Unlicensed Dremel,
What does his being or not being an "ignoramus" have to do with anything? Utterly irrelevant. You can turn the sound off - even if he never would have said a word, the video speaks for itself.
You may want to leave the sound on when you watch the video. Then you'll hear the guy admit that he doesn't understand ballistics and is learning as he goes. An enlightened man chooses to learn from those who possess knowledge, not from an uninformed novice.
With the sound off you missed the fact that some of his gel blocks are out of spec, that he fails to calibrate the blocks, and that he doesn't know the difference between a temporary wound cavity and a permanent wound cavity, and he presumably is ignorant of the fact that the temporary cavity in living tissue, produced by most service caliber handguns, is an insignificant and unreliable factor in wounding a human.
What would make you think that MORE penetration, coupled with MORE permanent wound cavity is somehow inferior to LESS penetration, coupled with LESS permanent wound cavity? (which was repeated over and over again consistently in the video)
Do yourself a favor and acquaint yourself with the IWBA's ammo specification and the FBI's bullet terminal ballistic performance criteria. Both organizations specify maximum gel penetration depths because:
- the human body is of a finite size, and after reaching vital tissues further penetration does little to no good;
- a bullet that penetrates so deeply as to pass through your target offers no significant benefit, but puts innocent people downrange at risk; and,
- a round that penetrates too much produces excess recoil, which degrades accuracy and slows down your rate of fire while producing no benefit.
Or else, you must think the video is doctored eh? Pick one. You can't have it both ways.
Nice strawman argument, Obama's favorite rhetorical fallacy, which is only effective on pozzed postmodernists. Sorry, I'm a modernist and not pozzed; thus, save your bogus arguments for the chumps.
The video is not doctored. It merely shows an admitted ignorant amateur learning as goes and offering poor recommendations.
Quote:
If you want deeper penetration and are willing to sacrifice expansion, virtually any FMJ will give you that at a fraction of the cost of the Xtreme Penetrator.
Who cares? The non-expanding bullet created a larger permanent wound cavity than the fully-expanded HST round - which is better: more permanent wound cavity or less permanent wound cavity?
Your only argument seems to be that it over-penetrates. Granted, it DOES do that. And that should be taken into account for any particular person's "mission" so to speak.
Read my first, second, and this third post I've offered in this thread and it is clear that I have pointed out much more than the touted round's overpenetration. Overpenetration per se is not a flaw; it simply offers little to no benefit and poses a safety concern to innocent bystanders. I carry FMJs in my .32 Auto, my .380 Auto, and my 9 Makarov, because it's either impossible or very hard to find rounds that penetrate adequately while expanding reliably in these calibers. Per both the IWBA and the FBI, penetration trumps expansion. I'd rather carry an FMJ that does not expand and overpenetrates than a JHP that underpenetrates while expanding minimally if at all.
The FBI doesn't necessarily eschew rounds that overpenetrate, but they don't give a round credit for more than 18 inches of penetration. Judging by the reported performance of most premium JHPs likely to be used by law enforcement, the manufacturers are designing rounds that typically expand dramatically while penetrating far short of the FBI maximum spec.
But if you want/need better penetration, AND more wounding, it's the way to go, seems to me.
Then the burden is on you to explain 1) why the IWBA and FBI have specified maximum penetration depths, 2) the benefits of overpenetration, and 3) if you offer a response to #2, then explain why no one is trying to design a handgun round that will penetrate 10 yd of ballistic gelatin (because if a little overpenetration is good, a lot of overpenetration must be great!).
Again, unless you think the video is a fraud, which I can tell you it's not....been watching the MAC man for years. As I say, he's an honest broker - his intelligence or knowledge level has zero to do with the test results plainly before our eyes there.
Keep slaying that strawman! I'll admit the guy is honest in this video because he admits his ignorance. One day he may become informed, but anyone who listens to anything he says about terminal ballistics at this point is a fool.
I mean, there's no question that gimmicky nonsense rounds are constantly peddled. But the proof is in the pudding - this one is the real deal - unless you think that expansion with less wound cavity beats no expansion with more wound cavity.
The volume of the permanent wound cavity is virtually immaterial unless penetration is deep enough to reach vital tissue where the intersection with the permanent wound cavity can cause meaningful damage. A large shallow wound cavity, as produced by a frangible round, may have a large volume, but with shallow penetration it cannot be counted on to produce a physiological stop.
Sure, the tests should be repeated to verify. But it's pretty plain to see what happened there, over and over
We live in a postmodern era where reason and empiricism is routinely ignored by many in favor of pseudoscience or mysticism. Your buddy's video falls squarely into the realm of pseudoscience. If you want to buy the ammo he's peddling, be my guest. But, can I then ask you to send me a large sum of cash so I can get my inheritance out of a Nigerian bank? I'll gladly return the money you loan me along with half my inheritance.