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 03-16-2013, 13:52   #21
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 16,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChallengerSRT View Post
I've no clue what are you talking about regarding, "solid copper bullets have more mass." If you put two equal size bullets side by side, one made of solid copper, and one of lead, the density of the lead bullet should be 3.26 times that of the copper one based upon their molecular weights. That increase in weight should pack much more punch if traveling at the same velicity.
Now, if you're talking about the HARDNESS of each metal, there should be a marked difference in penetration of one metal vs. the other due to the lead being so much softer. It will deform much faster with energy lost in doing so, plus more resistance due to increase in diameter.
Your statement of Solid copper bullets having more mass makes absolutely no sense to me.
And I agree with you, for lead has far more density than copper.
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 15:25   #22
WinterWizard
Senior Member
 
WinterWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,349
I think Tiro meant that the copper bullet must be a little longer in order to equal 185gr because of the density of lead vs. copper. So it does, in fact, have slightly more mass. But the mass is not where it will make a difference, in my opinion. The diameter and weight is the same (.451" and 185gr).

And I don't buy the whole "copper penetrates better" thing, at least not in handgun rounds. IMO, that is a bullet design factor, not bullet material. A lead or copper bullet will pass through assuming no expansion. It's the bullet shape, design and nature of expansion (combined with weight and velocity) that determine penetration.

If copper handgun bullets were so much better, then why aren't more LE agencies using them? And why do only a few ammo companies make them?

It's marketing, guys. Convince people that something is better, even if only slightly, and they will pay more for it, even if that product doesn't offer any real advantage. There is no truth in advertising.

But JMO. To each their own.

Last edited by WinterWizard; 03-16-2013 at 15:30..
WinterWizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 18:29   #23
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,179
10% Ballistic Gelatin Tests for:
Corbon .45 ACP 185gr. +p DPX

Testing Platform:
S&W 2 ” Snub

Barrier:
4 Layers of Denim

TEST RESULTS:

Round # 1:
Penetration: 13.875"
Recovered Weight: 182.7 gr.
Expansion*: .824 cal.


* Expansion measured at widest point.


10% Ballistic Gelatin Tests for:
Corbon .45 ACP 185gr. +p DPX

Testing Platform:
Glock 21

Barrier:
2 Layers of 16 gauge steel

TEST RESULTS:

Round # 1:
Penetration: 15.75"
Recovered Weight: 184.9 gr.
Expansion*: .551 cal.


* Expansion measured at widest point.

It's a different different gun and a different day but it is what it is. (copper corbon 185)

FYI DPX was the only round that penetrated two layers of 16 gauge steel.

Also: http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Sel...icturerev3.jpg

Make up your own mind.

Regards,
Comrade Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 03-16-2013 at 19:02..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 18:50   #24
jhaynes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Indiana
Posts: 14
10" may not sound like alot of penetration, but I would rather my bullet stay in the bad guy than pass through and hit something or someone behind him. That said I still like heavier bullets. I have not tried 230 grain in a short barrel gun to see how much velocity they drop.
jhaynes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 19:27   #25
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterWizard View Post
I think Tiro meant that the copper bullet must be a little longer in order to equal 185gr because of the density of lead vs. copper. So it does, in fact, have slightly more mass...
Bingo.



Quote:
...If copper handgun bullets were so much better, then why aren't more LE agencies using them? And why do only a few ammo companies make them?....
Simple reason as I stated earlier: cost.
Tiro Fijo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 21:10   #26
WinterWizard
Senior Member
 
WinterWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo View Post
Simple reason as I stated earlier: cost.
You may be right, but I am not convinced that is the sole reason.
WinterWizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2013, 23:19   #27
fredj338
Senior Member
 
fredj338's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: so.cal.
Posts: 21,800
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo View Post
3.3" barrel. Weight ≠ mass. Solid copper bullets have more mass.
Uhh, mass vs weight 185gr is 185gr. The length of the bullet has little to do with momentum. A longer for wt monometal bullet will give you slightly higher SD as it expands because it rarely loses wt & also rarely over expands. IMO, not offering much over a well designed bonded lead core bullet. They are also brutally expensive.
__________________
"Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified".

Last edited by fredj338; 03-16-2013 at 23:25..
fredj338 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 02:04   #28
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredj338 View Post
...IMO, not offering much over a well designed bonded lead core bullet...

