GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-25-2012, 08:24   #721
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by English View Post

Courtney demonstrated scientifically that one shot rapid collapse exists without direct CNS impact.

English
It exists, but it's not reliably repeatable, and therefore not a reliable wounding mechanism. It happens, but it can't be counted upon like tissue crush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024
I will also add, that yes I believe that the only way a handgun bullet wounds is by permanent crush.
Temporary cavity is another proven wound mechanism, stretching tissues past their elastic limit.
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 08:35   #722
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
It exists, but it's not reliably repeatable, and therefore not a reliable wounding mechanism. It happens, but it can't be counted upon like tissue crush.
This is where these discussions usually derail so quickly. When we (proponents of BPW) mention BPW somehow most think that we are saying it should be a primary consideration and we are not. BTW, I'm not saying you are one of those people.

After reviewing your personal risk assessment and all the criteria you require (caliber, platform, accuracy at speed, etc) for your needs you may find that several calibers with several loadings may fit the bill. At this point would it not be safe to say that choosing the particular load which has the highest amount of potential PBPW would just be adding to your list of advantages?
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic

Last edited by uz2bUSMC; 12-25-2012 at 08:35..
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 08:50   #723
4949shooter
Senior Member
 
4949shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Jersey Republik
Posts: 12,959


Ahhhh....nothing like arguing ammo performance on Christmas morning.
__________________
"...the men under your command deserve your leadership."-OXCOPS
4949shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 08:53   #724
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4949shooter View Post
Ahhhh....nothing like arguing ammo performance on Christmas morning.
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 10:01   #725
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
Once again I'll point to the fact that there are none who chose ammo based on anything that remotely sounds like BPW.
I know of no BPW advocate who has ever stated his/her ammo selection was based upon assumed BPW performance. In fact, Courtney himself listed as primary factors for self-defense rounds reliability, penetration, expansion, and accuracy before any consideration be given to BPW.

The stated or implied suggestion that anyone has --- or should --- select self-defense rounds on expected BPW performance is something that we ought to put to rest once and for all when the issue arises. To my knowledge nobody has ever advocated that criterion as the primary consideration when choosing duty/SD ammunition.
__________________
Rocket Scientist
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 11:19   #726
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by unit1069 View Post
I know of no BPW advocate who has ever stated his/her ammo selection was based upon assumed BPW performance. In fact, Courtney himself listed as primary factors for self-defense rounds reliability, penetration, expansion, and accuracy before any consideration be given to BPW.

The stated or implied suggestion that anyone has --- or should --- select self-defense rounds on expected BPW performance is something that we ought to put to rest once and for all when the issue arises. To my knowledge nobody has ever advocated that criterion as the primary consideration when choosing duty/SD ammunition.
I swear, you are one of the few that knows this even though it has been said hundreds of times over the years.
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 11:26   #727
rustytxrx
Senior Member
 
rustytxrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,068
Very interesting discussion of the arcane. I am pretty sure it has nothing to do with the winning a gun fight. The shooter and the gun win gun fights.

If the first officers in my post had a FN F2000 in her trunk I don't think she would have sustained any wounds at all.

The people tring to figure this out are way over thinking the situation. Really smart idiots.

Rusty
__________________
Rusty
Texas, I luv u
rustytxrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 13:30   #728
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
At this point would it not be safe to say that choosing the particular load which has the highest amount of potential PBPW would just be adding to your list of advantages?
The potential for PBPW has to be weighed against the increase in recoil from the higher velocity needed to make it possible. And with life-and-death situations involving guns, I'm not using a bullet that may or may not result in a PBPW. I'm using a heavy bullet that will crush vital tissues to stop the threat, or barring a vital hit, reach to CNS (180 gr .40s and 230 gr .45s). That's momentum at work, which I trust more than PBPW.

To each his own, and Happy Holidays to all !!
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 14:08   #729
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
It exists, but it's not reliably repeatable, and therefore not a reliable wounding mechanism. It happens, but it can't be counted upon like tissue crush.


.......
No handgun bullet has a reliably repeatable effect. Why should you expect or require that the BPW effect should do so? Where do you think that any advocate of useful BPW effects has ever said that it can be relied upon?

To be quite clear a bullet that produces a strong BPW effect must necessarily produce a substantial crush cavity but a crush cavity in itself can't be counted upon to have a consistent effect on the behaviour of the person shot. Any person shot with a round that produces a strong BPW effect will sometimes collapse rapidly but will always be severely wounded. What more could you reasonably ask for?

