Except for PMC, they all lie! [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Except for PMC, they all lie!


KindaBigBullet
02-20-2011, 23:09
I came across this vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SycE87lPBFQ

I can't believe how much they lie by. Where do they get there numbers?

bel970
02-21-2011, 00:04
you'd have to know what they were using for a test barrel, may not have even been a barrel for a specific handgun and I doubt all the manufactures used barrels to the same specs to get their velocity numbers. start reading the fine print (or dig around the manufactures web site) and you'll find that for 9mm most manufactures use a 5'' barrel, what percentage of shooters have anything with a 5'' barrel (outside of 1911s)?

NeverMore1701
02-21-2011, 04:51
you'd have to know what they were using for a test barrel, may not have even been a barrel for a specific handgun and I doubt all the manufactures used barrels to the same specs to get their velocity numbers. start reading the fine print (or dig around the manufactures web site) and you'll find that for 9mm most manufactures use a 5'' barrel, what percentage of shooters have anything with a 5'' barrel (outside of 1911s)?

Beretta 92 (almost).

KindaBigBullet
02-21-2011, 09:47
I think some of these ammo manufacturers were using a 16" barrel to get an extra 190+ fps on ome of these numbers.

The guy in to video used the same handgun for every shot he chrono'ed. That's a good basis of comparison.

There is another video that this same guy does later with other ammo. Buffalo Bore is another that came very close the numbers they advertise

Brucev
02-21-2011, 10:40
Take any lot of ammo and fire it in a variety of weapons. Velocity will vary. Velocity will also vary from one lot to another using the same weapon. Perfection has not yet been achieved in ammunition or weapons... except of course for Glock.

voyager4520
02-21-2011, 11:19
Most of it was loaded to .40SW velocities or lower. The Winchester Silvertip was the only load I saw that could actually call itself 10mm.

KindaBigBullet
02-21-2011, 14:36
I took all the variables into account.

But what's more important to these numbers are all the constants.

same gun
same barrel length
same location (altitude, temp, wind - give or take)

Not one company listed their product being slower than the numbers shown off the chrono.

There's another video (that I can't find right now) that adds more brands to that existing list. Only 2 brands came close to what they advertise. PMC and Buffalo Bore came within 10-25 fps off while that others exaggerated their numbers by more than 150fps. One of them had the balls to add 190+fps to their actual speed. That's a downn right lie.

Once again, with all the variable that you guys speak of, not one advertised speed was less than actual. Always more, some a lot lot more.

This make me question the power of factory 10mm rounds.

hamburger
02-21-2011, 15:00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcbURf-zT0U&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Here's more

That muck drop in speed takes away quite a bit their calculated energy.

I saw 45acp being chrono'ed and those rounds were off by a little bit. I thin 30 fps tops while most were off by around 10 fps.

TriggerFinger
02-22-2011, 17:55
So...

Double Tap is off by 85 - 193 fps. Most are off by 150+ fps
Car-Bon is off by 3 - 50 fps
BVAC is off by 164 - 184 fps
Elite is off by 23 -36 fps
In some, Hornady and PMC were faster than their listed numbers

From these numbers, I conclude that Elite, Car-Bon, Buffalo Bore, Hornady & PMC of HONEST manufacturers of ammunition. They tested their product and printed those numbers (rounded off) on the package while others (Double Tap) tested their numbers and added almost 200 fps to their's.

So what's the deal with Double Tap? That name is mentioned here a lot, but their numbers doesn't back them up.

fredj338
02-22-2011, 18:53
Not really a lie, more like marketing. You have to determine if the platforms used relate to your own gun. Even then, I have seen as much as 150fps diff between sim guns w/ identical ammo. A chronograph is a *****, never lies.

agtman
02-22-2011, 19:07
Most of it was loaded to .40SW velocities or lower. The Winchester Silvertip was the only load I saw that could actually call itself 10mm.

