caliber difference between

Discussion in 'General Weapons Discussion' started by DAC..florida, Apr 5, 2003.

  1. Tigertron

    Tigertron Yellow Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Me think you are just one of those "penetration" fanatics :) who only looks at penetration.

    Check this out:

    The 45 HydraShok:

    Rounds Penetration : Expansion : Wound Volume:
    230@ 956 : 13.6" 0.74" 5.83 cu
    230@ 878 : 20.0" 0.55" 4.80 cu
    230@ 858 : 16.4" 0.66" 5.59 cu

    GD :

    200@1062 (+P) 18.9" 0.55" 4.41cu
    230@896 18.9" 0.59" 5.17cu
    230@847 14.3" 0.70" 5.50cu

    FBI Test: Results are from clothed gelatin.

    Looking at these facts, it is quite a stretch to say "the 230 Hydro-shok didn't adequately perform" and "the .45 Hydro-shok rated very poorly in our agencies test trials", wouldn't you say?

    If penetration is the issue, any rounds that penetrate 12" are sufficient. I think "some agencies", who ever they are, need to rethink through their logic.
     
  2. Tigertron

    Tigertron Yellow Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Soldiers!!!

    I think you fail to recognize the reality that the 45 compensates for penetration [hell, actually the 45 penetrates just fine! ] and accuracy under stress. When I blow a big hole in you, it really does not matter it is a gut shot or a heart shot. You are gonna stop dead in your path. :D But hey, feel free to short change yourself by equipping yourself with more demanding rounds. Afterall, it is your own life that you are risking there. ;)
     
  3. A.R.K.

    A.R.K. Guest

    :rolleyes: Me thinks JN has returned from the grave...:rofl:

    If having adequate penetration to a vital organ through common obstacles or outstretched limbs means fanatacism...thats fine by me.

    No I would not. Were you at the FBI testing grounds? I was present when we tested the 230 HS, in fact I fired the test rounds through a Glock 21 into the media both clothed and unclothed. The HS balled up through light clothing. As felons usually wear clothes....

    Does this mean the 200+P GD walks on water? No, no round or caliber does. But it performed better in media and has worked wonderfully in actual police shootings for our agency. If it works in jello and works in living tissue and puts Bg's down...it works.

    The key term is adequate penetration. Since the GD is working well in real shootings I would say our logic is working just fine.

    Uh hug :rolleyes: Yes, that really narrows it down some. Well if thats the case, then other soldiers say the 9mm works just fine and they have more ammo with less weight. How about citing an actual piece of research for us from a credible source....???

    I don't think you've actually fired one :confused: A .45 will penetrate based on it's weight vs. sectional density the same as any other caliber.

    Comments like this lead me to believe you are JN with another screen name to get around the ban. You comment only happens in the movies my friend. People have soaked up multiple .45 torso hits and ran from the scene. Thats fact. Not the fiction of 'blow a big hole in you'

    Hmmmmm :shrug:
     
  4. Tigertron

    Tigertron Yellow Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who is JN? I don't think you should be throwing baseless accusation around that you cannot prove.

    It is very simple actually. Just take a look at the FBI test result. The only measurement that makes GD stands out is PENETRATION! In other categories, ie. expansion and wound volume, the 45 HydraShok performs superior to GD. Yet, you keep talking about how bad the 45 HydraShok performed when it actually performed superbly in expansion and wound volume and more than adequately in penetration, in clothed gelatin test, conducted by none other than the FBI which has no reason to fudge the test what so ever. Therefore, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out the only criterial you are hyping about is PENETRATION, where GD scored an 18" . Which most likely would over penetrate any torso and sail down the street and kill an innocent bystander, and as a result, land your *** in prison for involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide. NOT smart, my friend.

    As for the clogging issue, the FBI test used both bare gelatin AND clothed gelatin. If clogging occured, it would have occured in at least one of the 45 Hydrashok. But the test result speaks for itself.

    Therefore, it is really elementary, Watson. ;)

    It is very funny that since the FBI clothed gelatin test result proves you wrong, that you resort to dismiss the test result.

    Whatever. Believe what you like. Go argue with the FBI, if you like. Dismiss the soldiers' evaluation of the 9mm and the 45, if you like.

    As I have mentioned, it is your own life that you are poo-poo'ing ;) I'll take the experience of the FEDs and our battlefield warriors any day.
     
  5. A.R.K.

    A.R.K. Guest

    I have not thrown out any accusations...merely observations that you and JN are very similar in contend and accountability. :shrug:

    I the FBI is your Holy grail so be it. Those tests were performed many years ago. The HS has remained the same, GD's have gone through at least two revisions.

    *Can you cite the FBI test study your refering to?

    *Can you post the link to the study [it should be readily available as it's public record]?

    *Can you post ANY realworld shootings in which a GD sailed through a BG and hit an innocent bystander? Since we as an agency have used the 200+p Gd in numerous shootings [as well as the issued 124+P 9mm] we have yet to have one over-penetrate and not be recovered within feet of the body. I say 'body' since more often than not the Bg was DRT with either caliber. And the Bg's that were not DRT were incapacitated and not capable of further aggression.

    *Still waiting for links to these battlefield warriors that have had such a bad experience with the 9mm...Are these reports anywhere in our near future?

    *Do you understand what adequate penetration means?

    *Do you understand what sectional density is?

    *Do you understand that every caliber statistically has the almost the same percentage of failures vs stops?

    *Have you ever seen someone shot? I have [I'm talking real, not TV]?

    I await your answers.....

    :asian:
     
  6. Tigertron

    Tigertron Yellow Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obviously, the Commandos of the Special Forces Detachment Delta, its civilian sister, the agents of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team, don't think so. They, and many other elite units, pack the 45! The FBI HRT actually tested on live goats (anaesthesized) and examinedthe wound effect before they picked the 45.

    I am sure they know about their trade better than YOU do. Again, it is really elementary, Watson. ;)

    By the way, the SEAL Team 6 that pack the 9mm, they load their own ammo. In its founder, Marchenko's words, it packs enough power into the round to blow your head off CLEAN! ;) When he couldn't have access to that, he prefers the Winchester Black Talon. You don't hear him yup about PENETRATION, do you?
     
  7. A.R.K.

    A.R.K. Guest

    Sigh :rolleyes:

    No one has said the .45 sucks, only that it doesn't walk on water the way you claim. Things such as one hit from a 230 HS will put you down etc are utter nonsense. It might stop the threat...if it is placed well to hit a vital organ or CNS...maybe.

    Lots of special teams like the .45 BUT far more like the 9mm. Israeli IDF to mention one. In the end they are about the same in terms of terminal ballistics. Where you put the round is FAR more important than what the round is. You can debate that all that you like.

    Really? And how would you know that? :confused: You don't know my background or experience do you? Being new here and all...having never posted here before and all :shrug:

    I have far more experience than you my friend, that is evident. What is not evident is why you have yet to post references to your claims, links to your sources of information or answered any questions put to you. Very curious indeed....

    Can we expect you to back up your points any time soon? Experience tells me you have no more knowledge on this topic than what is available from guns n ammo. No offense but there is more to it than what a gun rag sells. Any answers or data forthcoming?

    :asian:123
     

Share This Page