Waiting on my new batch of 200's from Kevin, but it looks like he has stepped them up! This fellow 10mm shooter did a good job on these videos. Poor DT!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C7OEG_OlhU&feature=channel&list=UL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAvoeJRUtds&feature=channel&list=UL
Just got a box in yesterday of the 200's XTP.Man it topped at 1299 on that video you posted.
Those are moving right along!
Oddly the DoubleTap hasn't been working shooter to shooter.
I just clocked the Underwood 180 GD and 200 XTP a few days ago. This ammo was purchased from Underwood within the last three weeks. Fired in a Glock 20 with KKM 4.6" barrel.
The 180 Gold Dots averaged 1308 fps, but the 200 XTP's only managed 1167 fps....
Sounds about right out of a Glock 4.6" barrel. I think his 200's have changed now though and I haven't been able to get up with him to see what my order is.
Quote200 XTP's only managed 1167 fps....
Buffalo Bore rates their 200gr 10mm ammo at 1140 ft/s from a Glock 20. So, Underwood is good.
I like the videos! That Underwood was cookin'! Good work.
Quote from: harrygunner on June 22 2012 03:46:10 PM MDT
Quote200 XTP's only managed 1167 fps....
Buffalo Bore rates their 200gr 10mm ammo at 1140 ft/s from a Glock 20. So, Underwood is good.
The tester in that first video above got 1265 avg in a 4.6" bbl with the Underwood 200 XTP......100 fps faster than my batch, while my 180's were right in line with other shooter's results. My understanding is that the Underwood velocity ratings ARE from a 4.6" bbl.
Not ragging on Underwood at all, I'm very pleased with the quality of his stuff. But my particular lot of 200 XTP does seem to be slower than other reports I've seen. No matter as I bought these just to try and normally shoot handloads. Interesting stuff nonetheless.
Dan
Look tomorrow for my testing of Underwood 200's. If I get my .44 tomorrow I may just do them then. FWIW I averaged about 1212 FPS on the old 200's out of the 4.75" barrel.
I have some 155's that I want to do too which are EXTREME!!!
Sad to hear about the Double Tap ammunition. I thought that it would have performed better than that. :-[
Scott
I feel the 10mm community owes Double Tap a debt because they lead the charge on bringing full power 10mm ammo out. Hat's off to them for taking the risk and showing that a robust if small market existed.
But, they have certainly been eclipsed in performance by other boutique makers who have followed their lead.
Quote from: sqlbullet on June 25 2012 08:47:34 AM MDT
I feel the 10mm community owes Double Tap a debt because they lead the charge on bringing full power 10mm ammo out. Hat's off to them for taking the risk and showing that a robust if small market existed.
But, they have certainly been eclipsed in performance by other boutique makers who have followed their lead.
True Mike McNett was the first to come out with "full power" 10mm ammo. He started out with 4 loads in 10mm, and now he's where we see him today. And at one time his ammo did chrono relatively close to advertised specs. A couple of years or so went by when good 'ol Mike decided to double-cross us. First, true velocity fell below anything reasonable compared to his advertised claims which is where we're still at today.
Second, when he first introduced Montana Gold bullets to his lineup he decided not to let anyone in on it, allowing it to be a rude awakening to the purchaser when it showed up at their front door (we still thought we were getting XTPs that he listed as "controlled expansion"). And to top it all off, with lowered velocity we still get the pressure signs as when the ammo was loaded at higher velocity, suggesting he switched to a faster burning powder, I can only guess, to save money.
And now that he considers himself above the rest of us, he's disappeared off the face of the map (even from his own forum where he'll only show up to post "sales" and such, disappearing as quickly as he popped in) and clearly doesn't care what any of his customer base thinks.
So, that said, I would consider the "debt" paid, and that he was lucky to get what he got when he did, putting him where he's at today, still treating us like we don't matter and never did, while at the same time going against what he preached from the git-go. Maybe it's hard to tell, but I will NEVER purchase Double Tap ammo ever again. Many others don't anymore and won't either. And to that end, Rock On Underwood! ;)
I agree with 'REDLINE'. Things started out well (we should thank him for that), but lots of issues started popping up on Internet sites and McNett did not appear to respond.
Five years ago, I emailed and called, leaving messages over a three or four week period. I wanted to pick up another 1-2K rounds on my way back from Wyoming. My drive took me through Cedar City, UT on the 15 Fwy. No response of any kind. Guess that kept me from picking up weaker loads and bullets not intended for self-defense.
Funny, today, after five years, I received not one, but two emails from Double Tap. He's offering a 15% discount until the Fourth of July.
Wonder if he's feeling the competition from Underwood and others. I've bought from Underwood and will continue to do so. I think Underwood has gotten our point about what we want.
Here is a picture of some Double Tap, 200gr hard cast posted on the cast boolits forum. http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=166926 (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=166926)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/cadjak/Misc%20Firearms/10mm%20guns%20and%20ammo/photobucket-30932-1349209469438.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/cadjak/Misc%20Firearms/10mm%20guns%20and%20ammo/photobucket-35359-1349209655408.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/cadjak/Misc%20Firearms/10mm%20guns%20and%20ammo/CIMG3413_zps6cec3ffb.jpg)
Quote from: ennis on October 18 2012 08:41:35 PM MDT
Here is a picture of some Double Tap, 200gr hard cast posted on the cast boolits forum. http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=166926 (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=166926)
How in the HE double hockey sticks did that get past? I read the thread, and I can't believe anyone would even entertain the idea this happened AFTER it went into service. That's a bad bullet, without ANY doubt. Cold mold, whatever, it left DT that way. Mike owes free ammo for a year, after that mess.
