Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Caliber Corner (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   aguila 9mm (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1467790)

rubsy 01-27-2013 15:02

aguila 9mm
 
i was wondering if anyone used the aguila 117gr 9mm hp and if i could get some feedback.

deathpriest 01-27-2013 15:22

Sorry, no experience with 117 gr but, 115 gr had served me well. 100s of rounds

M 7 01-27-2013 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubsy (Post 19918203)
i was wondering if anyone used the aguila 117gr 9mm hp and if i could get some feedback.

Which round are you talking about?

Aquila made the IQ JHP in .45ACP (117 gr.) and in 9mm (65 gr.) so it is kinda hard to know which round you are talking about.

The Aquila IQ was a line of zinc-alloy JHPs that suffered from major fragmentation and shallow penetration.

Here's an example- http://www.firearmstactical.com/tact...2/article2.htm

It has been discontinued.

rubsy 01-27-2013 15:53

what type of pistol do you use? i shoot a glock 19.i just want to know if its reliable for glocks.

rubsy 01-27-2013 15:55

i don't know but ammo to go.com has it on their site for sale.

M 7 01-27-2013 15:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubsy (Post 19918342)
what type of pistol do you use? i shoot a glock 19.i just want to know if its reliable for glocks.



What works in my gun may not work in yours.


Only one way to find out. Gotta shoot it in your gun.

:dunno:

M 7 01-27-2013 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubsy (Post 19918345)
i don't know but ammo to go.com has it on their site for sale.

Given it's performance, I'd avoid it for SD/CCW use.

That leaves target practice and plinking. Kind of expensive for that. There are better options out there.

Kentguy 01-27-2013 16:05

rubsy,

Have you seen this?


Tiro Fijo 01-27-2013 17:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kentguy (Post 19918386)
...Have you seen this?...


Water tests are beyond worthless for determining anything other than how you'd fare in a fight with Aquaman.

robhic 01-27-2013 18:09

Their 115gr RN bullets are pretty good and seem a little bit snappier than others. I paid $197 for 500 and liked them,

(Those were some pretty sophisticated tests, too, huh?)

M 7 01-27-2013 18:46

This...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo (Post 19918757)
Water tests are beyond worthless for determining anything other than how you'd fare in a fight with Aquaman.

...conflicts with the facts and the research conducted by numerous experts in the field of terminal ballistics.

Merkavaboy 01-27-2013 19:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubsy (Post 19918203)
i was wondering if anyone used the aguila 117gr 9mm hp and if i could get some feedback.

Aguila of Mexico is a good brand and they make reliable ammo, but I'd never use their HP ammo for SD, just plinking/practice.

Tiro Fijo 01-27-2013 21:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by M 7 (Post 19918957)
This...



...conflicts with the facts and the research conducted by numerous experts in the field of terminal ballistics.


...who have never been in a gunfight. :upeyes:

Merkavaboy 01-27-2013 22:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by M 7 (Post 19918957)
This...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo
Water tests are beyond worthless for determining anything other than how you'd fare in a fight with Aquaman.


...conflicts with the facts and the research conducted by numerous experts in the field of terminal ballistics.

Maybe these "experts" should make an appearance on "Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader" TV show, because even a First Grader can coherently comprehend the difference between a living human being and a 55 gal. barrel filled with water let alone quivering blocks of ballistic gel.

Tiro is 100% correct. Such back yard ballistics test prove absolutely nothing when it comes down to what bullets do or don't do in living human beings.

rustytxrx 01-27-2013 23:34

I am locked oin mortal combat with cottontail, jackrabbits, and other small table fare much more often that with anything that need kill with a defensive round. A good shooting 115 gr that workds the slide will and addresses the sight pretty well is a real joy especailly when it was cheap. i feed 4 or 5 9 mm with plinking and small game loads. i use a 115 HP most of the time if I can find one in the appropriate price range.

I have one 9 mm that is on of my favorite small game guns. It is a Swiss Police P220 in 9mm. has the lanyard loop and the bottom release clip. It sights have been set by the sig shop as well as the treggier workd over. Capable of very good groups

http://i1340.photobucket.com/albums/...psb6ec9e67.jpg

rustytxrx 01-27-2013 23:44

When I can come up with a couple cases of a 115 HP plinking load agin I'll buy anooother two ro three cases.

I got about a case and 1/2 of the 115 grMagtech 9C left


I really enjoy plinking with the 9mm

Rusty

unit1069 01-28-2013 00:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by rustytxrx (Post 19920051)
I am locked oin mortal combat with cottontail, jackrabbits, and other small table fare much more often that with anything that need kill with a defensive round.

Why on earth don't you get a nice .22lr for that variety of mortal combat?

M 7 01-28-2013 01:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo (Post 19919714)
...who have never been in a gunfight. :upeyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkavaboy (Post 19919944)
Maybe these "experts" should make an appearance on "Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader" TV show, because even a First Grader can coherently comprehend the difference between a living human being and a 55 gal. barrel filled with water let alone quivering blocks of ballistic gel.

Tiro is 100% correct. Such back yard ballistics test prove absolutely nothing when it comes down to what bullets do or don't do in living human beings.


So, if the number of gunfights you have been in are what it takes to be able to make such informed declarations, how many gun fights have you two been in that makes your opinions superior to those of researchers like Dr Fackler, Dr Roberts, Dr DiMaio, Dr Williams, Duncan MacPherson, Charles Schwartz, Beat P. Kneubuehl, and Eugene Wolberg?

Contrary to your empty claims, gelatin and water are valid test mediums.

Merkavaboy 01-28-2013 07:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by M 7 (Post 19920313)
So, if the number of gunfights you have been in are what it takes to be able to make such informed declarations, how many gun fights have you two been in that makes your opinions superior to those of researchers like Dr Fackler, Dr Roberts, Dr DiMaio, Dr Williams, Duncan MacPherson, Charles Schwartz, Beat P. Kneubuehl, and Eugene Wolberg?

Contrary to your empty claims, gelatin and water are valid test mediums.

Let me ask you a few simplistic Yes/No questions (don't worry I'll provide you the correct answers to the questions) and hopefully you will understand why such ballistics tests are worthless. Here we go:

1) Is a plastic gallon jug of water (or water soaked newspaper stuffed in a plastic gallon jug) a living, breathing human being made of various types of tissue, blood and bones?
Yes / No.

2) Is a 55 gallon drum of water a living, breathing human being made of various types of tissue, blood and bones?
Yes / No.

3) Is a block of ballistic gel a living, breathing human being made of various types of tissue, blood and bones?
Yes / No.

If you haven't guessed correctly yet, let me provide you the answers.
1) No. 2) No. 3) No.

In otherwords, there is absolutely nothing that can simulate or replicate the flesh, blood and bones of a living breathing human being. This is an absolute fact. Period.

And BTW, how many of those "experts" you named have ever been involved in a gunfight with a homicidal jug of water or a murderous block of Kind & Knox ballistic gel??

M 7 01-28-2013 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkavaboy (Post 19920676)
Let me ask you a few simplistic Yes/No questions (don't worry I'll provide you the correct answers to the questions) and hopefully you will understand why such ballistics tests are worthless. Here we go:

1) Is a plastic gallon jug of water (or water soaked newspaper stuffed in a plastic gallon jug) a living, breathing human being made of various types of tissue, blood and bones?
Yes / No.

2) Is a 55 gallon drum of water a living, breathing human being made of various types of tissue, blood and bones?
Yes / No.

3) Is a block of ballistic gel a living, breathing human being made of various types of tissue, blood and bones?
Yes / No.

If you haven't guessed correctly yet, let me provide you the answers.
1) No. 2) No. 3) No.

In otherwords, there is absolutely nothing that can simulate or replicate the flesh, blood and bones of a living breathing human being. This is an absolute fact. Period.

Well, you didn't lie. Those were some very simplistic questions.

Those simplistic questions also suggest a misunderstanding of how ballistic test mediums work- test mediums that have been found to produce penetration and expansion that very closely matches that found in bullets recovered from bodies at autopsy.

However, there is hope!

Here are four independent citations that will help you correct that deficiency:

1) Here is a study that demonstrates this truth with great simplicity that I am sure that you will enjoy: http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Fac...hester_9mm.pdf

2) In "Bullet Penetration", Duncan MacPherson states in Chapter 7 on page 123 (in which he explains why water and gelatin are both valid test mediums):

"The near identical expansion of bullets in water, tissue, or realistic soft solid tissue simulants is known to be true from experiment."

3) In "Quantitative Ammunition Selection", Charles Schwartz concludes in Chapter 2 on page 14, which he dedicates to explaining the equivalence of water and gelatin, that:

"Upon consideration of the comparative analysis presented herein, it should be evident to the armed professional that water possesses dynamic qualities (a similar density and a virtually identical internal speed of sound) that are nearly identical to those of calibrated 10 percent ordnance gelatin, making it suitable for use as a ballistic test medium."

4) Finally, Dr. M. L. Fackler, M.D. states in his paper, “Applied Wound Ballistics: What’s New and What’s True”, that:

"Water can be used as a tissue simulant and causes just slightly more bullet deformation than gelatin or soap..."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkavaboy (Post 19920676)
And BTW, how many of those "experts" you named have ever been involved in a gunfight with a homicidal jug of water or a murderous block of Kind & Knox ballistic gel??

:rofl:

If this is the standard that defines expertise in the study of terminal ballistics, then perhaps you could provide us with a verifiable record of how many gun fights you have been in and your research that led you to your conclusion?

Oh well. At least you have a good sense of humor. :winkie:


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:08.

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