That's not really the point of gel testing in my mind. It just a way to get a baseline comparison from cartridge A to cartridge B. I don't think just because cartridge X gets 14" in gel thats what it will do in a human body. But if cartridge X gets so and so inches more in penetration and expands so and so more than cartridge Y in gel than I'm inclined to purchase cartridge X.
Correct. They aren't. But they are consistent. That's the purpose of gel.
Gel actually accounts for that. That's why they came up with minimal penetrating numbers. They shot pigs and cadavers with rounds that worked through bone and muscle. They in turn shot those same rounds into gel and measured the penetration. New rounds have to get that same penetration.
That's why I also stick to tried and tested rounds. The 124gr +P HSTs are a known quantity with excellent street credentials, the 77gr OTM mk262's performance is also well known by now. As such these are my two go to rounds. I am also dabbling in the 64gr Gold Dots but thats largely due to the very nice price PSA is charging for them, I suppose they do have a barrier busting role. Gel testing is just another data point, terminal performance is subject to so many variables I don't get too hung up on "what if it hits bone? What if it hits at an oblique angle?" type concerns. Good, proven ammo should be able to perform well over a wide set of circumstances.
Except quality hollow points have been proven to not penetrate enough under less than average conditions at times. Add an odd angle, a car door, and a heavy leather jacket followed by fleece and you have inadequate penetration.
Everything is a joke to you but birdshot is proven to not penetrate enough.Birdshot.
"Huge amount of energy dump."
Those physics will get you every time.
No shit.
I don't think they were actually hitting the fat sandal guy, not till he got dropped by a good hit. It os very common for "failure to stops" hits to be mistakenly attributed to misses. I for one am not going to switch to untried, too expensive, non expanding solid copper novelty rounds.
Was it lemon meringue? Cause that's my favorite kind.
Does a shotgun have more energy than a pistol? Does all the energy from the birdshot stop in the body?
The fat got got hit multiple times in the chest. If you slow down the video, you can actually see them hit. Reports later showed that a leg shot followed by a head shot put him down.
Ha ha! Lemon meringue? What a noob!!1!!1!
Still not going to alter my loadout based of one instance. Terminal ballistics is choas theory personifed, any of thousands of reasons can affect performance. The best we can do is average it out.
Um............. I select pie based on flavor not on ballistical performance? Though I do like pumpkin pie too. Also my mother's blueberry pie.Ha ha! Lemon meringue? What a noob!!1!!1!
Everyone knows you need the sectional density of pumpkin pie for any kind of penetration!
That wasn't the only instance. There are many more if you look them up. I'd provide links but I had to do a lot of fishing to find them and sift through the nonsense. But like you said, " Nothing short of a direct hit to the CNS with any round would immediately drop.". A solid bullet ensures that.
Absent published data showing increased effectiveness of solid bullets over hollowpoints I don't think you can make that claim. There is a large amount of data showing that FMJ pistol ammo is terribly ineffective though, particularly in 9mm. How are the solids any different than FMJ's?
You are no doubt aware of the equation f=ma correct?
That's correct if at a distance and the shot is spread. Not so a 5 to 10 ft.
What are you arguing for birdshot?
Would you rather be hit in the head with 10 ping pong balls thrown by MLB pitchers from 1 ft, or a baseball thrown by a 15 year old little leaguer from 3ft?
I'm answering honestly. Is rather get hit by the 15 year old.
No. Sorry. My analogy was about energy alone. Reread my post.
