Frustrated by total lack of academic rigor: gel results particularly .22, .25

[Ghost Dog]

There is another youtuber AZ Airgunner that makes Organic vids, but 4 layer tshirt. His results with duty loads are often 11.5-13" Pen. Another one too but not sure if his blocks are always right temp and calibrated as seems to get too far pen sometimes.

There is a .25 punch now coming out, looks decent but I am not sure I would rock a .25 as my only unless really really needed to those some of those little ww1 era stuff is pretty cool.

I can only think of one that is likely fairly safe to carry chamber loaded and quick to deploy, but most of that era I am not sure I would want to be climbing ladders.

[Polecat]

There is a .25 punch now coming out, looks decent but I am not sure I would rock a .25 as my only unless really really needed to those some of those little ww1 era stuff is pretty cool.

I can’t wait to see how the punch performs! I have a little Beretta 950 that runs like a sewing machine. It is super tiny and can fire it rapidly into 3-4” at 3-5 yards. I just shot some for function, it works great, as does the Buffalo Bore FMJ and hardcast. The Punch box says 825 FPS for 45 gr solid.

After having played with most permutations of those little .25s, and damn near killed myself, I traded, or just got rid of them at a loss, I was so frustrated. I think the Baby Browning is safe, accurate and reliable, and I kept the Beretta. Love the little thing.

[Ghost Dog]

My understanding is the Browning 25 32 and until the late run of 380s are not drop safe to be carried chamber loaded.

Have you had an Ortgies? They look cool not sure how safe w the grip safety activated.

It sounds like the detectives here have.. less then steller opinions about .25s

Punch Data is promising but if you put even a thin board in front of Gel block that would severely rob it's momentum to penetrate

[SWAT Lt.]

Several knowledgeable people have commented in this thread warning folks to avoid .22/.25 guns for self defense. Their advice is not based on ballistic gel results, it is based on real world performance in shootings they investigated or are otherwise familiar with. Having seen many shootings with each, I concur with them. Also, no fancy new ammo in either caliber is going substantially improve the performance of either, or to change my mind. Tom Givens speaks to this in his May newsletter and he is spot on.

[perlslacker]

Yeah don’t laugh right. Just DB, Wayne, Claude got me to thinking then that led to searching, which led to much frustration. One guy unpacked his gel, no comment as to temp, calibration etc. Then another used clear gel, etc. You get the idea. I guess I am just venting as the results are all over the map.

If you read the old IWBA journals*, there are a couple articles on just how hard it is to do proper ballistic gel testing. If you heat it wrong, store it wrong, remelt it too many times, etc. it can fail calibration. Even if you do everything right, it seems like you can still fail calibration. Clear gel is easier to handle, but Mike Wood performed a test whose results cast serious doubts on its usefulness as a test medium.

So...looking at Youtube tests, it's basically reading tea leaves. The "testers" clearly don't understand what they're doing. I think one guy actually uses ordnance gel, calibrates it with a BB, and then takes a temperature reading before shooting. I don't trust anyone else's organic gel data because they don't give enough information for me to know that they prepared the media competently. For clear gel tests I multiply the penetration depth by .8 and use that as a rough guide but I'm aware of how imperfect that is.

I have no opinion on .22s for self defense. I have a pocket holster and some Federal Punch for my Bobcat but I don't use it.

*Which are free online. I think I found the articles on this very forum, in fact.