Ammo Development Questions?

I am certainly no business giant of understanding but I have a few questions that maybe others understand better than I do.

I understand that it costs a lot to develop a reliably expanding bullet for each cartridge a manufacturer markets. There are also just a few major players in the police/personal defense civilian caliber market. That all said, it would seem to me, and I assume I may be wrong here, that there should be constant endeavors to improve so as to one-up the competition to build a better product within reason of course and budgets. There would seem to be a need for a uniform testing agency to guarantee the quality just as there is for say automobile safety since peoples lives hand in the balance on said products used by police and for self defense. Would such development not qualify for governmental grants at least as pertained to the development of Law Enforcement Ammo?

If, the answer to my above question is yes; it would seem to me there should be more and faster cartridge development going on. Just my thinking.

Please see my CLARIFICATION post below for more clarification of what I am saying as there is clearly a misunderstanding.

The government should set ammo standards? A new government agency?

What could possibly go wrong?

I don't have the answer. All I know is regardless of what ammo manufacturers come up with, it's hard to beat a 230 gr. FMJ .45 ACP round.

__________________
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS

Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) sets standards for ammunition, and the FBI developed testing protocols which all manufactures (that I know of) try to meet in some way. I'm not sure we need another organization to cover this. What would be the advantage?

Why would you want the government to be involved in that? Private ammo companies do fine.

What ammo is not performing up to your expectations?

The ammo companies have been spending money on bullet development and even cartridge development for a while. They have made a lot of progress, particularly on bullets.

I disagree with your claim that there is a need for a uniform testing agency. We who think that we know something about bullets and ammo cannot agree on testing methods. Myself, I believe that the FBI, of all people, have developed a fairly decent test protocol, yet it is expensive, and not everybody thinks much of it. And it still only evaluates bullet performance. Remember shot placement, penetration, and angels dancing on the head of a pin? And there is a lot of luck in that shot placement thing.

__________________
Formerly Model520Fan

So, we have three ballistics...

Internal - SAAMI

External - SAMMI

Terminal - FBI testing protocols

I'm not seeing a need for anything else.

No, that is NOT what I am saying. read my post again, please.

CLARIFICATION

I guess I am not making myself clear.

I am NOT speaking about a regulatory group or agency but an assisting group to assist private companies in ammo and bullet development in the same manner that the Department of Defense and different Agencies of the US Government have aided Universities and various Researchers in making advances in their projects via financial Research aid grants . Since this field (advancement in Law Enforce Ammunition) aids Law Enforcement Nation Wide it would seem to be a viable option at least to me. Does this make what I am try to get across clearer?

When I was at Eastern New Mexico University the school's Psychology Dept.(my major was Psychology) was part of a US Army project into the psychological manipulation of the human mind in order to reprogram the most seriously mentally ill into a more healthy way of "being" but it also had "military" ramifications so was partly funded by the US Army. Even though I was an undergraduate I took over a year's worth of post graduate classes for undergraduate credit and thus studied some of the results.

Lemme answer a question with a question(s):

Is bullet effectiveness and testing something that could be politicized, to encourage a particular outcome?

Would it be useful/profitable for a company to lobby for government standards slanted towards its own products? How would this affect actual product performance?

Would a bullet even need to function for a government to rate it as top-notch, based on some perceived political need?

Last question: How does the need for consistent testing of bullets that life may depend on compare to the government's handling of, say, medicines that life may depend on? Does anything other than "best results for the consumer" ever rear it's head there?

First (this is just cynical me) if there were an "agency" or institutuion dedicated to obective investigation and assessment of terminal ballistics compared to a standard, private enterprise would suffer. This is because there would me no room for the BS we know as marketing. Can you imagine the whining and weaseling that congress would display when it came time to establish and fund such an entity? Never gonna happen.

Second, and on a more practical note, handgun technology has peaked. A Colt Walker .44 wil stop a fight about as well as a high-capacity plastic wonder 9 with an RDS and hollowpoints. We are in an era of the refinement of that techmology, and incremental improvements in the capacity, sighting systems, weight saving, recoil control, corrosion resistance, reliabilty, ergonomics and size are not going to be revolutionary, or even really surprising to anyone.

What's needed in the SD marketplace is a concealable, convenient technology that will instantly and reliably incapacitate any violent physical threat, and be non-lethal at the same time. Tasers, etc. are a step in that direction, but we are likely decades away from any practical device. Everybody will want one. Every school teacher and Baptist minister will have one. They probably won't even look like a gun.

Why don't Romulan phasers don't have a "stun" setting? I guess they are just big meanies.

Do you have a source on that? Developing new cartridges would seem to involve a lot more cost and the manufacturers do it all the time. Many go the way of the dodo, but ammo manufacturing has long been the most profitable segment in the industry.

We’ve got quite a selection to choose from...
Speer
Hornady
Federal
Winchester
Remington
Norma
Fiocchi
COR BON
Sellier Bellot

————————————————-

I’m a firm believer in allowing market competition to drive development. It’s proven to be the best system known to man. If the manufacturers thought a “uniform testing agency” for projectiles would be beneficial, they’d organize one or push for an expansion of SAAMI.

Grant money doesn’t fall from the sky. It’s either extorted from tax payers, or handed out by private trusts/foundations. These non-profits are typically formed to avoid taxation and often have an agenda well outside of their stated mission. Non-profits, especially at the highest levels, represent some of the most blatant abuses written into our tax codes.

We’ve got a huge selection of quality bullets to chose from in todays market and many of them outperform anything previously available.

Expansion is just one aspect of bullet performance. In some cases, expansion can be detrimental (large, heavy skinned game, heavy garments, windshields, etc...). The shooter need to choose the right cartridge/bullet for the job and most of the time it’s a compromise between expansion, penetration and weight retention.

The industry doesn’t need to worry about better bullets; we got plenty of great ones already. They need to focus on producing more bullets, more ammo and more primers.

__________________
"I also cook."

Perhaps the State of California would be interested in
taking up your idea.

You don't have to assume we don't understand you. We understand what you're saying. We just don't agree with you. The free enterprise system of economics works perfectly fine and is only damaged when government gets involved.

What problem do you perceive that needs to be corrected? You've not stated that in any of your posts on the subject.

And remember, when you talk about "government funding", remember that the government has no money. The only money the government spends is confiscated from us citizens. So let's keep any government intervention out of the firearms and ammo business.

I read about the Gyro-Jet handguns and carbines with it's rocket powered ammo in the 1960's ... I fully expected development to be up there with heat seeking laser guided computer controlled ammo ... program in your target and shoot it 5 miles away ... but development got sidetracked with those dumb Star Trek Phasers ...then Star Trek gets canceled ...what a shame , lost in the weeds!
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

Of the listed ammo companies who exactly makes the most reliable expanding self-defense HP ammo? In my opinion, only Federal in their HST line and Winchester in their Ranger T-Series for the most commonly used self-defense/police oriented loadings. That is just my personal opinion but I believe there is a LOT of room for improvement from many companies and manufacturers to optimize both expansion with optimal penetration than is taking place. The US Government finds money to study the sex lives of hundreds of insects via University professor grants and untold dubious projects across the nation but can't do this? Really?

This is the last time I will respond to this thread as it is obviously going nowhere!

The thread actually started nowhere, so it didn't have far to go.

Gun owners as a group don't want government intervention in our lives. Why would we want them to somehow help fund "the magic bullet"? Considering how the government generally feels about private gun ownership, each government funded bullet would have a serial number on it and a microchip in it.

YkcorCal, see my post above. It's maybe part of the answer you're looking for, albeit it's only a .22LR, but this one's a little different. Smaller hole, of course, but if this new bullet/cartridge works, that's proof that companies are working on it!
Jeff T.

__________________
There's a Monster on the loose

Private companies are doing this fine all on their own. Just one example is Federal who has developed many different defensive loads over the years including...
Hydrashock
HST
Punch
Syntech
Hydrashock Deep

Sure there's probably more but this is just one example.

We Had the Black Talon from the early 90s by Winchester and it was "a better mouse trap". An then the lawsuits ended the production of "a better bullet". We do not need the government involved in anything to to with ammo or firearms, yet today, they are trying from what I see on TV this afternoon. I believe excellent bullets are made and sold ever day in the USA, this is my opinion on the subject.

Agreed. There is no shortage of research, development and improvement of bullets, and it is all done by private companies.

One thing I do know is I do not want to get shot with a .22 revolver/pistol or a .500 caliber revolver or anything in between! It's basically, "Feet, don't fail me now!"

__________________
There's a Monster on the loose

If it is'nt broke...........

why spend more $$$ on a new load ?

Only when their ammo stops selling, is it time to start the engine again.