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 12-26-2012, 07:43   #776
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
So then what are the criteria for selecting handgun rounds for the BPW crowd? I know it couldn't be the FBI tests; could it?
This is where I want to clear it up...again...

First, I don't believe that you have read Dr.Courtney's work(s). Maybe you skimmed through or just lost the information from memory over time, I don't know. But...you're here discussing this but don't even have an understanding of what you are arguing against.

Personally, I don't mind the FBI protocal as a good place to start for evaluating ammo. I don't agree with all of it but that's neither here nor there.

As I tried to explain to you in a previous post it is not FBI protocal or BPW. It does not have to be one or the other. You, me or anyone can choose any round round which meets IWBA criteria and still take it one step further by calculating the PBPW for the load selected. BPW is not 100%, it is not considered a primary wounding mechanism. It is an added advantage. Also, it should be noted, again, that there are basically 3 areas which BPW may play a Factor. 1) TBI, which is the most contaversial. 2) distant affect to the nervous system (i.e. spinal column local to gsw). 3) damage peripheral to the wound track.

Contrary to your previous claims, this theory has not been debunked. Fackler's counter arguments have lost credability but we will get there later.

Now, I have taken the time to re-explain this so if you wouldn't mind at least reading it thoroughly...it would be greatly appreciated.
__________________
- 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 12-26-2012, 09:16   #777
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
So then what are the criteria for selecting handgun rounds for the BPW crowd? I know it couldn't be the FBI tests; could it?
I don't know if there are criteria for the so-called "BPW crowd". I'm perfectly satisfied with the FBI protocol of 12" penetration, but I'm also aware that rounds such as 9BPLE that don't always penetrate that far into gel have proven street cred records.

My own criteria are (after guaranteeing gun/ammo reliability): total overall shooting characteristics, including accuracy (priority), penetration, expansion, recoil. Since I can't personally guarantee any of my criteria will be present in the event I'll ever need to draw and shoot in a potential life-or-death situation I have to rely on both calibrated and backyard tests to inform me. And I don't place total faith in the FBI protocol as I've carried 9BPLE on occasion and still have some of these rounds and would carry them again if needed or desired.

One descriptive written by someone else in an earlier post particularly struck me --- "dogmatic". I've followed these discussions for years here on Glock Talk and the one thing I believe can be said about some Facklerites is that they're dogmatic to the point they refuse to consider any possibility of BPW from handgun rounds.

I neither accept nor discount BPW, but I've asked many times if BPW does exist at a certain velocity then please, someone, tell me where that bright line exists, how it reliably produces BPW at that set velocity, and how it magically appears at that set velocity and remains constant above that set velocity without producing any variations of BPW below that set velocity under any circumstances.

To me it seems there are a number of people arguing that a loud bell goes off with a projectile travelling at, say, 2000 fps, and the sound of the bell guarantees BPW and all its instant stop miracles but until that bell sounds no such explosive effects can possibly take place. That just seems to be asking inquiring people to believe the myriad nuances of ballistics, bullet design, totality of circumstances, and the human body are static considerations when these converge in a shooting incident.
__________________
Rocket Scientist
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 10:11   #778
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by unit1069 View Post
I neither accept nor discount BPW, but I've asked many times if BPW does exist at a certain velocity then please, someone, tell me where that bright line exists, how it reliably produces BPW at that set velocity, and how it magically appears at that set velocity and remains constant above that set velocity without producing any variations of BPW below that set velocity under any circumstances.
You're looking at it wrong. BPW is messured in p.s.i. Based on that p.s.i you gain a percentage of probability that BPW may assist in incapacitation. This can not be calculated by velocity alone.
__________________
- 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 12-26-2012, 10:13   #779
RichardB
Silver Membership
Senior Member
 
RichardB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,357
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/printable/node/7866

It seems to me that real recorded street results trump any body's theory of wounding or incapacitation. I acknowledge that Highway Patrols need some extra omph to penetrate vehicle doors and windows, whether that comes thought extra FPS or change in bullet design I'll leave to the experimenters or school trained engineers to work out.

Often the perception of handgun power is sufficient for the police shirts to make a caliber purchasing decision. If the psychology of the individual police officers' leads them to think the NEW is better than the old then the morale is generally up and the police unions find other things to complain about. Very few officers will ever fire their handguns at a person, so morale counts. If there is a major failure then reconsideration of caliber quickly surfaces.

Remember a year or two ago the cops that were ambushed in a coffee shop on the west coast? The thug carried several 40S&W slugs in his carcass as he made his getaway and stayed free for several days. Has that PD gone to different bullets or calibers yet?

Vanity, vanity all is vanity.
__________________
Richard

“Food for thought is no substitute for the real thing”
RichardB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 10:16   #780
pisc1024
Senior Member
 
pisc1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
Temporary cavity is NOT limited to 44 mag and 357 mag. I urge you to look up what a temporary cavity is. All standard personal defense cals, as you put it, make temp cavs when the HP expands.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that none of the standard defense rounds show any significant damage beyond the permanent crush.

Quote:
All projectiles that penetrate the body can only disrupt tissue by these two wounding mechanisms: the localized crushing of tissue in the bullet's path and the transient stretching of tissue adjacent to the wound track. Projectile wounds differ in the amount and location of crushed and stretched tissue. The relative contribution by each of these mechanisms to any wound depends on the physical characteristics of the projectile, its size, weight, shape, construction, and velocity, penetration depth and the type of tissue with which the projectile interacts. Unlike rifle bullets, handgun bullets, regardless of whether they are fired from pistols or SMG’s, generally only disrupt tissue by the crush mechanism. In addition, temporary cavitation from most handgun bullets does not reliably damage tissue and is not usually a significant mechanism of wounding.
I found that here: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=34714
I thought that it made for interesting reading.
pisc1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 10:19   #781
clarkz71
Senior Member
 
clarkz71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
Well, bro I have said it a few different ways so maybe I can clear it up this time by saying it again...but I'll do that after I quote a different reply you have made. BPW can be tested in a lab. The pressure wave itself is the easy part. The hard part is deciding what role it plays when we talk incapacitation...
You're talking to a wall with this guy, he'd argue the sky is green
until blue in the face. Almost every post in his history is
argumentitive and adversarial. If he's former LEO I'll bet
he never let anyone off with a warning.

BPW is still hard to prove one way or the other without
comprehensive study, but cannot be proved or disproved
at this point in my opinion from what I've read.

Just my opinion based on my limited knowledge of the subject.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg View Post
Real Men of Genius....Here's to you, Mister self proclaimed-genius-surrounded by idiots!
.
G23 gen3 .40/.357 Sig
Florida Glocker #1923

Last edited by clarkz71; 12-26-2012 at 10:21..
clarkz71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 10:22   #782
pisc1024
Senior Member
 
pisc1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4949shooter View Post
It goes beyond the hole cause by the 10mm/.40 bullet. It is the expansion and temporary wound cavity caused by this expansion. The wax media does not resume its former position like ballistic gel or human tissue, thus illustrates the point.
I'm tracking now... I think though that wax is a poor stand in for a living thing. By this I mean you may see huge expansion of the wax when the bullet hits, but this is in no way a direct correlation of what happens in a living body when struck with a bullet. Most of the tissue of the body is fairly resilient, it will stretch as the bullet passes by, but it will not tear or be deformed significantly. If wax was a good indicator of how a bullet performed in the body, then I'm sure bullet design would be very different. Bottom line: I get your point, but I think you are comparing apples to oranges.
pisc1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 10:42   #783
pisc1024
Senior Member
 
pisc1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
This is where I want to clear it up...again...

First, I don't believe that you have read Dr.Courtney's work(s). Maybe you skimmed through or just lost the information from memory over time, I don't know. But...you're here discussing this but don't even have an understanding of what you are arguing against.

Personally, I don't mind the FBI protocal as a good place to start for evaluating ammo. I don't agree with all of it but that's neither here nor there.

As I tried to explain to you in a previous post it is not FBI protocal or BPW. It does not have to be one or the other. You, me or anyone can choose any round round which meets IWBA criteria and still take it one step further by calculating the PBPW for the load selected. BPW is not 100%, it is not considered a primary wounding mechanism. It is an added advantage. Also, it should be noted, again, that there are basically 3 areas which BPW may play a Factor. 1) TBI, which is the most contaversial. 2) distant affect to the nervous system (i.e. spinal column local to gsw). 3) damage peripheral to the wound track.

Contrary to your previous claims, this theory has not been debunked. Fackler's counter arguments have lost credability but we will get there later.

Now, I have taken the time to re-explain this so if you wouldn't mind at least reading it thoroughly...it would be greatly appreciated.
I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not I have read something, all I can say is I have.

I find that Courtney’s testing and scientific method to be pretty spotty at best. He hung his hat on animal testing, which as I said before has its place. He did this though using goats as one of his sources of data. Goats are an awful stand-in for humans, they are notorious for having a very low will to live or tolerate pain. He points to the Strasbourg tests, which most people doubt even really happened. He also references the one shot stop % which I thought had been laughed out of any serious study save for interesting reading while taking a dump. His theory is weak, and so is his science to back it up.
I do agree and think that it is a good idea to take everything into account, but let's face it, the discussion we are having about BPW is nothing more than academic. The FBI testing is real, you can touch it, and that's good enough for me.
pisc1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 10:47   #784
pisc1024
Senior Member
 
pisc1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 589
.....

Last edited by pisc1024; 12-26-2012 at 12:12..
pisc1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 11:22   #785
clarkz71
Senior Member
 
clarkz71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,606
Wow, a flurry of posts, wish I could read them but all
I can see is the following. I told you I put you on my Ignore List.

This message is hidden because pisc1024 is on your ignore list

First time I've done that in over 15 years on car, motorcycle
and gun forums. I won't get sucked into useless debate.
Sorry to all other members for an off topic post
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg View Post
Real Men of Genius....Here's to you, Mister self proclaimed-genius-surrounded by idiots!
.
G23 gen3 .40/.357 Sig
Florida Glocker #1923

Last edited by clarkz71; 12-26-2012 at 11:26..
clarkz71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 11:53   #786
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not I have read something, all I can say is I have.

I find that Courtney’s testing and scientific method to be pretty spotty at best. He hung his hat on animal testing, which as I said before has its place. He did this though using goats as one of his sources of data. Goats are an awful stand-in for humans, they are notorious for having a very low will to live or tolerate pain. He points to the Strasbourg tests, which most people doubt even really happened. He also references the one shot stop % which I thought had been laughed out of any serious study save for interesting reading while taking a dump. His theory is weak, and so is his science to back it up.
I do agree and think that it is a good idea to take everything into account, but let's face it, the discussion we are having about BPW is nothing more than academic. The FBI testing is real, you can touch it, and that's good enough for me.
And he used deer... His theory isn't backed by the Strasbourg or OSS data. He mearly points to the corelation in that if the goat test had taken place and the OSS data is correct it is similar to his findings. Also, he is not the only person to test distant effects of a projectile, quite a few have. All of them show distant pressure spikes and/or damage not caused by direct crush.

Dr.Courtney also set up a test method that anybody can duplicate if they are so inclined to try.
__________________
- 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 12-26-2012, 12:11   #787
pisc1024
Senior Member
 
pisc1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
And he used deer... His theory isn't backed by the Strasbourg or OSS data. He mearly points to the corelation in that if the goat test had taken place and the OSS data is correct it is similar to his findings. Also, he is not the only person to test distant effects of a projectile, quite a few have. All of them show distant pressure spikes and/or damage not caused by direct crush.

