General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

OT: recent ballistics tests

Started by WillBrink · · Last activity · 22 posts · 2,206 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
5 May 2005
Last activity
6 May 2005
Original author
WillBrink
Posts
22
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,206
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 22
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Gents, some very informative info from Dr. Gary Roberts over at Tactical
    Forums (a highly recommended site BTW) has just completed some very
    extensive ballistics testing with MANY major handgun and rifle calibers
    using LE/Defensive ammunition (Gold Dot, Ranger, Fed. Tactical/HST,
    Corbon, Hornady AMAX, Partition Gold, etc.) as per the FBI/IWBA
    (International Wound Ballistics Association) standards--bare gelatin, 4
    layers denim, auto glass, etc.--with terminal performance results
    (expansion, penetration, weight retention, accuracy, etc.) and I just
    thought this would be very useful information for all those interested
    in bullets/terminal ballistics. Enjoy:

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000964

    AND

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000963

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  2. WillBrink said:

    Gents, some very informative info from Dr. Gary Roberts over at
    Tactical Forums (a highly recommended site BTW) has just completed
    some very extensive ballistics testing with MANY major handgun and
    rifle calibers using LE/Defensive ammunition (Gold Dot, Ranger, Fed.
    Tactical/HST, Corbon, Hornady AMAX, Partition Gold, etc.) as per the
    FBI/IWBA (International Wound Ballistics Association) standards--bare
    gelatin, 4 layers denim, auto glass, etc.--with terminal performance
    results (expansion, penetration, weight retention, accuracy, etc.)
    and I just thought this would be very useful information for all
    those interested in bullets/terminal ballistics. Enjoy:

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000964

    AND

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000963

    Sounds interesting, but the links are dead.
    --
    -Larry

  3. RU retarded? This is MFW, not the NRA website.

  4. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Larry Hodges said:
    WillBrink said:

    Gents, some very informative info from Dr. Gary Roberts over at
    Tactical Forums (a highly recommended site BTW) has just completed
    some very extensive ballistics testing with MANY major handgun and
    rifle calibers using LE/Defensive ammunition (Gold Dot, Ranger, Fed.
    Tactical/HST, Corbon, Hornady AMAX, Partition Gold, etc.) as per the
    FBI/IWBA (International Wound Ballistics Association) standards--bare
    gelatin, 4 layers denim, auto glass, etc.--with terminal performance
    results (expansion, penetration, weight retention, accuracy, etc.)
    and I just thought this would be very useful information for all
    those interested in bullets/terminal ballistics. Enjoy:

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000964

    AND

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000963

    Sounds interesting, but the links are dead.

    [censored], so they are. Here's one of the posts by Dr. Roberts at the
    tactical forums but it's harder to read in the format below.

    _______________________________________

    For the first time in over a year, we were able to conduct some LE
    focused terminal performance testing in 10% ordnance gel:
    ------------------------------------------------
    Out of a 2² J-frame:
    ..38 Sp Safestop 148 gr plated WC, standard pressure, ave vel=744f/s
    BG: pen=20²+, RD=0.36², RW=148.1gr
    Denim: pen=19.0², RD=0.37², RW=149.1gr
    auto windshield: pen=14.2², RD=0.44², RW=140.9gr
    ..38 Sp Speer 135 gr +P JHP Gold Dot (53921), ave vel=856f/s
    BG: pen=13.1², RD=0.56², RW=134.5gr
    4 layer denim: pen=13.6², RD=0.53², RW=134.1gr
    auto windshield: pen=9.4², RD=0.51², RW=129.6gr
    These two .38 sp loads tested were specifically crafted for 2² BUG
    revolvers; they offer the best terminal performance of any loads we have
    ever seen fired from a J-frame and can both be strongly recommended for
    BUG use. The Safestop WC is milder shooting and offers better barrier
    performance; the Gold Dot JHP offers the most reliable expansion we have
    seen from a 2², but recoils more and does not handle intermediate
    barriers as well. Pick the one you preferŠ
    ------------------------------
    ..357 Mag Win 180 gr Partition Gold (S357P) from S&W 686 4²
    BG: vel=1075, pen=18.1², RD=.57², RW=171.1gr
    4 layer denim: vel=1090 f/s, pen=20+², RD=0.53, RW=175.6gr
    auto windshield: vel=1072, pen=20+², RD=0.39, RW=178.0gr
    ------------------------
    9 mm Corbon 100 gr +P PowerBall 1555 f/s from G17
    BG: pen=10.9², RD=0.60², RW=93.9gr
    4 layer denim: pen=11.4², RD=0.58², RW=97.5gr
    The mighty 4.7² of pen after the auto windshield was not comfortingŠ
    ..40 S&W Corbon 135 gr Powerball from S&W 4006
    BG: vel=1362 f/s, pen=11.6², RD=0.65², RW=131.4gr
    4 layer denim: vel=1359 f/s, pen=12.1², RD=0.65², RW=131.9gr
    auto windshield: vel=1365 f/s, pen=7.9², RD=0.61², RW=103.6gr
    ..45 ACP Corbon 135 gr +P Powerball from 1911
    BG: vel=1230 f/s, pen=12.1², RD=0.70², RW=158.8gr
    4 layer denim: vel=1267 f/s, pen=11.8², RD=0.66², RW=159.7gr
    auto windshield: vel=1251 f/s, pen=5.5², RD=0.73², RW=143.5gr
    The frequent core-jacket separations and rounded leading edges of the PB
    loads are a concern, as is their poor terminal performance after
    intermediate barrier penetration. We were frankly unimpressed with these
    loads. If you have to use Corbon handgun loads, stick with their DPX
    loadings of the superb Barnes XPB all copper bullets.
    ----------------------------
    9mm Fed 147 gr JHP HST (P9HST2) from G17:
    BG: vel=1037f/s, pen=11.9², RD=0.64², RW=147.8gr
    4 layer denim: vel=1049f/s, pen=14.7², RD=0.54², RW=147.5gr
    auto windshield: vel=1042 f/s, pen=13.4², RD=0.53², RW=140.4gr
    ..40 S&W Fed 180 gr JHP HST (P40HST1) from S&W 4006
    BG: vel=960 f/s, pen=12.6², RD=.65², RW=181.1gr
    4 layer denim: vel=961 f/s, pen=15.6², RD=0.62, 181.3 gr
    auto windshield: vel=904 f/s, pen=15.2², RD=0.47², RW=180.4gr
    ..45 ACP Fed 230 gr +P JHP HST (P45HST1) from 1911
    BG: vel=926 f/s, pen=12.6², RD=.74², RW=231.8gr
    4 layer denim: vel=915 f/s, pen=15.4², RD=0.67, 231.1 gr
    auto windshield: vel=918 f/s, pen=19.7², RD=0.54², RW=228.6gr
    As previously reported, the initial production Federal HST bullets
    failed to expand reliably in denim testing. The new versions appear to
    have solved this deficiency and offer good terminal performance across
    the spectrum.
    -- Note: When reporting the RD of handgun bullets like the Federal HST,