Until one has to shoot through steel (car/truck doors), then it beats the bonded handgun bullet. Granted, for the average layman this is of little consequence, (as well bonded bullets) but for LE it's a trump card.

Does it warrant the cost? In some scenarios where one needs the absolute maximum potential in a handgun round involving hard barriers, e.g., Highway Patrolmen. Other than that, economy wins as it is as you said, "brutally expensive".
Tiro Fijo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 07:56   #29
digilo
Senior Member
 
digilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChallengerSRT View Post
I've no clue what are you talking about regarding, "solid copper bullets have more mass." If you put two equal size bullets side by side, one made of solid copper, and one of lead, the density of the lead bullet should be 3.26 times that of the copper one based upon their molecular weights. That increase in weight should pack much more punch if traveling at the same velicity.
Now, if you're talking about the HARDNESS of each metal, there should be a marked difference in penetration of one metal vs. the other due to the lead being so much softer. It will deform much faster with energy lost in doing so, plus more resistance due to increase in diameter.
Your statement of Solid copper bullets having more mass makes absolutely no sense to me.
+1. He's spewing nonsense again.

"solid copper bullets have more mass."
__________________
Taste the wares, Email.
digilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 11:34   #30
fredj338
Senior Member
 
fredj338's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: so.cal.
Posts: 21,800
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by digilo View Post
+1. He's spewing nonsense again.

"solid copper bullets have more mass."
Sort of. If mass as a unit of weight, they have the same weight. If total projectile size not counting weight, the copper bullt is longer. So it depends on how you are defining mass. A pound of feathers or a pound of lead, which has more mass? Bulk or mass, is it semantics? To me mass means weight, not bulk, pound of feathers or pound of lead?
__________________
"Given adequate penetration, a larger diameter bullet will have an edge in wounding effectiveness. It will damage a blood vessel the smaller projectile barely misses. The larger permanent cavity may lead to faster blood loss. Although such an edge clearly exists, its significance cannot be quantified".

Last edited by fredj338; 03-17-2013 at 11:34..
fredj338 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 11:50   #31
WinterWizard
Senior Member
 
WinterWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,349
No definition of mass I've ever seen or have been taught in school implies weight. Mass refers the the size of something, or the area it takes up. I don't think weight has anything to do with it.
WinterWizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 12:47   #32
Little Joe
Platinum Membership
Senior Member
 
Little Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: At The Ready
Posts: 4,697
Here is a link to an accounting of a real world shooting with DPX. The light stuff did just fine here.

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/ammo-ca...-shooting.html
Little Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 13:26   #33
Tiro Fijo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterWizard View Post
No definition of mass I've ever seen or have been taught in school implies weight. Mass refers the the size of something, or the area it takes up. I don't think weight has anything to do with it.

Bingo again.


For the others who shot pool during science class, get educated:

Mass is a measure of how much matter something contains.

Weight is a measure of how strongly gravity pulls downwards.

Tiro Fijo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 15:44   #34
ChallengerSRT
Senior Member
 
ChallengerSRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 304
I guess I'm missing the point of this thread completely. I am well aware of what all of the definitions involved here mean. What I stated was that two bullets the same size or MASS put side by side, one solid copper, the other solid lead, will have a drastic difference in density (weight/unit volume). Take that difference in density, propel it at the same speed down range, and I'd expect the much heavier round to pack more punch.
If both bullets are the same grain, then I agree, the copper one would have to be considerably longer. What effect that has on anything, I've no clue. For the difference in cost, however, I'd rather pump a few rounds of lead towards the target for the price of one copper round. If the sky's the limit for cost, I'd go with titanium.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=lLX33bAVXuU
ChallengerSRT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 22:24   #35
WinterWizard
Senior Member
 
WinterWizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,349
I agree. This thread has gotten a little dumb at this point. But hey, it's the Caliber Corner. Threads always get dumb. Which is why I read them often.
WinterWizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 03:00   #36
NEOH212
Diesel Girl
 
NEOH212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: North East Ohio
Posts: 9,091
45 = 230 grain and nothing else.


Lighter bullets are for smaller calibers. Putting a lighter bullet in your .45 is like buying a Mustang with a V6.
__________________
When you finish speaking, don't forget to wipe.
NEOH212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 17:10   #37
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 16,020
I wonder how much penetration these bullets get?
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster 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 20:39.




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


Users Currently Online: 1,372
397 Members
975 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31