Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Post From Another forum

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

  • gerhard1
    started a topic Post From Another forum

    Post From Another forum

    C&P of something from anotheer forum

    So, I've taken my wife to the range more than a couple times and she has shot all of my pistols except my 44mag. She really likes my Glock, Shields and XD but she does have a difficult time with racking the slide and with limp wristing the pistol. Couple times we rented a 4" S&W Model 60 revolver and really like it and she shot it well. I've asked her if she would like here own pistol or revolver and she has always declined. Well, she literally woke up one morning about 4 weeks ago and said "I want a revolver." She couldn't elaborate on if it was a dream or what but she now is fully on board in getting a revolver.

    We went around to several of the better LGS in the area and had her fondle some of the airweights and the Model 60, 640 and 649. She decided she like the heavier feel of the Model 60 and wanted the exposed hammer to utilize single action as well as DA. She is now getting a nice new Model 60 for her birthday coming up in early February. I'll work with her at the range and make sure she is full capable of using the revolver for home defense if needed. Once we move back to OK she'll get professional training and then take her CCW class.

    Here's my question. I have plenty of good 44mag ammo for my Colt Anaconda but need some opinions on 38spl and 357 loads. I want her to shoot both calibers but think I need ot look at a quality 38spl hollow point or a good +P load. What grain should I be looking at for her? 125gr, 158gr? What do you shoot for training/plinking and for personal defense?

    If you have a good holster recommendation for CCW chime in as I will also be using that on occasion for myself to carry. Something quality and leather?
    Thoughts??

    LGS=Local Gun Shop

  • Chuck R.
    replied
    Originally posted by gerhard1 View Post
    ricco, does hydrostatic shock play a role in cartridge effectiveness? I'd think that the more tissue disrupted, the more likely and faster the target goes down. Please note that I'm not just referring to blood loss, but such things as tissue and organ damage.
    gerhard,

    I posted this before, but there's been at least a couple studies done that suggest some "hydro-static" shock does occur at at least the realm of magnum handgun velocities. This one study for instance set the parameters at 500 ft pounds and 12" of penetration, which is pretty much what the .357 125 load delivers.

    Energy Transfer Required for Remote Neural Effects Our own research (Courtney and Courtney) supports the conclusion that handgun levels of energy transfer can produce pressure waves leading to incapacitation and injury.[29][30][26][31][32] The work of Suneson et al. also suggests that remote neural effects can occur with levels of energy transfer possible with handguns (roughly 500 ftlbs/700 joules).
    Even though Wang et al. document remote neural damage for low levels of energy transfer, these levels of neural damage are probably too small to contribute to rapid incapacitation. Courtney and Courtney suggest that remote neural effects only begin to make significant contributions to rapid incapacitation for ballistic pressure wave levels above 500 PSI (corresponds to transferring roughly 300 ft-lbs in 12 inches of penetration) and become easily observable above 1000 PSI (corresponds to transferring roughly 600 ft-lbs in 1 foot of penetration).[29] Incapacitating effects in this range of energy transfer are consistent with observations of remote spinal injuries,[15] observations of suppressed EEGs and breathing interruptions in pigs,[27][33] and with observations of incapacitating effects of ballistic pressure waves without a wound channel.[34]
    https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0803/0803.3051.pdf

    I wouldn't count on it, but there does seem to be some evidence that it occurs to some extent with handguns. Rifles & carbines I have no doubt having dressed out a chitload of big game animals with "gooey" internals, blood shot meat etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • ricco
    replied
    Originally posted by gerhard1 View Post
    ricco, does hydrostatic shock play a role in cartridge effectiveness? I'd think that the more tissue disrupted, the more likely and faster the target goes down. Please note that I'm not just referring to blood loss, but such things as tissue and organ damage.
    As I understand it velocity is key

    A powerful Hydrostatic Shock is supposed to scramble the messages transmitted to and from the brain with tissue damage being secondary

    Typically, handgun rounds do not produce the velocity necessary to interrupt nerve impulses

    All bullets produce Hydrostatic Shock, how much the shock or ripple effect impacts the nerves and scramble the messages to and from the brain is dependent on the power of that ripple

    How fast incapacitation would occur from organ damage would depend on the organ, such as an injured liver would likely cause more rapid incapacitation than an a injured spleen


    Last edited by ricco; 02-12-2019, 18:33.

    Leave a comment:


  • gerhard1
    replied
    ricco, does hydrostatic shock play a role in cartridge effectiveness? I'd think that the more tissue disrupted, the more likely and faster the target goes down. Please note that I'm not just referring to blood loss, but such things as tissue and organ damage.

    Leave a comment:


  • mjkeat
    replied
    Some people have a serious aversion to anything outside of their echo chamber. It's probably a little bit like partisan politics. They just don't want to hear anything that doesn't come put of the mouth unless they have the correct identifying letter next to their name. It's probably the #1 enemy of growth. Why else would gunsite still have such a cult following?

    We know that same group hates questions. They absolutely refuse to answer them. They hide behind the ignore button.

    Leave a comment:


  • ricco
    replied
    Originally posted by Chuck R. View Post
    Agreed.

    I tagged both of them. Honestly I don't have the time to waste on either.
    It won't last, you'll miss me too much

    Leave a comment:


  • deerhunter
    replied
    Federals new HST short barrel is very nice. the boolits sit flush with case mouth, minimizing velocity changes based on angle changes of ammo, also have a very wide JHP cavity.

    Leave a comment:


  • deerhunter
    replied
    Originally posted by ricco View Post
    Bullets make holes

    But please let's move past the hydrostatic shock jello monster silliness
    lololol

    Leave a comment:


  • gerhard1
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chuck R.
    replied
    Agreed.

    I tagged both of them. Honestly I don't have the time to waste on either.

    Leave a comment:


  • gerhard1
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • pds45
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • mjkeat
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • Chuck R.
    replied
    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • mjkeat
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X