You don't see 10mm on the WalMart shelf. You do see .357 Sig on the WalMart shelf like .40 and .9. However, OP thinks .40 is a dying breed. .357 Sig definitely has more punch between 9mm, and .40 and has better availability than 10mm. Nuff said
That's only because S4F won't let us call each other dumbasses and DBs anymore.I'm just shocked OSA went this many pages on this of all subjects in a civil manner. Well done!
Specific rounds vary more than calibers.
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/
Ballistics gel sucks at anything other than testing a round in ballistics gel. In no way will ballistics gel mimic what happens in real life.
"Over the last few months, I’ve been working with the rest of the Lucky Gunner team on another one of our epic experiments, which we’re proud to finally unveil: ballistics gelatin testing for over 100 self-defense handgun ammunition loads. 117 to be precise, and that’s just round one. This testing will be ongoing, and we’ll keep adding to the results as we have the chance to test more loads."
Most ballistics-experts and MDs will disagree with your statement, and there are important reasons to compliment evidence from actual shootings with evidence from standardized medium (i.e., gel) to make ballistics-based decisions. But that aside, actual shootings provide evidence to support the same important point...that specific rounds vary more than calibers do in regard to ballistic performance (in actual human bodies).
Great link!! Thanks
pretty informative! But there are a couple of big problems
They have no replication of gel blocks. Also what is the effect of previous rounds in gel?
Look at data closely (I've posted a clip of it below). Notice how the lowest bullet always penetrates further (or equal) to previous bullets. Is that because the gel integrity has been compromised by having had 3-4 bullets fly through it?
Edit: the problem with this is that the bullets are not independent of each other (except of the first one).
Therefore their comparison of mean penetration and expansion are misleading.
Last edited:
I think the authors grouped the data with the shortest path at the top and the longest at the bottom, just for the sake of visual clarity. If you look at the actual photos, you can see that the bullet which penetrated the furthest into the gel isn't always the one on the bottom.
Still. I don't believe that 4 shots into the same gel won't affect the 5th shot. That goes for all shots except the first.
maybe I'm just hyper critical