    Nosler Partition Gold, and Barnes XPB, it is important to recall that
    the correct RD is the average of the SMALLEST and LARGEST measurements
    taken at the leading face of the bullet. Several recent tests seem to be
    incorrectly reporting the expansion of these types of bullets,
    improperly using only the largest measurement to offer an exaggerated RD
    size.
    The Win 124 gr +P Ranger Talon (RA124TP) load carries on in the
    outstanding fashion that has been the hallmark of the Ranger-T loads.
    From a G17:
    BG: vel=1242f/s, pen=13.0², RD=0.62², RW=114.7gr
    4 layer denim: vel=1238f/s, pen=13.0², RD=0.59², RW=116.8gr
    Auto windshields: vel=1235 f/s, pen=18.9², RD=0.50², RW=117.5gr
    Win 147 gr JHP Ranger Talon (RA9T) from G17
    BG: vel=987f/s, pen=15², RD=0.59², RW=148.1gr
    4 layer denim: vel=1005f/s, pen=15.7², RD=0.55², RW=144.1gr
    Win 230 gr +P JHP Ranger Talon (RA45TP) from 1911
    BG: vel=950f/s, pen=15.7², RD=0.59², RW=195.5gr
    4 layer denim: vel=958f/s, pen=15.2², RD=0.72², RW=230.2gr
    Note: During the BG test with the RA45TP, some over expansion with
    folding back of the petals, along with fragmentation was observed,
    resulting in less expansion than usually seen with this bullet-probably
    as a result of the velocity being on the hot side. The bullet worked
    perfectly in the denim testing.
    ------------------------------------------------
    ..223 BH loaded Nosler 60 gr Partition JSP from a 16² 1/7:
    BG: vel=2685f/s, pen=18.5², Max TC=11.5 cm @ 11.5 cm, RD=0.41², RW=52.5gr
    auto windsheld: vel=2757 f/s, pen=18.9², RD=0.32², RW=35.4gr
    The .223 BH loaded Nosler 60 gr Partition JSP has been recommended as a
    barrier load; while it performs better than most .223 loads, it is not
    as good as the 55/62 gr TBBC bullets for intermediate barriers and
    should be considered a distant second place.
    -----------------------------
    6.8 mm Barnes 85gr X from 16² 1/10
    BG: vel=2865 f/s, pen=19.3², Max [email hidden], RD=0.53², RW=85.6gr
    Auto windshield: vel=2851 f/s, pen=19.3², RD=0.32², RW=79.7grgr
    6.8 mm Sierra 110 gr JSP Pro-Hunter from 16² 1/10
    BG: vel=2500 f/s, pen=15.6², Max [email hidden], RD=0.64², RW=107.5gr
    Auto windshield: vel=2551 f/s, pen=12.2², RD=0.46², RW=73.6gr
    This is the finest 6.8 mm hunting bullet we have yet tested--I would be
    very comfortable using it on game up to 300 lbs or so. It will also be a
    great barrier round for LE. Heck, it is just a GREAT bullet periodŠ
    6.8 mm Accura 115 gr TMJ from 16² 1/10
    BG: vel=2426 f/s, pen=14.8², Max TC=10 cm@8-16cm, RD=0.55², RW=74.4gr
    auto windshield: vel=2368 f/s, pen=8.7², RD=0.58², RW=63.7²
    The Accura TMJ bullet has NO exposed lead, NO internal or external
    hollow cavities, readily fragments, and is reasonably priced. Like many
    OTM and FMJ loads, it offers relatively poor terminal performance
    through glass intermediate barriers. (Note, this was a downloaded test
    version--the current Barrett factory load is running 2635 f/s)
    All of these 6.8 mm loads were very impressive--all offered
    substantially superior terminal performance compared to all 5.56 mm and
    7.62x39mm loads we have tested.
    --------------------
    7.62x39mm Saspan 124 gr JHP (Ulyanovsk Machinery Plant) from 16² AKMS
    BG: vel=2297 f/s, pen=15.0², Max TC=10cm@18cm, RD=0.63², RW=100.5gr
