Think about what the effects of a pointed nose profile on drag, penetration depth, temporary stretch cavity, as well as permanent cavity?
What about the folding back the gilded metal jacket and how does that interact with the TC, PC, Pen, etc...?
Think about what the effects of a pointed nose profile on drag, penetration depth, temporary stretch cavity, as well as permanent cavity?
What about the folding back the gilded metal jacket and how does that interact with the TC, PC, Pen, etc...?
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
" La rose est sans pourquoi, elle fleurit parce qu’elle fleurit ; Elle n’a souci d’elle-même, ne demande pas si on la voit. » Angelus Silesius
"There are problems in this universe for which there are no answers." Paul Muad'dib
From post #16
"The erect post propelled tissue out of the path of the expanded bullet, reducing the amount of tissue that was contacted and crushed as the bullet penetrated. As a result, the bullet produced a narrower, but deeper, permanent cavity compared to conventional JHP bullets of the same caliber, weight, velocity and expanded diameter."
...so you're saying it needs some nice sharp talons to cut a wider wound cavity without adding enough drag to under penetrate?
Scroll down this FirearmsTactical.com article for more information on Winchester Ranger Talon.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140109...tm#Black-Talon
"Upon impact with flesh Ranger Talon performs identical to conventional hollowpoint bullets. However, as it penetrates and slows it does not suffer a decrease in effective bullet diameter. This is because tissue that stretches and flows around the smooth shoulder of the mushroom-shaped lead core comes into contact with the sharp copper jacket claws and is lacerated.
These lacerations contribute little to overall wound severity."
380 Auto is too constrained by size and pressure limitations to equally benefit from modern bullet design that has improved 9x19mm terminal performance.
Anymore thoughts or whatnot on this round?
The new LCP Max has me reconsidering the .380 vs my current J frame.
While this new load still appears to be a compromise expansion-wise it looks like it may offer similar performance to the .38 Wad-cutters I currently carry.
Am I off base with that speculation?
You saw this as linked/posted above?
https://general-cartridge.com/2020/0...allistics-gel/
J frame vs LCP Max is an interesting topic for debate. Twice the ammo capacity yet still chambered in a cartridge that may struggle to find a combination of penetration and expansion. 38 Special, especially from a snub, can also struggle with these.
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Yes, the article is what sparked my question.
I still think that for a pure BUG role the J frame holds the edge but for a stand-alone option the Max has me reconsidering. If this new round consistently performs as seen in the article then the doubled capacity starts to look very intriguing.
There are simply NPE situations where a stand-alone pocket gun is the best option and the LCP conceals better than a J in a pocket... If the Max offers virtually the same superior concealment, with double the capacity and similar ballistics to a J then it's hard to ignore.
Why does the J hold an edge?
The LCP II and LCP Max are the same thickness. The only real difference is in the length of the grip. The Max is about half an inch longer. Is this slight increase enough to ruin concealment over some other options?
The other thing to consider, as I mention in the LCP Max thread, is the size of the Ruger over something like the SIG P365. Is the step up from 380 to 380 Magnum worth the increase in size of the Max over the 365?
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk