Originally Posted by petepeterson

I always feel like a naysayer when it comes to ammo, but I feel that these things are way over-analyzed. Can it hurt to have the newest whiz-bang ammo? Probably not. But how much does it help?

I believe that the better-placed shot will perform better. All things being equal, maybe the new Speer neutron-depleted rocket propelled 151-gr JHP ($1/rd) does more tissue damage than the Federal 147-gr Hi-Shok ($.30/rd) from 20 years ago, but what is the ratio, really? Is the new stuff a 98, and the old stuff a 96, given the same placement? (Note: Strictly made-up numbers- no need to tell me that a .45 would then be a 110...)

Not raining on the parade, because ballistics and performance is a really fun subject. It just seems like we play into every marketing scheme that comes down the pike. Like mentioned above, how much better is it than Federal's own HST, which is pretty highly regarded?