Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: Revolver Ballistics: 38 Special+P vs. 9mm

  1. #41
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    End of the rainbow
    Talk about dick swinging. I’m out.
    1
     

  2. #42
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    End of the rainbow
    Actually. You know what.
    Can we get Caleb and the scwartz. To properly analize and collaborate on clear vs 10 gel. Might be funnier then the name callling
    0
     

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by camel View Post
    Actually. You know what.
    Can we get Caleb and the scwartz. To properly analize and collaborate on clear vs 10 gel. Might be funnier then the name callling
    Nah. See here’s the deal: he’s got this thing about me in his head that requires him to show up in my threads.

    And I’ve got this thing where I completely forget he exists until he forces his way into a post of mine, and when I have that misfortune, I always regret it immediately.
    1
     

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by camel View Post
    Actually. You know what.
    Can we get Caleb and the scwartz. To properly analize and collaborate on clear vs 10 gel. Might be funnier then the name callling
    Hard pass.

    That'd be boring.

    Besides the three sources that I cited earlier in post #32 (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....=1#post1411745), it's been done to death.

    Also worth looking at is the excellent 3 part article published by Lt Col (ret) Mike Wood from PoliceOne.com—

    https://press.hornady.com/assets/sit...risons-1-3.pdf

    As well as Andrew Butts' video produced by arfcom—

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJF-C2wuuCI&t=0s

    Both sources conclude (as did the prior three cited sources) that the clear gel product fails to correctly represent terminal expansion and penetration depth in addition to failing to correctly shear-validate as per the FBI test protocols.
    ''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein

    Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.
    0
     

  5. #45
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Texas
    I was disappointed to read member Jetfire's negative comments made to Schwartz. I don't understand most of what Schwartz writes because it goes over my head, but I don't imply that he's full of shit. I test reloads on rocks and dirt clods.
    3
     

  6. #46
    This is exactly the opposite of what I'd hoped for. Sigh.

    Look, at times, I think Caleb has been an asshole. I've even been on the receiving end. I once defended GJM in a thread after Caleb had slung some bullshit about pilots or bears, and lanes folks should stay in, and poked fun at his having a "household" name in the gun industry was simply because he was on a TV game show at one time. I caught flack for that from a mod, and was even banned from that thread after it become more argumentative (Which I thought was a double standard, and still do). Sometimes I dislike him or at least the way he says things or comes across. I think the water boy comment was bullshit, and really uncalled for. Maybe he even owes Charles an apology. There's beef there from previous interactions. Whatever. ETA (missed a copy/pasted line I meant to insert here): Caleb also has made some interesting and good contributions here, and as much as I dislike certain things he's said or done... I still appreciate where he's coming from.

    I think you jumped the gun a bit here Caleb... and that's why I think an apology may be in order. That's up to you. I may be unaware of all the previous relevant interactions, but I've seen some of this play out before.

    Charles may want to hold back on the lashing back out... as you said, "Its been done to death." We can all go find the data. I hope this doesn't seem argumentative, but "spamming" links to back up the done to death data might be coming across wrong.

    Disengage, guys... it looks bad for both of you. Pistol Forum can do better.

    That all has little to do with this thread. Going around in circles with this stuff has thoroughly derailed what could be a useful discussion. My question was simply for clarity's sake. That has now been answered. I hope the purse swinging, dick measuring, and shit slinging stops here.
    Last edited by WDR; 11-01-2022 at 10:45 PM.
    5
     

  7. #47
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    End of the rainbow
    Sorry. Going to label this as children are children. Mods please close the thread. Sorry for my interaction.
    0
     

  8. #48
    Deadeye Dick Clusterfrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    ...Employed?
    It's a quarter to 10pm, just got back from the mat room with bruised or cracked ribs, I haven't had dinner yet. I'm one grumpy mod. If someone wants to try again with a new thread with civil discussion about technical material, go for it.

    This thread: game over.
    “There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
    "You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
    8
     

  9. #49
    Site Supporter DocGKR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    The drama exhibited here is unacceptable. the Clear Ballistics folks may be the bomb; unfortunately their product is NOT accurate, repeatable, and does not offer valid terminal ballistic data. Period.
    Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
    10
     

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •