have given us a lot to be thankful for.

[MT Chambers]

The Lee group buys were a disaster.

[35remington]

I have a Lee group buy mould for a supposed HG 68 type design but flatbase. Drops bullets from the mould like marbles. Problem is the front drive band is undersized.

In addition, too many believe that the meplat edge on their HG 68 type clones should be sharp, when in fact the original design had a pronounced rounded edge to the meplat. There was a reason that was so, and many self proclaimed bullet designers ignore why originals were the way they were or have no concept of why good bullet designs have the features they do

The sharp edged meplat makes the loaded bullet a jammomatic in otherwise reliable 1911s. The design and execution were both duds.

Another 35 caliber bullet intended to optimize the 35 Remington at 225-230 grains by enlarging the RCBS 200 FN design by lengthening the nose shot poorly because the front part of the bullet was too small in diameter. We could only get it to shoot by beagling the mould.

[kevin c]

I've only had one dud, but my luck may be due to my buying molds only in the past two or three years, only in common pistol calibers and almost all proven designs. The one design that didn't work out most likely would have with more load tweaking, but I moved on to another design.

[JBinMN]

I see a join date of 2017. I remember far too many group buys that you paid for, waited 6-8 months to get and it came back 0.003" under what was spec'd. NOE and Accurate have given us a lot to be thankful for.

To whom are you addressing?

The OP, or me? Since we both have join dates of 2017?

The OP posted the topic & I posted just prior to you.

[Lloyd Smale]

I think some of the first duds were our own faults. I don't think back then people understood that just a tiny difference in one dimension of a bullet could turn it from gold to coal. Lots of those first group buys were attempts to make multiple cavity molds of existing designs like the lyman 429244 429214 and 429421 and either the maker didn't get it perfect or the designer thought he could improve it.

[jmort]

To whom are you addressing?

The OP, or me? Since we both have join dates of 2017?

The OP posted the topic & I posted just prior to you.

Does it matter?

[KVO]

jmort no offense taken. I know how lucky I am to have missed some of the old days on here. We've enjoyed an exponential growth in the number of GB runs, made by high quality manufacturers to boot.

Lloyd, I I'd call that a recurrence of "Lyman Syndrome" with the profile drift problem. The road to hell is paved with Thompson and Keith design copies.

[jmort]

I intended no offense. The other member wanted to know who the post in question was directed at, you or him.
Based on its content, I could not see how it mattered.
The last of the Lee buys occured arounf the time I joined.
I did did get an Original Official Ranch Dog 165 grain 30-30 six cavity.
It functions well, but the ones I got from Accurate and NOE are better.

[JBinMN]

Does it matter?

MT Gianni made it a point to start his comment the way he did & I was not sure to whom he was referencing.

Why does it matter?

Because I was curious to know...

Why you felt the need to ask your question escapes me. I do not see why it would even concern you enough to post to ask.

Now I have answered ya.

So, maybe "he" will answer me, or not.

[Larry Gibson]

Major problem I had with a couple 30 cal Lee GBs that were supposed to be duplicates of Lyman designs is the designer apparently spec'd them for he WW + Pb at 50/50 apparently based on the WWs he had stored behind his shed which he said we couldn't duplicate(?)....... When cast of COWW + 2% tin or #2 alloy they were so over large as to be useful only in .314 - .316 barrels, not the .308 barrels I wanted them for. I use them in my .31s but and one in my 30s but have to also size the nose on that one. The concept of the 6 cavity was to shorten the bullet making time, not lengthen it by adding additional steps to be done to the bullet to make it useable. They are still useable moulds and do cast good bullets, just not for what was wanted.

One 44 Keith GB was so over size it was totally useless to me. On the other hand a RD design 30 cal casts perfect sized bullets for my Mini Mk X 7.62x39. I can't say I got any "duds" from the Lee 6 cavity GBs as all were just as good as regular Lee 6 cavity moulds. With the usual prep and maintenance both the Lee GB and commercial 6 cavity moulds are serving me well as far as the casting of bullets goes.

[Burnt Fingers]

I've got a four cavity H&G 68 and it has a sharp edge on the front drive band. So does my RCBS 201KT and they both shoot just fine.

[Burnt Fingers]

I’ve got that same NOE 160 WFN and couldn’t get it to shoot well in any .38 Specials. I had all but given up on it until I tried it in my S&W 929 and it shoots better than a dozen or more different bullets that I’ve tried. At 850 FPS it does great even out to 100 yards.

The first thing that comes to mind for “hype” is the non-lube groove bullets for powder coating. You can PC any bullet!

Hey! I bought that NOE mold out of inventory. In the hollow point version it shoots quite well out of my 586.

The NLG molds are awesome for Hi-Tek. They also fall out of the mold like rain. I've got NLG molds from both MP and NOE and love casting with them. I don't PC any of them, just Hi-Tek.

[35remington]

I do desire a sharp front edge on the first band and want it to be full diameter rather than rounded and undersized. The mould was the latter. The edge of the meplat was also very sharp which is not good. All of that combined into one mould was not helpful. I now have a mould that lets me periodically practice my malfunction clearing drills, which is not what I wanted from a HG 68 type design.