Is gel testing realistic?

[Unobtanium]

Water only gives you part of the picture, ie. the ideal expansion. Gelatin will give you much more interesting data in regards to the bullet's overall performance. Granted - for pistol bullets that's not a huge factor but it is for rifle bullets. Neck length to yaw, temporary and permanent cavity size, etc.

That's what's so odd, the slugs I am testing expand only 25% as much as they do in gel. I've never seen that from water as a medium before.

[Zhukov]

Yeah, that is weird. My guess (and that's all it is) is that slugs might behave differently in water than other projectiles.

[Unobtanium]

Yeah, that is weird. My guess (and that's all it is) is that slugs might behave differently in water than other projectiles.

That was what I was arriving at and curious about. My take on it (a guess as well):


Regular JHP's expand due to force within the HP cavity.
Slugs expand because of resistance across the face.
I will note that the "hollowpoint" in every truly HP slug I have ever fired is "blown out" (hydraulic pressure pushes a hole through the front of the slug at this location).

The rest of the slug compacts, and expands radially.

I think maybe slugs do not expand as well in water because they do not meet as much frontal resistance as in gel or tissue.

Mulling it over, that's the best I can come up with. A correlation would be an FMJ pistol round into water vs. gel. You're more likely to see a slight bit of deformation from the gel strike.

[SiriusBlunder]

From http://www.le.vistaoutdoor.com/downl..._Data_Book.pdf:

Shotgun: 870 Cylinder Bore • Barrel: 18.5 inches • Range: Muzzle 10 ft. from front of gel block

[the Schwartz]

Every bullet I've ever fired into water looks like a bare gel bullet, except expansion in some cases has been very slightly more. I've never ever until now had the opposite.

Water even correlates to penetration in tissues after corrective factor.

Yes, there are even equations for that 'conversion' if you wish to pursue it.

Both MacPherson (Bullet Penetration) and Schwartz (Quantitative Ammunition Selection) have them; both researchers rely upon modified Poncelet penetration equations correlated against actual gelatin test data.