RBCD Ammo Test


February 6, 2003, 10:48 PM
Fella posted this on the KTOG Yahoo List. Thought it might be of interest:


If you enjoyed reading about "RBCD Ammo Test" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
February 7, 2003, 06:37 AM
The RBCD .40 cal performance, in terms of velocity and energy, is awesome. I carry RBCD 60 gr TFSP's in my Smith 340SC .357 mag. I'm an advocate of the lighter/faster ballistics for self-defense. New technology takes awhile to catch on but I think this patented ammo is the future in handgun performance.

February 7, 2003, 08:47 AM
WHAT makes this ammo SOOOOO expensive?:rolleyes:

February 7, 2003, 09:07 AM
They are selling to a small section of people and they probably don't have a very large production ability. So that is probably why the price is so high. Heck, there was another specialty low weight, high velocity ammo I looked at that was about $46 a box.

February 7, 2003, 09:27 AM
One of our guys bought a box of this stuff and we funcition fired it through a Seecamp. Found it quite reliable and prone to the explosiveness advertised. We dry functioned the stuff through a seecamp multiple times to see if the bullets would stay in the cases ( some of the high dollar funny bullet stuff is loosely constituted and the bullets tend to fall out.)

The RCBD held together well, functioned well and worked as advertised.

February 7, 2003, 11:58 AM
In regards to that supposedly unbiased and non-affiliated report, I have a question. Which version of the ammo was he using? The LEO/Military only version, or the other version that's being sold to the public? They are not the same.

When I want an actual unbiased opinion, I'll check www.ammolab.com for performance. Not from some unidentified source on the net that says they're not affiliated to RBCD.

The RBCD ammo turned in a fairly dismal performace over at ammolab.

February 7, 2003, 06:58 PM

Jim Cirillo promotes it as a new line of defensive ammo.

In an issue of GunWorld a while back, there was an article on RBCD Platinum Plus ammo, along with several dramatic pictures of the craters left in the clay blocks shot with this stuff. The bullet used in this ammo is referred to as a Total Fragmenting Soft Point (TFSP).

For example, the RBCD 10mm load launches a 77gn TFSP @ 2420 fps for 1015 ft-lbs of smack-down energy. :what: This is currently RBCD's most powerful load.

Their .45acp/115gn TFSP runs @ 1650 fps for 700 ft-lbs of energy. A .45acp/90gn TFSP launches @ 2036 fps for 828 ft-lbs.

It seems to me that if a BG ever got hit COM with just one TFSP from any of these loads at the velocities indicated - let alone a well-aimed double-tap - he's going down right now.

HTH. :)


February 7, 2003, 07:06 PM
along with several dramatic pictures of the craters left in the clay blocks shot with this stuff

So..... When was the last time you heard of somebody being attacked by a clay block? Ever? Didn't think so?

Clay does not even begin to approximate human tissue, so comparing performance in that medium to real world performance is completely moot. Unless, I suppose, your assailant is some kind of pottery enthusiast.

Sorry, until this product actually starts coming up with real world usage performance statistics, I wouldn't even consider it proven enough to consider for a personal protection roll. Especially where there are more proven designs out there that cost considerable less.

February 7, 2003, 08:13 PM
"So..... When was the last time you heard of somebody being attacked by a clay block?"

I've never heard of anyone being attacked by a container of standard ballistic gelatin either - so that argument doesn't fly. :rolleyes:

What's with all the hostility to a new ammo product anyway?

You buy a few packs or boxes and try it out. If it's not your cup of tea, stick with a more traditional load.

Personally, I'd prefer to see RBCD loads tested more extensively in a variety of mediums and, especially, against hard barriers (like auto glass, metal and different types of wood).

But what I've seen and read interests me enough to look into it, and to keep an open mind while doing so.

February 7, 2003, 09:40 PM
I believe RBCD is now shipping a little over 50K rounds per month to law enforcement.

Search the old TFL for some testimony of real life uses against a charging dog and one of a wild pig.

Both examples produced single shot, dead right there kills with devastating damage to the target.

February 7, 2003, 10:28 PM
I believe RBCD is now shipping a little over 50K rounds per month to law enforcement.

And once again, the law enforcement version of the ammunition is not the same as what Joe Average Citizen is going to be able to buy. I'd also like to see where you got those numbers.

What's with all the hostility to a new ammo product anyway?

