Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Post From Another forum

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Chuck R. View Post
    Here's a pretty decent video test of the 135grn GDHP 135+p:



    Average MV of 835 fps out of a snub is about middle of the road as far as MVs go. Here's a decent comparison:

    https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/rev...llistics-test/

    I think "blasty" is pretty much the norm out of a snub nose revolver as far as common SD ammo is concerned.
    So how does this translate into the real world?

    I remember when The manufacturers or RIP sent a gel block that they shot with 2 of their defensive marketed ammunition. It was impressive. After a conference call where we were told to push the stuff I was sent a photo taken with the medical professional's phone. The photo was of an xray hanging on the viewing device. It was of an individual who was actually shot with RIP. The wounds were shallow.

    My point though the gel test made the round look more than capable it's use on am actual human being was anything but.

    So?

    It's a whole lot of fun to watch these videos and hypothesis as it is with techniques and such. The issue is real life doesn't always care about theory.
    Failure is an opportunity to learn.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by mjkeat View Post

      So how does this translate into the real world?

      I remember when The manufacturers or RIP sent a gel block that they shot with 2 of their defensive marketed ammunition. It was impressive. After a conference call where we were told to push the stuff I was sent a photo taken with the medical professional's phone. The photo was of an xray hanging on the viewing device. It was of an individual who was actually shot with RIP. The wounds were shallow.

      My point though the gel test made the round look more than capable it's use on am actual human being was anything but.

      So?

      It's a whole lot of fun to watch these videos and hypothesis as it is with techniques and such. The issue is real life doesn't always care about theory.
      What?

      A magic bullet didn't work as advertised, how can that be, say it ain't so

      I'm shocked, shocked I tell you
      "I suppose it's tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail...." ~Abraham Maslow~

      "Skill makes you harder to kill" ~ Unknown

      Comment


      • #18
        I clicked on 3 threads and all 3 followed the same basic template. I share my opinion based on experience with thousands of shooters as well as my own experiences coupled with a fair amount of research and experimentation, someone disagrees and acts silly. No counter argument just a quasi personal attack. Im the issue.
        Failure is an opportunity to learn.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by mjkeat View Post
          I clicked on 3 threads and all 3 followed the same basic template. I share my opinion based on experience with thousands of shooters as well as my own experiences coupled with a fair amount of research and experimentation, someone disagrees and acts silly. No counter argument just a quasi personal attack. Im the issue.
          Good thing the Salem Witch Trials are over, if not, the fudds would be piling up sticks around the posts

          "How dare you question traditional marksmanship, you must pay for your evil beliefs"
          "I suppose it's tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail...." ~Abraham Maslow~

          "Skill makes you harder to kill" ~ Unknown

          Comment


          • #20
            Chuck, thanks for the article. I like the charts. It's enough to make a gel junkie breathe hard.

            Some people tend to get excited about gel testing, and only gel testing, as if it is absolutely definitive. It's not, but it is good for comparing with actual street results--and the more of those, the better the comparison. If a particular load expands to a picture-perfect mushroom in gel, but in real life it tends to not stop people very well (maybe it doesn't expand well in flesh'n'bone, or whatever), then that's probably not a smart choice for social work. If a certain load expands OK-but-not-great in gel, but has a good record in the real world, it would likely be a better choice for social work. If another load expands so good in gel you could use it in a magazine article, AND does a good job on the street, you get the best of both worlds--if you're a gel junkie.
            Looking at the pictures in the charts, it seems the 135gr Gold Dot Short Barrel doesn't tend to make pretty mushrooms in gel, at least not every time; BUT it has proven itself quite effective in real life. In particular, NYPD has been very happy with its results in OIS's, and they tend to shoot a lot of people, relatively speaking. There have been reliable reports from other sources that it works just as well for other agencies, and in 'civilian' cases.

            All that, but there still is no magic bullet. Videos of gel testing are informative, to a point; but one problem with them on the internet is you don't know how honest the 'testers' are--as in did they shoot 10-20+ videos, then cherry-pick the best looking ones (or worst, depending on what they're trying to prove)? Also, five or ten or twenty examples, however good or bad they are, are not definitive proof that the load will always perform 'this way.' Just because a bad guy drops like a rock when he is shot once with 'this load' doesn't mean the next bad guy won't need multiple rounds of the same load before he drops. Too many variables. Probably not a good idea to shoot once, then stand back and see what happens. It's still smart to keep shooting until it isn't necessary to continue.

            Some will disagree, but one of the rights theye still have is the right to be wrong. Ace2
            Last edited by Ace; 02-11-2019, 01:24.
            Sometimes the term 'Idiot' is a description and not an insult.

            Comment


            • #21
              Bullets make holes, nothing more

              Unless the bullet injures the brain or brain stem all common self defense caliber pistols do the very same thing

              They cause blood loss, when enough blood is lost oxygenated blood doesn't reach the brain and causes unconsciousness

              Forget the magical hydrostatic shock nonsense

              Listen to the testimony from the man who LITERALLY wrote the book on gunshot wounds

              If you're really really bored and can't stand too much factual information at one time skip to :50 seconds

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb1RC5jPdBU

              or skip to 1:10:00

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjZmp4B8IHs&t=4511s

              But please let's move past the hydrostatic shock jello monster silliness
              Last edited by ricco; 02-11-2019, 01:40.
              "I suppose it's tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail...." ~Abraham Maslow~

              "Skill makes you harder to kill" ~ Unknown

              Comment


              • #22
                In my 38/357 revolvers, I tend to favor GDHP rounds after a pathologist who I was shooting with one time said that they performed well on the street.



                I looked it up and the short barrel load is what they make. It should also perform well in my 4" Colt and S&W revolvers
                Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
                The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Ace View Post
                  Chuck, thanks for the article. I like the charts. It's enough to make a gel junkie breathe hard.

                  Some people tend to get excited about gel testing, and only gel testing, as if it is absolutely definitive. It's not, but it is good for comparing with actual street results--and the more of those, the better the comparison. If a particular load expands to a picture-perfect mushroom in gel, but in real life it tends to not stop people very well (maybe it doesn't expand well in flesh'n'bone, or whatever), then that's probably not a smart choice for social work. If a certain load expands OK-but-not-great in gel, but has a good record in the real world, it would likely be a better choice for social work. If another load expands so good in gel you could use it in a magazine article, AND does a good job on the street, you get the best of both worlds--if you're a gel junkie.
                  Looking at the pictures in the charts, it seems the 135gr Gold Dot Short Barrel doesn't tend to make pretty mushrooms in gel, at least not every time; BUT it has proven itself quite effective in real life. In particular, NYPD has been very happy with its results in OIS's, and they tend to shoot a lot of people, relatively speaking. There have been reliable reports from other sources that it works just as well for other agencies, and in 'civilian' cases.

                  All that, but there still is no magic bullet. Videos of gel testing are informative, to a point; but one problem with them on the internet is you don't know how honest the 'testers' are--as in did they shoot 10-20+ videos, then cherry-pick the best looking ones (or worst, depending on what they're trying to prove)? Also, five or ten or twenty examples, however good or bad they are, are not definitive proof that the load will always perform 'this way.' Just because a bad guy drops like a rock when he is shot once with 'this load' doesn't mean the next bad guy won't need multiple rounds of the same load before he drops. Too many variables. Probably not a good idea to shoot once, then stand back and see what happens. It's still smart to keep shooting until it isn't necessary to continue.

                  Some will disagree, but one of the rights theye still have is the right to be wrong. Ace2
                  Where and when did you get the NYPD info?

                  Originally posted by gerhard1 View Post
                  In my 38/357 revolvers, I tend to favor GDHP rounds after a pathologist who I was shooting with one time said that they performed well on the street.



                  I looked it up and the short barrel load is what they make. It should also perform well in my 4" Colt and S&W revolvers
                  Please expand on what he said and when he said it.
                  Last edited by mjkeat; 02-11-2019, 03:37.
                  Failure is an opportunity to learn.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Ace,

                    Your welcome. Agree that there's no magic, but also feel a little research is prudent. I think the best way to look at the gel stuff is a comparison of load A to load B IF one of the other has some decent reviews based on real world incidents. My favorite site for this kind of info is:

                    http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammun....aspx?id=54226

                    Which will break down the testing against the FBI protocols. Also allows you to compare calibers/loads. Doesn't do all loads available, but I tend to carry the Speer GDHP law Enforcement marked stuff anyway.

                    BTW: gerhard, the "ignore" function when enabled through your profile does work!
                    The Lion Does Not Turn Around When the Small Dog Barks

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      The ignore finction or pretending to utilize the ignore function is a great great way to hide when asked questions about silly information shared. Isn't it?
                      Failure is an opportunity to learn.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I have heard the 'difficult' to rack the slide argument for years. Especially from women. Does it take some strength? Yea, but so does picking up an apple. Racking a slide is a technique, not an exercise in grip strength. I have shown people how to push-pull and they were amazed at how simple it was. They were just holding the grip and pulling the slide back. Yes that can be difficult. Thirty seconds instruction gives a new perspective to auto pistols.
                        I'm probably on the list. Don't laugh. So are you!
                        Multi-Tasking is great until you actually have to accomplish something.
                        I quit playing by other peoples rules. They are not written with my best interests in mind.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Chuck R. View Post
                          Ace,

                          Your welcome. Agree that there's no magic, but also feel a little research is prudent. I think the best way to look at the gel stuff is a comparison of load A to load B IF one of the other has some decent reviews based on real world incidents. My favorite site for this kind of info is:

                          http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammun....aspx?id=54226

                          Which will break down the testing against the FBI protocols. Also allows you to compare calibers/loads. Doesn't do all loads available, but I tend to carry the Speer GDHP law Enforcement marked stuff anyway.

                          BTW: gerhard, the "ignore" function when enabled through your profile does work!
                          Chuck, it is true that there is no such thing as a magic bullet. But there are rounds which are more likely to stop an attack than others. All these rounds do is is increase the shooter's margin of error. That's my opinion and I freely admit that I can't back it up with hard data. There is a cost to these higher-velocity rounds and that is that they are harder to control.

                          Like I have said repeatedly,it is a trade-off.

                          And I know the 'ignore' function works. I feel a lot better since I blocked the one poster. Now when he plays his games it does him no good.
                          Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
                          The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Agreed.

                            I tagged both of them. Honestly I don't have the time to waste on either.
                            The Lion Does Not Turn Around When the Small Dog Barks

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Chuck R. View Post
                              Agreed.

                              I tagged both of them. Honestly I don't have the time to waste on either.
                              I just blocked the one. ricco, I still have degree of respect for.
                              Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
                              The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by ricco View Post
                                Bullets make holes

                                But please let's move past the hydrostatic shock jello monster silliness
                                lololol
                                PLAY THE TRUMP CARD IN 2016!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X