    7.62x39mm 125 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip from Georgia Arms fired in 16² AKMS
    BG: vel=2174 f/s, pen=20+², Max TC=7cm@8 cm, small diameter TC and poor
    fragmentation pattern resulted in sub-optimal terminal performance.
    Excessive flash and dirty powder. Note--load is advertised as "2400 fps".
    7.62x39mm 154 gr Wolff JSP from 16² AKMS
    BG: vel=2257 f/s, pen=20+², Max TC=7.5cm@10cm, unexpanded lead core
    exited block.
    The 7.62x39mm loads offered the most disappointments of anything tested.
    The 124 gr Saspan/Ulyanovsk JHP was the only 7.62x39 mm load in this
    test which offered acceptable terminal performance. We had hoped the 125
    gr PT load would bring the 7.62x39mm up to 6.8 mm type performance--it
    does not.
    --------------
    ..308 110gr Hornady JSP from 18² M1A
    BG: vel=3087 f/s, pen=16.9², Max TC = 8 cm@10 cm, RD=0.63², RW=56.4gr
    Despite the relatively high velocity, not particularly impressive
    performance, especially compared to the 150-155 gr loads.
    ..308 125 gr Nosler BT from Georgia Arms from 18² M1A
    BG: 2847 f/s, pen=16.1², Max TC=11cm@10cm, RD=0.47², RW=72.6gr
    Again, relatively poor performance from the 125 gr BT, as well as being
    a flashy and dirty load. Note--load is advertised as "3000 fps".
    ..308 Lapua 150 gr JSP from 18² M1A
    BG: vel=2743 f/s, pen=20+², Max TC =10cm@11cm, RD=0.50², RW=92.5gr
    Good traditional hunting terminal performance similar to the Sierra Game
    King that was previously reviewed by Fackler, as well as discussed in
    our reports.
    ..308 Barnes 168 gr X from 18² M1A
    BG: vel=2576 f/s, pen=20+², Max TC =12cm@12cm, RD=0.57², RW=168.2gr
    auto windshield: vel=2574 f/s, pen=20+², RD=0.42², RW=148.2gr
    Pretty decent barrier penetration and a good hunting load; the new
    Barnes Triple Shock bullets are even better.
    ..308 168 gr Hornady AMAX PT loaded by HSM from 18² M1A
    BG: vel=2418 f/s, pen=18.1², RD=0.56², RW=144.5gr
    Same outstanding performance as previously reported with BH and Hornady
    loads using the AMAX.
    Note--a 168 gr AMAX was recently used to stop a hostile shooter in a LE
    OIS incident; the crossing shot to the torso remained in the suspect and
    created impressive damage on autopsy, with the actual damage pattern in
    tissue exactly as predicted by 10% gel studies.
    ..308 180 gr Nosler Accubond loaded by BH and fired in 18² M1A
    BG: vel=2499 f/s, pen=20+², Max TC=12cm@7-22cm, RD=0.56², RW=149.5gr
    auto windshield: vel=2509 f/s, pen=20+², RD=0.54², RW=126.6gr
    Currently, many LE precision marksmen rely upon the Federal Tactical 165
    gr bonded JSP load using the TBBC bullet for intermediate glass
    barriers. While the 165gr TBBC offers excellent terminal performance,
    accuracy is somewhat lacking. The new 180 gr Nosler/BH Accubond loading
    couples superb terminal performance through glass with sub-MOA accuracy
    and can be considered equally acceptable for glass barriers as the TBBC.
    The Accubond should also make a superb hunting bullet for any game
    encountered in the lower 48 states. For rural agencies, this might be
    the only load needed for LE counter-sniping; it is important to realize
    that like the TBBC, the Accubond will ALWAYS exit the target, so
    awareness of the backstop is critical when employing this round. For
    urban use, the 155 gr AMAX is still probably the best primary choice,
    with the Accubond/TBBC reserved for glass and other intermediate
    barriers.

