SOMETHING TO REMEMBER WHEN WATCHING/READING ABOUT AMMO TESTINGS

[chief38]

First off I make no claims to be a ballistics expert and so the following thoughts are just my own. To me this is just plain common sense.

When selecting a "carry load" I think we've all watched Gel Block, wooden 2x4, Plywood, water bucket & Chronograph tests on Youtube or read about them in the Gun Rags. Even though these tests are better than nothing (I've done some myself), it's my personal opinion that in the real world, a time proven street record is always better but unfortunately, a true street test takes years to compile! This is because testing in a Gel Blocks (or similar) only compares the relative effectiveness and performance of bullets aagainst each other in that particular test media on that particular day out of a particular gun and not in a Human Body wearing different clothing at different times shot out of different guns.

Gel Blocks and water tests have no bones, cartilage, arteries, veins, muscle, tendons, belt buckles, pens, watches, wallets in pockets, etc. to change how a bullet performs when struck. As much as it might not please the public at large, testing on already dead animals might prove to be a much better test media. There are a few "Testers" that do use meat and bones from Cattle and Pigs with Denim covering. Those tests are more accurate representations of real life IMO and at least have some real life scenarios of what a bullet might strike on a human and how it reacts and performs.

Why more relevant test media is not used for SD ammo I can only imagine, and I just wanted to mention this as I think of this each & every time I watch ballistic testing being conducted.

So while Ballistic Gel & Denim does sort of compare one bullet against another in that particular set of circumstances, IMO is does not accurately test bullets for real life performance. Unfortunately for us, Law Enforcement and Media outlets do not readily make this info public to us and so we just have to use what we can see, test ourselves and can "figure out" when it comes to choosing SD ammo. While I have no hard and fast solution, I did want to throw it out for discussion.

 

[alwslate]

All true but there are a few concepts that have been tested countless
times and have been been accepted as valid such as penetration and
shot placement. Out of handguns hard cast WCs and SWCs that cut
flesh and bone have been proven effective against live targets. The idea
of the absolute best SD ammo is generally way over thought.

 

[Jaymo]

Which is why I keep coming back to hard cast WCs and to the FBI load.

 

[stansdds]

Gelatin tests provide a uniform medium for comparing bullet performance, that is all it does and is not a guarantee of similar performance in the real world.



Oh, and it provides fodder for discussions.

 

[rockquarry]

Many seem to rely on the results of sterile "classroom" bullet evaluation in various forms as mentioned above. Along these lines, it seems that a number of concealed carry people (and perhaps others) agonize over things that are really quite insignificant.

There may be some true worth (but if there is, we don't know how much) in examining bullets fired through jello, newspaper, boards, bones, coats, etc.

As a non-expert with a very simple mind, maybe I'm missing something here, but I think it is far more important to learn to shoot well and try a variety of ammunitions, selecting what works best for the individual. Hitting a target with consistency is more important than other considerations. Bullet performance in a glob of jello becomes very secondary.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I think that gelatin is used because it is consistent, which many people consider desirable for COMPARING bullets/loads. Unfortunately, human targets are not consistent. Even if dead (or live) animals were used as a test medium, the results would be more or less random within some limited range, JUST AS THEY ARE IN REAL LIFE.

It seems to me that an intelligent choice is the largest caliber one can handle effectively, slight "overpenetration" as a goal, and a study of anatomy on the off chance that one might actually be able to apply the knowledge. And I still believe that Dick Tracy bullets, wadcutters, and some hollow points have an advantage.

 

[Old_Cop]

Dick Tracy bullets? I am not familiar with this term.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

Watched an old Army training film, probably WW2 vintage based upon weapons, equipment, clothing, etc. Basically, it demonstrated testing of various small arms and ammunition using live goats and sheep as targets, followed by necropsy results detailing actual damages inflicted.

I don't think PETA was around back then.

Most of those old Army films are in the public domain now. That one could probably be found, and I suspect there are others as well.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Dick Tracy bullets? I am not familiar with this term.

Tubular bullets, produced by PMC after the Abe Flatau design of much larger projectiles for the Army. In .38 Spl, they weighed 66 gr, and were sometimes called cookie cutters. In the old Dick Tracy cartoons, the result of being penetrated by a bullet was illustrated as a perfectly cylindrical through-and through, which was approximately what one might expect from a PMC tubular bullet that didn't hit bone.

BTW, they were quite flat-shooting and, in my experience, very accurate. They did shoot quite low, so they were best suited for guns with adjustable sights.