Dr.Courtney also set up a test method that anybody can duplicate if they are so inclined to try.
Who else has worked on this? I am truly interested; I would like to see their work. As I said, I think personally if you are using Strasbourg and oss as evidence that your theory is true, then you are stretching. Once again, I'm not arguing that BPW doesn’t exist; I am arguing that it is not present in most handgun cals. To be sure when a rifle round strikes a body at 2800ish FPS something dose happen. Even with this however, it is still not 100% of the time you see an instant drop with a rifle.
pisc1024 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 12:25   #788
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
Who else has worked on this? I am truly interested; I would like to see their work. As I said, I think personally if you are using Strasbourg and oss as evidence that your theory is true, then you are stretching. Once again, I'm not arguing that BPW doesn’t exist; I am arguing that it is not present in most handgun cals. To be sure when a rifle round strikes a body at 2800ish FPS something dose happen. Even with this however, it is still not 100% of the time you see an instant drop with a rifle.
Velocity alone is not the main importance but I've covered that enough.

I'm gonna try to find some links for you, I'll be back.

Here is an abstract from Suneson et al

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2313747

Another from Sturtevant

http://link.springer.com/article/10....744581?LI=true

Actually, I'm going to do this via Wiki. It's difficult to find some of this information without having access to some of the sites. Don't freak out because it is a Wiki link... it has all the references you may want to research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
__________________
- 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; 12-26-2012 at 13:01..
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 14:54   #789
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that none of the standard defense rounds show any significant damage beyond the permanent crush.
.
Maybe not, but as your posts were written, you were saying that TC didn't happen at all, except with 44 mag and maybe 357, and I was saying that it does, not that it's a reliable wound mechanism.

It isn't reliable, but it is reproducible, in gel tests, in test animal and in the dissection of animals killed in hunts. Look at the tests on Brassfetcher.com for visible TC effects. The expansion of the bullet creates a temporary wound cavity, which forces the tissues apart, and *if* that separation exceeds the tissues elastic limits, then the tissue is damaged-torn blood vessels, organ tissue, connective tissues, etc- then cavity violently collapses back in on itself, which can compound the wounding. (actually it is a process expand, - collapse, rebound/expand, collapse again, until the energy is expended.)

TC is dependent to a great degree on bullet design and velocity. Higher velocity rounds result in greater TCs *usually*. If forced to choose between TC as a wound mechanism, or PBW, as a consideration in ammo selection, I would choose TC.

That said, I don't count on it, nor do I use light high-vel bullets. I count on high-mass bullets with the momentum to reach vitals or the CNS, and I count on my shot placement, rather than a specific caliber, although again, I chose the caliber in order to shoot a particular weight bullet within a given frame size (.40 S&W 180 gr JHP). For myself, it doesn't make sense to move the the larger platform of the .45ACP to shoot a 230 gr bullet versus the 180 I'm using now.
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 15:05   #790
scottyd2506
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo View Post
Then that fella they had to shoot at least five times a couple of years back in El Paso with a .357 SIG was my imagination? You won't find that on the Internet.
You misunderstand multiple shots fired vs shots needed to be fired. just because a cop unloads 5 or 10 rounds into a attacking bad guy running at him from 30 yards does not mean that the 1st shot failed. It mans the officer is not taking chances.

A lot of police will fire rapidly when in danger, maybe the 1rst round would stop them, but why take chances with your life.

No round is 100% on the 1rst shot or even the who magazine for that matter. Not the 357 magnum or 357 sig for that matter.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo View Post
The .357 SIG works better on auto body & glass penetration, which was the main reason the TX DPS selected it. It's not a death ray by any means. Any difference between it and 9mm 115 gr. +p+ on people is negligible at best and difficult to quantify. No bad guy will be able to differentiate 10 more gr. of lead in his body. The .357 SIG, while a fantastic handgun round, does not have mythical powers.

