R.I.P. 9mm rounds

[M. Sage]

I suppose I should have worded that better. They're not illegal but they changed the case to brass and renamed them to Ranger-T and restricted public sale to law enforcement.

As for the RIPs, I doubt they're a gimmick. You sure as hell wouldn't want to get shot with one and that's pretty much the point, to stop the aggressor.

-TXG-

The Ranger is a slightly upgraded version of the Talon, and it's not illegal to sell them to people. There are several sources on the net. It's just that Winchester doesn't want to sell them to other than LE, but once the ammo hits distributors, that's pretty much out the window.

As clear as I can say it, there's no legal restriction on Ranger, HST or any other non-armor-piercing (as defined by federal and/or state law) handgun ammunition that prevents you or I from buying it.

 

[AKM]

"Just take your shotgun, and shoot through the door"

Or twice from the balcony


sent from the bathroom

 

[Flyingswords]

imo Theyre like the Hexolit 32 shotgun shells from D Dupleks. They have the projectiles that bloom like a flower upon impact and separate. With the only real difference(s) being that the D Dupleks shell has that actual main projectile left after separation and its impact is far more worse.

 

[M. Sage]

imo Theyre like the Hexolit 32 shotgun shells from D Dupleks. They have the projectiles that bloom like a flower upon impact and separate. With the only real difference(s) being that the D Dupleks shell has that actual main projectile left after separation and its impact is far more worse.

Because shotguns have enough energy to get away with stuff like this. I've seen a lot of tests where regular hollow point slugs wind up fragmenting in ballistic gelatin.

When you've got enough energy behind the projectile, fragmentation can do wonderful things for wounding. Unfortunately, handguns lack the kind of power necessary for that.

 

[El Pistolero]

Didn't know 'Talon' rounds where forbidden at all. Why is it that PDX1 are available then?

 

[Younggun]

Black talons aren't forbidden.

 

[Andy]

Didn't know 'Talon' rounds where forbidden at all. Why is it that PDX1 are available then?

They were never forbidden.

Back in the day when I carried those myself, a lot of pressure of the "Racist!" variety was thrown at Winchester - then doctors climbed into the fray, claiming the sharp petals poked through their gloves when inserting a finger to probe for the bullet (in the heyday of the AIDS panic). Winchester withdrew the ammo from the market themselves, but it surfaced again as Ranger sans the black color or pointed petals.

 

[M. Sage]

They were never forbidden.

Back in the day when I carried those myself, a lot of pressure of the "Racist!" variety was thrown at Winchester - then doctors climbed into the fray, claiming the sharp petals poked through their gloves when inserting a finger to probe for the bullet (in the heyday of the AIDS panic). Winchester withdrew the ammo from the market themselves, but it surfaced again as Ranger sans the black color or pointed petals.

Oh, it's still available with the sharp petals. The HST comes through pretty sharp, and I think the Golden Saber does, too.

 

[Andy]

Love Golden Sabers - I switched to those after a very brief flirtation with Silvertips.

 

[London]

It's just that Winchester doesn't want to sell them to other than LE,

That's their official story to the public, anyway. Come on, man, what ammo maker wants to make less money?

Seems to me they're putting that load of BS out there to drum up "The forbidden factor" of owning "banned" ammunition which was all over the news because "It explodes like a thousand razor blades." It probably worked better 15 years ago when everybody had heard of Black Talons. These days almost no one know or remembers them, but you know there are always going to be uneducated gun owners out there bragging about how they got their hands on "Banned police ammunition."

You know, the same kind of guys who think a Tec-9 is the ultimate home-defense pistol and load it up with hollowpoints...

 

[London]

then doctors climbed into the fray, claiming the sharp petals poked through their gloves when inserting a finger to probe for the bullet (in the heyday of the AIDS panic).

I always thought that had a lot more to do with stupidity on behalf of the doctors or it was even a case of liberal doctors "Lying for the Lord" to support their anti-gun agenda.

"Okay, students, we have a 23 year old male patient, shot multiple times in the torso. Opening him up reveals numerous sharp metal fragments have separated from the bullets and embedded themselves throughout his flesh. In a case like this, the best course of action is to forsake the numerous long metal extraction tools you have available, and go all kamikazi with your fingers. Remember to put your thin, easily tearable gloves on first, though!"

 

[Andy]

Apparently it's a perfectly-acceptable surgical technique - are you a surgeon?

 

[London]

Apparently it's a perfectly-acceptable surgical technique - are you a surgeon?

LOL. No. Are you?

I have enough sense not to stick my fingers into sharp metal objects covered in a total stranger's blood, though. I'm trying to imagine a situation where slippery, rubber and blood-coated human fingers would do a better job of pulling a small object out of a human body than a locking metal tool would... but it escapes me.