English
English is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 14:13   #730
English
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 5,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
The potential for PBPW has to be weighed against the increase in recoil from the higher velocity needed to make it possible. And with life-and-death situations involving guns, I'm not using a bullet that may or may not result in a PBPW. I'm using a heavy bullet that will crush vital tissues to stop the threat, or barring a vital hit, reach to CNS (180 gr .40s and 230 gr .45s). That's momentum at work, which I trust more than PBPW.

To each his own, and Happy Holidays to all !!
Ah! I understand. You prefer to fire something with more recoil.

Less than 2% of shots to the thorax hit the spine so that idea is a waste of recoil. If you can shoot well enough to hit the brain you gain nothing from going above a 9mm Parabellum or maybe the 9mm Makarov, so the recoiol is wasted there.

English
English is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 14:36   #731
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by English View Post
Ah! I understand. You prefer to fire something with more recoil.

Less than 2% of shots to the thorax hit the spine so that idea is a waste of recoil. If you can shoot well enough to hit the brain you gain nothing from going above a 9mm Parabellum or maybe the 9mm Makarov, so the recoiol is wasted there.

English
Make all the erroneous conclusions you want, if it helps you.
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 14:40   #732
scottyd2506
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by pisc1024 View Post
there are thousands of LEOs who go to work using ammo that is chosen based wholly or partly on the FBI protocols.

Bottom line, thousands of cops put on their guns filled with bullets that are designed around the FBI protocols. These bullets work, and work well. Once again, I say I don't have to prove anything, it's all there for you.
Those bullets work well in ballistic gel tests, but not real life. If we base our handgun performance on the FBI, then we are doomed, the Miami shootout proved beyond a doubt the pencel neck white color FBI high brass who choose what ammo the agents use are dumber than a box of rocks. They failed once and will again

I don't listen to failures to base performance from.

if shot placement was EVERYTHING, then why a 9mm over a 380 or a 380 would shoot faster with much less recoil.
Ballistic gel test and doctors would records tell little of what REAL LIFE is...
the Texas DPS etc have used the 357 mag, then wanted hi cap mags and used 9mm,, the 9mm FAILED and they went to 45, and then to 357 Sig and the real world results are 100% success after almost 20 years.

Same agency had many many many many failures stopping bad guys with the best 9x19 9mm +p+ police loads.

It appears that 1400 fps with a 35 caliber 125 JHP just plain works. like it or not.

a 357 sig Underwood 125 gold dot load at 1500 fps (out of a 4 inch glock 32) equals the old 357 mag 125 at 1450 fps.
That's 15+1 rounds or (13+1 rounds in a compact) of 357 magnum performance. I know the 357 mag can be loaded to much better fps, but around 1400 fps is what works
with a 125 in that caliber.

It is a fact thousands and thousands of LE agencies have replaced the 9mm +p+ police ammo and guns for something different. where it be a 357 sig, 40 SW or 45, this shows beyond a doubt the 9x19 has failed.
We know NYPD and LAPD use the 9mm because of the ultra high population and the fear of high power round over penetration, and among others the liberal politicians who run those areas.

I don't think 1 357 is more effective than 2x 9x19's bullets, but I think 15x rounds of is much more effective that 17x 9x19's,

The 357 vs 40 and 45. they are pretty close in my mind, yet in the real world, the Texas DPS LEO wanted something better than the 45 acp (that replaced the 9mm they used after the 357 magnum revolvers), the 357 sig they use now they are HAPPY with and are not looking for a replacement.

in the real world if the 9mm +p+ stops someone 90-91% of the time and the 357 sig, 40 and 45 stop someone 95-99% of the time, it is most likely lack of penetration on the 9mm vs heavyweight bad guys (270-350 lbs on meth or crack).. And in today's world most people are much bigger than 20-40 years ago. a lot of those of the dangerous drug dealers seem to be big 270-350 lb guys.

the 9x19 +p+ might work well for the normal and anorexic guys. but the added performance of the 357's penetration, 200 fps of ballistic shock seems to bring the Bg down quicker in REAL LIFE.
scottyd2506 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 15:01   #733
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by English View Post
No handgun bullet has a reliably repeatable effect. Why should you expect or require that the BPW effect should do so? Where do you think that any advocate of useful BPW effects has ever said that it can be relied upon?

