I did ask for a spreadsheet of the recorded test data in post #9.
Little to no data = little to no interpretation.
Type: Posts; User: snakyjake
I did ask for a spreadsheet of the recorded test data in post #9.
Little to no data = little to no interpretation.
No, I'm looking for a reason why the outcomes are different. If the bullet was out of spec, that could have been a reason.
If manufacturer's data isn't credible, I wouldn't trust their product either.
I think it is fair to compare other credible tests and sources, rather than only accepting a single test/source. That's why I wanted to see a table/spreadsheet of results from other sources and...
Here is the phenomenon that is difficult to grasp (source):
8451
Or another:
8452
No reason to guess, as I've never said I had any training or did any testing.
How do I know the HST bullet didn't penetrate 13.8" because it was a 148.4 gr bullet?
What would the penetration...
Yes, in your test. But NOT Federal's own test in bare gelatin (12.0") or heavy clothing (12.5").
Federal retained weight is 147.0 gr.
Federal bullet is spec.
Your retained weight is 148.4...
Yes, and this is why I don't want my load near the minimum penetration.
I consider the bare gelatin the baseline to normalize the test. If the bare gelatin tests aren't equivalent, then I begin to question.
This test is the ONLY test that I have seen where the bullet...
I still question the HST too...
Here are some facts according to the FBI:
The FBI specifies 18" penetration is ideal; the closer to 18" the better, but not over 18".
The FBI specifically...
Some might think I'm a pain in the ass...but a 2" variance in bare gelatin is not something I can easily ignore or accept.
So I contacted Hornady for some real answers. And yes, there is a typo...
Yes, so why would the results be different?
DocGKR,
Why is there a variation in your test results compared to Federal (ATK) test?
Is it the test?
Is there that much performance variation between tests?
Good point about the 25/50 round box difference. But when I was comparing the manufacturer's FBI gelatin tests of the 135 gr, the bare gelatin have different results. I thought the bare gelatin was...
Mentioning more about inconsistencies...I'm noticing Hornady has multiple SKU's for the same? or similar? And the gelatin results are different, perhaps because of the barrel length...
Good point, I'll take a look at that.
There does seem to be inconsistencies, not just with HST. I'm not sure if the load is inconsistent, the testing, or variable chaos (too many unmeasurable factors). It shouldn't be the test,...
The reason why I was bringing up the spreadsheet is for tracking the results. I'm trying to reconcile differences between this test and the tests here.
DocGKR.....[P9HST2?]..9 mm Fed 147 gr HST...
It is interesting to see how much the results differ from other sources or different barrel size.
I'm guessing the polymer used to fill hollow point bullets is going to deteriorate over time, and lose its effectivity, or the reason why it was added.
Anyone know how much time?
Is there a spreadsheet being maintained so we can see how all the loads compare?
Hornady (and I don't know which SKU) was mentioned, but I'm searching around for the results.
I was reading something about 1:7 "over stabilizing" a 5.56 55 gr bullet, and not optimum.
I also thought all that was needed is to choose the fastest twist rate necessary for the bullet weight. ...
I appreciate DocGKR's "5.56 mm Duty Loads", but could we get a list of the best "duty" loads available for [I]civilians?
This means the loads aren't limited to only military/LE.
Aren't rare, or...
I want the Federal XM556FBIT3, but haven't been able to find it.
Winchester RA556B second choice.
50gr TSX loaded by Black Hills (5.56) third choice.
"The better bonded loads like TBBC, are...