close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

357SIG proving to be an unbelievable manstopper???

Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by glock20c10mm, Jan 15, 2010.

  1. glock20c10mm

    glock20c10mm

    3,919
    7
    Dec 4, 2004
    Out West
    Then why are you still asking questions if that's what you believe? You could have just posted that and we'ld have all known where you stood.
    I wasn't shouting, nor did I mean to imply that I was. I didn't think I'ld have to repost the fine print. My bad.
    That's generally not true. Deer don't stop running away until one of two things happen. 1) They don't have enough oxygen left in them to run further. 2) They run and then choose to lie down assuming they've escaped further danger. In the IWBA Journals it was noted that one good reason to use animals for testing is because they generally aren't subject to many of the same psychological factors as humans.
    Proving or disproving what?
    As are you it appears. Simply from opposite ends of the proverbial spectrum. Are we having fun yet?
    And you're welcome to that opinion. My basis for using the theory to my advantage comes from the basic understanding of the principal of the theory. Like I said, I have plenty of questions myself, not to mention a larger data set would be awesome. Either way I do believe the theory holds water to enough of an extent based on events aside from the theory for me to apply it in my choice of carry ammo. Got a problem with that?
    I have no problem with any amount or lack thereof in relation to skepticism or critiscism. Those are for the individual to decide for themselves, or at least up to whatever level they choose. As for bad data, what data are you saying is bad outside of the goat tests or the Marshall/Sanow data set?
    Why would you think such a thing? What you say is absurd to say the least. You simply don't understand what it means for any data set to be statistically valid and I don't care to explain it to you. BTW, that is fact, not my opinion.
    Who's argueing against the fact I'm biased toward the research?

    No, Dr. Courtney doesn't have to prove anything. He did some studies and wrote up an explanation with the findings. At this point, anyone else on the planet can do or not do whatever they do or don't want with it.

    Besides, you already feel rubbed the wrong way by Dr. Courtney. At what point would he ever be done getting you to believe he ever did anything right? Beside the fact you said it would all have to be verified by a third party before you'ld believe it anyway.
    No, it's not specious. I don't have to understand how gravity works to know that what goes up must come down.
    They aren't ad hominen attacks when speaking of direct experience in conversing with the person(s) in question.
    And it's obvious you don't understand that any of that learned basic science doesn't prove anyone is or isn't a liar among many other negative adjectives towards anothers trustworthyness.
    What about them?
    That's not always true. Like when someone wrongly preaches for or against anything because of the way it may/will take negative effect on their credebility in one way or another if they don't.
    Sorry, but I can't be betrayed by something I'm open with. As for you saying; "I'm not sure why you seem to think that anyone critical of the research is somehow not qualified to evaluate it..." I didn't, nor would I say such a thing, as it is not true. But yes, it is my opinion as it were.
    Betraying my bias, yes, I think I've covered that. As for criticism....anyone can criticize anything. False accusations could also be construed to be criticism. Nothing wrong with critisism as long as it's honestly derived. But that's not always the case.
    I didn't need to take the hint. I'm also not paranoid. And in some cases it doesn't matter enough to worry about, like with the ATK workshop testing and results.
    You say people are very hard to kill. Why? Because they're moving while you're trying for good shot placement? Aside from that, yes, I'm sure there's much more to learn. If not, a whole lot of scientists are studying a whole lot of stuff in vain.
    Who cares? There are exceptions to every rule. It's not like the "shrug-it-off" standard is associated with anything close to a majority. And why are you so stuck on TBI? Who cares, TBI or not, if it works toward quicker incapacitation reguardless the mechanism? It may be limited to a percentage basis, but if it works as much as expected, who cares? I'm not saying it does or doesn't within the expected parameters of the threory. Just saying.

    Drugs and adrenalin make a difference in what?



    Good Shooting,
    Craig :cheers:
     
  2. glock20c10mm

    glock20c10mm

    3,919
    7
    Dec 4, 2004
    Out West
    Did you try to be rude, or did it just come naturally?
     


  3. Erich1B

    Erich1B

    86
    0
    May 18, 2008
    Tampa
    :popcorn: Wow, I haven't read this thread in a while and come back to find another BPW debate................
     
  4. glocksterr

    glocksterr DirtyGlockHippy

    1,298
    0
    Aug 10, 2008
    NC,USA

    maybe you where not looking for the right thing or in the right place. sort of under your nose so to speak.


