A closer look at 147gr 9mm Gold Dot ammo

Thanks for posting it. I use these informal tests to "backstop" tests done in ballistic gel. I don't like relying on just one test so this type test gives me a bit more confidence in a round. I personally use the 124 gr. Gold Dots but if it works, it works.
 
Great video and post, Strum. That also my choice for carry as well, although sometimes I go work the 124gr. Years ago, I managed to get a great deal on 500 rounds (250 124gr, 250 147gr) I just shot the last of it this weekend so it's time to hunt down another deal.

147gr HST is better, even according to federal's own LE website
Click to expand...

Lets have the link.
 
Thanks for the effort.

I know that cooking up ordinance gelatin, transporting it to the test site, keeping it at the right temperature right up until the time you test, and calibrating it and all that is really quite a bit of work.

Having said that - I'm not a fan of test firing rnds into water jugs, sogggy newspaper, wet telephone books or anything else besides ordinance gelatin.

You say "This is by no means scientific testing [sic] water isn't necesarily the best test media, but it gives you an idea of just how well the ammunition will perform,"

Well actually it doesn't.

There is no data or study that I've ever seen that shows how performance in water correlates to performance in human tissue or ordinance gelatin.

Most major ammunition manufactures now design their bullets around the FBI tests - plain ordinance gelatin, and 4-ply denim. I could fire a bulet through 4 pumpkins, or a block of styrofoam and say the same thing "This is by no means scientific testing this isn't necesarily the best test media, but it gives you an idea of just how well the ammunition will perform"

You make a disclaimer and then you make claims for the ammo's performance.

I respect your work, very good presentation and high production value but your premise is flawed.
 
It's not that I don't believe you, it's just a common practice to post a link to back up your statement. You bring nothing to discussion when you make a statement and provide no data.
 
Most major ammunition manufactures now design their bullets around the FBI tests - plain ordinance gelatin, and 4-ply denim. I could fire a bulet through 4 pumpkins, or a block of styrofoam and say the same thing "This is by no means scientific testing this isn't necesarily the best test media, but it gives you an idea of just how well the ammunition will perform"

You make a disclaimer and then you make claims for the ammo's performance.

I respect your work, very good presentation and high production value but your premise is flawed.
Click to expand...
Shooting ordinance gelatin isn't representative of how a bullet will react in actual human flesh. Some folks like to think it is, but in reality it's no more accurate than water is - which is to say not very accurate. What it does allow for is consistency, if properly used, and gives people a standard to work from. It makes measuring penetration easier, it gives a visual representation of wounding (albeit not necessarily representative of actual wounds in humans), is translucent so you can view the wound, and it's relatively easy to make and inexpensive.

There's nothing man made that accurately represents the actual performance of a bullet in a human body. There are way too many variables to account for (varying densities of organs, bones, fat, etc). While I'm sure someone could devise a perfect ballistic replica given enough money and resources, it's not cost effective nor practical.
 
It's not that I don't believe you, it's just a common practice to post a link to back up your statement. You bring nothing to discussion when you make a statement and provide no data.
Click to expand...


sorry, took your post the wrong way, my friend. :o



i can't find information on performance in ordinance gelatin on Federal's site
Click to expand...

here's a ton of it lol (you were looking at their civilian site):

http://le.atk.com/general/irl/woundballistics.aspx
 
I agree that ordinance gelatin isn’t going to predict exactly how a bullet will react in actual human flesh. No bullet is even going to behave the same way each time fired out of the same pistol into different blocks of gelatin. No bullet fired into the same spot on different animals (or humans) is going to behave the same way each time.


However there is a loose correlation between how a round performs in ordinance gelatin and how effective the round will generally be against humans. It’s a loose correlation that Dr. Martin Fackler has made and many major law enforcement agencies believe that correlation.

And just generally speaking, ordinance gel represents a standard measurement so if I am going to make decisions about which round to carry – I cannot make a valid comparison between a 147gr Winchester Ranger T fired into ordinance gelatin versus a Remington 147gr Golden Sabre fired into wet newspaper versus a 147gr Speer Gold Dot fired into water jugs.
 
And just generally speaking, ordinance gel represents a standard measurement so if I am going to make decisions about which round to carry – I cannot make a valid comparison between a 147gr Winchester Ranger T fired into ordinance gelatin versus a Remington 147gr Golden Sabre fired into wet newspaper versus a 147gr Speer Gold Dot fired into water jugs.
Click to expand...
No one is asking you to compare rounds fired into wet newspaper, gelatin, or water and to draw a comparison between them.

The beauty of water is that it's consistently dense, cheap, readily available, easily portable, doesn't require calibration, doesn't have the temperature requirements of gelatin and there's little chance of you botching the mixture. It's so easy to find and use for testing that you can do it yourself and not rely on 3rd parties to do your testing for you.

Since the human body on average is roughly 60% water, water isn't a completely whacky test medium. Sure, you can't measure penetration with any degree of accuracy, nor can you simulate a wound track (not that the track in gelatin is representative of actual damage in flesh), but you can get an idea of how a bullet will expand, how much weight it might retain under ideal circumstances (not hitting bone for example) and get an idea of the final diameter of the bullet after expansion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top