Let's just say I don't particularly care for a company whose marketing tactics have gotten 2 online firearms forums shut down. Just ask any member of the now defunct "Unofficial Kimber Forum" how they feel about the antics. I'm also not terribly enthused about a company that starts attacking the credibility of a testing group (www.ammolab.com) when they show that the product does not quite live up the hype that the company is spouting about their products. The fact that they also start personal attacks on people who ask for real world performance data on the stuff does not exactly endear them to me either.

Tell you what. You show me a review or performance data generated by a recognized independant, Law Enforcement, or military organization that backs up the performance of the civilian version of the ammo, and I'll consider picking some up for my own evaluation. Until then, I'm going to stick with PROVEN designs that have shown that they work.

Kentucky Rifle
February 8, 2003, 10:21 AM
You were right.


February 8, 2003, 11:59 AM
Of the type, I think I'd stick w/ the Cor-Bon Pow'R'Ball. It gave better penetration & more uniform expansion & weight retention.

But then again, I'm a "deep & wide" kinda guy...:evil:

February 8, 2003, 12:24 PM
Mag Safe..Glaser Safty Slugs...I have all these and have carried them. The search for the magic bullet. I'm all for it. I have gone back to the tried and true Federal, Winchester, Speer, Remington. The jury is still out on these new frangible bullets for me. I have done my own tests with Glaser and Mag Safe. I was impressed but not sold completely. For ALL situations I will stick to the main ammo makers for now. Shot Placement.....Under Stress....Practice with whatever caliber you shoot the best....Pratice.

February 8, 2003, 02:42 PM
This is one of the rare occasions when I disagree with agtman.

Ballistic gelatin was shown to mimic human tissue by Dr. Fackler who compared the results with testing in cadavers. The results were actually very close, and temporary and permanent wound cavities were well modelled by the jello blocks.

The problem with shooting clay blocks is that the clay isn't an elastic medium, like human tissue, and therefore the "wound cavity" in the clay block is an unrealistic representation of a wound in living tissue. Human tissue springs back to its original shape after being stretched by a passing bullet, and only the crushing action of the meplat of the expanding bullet creates the permanent wound cavity.

Rifle bullets at rifle velocities create different wound profiles because of fragmentation and yaw during the phase of temporary wound cavity. Pistol bullets don't yaw upon entering tissue because the weight balance between the nose and the tail of the bullet is pretty close.

Bone strikes create a hole new animal and prefragmenting rounds that strike and arm and fragment while still in the arm will most likely not have neough penetration to reach the vitals in the chest.

RBCD did threaten ammolab.com with litigation, IIRC, if David published the dismal performance on his webpage from factory-supplied ammo. The one RBCD test that he has was supplied by an independent donation of ammunition for his testing.

I will admit, though, that it would be interesting to see the wound profile of a 2400fps pistol bullet... :uhoh: ...none of the other RBCD pistol rounds come close to rifle velocities except this one...

February 8, 2003, 08:02 PM
So tell me, WHAT makes this ammo SOOOOO expensive?

February 8, 2003, 08:16 PM
I haven't tested RBCD ammo, but if a "super" cartridge was destined to be in my CCWs, this stuff would be among the first candidates....

February 8, 2003, 08:17 PM
So tell me, WHAT makes this ammo SOOOOO expensive? Okay.

RBCD is selling all they can make at those prices.

It's a supply and demand issue.

Felonious Monk
February 8, 2003, 08:21 PM
The promise of it being the One True Sword.

And what the market will bear.
I can't ever imagine using alot of it...
But would like to have about one box in each of my chosen calibers. Just not badly enough to spend the bucks...

Another interesting option is the Aguila IQ.
Another super-light, super-fast round. Info is sketchy from what I can find, but it's priced competitively enough that one might actually be able to BUY enough to test it thoroughly.

February 9, 2003, 04:36 AM
MarineTech, why would we think that alamo is related to RBCD? Alamo, the person is in Austin, Tx and McBrides gun shop in Austin sells RBCD. I should know, I live in Austin also. RBCD is in San Antonio, about 85 miles south. Not only that, but the guy shot bullet proof glass!! Why would someone from RBCD shoot bulletproof glass? For all we know you are associated with ammolab, after all you are in the same part of the country. In fact I think that the ammolab owner has the same computer background as you. Do you know each other? Are you a clandestine representative of ammolab? I don't really think that you are, but anyone can make unsubstantiated accusations on the internet and imply alamo's (who I do not know) report is 'supposedly unbiased and non-affiliated'. Attack the facts not the person. You are implying that he is in violation of the TOS.

RBCD is Roscoe, his son who I do not know, and wife Cindy. I have been to the shop, not where the machinery is because it is in a restricted area off limits to the public, and those are the only employees that I know of.

As far as ammolab being unbiased, I got a copy of the contract that ammolab asked RBCD to sign. Roscoe would not and I don't think ammolab liked it one bit. I posted excerpts on TFL. So I don't necesarily think that they are unbiased, but that is nothing more than my opinion and isn't any more valid than anyone elses. Someone from ammolab DID accuse me of being someone I am not. Remember the unsubstantiated accusations I referred to earlier? I don't even know who the people are ammolab accused me of being, nor do I care, but if you doubt it, I am currently attending a gun rights activist conference in Dallas. I had lunch with Jim March (http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/) today and dinner tonight with Jim March, Clayton Cramer author of 'The Racist Roots of Gun Control' (www.claytoncramer.com), and Kenn Blanchard known around TFL as Blackmanwithagun which is also the title of his book (www.blackmanwithagun.com). These are the references that anyone involved on these boards or involved with gun rights would know and are welcome to check out. The fact that ammolab would make accusations that are completely untrue without checking for the truth, leaves me VERY suspect of ANY other statements or claims that they might make.

As far as ballistic clay goes, it is used by the National Institute of Justice for their testing. The choice of test media is a matter of preference, some choose one, some another. I will be very happy to put this to rest if Sandia Labs is ever able to publish the results of their testing and you will be glad to know that they did use jelly. I agree, that is what everyone should use. Now it is just a matter of picking 10% or 20% and deciding on a temperature.

For any testing like this, it needs to be done by a QUALIFED person. The interpretations and conclusions must be done by QUALIFIED people. I have no idea the background of the testers nor the qualifications of anyone at any testing facility that would lead me to believe that any results are better from one or the other. Again, if the results came from Underwriters Laboratories or Sandia Labs I would be much more receptive to a scientific report than I am to opinion. My opinion is such that RBCD has been in my guns since 11/99.

agtman, I agree with 'What's with all the hostility to a new ammo product anyway? You buy a few packs or boxes and try it out. If it's not your cup of tea, stick with a more traditional load.' You will be happy with the penetration of intermediate obstacles like sheet rock if you are comparing it to a pre-frag, RBCD stays together.

Coltdriver, I don't know where you get the numbers from either, but they could be right, maybe even a little low in some months. I know of one order that went to 'a friendly govt' that was 10,000 rounds and that info was NOT from Roscoe, but through another source. Same source I found out about the world record Canadian sniper shot using RBCD. Hard to know if that was 20% of an entire months production, but I doubt it. You also mention the shootings with RBCD, there is a guy here in Austin who hunts hogs NW of here using RBCD in 9mm!!!!!! I wouldn't dream of trying to take a 200+ lb hog with a 9mm, but if I had to I would choose RBCD since I know it works.

The LEO version of RBCD cannot be sold to citizens. It is not like other LEO only ammo. RBCD will penetrate threat level II armor, maybe higher ;), so is banned from sale to the public.

Sec. 922. (a)

It shall be unlawful -
(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing ammunition, except that this paragraph shall not apply to -

(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, except that this paragraph shall not apply to -

The LEO only ammo has a level of tungsten that gives it performance beyond what the law allows. It is considered 'armor piercing'. You would REALLY be surprised at what some of the rifle ammo can penetrate!!!! The U.S. Military is VERY concerned and some loads have been pulled or modified under instruction from BATF. Again, due to non-disclosure agreements that Roscoe has with the govt, my info came from, lets say, an area north of Austin.

I would be interested to know how Roscoe got independently owned forums to completely shut down, considering that he has never posted on any forum that I am aware of. I would like details of this. I do remember some group, was it Front Sight, that caused some problems, but I never got involved so don't know anything about it. I have never heard about RBCD shutting down a forum.

tetchaje1, I agree with much of what you say. RBCD has put some ballistic gelatin pictures on their site. The real eyeopener will be the test that they are going to be doing, hopefully this summer, using gelatin and filmed by a high speed camera. Roscoe has access to this thing and it shoots something like 1200 frames a second, IIRC. A new video will eventually be available with that footage, I hope by the end of the year. You did mention that RBCD threatened ammolab.com with litigation. I have heard nothing about that, but would fail to see how RBCD could sue someone for printing the truth. If what was to be published was libelous, that is another story. How do you know this to be fact? If RBCD threatened a suit, ammolab should provide you with a copy of the letter they received. I told Roscoe that the only way I would post a report on the contract ammolab sent RBCD was if he gave me a copy, so he did, which is where the excerpts came from that I posted on TFL.

Monk, you can do what I do and buy a box every month or two. One of the distributors hits the Dallas area gun shows and I grab a box when I am there.

There is some new info coming out on RBCD that I will report from the SHOT Show on Thursday.

February 9, 2003, 08:33 AM
I'm sure not associated with RBCD, I've never even used it before. The fella that posted it has been on the KTOG Yahoo list for about a year & I've followed his postings. An interesting & slightly quirky guy. He's always trying out new things. If he was associated with RBCD, he would have mentioned RBCD ammo long before now. He had tried other ammo before this. His main interest seems to be 4x4s.

February 9, 2003, 09:35 AM
I was at the local gun show yesterday and stopped at the booth of a guy selling the RBCD ammo. Listened to him for awhile, looked at the boxes, saw the price, $35.00 for 20 and moved on down the row. It may be all that & a bag o'chips, but I'll stick with Gold Dots that I can buy for less than 1/2 the price. Heck, with any luck, I'll never use them anyway.;)

February 9, 2003, 09:53 AM

yeah right.
hahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha ha!

February 9, 2003, 02:01 PM
Jeff OTMG,

alamo just posted a link to MuddyJeep's RBCD test. MuddyJeep, AFAIK, has something to do with selling the Pocket Slipper laser sight device for mouse guns, but I don't think he's in the ammo or testing business.

Felonious Monk
February 9, 2003, 04:38 PM
Alamo saidAn interesting & slightly quirky guy. He's always trying out new things. If he was associated with RBCD, he would have mentioned RBCD ammo long before now. He had tried other ammo before this. His main interest seems to be 4x4s.Muddyjeep is a straight shooter, a "stand-up guy", and I'd share a foxhole with him anytime.

He's also wild as a buck, and a little crazy.
But he's honest as the day is long, and if he posted pics and a disclaimer saying something such as "not affiliated with RBCD", I'd sign the note for you to take it to the bank.

Nuff said.

February 9, 2003, 10:48 PM
Guys, just to clarify my stance. I am NOT saying ammolab is bad or wrong. The info they have MAY be correct and may be unbiased. The point I am making is that we have no way of knowing if stuff posted on the internet is accurate. It is all rumor. That would include my own www.shotshowreports.com site. None of us know the 'politics' going on behind a site nor the qualifications of the people posting the info and before we believe anything that is information we should have. Some of the info on my site is given to me so that I will report it. The company wants the exposure. I do not post anything that I don't believe to be true, but you have no way of knowing. Hopefully I have some credibility bringing you the info I post, but if you don't believe me it really doesn't hurt my feelings. Of course most of the info I post would not be enhanced by a background in engineering, statistical analysis, or physics, and when I do run into something that does need input from an engineer, as my discussion with Justin Moon about a titanium slide on a PM9 a few years ago, I DO have a person with a degree in mechanical engineering with a background in CAD and manufacturing with me who knows and understands stresses and related issues. I usually have my gunsmith along as well if there is something that I need him for. So lets not think that I am saying ammolab is wrong, lets just say that until a proper analysis is done by someone with credentials I have seen I will be sceptical.

Glad to see that some of you know Muddyjeep and that he isn't with RBCD. I would not have thought so, but some implied that he was somehow.

Prodigalshooter, RBCD is expensive, but cheaper than the MagSafes I use to use so I guess it is relative. As I said, I by a box every couple of months, kind of reduces the hurt that way.

One thing I failed to mention earlier. I have known Roscoe for over two years and have NEVER known him to post on a forum. Part of the reason for that is that since he owns the company he would have a vested interest in selling his ammo so who would believe him, another thing being that he must remain relatively tight lipped on many specifics due to non-disclousure agreements regarding, customers, performance, and technology. A couple of times when I have called him to verify information I have the response has been, 'I can neither confirm nor deny any of that information'. This is why I don't think that he posted any attack on any forum against the credibility of anyone nor participated in any personal attacks on a forum. I have no way to know for sure, but would welcome any proof to the contrary from the accuser.

It does appear that Roscoe does lurk on the the boards since his website has added gelatin photos. When comments were made regarding the scale of the block dimensions have been added. When comments about the type of gelatin were made, the 10% was specified. It even appears that RBCD has, for some reason, decided to fire some loads through four layers of 13oz denim or four sheets of ballistic nylon. I know of no standard for clothing gelatin for testing, I always liked naked jello myself. Check out http://www.rbcd.net/gelatin%20photos.html for the RBCD jello shoot then check out the loads shot by ammolab. I will tell you that I began college as a chemical engineer and that it is entirely possible for two people to conduct the same experiment and achieve different results. It doesn't even mean that we would be trying for different results, sometimes it just happens.

Until the final verdict is in, everyone will have to remember that everyone has an opinion and that some are right and some are wrong. We just aren't sure which ones those are yet so everyone will have to pick for themselves.

February 12, 2003, 11:33 AM
I've talked with Roscoe Stoker several times on the phone (Yes, he often answers the toll-free number) and I believe he is an honest, hard-working, very creative type guy. My first shipment was pilfered by one of UPS's finest. With one phone call, a replacement shipment was sent immediately, no questions asked.

Folks, RBCD is a small operation and I seriously doubt Roscoe has enough time to peruse the various shooting forums. Running a small business is a 24 hour-a-day commitment. With RBCD's in my .357 mag 340SC, I think have one of the ultimate pocket handgun stopper combinations possible.

To each his own; I have complete confidence that RBCD ammo will do what it purports to do: Drop'em in their tracks immediately.

Hey Jeff: I'm looking forward to your SHOT Show 2003 updates.

February 12, 2003, 12:19 PM
This ammo is too new and has too much bad karma revolving around it for my taste. Think I'll stick with Glaser Blue when I need a "safety"- style bullet, as in indoors (in the house). I've found them to be trouble-free. They shoot to point of aim and always go bang. I use .44 Special, .45ACP (never a malfunction), and .357 Mag. Once a year I fire my on hand stock and load new stuff. Not cheap, but hey! Forget clay and gelatin. I've seen X-rays of humans after being shot with Glasers. It looks like a contact shotgun wound. The skull shots are especially impressive. Convinced me!

"If you need to shoot...shoot...don't talk." Tuco

February 12, 2003, 12:37 PM
moxie, the Glaser Blue is good stuff, I used to carry it. I too have seen x-rays of the Glaser hits and they are impressive. Many people here will tell you that there is not enough penetration, which is one of the reasons I went to RBCD. Higher velocity at standard pressure are others. I have been using RBCD since 1999 so it isn't that new and the govt is using a bunch of it, but if you like the Glaser and are looking for lower penetration then you should be happy. Actually RBCD slugs will penetrate sheetrock and other barriers without disrupting, unlike the Glaser or MagSafe. They will break up on something like a sidewalk or glancing off a brick wall, but not as readily as a Glaser.

Felonious Monk
February 12, 2003, 03:00 PM
The Magsafe results I've seen have been very "underwhelming". ;)

All the exotic prefrag Ubercartridges seem ridiculously overpriced.

Jeff OTMG and all, do you know anything about Aguila IQ ammo?
9mm Specs: Throws a 65g JHP bullet 1550 fps for 347 FPE! :what:
9mm Specs for RBCD's 60gr at 2010fps for 539fpe :what: :what:!!

I can get the Aguila for $11/20ct. box, and the RBCD cost me how much? Could be an option for me, if the Aguila performs.

What do you think?

February 12, 2003, 06:10 PM
The ONLY thing I would like to see from Muddyjeep's unofficial test is a SECOND STRIKE of RCBD ammo against that glass.

His claim is that two shots and I am sure there would be a big hole and a far worse outcome for clerk behind glass.

Why didn't Muddyjeep just shoot it again to find out?

To be honest, I distrust all ammunition claims. I also distrust my own aim. This is why I must practice and not believe in a magic bullet.

February 12, 2003, 08:56 PM
Jeff OTMG:

If you know, has the RBCD ammo been tested for penetration against the metal (as to both type and thickness) and the glass typically used in autos in the U.S.?

And if so, are the test results available for review anywhere? (I'm interested in the 10mm/77gn load @ 2420 fps/1015 ft-lbs - obviously ;) ).

Thanks. :)


If you enjoyed reading about "RBCD Ammo Test" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!