View Single Post
Old 01-13-2006, 14:51   #141
B_Easy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally posted by Derringer
That's it, avoid the subject of performance. Just resort to personal attacks.
If you don't have anything to say except cliches and parroting the same things over and over again not many useful ideas can be gleaned.
RBCD is NOT the answer to all shooting scenarios.
I carry gold dots and black hills 124+p for certain things in addition to RBCD.

The small arms munition market is worth 3 BILLION plus currently,
and some of that money goes to the "experts". when companies hand out money a few tend to agree with big guys to keep on the gravy train.

I've yet to see what's different about it.

The animal tests I've seen show that it's regular old high velocity low weight ammo.

By the way, the #'s listed on the website are FALSE

The penetration depths reflect the round in gel, where it doesn't fragment, while the cavity diameters reflect the round in animal tests, where it DOES fragment, but doesn't penetrate due to little retained mass.

In other words, they're tying together two separate tests to make their ammo seem worthwhile.

Of course it looks like it works, the wounds are massive in diameter, but the depth of them is less than impressive.
__________________
They say that sleep is the cousin of death, so my eyes are wide open, 'cause a dream is kin to your last breath.
B_Easy is offline   Reply With Quote