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 02-06-2010, 00:33   #261
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bones13 View Post
There ARE many unanswered questions. If there's any point I'm trying to make it's that there is a LONG way to go before any of this starts looking solid.
Then why are you still asking questions if that's what you believe? You could have just posted that and we'ld have all known where you stood.
Quote:
I can read, no need to shout.
I wasn't shouting, nor did I mean to imply that I was. I didn't think I'ld have to repost the fine print. My bad.
Quote:
Psychology is a not insignificant part of this. Humans and animals can and do choose to "quit".
That's generally not true. Deer don't stop running away until one of two things happen. 1) They don't have enough oxygen left in them to run further. 2) They run and then choose to lie down assuming they've escaped further danger. In the IWBA Journals it was noted that one good reason to use animals for testing is because they generally aren't subject to many of the same psychological factors as humans.
Quote:
Besides, in "The Ballistic Pressure Wave Theory of Handgun Bullet Incapacitation" on page three the chart clearly shows the minimum incapacitation time as 5 seconds. Remember, there are lies, damned lies and statistics.
Proving or disproving what?
Quote:
Garbage in, garbage out. What part don't you understand? You're really emotionally invested in this stuff, aren't you?
As are you it appears. Simply from opposite ends of the proverbial spectrum. Are we having fun yet?
Quote:
There must be better data before you can call a correlation sound. Good research design demands it.
And you're welcome to that opinion. My basis for using the theory to my advantage comes from the basic understanding of the principal of the theory. Like I said, I have plenty of questions myself, not to mention a larger data set would be awesome. Either way I do believe the theory holds water to enough of an extent based on events aside from the theory for me to apply it in my choice of carry ammo. Got a problem with that?
Quote:
What do you think about healthy skepticism and valid criticism versus blind acceptance of bad data?
I have no problem with any amount or lack thereof in relation to skepticism or critiscism. Those are for the individual to decide for themselves, or at least up to whatever level they choose. As for bad data, what data are you saying is bad outside of the goat tests or the Marshall/Sanow data set?
Quote:
Extremely small sample sizes are simply not valid. Sample size for this would need to be in the hundreds if not thousands. Otherwise the statistics are useless.
Why would you think such a thing? What you say is absurd to say the least. You simply don't understand what it means for any data set to be statistically valid and I don't care to explain it to you. BTW, that is fact, not my opinion.
Quote:
Nowhere has your positive bias toward this research been more obvious than in this statement. There is no requirement to disprove, rather the onus is on Courtney to prove. Basic tenet of science.
Who's argueing against the fact I'm biased toward the research?

No, Dr. Courtney doesn't have to prove anything. He did some studies and wrote up an explanation with the findings. At this point, anyone else on the planet can do or not do whatever they do or don't want with it.

Besides, you already feel rubbed the wrong way by Dr. Courtney. At what point would he ever be done getting you to believe he ever did anything right? Beside the fact you said it would all have to be verified by a third party before you'ld believe it anyway.
Quote:
"Common knowledge" is not science. This entire line of your argument is specious.
No, it's not specious. I don't have to understand how gravity works to know that what goes up must come down.
Quote:
Yours and other's repeated ad hominem attacks again betray your extreme prejudice.
They aren't ad hominen attacks when speaking of direct experience in conversing with the person(s) in question.
Quote:
I don't think you really understand the education health care professionals receive. The basic science portion includes coursework in gross anatomy with cadaver dissection, histology, physiology, biochemistry, neuroanatomy with brain dissection, pathology, microbiology, pharmacology and radiology. Pre-professional training includes chemistry, biochemisty, biology, physics and organic chemistry. Generally, anyone in a profession who is licensed to prescribe medications has a good life sciences base to their education.
And it's obvious you don't understand that any of that learned basic science doesn't prove anyone is or isn't a liar among many other negative adjectives towards anothers trustworthyness.
Quote:
No evidence against it? What about the problems with the evidence FOR it? You just can't turn it around like that.
What about them?
Quote:
The science is in the ability of the research to withstand criticism. Period.
That's not always true. Like when someone wrongly preaches for or against anything because of the way it may/will take negative effect on their credebility in one way or another if they don't.
Quote:
This entire rant again betrays your extreme bias for Courtney's work. I've read the studies. It's not a very impressive body of work based on the data he presents. Get better data and it would be more persuasive. Who's being fed lies here? I'm not sure why you seem to think that anyone critical of the research is somehow not qualified to evaluate it, but it's clear that is your opinion.
Sorry, but I can't be betrayed by something I'm open with. As for you saying; "I'm not sure why you seem to think that anyone critical of the research is somehow not qualified to evaluate it..." I didn't, nor would I say such a thing, as it is not true. But yes, it is my opinion as it were.
Quote:
I agree; there is a basis for further research, a LOT more research, necessary to answer the many valid criticisms. Stating that you already "know" only betrays your bias yet again. Grain of salt, bro.
Betraying my bias, yes, I think I've covered that. As for criticism....anyone can criticize anything. False accusations could also be construed to be criticism. Nothing wrong with critisism as long as it's honestly derived. But that's not always the case.
Quote:
Conspiracy? Any data collected by an entity with a financial stake in the outcome is automatically suspect. That doesn't mean it's invalid but it's only valid if it can be repeated. The federal data looks good but I don't trust it blindly. Take a hint.
I didn't need to take the hint. I'm also not paranoid. And in some cases it doesn't matter enough to worry about, like with the ATK workshop testing and results.
Quote:
I had already found that but thanks for reposting. I understand it, but those equations apply best in a homogeneous material like water or ballistic gel, and the human body is far from homogeneous. I personally think there is a lot we don't fully understand about how tough the body really is. People are very hard to kill. The internal structure is highly resistant to all sorts of trauma. It's flexible, segmented into all sorts of compartments and there's TWO of many important structures.
You say people are very hard to kill. Why? Because they're moving while you're trying for good shot placement? Aside from that, yes, I'm sure there's much more to learn. If not, a whole lot of scientists are studying a whole lot of stuff in vain.
Quote:
Think about all the cases where people are shot with multiple high energy projectiles and basically shrug it off. This is part of the reason incapacitation due to TBI from BPW doesn't ring true to me; Drugs and adrenalin shouldn't make a difference but they do.
Who cares? There are exceptions to every rule. It's not like the "shrug-it-off" standard is associated with anything close to a majority. And why are you so stuck on TBI? Who cares, TBI or not, if it works toward quicker incapacitation reguardless the mechanism? It may be limited to a percentage basis, but if it works as much as expected, who cares? I'm not saying it does or doesn't within the expected parameters of the threory. Just saying.

Drugs and adrenalin make a difference in what?



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 02-06-2010, 00:39   #262
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocKWL View Post
"When you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with..."



What reason is that?




The data correlates to something that did not happen or to a data set which has proven to be skewed?



Courtney seems to be able to repeat these test with stunning regularity. Why can't the same be seen on the streets?



It's been posted; here and on other forums. You choose to ignore them.



Courtney's degree is related to ballistics how?



Can you back that up with fact? What LE agencies currently use this round?



You just described yourself.



How many people hunt deer at contact distances? Is a .357 Magnum a wise choice to shoot deer at 500 yards?



How does this external instrument calculate what is happening inside a living organism? What is the make and model of this transducer so I can refer to it's technical specifications?



"5" was derived how?

How do you know what the energy on target is?

How is Pi relevant in the equation?

How do you know in advance what penetration depth will be?
Did you try to be rude, or did it just come naturally?
__________________
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 02-06-2010, 09:02   #263
Erich1B
Member
 
Erich1B's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Tampa
Posts: 86
Wow, I haven't read this thread in a while and come back to find another BPW debate................
__________________
Glock 29 10mm
Glock 33 357 Sig

Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Erich1B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 09:17   #264
glocksterr
DirtyGlockHippy
 
glocksterr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: NC,USA
Posts: 1,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahahn View Post
The added advantage is the wording I was looking for, but couldn't find. I enjoy that there's a possibility that, on top of shot placement and action on my part, the bullet may do above what I expect it to do. Am I going to rely on it? No, but it's nice to know that should the conditions be favorable, it may occur.

maybe you where not looking for the right thing or in the right place. sort of under your nose so to speak.


glocksterr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 12:44   #265
swede1945
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 15
The US Army has published work supporting remote wounding and rapid incapacitation effects of ballistic waves. See Ronald Bellamy’s work in the Textbook of Military Medicine. The Swedish Defense Forces also published a number of papers in the Journal of Trauma. A group at the Third Military Medical University (China) confirmed and extended the Swedes’ findings about remote cerebral effects of ballistic waves at handgun levels of energy transfer. Professor Karl Sellier (Institute of Legal Medicine in Bonn, Germany) describes remote wounding effects of ballistic waves in his book, Wound Ballistics and the Scientific Background. A team at West Point has published work in the peer-reviewed journals, Brain Injury and Injury. A shock wave expert at Cal Tech attributed remote spinal injuries to a shock wave produced by a 9mm bullet. A Czech researcher has consistently found brain injuries in autopsies of victims shot in the chest with handgun bullets. In a “Historical Overview of Wound Ballistics Research” an Australian researcher recently summarized the positive findings related to remote wounding effects of ballistic waves. This body of work has been peer-reviewed and positively cited. The minority who continue to espouse negative views have not published anything a peer-reviewed journals for a long time, limiting their opinions to internet forums, knowing how easy it would be to embarrass them with the considerable published evidence that now exists from a wide variety of sources.
swede1945 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 13:03   #266
glockman23
Senior Member
 
glockman23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwest Michigan
Posts: 428
Wow, this thread is generating a lot of buzz. As far as to the original question I'm sure it's a great stopper if you can hit anything (same with any other caliber I suppose). Then again a .44 mag is a "better stopper" and a .500 is better than that, ect.

I think if you had to shoot through barriers (ie car doors) it would be a good choice, which is why the secret service issues them (at least that's what I heard). For an average citizen like you and me overpenetration is a very bad thing. If I wanted something that overpenetrates and is expensive I'd get a 10mm. I'll stick with 9, .40 or .45 for SD.
__________________
"Hitting an annoying yellow jacket buzzing a picnic table without spraying the guests or the food might be better practice for combat than long range paper punching. So might a plain old-fashioned water pistol fight."
glockman23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 14:56   #267
remat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post
The question to me is if you really believe that or if you were simply being arguementative. In the end, how truthful anyone is has no dependence whatsoever on an added title to their name or credentials or where they were or weren't published. Please tell me you didn't really believe that?
You asked what happens when two Dr's disagree. My opinion is based on the body of work. You can marginalize it if you like.

Your words implied that DocGKR had no real experience or knowledge in wound ballistics, and equated his credentials to simply being a dr/dentist. For those unfamiliar with his work I just suggest they do a little homework and decide for themselves. A good place start is to read his work with NDIA.

"Truth" is elusive in medicine and ballistics. It has a lot to do with opinion and the individual cases. So, ask 3 Dr's and you are likely to get at least that many answers.

In the end, the "truth" is what people want to believe it is. If they chose it to be OSS%, +P+, bonded bullets, fragmenting bullets, midweight bullets, heavy bullets, most accurate bullet (hope I didn't miss anybody's camp), so be it. I am not sure why people get so upset that someone doesn't agree. Personally, I still don't want to get shot with a 380 (whether it be an FMJ, 88gr, 90gr, or even 102gr) -- even if it is low on everybody's ballistic ranking.

On that note, other than to say that I wish more folks made a bonded 147gr 357Sig load, I am out of this thread.

regards

Last edited by remat; 02-06-2010 at 15:01..
remat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 15:52   #268
glock20c10mm
Senior Member
 
glock20c10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Out West
Posts: 5,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by remat View Post
You asked what happens when two Dr's disagree. My opinion is based on the body of work. You can marginalize it if you like.

Your words implied that DocGKR had no real experience or knowledge in wound ballistics, and equated his credentials to simply being a dr/dentist. For those unfamiliar with his work I just suggest they do a little homework and decide for themselves. A good place start is to read his work with NDIA.

"Truth" is elusive in medicine and ballistics. It has a lot to do with opinion and the individual cases. So, ask 3 Dr's and you are likely to get at least that many answers.

In the end, the "truth" is what people want to believe it is. If they chose it to be OSS%, +P+, bonded bullets, fragmenting bullets, midweight bullets, heavy bullets, most accurate bullet (hope I didn't miss anybody's camp), so be it. I am not sure why people get so upset that someone doesn't agree. Personally, I still don't want to get shot with a 380 (whether it be an FMJ, 88gr, 90gr, or even 102gr) -- even if it is low on everybody's ballistic ranking.

On that note, other than to say that I wish more folks made a bonded 147gr 357Sig load, I am out of this thread.

regards
In the end, the "truth" is what people want to believe it is. That statement is absurd! That is what opinion is, having nothing directly to do with truth.

IMO Dr. Roberts is a tool, sometimes even trolling when he decides to come into a thread and lay down the law based only on his opinion while belittling the next person. He would like to believe he knows it all, when in reality he refuses any data/study that isn't at least 20 years old. That is not to say he is stupid, as he is not. But just because he's not stupid doesn't always make him always right either.

