Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Caliber Corner (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Speer Gold Dot 64gr 223 Ballistics Gel Test & Results (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1453149)

plouffedaddy 11-14-2012 15:20

Speer Gold Dot 64gr 223 Ballistics Gel Test & Results
 
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l1...3/DSC01840.jpg
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l1...3/DSC01838.jpg
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l1...3/DSC01841.jpg

Just finished up the testing of the 223 Speer Gold Dot 64gr soft point round. Here's a summary of the conditions and results.

Test conditions:
-16'' PSA mid-length chrome lined barrel
-70 degrees
-300 feet above sea level
-Test rounds fired from 7 feet
-FBI spec Clear Ballistics gel block (more on this below)
-4 layers of denim

Results:
-2,753 fps average velocity
-1076 ft/lbs energy
-18.5'' penetration
-Maximum expansion measurement: 0.48''
-Minimum expansion measurement: 0.35''
-Retained weight: 54 grains


The manufacture of the gel block, Clear Ballistics, claims their gel meets FBI specs for testing. I calibrate my gel per their specs prior to testing and use 4 layers of denim per IWBA protocol.

However, by no means am I saying this test is a substitute for the great work industry professionals like Dr. Roberts and others do. I'm just a shooter that likes to learn about the products I use.

Here's the video showing the test, the permanent cavity, and a discussion of the results:


Questions? Comments?

SCmasterblaster 11-14-2012 19:52

It looks like
 
some potent ammunition! :cool:

J_P 11-14-2012 19:57

Nice write up, I've searched for test on this exact round and didn't find much. Thanks for the info much appreciated!!


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

cowboy1964 11-14-2012 20:17

The 55gr Gold Dots seem to be easier to find than the 62gr.

plouffedaddy 11-15-2012 10:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboy1964 (Post 19632350)
The 55gr Gold Dots seem to be easier to find than the 62gr.

For those that are eligible, gtdist.com has these available currently.

Andy W 11-15-2012 10:43

18.5' is a little too much penetration for civilian applications. Good chance of overpenetration which is an issue for urban home defense. You don't wanna shoot through the bad guy and have the bullet pass through the wall ending up God knows where.

triggerjerk 11-15-2012 11:57

Good video.

SCmasterblaster 11-15-2012 16:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy W (Post 19634220)
18.5' is a little too much penetration for civilian applications. Good chance of overpenetration which is an issue for urban home defense. You don't wanna shoot through the bad guy and have the bullet pass through the wall ending up God knows where.

This is an important consideration when choosing a HD gun. I use a 115gr JHP +p+ in my G17, and I am aware of how it can penetrate walls in my apartment.

uz2bUSMC 11-15-2012 19:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy W (Post 19634220)
18.5' is a little too much penetration for civilian applications. Good chance of over penetration which is an issue for urban home defense. You don't wanna shoot through the bad guy and have the bullet pass through the wall ending up God knows where.

There is more to the break down on penetration than just simply 18.5 is too much. IMHO, people see that 12" mark as the only mark that is acceptable. Of course ballistic gel and it's variants are consistent media, there is no air space like what might be found in a lung, no difference in tissue like in the body and lastly, no bone. So, what can happen in the body can be different in gel, everyone knows this... or should. BUT, gel tests are the convenient consistency that most look at for an idea of what they want or feel they need. So to keep things convenient for discussion sake I'm going forward with my comments as if the gel correlates mostly to what you can expect for penetration on an assailant. This should be fair since the gel test is what feeds your apprehension for this loading.

I've explained it this way before so here goes...

Picture a thin individual, 8 1/2" from chest to back. Also envision a squared off shot opportunity (perfectly facing this notional BG). Once the shot is made, based on the gel test for comparison sake, we are going to allow 18.5" of penetration. The skin alone equates to roughly 2" of penetration value on the front because it is supported by tissue underneath and I would venture to guess the fact that the sectional density of the bullet helps since it is still unchanged (it has not expanded). The skin on the back (exit) side equates to roughly 4" penetration value (at this point the skin has room to move and the bullet is expanded, decreasing it's sectional density). At this point we already have 6 total inches accounted for. When we add in the other 8" (roughly) of body depth we are now totaling 14" of penetration value on our thin assailant. This would leave us with only 4.5" of unaccounted penetration value. The bullet, at this point, has a much worse sectional density which will make it more difficult to penetrate the skin of another unwanted target. It also would have a small chance of making it to the vitals.

Yes, I know that hitting any other target is bad no matter how you slice it but it's not really the point. The main point is that given an extremely thin individual that bullet doesn't have much of an opportunity to cause harm. If that same notional individual turns slightly he would add even more penetration value. If he presents any limb in the way of the bullet, again, more value is added. Or if he is simply the average torso size of 9.4" or greater, is quartering away from you and presents arms in the path of your bullet... you have nothing to worry about.

Also note that I am not the more penetration is better type. I don't really worry if a bullet doesn't reach 12". The biggest worry anyone should have is a miss.

Glock19Fan 11-15-2012 19:38

It could be a good candidate for a hunting round.

I do agree for a HD round this would not be a good option. But I am sure for LE applications it would shine on the streets.

uz2bUSMC 11-15-2012 19:59

Another quality review, Plouffe, 'preciate the time and energy you put into your work.:thumbsup:

collim1 11-15-2012 22:48

Thanks for posting. I bought 80rds of this load today, wish I could have afforded more of it. I plan on shooting 20rds to check reliability and POA then keeping two 30rd mags of it loaded.

cowboy1964 11-16-2012 07:28

I've seen some high speed gel testing where the bullet appears to be sure that it is going to punch out of the back side of the gel but the gel stretches so much that it retains the bullet. Skin works the same way. Even if it were to punch through it would likely not do much damage to someone, between the extremely reduced velocity and (hopefully) the expanded size. This is assuming the FBI range of 12-18" of penetration. If we're talking the typical 24-28" penetration of FMJs, forget about it, that sucker is gonna keep right on going.

Travclem 11-16-2012 12:43

Really looking forward to the 10.5" test.

plouffedaddy 11-16-2012 14:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC (Post 19636097)
Another quality review, Plouffe, 'preciate the time and energy you put into your work.:thumbsup:

Thank you gents.

SCmasterblaster 11-16-2012 15:34

Which Carolina P?
 
North or south? :cool:


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:43.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.