I'm not a mechanic either but I'd probably be very curious about one complaining how hard it is to use a wood saw on a certain car....

 

[Andy]

No, I'm not but nor am I going to assume that I know better than surgeons themselves.

By all means, feel free to go and argue your opinion to trauma surgeons who do just that; I'm sure they'd appreciate the advice to keep their hands and fingers outside of the human body

Some medical personnel were concerned that the sharp barb like tips could potentially cause tears in the surgical gloves and hands of the medical workers, exposing them to greater risk of infection, however there are no documented reports of this actually happening

Lest I'm sounding harsh, I happen to agree with you that it seems to be a crazy way of getting a bullet out of a body.

 

[Texas42]

The term is blunt dissection.

Listen, I don't pretend to be a surgeon, but the goal of surgery is hemostatis, not removal of the bullet. I have no idea the incidence of a torn glove, nor whether there is any data to suggest that sharp hollow-point bullets increase risk of puncture. Lots of sharp objects, especially if bone was hit.

 

[M. Sage]

The term is blunt dissection.

Listen, I don't pretend to be a surgeon, but the goal of surgery is hemostatis, not removal of the bullet. I have no idea the incidence of a torn glove, nor whether there is any data to suggest that sharp hollow-point bullets increase risk of puncture. Lots of sharp objects, especially if bone was hit.

Yep. I'm not a surgeon, but what I understand is that it's pretty common to leave bullets in place as until they can be pulled out at a point after the patient is stabilized, not while he's laying there bleeding all over everything and soaking up whole blood supplies. The only reason to go in after a bullet immediately (AFAIK) is if it's in a place that's going to cause more problems, and then the decision has to be made whether it's worth going after in the first place. Sometimes it'll cause more damage to remove than to just leave it.

What I do know is that if you leave a bullet in a person, their body naturally forms a cyst around it and... well, nothing. There have been plenty of vets who came home and found out decades after the fact that they were carrying around a souvenir they hadn't even realized was there.

That and unless it's a complete garbage bullet and a very superficial wound, there's not a lot of people going to be able to reach it with their finger.

 

[ShootingTheBull]

Yep. I'm not a surgeon, but what I understand is that it's pretty common to leave bullets in place as until they can be pulled out at a point after the patient is stabilized, not while he's laying there bleeding all over everything and soaking up whole blood supplies. The only reason to go in after a bullet immediately (AFAIK) is if it's in a place that's going to cause more problems, and then the decision has to be made whether it's worth going after in the first place. Sometimes it'll cause more damage to remove than to just leave it.

What I do know is that if you leave a bullet in a person, their body naturally forms a cyst around it and... well, nothing. There have been plenty of vets who came home and found out decades after the fact that they were carrying around a souvenir they hadn't even realized was there.

Entirely true. In conversations with some emergency-room doctors, they don't even bother to remove the shrapnel from a fragmenting bullet, unless it's in direct threat to some vital bloodpipe or organ. I've been told that there are plenty of people who've been shot with birdshot, who have very interesting x-rays indeed...

 

[rushthezeppelin]

RIP Ammunition - High Speed Slow Motion Tests - YouTube

Well they did get the hole saw claim right...it almost seems like it performs better with a drywall plug in the cavity LOL. Now we just have to create drywall muzzle devices

 

[ShootingTheBull]

Looks like he got the exact same results I did. And, unlike the manufacturer, he used a standard sized gel block. So you can see that the "trocars" broke off to create about a 3.5" diameter circle.

The drywall test looks like there were a couple of problems, he hit too high on the block so it wasn't entirely surrounded by enough gel (FBI recommends 1.75" in), and second, yeah, looks like it must have gotten plugged by the drywall. As such, it looks very much like the bullet that I got through the plywood, at about the same penetration distance (I got about 9.25" or 9.5", don't remember exactly). The second drywall test (with insulation) provides more interesting results, the trocars didn't create the same type of circular pattern and it looks like one of them might have penetrated a good 8" or 9". But it also looks like the base came up short and didn't penetrate more than maybe 9", again because the trocars didn't all come off.

It's actually kind of funny, a few guys have come out to call my tests into question, and they're pointing to this "RatedRR" test as an example of a "legit" independent test. Which, I'm sure it is, but -- the results are exactly the same. The only difference I could tell is that the RatedRR tester has dramatic music and super-slow-mo footage, and apparently that appeals to people who enjoy the G2Research R.I.P. video which also features those elements. But it doesn't change the permanent damage cavity...

 

[Younggun]

I wasn't able to watch your video, but I'm curious about something.

Is it normal to only fire 1 shot for each test?

Also, for the test to be accurate shouldn't a new block be used for each shot, or at least every couple of shots?


I found the music and chopped slo-mo replayed annoying.