So your trying to tell us the 9mm is equal or to the 357 40 and 45?

Why is it then LE agencies are dropping the 9mm by the 1000's and 1000's?? because they just want a change of pace! Is that what your saying?

Why did the Texas DPS when they switched from the 357 Revolver to 9mm auto-loaders have serious problems stopping bad guys...I mean 10 grains or 200 fps doesn't matter right.?

LE agencies one after the another have reported FAILURES galore with the 9mm, and went to something better you may find remote failures with the 357 sig or 40 or 45 or 10 or even 44 mag. nothing is 100%. esp a handgun. But if one is forced to carry a handgun, might as well do better than the 9mm.

The lame excuse of "it's only better for penetrating auto glass" is ridicules.

The Texas DPS did like how the 357 penetrated auto glass better than the .45


The old proven 357 mag load with a 125 at 1450 fps from a 4 inch bbl or 1500-1550 fps from a 6 inch service revolver is a proven round. the 357 sig can duplicate this, the Underwood 125 Gold dot leaves a Glock 32 4 inch bbl at 1511 fps avg.

the 9mm is not even near what any of the 357's are

Look at the old Marshal studies, long before the gold dot 357 loads that are ,like 99% effective now.

Even Marshal also discounted multiple shots, only failures to stop if one shot was fired.
This is why the 75% rating went to 96% for the best 357 magnum etc. the best 9mm went from 68% to 91%. I have the stats both ways.

Any way you do the math, the extra 200 fps matters in REAL LIFE


200 fps is 96% vs 91%. that is 1 in 20 that are not stopped vs 1 in 10 not stopped 1st shot.

If I'm a police chief handing out calibers. I'd rather have the 1 in 20 shooting be a failure than 1 in 10.



The 9mm is good against skinny anorexic to avg Joe weight guys, the 357 has that extra penetration (like windshields) to damage the vitals on a 300 lb attacking bad guy. people are bigger now a days. More fat and muscle wise. a lot of those drug dealers are big ol 300 lb plus guy, a 9mm (9x19) is just going to pi$$ them off.
pentrating the large fat and muscle layers and barely making it an inch into the organs is just going to make someone big mad and more dangerous. the Extra 200 fps or 10 grains makes a HUGE difference.



The 9mm (9x19) is a failure, if it was "AS GOOD" and shot placement was everything, then why did the 10mm or 40 SW get developed and eventually replace almost every 9mm state police sidearm??? the 9x19 has been a dismal failure across the USA

Your opinion or mine doesn't matter, nor does fake ballistic gelatin for mimicking tissue.
What matters is 1st hand experience in in real life, the Texas DPS officers did not like the 9mm's stopping power, but they LOVE the 357 sig stopping power, what more proof you need that 10 grains or 200 fps matters.

Your calculations are on paper or fake bal gel tests and theory , the Texas DPS is based on REAL LIFE results.

You are not debating with me here, you are trying to debate with those officers who have seen the results.

Last edited by scottyd2506; 12-26-2012 at 15:15..
scottyd2506 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 15:36   #791
4949shooter
Senior Member
 
4949shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Jersey Republik
Posts: 12,804


Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
I'm tracking now... I think though that wax is a poor stand in for a living thing. By this I mean you may see huge expansion of the wax when the bullet hits, but this is in no way a direct correlation of what happens in a living body when struck with a bullet. Most of the tissue of the body is fairly resilient, it will stretch as the bullet passes by, but it will not tear or be deformed significantly. If wax was a good indicator of how a bullet performed in the body, then I'm sure bullet design would be very different. Bottom line: I get your point, but I think you are comparing apples to oranges.
Don't get me wrong, wax media does not simulate human tissue. I was just using it to illustrate a point, which I think you get.
__________________
"...the men under your command deserve your leadership."-OXCOPS
4949shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 15:38   #792
4949shooter
Senior Member
 
