Model12Win
Moderator
Compare reports from the Great War to today's current conflict in Iraq.
Real world results speak for themselves.
Real world results speak for themselves.
Me too...and placement trumps everything. I sometimes think we get wrapped around the handle attempting to make mathematical models which will predict, even partially, gunshot effectiveness. There are just too many variables involved IMHO, for me to trust any that I've studied...but a bullet, damned near any bullet, placed in the critical CNS or major artery/heart zones will do the job. RodPersonally, I prefer the Taylor KO formula which includes bullet diameter and doesn't over emphasize velocity as the straight energy formula does.
The Taylor KO tables were developed for big game rounds desinged to hunt large African game animals and really wasn't intended for handguns.
https://www.chuckhawks.com/taylor_KO_factor.htm
I'd be very interested to do that. What data sources are you using for that comparison? I'm not aware of any reliable/verifiable reports/studies on handgun stopping power from either conflict.Compare reports from the Great War to today's current conflict in Iraq.
What is the basis for this claim? I've not seen any scientific studies/reports which show good correlation between TKO values and commonly accepted parameters used to measure terminal effects on living tissue.Doesn't matter what it was originally designed for, it works just as well for handguns for determining it's effect on living tissue.
That's completely dependent on the design of the projectile, and how well it expands.MINSH101 said:There's only .002 difference between a 9mm and .357. The result is a larger hole from a .357. Not because of the size of projectiles, but rather the energy. That's the premise of my original post.
You are obviously free to evaluate load performance any way you see fit and I can't see how that would bother anyone--it certainly doesn't bother me.Why does it bother some of you guys that I prefer to use a different standard for measuring load performance?
I feel the same.Measure how you want, no skin off my nose.
it's one thing to say "I like handgun loadings with nickel plated cases and that's all I will use." It's quite another to say: "If you want a good way to determine the effect of a loading on living tissue--just look at the cases to see if they're nickel plated." One is a statement of personal preference, the latter is an assertion of fact.
Personally, I prefer the Taylor KO formula which includes bullet diameter and doesn't over emphasize velocity as the straight energy formula does. Just MHO.
The Taylor KO tables were developed for big game rounds desinged to hunt large African game animals and really wasn't intended for handguns.
https://www.chuckhawks.com/taylor_KO_factor.htm
I just said that it's not. Twice.It's obviously still bothering you, John.
This is, indeed, a statement of preference. However, you will note that I made no comment about your preference and instead referred to the provided rationale which is in error.Personally, I prefer the Taylor KO formula which includes bullet diameter and doesn't over emphasize velocity as the straight energy formula does. Just MHO.
This was the second comment I responded to and it was not a statement of preference, it was a claim that TKO works well for determining the effect of handgun loadings on living tissue. The information I have seen is inconsistent with this claim and therefore I asked what the basis for the claim was to determine if there was additional information I need to look at.Doesn't matter what it was originally designed for, it works just as well for handguns for determining it's effect on living tissue.
That's your takeaway from this exchange? Ok...You seem to have this thing with nickle plated cases.