I have some DT hardcast made about five years ago. Looked decent back then. If only they kept doing what they started out doing.
Fortunately, there's Underwood. I bought some of his 200gr XTP rounds.
For Kevin's sake, we are going to have to suggest he change his warning on his website and boxes. He names Colt and uses the words "complete lack of support". Better if he states some barrels do not meet his requirements or some other opinion.
Maybe only 290 degrees of unsupported (Delta on the left) :o
(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/528347_417434484961256_107247788_n.jpg)
That's insane.
Quote from: harrygunner on October 19 2012 06:17:20 PM MDT
I have some DT hardcast made about five years ago. Looked decent back then. If only they kept doing what they started out doing.
Fortunately, there's Underwood. I bought some of his 200gr XTP rounds.
For Kevin's sake, we are going to have to suggest he change his warning on his website and boxes. He names Colt and uses the words "complete lack of support". Better if he states some barrels do not meet his requirements or some other opinion.
They (Underwood) are dead-on accurate with that statement/advice. The support issue warning is unique to the DE. Sure, there are "less supported" chambers, but none like the DE. Intercooler's pic is not a cartoon. If there ever was a "complete lack of support", that's it.
I'm looking at this from the point of view of a business owner. My company has never been sued, but it is in a sensitive industry where product liability must be carefully managed.
Given that the warning is an absolute statement, it's indefensible and could be viewed as demeaning or slanderous.
Underwood is a small company and can't afford large legal fees. This won't go to court. Colt would likely send a letter and Kevin would simply change the wording. It would be better to state the specified barrels do not meet Underwood requirements or some other wording of company policy/procedures.
Every time I read that warning, it brings up this concern in my mind and I simply want to make sure one of our favorite vendors stays safe.
You do realize Kevin sells Delta specific ammo? That should cover his bases on anything dealing with a Colt. I don't know many Lawyers that would want to fight a case against a MFG when they have such warnings on other ammo but also carry a specific product line tailored to one specific pistol. It's like trying to protect an idiot from himself and stands on it's own.
Everything I read here seems to want Kevin to go backwards on his 10mm. McNett and Buffalo Bore to the best of my knowledge put no warnings or have seperate line for the Deltas. Which is worse?
How is staying at the advertised 1250fps for 200XTP, while not erringly going beyond to 1300fps, downgrading?
Are you basing it being dangerous or bad on 1300 FPS like a speed limit? The Armscor 180gr that split on me and showed flattened primers were around 1200-1250 FPS. I just look at my brass and some people measure the cases with a micrometer.
In regard to 800X, yes. Compared to other ammo, no.
Quote from: harrygunner on October 20 2012 01:17:55 PM MDT
I'm looking at this from the point of view of a business owner. My company has never been sued, but it is in a sensitive industry where product liability must be carefully managed.
Given that the warning is an absolute statement, it's indefensible and could be viewed as demeaning or slanderous.
Underwood is a small company and can't afford large legal fees. This won't go to court. Colt would likely send a letter and Kevin would simply change the wording. It would be better to state the specified barrels do not meet Underwood requirements or some other wording of company policy/procedures.
Every time I read that warning, it brings up this concern in my mind and I simply want to make sure one of our favorite vendors stays safe.
As Intercooler said, I don't think they have anything to worry about. The picture speaks a thousand words. If Colt could prove the statement untrue, perhaps they'd have something. It's only libel if it's untrue, or maliciously damaging with no evidence to substantiate the statement. Many products make similar statements. If Underwood only stated to not use the ammo in a Colt DE, a lot more shooters would do it anyway. Giving a very specific reason may make a shooter take a look, knowing what to look for. Sounds like MORE responsible, rather than LESS. Ammunition is a dangerous business, and things still go wrong under the best of circumstances. Underwood is only warning against a dangerous potential, and giving a specific reason for it. They'd be more likely sued if they only warned to not use the ammo in specific pistols, alone. To say consumers shouldn't use the product in "some" firearms would be wholly irresponsible. Colt isn't suffering any damage. However, they might if the wrong ammo blew up one of their guns. Colt only specifies they warrant use with commercially available ammo. They don't specify which ammo shouldn't be used. Perhaps they should?
FYI, Kevin will be changing the wording of the warning. He said once he read the warning, he got my point.
In some ways, businesses need to be like the "gray man" mentioned in self-defense discussions. Avoid unnecessary issues. Wastes time if not money.
The crazy thing is the other guys put nothing.
The issue wasn't about having a warning or not. I think a warning is good.
The issue was the wording of the warning. Kevin is simply going to change it to something that makes the point without the hyperbolic phrasing.
That's what Armscor did. DoubleTap and BB don't have anything on the box or website.
It comes down to honesty for me! I am not going to buy ammunition from DT because of the lies they tell about their ammo. I buy Underwood for their honesty in the product they sell.
I feel if a company is dishonest about their velocities, what else are they doing wrong?
I'm trying to cut DoubleTap a little slack where I can. In 9mm and .357 recently they tested out good. I haven't shot enough of their 10mm to pass judgement but when I have they aren't totally off in my pistols.
In a way I think we may have had people taking a stock Glock and doing their testing with that. No change in recoil spring and let her go!
In a Glock striker fire you have a recoil spring. In a standard pistol you have a recoil spring, hammer/hammer spring to counteract the slide movement back (unlocking). Much of the performance could be lost right there. At any rate Buffalo Bore and DoubleTap are to costly to shoot any quantity of. Underwood and PBR seem to be the better options there and so far neither fail to meet claims.
Leaving Utah now. Drove in last night, passing Cedar City where Double Tap is located. Reminded me of the change of attitude about them. Hope they start listening to their customers. That's the only way to build a successful business.