4949shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Jersey Republik
Posts: 12,804


Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
Who else has worked on this? I am truly interested; I would like to see their work. As I said, I think personally if you are using Strasbourg and oss as evidence that your theory is true, then you are stretching. Once again, I'm not arguing that BPW doesn’t exist; I am arguing that it is not present in most handgun cals. To be sure when a rifle round strikes a body at 2800ish FPS something dose happen. Even with this however, it is still not 100% of the time you see an instant drop with a rifle.
How do you explain the street results of the .357 magnum 125 grain bullet at 1450 fps?
__________________
"...the men under your command deserve your leadership."-OXCOPS
4949shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 15:52   #793
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
Geeeze lot of reading.

I can tell you what caliber to use to stop 100 to 200 pound pigs. I don't know that the pig is a good stand in for humans, I can tell you he is tuff.

FBI had it right the first time and wrong the second time

10mm.

just like the guy who started this thread.

and if i knew i was going to a gun fight....G20.

Rusty
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u

Last edited by rustytxrx; 12-26-2012 at 15:53..
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 16:12   #794
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustytxrx View Post
Geeeze lot of reading.

I can tell you what caliber to use to stop 100 to 200 pound pigs. I don't know that the pig is a good stand in for humans, I can tell you he is tuff.

FBI had it right the first time and wrong the second time

10mm.

just like the guy who started this thread.

and if i knew i was going to a gun fight....G20.

Rusty
Hmmm, I wasn't expecting to see this from you.
__________________
- 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 12-26-2012, 16:14   #795
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
I have heard all the issues you are about to bring up regarding the 10mm. I have invited several fellow pistol shooters who thought their gun was every thing the 10mm is, to set in a stand and prove it.

For the last 20 years I have hunted pigs with the same 10mm G20. I have found NO REASON to change to any other semi auto pistol. There is not another production caliber that competes with it in the world of pigs.

Caliber Corner
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u

Last edited by rustytxrx; 12-26-2012 at 16:45..
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 16:17   #796
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
What issues was I going to bring up?
__________________
- 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 12-26-2012, 16:17   #797
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by rustytxrx View Post

Caliber Corner
Old-school Glocks rule.


<-- owns 2nd gen 23
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 16:28   #798
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
of course I am speaking of pistols not revolvers.

I bought the bottom gen2 in 1995 or 1996. I bought the gen3 to put a light on.

I won't belabor the issue but I have put A LOT of pigs in the freeze. I know for a absolute fact that a center mass shot from a 9mm is a joke on a pig over 18 months old. works for brain shots but that is it

Rusty
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 17:59   #799
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
I understand that the discussion is inpart regarding tissue damage theory exteranl to bullet ballastics. I think the facct is that the energy has to be contained in the bullet before it can be dispersed into any theory...these are muzzle energies I calculated from data I chronographed from my personal pistols...

9mm +p+ = 500ft/lb

9mm +p = 431ft/lb

sig 357 = 550ft/lb

40 cal +p = 510ft/lb

45 acp +p = 460ft/lb

10mm = 748ft/lb

Hmmmm ya see a difference?

40 cal work horse that I have shoot A LOT.

Caliber Corner
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u

Last edited by rustytxrx; 12-26-2012 at 18:00..
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2012, 18:13   #800
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
There would indeed have to be a very specical bullet to seperate the first 5 caliblers into one caliber being a lot more effective than the other four???? ya think

Now that number 6. Hmmmm I can see how that caliber might prove to be more effective than the other 5.

44 magmun has close to 1000 ft/lb

.223 about 1300 ft/lb

.308 about 2600 ft/lb

You guys are asking a lot out of theories with little muzzle energy to support them

Rusty
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u
rustytxrx 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 12:52.



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


Users Currently Online: 1,122
311 Members
811 Guests

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