I just saw that Mr. Ammo Quest put out another video on Hornady 147gr Custom 9mm, just bare gel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGUw2pX5IK0
He yaks too much and ends up contradicting himself. Is it just his opinion that 18" is too much penetration? I'm wondering where that 18" number comes from?
It's a minor point but I think he has a misunderstanding of the IWBA four-layer heavy denim protocol.
He says of the IWBA test protocol that it
He's a little dramatic at times and "absolute" is an over-used word IMO. Anyway the four-layer heavy denim test is not the absolute worst case scenario for clothing and was never meant to be. Duncan MacPherson said himself that the four-layer heavy denim test does not represent a simulation of any specific clothing.
The FBI heavy clothing test might have been a decent test for ammo selection (and maybe not) It definitely was not a good means to use for ammunition development and design.
My understanding of the IWBA four-layer heavy denim protocol is that it allowed for more consistent evaluation of bullet behavior - specifically bullet performance through soft barriers. From a design perspective, testing through "heavy clothing" was rather arbitrary, and MacPherson set out to find what specifically about clothing affected bullet behavior.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGUw2pX5IK0
He yaks too much and ends up contradicting himself. Is it just his opinion that 18" is too much penetration? I'm wondering where that 18" number comes from?
It's a minor point but I think he has a misunderstanding of the IWBA four-layer heavy denim protocol.
He says of the IWBA test protocol that it
represents an absolute worst case scenario for clothing, plugging of the hollow point cavity and interfering with the bullet's expansion
He's a little dramatic at times and "absolute" is an over-used word IMO. Anyway the four-layer heavy denim test is not the absolute worst case scenario for clothing and was never meant to be. Duncan MacPherson said himself that the four-layer heavy denim test does not represent a simulation of any specific clothing.
The FBI heavy clothing test might have been a decent test for ammo selection (and maybe not) It definitely was not a good means to use for ammunition development and design.
My understanding of the IWBA four-layer heavy denim protocol is that it allowed for more consistent evaluation of bullet behavior - specifically bullet performance through soft barriers. From a design perspective, testing through "heavy clothing" was rather arbitrary, and MacPherson set out to find what specifically about clothing affected bullet behavior.