|
|
03-11-2017, 10:00 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Triad Area North Carolina
Posts: 1,613
Likes: 1,184
Liked 2,027 Times in 826 Posts
|
|
Wow ..why do i NOT want this in my shield ??
Any members here more knowledged than I please respond as to why i don't want the Civil Defense 45 acp round in my shield. Have you seen the gel test?
__________________
Hipcocked45
Last edited by dben002; 03-11-2017 at 10:07 PM.
|
03-11-2017, 11:41 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 3,323
Likes: 1,771
Liked 7,345 Times in 1,910 Posts
|
|
Look at the Liberty line.
Sure, the recoil is gentle but it doesn't consistently expand OR penetrate deeply.
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self...c-tests/#45ACP
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 02:04 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 665
Likes: 171
Liked 665 Times in 281 Posts
|
|
Federal hst is what you want
|
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 10:32 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Triad Area North Carolina
Posts: 1,613
Likes: 1,184
Liked 2,027 Times in 826 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by V0OBWxZS16
|
I was asking ..as i have not seen any other ammo that creates such a devastating entry wound cavity at approx 2 inches in and over 6 inches wide. That would seem to be a threat ending wound....
__________________
Hipcocked45
|
03-12-2017, 10:47 AM
|
Banned
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Battery Oaks Range, S.C.
Posts: 1,847
Likes: 5,663
Liked 3,574 Times in 1,163 Posts
|
|
I am an old man and I have never understood why people are so carried away with GEL tests. What do they really think it simulates?
|
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 11:36 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Triad Area North Carolina
Posts: 1,613
Likes: 1,184
Liked 2,027 Times in 826 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee's Landing Billy
I am an old man and I have never understood why people are so carried away with GEL tests. What do they really think it simulates?
|
Don't know for sure but would have to guess that if ballistic gel is formulated to FBI specifications it is the closest thing we have to simulate human tissue and gives "some" comparison base for testing effects of different ammo. Why else would they use it
__________________
Hipcocked45
|
03-12-2017, 12:56 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,162
Likes: 3,627
Liked 5,213 Times in 2,175 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee's Landing Billy
I am an old man and I have never understood why people are so carried away with GEL tests. What do they really think it simulates?
|
It seems to simulate naked bellies fairly well, and its main motivation for use is that it is uniform and can be used for controlled lab testing with repeatable results. The disadvantage is that the similarity to hits on a real mammalian body, other than the NAKED BELLY, is ephemeral at best. A fragile bullet can blow up on a wrist bone and do little to no damage to the body behind it. A thick leather coat can similarly stop it.
I am not a great fan of "trick" bullets that seem to produce good results only under very specific, limited conditions. When I go deer hunting, I want a sturdy, expanding, penetrating bullet, and humans are similar in size to a deer.
__________________
Science plus Art
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 01:23 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 7,352
Likes: 7,554
Liked 5,591 Times in 2,563 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dben002
Don't know for sure but would have to guess that if ballistic gel is formulated to FBI specifications it is the closest thing we have to simulate human tissue and gives "some" comparison base for testing effects of different ammo. Why else would they use it
|
They use it because it's the best they can do, which is VERY POOR. You see any bones in that gelatin? And if there were, the results would vary TREMENDOUSLY from shot to shot, which is not usually the best way to test one ammo against another, which is really what testing is about.
This is not a criticism of the FBI, which is doing the best it can. But don't try to invalidate LLB's comment by dreaming that if the FBI uses it, it's good. It isn't.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 01:39 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: SW VA
Posts: 262
Likes: 282
Liked 496 Times in 173 Posts
|
|
Gel testing does give us a tool for evaluating ammo on a somewhat level playing field. As close to scientific method tests as we have right now....but...
I wonder if the ammo companies are just designing rounds for the greatest WOW effect in gel test videos??? It's a good way to sell magic bullets....
Not bashing the ammo in question, I know zero about it.
If it hits where you aim and works in your gun you're 95% there!
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 02:14 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Wrong side of Washington
Posts: 10,195
Likes: 13,018
Liked 17,137 Times in 5,148 Posts
|
|
Your choice. But I quit getting excited about new fangled ammo years ago. Instead I choose to base my ammo selection on what law enforcement uses that has been proven on the street.
Off the top off my head the top two seem to be Federal HST and Speer Gold Dot.
__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!
|
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 02:52 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 16,601
Likes: 7,342
Liked 17,200 Times in 7,303 Posts
|
|
I use whats proven. Doesn't get any simpler. GD and HST
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-12-2017, 06:06 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 16,601
Likes: 7,342
Liked 17,200 Times in 7,303 Posts
|
|
Gun doesn't know the difference between 200 and 220 and 50fps +/-. And one doesn't do anything better than the other.
Gel test work because it simulates human tissue and it can be used to judge one manufacturer vs another. Want to know what your bullet does in soft flesh? Shoot something living....or....shoot gel. Only way you can see what a FMJ does compared to HP, how it does it and when it does it. Otherwise it's just a guessing game. No you cannot put the human element to gel but you also can't just shoot humans. Another thing is you can't count on the human element. One person may die from a 22 and the next will survive 6 shots of 357 to the chest (happened in 1994). You're testing the bullet not the person
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
|
03-13-2017, 04:21 AM
|
|
Moderator SWCA Member Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northeast PA, USA
Posts: 8,877
Likes: 1,029
Liked 5,070 Times in 2,660 Posts
|
|
I have to agree, IMO the Federal HST and Speer GDHP ammo are the best available today.
__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-13-2017, 09:12 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Mid-MO
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Liked 124 Times in 44 Posts
|
|
JMO, but if you really want to know how a handgun bullet works talk to a deer hunter.
|
03-13-2017, 08:14 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 3,323
Likes: 1,771
Liked 7,345 Times in 1,910 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchAngelCD
I have to agree, IMO the Federal HST and Speer GDHP ammo are the best available today.
|
I would add the Winchester Ranger to that. I have a lot of Hornady Critical Defense/Critical Duty which I'm trying to use and replace with the three listed here. The Hornady is good but not "best".
|
03-13-2017, 08:35 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 504
Likes: 241
Liked 310 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dben002
I was asking ..as i have not seen any other ammo that creates such a devastating entry wound cavity at approx 2 inches in and over 6 inches wide. That would seem to be a threat ending wound....
|
It doesn't create a devastating entry wound cavity. The threat-ending targets within the human body are the brain, upper spinal cord, heart, and pulmonary arteries. Those targets are several inches deep from a perfect frontal shot and if you are only offered an angle or the bad guy's arms are in the way then significant penetration is required.
For pistol bullets you want loads and projectiles that do not fragment and perform well in the IWBA or FBI test protocols which evaluate penetration depth, expansion reliability, and barrier penetration.
The links I provided before can explain things better and more completely than I can here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee's Landing Billy
I am an old man and I have never understood why people are so carried away with GEL tests. What do they really think it simulates?
|
It was designed to simulate tissue. It provides almost the same effect on the bullet as tissue (that "equal and opposite" stuff we all learned in school.) This allows evaluation of projectile deformation and penetration in tissue.
Testing with bones embedded in the gelatin and comparisons between gelatin and real life have been done:
http://publications.gc.ca/collection...-2-1995-1E.pdf
http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fac...hester_9mm.pdf
Last edited by V0OBWxZS16; 03-13-2017 at 08:37 PM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
03-14-2017, 12:36 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountains of Colorado
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 2,438
Liked 6,649 Times in 1,840 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee's Landing Billy
I am an old man and I have never understood why people are so carried away with GEL tests. What do they really think it simulates?
|
I have to agree. I use downed big game animals as my test medium. As soon as I arrive at a downed elk, deer, or antelope, I prop it up and test varying calibers and bullets. The results very often differ from gel. Last year I used a model 36 2" and Winchester 110 grn hollow points and 125 grn Remington Golden Sabre on a small mule deer buck that had just been hit by a car. None of the 4 bullets I fired exited the broadside ribcage shots I took. Later that year I shot a similar sized mule deer buck on the last day of season. I propped him up and used my Ruger LCP and Buffalo Bore 95 grn flat point full metal jackets. Two shots through the ribcage and one through the neck and every bullet exited and went whistling across the mountains. This was winter time and the deer had a heavy coat of fur. From the you tube videos I have not seen such performance as I experienced.
|
03-14-2017, 07:58 AM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 7,352
Likes: 7,554
Liked 5,591 Times in 2,563 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by V0OBWxZS16
It was designed to simulate tissue. It provides almost the same effect on the bullet as tissue (that "equal and opposite" stuff we all learned in school.)
|
Which tissue?
|
03-14-2017, 01:49 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Hancock County Ohio
Posts: 710
Likes: 2,507
Liked 525 Times in 235 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee's Landing Billy
I am an old man and I have never understood why people are so carried away with GEL tests. What do they really think it simulates?
|
Cheaper than using cadavers and much less public outrage.
Like any other scientific evaluation, a universal control is needed to translate data between different companies.
|
03-15-2017, 05:08 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 504
Likes: 241
Liked 310 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Model520Fan
Which tissue?
|
Muscle tissue. It's supposedly the most difficult to penetrate.
|
03-16-2017, 07:40 AM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 7,352
Likes: 7,554
Liked 5,591 Times in 2,563 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by V0OBWxZS16
Muscle tissue. It's supposedly the most difficult to penetrate.
|
More difficult than bone?
|
03-16-2017, 11:51 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 504
Likes: 241
Liked 310 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Model520Fan
More difficult than bone?
|
I meant soft tissue not bone.
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|