Comments

1. On January 4, 2022 at 1:30 pm, billrla said:

   Gel block tests are usually done with rectangular blocks of homogeneous gel. It could be instructive to make gel models that contain simulated organs, bone, connective tissues and fluids. Sensors (pressure, acceleration, etc.) could also be embedded. This would be an expensive endeavor, but, if done reproducibly, could provide useful standards for testing purposes.

   Automobile and aircraft manufactures use highly instrumented crash test dummies. Why don’t firearm and ammo manufacturers do the same? Perhaps, it’s a question of budget, but, the military has a big budget.

2. On January 5, 2022 at 9:33 am, Rocketguy said:

   Not sure why anyone would find using “deer ammo” odd. We are medium game sized. My ready mags are stuffed with Federal Fusion 62 grn bonded loads. A plain old 30-30 150 grn flat point will ruin your whole day.

3. On January 5, 2022 at 4:41 pm, Georgiaboy61 said:

   @ Rocketguy

   Re: “Not sure why anyone would find using ‘deer ammo’ odd.”

   Probably a combination of things…. tradition, inertia, marketing, legal factors, etc.

   I have long held the suspicion, which I cannot prove, that varmint loads in .223 Remington are not all that different from tactical self-defense loads offered by manufacturers in that same caliber.

   However, I do not use such ammo for self-defense because it was not designed for such use, even thought it may work fine in the real world employed in such a way. But I know of at least one well-respected tactical trainer who uses varmint ammo in precisely that way, and has admitted to it in an internet forum. Your mileage may vary….

   In the same way, hunting rounds which use a hollow-point or expanding type of construction are not all that different from personal-defense loads also designed for self-defense/tactical use.

   As you stated, “we are medium game”… yes, in a manner of speaking.

   Tradition plays a part, or “we do it this way because we have always done it this way,” that sort of thing.

   Since the late 1800s, western nation states have adhered to the Geneva and Hague Conventions (Treaties) on the conduct of land warfare. These agreements stipulate, among other things, that small-arms ammunition intended for military use should not utilize hollow-point or expanding/mushrooming bullet/projectile designs, only jacketed or full-metal jacket ammunition with a lead core and a gilding metal coating or jacket.

   Naturally, nations and their armies being what they are – including the U.S. – have often sought ways since that time of circumventing those very same restrictions… so go figure.

   Strictly-speaking, since civilians and cops are not military personnel, they are not bound by such agreements, which is why a uniformed patrol officer and a guy with a CCW probably have HP ammo loaded in their respective sidearms.

   Of course, the lack of internal logic and consistency in the Hague and Geneva Conventions has been commented upon at length by others… and often with justification. How is it considered humane to use FMJ rather than hollow-point ammo, but OK to use fragmentation grenades, Claymore mines and incendiary weapons? Darned if I can figure that one out….

   So inertia plays a role, too, along with tradition and established practice.

   Most civilians who enjoy the shooting sports use lots of FMJ, whether they are shooting a long gun or a handgun, the reason being that it is the cheapest and most-economic alternative on offer in many places. Purpose-designed hunting ammunition tends to cost more. Ditto for purpose-designed/manufactured tactical ammunition, such as Hornady’s TAP line marketed to law-enforcement.

   If one is ever involved in a use-of-force incident and is called upon to defend one’s choice of personal protection ammunition in court, it is theoretically possible that the opposition attorney might accuse someone using hunting ammo for self defend of being a “hunter” of humans, and not simply an armed citizen.

   A friend of mine who is active in the FA training community raised that point in a CCW class, and it does happen occasionally where lawyers make such claims. They’ll seize upon anything uncovered in the discovery phase of the trial in order to gain an advantage for their client(s). Depending on where you live, the laws there, and so forth.

   That said, it seems plausible that someone under the threat of grave bodily injury or even death would use whatever ammunition was at-hand, for defense of self and loved ones, if it came to that.

   Some gas-operated guns do not respond well to lead-tipped ammunition, and there are warnings against its use, or cautionary statements to be sure and clean the FA thoroughly if using such ammunition. But that is an easy fix if it is indeed a problem: Just use a bonded solid instead, one of those all-copper designs by Barnes or the equivalent. No lead, no fuss, no muss.

4. On January 9, 2022 at 12:00 am, X said:

   Never used the Winchester, but have killed three deer with Nosler 64 bonded. All one shot kills (within 50 yards, though). Does the trick. Wouldn’t hesitate to use it on 2-legged critters.

   Bonus: a 1 in 12 twist WILL stabilize a 64 grain bullet…

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment