Wadcutters for Defense?

defjon said:
They should use those ballistic torsos like on forged in fire.

Ribs, bones organs etc.

That would give us something
Click to expand...
Would that be theoretically possible? Yes, I think so.

Would it be practical? No, and it would be extremely costly.

Would it tell us anything that we do not already know? No. We surely know all we need to know about bullet performance and handgun wounding effectiveness. We know which bullets work with what barriers and which ones don't. We know what ammunition has performed satisfactorily in the field.

*********

I'll share my silly entry for the Department of Useless Information. We know that bullets do not do much for us unless they hit the right things. That's why several hits are usually needed. Someone posted a graphic here some time ago showing how a bullet with a particular point of impact and the the same trajectory might hit a certain internal body element in one instance, and how the attacker's turning, twisting, or bending can cause the same bullet to miss. It was eye-opening

In laser sim and FoF shooting, we score one hit as a stop, but we know that that's too generous. It occurred to me that with some 3-D modeling, some physiological assumptions, and some powerful simulation algorithms, we could possibly come up with a system that would score only the "good" hits.

The idea, of course, was ridiculous. Even if we did that, here are far too many variables in what can effect a timely physiological stop to waste time trying to model it.

What more do we need to know? Why? Is it within the reach of the practical? I see no need to spend our effort on these things.
 
defjon said:
They should use those ballistic torsos like on forged in fire.

Ribs, bones organs etc.

That would give us something
Click to expand...
We have over 30 years of experience with properly prepared and calibrated Type 250A ordnance gelatin (aka "standard gelatin") that disprove the "it's not valid because gelatin is homogeneous" naysayers.

Bullets that perform well in standard gelatin have been proven to perform well in actual shootings.

If "homogeneous" was an actual flaw, then it'd have been revealed by now, but that's not the case.

Standard gelatin depicts average terminal performance. Yes, in actual shootings some bullets may penetrate a little more and some bullets may penetrate a little less, but average terminal performance in human bodies matches average terminal performance depicted in standard gelatin.

Over 25 years ago researchers with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police performed extensive tests with pork bones embedded in gelatin blocks. Their findings? Striking a rib affects a handgun bullet's terminal performance a negligible amount. Their findings were published in Wound Ballistics Review, Volume 2, Number 3, on pages 8 though 28 of this link: "Comparative Performance of 9mm Parabellum, .38 Special and .40 Smith & Wesson Ammunition in Ballistic Gelatin."
 
RevolvingGarbage said:
And using a system like the “meat target”, you can observe comparative results between different calibers. Gel is not people, but we can learn things by shooting it. The meat target is not people, but we can also learn things by shooting it.

Scientific proof is not absolutely needed to make useful comparisons of ballistic performance, and that should be obvious from the fact that scientific proof of effectiveness for the intended purpose is pretty limited beyond saying something like “.22 Kolibri is definitely not good enough” or “.50BMG is an effective stopper.”
Click to expand...
I agree, the meat target isn't meant to replicate performance on people, it's meant to be a base test between different projectiles and also better measure "damage" bullets do. Gel tests measure two things: penetration depth and bullet expansion.

Using both gel and other means of testing adds more data to come to a conclusion of a bullets effectiveness or not.
 
TTv2 said:
I agree, the meat target isn't meant to replicate performance on people, it's meant to be a base test between different projectiles and also better measure "damage" bullets do. Gel tests measure two things: penetration depth and bullet expansion.
Click to expand...
Properly prepared and calibrated Type 250A ordnance gelatin accurately depicts a bullet's wounding effects in soft tissues. This is why Fackler named them "Wound Profiles".

Most people don't have the requisite knowledge to properly interpret the wounding effects produced in standard gelatin.
 
Shawn Dodson said:
Properly prepared and calibrated Type 250A ordnance gelatin accurately depicts a bullet's wounding effects in soft tissues. This is why Fackler named them "Wound Profiles".
Click to expand...
I was not aware of that.
Shawn Dodson said:
Most people don't have the requisite knowledge to properly interpret the wounding effects produced in standard gelatin.
Click to expand...
It is amazing how poorly some Youtube testers describe the results.
 
Kleanbore said:
How might it do that?
Click to expand...
After shooting meat "muscle" and fruit "lungs" you inspect visually the results. The more pulpy the fruit looks, the more damage the projectiles do. Compare that to other projectiles and calibers to other meat and fruit tests and you have a relative means for assessment of damage difference.
 
TTv2 said:
After shooting meat "muscle" and fruit "lungs" you inspect visually the results. The more pulpy the fruit looks, the more damage the projectiles do. Compare that to other projectiles and calibers to other meat and fruit tests and you have a relative means for assessment of damage difference.
Click to expand...
That sounds like a compete waste of time and materials.

Subjective evaluations can never match objective measurements.

What purpose would it serve?
 
OK, Rocky, here is the deal.
We will shoot you one time. If you live over it, you get off Death Row. If you can walk out the door, you will be considered for parole.
 
I always think that people use meat targets, meat and water jugs,wet magazines stacked together or something different than ordnance gelatin just to attract viewers.
 
TTv2 said:
I would buy if it was in .32 Mag and the frame and cylinder appropriately sized for the smaller caliber.
Click to expand...

Yep .. a shorter titanium cylinder with a longer protruding forcing cone .. 6 shot 32 Mag ..
perfect pocket carry BUG
 
Pudge said:
What purpose do the objective measurements of bullet performance serve?
Click to expand...
Objective and repeatable testing in a medium that reacts similarly to live human targets is used to support the design, development, and comparison of effective defensive ammunition, and to demonstrate that customer performance specifications are met or exceeded.
 
Kleanbore said:
Objective and repeatable testing in a medium that reacts similarly to live human targets is used to support the design, development, and comparison of effective defensive ammunition, and to demonstrate that customer performance specifications are met or exceeded.
Click to expand...
The FBI testing standards were established in 1988, and have been widely adopted by law enforcement and civilian use. In the 3+ decades, have those standards resulted in data that indicate a measurable improvement over past effectiveness of handguns in stopping threats?
 
Pudge said:
The FBI testing standards were established in 1988, and have been widely adopted by law enforcement and civilian use. In the 3+ decades, have those standards resulted in data that indicate a measurable improvement over past effectiveness of handguns in stopping threats?
Click to expand...
We do not see reports that today's premium defensive ammunition falls short in terms of field performance.

That was not the case in years past.

The improvements have resulted from changes in design and in advances in manufacturing processes. The testing is a means to an end.
 
Kleanbore said:
We do not see reports that today's premium defensive ammunition falls short in terms of field performance.

That was not the case in years past.

The improvements have resulted from changes in design and in advances in manufacturing processes. The testing is a means to an end.
Click to expand...

The improvements you reference are subjective without data that proves them. Is there any?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Wadcutters for Defense?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
deputy tom
deputy tom
W
  • Locked
Wadcutters for self defense loads?
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
8K
jeepnik
jeepnik
V
  • Locked
Wadcutters for .38 Special SD loads?
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
10K
suemarkp
S
T
  • Locked
Best .357/.38 defensive load?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
sidheshooter
S
C
  • Locked
. 38Spl Semi-wadcutter or Hollowpoints
Replies
23
Views
2K
GRIZ22
G
Back
Top