GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-13-2010, 03:55   #381
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
N/Apower,

The following are the current estimated probabilities of BPW playing a role for humans taking an unobstructed hit to the chest for given pressure wave magantudes:

BPW Probablility
500psi = 15%
700psi = 50%
1000psi = 75%
1300psi = 90%

The probability approaches 100% as BPW continues to increase, but will never really reach 100%. The accuracy in the prediction is roughly 10%.




And, since I have time right now, and in case you and/or others want to know, here is why bullet fragmentation increases the level of peak ballistic pressure wave -

If kinetic energy and penetration depth are equal, bullets that fragment create a larger pressure wave than bullets that retain 100% of their mass. This is because the average penetration depth is shorter than the maximum penetration depth. Recall that the average force with no mass loss is given by [COC06c]

Fave = E/d,

where E is the kinetic energy and d is the maximum penetration depth.

If we consider the case of a bullet with some fraction, f, of mass lost to fragmentation, the fraction of retained mass is (1-f) and the average force is then given by

Fave = (1-f)E/d + f E/df,

where df is depth of the center of mass of the bullet fragments. In other words, df is the average penetration depth of the fragments. Most fragments do not penetrate as deeply as the maximum penetration depth d, so that the average fragment penetration depth df can be expressed as a fraction of the maximum penetration depth

df = d/k,

where k is greater than 1. Consequently, the average force becomes,

Fave = (1-f)E/d + f k E/d.

This can be rewritten as

Fave = [1 + f (k-1)]E/d.

So we see that the enhancement factor for the average force is [1 + f(k 1)], where f is the fraction of lost mass, and k describes the relative penetration depth of the mass lost by fragmentation. If the mass lost by fragmentation penetrates of the maximum penetration depth on average, k = 2, and the enhancement factor for the average force is (1+f). In other words, a 40% loss of mass increases the average force (and thus the pressure wave) by 40%.

If the mass lost by fragmentation penetrates ⅓ of the maximum penetration depth on average, k = 3, and the enhancement factor for the average force is (1+2f). In other words, a 40% loss of mass increases the average force (and thus the pressure wave) by 80%.

Consequently, bullets that fragment can create larger pressure waves than bullets that do not fragment but have the same kinetic energy and penetration depth. Most fragmenting bullets have an average fragment penetration depth of ⅓ to of their maximum penetration depth, so that the pressure wave enhancement factor is between (1+f) and (1+2f).

In other words, a bullet which loses 10% of its original mass has a BPW 10-20% larger than one which retains 100% of its original mass. Likewise , a bullet which loses 30% of its original mass to fragmentation has a BPW 30-60% larger than one which retains 100% of its original mass.



Good Shooting,
Craig
__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 04:10   #382
N/Apower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post
You're right, he doesn't get it. Maybe now he will. My fingers are crossed. Now I see he's posted back as I've quoted you.



N/Apower,

Here is some info that should help you understand and answer to your curiousness -

The equation for JHP handgun bullets with 100% mass retention is -
p = (5*E)/(pi*d)

p is the peak pressure wave magnatude on the surphase of a 1" diameter cylinder centered on the wound channel (in psi). E is the impact energy (in ft-lbs) and d is the penetration depth (in feet).

If a JHP bullet fragments then generally whatever % the bullet fragments is the same % you need to add to the PBPW originally figured for nonfragmentation.

For FMJ handgun bullets the equation changes to a reasonable approximation of -
p = (3*E)/(pi*d)

For FMJ rifle bullets there is much more variation because some tumble deep and some tumble at shallow depths and some fragment. The retarding force profile (the more retarding force the greater the PBPW) is dominated by the depth at which a FMJ rifle bullet tumbles.

An FMJ rifle bullet which does not fragment and tumbles late in the penetration (10" or more) will have a peak pressure wave comparable to the formula for FMJ pistol bullets.

An FMJ rifle bullet which does not fragment and tumbles early (first 4") will have a peak pressure wave comparable to the formula for JHP handgun bullets.

You might wonder why PBPW goes up with bullet fragmentation. This involves a bunch more math which I can post if you like, but I don't see that it's necessary. What I do understand is the basic principal which I believe will be simple for you also once you simply basically understand the basic equations above for equating PBPW.

If it is necessary for you, maybe this will help, and it's about as far into as I'ld prefer to get. If kinetic energy and penetration depth are equal, bullets that fragment create a larger pressure wave than bullets that retain 100% of their mass because the average penetration depth is shorter than the maximum penetration depth. Less penetration depth with equal kinetic energy = higher PBPW.


Also, not to rush you, but I did ask you specific questions you haven't answered in your last post. I'm hoping to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.


Good Shooting,
Craig

I skimmed his paper when I first saw it, saw that there was a sample size of 10, noted that he included no real data, and threw it out as unacceptable work based on lack of data/information. It would have gotten an "F" in any intermediate college class he chose to turn it during.

When you asked your question, I half-heartedly went looking for it, and didn't find it, and didn't worry about it.

The numbers above would have you believe that the answer to the problem is the shotgun loaded with bird-shot at close range. However, real-world use of this proves it's fallacy.

On the same hand, it would make one think that hard-cast solids are horrible bullets to use on nasty animals like cape buffalo, etc--yet we know that this is not the case.

Sure, BPW exists, but what does it DO? Whatever it does (or doesn't) do, it's mighty un-predictable. I would much rather choose my tools based on something predictable, like penetration and expansion.

Given the numbers/percentages of probability of BPW, there is a lot wrong with it if you review some OIS's and look at how people kept trucking after multiple shots.

This sticky from this forum shows as much.
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/...eb.htm#page_15

You can talk about BPW all you want, throw all the equations out there you want, etc. but that doesn't make it any more effective.

Last edited by N/Apower; 02-13-2010 at 04:15..
N/Apower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 09:14   #383
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by N/Apower View Post
Sure, BPW exists, but what does it DO? Whatever it does (or doesn't) do, it's mighty un-predictable. I would much rather choose my tools based on something predictable, like penetration and expansion.
If you've read Courtney's work you know he has stated clearly that for self-defense rounds penetration, expansion, accuracy, etc ... are perquisites before any BPW consideration is taken into account.

It truly amazes me how many GT members come to the many BPW threads, begin criticizing BPW theory, and inexplicably hold the incorrect notion that any BPW advocate has asserted BPW is more important than the perquisite factors everyone agrees are of primary importance.
__________________
Rocket Scientist
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 10:47   #384
KenB22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post

The work I do requires I be precise, Glocktalk is not a job... so I'm not required too.
OK Batman. Whatever you say. You have your Pulitzer prize winning story now: The FBI is letting innocent agents die because they are too cheap and uncaring to buy the ammunition that you and everyone with half a brain knows is clearly superior in stopping BG's. I say go for it. I'll set up the meeting with Dan Rather. You can be famous and save lives at the same time. Isn't that what a Batman does??
KenB22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 11:28   #385
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by N/Apower View Post
I skimmed his paper when I first saw it, saw that there was a sample size of 10, noted that he included no real data, and threw it out as unacceptable work based on lack of data/information. It would have gotten an "F" in any intermediate college class he chose to turn it during.

When you asked your question, I half-heartedly went looking for it, and didn't find it, and didn't worry about it.

The numbers above would have you believe that the answer to the problem is the shotgun loaded with bird-shot at close range. However, real-world use of this proves it's fallacy.

On the same hand, it would make one think that hard-cast solids are horrible bullets to use on nasty animals like cape buffalo, etc--yet we know that this is not the case.

Sure, BPW exists, but what does it DO? Whatever it does (or doesn't) do, it's mighty un-predictable. I would much rather choose my tools based on something predictable, like penetration and expansion.

Given the numbers/percentages of probability of BPW, there is a lot wrong with it if you review some OIS's and look at how people kept trucking after multiple shots.

This sticky from this forum shows as much.
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/...eb.htm#page_15

You can talk about BPW all you want, throw all the equations out there you want, etc. but that doesn't make it any more effective.
It appears skimming is all you're capable of, clearly explaining you lack of knowledge/understanding of anything you've commented on in this thread thus far. It's no wonder everything you question is such a far reach for you to understand.

And again, not to rush you, but I did ask you specific questions in my post #376 you haven't answered. I'm expecting to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.

I've offered you a wealth of information directly pertaining to much of your misunderstanding. There's more but I feel you have enough to digest at one time. But since skimming seems to be all you're capable of it seems I may have wasted my time.

And on top of all that you've done nothing but skim Dr. Courntey's original work (I have to assume at this point you haven't a clue he's furthered his studies) and yet have the audacity as you claim above to make such uneducated statements as; "The numbers above would have you believe that the answer to the problem is the shotgun loaded with bird-shot at close range." To say/believe anything that far off base shows you are void of any intelligent knowledge reguarding Dr. Courtney's theory of BPW, as has been recently pointed out to you already by at least 3 other GT members.

Oh, and again, since skimming is your trade signature I should remention - not to rush you, but I did ask you specific questions in my post #376 you haven't answered. I'm expecting to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.

As for that link you posted which I've read more than once over the years now, please point out what it claimed toward BPW being a falsehood (I don't mean directly, indirectly is fine). I'm assuming you're mostly leaning toward the one-shot-stop stuff? Help us out here. The charts showing death certianly don't tell us anything toward temporary incapactitation. Nor does the literature itself which I read. Please show me what I clearly must have missed.

And again, since you're a self-admitted skimmer and I have no way of knowing where you'll start reading again, you should know - I did ask you specific questions in my post #376 you haven't answered. I'm expecting to hear from you on them unless you're simply acknowledging you were wrong by ignoring them.


Hopefully the next time you post back it will show that you know what you're talking about as you now have the info to do so. How anyone can skim anything and come away believing they understand the full content of what was discussed is far beyond my comprehension! Arent' you the one who claimed they work in/around ICUs???

I'm surprised uz2bUSMC put up with you as long as he did! His patience generally don't extend that far. Maybe he thinks there's hope for you. Well, lets all hope there is. Then there's KenB22... Let's hope he's learning now too.



Are we clear?

Craig




__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 11:42   #386
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenB22 View Post
OK Batman. Whatever you say. You have your Pulitzer prize winning story now: The FBI is letting innocent agents die because they are too cheap and uncaring to buy the ammunition that you and everyone with half a brain knows is clearly superior in stopping BG's. I say go for it. I'll set up the meeting with Dan Rather. You can be famous and save lives at the same time. Isn't that what a Batman does??
Why do you presume everyone with half a brain knows???

Would you think it wise for all FBI agents to carry 10mm Auto???

You do realize they have long guns too, right???

You do realize many agents limit themselves to the bare minimum required tactical practice and many of them wouldn't consider themselves shooters, right???

You do realize the vast majority of FBI agents don't get the same training as Navy Seals, right???

You do realize a number of agencies in some departments have dumped 180gr 40S&W loads in favor of much faster and lighter 155gr 40S&W loads, right???

You do realize the ammo companies know they still have to come up with the lowest bid for ammo while simply meeting the FBI's basic list of requirements, right???

You do realize not all federal agencies carry the same ammo, right? Does the Secret Service carrying 357SIGs know something the FBI doesn't, or do you presume the Secret Service to be stupid because the FBI already knows what's best???

Can you explain why Winchester says there is a cult following to their 9mm 127gr +P+ load among LE???

You do realize many LE depts have ammo choosen for them by some bean counter who has an office window with a view that could care less what ammo they shoot, right???

You do realize there are LE depts carrying Federal EFMJ, right??? (That's a VERY POOR carry choice if you didn't know!)


I could go on, but I'm quite sure you're lost already.



Good Shooting,
Craig
__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.

Last edited by glock20c10mm; 02-13-2010 at 11:55..
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 14:13   #387
N/Apower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 585
See below.

Last edited by N/Apower; 02-13-2010 at 14:34..
N/Apower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 14:33   #388
N/Apower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post
I don't know what your job title is but I'ld bet quite a bit of money it ain't "Doctor". I've never been in the medical profession and it seems I know more than you. Some of what you post is just plain think-you-know but you just plain don't. I'm not saying this to ridicule you, it's just a fact.

As for what you seem to think is required toward diagnosing mild to moderate TBI, how about I just explain a few things to you.

In the sense of objectivity and comprehensive thought (whether one chooses to consider it or not), I think the following is important to keep in mind toward Dr. Courtney's scientific study of BPW and it's possible attributes of quicker incapacitation some percentage of the time (not to mention among quite a bit of other supporting scientific study), in reguard to actually finding symptoms.

With reguard to brain trauma, how can those that treat gunshot wound victims know if there was remote brain damage or not? MRIs and CT scans don't usually even tell doctors if someone has a concussion.

Brain-bleeds show up on imaging. How ELSE is there going to be TBI from a remote GSW, if not from a brain-bleed caused by a "pressure spike"?

Much of mild traumatic brain injury is far from being understood, let alone they don't know how to diagnose much of it. Yet mild to moderate TBI still clearly exists even though they have trouble with the explanation part.

You are right, lots of TBI won't show up on imaging, but bleeding does. Again, this person isn't recieving a torsional injury. There is a supposed vessicular "over-pressure" condition.

The defense dept has been throwing out grant money to study all kinds of forms of brain injury for years now.

The same mild TBI that they don't fully know how to diagnose or treat yet, sometimes the symptoms go away by themselves. So far as they know right now, the effects of mild TBI can disappear in seconds to years, after whatever happened to happen to cause it to happen.

All the doctors can do is see if the patient has symptoms of being mentally screwed up in any way, physical or mental. Brain injury does not necessarily mean brain damage.

Grade 1 concussion is defined as mild, very brief, neurological disturbance such as confusion, without loss of consciousness. And therefore anyone treating a gunshot wound victim may very well NOT know the person had a grade 1 concussion, as the symptoms for it may very well have subsided by the time the vitim was seen by anyone with a medical background.

Again...so? I don't want to cause a grade 1 concussion. I want to cause incapacitation. Hell, being shot period is likely to cause "brief confusion", so I guess as long as Mr. Courtney can prove GSW's cause confusion, we can't DISPROVE that it didn't cause a grade 1, now can we? Sounds almost like religion to me. You can't show me your savior, but I can't NOT show you your savior either.

A concussion is a traumatically induced transient loss of normal brain function. Who knows if they (doctors and such) can even explain a fraction of what diagnosing the brain all actually entails?

Not me.

So what about the shootees on the good side paying attention to what happens to the BGs after they are shot by whatever round? I don't know. Much of the time they can't remember what they did themselves.

They (doctors and such) already know that anatomical imaging such as computerized tomography (CT scans) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) don't always tell them much of anything in relation to obvious signs of mild TBI. Contrast-enhanced CT scans help a little, but still leave some to be desired.

So now a days studies and testing are being done with functional imaging like: Functional MRI (fMRI), Positron emission tomography (PET scanning), Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT scan), and ELECTRO-PHYSIOLOGICAL STUDIES (EEG, evoked potentials, and 'brain mapping'). And thats besides Neuro-psychological (NP) testing.

Brain injury can simply be trivial, and completely reversible by natural healing processes, again, taking anywhere from seconds to years. The symptoms of concussion alone, limited to what they know so far are varying degrees of impairment of limb movement, vision, speech, and cognitive function, not to mention coma.

Another thing to keep in mind is if there isn't a symptom, they don't look for a cause or vis versa. Especially symtoms that may subside before the GSW victim gets to the folks meant to treat the GSW. Once again, the religious type dogma of "you can't prove it's NOT real".

In a way, this leaves believers and nonbelievers in a predicament as to who's right or wrong. Yes it does. All I know is we have a more than fair amount of supporting evidence (IMO), with zero evidence going against it. You also have zero-evidence that there isn't a tea-pot circling the earth so fast and so far away that we cannot spot it that is controlling everything that happens with magic-waves. Problem at this point and time is, both sides still need "proof" which will require further scientific analysis/study which neither has, and doesn't seem to be available to us either way if any does exist somewhere. That's right. More proof is needed. Why? because the effect claimed is so variable as to be attributable to many other things.

That said, I don't feel there probably have to be ruptured vessels in the brain for mild to moderate TBI to have occured. And BTW, who here was claiming mild to moderate TBI being a quantifiable, reliable wounding mechanism. You made that up in your own mind! Perhapse I did, but it was IMPLIED that this was so, otherwise why waste your time with the theory?

And who everyone who is a fan of BPW being the cause of this incapacitation is trying to credit what a bullet external force with 100% of what incapacitation outcome??? What are you talking about?

State of mind plays a larger roll in how someone behaves upon being shot than BPW does whether it is real or not.
To say; "That which produces the largest permanent hole, has better effect than that which produces the smallest, with regard to cessation of target action.", would be akin to saying all 45 Auto loads are better than any 9mm Luger loads in terms of quickest to incapacitate a BG. Are you saying that? Do all .45 auto loads produce a larger hole than any 9mm Luger load? Are you saying that?

You said; "Beyond blood volume loss, expansion, and penetration, and tissue crushed, this is a science of grays. The "gello shooters" are not ignoring this, rather they are choosing not to try to measure that which cannot be quantified and sticking with what can." That said, what are they sticking with that can, be measured? Permanent wound volume.

