mljdeckard
Member
My dad once killed two mulies on the same day with it. I wouldn't hunt deer with it.
Muzzle Energy and Terminal Ballistics, .357 & .30 Carbine
- Thread starter ArfinGreebly
- Start date
- Status
mljdeckard
Member
I now find myself curious to look into these options.
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_97
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_97
Sunray
Member
"...assertion #2:..." Applies to military ball ammo only. In any case, it's an apples and oranges thing.
"...same caliber as a M1 carbine..." Nope. .308" vs .311".
"...same caliber as a M1 carbine..." Nope. .308" vs .311".
OP
OP
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
High Performance?
Holy cow.
$80 for 50 rds for the Barnes copper ammo.
$60 for 50 rds for the soft point.
MV 2010 fps, 980 fpe.
A little higher velocity, a little more energy at all points.
I'd love to see some data on the terminal performance of these rounds.
Of course, that's some pricey performance.
I pay less than that per round for Hornady .30-30 ammo, good out to 200, even 300 yards, with a whole lot more punch.
Of course, a couple of 15-rd mags of the Barnes TSX stuff might well be hell on wheels. As insurance, that's pretty cheap. And if it makes for more effective hunting, an extra dollar for meat in camp? I could live with that. Surely not gonna light off a case of that down range on paper, though.
Still, I'm intrigued. Love to have more data.
Holy cow.
$80 for 50 rds for the Barnes copper ammo.
$60 for 50 rds for the soft point.
MV 2010 fps, 980 fpe.
A little higher velocity, a little more energy at all points.
I'd love to see some data on the terminal performance of these rounds.
Of course, that's some pricey performance.
I pay less than that per round for Hornady .30-30 ammo, good out to 200, even 300 yards, with a whole lot more punch.
Of course, a couple of 15-rd mags of the Barnes TSX stuff might well be hell on wheels. As insurance, that's pretty cheap. And if it makes for more effective hunting, an extra dollar for meat in camp? I could live with that. Surely not gonna light off a case of that down range on paper, though.
Still, I'm intrigued. Love to have more data.
Snowdog
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,606
mljdeckard, I had no idea that Douple Tap loaded for the .30 Carbine. I see it's not all that much hotter (if at all) than run-of-the-mill fodder. Though I suppose it wouldn't be wise to hot-rod loads for 60-year-old warhorses.
I have a couple boxes of DPX for my carbine, but I have yet to function test them, so I still have mine loaded with JSP which I have plenty confidence in.
I would't mind seeing a Pow'r Ball-esque load or round-nose profile EFMJ type bullet engineers specifically for the M1 carbine.
I understand many of the feed issues with JSP loads are due to the exposed soft lead slightly deforming after striking the feed ramp, soaking up just enough of the forward momentum of the bolt to cause issues.
I would imagine much of this would be corrected with a EFMJ with a harder material of copper/gilded metal jacket or a Pow'rBall format with hard polymer at the tip (both with a soft lead core, of course).
However, I don't mean to sound as if complaining. My M1 carbine has fed everything just fine so far. I think that's generally the norm.
I have a couple boxes of DPX for my carbine, but I have yet to function test them, so I still have mine loaded with JSP which I have plenty confidence in.
I would't mind seeing a Pow'r Ball-esque load or round-nose profile EFMJ type bullet engineers specifically for the M1 carbine.
I understand many of the feed issues with JSP loads are due to the exposed soft lead slightly deforming after striking the feed ramp, soaking up just enough of the forward momentum of the bolt to cause issues.
I would imagine much of this would be corrected with a EFMJ with a harder material of copper/gilded metal jacket or a Pow'rBall format with hard polymer at the tip (both with a soft lead core, of course).
However, I don't mean to sound as if complaining. My M1 carbine has fed everything just fine so far. I think that's generally the norm.
billw_willy
Member
Energy means little in ballistics. I calculated momentum, the force that makes a bullet penetrate for the two examples with both in 110 gr, the 30 Carbine won handily and by the way, the Carbine can aim and hit more reliably than a handgun. The MVs of each were really too high but used them anyway. With a 158 gr 357 Mag at 1200 MV, the momentum numbers were nearly the same with the Carbine edging the handgun.
I loaded some 155 gr cast bullets for my M-1 Carbine and successfully shot them using reduced loads of powder, having no load data and arriving at what I considered maximum pressure that functioned the action without jams. The longer bullets shot accurately at 25 yards but the bullet prints were slightly yawed. The primer pockets were loosened and I quit such load development.
I loaded some 155 gr cast bullets for my M-1 Carbine and successfully shot them using reduced loads of powder, having no load data and arriving at what I considered maximum pressure that functioned the action without jams. The longer bullets shot accurately at 25 yards but the bullet prints were slightly yawed. The primer pockets were loosened and I quit such load development.
- Status