And that's stretching it, since most who've actually chronographed the 10mm STs aren't seeing anywhere near the alleged "1290fps" that Winchester claims from its 5.5" secret-squirrel test tube, ... :whistling: It's more like 1200-1225fps, and with some reads as low as 1150-80fps. :upeyes: Do a Search down on the 10Ring. With that bullet-weight, 175gns, a high-performance 10mm load should easily do 1300fps, if not closer to 1375fps.

My own experience with PMC's 170gn 10mm load, supposedly clocking @ 1200fps, was more consistently like 1100fps, and that's out of a real-world, 5" S&W 1006.

:cool:

hamburger
02-22-2011, 22:26
Not really a lie, more like marketing. You have to determine if the platforms used relate to your own gun. Even then, I have seen as much as 150fps diff between sim guns w/ identical ammo. A chronograph is a *****, never lies.


The new 2011 Kia Rio at your local Kia dealership comes with a 350hp engine that outputs 400lbs of torque.

Is that marketing or a downright lie?



I can understand if ALL ammo companies were off, but that's not the case. I see that Double Tap was off by the largest margin while some of the other reputable name like Car-Bon were in the realm of "give-or-take" a few fps.

The guy in the video uses a Glock 20. Lots of the ammo company states they tested with a Glock 20 as well. For some reason, the manufacturer's Glock that they use seems to, either be equipted with a 20" barrel or a magig chrono was used.

That's just my take from looking at these velocity that are off by some 190fps.




I'm gonna start selling reload 45acp. Anyone interested?

230gr
1350fps - 4.5" barrel
750ft/lbs muzzle energy
749ft/lbs energy at 100 yards
748ft/lbs energy at 200 yards

TriggerFinger
02-23-2011, 12:19
No Double Taps for me in any caliber

DEADEYEGUY
02-23-2011, 17:36
Some use specia test barrels that squeeze the maximum speed out of the rounds they can get. Most .45 loads are tested out of 5" barrels because forever the full sized 1911 was by far the most common gun to shoot this round. 9mm is usually tested in 4" barrels. .38 Special usually in 4" barrels. That's why so many .38 Special loads don't expand in 2" barrels. Many of the companies are starting to respond to the fact that most civilians and plainclothes LEO's use shorter barrels. Speer Short Barreled ammo and Hornady Critical Defense being examples.
Alot of rounds like the 9mm may be fired out of older weapons that can't take the pressure of more modern versions of the round. That is why even though we call them "+P" they are actually the standard pressure of 9mm rounds throughout the rest of the world. Too many lawyers looking to make a buck. Very few makers load ammo to it's full potential. That's why alot is LEO only. For no other reason except the LEO's agree to not sue them if it shortens th life of their guns.

fredj338
02-23-2011, 18:37
The new 2011 Kia Rio at your local Kia dealership comes with a 350hp engine that outputs 400lbs of torque.

Is that marketing or a downright lie?

I can understand if ALL ammo companies were off, but that's not the case. I see that Double Tap was off by the largest margin while some of the other reputable name like Car-Bon were in the realm of "give-or-take" a few fps.

The guy in the video uses a Glock 20. Lots of the ammo company states they tested with a Glock 20 as well. For some reason, the manufacturer's Glock that they use seems to, either be equipted with a 20" barrel or a magig chrono was used.

That's just my take from looking at these velocity that are off by some 190fps.

I'm gonna start selling reload 45acp. Anyone interested?

230gr
1350fps - 4.5" barrel
750ft/lbs muzzle energy
749ft/lbs energy at 100 yards BTW, these #s would be a lie, as no one could get them regardless of platform
748ft/lbs energy at 200 yards
I would wager you strap you Kia to a dyno & it comes up short of adv HP as well.:upeyes:
NO two guns are the same, even if they come off the line one after the other. A bbl made on Monday's tooling will be slightly diff than one on Firdays. You are going to get diff vel readings. As noted, in some guns as much as 150fps diff w/ same bbl lengths is not unheard of. Revolvers vary more than semiautos & semis more than a single shot. Any ammo manuf is going to put his best numbers up, even if they only came up one time. As always, trust but verify.:whistling:

hamburger
02-24-2011, 09:21
I would wager you strap you Kia to a dyno & it comes up short of adv HP as well.:upeyes:
NO two guns are the same, even if they come off the line one after the other. A bbl made on Monday's tooling will be slightly diff than one on Firdays. You are going to get diff vel readings. As noted, in some guns as much as 150fps diff w/ same bbl lengths is not unheard of. Revolvers vary more than semiautos & semis more than a single shot. Any ammo manuf is going to put his best numbers up, even if they only came up one time. As always, trust but verify.:whistling:

That Kia on a dyno is hp at wheel reading vs hp at crank

Double Tap shot out of a Glock 20 vs Double Tap shot out of a Glock 20 is a fair comparison.

I'm not saying the gun is bad nor the round is bad either. I just don't trust SOME of these ammo companies. The guy that make the video shows every shot reading. The average is way less than Double Tap proclaims

Buffalo Bore was shot multiple times and they seem to be very very close to the numbers advertise. Also their spread was only 39 fps which means they create very consistent rounds. Double Tap 135gr nosler jhp had a speed of 199 fps. Not consistent at all.

cole
02-24-2011, 10:47
I came across this vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SycE87lPBFQ

I can't believe how much they lie by. Where do they get there numbers?

Umm... absolute best case outcomes obtained in controlled conditions designed to get the outcome needed for marketing purposes. They are presented as the norm so you'll buy the ammo. Most marketing is exaggeration at best.

Taterhead
03-04-2011, 15:04
Most of it was loaded to .40SW velocities or lower. The Winchester Silvertip was the only load I saw that could actually call itself 10mm.

My chrony results were a disappointing 1150 fps. Way less than advertised. Firearm was G20. Still in 10mm territory though.

TriggerFinger
03-04-2011, 16:34
My chrony results were a disappointing 1150 fps. Way less than advertised. Firearm was G20. Still in 10mm territory though.

I agree that it is very disappointing when you expect 1200pfs from BVAC and you only get 1000fps.

What I got from these videos is which manufacturers are true to their claims and which ones are BS artists.


To Taterhead : Which ammo did you chrono for 1150fps?

fredj338
03-04-2011, 18:46
That Kia on a dyno is hp at wheel reading vs hp at crank

Double Tap shot out of a Glock 20 vs Double Tap shot out of a Glock 20 is a fair comparison.

I'm not saying the gun is bad nor the round is bad either. I just don't trust SOME of these ammo companies. The guy that make the video shows every shot reading. The average is way less than Double Tap proclaims

Buffalo Bore was shot multiple times and they seem to be very very close to the numbers advertise. Also their spread was only 39 fps which means they create very consistent rounds. Double Tap 135gr nosler jhp had a speed of 199 fps. Not consistent at all.

No, your G20 is not my G20. So you are NEVER going to get the exact same vel readings, if you do, it's a fluke. Again, you expect too much. Anyone that has shot over a chronograph for long understands there are so many variables between each gun; chamber dims, ammo dims, temps, elevation, etc & load that reproducing exact results in another gunm another day is always going to be iffy at best. You take the manuf claim w/ a grain of salt, test their ammo & then decide. In all my years, I have rarley found a manuf vel claim to be even within 30fps of what I can get in my guns. It is what it is, but I doubt it's a lie. More like they once got that vel reading out of a certain gun so there ya go, that is the posted/tested velocity.:dunno:

Dave T
03-05-2011, 20:49
There is a world of difference between the variation from one gun to another and the (expletive deleted) poor results for most of the 10mm ammo tested. With the possible exception of Buffalo Bore and Cor-Bon, factory 10mm barely qualifies as 40 S&W +P.

I chronographed Win 175 STs ten years ago and got 1147 fps from a Glock 20. Last year I got 1164 from a different G20. Both are sadly lacking when the factory claims 1290 fps. Yea, the factory used a 5" and the G20 is 4.6" but it should be more like 50 fps difference, not over 100.

The truth is, if you want 10mm performance (the original requirement was a 200g @ 1200 fps from a 5" bbl) you have to hand load. No other way to get real 10mm performance...unless you can afford Buffalo Bore. I sure can't.

Dave

agtman
03-06-2011, 10:55
I agree that it is very disappointing when you expect 1200pfs from BVAC and you only get 1000fps.

What I got from these videos is which manufacturers are true to their claims and which ones are BS artists.


To Taterhead : Which ammo did you chrono for 1150fps?

Just FYI, but he's referring to the 175gn 10mm ST load, which isn't anywhere near the alleged "1290fps" Winchester claims - and hasn't been since the early '90s. By the way, the factory test barrel for this claimed velocity is 5.5".

Only Ron Reed at Reed's Ammo loaded the STs to a high-performance level, 1300fps, IIRC, and that was from a real-world gun: a 5" Delta, IIRC.

cowboywannabe
03-06-2011, 11:27
if you want true 10mm power Buffalo Bore and Swamp Fox are the only players in the game.

all others like Cor-Bon and the like make MID level powered loads if and when they meet their claimed velocities.

PMC and Hornandy being right on their numbers is nice but that doesnt make them true 10mm powered rounds.

if the Win STHP ever got what Win lies, i mean claims it to do it would be a great 10mm round.

for now, unless you get BB or SF youre only getting .40cal "+p" power.

and DT's velocity claims have been outted on many a youtube video as optimistic at best.

Zombie Steve
03-06-2011, 21:37
If you think that's bad, look at revolver numbers. Everyone either does their testing in a 7-1/2" barrel or they use a universal receiver (no cylinder gap to jump and release gasses). I'm curious if on a universal receiver if they count the chamber in the length of the barrel like they do in autos...

I've never regretted spending money on my chronograph.

Thanks, fred, for mentioning altitude and temperature. Some powders can be finicky in the cold. Altitude doesn't matter as much running over a chronograph 10 feet away, but you can bet it makes a huge difference downrange. Some of y'all have some thick air. :whistling:

hamburger
03-07-2011, 10:10
No, your G20 is not my G20. So you are NEVER going to get the exact same vel readings, if you do, it's a fluke. Again, you expect too much. Anyone that has shot over a chronograph for long understands there are so many variables between each gun; chamber dims, ammo dims, temps, elevation, etc & load that reproducing exact results in another gunm another day is always going to be iffy at best. You take the manuf claim w/ a grain of salt, test their ammo & then decide. In all my years, I have rarley found a manuf vel claim to be even within 30fps of what I can get in my guns. It is what it is, but I doubt it's a lie. More like they once got that vel reading out of a certain gun so there ya go, that is the posted/tested velocity.:dunno:

I'm not arguing your point. I don't think you understand my point.

I understand that there are differences due to unlimited amounts of varibles.

Take all that into account while watching the posted video and i see that some brands have a much much larger variation in their tested ballistics averages and other are very very close and consistant with their numbers.

All tested out of the same gun. it's not like Buffalo Bore was shot out of a 12" barrel while Double Taps were shot out of a 3.5" barrel.

Buffalo Bore's bullet wasn't shot at point blank range while Double Taps were shot at 100yrs away.

Buffalo Bore wasn't shot at sea level compared to Double Taps being shot, tested, and recorded out in the vacuum of outer space.


My point is:
All shot from the same gun
All shot through the same chrono
All shot at the same location
Some were proven that manufacturers' claims are true
Some show a huge exagergeration from manufacturers' claim.

Zombie Steve
03-07-2011, 17:00
I'm not arguing your point. I don't think you understand my point.

I understand that there are differences due to unlimited amounts of varibles.

Take all that into account while watching the posted video and i see that some brands have a much much larger variation in their tested ballistics averages and other are very very close and consistant with their numbers.

All tested out of the same gun. it's not like Buffalo Bore was shot out of a 12" barrel while Double Taps were shot out of a 3.5" barrel.

Buffalo Bore's bullet wasn't shot at point blank range while Double Taps were shot at 100yrs away.

Buffalo Bore wasn't shot at sea level compared to Double Taps being shot, tested, and recorded out in the vacuum of outer space.


My point is:
All shot from the same gun
All shot through the same chrono
All shot at the same location
Some were proven that manufacturers' claims are true
Some show a huge exagergeration from manufacturers' claim.

Point is that even thought they were all shot from the same gun / time / location and we're assuming no monkey business in how the video was put together - it wasn't the same gun / altitude / temp / chrono as when and where the manufacturers tested.

TriggerFinger
03-07-2011, 22:58
Point is that even thought they were all shot from the same gun / time / location and we're assuming no monkey business in how the video was put together - it wasn't the same gun / altitude / temp / chrono as when and where the manufacturers tested.

Shouldn't the difference be proportional?

I'm no quantum physicist, but numbers exposed to the same variable change accordingly

glock20c10mm
03-07-2011, 23:28
Shouldn't the difference be proportional?

I'm no quantum physicist, but numbers exposed to the same variable change accordingly
Very Very Good Point! :agree: Double Tap's box flap claims are so far off that the word "lie" doesn't even quite say it. Then most of the others (10mm loads specifically) aren't even worth the time being 40S&W wannabees. If I wanted the equivalent of 40S&W I'ld have bought a handgun chambered for 40S&W.

Zombie Steve
03-08-2011, 06:09
Well, as an example, I've chronographed .223 using Varget and AA2230 powder at different temps. In the cold, Varget (coated stick powder) was almost unaffected, AA2230 was a big change (ball powder) -almost 120 fps. So because of the powder type, that one temperature variable changed quite a bit.

I'm not saying manufacturers aren't optimistic with their numbers. I'm sure most are. It's just that these things can and do come into play, and not necessarily evenly across the board.

TriggerFinger
03-08-2011, 09:35
Point is that even thought they were all shot from the same gun / time / location and we're assuming no monkey business in how the video was put together - it wasn't the same gun / altitude / temp / chrono as when and where the manufacturers tested.


I think the issue is that the numbers are so far off for Double Tap because they show their 10mm ballistic numbers shot out of a Glock 20 and Glock 29.

The guy who posted the video also shot out of a Glock 20 and compared those numbers to Double Taps Glock 20 numbers.

Unless Double Tap shot out of a Glock 20 with a 12" barrel. Then their numbers make sense compared to the video's.

hamburger
03-08-2011, 09:45
I'm not saying manufacturers aren't optimistic with their numbers. I'm sure most are. It's just that these things can and do come into play, and not necessarily evenly across the board.

Some are more optimistic then others
Some are on point such as Buffalo Bore and PMC
Some (insert double tap here) are down right liars

If there's so many variables, should some of Double Taps claims be out done by others that chrono'ed Double Tap ammo?

Nope. Not the case. Every test shows significantly lower numbers then they claim. Not good to lie to 10mm buyers.

TriggerFinger
03-08-2011, 09:53
Some are more optimistic then others
Some are on point such as Buffalo Bore and PMC
Some (insert double tap here) are down right liars

If there's so many variables, should some of Double Taps claims be out done by others that chrono'ed Double Tap ammo?

Nope. Not the case. Every test shows significantly lower numbers then they claim. Not good to lie to 10mm buyers.

That what I gets from this too.

The "F"ed up part is that lots of 10mm shooters here mention Double Tap as a suggestion along with Buffalo Bore and Swamp Fox, but they are not in the same league.

Before I came across this thread, I thought Double Taps were up there with some other top ammo brands. I stand corrected.

Full power 10mm price for 40 caliber performance is just wrong.

glock20c10mm
03-08-2011, 13:13
That what I gets from this too.

The "F"ed up part is that lots of 10mm shooters here mention Double Tap as a suggestion along with Buffalo Bore and Swamp Fox, but they are not in the same league.

Before I came across this thread, I thought Double Taps were up there with some other top ammo brands. I stand corrected.

Full power 10mm price for 40 caliber performance is just wrong.
Yeah, there are quite a few out there still first learning that DT just isn't the way to go anymore. No question the word is getting out though!:rant:

As for your last sentence, right on! That would be like 38Spcl shooters paying 357Mag prices. It's beyond BS.:fist: