simple Hi-Tek coating

[ChaplainJohn]

Remind me to send you a few drop bears to infest the rafters of your shed. hahahahahah.
Attachment 93127

Finally got thru the whole thread! I just have to ask... Ausglock have you got those droppers started to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave yet? Please hurry, help us out of our misery!!!
I'll be on with annoying questions later. I already have product and most of equipment in place. Casting will start in a week or two soon as loading room is finished.

[Ausglock]

Australian Customs would not let me send them to that address. They said that the tennant of the dwelling was known for being cruel to dumb animals.

[NVScouter]

So after reading the last 50 pages still no real answer on rifle use?

I say the 20 rounds at 25M no leading test. No accuracy report even at pistol range. How about at 100/200/300/400 yards (I'd even take meters!)

I'm interested but would like more info before dropping $$ on an unknown.

[Ausglock]

So after reading the last 50 pages still no real answer on rifle use?

I say the 20 rounds at 25M no leading test. No accuracy report even at pistol range. How about at 100/200/300/400 yards (I'd even take meters!)

I'm interested but would like more info before dropping $$ on an unknown.

Maybe see here?
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...fps-or-greater

[220]

Seems its to cold for you blokes to do any testing and to hot for any of us down under.
They are talking temps of around 110 here for the next week or more when it cools down I've got some testing to do. Mainly pistol but some 357 loads that will see duty in my marlin for hunting and lever silhouette.

[NVScouter]

Thanks Ausieglock. I hope that keeps going!

[dverna]

NV

Coated (either PC or Hi-Tek) bullets have not been able to achieve very many accurate loads at rifle velocities - only two as far as I know. That was why I started the thread that Ausglock directed you to.

The good news is that with both types of coating, leading at velocities over 2500 fps has not been an problem. So, there is hope coatings may yet deliver the goods.

I have no horse in this race as I do not coat - and will not - unless coated bullets can achieve superior results in rifle loads. My gut feeling is that PC will have a better chance than Hi-Tek (note: both "success" stories in rifles are with PC). Popper has done work with both coatings and has achieved success with PC in a .308 and he uses Hi-Tek for pistol bullets.

Good luck

Don Verna

[HI-TEK]

NV

Coated (either PC or Hi-Tek) bullets have not been able to achieve very many accurate loads at rifle velocities - only two as far as I know. That was why I started the thread that Ausglock directed you to.

The good news is that with both types of coating, leading at velocities over 2500 fps has not been an problem. So, there is hope coatings may yet deliver the goods.

I have no horse in this race as I do not coat - and will not - unless coated bullets can achieve superior results in rifle loads. My gut feeling is that PC will have a better chance than Hi-Tek (note: both "success" stories in rifles are with PC). Popper has done work with both coatings and has achieved success with PC in a .308 and he uses Hi-Tek for pistol bullets.

Good luck

Don Verna

Hi Don,
Thanks for input.

Just for information, locally, a commercial caster, reported results on rifle use application using Dark Green coating.
I have posted this previously.
I dont know if this result is of significance or not.

Below is what was done.

Quote
"165 grain, 309 dia, 308 rifle, maximum load 41 grains ADI powder 2206H , travelling 2650-2750 ft/sec,
20 shots were fired. Only powder residue left barrel was clean. 2 coats of coating.
One coating also gave same results same. No gas checks were used." End of Quote.

[popper]

Quote
"165 grain, 309 dia, 308 rifle, maximum load 41 grains ADI powder 2206H , travelling 2650-2750 ft/sec,
20 shots were fired. Only powder residue left barrel was clean. 2 coats of coating.
One coating also gave same results same. No gas checks were used." End of Quote.
I assume this was NOT an accuracy test. Starting Varget load for jacketed.

[HI-TEK]

Quote
"165 grain, 309 dia, 308 rifle, maximum load 41 grains ADI powder 2206H , travelling 2650-2750 ft/sec,
20 shots were fired. Only powder residue left barrel was clean. 2 coats of coating.
One coating also gave same results same. No gas checks were used." End of Quote.
I assume this was NOT an accuracy test. Starting Varget load for jacketed.

Thanks for your reply.
You are correct.
Tests that were done was to determine
1. That coating prevented Leading of barrel in such use.
2. Coating stayed on alloy and did not foul up barrel.
3. Determine if standard alloy 92:6:2 could be shot with such speeds, and hit the target without disintegration.
User did advise, that at that point, they did not consider accuracy matters, as tests were mainly to see if it could be done or not.
They also said, that as their business was mainly handguns, there was no urgency to do any further testing with rifle ammo.
From various reports on this site, many have used the coated alloys successfully. I have not been advised details so I can comment.

[Gateway Bullets]

Hi-Tek,

I've been working with a local guy that wants to start running product in his subsonic 300 Blackout through a suppressor. He gave me a few molds to play with so I can coat his projectiles. He is very excited about the bullets coated with the snake oil!

I'll let you know how they run through his gun.

[dverna]

Hi-Tek

I had to laugh when I read "they did not consider accuracy matters". Duhhhhh?

Listen, I understand the guy was just seeing what the coating would do but I still find it truly astounding that people just shoot rounds to check for leading and are too lazy to put up a target and see the results. The funny thing is I have never shot or met people like that. Just shoot 20 rounds into the berm for the fun of it. What???

I am cynical. It is likely they shot at a target and the results were less than stellar.

I started a thread for people to post success at achieving 2 moa at 1800+ fps. That will cover a lot of cast rifle bullets/loads and should not be too far a stretch over the great results Hi-Tek has demonstrated at pistol velocities. We both know that rifle shooters will want to go a lot faster but it looks like 1800 fps has not been easy - at least so far. Let's walk before we run!!

I intend to bump the thread every month if it dies but so far I have only done it once. With better weather here in the North America still 2-3 months away things should start to pop soon and we will see more test results

Please do not take my previous comments as a condemnation of your product. It is doing a great job with pistol bullets and frankly that is where the biggest market is. Like I said, I am not pushing an agenda. But as yet, only PC'ed bullets have been able to achieve accuracy. And it DOES matter - LOL

All good,

Don Verna

[HI-TEK]

Hi-Tek

I had to laugh when I read "they did not consider accuracy matters". Duhhhhh?

Listen, I understand the guy was just seeing what the coating would do but I still find it truly astounding that people just shoot rounds to check for leading and are too lazy to put up a target and see the results. The funny thing is I have never shot or met people like that. Just shoot 20 rounds into the berm for the fun of it. What???

I am cynical. It is likely they shot at a target and the results were less than stellar.

I started a thread for people to post success at achieving 2 moa at 1800+ fps. That will cover a lot of cast rifle bullets/loads and should not be too far a stretch over the great results Hi-Tek has demonstrated at pistol velocities. We both know that rifle shooters will want to go a lot faster but it looks like 1800 fps has not been easy - at least so far. Let's walk before we run!!

I intend to bump the thread every month if it dies but so far I have only done it once. With better weather here in the North America still 2-3 months away things should start to pop soon and we will see more test results

Please do not take my previous comments as a condemnation of your product. It is doing a great job with pistol bullets and frankly that is where the biggest market is. Like I said, I am not pushing an agenda. But as yet, only PC'ed bullets have been able to achieve accuracy. And it DOES matter - LOL

All good,

Don Verna

Thanks for your reply.
I do not understand your having to laugh about someone trying to determine if 92:6:2 alloy could be shot in a rifle?
He used a Worthington arms 308, old gun, and a rebuilt rifle with new 303 long distance target barrel.
Both guns were found to have No coating deposits, No leading but failed grouping aspects.

Reason for the test was to determine if the coating withstood the shooting action without barrels Leading up at speeds that were used.

I contacted tester, and I was advised, that he considered that the speeds achieved were much too high for the alloy used and grouping was not good at all.
He simply realised that at the speeds achieved, the coating did not fail, and did not separate from the alloy, left no residues, and no Leading inside barrel..

Also, as the coating did not fail at that speed, despite poor grouping, the test proved a point or two, and, as advised previously, his business is handgun ammo, and has very low interest with doing testing with other loads, and other alloys, as he has not had the time, as he is flat out with his other production.
Rifle ammo is not his big volume business.
You noted, that you PC'd bullets that alleged as having worked, but fail to advise with your reply, what gun,what alloy you used, what hardness, what speed achieved, what powder load, etc etc.

From various blogs where PC shooting results have been posted, I have seen a number of very upset folk trying to find out how to remove baked on and bonded PC from inside their barrels which also included Lead deposits bonded with the PC coating..

I am not saying that some PC material will not work, but you are asking for very detailed test results, and continue question capability of the HI-Tek coatings, in Rifle ammo, without specifying that the product in fact had not failed, but alloys used were probably the problem in the first place.

I have no problems with people being sceptical, as it is natural reaction, especially when such technology was previously not known.
What you may or may not know, is that our coating has been used successfully, on Jacketed Rifle ammo, where the coating significantly reduced and in some instances eliminated Copper fouling and barrels were left clean.
So, the search for the magic "solution" is still on-going.

[dverna]

Hi-Tek,

It would have been so much simpler to give the whole story up front - which is - "no leading but poor accuracy". End of story. Nothing new. Coatings (including yours) have been pushed over 2500 fps without leading so that is not news. The news will be when we achieve repeatable accuracy. Your words were "they did not consider accuracy matters". That sparked my reply.

I am not using any coatings. As I have stated in other threads "I have no horse in this race". I will use whatever works. Right now, at this point in time, with only two people having met the 2 moa at 1800+ fps level of performance, I am staying with traditional lubes for rifle work. BUT, I am open to change IF something better comes along.

You write, "you are asking for very detailed test results, and continue question capability of the HI-Tek coatings, in Rifle ammo, without specifying that the product in fact had not failed, but alloys used were probably the problem in the first place." Let's examine that.

If the group size, number of shots, yardage, load data (or velocity), alloy, sized diameter, type of coating used, and how it was applied is 'very detailed' - color (colour for our Queen's English friends) me guilty. I am anal about stuff like that. But, I guess that is a lot of information so let's keep it simple. Just post a group, range and the load data. It will give us a start.

You are upset about me questioning the performance of Hi-Tek in rifles and I am guilty again. So far, after years of use down-under, and over a year of testing here in the US no one has posted a decent group at rifle velocities using Hi-Tek. I am sorry but I have to conclude it does not work - at least in its present form. What other conclusion can anyone draw?

It is not my place to explain why Hi-Tek has not worked. I trust you will agree that is your job - it is your product. If alloy is suspected, start with straight linotype. Get some success first, and then work with softer alloys. I would be happy to cast with straight linotype (I have about 400 lbs) IF that is what it takes - but we need to know that.

Sir, I am not against you or your product. I sincerely hope something better than traditional lubes permit cast bullets to more easily reach a new level of performance. A level that that can achieve with paper but is a pain to do. If I may be bold, let me provide some advice and my impressions.

You do not seem to be a shooter (at least not a rifle shooter). Your contribution is the chemistry and production of coatings. Your time is better spent there than learning to cast perfect bullets, load perfect ammunition, tune a target gun, and do the testing. Find a person in your area who has the ability and interest in developing the test data to prove the product. Pay them a little bit for their help if necessary - although some will do it for nothing or for free product.

You have stumbled around the rifle performance question for a long time. People like popper who have tried both have decided to go with PC'ed bullets for rifles. The more "success stories" we see with PC'ed bullets, the greater the number of people who will go that route. Once the market shifts in that direction, you will need a superior product to get market share back and it will be a tough battle. Trust me - as we say here "this is not my first rodeo". Taking market share is not easy even when you have a better product. But you know that - getting commercial casters in the US to convert to Hi-Tek has been challenge.

Just my $.02 and I do sincerely wish you success.

Don Verna

[HI-TEK]

Hi-Tek,

It would have been so much simpler to give the whole story up front - which is - "no leading but poor accuracy". End of story. Nothing new. Coatings (including yours) have been pushed over 2500 fps without leading so that is not news. The news will be when we achieve repeatable accuracy. Your words were "they did not consider accuracy matters". That sparked my reply.

I am not using any coatings. As I have stated in other threads "I have no horse in this race". I will use whatever works. Right now, at this point in time, with only two people having met the 2 moa at 1800+ fps level of performance, I am staying with traditional lubes for rifle work. BUT, I am open to change IF something better comes along.

You write, "you are asking for very detailed test results, and continue question capability of the HI-Tek coatings, in Rifle ammo, without specifying that the product in fact had not failed, but alloys used were probably the problem in the first place." Let's examine that.

If the group size, number of shots, yardage, load data (or velocity), alloy, sized diameter, type of coating used, and how it was applied is 'very detailed' - color (colour for our Queen's English friends) me guilty. I am anal about stuff like that. But, I guess that is a lot of information so let's keep it simple. Just post a group, range and the load data. It will give us a start.

You are upset about me questioning the performance of Hi-Tek in rifles and I am guilty again. So far, after years of use down-under, and over a year of testing here in the US no one has posted a decent group at rifle velocities using Hi-Tek. I am sorry but I have to conclude it does not work - at least in its present form. What other conclusion can anyone draw?

It is not my place to explain why Hi-Tek has not worked. I trust you will agree that is your job - it is your product. If alloy is suspected, start with straight linotype. Get some success first, and then work with softer alloys. I would be happy to cast with straight linotype (I have about 400 lbs) IF that is what it takes - but we need to know that.

Sir, I am not against you or your product. I sincerely hope something better than traditional lubes permit cast bullets to more easily reach a new level of performance. A level that that can achieve with paper but is a pain to do. If I may be bold, let me provide some advice and my impressions.

You do not seem to be a shooter (at least not a rifle shooter). Your contribution is the chemistry and production of coatings. Your time is better spent there than learning to cast perfect bullets, load perfect ammunition, tune a target gun, and do the testing. Find a person in your area who has the ability and interest in developing the test data to prove the product. Pay them a little bit for their help if necessary - although some will do it for nothing or for free product.

You have stumbled around the rifle performance question for a long time. People like popper who have tried both have decided to go with PC'ed bullets for rifles. The more "success stories" we see with PC'ed bullets, the greater the number of people who will go that route. Once the market shifts in that direction, you will need a superior product to get market share back and it will be a tough battle. Trust me - as we say here "this is not my first rodeo". Taking market share is not easy even when you have a better product. But you know that - getting commercial casters in the US to convert to Hi-Tek has been challenge.

Just my $.02 and I do sincerely wish you success.

Don Verna

Thank you for your reply.
I will take on board your suggestions and try to improve.

[HI-TEK]

I just wish to add some responses to your suggestions.
Item 1.
Quote; "It is not my place to explain why Hi-Tek has not worked".
"I am sorry but I have to conclude it does not work - at least in its present form.

Reply, I do not know why you keep on saying this?
The coatings are not designed to be an armor plate, nor is it expected to solve all other engineering problems associated with all manner of guns.

The coating is simply a dry film bonded lube to separate barrel from alloy/metal contact during shooting.

If the coating had survived on shot projectiles, and stopped Leading and/or barrel fouling, then, as far as I am concerned, the coating has done its job for what it was designed to do.

The coating reduced atomized Lead emissions, then it has done its job.

If it has been used successfully on Jacketed ammo, to stop Copper fouling and Leading, then again the coating has done its job.

In many applications the coating has eliminated need for Gas checks. So the coating did what it was supposed to, and that is, reflect heat away from projectiles produced from powder burn and frictional heat.
I cannot understand the stance you are adopting, saying the HI-TEK did not work?

What do you wish for the coating to achieve? Please explain or clarify.

Item2,
Quote. "Find a person in your area who has the ability and interest in developing the test data to prove the product. Pay them a little... "

My reply; Fair comment, but not as simple as your suggestion.

For many years, I have been involved with trying to please all commercial manufacturers, to improve performance of the coatings which they use so the product works in majority of disciplines.
Commercial casters, are the ones, directly dealing with all shooters they supply.
Tests, that had been conducted with shooters in conjunction with manufacturers, those results I do not get back unless things go wrong, or, I get no feed back at all.
It seems similar situation in the US and elsewhere.

For some reason, when things don't go right, it is always the coatings problem/fault, and I get all the complaints.
When things are going OK, no one wants to share, as they seem to wish to guard such results, and especially the manufacturers as they wish to guard their business.

Item3,
Quote, "Your contribution is the chemistry and production of coatings. Your time is better spent there"
My reply, Again fair comment, but again with some concerns, and I will try to explain.

When I was first approached to produce a slippery bonded coating some 22 years ago, and I relied on what was requested by commercial manufacturers and developed some coatings.

Initial tests were a total disaster, as we could not even hit a target.
Immediately, the responses were "the coating does not work", "coating is no good".."needs to be more slippery"..... been there, done that.

What we in fact discovered, that there was nothing wrong with the coatings and provided exactly what was requested by manufacturers, bonded and very slippery.

The facts were, that we made the stuff far too slippery, so there was no pressure build up inside barrel to provide speed required to shoot out projectile to hit the target.
I was sent up the proverbial garden path with wrong information and wrong requirements, as to what was actually required for the coatings to work successfully.
As there was no data or information to use at all, as starting reference point, from any source, I had to start again from the beginning.

Until I got rid of all the black magic, "make it more slippery", and, "it will go faster" etc etc... I simply abandoned all the wish list posed, and started looking at engineering aspect requirements that the coatings had to cope with..
Thereafter we began to get success.
When manufacturers supplied product that worked using the new coatings, I got no feed back at all good or bad, as I was always one step away from end users.

I am happy to take on board constructive criticisms, but I cannot simply accept the comment "coating did not work" without detailed explanation of why that comment was made.
Now you have some idea and hopefully some understanding, why I am possibly a little sensitive with such statements.

[Ausglock]

Don. Rifle shooters in Australia ( not pistol calibre rifles) don't care about cast bullets for their rifles. They all use jacketed.
I use jacketed in my 308, 223, 25/06. Why? Because I could not be bothered pizzing around with cast bullets.

Now, If the US rifle shooters wish to do some serious testing, then go right ahead.
I will keep casting and coating pistol bullets.

[Ausglock]

New HI-TEK Zombie Slayer Green.

[Gateway Bullets]

I asked Hi-Tek about a zombie bullet. I don't think he believed me the zombie apocalypse is already starting to happen!

[dverna]

Hi-Tek

By "work", with respect to use in rifles, I mean the coating needs to at least equal what we can do with traditional lubes. The coating should do the following:

Allow velocities of at least 1800 fps and preferably 2500fps with minimal leading for 150 shots AND deliver 2 MOA accuracy. (Look at what Larry Gibson accomplished - a 10 shot group well under 1" @ 2600 fps.) As stated previously, we know coatings will prevent leading but that it not enough, They must also demonstrate accuracy. If, after all this time, the need for accuracy has not been understood this should make it clear. No accuracy = it does not work. All the other benefits mean almost nothing. Do not let the needs of pistol shooters establish the performance requirements of cast rifle bullet shooters.

You state "When things are going OK, no one wants to share, as they seem to wish to guard such results, and especially the manufacturers as they wish to guard their business." All the more reason to take control of the range testing. Sitting there, complaining about it, and accepting it does not make any sense. You do want to prove the product don't you?

There are a few Australian rifle bullet casters on this site. Maybe you should reach out to them. They seem to be good guys and knowledgable. They have a much better understanding than your buddy below.


Ausglock,
I expect better from you.

Your words, "Rifle shooters in Australia (not pistol calibre rifles) don't care about cast bullets for their rifles. They all use jacketed. I use jacketed in my 308, 223, 25/06. Why? Because I could not be bothered pizzing around with cast bullets."

Maybe ALL rifle shooters in Australia shoot jacketed but there are few of Australian boys who frequent this forum and shoot cast. I am not aware of any of them speaking up for Hi-Tek coatings or showing results. Why is that?

"Pizzing around with cast bullets" at rifle velocities requires better casting ability, reloading ability and sometimes better lubes than needed to achieve acceptable pistol performance. I should correct that a bit, if you are going to "pizz around" casting for rifles, you probably need a better lube than Hi-Tek if that is all you have - based on current results.

If your advice to Hi-Tek is to let US rifle shooters do the testing and hope for the best it is poor advice. A perusal of this sub-forum will reveal most of the coating work on rifle bullets is gravitating to PC.

Lastly, saying "I will keep casting and coating pistol bullets" does nothing to address the use of coatings at rifle velocities or help get Hi-Tek to the next level. But that is OK - you are a pistol shooter and the stuff works for you. Your interest (and skills?) end there.


Hi-Tek, I have followed this thread from the beginning. This will likely be my last post. My attempts to steer you in the right direction when it comes to rifle perfomance are my honest and considered opinions. I want to see a better way to get rifle bullets down the bore for my own selfish reasons and hope you find the magic formula. If you achieve success, please post it on the thread "Real Accuracy (2 moa or less) with Coated Rifle Bullets at 1800 fps or greater". This thread is 116 pages of mostly pistol results and "atta boys". Your success will be more readily discoverd in a shorter thread that targets rifle shooters than buried here. The other option is to create your own thread "Hi-Tek at rifle velocities". New members and visitors will not wade thorugh 116 or more pages of stuff that repeats itself and is sometimes meaningless. That is the last modicum of advice. Again, good luck!!!

Before others comment, "Why don't you buy some product and test it?" I am lazy. I have no interest in doing the development work for Hi-Tek. I expect Hi-Tek do to do the work and market their product. If I spend any time on coatings it will be PC because there is no company support for it - and at this time it seems to hold more promise. But the reality is I would rather spend my time working up loads and shooting them with proven coatings/lubes - not testing coatings. Once a better way is discovered I will use it, but the journey, with all its detours and false starts, is of little interest to me - only the destination. I am like the little kid in the backseat, "Are we there yet?!"

With apologies to all I have offended in my frustration. The 115th page of "Simple Hi-Tek" simply broke me, "accuracy does not matter".

Don Verna