To be quite clear a bullet that produces a strong BPW effect must necessarily produce a substantial crush cavity but a crush cavity in itself can't be counted upon to have a consistent effect on the behaviour of the person shot. Any person shot with a round that produces a strong BPW effect will sometimes collapse rapidly but will always be severely wounded. What more could you reasonably ask for?

English
If it can't be relied on then it isn't useful as a wounding mechanism.

Yes, several bullet designs have repeatable effects. Hunters pay top dollar for the predictability designed into a good flatnosed solid, or the fragmentation of a good frangible round. Gold Dots are known and designed and have the record of reliable repeatable expansion, among others. Numbers bear this out. Are there exceptions? Sure, but those don't disprove the rule.

What isn't reproducible is this mythical BPW, this idea of some magic ballistic pressure wave. The people who purport to believe in it can never seem to define it, can never seem to reproduce it, and always seem to skirt around the discussion with oblique tangential responses.

One time it's dependent on crush cavity ("a bullet that produces a strong BPW effect must necessarily produce a substantial crush cavity") which depends on bullet mass and momentum, the next it's velocity-dependent.

Like I said, I prefer to rely on momentum to hit vitals or CNS, with a heavy bullet, rather than some mythical BPW, lightning bolt bullets, chi balls, or other cartoon fare.

Oh, and FYI, the light/fast bullets you love so much result in more muzzle energy, and hence more recoil, than the heavy bullets I prefer. I don't want a big shallow wound, I want to reach vitals or hit the CNS, which is the most reliable wounding mechanism, and that takes momentum, which relies on bullet mass.
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 15:03   #734
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyd2506 View Post
200 fps of ballistic shock
Can you please define "ballistic shock", as you used it?

Thank you.
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 16:38   #735
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
What isn't reproducible is this mythical BPW, this idea of some magic ballistic pressure wave. The people who purport to believe in it can never seem to define it, can never seem to reproduce it, and always seem to skirt around the discussion with oblique tangential responses.

One time it's dependent on crush cavity ("a bullet that produces a strong BPW effect must necessarily produce a substantial crush cavity") which depends on bullet mass and momentum, the next it's velocity-dependent.
The pressure wave exists, no two ways about that. What it's contributions are is what is up for debate. What definition are you asking for?
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 17:20   #736
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
........
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.

Last edited by digilo; 12-25-2012 at 17:21..
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 17:22   #737
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyd2506 View Post
..the Texas DPS etc have used the 357 mag, then wanted hi cap mags and used 9mm,, the 9mm FAILED and they went to 45, and then to 357 Sig and the real world results are 100% success after almost 20 years...
Wrong.

Quote:
...Same agency had many many many many failures stopping bad guys with the best 9x19 9mm +p+ police loads...
TOTALLY wrong.


Quote:
...It appears that 1400 fps with a 35 caliber 125 JHP just plain works. like it or not....
Partially wrong/right.

Quote:
...It is a fact thousands and thousands of LE agencies have replaced the 9mm +p+ police ammo and guns for something different. where it be a 357 sig, 40 SW or 45, this shows beyond a doubt the 9x19 has failed.
We know NYPD and LAPD use the 9mm because of the ultra high population and the fear of high power round over penetration, and among others the liberal politicians who run those areas...
Wrong ne plus ultra.



Quote:
...the 9x19 +p+ might work well for the normal and anorexic guys...

This is a perfect example of someone totally regurgitating BS they have read on the Internet and/or gunrags. Incredible. Just a major fail.
Tiro Fijo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 17:22   #738
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC View Post
The pressure wave exists, no two ways about that. What it's contributions are is what is up for debate. What definition are you asking for?

Define "ballistic pressure wave".
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 17:27   #739
uz2bUSMC
10mm defender
 
uz2bUSMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: J-Ville NC
Posts: 3,620
Calm down. If I was asking about that I would have quoted where you asked him directly about his definition of "hydrostatic shock" but I did not. I quoted your reply to English where you say it is never defined.
__________________
- Without idiots, there would be no baseline for common sense.

- "Our country went through a transition during the last election where the parasites came together and outnumbered the hosts." -jdavionic
uz2bUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2012, 17:31   #740
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo View Post

This is a perfect example of someone totally regurgitating BS they have read on the Internet and/or gunrags. Incredible. Just a major fail.
Tiro. It appears that a .35 cal 125 gr JHP bullet at 1400 FPS just plain works, but those same caliber bullets at 1300 result in "many, many, many failures to stop bad guys".
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:49.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,443
411 Members
1,032 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42