 

[tenntex32]

The Meat Target baby!!!!! (Paul Harrel)

Best gun guy on youtube……..by far.

Here's a video with a couple of .357 and .44 Magnum S&W examples. (And a couple of ruddy Rugers too.)

The meat target part of the video starts at 15:45.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjxryJ9FKVA[/ame]

Dale

 

[LoboGunLeather]

The Meat Target baby!!!!! (Paul Harrel)

Best gun guy on youtube……..by far.

Here's a video with a couple of .357 and .44 Magnum S&W examples. The meat target part of the video starts at 15:45.

YouTube

Dale

I can think of better things to do with ribs.

 

[eb07]

The bullets that have performed well in FBI gel tests have also performed well in actual shootings. Good enough for me.

 

[Univibe]

Something else to remember:

The ER doctor and the medical examiner can't tell from entrance wound, wound track, or exit, what caliber it was, let alone what kind of bullet it was. Hollow points seldom expand in people at handgun velocity, even in .357 mag. Mostly they just whistle on through like FMJ, more or less.

U-vibe carries FMJ NATO on the street. $10/ 50 in quantity. Works as well as wonderslugs.

Shot placement and penetration matter.
The other stuff doesn't.

 

[Firesticks]

The human body does not deal well with hydro-static shock from bullets. The more you can generate the better. Accuarcy (hitting the target proper)first then the needed penetration and finally shock. The more tissue disturbed the better. I will take large cavity hollow points unless I am hunting for meat. All other targets that require damage get hollow points!

 

[ArchAngelCD]

They have to test in jello because every time they ask for volunteers to be shot to test the bullet performance they get no takers.

 

[JohnHL]

When it comes to ammo testings,

"There are lies, damn lies, and ballistics!"

John

 

[stansdds]

Something else to remember:

The ER doctor and the medical examiner can't tell from entrance wound, wound track, or exit, what caliber it was, let alone what kind of bullet it was. Hollow points seldom expand in people at handgun velocity, even in .357 mag. Mostly they just whistle on through like FMJ, more or less.

U-vibe carries FMJ NATO on the street. $10/ 50 in quantity. Works as well as wonderslugs.

Shot placement and penetration matter.
The other stuff doesn't.

Incorrect assumption. Based on reports from surgeons and medical examiners and recovered bullets, hollow point handgun rounds can and do expand as they pass through a body.

 

[federali]

Ballistic Testing

People have been instantly stopped by 22s, 25s and those obsolete .32 and .38 S&W rounds while others have continued fighting with a magazine full of 9mms in their hide.

If there was an accurate and consistent predictor of bullet performance in a live target, think of how boring the forums would be.

 

[zzclancy]

Thanks

The Meat Target baby!!!!! (Paul Harrel)

Best gun guy on youtube……..by far.

Here's a video with a couple of .357 and .44 Magnum S&W examples. (And a couple of ruddy Rugers too.)

The meat target part of the video starts at 15:45.

YouTube

Dale

Thanks for the video. Seems more realistic that the usual mediums.

 

[Duckford]

Keep in mind that ballistics gel is calibrated to be as close to LIVING tissue as possible, this is another reason why it is highly valued. Keep in mind that tissue starts to break down after butchering, this is why beef is left to hang for up to three weeks, its why anything should sit on on the racks or on the hook for at least a few days. I've had premium meat so soft with good marbling, aged properly, you can about push your finger through it. Not only are cuts of meat very different by animal, aging, individual animal, they are no longer real samples of LIVING tissues. World of difference between a live animal's muscle at 99-100 degrees F, pumped up with blood, with full connective tissue not breaking down from aging, that and your lump of pork or beef or lamb that you get from the store that's dead, no longer at living temperatures, muscle breaking down and connective tissues breaking down. Meat tests are some of the worst because people give them 1:1 real world effect to real living tissue, its false legitimacy and a logical fallacy.

That's why the pros don't use dead chunks of flesh. Change a few factors and the meat won't be anywhere close to tissue, change something like temperature you will alter effects greatly, morning fresh bull steak hard as a hockey puck or prime steer aged rib eye? Doens't matter, a dead animal butchered isn't a live animal, or person, in the form and function in any case.

I like Mr. Harell, but this is pure gimmick to get views. People who mock "Jello" for not being real enough are going for a replacement that may be even less accurate and have less real correlation to real targets in real life. I think Lucky Jack thought he was making a good trade, all the while not knowing that maybe his new medium was a massive downgrade.