R.I.P. 9mm rounds

[Andy]

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.

You're missing the point.

I didn't say there was any such data or any actual incidents; I said that ranting from medical folks who DID have that concern - rightly or wrongly - added to the pressure on Winchester to get the bullet pulled from the shelves. I was around in those days and remember the hysteria well - everyone was going off their heads, talking about buzz-saw bullets and having heart-attacks and fainting-spells - it was ridiculous watching so-called adults get a case of the vapors.

 

[Andy]

DT

 

[M. Sage]

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?

Each hit is "scored" on its own, if that's what you mean.

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.

Depends on what you're testing. Things like pistol bullets, you can usually test several in the same block by hitting different areas because they don't damage anything they don't actually touch. As long as you don't cross the streams, the results will be valid.

 

[Younggun]

The first question I was meaning more in terms of repeatability.


Shoot once through denim and the bullet may expand and penetrated great.

Shoot again it may clog the tip and not expand.

Third shot may bring fragmentation and under penetration.


That's an extreme example, but just pointing out why it seems more than one shot should be taken for each test.

 

[ShootingTheBull]

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

Depends on how much damage the round does to the block. In normal handgun testing, we try to fit five shots in each block. With rifle rounds, you can't get more than one in there. With the G2 R.I.P., you can pretty much get two in, if you reverse the block.

So then it depends on how many blocks you want to dedicate to testing.

Many youtube ammo testers only do one shot at all (like tnoutdoors9). I prefer to do five shots in bare gel and five shots in denim-covered gel when possible. But with something like the R.I.P., you'd be looking at a dozen blocks to do it right, and that's just getting into way too much money for an unsponsored 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?

As M.Sage said, it depends on whether the streams cross. The FBI specification is five shots per block, but if any shots cross then you should discard those shots' data.

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

You must be referencing the RatedRR test, right? I don't use music or chopped slow-mo, I just use an initial slow-mo shot to capture each round's temporary cavity and penetration characteristics.

 

[ShootingTheBull]

The first question I was meaning more in terms of repeatability.

Your instincts are spot-on. I've done several tests where three of the five perform great, but the other two don't. I did one test where three rounds did well, one underpenetrated, and one overpenetrated. I just finished a 5 & 5 test where through bare gel they were perfect as can be, and in denim 4 of the five were great, but then the fifth one failed to expand and grossly overpenetrated.

The larger the sample size you have to draw from, the better the conclusions you can reach.