    :dunno:
     
  5. swede1945

    swede1945

    15
    0
    May 30, 2008
    The US Army has published work supporting remote wounding and rapid incapacitation effects of ballistic waves. See Ronald Bellamy’s work in the Textbook of Military Medicine. The Swedish Defense Forces also published a number of papers in the Journal of Trauma. A group at the Third Military Medical University (China) confirmed and extended the Swedes’ findings about remote cerebral effects of ballistic waves at handgun levels of energy transfer. Professor Karl Sellier (Institute of Legal Medicine in Bonn, Germany) describes remote wounding effects of ballistic waves in his book, Wound Ballistics and the Scientific Background. A team at West Point has published work in the peer-reviewed journals, Brain Injury and Injury. A shock wave expert at Cal Tech attributed remote spinal injuries to a shock wave produced by a 9mm bullet. A Czech researcher has consistently found brain injuries in autopsies of victims shot in the chest with handgun bullets. In a “Historical Overview of Wound Ballistics Research” an Australian researcher recently summarized the positive findings related to remote wounding effects of ballistic waves. This body of work has been peer-reviewed and positively cited. The minority who continue to espouse negative views have not published anything a peer-reviewed journals for a long time, limiting their opinions to internet forums, knowing how easy it would be to embarrass them with the considerable published evidence that now exists from a wide variety of sources.
     
  6. Wow, this thread is generating a lot of buzz. As far as to the original question I'm sure it's a great stopper if you can hit anything (same with any other caliber I suppose). Then again a .44 mag is a "better stopper" and a .500 is better than that, ect.

    I think if you had to shoot through barriers (ie car doors) it would be a good choice, which is why the secret service issues them (at least that's what I heard). For an average citizen like you and me overpenetration is a very bad thing. If I wanted something that overpenetrates and is expensive I'd get a 10mm. I'll stick with 9, .40 or .45 for SD.
     
  7. remat

    remat

    2,049
    0
    Mar 19, 2006
    Seattle, WA
    You asked what happens when two Dr's disagree. My opinion is based on the body of work. You can marginalize it if you like.

    Your words implied that DocGKR had no real experience or knowledge in wound ballistics, and equated his credentials to simply being a dr/dentist. For those unfamiliar with his work I just suggest they do a little homework and decide for themselves. A good place start is to read his work with NDIA.

    "Truth" is elusive in medicine and ballistics. It has a lot to do with opinion and the individual cases. So, ask 3 Dr's and you are likely to get at least that many answers.

    In the end, the "truth" is what people want to believe it is. If they chose it to be OSS%, +P+, bonded bullets, fragmenting bullets, midweight bullets, heavy bullets, most accurate bullet (hope I didn't miss anybody's camp), so be it. I am not sure why people get so upset that someone doesn't agree. Personally, I still don't want to get shot with a 380 (whether it be an FMJ, 88gr, 90gr, or even 102gr) -- even if it is low on everybody's ballistic ranking.

    On that note, other than to say that I wish more folks made a bonded 147gr 357Sig load, I am out of this thread. :)

    regards
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2010
  8. glock20c10mm

    glock20c10mm

    3,919
    7
    Dec 4, 2004
    Out West
    In the end, the "truth" is what people want to believe it is. That statement is absurd! That is what opinion is, having nothing directly to do with truth.

    IMO Dr. Roberts is a tool, sometimes even trolling when he decides to come into a thread and lay down the law based only on his opinion while belittling the next person. He would like to believe he knows it all, when in reality he refuses any data/study that isn't at least 20 years old. That is not to say he is stupid, as he is not. But just because he's not stupid doesn't always make him always right either.

    Tell me, what has Dr. Roberts taught you that you didn't already know in terms of what makes a SD round an acceptable one?
     
  9. LEAD

    LEAD

    1,981
    1
    Jan 9, 2009
    VT
    You've got a lot to say about this topic. Thanks for the information
     
  10. English

    English

    4,585
    42
    Dec 24, 2005
    London
    As a single sentence summarry of Post Modernism, that is probably as good as it gets and it is completely false. if you change it to, 'In the end, what people believe is the "truth" is what people want to believe is the truth.', then it describes the though process of most people. Unfortunately, though we might never know the truth about a particular issue, or, if we do know it, it still remains possible that our knowledge is incorrect, the truth does actually exist and all those people are wrong and will fight for their right to be wrong till their dying breath.

    The world and the universe are real and not creations of our minds. To think otherwise is a remarkable level of conceit or a remarkable level of credulity. The nature of truth means there is no certainty because we can prove only falsity and never truth. This concept is can be difficult to live with for anyone. For many it seems to be impossible.

    What we choose to act on as "truth" is inevitably based on a ballance of probabilities. If we hope to reach a sound decision on truth, those probabilities should be objective rather than subjective. Depending on the subject matter that objective evidence might be anything from extremely strong to relatively weak, but will be all we have to work with. It the case of BPW effects, the work of Dr Courtney and others makes its truth a strong probability. That makes the opposition case corespondingly feeble, no matter the "work" and status of Dr. Roberts.

    English
     
  11. remat

    remat

    2,049
    0
    Mar 19, 2006
    Seattle, WA
    double tapped
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2010
  12. remat

    remat

    2,049
    0
    Mar 19, 2006
    Seattle, WA
    Boy, you guys sure get hung up on semantics. I said people "chose" what to believe as "truth." Truth is not necessarily black and white and is highly case dependant.

    Truth in medicine? It is called "practicing" medicine and a Dr gives his "opinion" for a reason. Even lab results require "interpretation."

    What a person believes to be "truth" is de facto truth to them. Likely, no amount of debate will necessarily change that. What the world "is" is highly debateable and dependant on your frame of reference. If there was truth in what the best bullet was, we would all be carrying it.

    I see that we cannot even agree with that and you with to rely on "absolutes." That's fine. Your "truth" is a low opinion of DocGKR. I don't agree with you, get over it.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2010
  13. sigcalcatrant

    sigcalcatrant

    6,552
    0
    Mar 8, 2008
    Speaking as a mere spectator to this thread, it seems like the anti-BPW guys don't think that BPW should be considered, mentioned, or even thought about as a possibility. They get down right testy. Posts like the above are just begging for an ad hominem barrage of Facklerism-laced epithets.
     
  14. English

    English

    4,585
    42
    Dec 24, 2005
    London
    You still don't get it but you might be half way there. Truth is not a matter of choice but exists regardless of choice or majority opinion. In contrast, people have a range of opinions about a single truth. Hence, indeed, sensible medical Drs. will give their opinion rather than claim it to be truth. You are confusing the terms "truth" and "opinion".

    English
     
  15. uz2bUSMC

    uz2bUSMC 10mm defender

    2,398
    2
    Oct 21, 2005
    J-Ville NC
    Always ready. Why do you think CC happens to be our favorite hangout spot?
     
  16. happyguy

    happyguy Man, I'm Pretty

    I don't know much about the .357 SIG as it doesn't really interest me but I take issue with the above statement.

    The .357 round does have more recoil than the .40 SW.

    The SAAMI max pressure for .40 SW is 35,000 and for the .357 is 40,000.

    The average muzzle energy of the .40 SW is 425 fp and the .357 is 475 fp.

    There is no way they have the same recoil.

    That is why Glock beefed up the frame of their guns when they introduced the caliber in their guns.

    Regards,
    Happyguy :)
     
  17. uz2bUSMC

    uz2bUSMC 10mm defender

    2,398
    2
    Oct 21, 2005
    J-Ville NC
    It doesn't work quite the way you think. Take a .45acp 230 @ 850 which produces 370ft.lbs for example. This would have a heavier recoil than the .357sig you mentioned above if they were in similarly weighted pistols. The reason is that it takes more umph to get a heavier bullet started down the barrel.
     
  18. happyguy

    happyguy Man, I'm Pretty

    Your understanding of physics is flawed.

    The majority of recoil actually occurs after the bullet has left the barrel. It is caused by the escaping gases and the increased pressure of the .357 SIG and reduced bore size both contribute to increased recoil. Think of a rocket engine.

    It's like the difference between a firehose without a nozzle on the end and one with the nozzle adjusted to the tightest stream.

    A twelve year old could handle the former where it might take two grown men to handle the latter.

    Regards,
    Happyguy :)
     
  19. DocKWL

    DocKWL

    499
    0
    May 15, 2009
    That is the understatement of the century.
     
  20. uz2bUSMC

    uz2bUSMC 10mm defender

    2,398
    2
    Oct 21, 2005
    J-Ville NC
    I missed you too.

    Forgot to add: That first half of Duncan's book that you read must have taught you to everything about physics...
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2010