As for what you think the Courtney's work tells you to do, you are dead wrong!!! The position the Courtney's actually take is that proper penetration depth must be met for any personal risk assessment one deems neccessary before the amount of BPW is taken into account. That is explicitly stated in their paper on the deer incapacitation study. I missed it and agree 100% with that statement.

This is a fraction of the reason why uz2bUSMC tells you you don't know what you're talking about because you clearly don't.

I have run the numbers for various common SD loads where I could get the pertinent apples to apples comparison data so we can see how different loads stack up against each other. The list is as follows -

The kinetic energy is listed after "KE", penetration depth is listed after "P" and is based on clothed gel for ALL rounds, expanded bullet diameter is listed after "E", wound volume is listed in cubic inches(ci) and is based on 12" penetration for ALL rounds unless a specific round couldn't manage 12" penetration, and in the last column in pounds per square inch(psi) is the peak ballistic pressure wave. Please note - for PBPW, for any round that fragmented to any extent, the PBPW is actually higher than what's shown. All PBPW numbers assume zero fragmentation. Very generally, for the PERCENTAGE a round fragments, that same percentage would be added to the PBPW in psi.

Most of the HST #s and Speer Gold Dot #s are based on averages from the ATK workshop results with various police departments. Those that aren't based on an average were tested only 1 time. Those workshop results can be viewed in their entirety here - http://www.le.atk.com/general/irl/woundballistics.aspx

Win 380auto T Series, 95gr, 1000fps, KE=211, P=7.95, E=.64, 2.6ci, 507psi

Speer 38special+P GD, 135gr, 860fps, KE=222, P=11.75, E=.59, 3.2ci, 361psi
Win 38spcl T Series+P, 130gr, 925fps, KE=247, P=12.00, E=.67, 4.2ci, 393psi

Win 9mm+P+ Ranger, 115gr, 1335fps, KE=455, P=8.50, E=.81, 4.4ci, 1023psi
DT 9mm+P Gold Dot, 115gr, 1415fps, KE=511, P=12.00, E=.70, 4.6ci, 813psi
DT 9mm+P Gold Dot, 124gr, 1310fps, KE=472, P=13.25, E=.70, 4.6ci, 684psi
Federal 9mm+P HST, 124gr, 1200fps, KE=396, P=12.50, E=.66, 4.1ci, 605psi
Federal 9mm HST,,,, 124gr, 1150fps, KE=364, P=13.90, E=.64, 3.9ci, 501psi
Win9mm+P T Series, 124gr, 1180fps, KE=383, P=13.90, E=.67, 4.2ci, 526psi
Win9mm +P Bonded, 124gr, 1180fps, KE=383, P=18.70, E=.54, 2.7ci, 392psi
Win9mm+P+TSeries, 127gr, 1250fps, KE=441, P=12.20, E=.68, 4.4ci, 691psi
DT 9mm+P Gold Dot, 147gr, 1125fps, KE=413, P=14.00, E=.66, 4.1ci, 563psi
Federal 9mm HST,,,, 147gr, 1000fps, KE=326, P=14.40, E=.66, 4.1ci, 433psi
Speer 9mm GD,,,,,,,, 147gr,, 990fps, KE=320, P=15.25, E=.58, 3.2ci, 401psi
Win 9mm T Series,,,, 147gr,, 990fps, KE=320, P=14.50, E=.66, 4.1ci, 422psi
Win 9mm Bonded,,,,, 147gr,, 995fps, KE=323, P=16.50, E=.59, 3.3ci, 374psi

DT 357SIG Gold Dot, 115gr, 1550fps, KE=613, P=12.12, E=.71, 4.8ci, 955psi
DT 357SIG Gold Dot, 125gr, 1450fps, KE=584, P=14.50, E=.66, 4.1ci, 770psi
Win357SIG T Series, 125gr, 1350fps, KE=506, P=12.10, E=.66, 4.1ci, 798psi
Win357SIG Bonded,, 125gr, 1350fps, KE=506, P=15.90, E=.57, 3.1ci, 608psi
DT 357SIG Gold Dot, 147gr, 1250fps, KE=510, P=14.75, E=.73, 5.0ci, 661psi

DT 357mag Gold Dot, 125gr, 1600fps, KE=710, P=12.75, E=.69, 4.5ci, 1063psi
Speer SB 357magGD, 125gr,,, 990fps, KE=294, P=14.50, E=.65, 4.0ci, 388psi
Win 357magSilvertip, 145gr, 1290fps,, KE=536, P=12.50, E=.59, 3.3ci, 819psi
DT 357mag Gold Dot, 158gr, 1400fps, KE=688, P=19.00, E=.56, 3.0ci, 692psi

DT 9X25 Gold Dot, 115gr, 1800fps, KE=827, P=10.00, E=.64, 3.2ci, 1579psi
DT 9X25 Gold Dot, 125gr, 1725fps, KE=826, P=15.00, E=.74, 5.2ci, 1051psi
DT 9X25 Gold Dot, 147gr, 1550fps, KE=784, P=17.50, E=.68, 4.4ci,, 856psi

DT 40S&W Nosler,,,, 135gr, 1375fps, KE=567, P=12.10, E=.72, 4.9ci, 894psi
DT 40S&W Gold Dot, 155gr, 1275fps, KE=559, P=13.00, E=.76, 5.4ci, 825psi
DT 40S&W Gold Dot, 165gr, 1200fps, KE=528, P=14.00, E=.70, 4.6ci, 721psi
Rem Golden Saber,,, 165gr, 1150fps, KE=485, P=14.00, E=.67, 4.2ci, 662psi
Federal 40S&W HST, 165gr, 1130fps, KE=468, P=14.00, E=.75, 5.3ci, 637psi
Win40S&W T Series, 165gr, 1140fps, KE=476, P=13.20, E=.70, 4.6ci, 690psi
Win 40S&W Bonded, 165gr, 1140fps, KE=476, P=19.00, E=.55, 2.9ci, 479psi
Speer 40S&W GD,,,, 180gr. 1025fps, KE=420, P=11.75, E=.72, 4.9ci, 683psi
DT 40S&W Gold Dot, 180gr, 1100fps, KE=484, P=14.75, E=.68, 4.4ci, 626psi
Federal 40S&W HST, 180gr, 1010fps, KE=408, P=13.40, E=.77, 5.6ci, 582psi
Rem JHP (not GS),,,, 180gr, 1015fps, KE=412, P=13.25, E=.69, 4.5ci, 594psi
Win40S&W T Series, 180gr,,, 990fps, KE=392, P=14.30, E=.70, 4.6ci, 524psi
Win 40S&W Bonded, 180gr,, 1070fps, KE=458, P=21.80, E=.51, 2.5ci, 402psi

DT 10mm Nosler,,,, 135gr, 1600fps, KE=767, P=11.00, E=.70, 4.2ci, 1332psi
DT 10mm Gold Dot, 155gr, 1475fps, KE=749, P=13.50, E=.88, 7.3ci, 1061psi
DT 10mm G. Saber, 165gr, 1425fps, KE=744, P=14.75, E=.82, 6.3ci, 964psi
DT 10mm Gold Dot, 165gr, 1400psi, KE=718, P=14.25, E=1.02, 9.8ci, 962psi
DT 10mm Gold Dot, 180gr, 1300fps, KE=675, P=15.25, E=.96, 8.7ci, 846psi
DT 10mm G. Saber, 180gr, 1330fps, KE=707, P=16.00, E=.85, 6.8ci, 844psi
DT 10mm Hor. XTP, 180gr, 1350fps, KE=728, P=17.25, E=.77, 5.6ci, 808psi
DT 10mm Hor. XTP, 200gr, 1250fps, KE=694, P=19.50, E=.72, 4.9ci, 680psi

Win 45GAP T Series, 230gr, 905fps, KE=418, P=12.70, E=.72, 4.9ci, 630psi

DT 45auto Gold Dot, 185gr, 1225fps, KE=616, P=12.75, E=.82, 6.3ci, 923psi
Rem45auto G Saber, 185gr, 1140fps, KE=534, P=14.25, E=.70, 4.6ci, 716psi
Win45auto Silvertip, 185gr, 1000fps, KE=411, P=13.25, E=.70, 4.6ci, 593psi
DT 45auto Gold Dot, 200gr, 1125fps, KE=562, P=14.25, E=.88, 7.3ci, 753psi
DT 45auto Gold Dot, 230gr, 1010fps, KE=521, P=15.25, E=.95, 8.5ci, 653psi
Federal45auto+P HST,230gr, 950fps, KE=461, P=14.60, E=.85, 6.8ci, 603psi
Federal 45auto HST, 230gr,, 890fps, KE=405, P=14.40, E=.86, 7.0ci, 537psi
Speer 45auto G Dot, 230gr,, 890fps, KE=405, P=13.50, E=.70, 4.6ci, 573psi
Rem45auto G Saber, 230gr,, 875fps, KE=391, P=14.00, E=.74, 5.2ci, 534psi
Win 45auto T Series, 230gr, 905fps, KE=418, P=12.70, E=.72, 4.9ci, 630psi
Win45auto+PTSeries, 230gr, 990fps, KE=500, P=15.20, E=.78, 5.7ci, 628psi
Win 45 auto Bonded, 230gr, 905fps, KE=418, P=15.80, E=.67, 4.2ci, 506psi

So what you consider to be a "poor decision", doesn't have to be.

You said; "However, there is nothing "iffy" about the fact that numerous people have been killed because they used ammunition that would not penetrate deep enough to kill their assailant." So what about the old 158gr 38 Special load that used to be popular among LE that they finally dubbed the "Widow Maker" for that exact reason EXCEPT that it did penetrate far enough? On the flip-side, you have the 9mm from the Miami shootout. There are always outliers.

What about where you say; "Therefor, while I think the 357SIG's extra energy on soft tissue is certainly a good thing (how could it not be?), I don't think that one should use 115gr Corbon's, or that one should state that the 357SIG is "far superior" to a 147gr 9mm that expands properly."??? A 115gr Corbon is likely to fragment upon striking a humerous, etc. and may not penetrate deep enough into the thoracic cavity. Further, I have not seen where the 357SIG is doing so much better than modern 147gr 9mm. Several departments use the 147gr loads and are quite happy with them. Same for the 357SIG.

In what way do you suggest the 357SIG's extra energy on soft tissue is certainly a good thing to the extent of suggesting is must be? Not to mention that everyone's definition of far superior probably varies by quite a bit. It is better to have more disruption than less. Why? Because I do think that TC matters. TC is basically "tissue displaced". When I punch someone, it doesn't create a permanent cavity of course, but when I fought full contact, I had good results from a properly placed punch, ESPECIALLY against people who were not motivated very highly. Ergo, if someone isn't very motivated, maybe it will make them feel a little sicker to their stomach? I don't know for sure, but why not? In the same stance, I can agree with you on BPW, that it is nice to have a bullet with a "high psi" rating as long as it does acceptably in other areas.

As for sticking up for 9mm, at least from the standpoint of you suggesting the 357SIG is not far superior to it, consider what SSA Urey Patrick of the Firearms Training Unit, FBI Academy, Quantico, VA, when asked; "Are you saying the 9mm is no good?" , replied;

"No, we are saying it is as good as the 38 Special, which has served us for a long time. It has severe limitations, which we are not willing to accept. It is woefully inadequate for shooting at people in cars, for example, and over half of our shootings involve vehicles. It is a marginally adequate wounding agent. We have had a number of 9mm shootings over the past couple of years, and if you define a good shooting as one in which the subject stops whatever he was doing when he gets shot, we have yet to have a good one, and we are hitting our adversaries multiple times. We have shot half a dozen dogs in the past year and have not killed one yet, although we have run up a significant veteranary bill. The 9mm with proper ammunition is not a bad round. It is just no where near as effective as the 10mm and 45 offerings and the disparity between it and the larger calibers has remained a constant throughout all the testing we have done over the past two years."

That statement is...how old? It is so old as to no-longer be valid. During their tests, yes, the 9mm was lacking. With several generations of ammunition being developed, this is no-longer quite the case. One can go to ATK's website and see it penetrating just as deeply, and expanding just as nicely, as the 357SIG. Which is to say, sometimes more, sometimes less, but it meets the 12" minimum through all 8 FBI tests.

Yet many of us have learned just how superior the 357SIG is according to those who have used both against humans and animals. Texas DPS alone has praised it.

Much of your comentary ranges from far reaching to plain absurd at best. Have you ever actually read Dr. Courtney's paper on the deer study?

Questions answered.
N/Apower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 14:40   #389
N/Apower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post
Why do you presume everyone with half a brain knows???

Would you think it wise for all FBI agents to carry 10mm Auto???

You do realize they have long guns too, right???

You do realize many agents limit themselves to the bare minimum required tactical practice and many of them wouldn't consider themselves shooters, right???
See this at the range often among LE.

You do realize the vast majority of FBI agents don't get the same training as Navy Seals, right???

You do realize a number of agencies in some departments have dumped 180gr 40S&W loads in favor of much faster and lighter 155gr 40S&W loads, right???
Overpenetration caused problems. I read an article on this just the other day. Seems one department dumped the 180's after killing someone on a shoot-through.

You do realize the ammo companies know they still have to come up with the lowest bid for ammo while simply meeting the FBI's basic list of requirements, right???
Yep, but when you consider that the heads of these divisions personally carry something like a 9mm instead of 357SIG, it makes you wonder. They know more about their ammo than you do.

You do realize not all federal agencies carry the same ammo, right? Does the Secret Service carrying 357SIGs know something the FBI doesn't, or do you presume the Secret Service to be stupid because the FBI already knows what's best???
The secret service carries the 53918 (reduced penetration) load while the FAMs carry the 54234 (TX DPS) load.

Can you explain why Winchester says there is a cult following to their 9mm 127gr +P+ load among LE???
No, especially when the BPW/psi numbers just posted for it in an above post are only roughly 2/3 that of the 115gr offering. Should indicate that the 115gr load is VASTLY superior and should be the one with the cult following, right?

You do realize many LE depts have ammo choosen for them by some bean counter who has an office window with a view that could care less what ammo they shoot, right???
I keep hearing this, and yet I look around me and see my local PD using Gold Dots, the Sherriffs using Ranger T, and TX DPS 20 miles away from me issuing 357SIG/P-series guns. Where's that penny-penching mentality? I woulda thunk they would all have promotional Glocks using 9mm WWB.

You do realize there are LE depts carrying Federal EFMJ, right??? (That's a VERY POOR carry choice if you didn't know!)
Sadly.


I could go on, but I'm quite sure you're lost already.



Good Shooting,
Craig
In red.
N/Apower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 15:05   #390
KenB22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post
Why do you presume everyone with half a brain knows???
That's certainly what you and your friends think. Everyone who disagrees with you and your buddies is called stupid or ignorant or some variation thereof. Everyone who agrees with you is called smart. Want me to cite the post numbers of everyone who has been insulted because they don't agree with the theory?
KenB22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 19:11   #391
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by N/Apower View Post
Brain-bleeds show up on imaging. How ELSE is there going to be TBI from a remote GSW, if not from a brain-bleed caused by a "pressure spike"?
Because brain injury does not necessarily mean brain damage.
Quote:
Again...so? I don't want to cause a grade 1 concussion. I want to cause incapacitation. Hell, being shot period is likely to cause "brief confusion", so I guess as long as Mr. Courtney can prove GSW's cause confusion, we can't DISPROVE that it didn't cause a grade 1, now can we? Sounds almost like religion to me. You can't show me your savior, but I can't NOT show you your savior either.
At this point for some I suppose there is truth in what you say about proving and disproving. Until someone does a more definitive study (like Dr. Courtney's but with a larger data set) for all to see who haven't seen it on their own I guess some people will be in the dark so to speak. A more definitive study also demonstrating more levels of BPW.
Quote:
Once again, the religious type dogma of "you can't prove it's NOT real".
You mean except for Dr. Courtney's study?
Quote:
You also have zero-evidence that there isn't a tea-pot circling the earth so fast and so far away that we cannot spot it that is controlling everything that happens with magic-waves.
Again, small data set or not, we do still have Dr. Courtney's study with lots of supporting evidence. More details and refined details would be nice, but we do have reasonably solid data to start out with.
Quote:
That's right. More proof is needed. Why? because the effect claimed is so variable as to be attributable to many other things.
Not so much when animals are used for the testing which they have been so far.
Quote:
Perhapse I did, but it was IMPLIED that this was so, otherwise why waste your time with the theory?
No it wasn't implied, or if it was I missed it. I don't know of anyone around here that supports the BPW theory in the sense they expect results 100% of the time.
Quote:
Do all .45 auto loads produce a larger hole than any 9mm Luger load? Are you saying that?
No.
Quote:
Permanent wound volume.
Permanent wound volume, blood volume loss, expansion, penetration, and crushed tissue are all a science of grays. Not on whether or not they probably will happen, but to what extent, shooting to shooting.
Quote:
On the flip-side, you have the 9mm from the Miami shootout. There are always outliers.
True but beside the point. I was point out a round that does penetrate far enough but was still generally labeled as a failure.
Quote:
A 115gr Corbon is likely to fragment upon striking a humerous, etc. and may not penetrate deep enough into the thoracic cavity. Further, I have not seen where the 357SIG is doing so much better than modern 147gr 9mm. Several departments use the 147gr loads and are quite happy with them. Same for the 357SIG.
Right, most LE have left the various 115gr loads for heavier counterparts. Maybe it's just because you haven't been around here in caliber corner long enough yet, but there's been plenty discussed by LE and hunters on the 357SIG being clearly superior overall in terms of incapacitation over 9mm.
Quote:
Because I do think that TC matters. TC is basically "tissue displaced". When I punch someone, it doesn't create a permanent cavity of course, but when I fought full contact, I had good results from a properly placed punch, ESPECIALLY against people who were not motivated very highly. Ergo, if someone isn't very motivated, maybe it will make them feel a little sicker to their stomach? I don't know for sure, but why not? In the same stance, I can agree with you on BPW, that it is nice to have a bullet with a "high psi" rating as long as it does acceptably in other areas.
Interesting way of looking at it. (That was meant in a positive way.)
Quote:
That statement is...how old? It is so old as to no-longer be valid. During their tests, yes, the 9mm was lacking. With several generations of ammunition being developed, this is no-longer quite the case. One can go to ATK's website and see it penetrating just as deeply, and expanding just as nicely, as the 357SIG. Which is to say, sometimes more, sometimes less, but it meets the 12" minimum through all 8 FBI tests.
The data was young enough that the bullets in question were Hydra-Shoks.
__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 19:13   #392
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenB22 View Post
OK Batman. Whatever you say. You have your Pulitzer prize winning story now: The FBI is letting innocent agents die because they are too cheap and uncaring to buy the ammunition that you and everyone with half a brain knows is clearly superior in stopping BG's. I say go for it. I'll set up the meeting with Dan Rather. You can be famous and save lives at the same time. Isn't that what a Batman does??

Riiiight, the FBI is the only ones who qualify as law enforcemnt. I see, so all the times you mentioned government agencies or law enforcement... you actually meant FBI. I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was supposed to read your mind. Maybe instead of spellchecking your post you should take time, instead, to make sure they make sense.

Little hint there are other agencies besides the FBI that belong to the government. There are other agencies that put down bad guys besides the FBI... is any of this starting to click, Robin?

Now read your posts below ( a few times), then your quote above so you can better understand your own nonsense.


Quote:
No. I think my point is clear. Nobody in law enforcement, nobody who makes handguns and none of the ammo companies care one whit about ballistic pressure waves. None of them consider BPW at all. It's a non-issue to them. Only people talking about BPW are people on bulletin boards trying to convince others how smart they are and that BPW exists. When people who have to put down bad guys pay attention to this stuff, I will too.
Did you know that the military puts down bad guys? Do you know what is loaded in their 9mm's? It ball ammo. If the military cared more about their troops than mission accomplishment their would be less restrictive ROE's. You know anything about that, Ken?
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 19:27   #393
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by N/Apower View Post
Overpenetration caused problems. I read an article on this just the other day. Seems one department dumped the 180's after killing someone on a shoot-through.
Not with all of them. Where most Border Patrol Agents work out here is in the middle of nowhere. Either way, over penetration is a myth and the majority of LE that carry 40S&W still carry 180gr.
Quote:
Yep, but when you consider that the heads of these divisions personally carry something like a 9mm instead of 357SIG, it makes you wonder. They know more about their ammo than you do.
I don't believe we can assume to know what the heads of 99.999% of all divisions carry. Beside that, there are some that carry 45. At the end of the day I don't believe most heads of the division have any clue why they should carry any ammo over other ammo.
Quote:
The secret service carries the 53918 (reduced penetration) load while the FAMs carry the 54234 (TX DPS) load.
I don't know ammo by those numbers. Who manufactures it?
Quote:
No, especially when the BPW/psi numbers just posted for it in an above post are only roughly 2/3 that of the 115gr offering. Should indicate that the 115gr load is VASTLY superior and should be the one with the cult following, right?
Not if the 115s can't be relied upon for proper penetration depth.
Quote:
I keep hearing this, and yet I look around me and see my local PD using Gold Dots, the Sherriffs using Ranger T, and TX DPS 20 miles away from me issuing 357SIG/P-series guns. Where's that penny-penching mentality? I woulda thunk they would all have promotional Glocks using 9mm WWB.
Who knows what specific guidelines they were given in choosing ammo. Maybe it had to be the cheapest premium ammo. Maybe they really are getting what they should for their risk assessments. I'm not aware that Ranger T is all the expensive anyway, if at all. It's the Ranger Bonded loads that cost the big bucks by comparison. Either way they aren't representative for the 1000s of LE depts across the nation.

Notice your coments are beyond the point I was making to KenB22 though. Otherwise, thoughtful comentary none-the-less.
__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.

Last edited by glock20c10mm; 02-13-2010 at 19:29..
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 19:27   #394
Mrs_Esterhouse
Senior Member
 
Mrs_Esterhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
Did you know that the military puts down bad guys? Do you know what is loaded in their 9mm's? It ball ammo. If the military cared more about their troops than mission accomplishment their would be less restrictive ROE's. You know anything about that, Ken?
Just a quick point for clarification. The US military only uses ball ammo because the Geneva convention bans hollow point ammunition. Unless we withdraw from that treaty, we will be shooting ball ammo for decades to come.
__________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
-Sir Winston Churchill

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Member
Mrs_Esterhouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 19:45   #395
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs_Esterhouse View Post
Just a quick point for clarification. The US military only uses ball ammo because the Geneva convention bans hollow point ammunition. Unless we withdraw from that treaty, we will be shooting ball ammo for decades to come.
The point is that other things dictate the choices made.

And it's the HAGUE convention, not Geneva.
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 19:47   #396
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Hey Bones13 I didn't forget about you, just took time to get back to you. Better late than never.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bones13 View Post
Dunno what Fackler thinks about it but I suspect that his main complaint would be that the best that could be done, even with good data, is prove the existence of an unreliable phenomenon.
Unreliable doesn't always mean unexpected most of the time.
Quote:
FWIW Courtney does talk directly about TBI being the mechanism on the first page:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0803/0803.3053.pdf
True.
Quote:
My perspective is that even every thought you have can be traced to a particular physiologic event - a specific set of neurons firing in a specific pattern. There has to be a physiologic explanation to take it beyond just saying "I shoot him & he fall down go boom". What exactly do we mean by incapacitation? Seemingly specific words have a way of meaning less than we think. What does it mean to say a neuron fires? It gets complicated very quickly.
The only way I can see it to mean is that a BG or animal was forced for some reason to give up their attack.
Quote:
All good questions, but specifics are what drives the science. It was asserted earlier in this thread that there is no difference between the type of damage that occurs when sheep butt heads and when BPW causes TBI, which is just silly.
I can see where it could have been taken that way, but what was meant is explained in Dr. Courtney's write up of the deer study. And what you said wasn't it.
Quote:
Dunno if I'd completely accept the assertion that there's NO difference but I get what you're saying.
That's honest enough and fair enough for me.
Quote:
The military and LE aren't usually researchers. Sometimes research conducted by military or LE agencies is biased, too. If your boss wants the results to be X, the results have a way of being X, especially if you want a promotion.
Very true! But my point was based on the ammo they carry rating very low in terms of peak BPW.
Quote:
The literature talks about psychological versus physiological factors causing incapacitation. Does a larger BPW simply means it hurts more? Or that it gives the victim a greater sense of "having been shot"?

I used to have a link (which of course now I can't find) to an article about how hollywood cliches have informed peoples expectation about what happens when someone is shot. People fall down because they think they're supposed to.
I'm with ya on all that.
__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 20:00   #397
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenB22 View Post
That's certainly what you and your friends think.
Not at all.
Quote:
Everyone who disagrees with you and your buddies is called stupid or ignorant or some variation thereof.
Not always. Usually we give you benefit of the doubt at first. Then, if you don't listen to reason (not our opinoin but reason toward what has nothing to do with out opinion) you get called stupid or ignorant or some variation thereof. Remember, just because you spell well doesn't mean you're smart in what you're talking about.
Quote:
Everyone who agrees with you is called smart.
Not always. Remember the guy uz2bUSMC likes when he posts some posts and not others. Some we think are smart sometimes and stupid, dumb, or some variation thereof others.
Quote:
Want me to cite the post numbers of everyone who has been insulted because they don't agree with the theory?
It's not about whether or not you agree with "the theory". It's whether you can debate your side intelligently or not. You can't. Sorry. Believe me, I wish it could be different. You my friend should be asking questions about what you clearly don't understand and we've been gracious enough to point out to you so that you can make an intelligent argument against "us". As it stands, it's clear you don't have enough info to know if you should go along with the theory or not.

And then to argue someones grammer. I know a guy who can't spell worth anything, but he'll beat my ass in a game of chess everytime!



Good Shooting,
Craig
__________________
Free Men Don't Need To Ask Permission To Bear Arms

The Glock 29 is the most versatile handgun yet produced.
glock20c10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 20:33   #398
N/Apower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post
Not with all of them. Where most Border Patrol Agents work out here is in the middle of nowhere. Either way, over penetration is a myth and the majority of LE that carry 40S&W still carry 180gr.

Border Patrol has consistantly gone with the light/fast and had good results with it. They are the one agency I would cite as an example of consistant positive results with the light/fast stuff. However, I do belive they have switched to something heavier now.

I don't believe we can assume to know what the heads of 99.999% of all divisions carry. Beside that, there are some that carry 45. At the end of the day I don't believe most heads of the division have any clue why they should carry any ammo over other ammo.

Correct, but I can tell you that Hal Price of ATK carries 9mm because he views the 357SIG as a negligible improvement. I can tell you that Evan Marshall also carries calibers other than 357SIG. What does Courtney carry? That I would like to know.

I don't know ammo by those numbers. Who manufactures it?

Those are product numbers corresponding to the two loads offered by Speer/ATK in 357SIG using Gold Dot projectiles.

Not if the 115s can't be relied upon for proper penetration depth.

9BPLE has been shown to penetrate to, or VERY near to 12" in gel. I would wager it's psi is as high/higher than 127+P+.

Who knows what specific guidelines they were given in choosing ammo. Maybe it had to be the cheapest premium ammo. Maybe they really are getting what they should for their risk assessments. I'm not aware that Ranger T is all the expensive anyway, if at all. It's the Ranger Bonded loads that cost the big bucks by comparison. Either way they aren't representative for the 1000s of LE depts across the nation.

Notice your coments are beyond the point I was making to KenB22 though. Otherwise, thoughtful comentary none-the-less.

True enough, and I was not responding on behalf of KenB22, but with thoughts of my own.

Last edited by N/Apower; 02-13-2010 at 20:45..
N/Apower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 20:38   #399
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Correct, but I can tell you that Hal Price of ATK carries 9mm because he views the 357SIG as a negligible improvement. I can tell you that Evan Marshall also carries calibers other than 357SIG. What does Courtney carry? That I would like to know.
Pretty sure .357 sig (as he has posted on here), also pretty sure he handles it well too (as I was told). I think his wife digs the .357sig aswell.
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2010, 20:41   #400
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
N/Apower,

I read half of that link you posted the other night (so far), and I am going to finish it soon (work is keeping me busy this weekend). I have not seen that before, it is interesting, thanks for sharing it.
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:39.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,289
294 Members
995 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42