close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

REAL LIFE (sorta) testing

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Beware Owner, Feb 2, 2010.

  1. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    I think it's about time we started taking some dead cattle/deer and start shooting them up to see how our guns and ammo really perform on flesh, bone, muscle, and fat. Whaddaya think?
     
  2. Doc Holliday

    Doc Holliday CLM

    Messages:
    5,642
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Location:
    Arizona Oven
    :upeyes:
     

  3. american lockpicker

    american lockpicker License to Il

    Messages:
    8,219
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Location:
    Wood County, West Virginia
    Wouldn't ballistic gel be a lot better?
     
  4. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Would it? I mean, how well does a block of gel resemble a human being's anatomy?
     
  5. Carrys

    Carrys Inquisitive

    Messages:
    13,123
    Likes Received:
    6
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Location:
    Green Country
    You are absolutely right.









    Send me a side o' beef or venison, your choice, frozen and in good condition. I'll send you a first hand report on how "good" they were.

    Deal?:whistling:
     
  6. american lockpicker

    american lockpicker License to Il

    Messages:
    8,219
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Location:
    Wood County, West Virginia
    It doesn't but at least you can see what the bullet does. If you use an animal you will have a lot of work disecting it to see what happened. But hey if you think its worth it and its legal give it a try.
     
  7. HerrGlock

    HerrGlock Scouts Out CLM

    Messages:
    23,802
    Likes Received:
    256
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2000
    http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/pigboard.html
    In the recent past, performance tests were conducted to determine the ballistic effects of different weapons and ammunition on flesh and bone targets, living and dead, and to determine the efficacy of different types and designs of body armor in defeating the threats presented by these projectiles.

    The following information was taken from the personal notes of an experienced law enforcement observer in the field of forensics from a large western law enforcement agency.

    The final reports were proprietary to armor manufacturers who funded the research as well as being classified as proprietary/ confidential by certain government agencies that placed a gag order on distributing data from the report. The report itself can't be distributed, however, the individual mentioned above was under no such constraint to not discuss what he saw and wrote down in his personal notes.

    It should be noted that on at least two other different occasions in the past, the U.S. Army has conducted similar tests on unarmored subjects. The first of these was a handgun test in conducted in 1904 that resulted in the adoption of the .45ACP cartridge as the military standard and the second was convened in June of 1928 and dubbed the “Pig Board” due to it's use of pigs as test subjects. The purpose of the Pig Board was to determine the most effective cartridge for use in military rifles against human targets. That exercise resulted in the identification of a .276 caliber (approximate 7mm) high velocity bullet as the optimum choice. That choice was not put into practice, although the M1 Garand was developed in a working model for it, because a high ranking general of the time (General Douglas MacArthur) insisted on using the already developed .30/06 cartridge; which was more powerful anyway. Thus the Army adopted the M1 Garand in .30/06 caliber, which was later changed to the .308 caliber. The .308 caliber approximated the results of the .276 in a larger diameter projectile. This choice was probably precipitated by the popular manufacture of commercial weapons in the .308 caliber.(1)

    In the current modern test instance, tests were conducted on human cadavers, live pigs and ballistic gelatin, both unprotected and protected by modern body armor. Test weapon types were rifles, shotguns and pistols. There was about fourteen months of research conducted.
     
  8. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    I guess it'd take someone serious about knowing the terminal performance of their carry ammo.
     
  9. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    You see, that's what I'm talking about. Nice. Funny thing, I was looking at a rifle in .308 for an all around rifle, this confirms to me why. The only thing is that ammo has evolved a lot since these tests, and what was then the best choice, may not be so right now. I'm thinking it's about time we ran some more tests on flesh and bone so we can know for a fact, beyond any sort of conjecture, what really messes 'em up.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2010
  10. havensal

    havensal Getting older every day! CLM

    Messages:
    2,943
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2003
    Location:
    Western, NY
    Test all you want, it still can't guarantee a 1 shot stop. :wavey:

    The human (and other) body is to complex with to many variables to get anything definitive. :wavey:
     
  11. HerrGlock

    HerrGlock Scouts Out CLM

    Messages:
    23,802
    Likes Received:
    256
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2000
    Even then it wouldn't be definitive unless you did it in all temperatures, all clothing conditions, with all types of barrier material and with every type of bullet made.

    Perhaps you could read up on the FBI's tests after the Miami shootout, the pig studies the military has done and read a bit in various places like

    http://www.stoppingpower.net/books/book_handgun.asp
    http://www.chuckhawks.com/beginners_stopping_power.htm
    http://www.gunblast.com/RKCampbell_StoppingPower.htm

    But that's okay. If all you want to do is tell us how inadequately researched we are, knock yourself out.
     
  12. Gallium

    Gallium CLM

    Messages:
    28,685
    Likes Received:
    17
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003

    There is already an overwhelming abundance of data on terminal ballistics of all of the popular handgun and long gun calibers. If you want to test, knock yourself out.

    'Drew
     
  13. Carrys

    Carrys Inquisitive

    Messages:
    13,123
    Likes Received:
    6
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Location:
    Green Country



    Oh, that's right.

    We're all the stupid or lackadaisical ones, just because we don't believe in reinventing the wheel.

    I've been to the site noted by Herr Glock many times. If you shoot most any modern ammo, it's there. Why should we have to recreate all the mess and trouble of conducting such tests when we can just find the results there?


    As the other poster said, if it's something you believe in so much.........give it a go. No one is stopping you or telling you that you can't. But to insult the rest of us just because we are a bit more pragmatic is nonsense. And rather rude.


    Sorry, but it sounds an awful lot like someone got their feelings hurt because we thought it was a silly idea.

    Which it was.
     
  14. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    True...I know one shot stops are never guaranteed. That's not what anybody should be looking for. We should be looking for a better way to test terminal ballistics, that's what I'm saying. Sure, you shot into a gel block, looked nice. Shoot that same thing into a chest, it won't look the same.

    There is nothing definitive about terminal ballistics. Yes, you'll have about the same variations as you do with gel blocks, but shooting into flesh is definitely closer to reality.

    I've read up on these, and I'm also a fan of independent testing.

    Wow, way out of context. Never seen you in that light, Herr. You feeling ok today? Someone hacked your password? Is this you?
     
  15. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Are we pissy today, guys? :rofl:
     
  16. vafish

    vafish

    Messages:
    16,647
    Likes Received:
    140
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    Location:
    Commonwealth of Virginia
    I don't think it's a silly idea, but it's an idea that has been done already. And the tests didn't prove anything beyond what ballistics gelatin tests proved.

    The key to interpreting gelatin tests is to know that average penetration in gelatin is equivalent to average penetration in humans. Also gelatin is a nice homogeneous substance to test in. If properly made and verified (I hate calibrated because there is no way to adjust your gelatin once you have made it) it gives a repeatable substance that anyone can verify.
     
  17. HerrGlock

    HerrGlock Scouts Out CLM

    Messages:
    23,802
    Likes Received:
    256
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2000
    Oh it's me alright. Not out of context, that's your whole post:

    That's one of the most patronizing comments I've seen today, just hit me when I was going and looking up some tests for you. If you're looking for discussion and debate, leave it a lot lower keyed than that.

    You do realize you're going to get branded all sorts of horrible things if you perform any of those tests no matter what the condition of the carcass is. Just think what the media would do to you if you found yourself a dozen or so road kills and tested the snot out of your ammo then you actually went and used a firearm in self defense. Holy COW you'd get crucified. Wouldn't matter if you were right and had a hundred witnesses to it, you went and made sure you had man killer ammo by shooting up animals.
     
  18. fwm

    fwm

    Messages:
    2,630
    Likes Received:
    31
    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    Near Central US
    I have convinced myself after shooting at a target made of ash (about the same strength as bone) resembling chest cavity with ribs and spine, with help from my Dr. niece, that ballistic gel does nothing more than show you relative power of each charge.

    Without ribs, shoulders, spines, shirts, jackets, you have absolutely no idea what a bullet does in an actual body.

    The results of my impromptu skeleton has made me switch from .380 to .40 for primary carry. In ballistic gel, .380 looks nearly as impressive as 9mm. In my target, most shots could not penetrate a flannel shirt and the rib cage to enter the chest cavity. Sure, some did, but far too few to make me want to rely on it. 9mm did much better. All rounds penetrated far enough to be lethal, but .40 added shattered ash (bone) to the penetrating mass.

    And with clothes over the target, you can kiss your beloved 'expansion' good bye. The material fills the HP and it then acts like ball ammo. Can't see that from gel. (At least one good argument for HP, the material carried into the body is sure to set up infection in survivors)

    I would much rather see a study done on animal carcasses, despite the difficulty, than to rely on such deceptive methods as gel.
     
  19. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Ok, check this out. When I wrote that, I hadn't even seen your post, I only saw it after I sent mine responding to previous posts. You must've hit the Submit Reply button milliseconds before I hit mine. I then responded to YOU on Post #9, please tell me how patronizing I was to you there.

    I can't remember who exactly said it first, not sure if it was in a court setting or not, but the viable defense towards that is that lethal force is supposed to be just that, lethal. The probable cause, in case anything were to happen (God forbid), would be where you'd know if the case goes forward or not. Correct me if I'm wrong.
     
  20. Beware Owner

    Beware Owner NOT a victim.

    Messages:
    8,555
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Pretty much what I'm saying, but better explained.