9 mm 147 gr duty load testing

[Steve m]

might have to switch from the Speer Gold Dots 124 grn +p to the 147 grn HST, for some reason in NC i can readily find the HST, the gold dot hard to find.
Thanks Doc for your work and knowledge on the subject.

[Steve m]

Found some 147grn HST, after the holidays i am going to see how my g-19's like it compared to my speer gold dot 124grn +p for POA/POI issues, if successful then a swith of carry ammo is in order, Thanks Doc for your work in this area.

[GCBHM]

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

Then go ride a bike or something, but for the love of all that is right, STFU! Geez!!! I've been reading and digesting this thread for 14 pages now, and I can't take it anymore. Just go! You're not even TRYING to understand anything. You're trolling. STOP!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GCBHM]

Sometimes I get a bit dejected at all the derp and want to stop publicly posting. The only thing that keeps me doing it, is if I think it is benefiting citizens and officers who don't have access to more comprehensive data. There is so much BS being posted on the internet, especially YouTube and Wiki that I worry folks will get easily duped...

FWIW, I'm fascinated by your posts and appreciate the fact you take the time. Please do not stop, unless you just don't want to do it anymore. You're a great help to a lot of people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JM Campbell]

Pssst....that's a 1 year 3 month old post. Otherwise I'm in agreement with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GCBHM]

I appreciate the enthusiasm (I really do!), but please use the report post button and let the moderators handle the moderating.

As JM Campbell noted, this is an old thread from last summer. Also, the user you are telling to just go is already gone and isn't coming back. In other words, this is a problem that was handled long ago. Just because there is not an angry public post from a moderator telling someone to fuck off, doesn't mean that it hasn't been dealt with.

Very well. Duly noted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GCBHM]

Pssst....that's a 1 year 3 month old post. Otherwise I'm in agreement with you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm fairly new and was somewhat engrossed...but thanks for the reminder. I don't usually respond to others like that, but geewhiz! [emoji23]🤦*♂️


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[QED]

That's an interesting 5-shot bare gel result with 147 grain HST @ 1017 fps, showing 13.8" penetration @ 0.66" RD. That's about what can be expected with a .40/180 grain HST at same velocity. However, according to MacPherson, 147 grain @ 1017 fps @ RD=0.66", penetration = 11.2". The difference in penetration is significant, of course.

[Nephrology]

That's an interesting 5-shot bare gel result with 147 grain HST @ 1017 fps, showing 13.8" penetration @ 0.66" RD. That's about what can be expected with a .40/180 grain HST at same velocity. However, according to MacPherson, 147 grain @ 1017 fps @ RD=0.66", penetration = 11.2". The difference in penetration is significant, of course.

As with all things, each time you run the same test with the same variables, you can expect the results to vary within two standard deviations of the mean.

[QED]

As with all things, each time you run the same test with the same variables, you can expect the results to vary within two standard deviations of the mean.

Outside of significant experimental error, there really should not be significant deviation of penetration from the mean -- since bare standard gel is homogeneous and the 147 grain HST velocity, mass, and recovered diameter are essentially fixed. Penetration, then, is subject to the well-known laws of physics as was thoroughly discussed in D. MacPherson's excellent book on the subject, for example. Robustly expanding JHP terminal tests in bare gel should generally be quite repeatable, unlike similar tests in tissue.