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  5. WillBrink said:

    For the first time in over a year, we were able to conduct some LE
    focused terminal performance testing in 10% ordnance gel:

    You know, I'd assume that if I hit the guy with a .308 in the
    (unarmored) body or head, he's going to go down and stay down.

    Now, mouse gun caliber tests, those would be useful.

  6. WillBrink said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    T said:
    WillBrink said:

    For the first time in over a year, we were able to conduct some LE
    focused terminal performance testing in 10% ordnance gel:

    You know, I'd assume that if I hit the guy with a .308 in the
    (unarmored) body or head, he's going to go down and stay down.

    One would hope!

    Quoted message said:

    Now, mouse gun caliber tests, those would be useful.

    Such as?

    ..32 ACP.

    Yeah, I know; I have .45s in the purse and glove compartment, 12 gauges
    in the condo and trunk... but the .32 is almost always on me.

  7. In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Axel of the North!) said:

    On Thu, 05 May 2005 18:19:59 -0400, WillBrink <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    Quoted message said:

    RU retarded?

    Ah, you must be new here. Let me welcome you by telling you to go f*&^
    yourself.
    Willie "on the" Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

    so he doesn't think that self-protection is good enough for MFW?

    So it appears!

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  8. In article <[email hidden]>,

    John Hanson said:

    On Thu, 05 May 2005 16:48:22 -0400, WillBrink <[email hidden]>
    wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:

    Gents, some very informative info from Dr. Gary Roberts over at Tactical
    Forums (a highly recommended site BTW) has just completed some very
    extensive ballistics testing with MANY major handgun and rifle calibers
    using LE/Defensive ammunition (Gold Dot, Ranger, Fed. Tactical/HST,
    Corbon, Hornady AMAX, Partition Gold, etc.) as per the FBI/IWBA
    (International Wound Ballistics Association) standards--bare gelatin, 4
    layers denim, auto glass, etc.--with terminal performance results
    (expansion, penetration, weight retention, accuracy, etc.) and I just
    thought this would be very useful information for all those interested
    in bullets/terminal ballistics. Enjoy:

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000964

    AND

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000963

    Looks like I made the right choice with the .40 for my main defensive
    weapon.

    ..45 ACP is still better.

    Quoted message said:

    My next pistol will be in .45 GAP though and would have like
    to see that tested.

    Personally, I think the .45 GAP looks to fix a problem that does not
    exist.

    Quoted message said:

    I'd also like to see the SW99 come out in that
    caliber as I really like that pistol and the lack of external safety.

    SW99 is just their knock off of the Walther P99, which is a better gun
    BTW. I had a P99 in .40.

    Quoted message said:

    Oh, and, I'm thinking about getting a much smaller, throw in the
    pocket type handgun. I'll probably have to choose a smaller caliber
    for that i.e. .38 special or .380.

    I would have said no way a few years ago, but now Speer makes .38 ammo
    designed for short barrels (ala .38 snub) with decent ballistics.

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  9. In article <[email hidden]>,

    T said:
    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    Now, mouse gun caliber tests, those would be useful.

    Such as?

    .32 ACP.

    But that's not a duty load (thank God), which was the focus of those
    tests.

    Quoted message said:


    Yeah, I know; I have .45s in the purse and glove compartment, 12 gauges
    in the condo and trunk... but the .32 is almost always on me.

    Would be interesting to see with the newer loads I agree. I tell you
    though, now that Speer makes some good loads for .38 short barrels, an
    SnW Airweight is small and lightand gives you decent ballistics. No
    doubt, the .32 you have on you is always better then the .45 you left at
    home.

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  10. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    .32 ACP.
    Yeah, I know; I have .45s in the purse and glove compartment, 12 gauges
    in the condo and trunk... but the .32 is almost always on me.

    Would be interesting to see with the newer loads I agree. I tell you
    though, now that Speer makes some good loads for .38 short barrels, an
    SnW Airweight is small and lightand gives you decent ballistics. No
    doubt, the .32 you have on you is always better then the .45 you left at
    home.

    It's in the purse, damn it. ;-) But the .32 is- hey, look at that!
    It's in my hand!

  11. John Hanson said:


    Looks like I made the right choice with the .40 for my main defensive
    weapon. My next pistol will be in .45 GAP though and would have like
    to see that tested.

    Why bother? It has to be the exact same as the .45 ACP. What pistol you
    looking at? Do you have small hands? I view the GAP as another cart in
    search of a mission.

