Look here first:
http://www.mibullet.com/
I contacted them via email, and wrote the following...
Todd and Jaye,
I am writing to you about your ammunition and how it should be tested.
I am 55 years old and have been involved in shooting since I was 10. I specifically became interested in wound ballistics at about age 20 (in the late 1970's), and eventually got in contact with Dr. Martin L. Fackler M.D. F.A.C.S. who was head of the Letterman Army Institute of Research's Wound Ballistics Laboratory. Fackler is well known worldwide for his contributions and knowledge of wound ballistics, ballistic gelatin development and surgical techniques as they relate to gunshot wounds. Fackler went on to start the International Wound Ballistics Association (IWBA), along with others who were of similar caliber (no pun intended) and I was privileged to become a member in 1993. I authored three ammunition testing reports in our international journal: Wound Ballistics Review (WBR), and assisted in a gelatin problem, and was also asked to speak at one of the IWBA Conferences. I only say these things about myself to try to show you that I have some knowledge of what I am telling you.
That said, I am concerned about the actual effectiveness of your ammunition in real life shootings. The concept seems possible to some, but from a more experienced view, it looks impossible. Shooting paper targets and watermelons is not the same as shooting people. In fact, shooting ballistic gelatin (properly prepared and calibrated) is not going to show what your ammunition will do to people, either.
Although you don't give weights for the components that make up your projectiles, I would expect them to be relatively lightweight, as loads similar to these typically are. The center projectile is likely the heaviest component, and it will likely not go very deep, especially when connected to the outer components via Kevlar threads. The threads themselves would not cut well into skin because skin can be rather tough to cut, and the threads would be parallel in relation to the skin surface on impact. The outer components would not likely impact in such a way as to cause more than fairly superficial gouges when they do hit based on their small size, likely light weights and probably uncertain angles of attack.
The only way you would likely be able to get an honest measure of what this ammunition would do without shooting a living person or animal would be to shoot a properly prepared and calibrated gelatin block that has been covered with fresh pig skin. This is an accepted experimental process that simulates a person and the skin that covers a person.
Human skin is actually quite tough and stretchy, and takes about 300 feet per second velocity just to penetrate through by a bullet. Bare gelatin works well with typical bullet designs, which your design is not. Your design would likely penetrate better in bare gelatin than gelatin with pig skin, but the latter way would yield more accurate data.
If you decided to get involved with this sort of testing, you should be prepared that you likely would need to tweak your design at the very least to get optimum effect. Realize also that in wound ballistics it is generally held that 12 to 16 inches of penetration is the optimum range, with about 10 to 12 inches being consider minimum to assure reaching the vital organs, blood vessels and structures. Let me know if I can be of help, including some basic wound ballistics knowledge that the average consumer is unaware of.
As this design is currently, I would doubt that any law enforcement, military of other professional organizations will take it seriously... but many civilians who never got past gun magazines will line up due to what they are think they are seeing on your 'interesting' videos.
Respectfully,
Ron.