Bullet Heads.........arrrgh!

[1066]

[QUOTE=himself;6770003]

I been pushing Heads into cases for forty years,

So to you Mr battle of Hastings, why don't you try to be helpful to folk on here instead of being an arse. John F.

I'm always ready to help John, but unfortunately I think this is a case of "horses to water".

[BigDuncs]

http://www.sportsmanguncentre.co.uk/.../Bullet+Heads/

In addition to Kranks, I see that The Sportsman's are also calling bullets 'bullet heads'. Seems like the big ones who are at the sharp end of reloading ie the ones who have a business involved in reloading are taking a somewhat more pragmatic view on terminology than some on here.

I guess it boils down to the word 'bullets' being potentially confusing whereas 'bullet heads' leaves no room for ambiguity with the great British public.

And here was me bollocking my lad last week for calling them bullet heads.

[Randy Bohannon]

I been pushing Heads into cases for forty years, and yes I know all the Jargon you word police like to use just to show the rest of us
how clever you is.
I have reached my mid seventies using words like Bullet heads is a simpler means of explaining to New Shooters than ,
Cannelure , ogive, BC ect, and you know all of the shooters that I have tried to help with reloading and shooting have turned out to be fairly good shooters.
Some are even World Class.
So to you Mr battle of Hastings, why don't you try to be helpful to folk on here instead of being an arse. John F.

How is bullet heads simpler, it's two words where as just "bullets" is one?!

[BigDuncs]

How is bullet heads simpler, it's two words where as just "bullets" is one?!

That's why many just drop the 'bullet' part and call them heads.... Honestly

[airgunnut]

Who was it said on here that it's intuitive for (bullet) heads to fit into necks which are above the shoulder......

but what if you load shoulder-less cases, like .357 or 38 special?
I call them bullet heads as it avoids confusion when speaking to other shooters who dont reload, when buying I usually say 357 heads

[Randy Bohannon]

That's why many just drop the 'bullet' part and call them heads.... Honestly

...

Somewhere DavidTS is screaming like he's s on fire and won't know why until he logs on when gets home from work...

[Randy Bohannon]

but what if you load shoulder-less cases, like .357 or 38 special?

Then they are called bullet headneckandshoulders, for simplicity; bulletHNS for convinience.

I call them bullet heads as it avoids confusion when speaking to other shooters who dont reload, when buying I usually say 357 heads

You're perpetuating this scourge on our land?!

For shame sir!

[richness]

Please for the love of God make this thread stop

[Randy Bohannon]

Please for the love of God make this thread stop

Yup, the mods ought to put a bullet head in it.

[BigDuncs]

Yup, the mods ought to put a bullet head in it.

Very good ......

and probably one of the best points made in the whole thread

[Turnup]

MY comment is nothing less than the truth.

YOUR second comment is somewhat less than the truth, unless you can come up with some obscure and arcane explanation for it that has somehow eluded those of us with average intelligence.

tac

The proposition that the vast majority of the UK population have more than the average number of legs was first explained to me by a Swedish statistician to illustrate the difficulties in properly understanding statistics, even apparently simple things such as averages. He supported his statement thusly:

We can agree, without actual numbers, that there are people in the UK who have no (0) legs, yes?

We can agree, without actual numbers, that there are people in the UK who have one leg, yes?

We could think about people who have partial legs but this would be difficult to define well and anyway these can be disregarded from our thinking for reasons which will become clear later.

We can agree that the vast majority of people in the UK have two legs, yes?

We can agree that there are NO people in the UK with more than two legs, yes?

So adding up all the legs and dividing by the number of people, we can see that the average number of legs for people in the UK is some numberslightly less than two. Accounting for partial legs would further reduce the average and so does not lead to error in our reasoning.

The vast majority of people, have two legs, and this is MORE than the average number of legs.

QED

[223AI]

The proposition that the vast majority of the UK population have more than the average number of legs was first explained to me by a Swedish statistician to illustrate the difficulties in properly understanding statistics, even apparently simple things such as averages. He supported his statement thusly:

We can agree, without actual numbers, that there are people in the UK who have no (0) legs, yes?

We can agree, without actual numbers, that there are people in the UK who have one leg, yes?

We could think about people who have partial legs but this would be difficult to define well and anyway these can be disregarded from our thinking for reasons which will become clear later.

We can agree that the vast majority of people in the UK have two legs, yes?

We can agree that there are NO people in the UK with more than two legs, yes?

So adding up all the legs and dividing by the number of people, we can see that the average number of legs for people in the UK is some numberslightly less than two. Accounting for partial legs would further reduce the average and so does not lead to error in our reasoning.

The vast majority of people, have two legs, and this is MORE than the average number of legs.

QED

Did it really need explaining?

A basic understanding of averages means if there is one person in the uk with 1 leg, everyone else has a higher than average number, provided by average you mean the mean, which is the common understanding of the word.

[Randy Bohannon]

Did it really need explaining?

Not to the median member.

[Ranyhyn]

http://www.sportsmanguncentre.co.uk/.../Bullet+Heads/

In addition to Kranks, I see that The Sportsman's are also calling bullets 'bullet heads'. Seems like the big ones who are at the sharp end of reloading ie the ones who have a business involved in reloading are taking a somewhat more pragmatic view on terminology than some on here.

I guess it boils down to the word 'bullets' being potentially confusing whereas 'bullet heads' leaves no room for ambiguity with the great British public.

And here was me bollocking my lad last week for calling them bullet heads.

Pre-freakin-cisely
Some of the main reloading suppliers just call them 'heads'

[waterford103]

Yet the folks who actually MAKE then call them what they are - BULLETS , Sierra actually call themselves BULLETSMITHS not HEADSMITHS ! I suppose in this lazy casual world it's ok for ignorant folks to call them h_ads , I can't bring myself to utter that word instead of BULLETS .