Tell me, what has Dr. Roberts taught you that you didn't already know in terms of what makes a SD round an acceptable one?
__________________
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 02-06-2010, 15:56   #269
LEAD
Senior Member
 
LEAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: VT
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by swede1945 View Post
The US Army has published work supporting remote wounding and rapid incapacitation effects of ballistic waves. See Ronald Bellamy’s work in the Textbook of Military Medicine. The Swedish Defense Forces also published a number of papers in the Journal of Trauma. A group at the Third Military Medical University (China) confirmed and extended the Swedes’ findings about remote cerebral effects of ballistic waves at handgun levels of energy transfer. Professor Karl Sellier (Institute of Legal Medicine in Bonn, Germany) describes remote wounding effects of ballistic waves in his book, Wound Ballistics and the Scientific Background. A team at West Point has published work in the peer-reviewed journals, Brain Injury and Injury. A shock wave expert at Cal Tech attributed remote spinal injuries to a shock wave produced by a 9mm bullet. A Czech researcher has consistently found brain injuries in autopsies of victims shot in the chest with handgun bullets. In a “Historical Overview of Wound Ballistics Research” an Australian researcher recently summarized the positive findings related to remote wounding effects of ballistic waves. This body of work has been peer-reviewed and positively cited. The minority who continue to espouse negative views have not published anything a peer-reviewed journals for a long time, limiting their opinions to internet forums, knowing how easy it would be to embarrass them with the considerable published evidence that now exists from a wide variety of sources.
You've got a lot to say about this topic. Thanks for the information
LEAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 16:31   #270
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by remat View Post
....
In the end, the "truth" is what people want to believe it is.....
As a single sentence summarry of Post Modernism, that is probably as good as it gets and it is completely false. if you change it to, 'In the end, what people believe is the "truth" is what people want to believe is the truth.', then it describes the though process of most people. Unfortunately, though we might never know the truth about a particular issue, or, if we do know it, it still remains possible that our knowledge is incorrect, the truth does actually exist and all those people are wrong and will fight for their right to be wrong till their dying breath.

The world and the universe are real and not creations of our minds. To think otherwise is a remarkable level of conceit or a remarkable level of credulity. The nature of truth means there is no certainty because we can prove only falsity and never truth. This concept is can be difficult to live with for anyone. For many it seems to be impossible.

What we choose to act on as "truth" is inevitably based on a ballance of probabilities. If we hope to reach a sound decision on truth, those probabilities should be objective rather than subjective. Depending on the subject matter that objective evidence might be anything from extremely strong to relatively weak, but will be all we have to work with. It the case of BPW effects, the work of Dr Courtney and others makes its truth a strong probability. That makes the opposition case corespondingly feeble, no matter the "work" and status of Dr. Roberts.

English
English is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 18:10   #271
remat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,364
double tapped

Last edited by remat; 02-06-2010 at 18:22..
remat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 18:21   #272
remat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,364
Boy, you guys sure get hung up on semantics. I said people "chose" what to believe as "truth." Truth is not necessarily black and white and is highly case dependant.

Truth in medicine? It is called "practicing" medicine and a Dr gives his "opinion" for a reason. Even lab results require "interpretation."

What a person believes to be "truth" is de facto truth to them. Likely, no amount of debate will necessarily change that. What the world "is" is highly debateable and dependant on your frame of reference. If there was truth in what the best bullet was, we would all be carrying it.

I see that we cannot even agree with that and you with to rely on "absolutes." That's fine. Your "truth" is a low opinion of DocGKR. I don't agree with you, get over it.

Last edited by remat; 02-06-2010 at 18:39..
remat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2010, 22:10   #273
sigcalcatrant
Senior Member
 
sigcalcatrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahahn View Post
The added advantage is the wording I was looking for, but couldn't find. I enjoy that there's a possibility that, on top of shot placement and action on my part, the bullet may do above what I expect it to do. Am I going to rely on it? No, but it's nice to know that should the conditions be favorable, it may occur.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
Perfect. You seem to have the perfect understanding of the points that are trying to be made regarding BPW, sir. I DON'T KNOW THAT YOUR LAST THREE SENTENCES COULD HAVE BEEN WRITTEN ANY BETTER BY ANYONE!
Speaking as a mere spectator to this thread, it seems like the anti-BPW guys don't think that BPW should be considered, mentioned, or even thought about as a possibility. They get down right testy. Posts like the above are just begging for an ad hominem barrage of Facklerism-laced epithets.
__________________
"Never Doubt the Snout"
sigcalcatrant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2010, 06:19   #274
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by remat View Post
Boy, you guys sure get hung up on semantics. I said people "chose" what to believe as "truth." Truth is not necessarily black and white and is highly case dependant.

Truth in medicine? It is called "practicing" medicine and a Dr gives his "opinion" for a reason. Even lab results require "interpretation."

What a person believes to be "truth" is de facto truth to them. Likely, no amount of debate will necessarily change that. What the world "is" is highly debateable and dependant on your frame of reference. If there was truth in what the best bullet was, we would all be carrying it.

I see that we cannot even agree with that and you with to rely on "absolutes." That's fine. Your "truth" is a low opinion of DocGKR. I don't agree with you, get over it.
You still don't get it but you might be half way there. Truth is not a matter of choice but exists regardless of choice or majority opinion. In contrast, people have a range of opinions about a single truth. Hence, indeed, sensible medical Drs. will give their opinion rather than claim it to be truth. You are confusing the terms "truth" and "opinion".

English
English is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2010, 06:43   #275
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigcalcatrant View Post
Speaking as a mere spectator to this thread, it seems like the anti-BPW guys don't think that BPW should be considered, mentioned, or even thought about as a possibility. They get down right testy. Posts like the above are just begging for an ad hominem barrage of Facklerism-laced epithets.
Always ready. Why do you think CC happens to be our favorite hangout spot?
__________________
- 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 02-07-2010, 07:13   #276
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock20c10mm View Post

Then again it doesn't recoil anymore than 40 (differently yes, more no).



Craig
I don't know much about the .357 SIG as it doesn't really interest me but I take issue with the above statement.

The .357 round does have more recoil than the .40 SW.

The SAAMI max pressure for .40 SW is 35,000 and for the .357 is 40,000.

The average muzzle energy of the .40 SW is 425 fp and the .357 is 475 fp.

There is no way they have the same recoil.

That is why Glock beefed up the frame of their guns when they introduced the caliber in their guns.

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2010, 07:35   #277
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyguy View Post
I don't know much about the .357 SIG as it doesn't really interest me but I take issue with the above statement.

The .357 round does have more recoil than the .40 SW.

The SAAMI max pressure for .40 SW is 35,000 and for the .357 is 40,000.

The average muzzle energy of the .40 SW is 425 fp and the .357 is 475 fp.

There is no way they have the same recoil.

That is why Glock beefed up the frame of their guns when they introduced the caliber in their guns.

Regards,
Happyguy
It doesn't work quite the way you think. Take a .45acp 230 @ 850 which produces 370ft.lbs for example. This would have a heavier recoil than the .357sig you mentioned above if they were in similarly weighted pistols. The reason is that it takes more umph to get a heavier bullet started down the barrel.
__________________
- 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 02-07-2010, 07:40   #278
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
It doesn't work quite the way you think. Take a .45acp 230 @ 850 which produces 370ft.lbs for example. This would have a heavier recoil than the .357sig you mentioned above if they were in similarly weighted pistols. The reason is that it takes more umph to get a heavier bullet started down the barrel.
Your understanding of physics is flawed.

The majority of recoil actually occurs after the bullet has left the barrel. It is caused by the escaping gases and the increased pressure of the .357 SIG and reduced bore size both contribute to increased recoil. Think of a rocket engine.

It's like the difference between a firehose without a nozzle on the end and one with the nozzle adjusted to the tightest stream.

A twelve year old could handle the former where it might take two grown men to handle the latter.

Regards,
Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2010, 07:50   #279
DocKWL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyguy View Post
Your understanding of physics is flawed.

The majority of recoil actually occurs after the bullet has left the barrel. It is caused by the escaping gases and the increased pressure of the .357 SIG and reduced bore size both contribute to increased recoil. Think of a rocket engine.

It's like the difference between a firehose without a nozzle on the end and one with the nozzle adjusted to the tightest stream.

A twelve year old could handle the former where it might take two grown men to handle the latter.

Regards,
Happyguy
Quote:
Your understanding of physics is flawed.
That is the understatement of the century.
DocKWL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2010, 07:57   #280
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocKWL View Post
That is the understatement of the century.
I missed you too.

Forgot to add: That first half of Duncan's book that you read must have taught you to everything about physics...
__________________
- 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

Last edited by uz2bUSMC; 02-07-2010 at 08:09..
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 01:58.




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


Users Currently Online: 622
141 Members
481 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31