  12. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Paul Cassel said:
    John Hanson said:


    Looks like I made the right choice with the .40 for my main defensive
    weapon. My next pistol will be in .45 GAP though and would have like
    to see that tested.

    Why bother? It has to be the exact same as the .45 ACP. What pistol you
    looking at? Do you have small hands? I view the GAP as another cart in
    search of a mission.

    As you will see, that sums up my feelings exactly. Recoil is also quite
    stiff with the .45 GAP.

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  13. In article <[email hidden]>,

    T said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    .32 ACP.
    Yeah, I know; I have .45s in the purse and glove compartment, 12 gauges
    in the condo and trunk... but the .32 is almost always on me.

    Would be interesting to see with the newer loads I agree. I tell you
    though, now that Speer makes some good loads for .38 short barrels, an
    SnW Airweight is small and lightand gives you decent ballistics. No
    doubt, the .32 you have on you is always better then the .45 you left at
    home.

    It's in the purse, damn it. ;-)

    As long as you can get to it. Guns sitting in purses are a bad idea,
    unless it's a purse designed for carry.

    Quoted message said:

    But the .32 is- hey, look at that!
    It's in my hand!

    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

  14. On Fri, 06 May 2005 09:02:22 -0400, WillBrink <[email hidden]>
    wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    John Hanson said:

    On Thu, 05 May 2005 16:48:22 -0400, WillBrink <[email hidden]>
    wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:

    Gents, some very informative info from Dr. Gary Roberts over at Tactical
    Forums (a highly recommended site BTW) has just completed some very
    extensive ballistics testing with MANY major handgun and rifle calibers
    using LE/Defensive ammunition (Gold Dot, Ranger, Fed. Tactical/HST,
    Corbon, Hornady AMAX, Partition Gold, etc.) as per the FBI/IWBA
    (International Wound Ballistics Association) standards--bare gelatin, 4
    layers denim, auto glass, etc.--with terminal performance results
    (expansion, penetration, weight retention, accuracy, etc.) and I just
    thought this would be very useful information for all those interested
    in bullets/terminal ballistics. Enjoy:

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000964

    AND

    http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000963

    Looks like I made the right choice with the .40 for my main defensive
    weapon.

    .45 ACP is still better.

    Quoted message said:

    My next pistol will be in .45 GAP though and would have like
    to see that tested.

    Personally, I think the .45 GAP looks to fix a problem that does not
    exist.

    I like the ballistics and the big hole. Plus, it will work nicely in
    a compact.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    I'd also like to see the SW99 come out in that
    caliber as I really like that pistol and the lack of external safety.

    SW99 is just their knock off of the Walther P99, which is a better gun
    BTW. I had a P99 in .40.

    It's not a knock off. The frame is made by Walther. I believe the
    only parts that are manufactured by S&W is the slide and barrel.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Oh, and, I'm thinking about getting a much smaller, throw in the
    pocket type handgun. I'll probably have to choose a smaller caliber
    for that i.e. .38 special or .380.

    I would have said no way a few years ago, but now Speer makes .38 ammo
    designed for short barrels (ala .38 snub) with decent ballistics.

  15. On Fri, 06 May 2005 07:26:23 -0600, Paul Cassel
    <[email hidden]> wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:
    John Hanson said:


    Looks like I made the right choice with the .40 for my main defensive
    weapon. My next pistol will be in .45 GAP though and would have like
    to see that tested.

    Why bother? It has to be the exact same as the .45 ACP. What pistol you
    looking at? Do you have small hands? I view the GAP as another cart in
    search of a mission.

    I'm not sure if my hands are small but I like a small grip. The
    pistol that is chambered in .45 GAP that I like doesn't exist at this
    time.

  16. "WillBrink" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:
    T said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Now, mouse gun caliber tests, those would be useful.

    Such as?

    .32 ACP.

    But that's not a duty load (thank God), which was the focus of those
    tests.

    Quoted message said:

    Yeah, I know; I have .45s in the purse and glove compartment, 12 gauges
    in the condo and trunk... but the .32 is almost always on me.

    Would be interesting to see with the newer loads I agree. I tell you
    though, now that Speer makes some good loads for .38 short barrels, an
    SnW Airweight is small and lightand gives you decent ballistics. No
    doubt, the .32 you have on you is always better then the .45 you left at
    home.

    Even in swim trucks, my Seecamp .32ACP keeps me company.

    David

  17. "David Cohen" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:


    Even in swim trucks, my Seecamp .32ACP keeps me company.

    David, I am troubled by this statement.

    Apparently you have a small truck that you take swimming.

    And it is so small, it can barely contain the aforementioned mouse gun.

    Maybe your mother did not buy you enough toys as a youngster.

    And you have been trying to make up for it ever since.

  18. "Lee Michaels" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    "David Cohen" <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:


    Even in swim trucks, my Seecamp .32ACP keeps me company.


    David, I am troubled by this statement.

    Apparently you have a small truck that you take swimming.

    And it is so small, it can barely contain the aforementioned mouse gun.

    Maybe your mother did not buy you enough toys as a youngster.

    And you have been trying to make up for it ever since.

    I swim in a truck, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

    David

  19. "David Cohen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:


    Even in swim trucks, my Seecamp .32ACP keeps me company.

    David

    When it's cold, we can tell.

    --
    Dr. Dickie
    Skepticult member in good standing #394-00596-438
    Poking kooks with a pointy stick.
    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new
    discoveries,
    is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!'😉, but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'"
    - Isaac Asimov

  20. In article <[email hidden]>,

    John Hanson said:

    On Fri, 06 May 2005 09:02:22 -0400, WillBrink <[email hidden]>
    wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    John Hanson said:

    On Thu, 05 May 2005 16:48:22 -0400, WillBrink <[email hidden]>
    wrote in misc.fitness.weights:

    >Gents, some very informative info from Dr. Gary Roberts over at Tactical
    >Forums (a highly recommended site BTW) has just completed some very
    >extensive ballistics testing with MANY major handgun and rifle calibers
    >using LE/Defensive ammunition (Gold Dot, Ranger, Fed. Tactical/HST,
    >Corbon, Hornady AMAX, Partition Gold, etc.) as per the FBI/IWBA
    >(International Wound Ballistics Association) standards--bare gelatin, 4
    >layers denim, auto glass, etc.--with terminal performance results
    >(expansion, penetration, weight retention, accuracy, etc.) and I just
    >thought this would be very useful information for all those interested
    >in bullets/terminal ballistics. Enjoy:
    >
    >http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000964
    >
    >AND
    >
    >http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...c;f=78;t=000963

    Looks like I made the right choice with the .40 for my main defensive
    weapon.

    .45 ACP is still better.

    Quoted message said:

    My next pistol will be in .45 GAP though and would have like
    to see that tested.

    Personally, I think the .45 GAP looks to fix a problem that does not
    exist.

    I like the ballistics and the big hole. Plus, it will work nicely in
    a compact.

    There are lots of very compact .45 ACPs these days and recoil from GAP
    is very sharp. 45 ACP has 100 years plus of proving itself. Up to you
    bro, but I think it's the latest wiz ban round (ala .357 Sig) in search
    of sales.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    I'd also like to see the SW99 come out in that
    caliber as I really like that pistol and the lack of external safety.

    SW99 is just their knock off of the Walther P99, which is a better gun
    BTW. I had a P99 in .40.

    It's not a knock off. The frame is made by Walther. I believe the
    only parts that are manufactured by S&W is the slide and barrel.

    Yup, quality in the P99 is higher however.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Oh, and, I'm thinking about getting a much smaller, throw in the
    pocket type handgun. I'll probably have to choose a smaller caliber
    for that i.e. .38 special or .380.

    I would have said no way a few years ago, but now Speer makes .38 ammo
    designed for short barrels (ala .38 snub) with decent ballistics.


    --
    Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.