This applies to any major federal or state agency but since the FBI ammo tests and results are what most everyone seems to use I wondered if anyone knew if they used different tests, test parameters or calculated the results and rankings differently than handgun ammunition testing? This applies to rifle,shotgun with buckshot and slugs. ANy links to testing info is appreciated as well as clarification.
The best source for the answer to your question would be to contact the Bureau's Ballistic Research Facility with a request for their data, on dept letterhead signed by a manager. We've got that route. Easy to do.
Barring that, a websearch can be your friend. For example, Hornandy has their Mil & L/E ammunition & test report application guide, here: http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/site...tion-Guide.pdf
They devote several pages to the subject.
Unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it I am retired now so I can't go that route. I'll have to find another way or ask my old dept to do me the favor. ThanksOriginally Posted by Angus McFee
Both handguns and long guns need to meet the minimum 12-18" penetration guidelines while being barrier blind. The only difference between them, is that long guns may have a significant stretch component which is also measured, unlike handguns which generally just poke holes.
See: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....istol-calibers
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
Did the FBI have added criteria for the stretch cavity impact of rifle rounds? Did it get any different value added/considered with the stretch cavity?Both handguns and long guns need to meet the minimum 12-18" penetration guidelines while being barrier blind. The only difference between them, is that long guns may have a significant stretch component which is also measured, unlike handguns which generally just poke holes.
See: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....istol-calibers
Stretch cavity certainly can be very important wounding component with rifles. With that as a premise, and with the rifle caliber referenced here, for example, I would not be concerned about adequate penetration, quite the contrary. Unlike with most handguns, where 16-17" penetration in 10% "real" bare gel could be, at times, necessary to reach and disrupt a vital organ in a human opponent, rifle bullet penetration of more than about 15" would, most likely, be neither necessary nor desirable in the same scenario.
Reply With Quote