Author Topic: Ammo testing  (Read 779 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline .270

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 69
  • Gender: Male
Ammo testing
« on: February 20, 2011, 01:26:12 AM »
This made me rethink what Im shooting. http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot8.htm

Offline Land_Owner

  • Global Moderator
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (31)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4476
    • Permission Granted - Land Owner
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2011, 02:09:27 AM »
What are you shooting?  Nice post.

Doesn't matter that much to me.  I shoot until the magazine is empty.  Seven (7) hits and holes, regardless of heavy clothing and non-mushrooming bullets, are better than one.  I do not wait for the first bullet to "be all it can be."

Offline spruce

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2011, 04:34:18 AM »
Didn't see anything surprising.  HP pistol bullets tend to perform much like FMJ if the cavity gets plugged up with clothing, drywall, etc.  I'd still prefer HP's over FMJ roundnose because if they don't plug up they will expand, and if they do plug up they're still as good as FMJ roundnose.

As for the M1 carbine, it was never known as a good "stopper" even in the Pacific in WWII - and I doubt many Japanese soldiers were wearing heavy winter clothing!  I would guess  a lot of those Chinese/North Koreans eventually died of their wounds, but just didn't show any immediate effects of being hit - hence the rumors of the bullets being stopped by their clothing.
The carbine was intended to replace the .45 Auto pistol as a personal sidearm for non-combat personnel and crews on crew served weapons.  It was pressed into service as a front-line infantry weapon - a role it was ill-suited for in my opinion.

Offline Spirithawk

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2495
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2011, 05:16:10 AM »
I kinda disagree that a hollow point, with the hollow plugged by debri, would be as good as a FMJ. Doesn't it seem likely that if that were the case, the hollow being plugged, that the hollow point might lose quite a bit of velocity in it's getting that hollow plugged thus lessening the extent of penetration whereas the FMJ would just punch through getting deeper penetration? Don't get me wrong, hollow points have their purpose. What I do is alternate rounds. HP, FMJ, HP, FMJ, ect. They feed just fine in my PF-9 and I feel lots better prepared for a variety of situations and like Land_Owner I shoot till there's no longer a threat.

Offline Pat/Rick

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1935
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #4 on: February 20, 2011, 08:01:42 AM »
Be sure of whats beyond your target, you are liable for collateral damages.Even in a defensive situation.

I think the Box o' truth is fairly good, and I like what they're doing there. The ballistic gel expansion tests by manufacturers do not IMO give an accurate representation. Maybe they should put some denim or flannel in front of the gel block first? I doubt they would get the dramatic expansion photos for the magazine pages that way.

Offline Mohawk

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1958
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2011, 09:28:51 AM »
Gold Dots, SXT, and Corbon DPX expand fine in heavy clothing if that is your concern. I prefer the most accurate load expansion or not.

Offline srussell

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (14)
  • A Real Regular
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2011, 06:36:55 PM »
matrial hanging up like that will move and slow down the bullet most likely to the point  that its moving to slow to expand.if you put on that many layers with your body as a solid back stop the bullet would act alot differant

Offline Mikey

  • GBO Supporter
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8734
Re: Ammo testing
« Reply #7 on: February 21, 2011, 01:14:32 AM »
The only problem with the 30 Carbine round is over-penetration.  Hey, it's a 110 gn 30 caliber slug traveling at near 2000'/sec - it's gonna zip through someone quite easily and in ball configuration it won't do much damage at all.  You get nearly the same effect with the 7.62x25mm Tokarev round and the only improvement I have seen in both calibers, which are both .308 by the way, is to load soft nosed slugs or a good Keith style semi-wadcutter, if you can find one.  jmtcw.