9 mm 147 gr duty load testing

[Jared]

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 be if it was a true spec 147 gr bullet? 12 inches?
What was the data of the individual 5 rounds?

You do realize that a grain is 0.000143 of a pound right? In other words, there's basically 7000 grains in one pound. And you are quibbling over 1.4 of these tiny little grains and can't seem to grasp that a little gel could stick to the bullet and add 1.4 of these tiny little grains to the initial bullets weight.

[snakyjake]

Just because a test comes from the manufacturer doesn't make it valid or credible.

If manufacturer's data isn't credible, I wouldn't trust their product either.

[snakyjake]

You do realize that a grain is 0.000143 of a pound right? In other words, there's basically 7000 grains in one pound. And you are quibbling over 1.4 of these tiny little grains and can't seem to grasp that a little gel could stick to the bullet and add 1.4 of these tiny little grains to the initial bullets weight.

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.

[DocGKR]

We have tested HST multiple times over the past decade of LE duty use. Lab testing has been very consistent and the results from actual OIS incidents strongly correlate with the lab testing.

I occasionally post portions of our test results to try and assist officers from agencies that do not have ballistic testing programs in place and help ensure they have adequate information to make informed duty ammunition selections.

It is sad that you do not seem to have access to valid data, nor do you seem to know how to interpret such information.

[DiscipulusArmorum]

If manufacturer's data isn't credible, I wouldn't trust their product either.

That's your prerogative. Nobody is forcing you to buy HST! Go buy some Gold Dot, Ranger, Critical Duty, whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy. Then stop worrying about it, and get to the actual business of improving your skills, which takes more work than sitting at your computer making spreadsheets to obsess over.

It will likely fall on deaf ears, but here's a quote from one of Doc's stickied posts that you should take to heart:

Only after proper foundational and ongoing repetitive refresher training, cultivating warrior mind-set, and ensuring weapon system reliability do you need to worry about ammunition selection. Most folks would be far better off practicing with what they have, rather than worrying about what is "best". As long as you know your what your weapon and ammo can realistically accomplish, it is all just a matter of training and shot placement.

[snakyjake]

It is sad that you do not seem to have access to valid data

I did ask for a spreadsheet of the recorded test data in post #9.

nor do you seem to know how to interpret such information.

Little to no data = little to no interpretation.

[RJ]

[Hauptmann]

I did ask for a spreadsheet of the recorded test data in post #9.



Little to no data = little to no interpretation.

[Sigfan26]

I did ask for a spreadsheet of the recorded test data in post #9.



Little to no data = little to no interpretation.

Why do you seem to think you're so special? Why do you need that spreadsheet? Did ATK post a spreadsheet of each shot fired to obtain their average?

[DocGKR]

The LE agency that requested the test got the full data package.....on the other hand, you don't get it, in every respect.