Underwood .38 Spl 150gr Wadcutter in Clear Ballistics Gel

[mtnbkr]

*Why* is clear gel not consistent? What makes it inconsistent? Is this a batch-to-batch issue or a shot-to-shot one?

As a manufactured non-organic product, one would expect the consistency to be better, so what makes it inferior?

I'm curious because this keeps getting brought up, but nobody ever explains the hows and whys.

Chris

[JCN]

It's not about keeping an open mind.

Just say I like shooting clear gel because it's fun. That's enough.

I don’t think it’s fun. Which is why I’m telling you that there was no point in responding with a closed mind.

For other people:

Say I took a single velocity measurement with a LabRadar and compared it in a gross way to a different reading in different temp in different humidity at different sea level and at different muzzle distance.

I can compare them in a gross way that still is educational without it being scientific.

Like 150 9mm Syntech is in the 800-900 fps range whereas 147 HST is in the 1000-1100 fps range and I can make some generalizable inferences that guide my choices in consumption and utilization.

*Why* is clear gel not consistent? What makes it inconsistent? Is this a batch-to-batch issue or a shot-to-shot one?

As a manufactured non-organic product, one would expect the consistency to be better, so what makes it inferior?

I'm curious because this keeps getting brought up, but nobody ever explains the hows and whys.

Chris

And also how that consistency and lack of consistency is modified and mitigated by the remelting process that we use to reformulate and reconstitute blocks.

When I initially bought my 20% block, my original thought was to add some to a 10% block and heat and mix to get something closer to 12% but more consistent with the organic gel BB calibration. I even bought a BB gun to help test.

But quickly I figured, “what’s the point?”

And 20% clear gel is easier to use and transport.

So I usually will run a 9mm Gold Dot as an internal control of penetration and say “good enough” based off that for any new ammo I test.

Does it really matter if something penetrates 30 inches in clear 10% or 26 inches in organic? Not to me because both grossly overpenetrate for my use.

[Crazy Dane]

We get it man, organic gel is the gold standard.

Purists think clear gel is “worthless.”

We get it man.

This^^

I have used clear gel; it gave me a cost-effective solution to that task I was trying to accomplish. I didn't need results to prove to anything to anyone but me. I used it to develop a reduced recoil/velocity load for my aging father to hunt deer with. There are bullets that didn't expand that were well within their advertised expansion range. Maybe if I had used wet phone books or a box of zip lock bags filled with water, I would have gotten better results.

[the Schwartz]

Here’s in 20% gel compared to the Underwood SWC.





We get it man, organic gel is the gold standard.

Purists think clear gel is “worthless.”

We get it man.

I still like it for comparative testing against a known gold standard.

I’ll usually shoot 9mm Gold Dot as the control and compare against that.

Even organic gel is a simplified estimate on what might work in a real shooting when you add a ton of extra variables like bone and non-muscle structures.

I’ve gone to using 20% clear gel for convenience and transport.

I am sorry that the presentation of factual material in this thread bothers you enough to cause you to react in the manner that you chose.

Anything worth doing is worth doing right.

There are quite a few of us here who prefer to hold to that standard and I count myself fortunate to number amongst those notable individuals.

If you take issue with other's reliance upon scientifically valid test protocols it's not an ''us'' problem.

It's a ''you'' problem.

[JCN]

Just as an FYI to the general populace

[JCN]

Anything worth doing is worth doing right.

This IMO is dumb.

I said that you do great work and I think your standard is admirable.

This is your field of work. I’m not saying it’s not awesomesauce and I have no problem with that.

You’re a 5 star chef.

But you know, there’s a time for chicken nuggets.

[JCN]

Re: anything worth doing is worth doing right…

Are you a ripped triathlete?

Are you a top level marksman?

When you last ate a meal, was it of gourmet quality?

Life is about compromise in a world of finite resources, time being the most valuable one.

[the Schwartz]

Anything worth doing is worth doing right.

This IMO is dumb.

Re: anything worth doing is worth doing right…

Are you a ripped triathlete?

Are you a top level marksman?

When you last ate a meal, was it of gourmet quality?

Life is about compromise in a world of finite resources, time being the most valuable one.

I am sure that those (military and law enforcement personnel) whose lives depend upon conducting scientifically-valid terminal ballistic research would beg to difffer with you.

There's a tremendous difference between legitimate scientific research and goofing off in one's own backyard. Doing the former correctly is extremely important. In the case of the latter, it doesn't matter at all. That's a huge distinction.

And, as many here might note, I didn't have to use the term "dumb" when referring to another's thoughts in the process of explaining that distinction.

[JCN]

I am sure that those (military and law enforcement personnel) whose lives depend upon conducting scientifically-valid terminal ballistic research would beg to difffer with you.

There's a tremendous difference between legitimate scientific research and goofing off in one's own backyard. Doing the former correctly is extremely important. In the case of the latter, it doesn't matter at all. That's a huge distinction.

Of course. That’s exactly what I said.

I’m glad you are rigorous in your scientific work because that work is super important and lives depend on it.

For me as a hobby, good enough is good enough.

That’s literally what I said.

Which begs the question of why you continuously project your context on hobbyists.

Do you think @5pins is testing so a military org can run wadcutters?

I think you’re great and the work you do is great.

But it’s inappropriate to apply that to hobbyist endeavors.

[the Schwartz]

Of course. That’s exactly what I said.

I’m glad you are rigorous in your scientific work because that work is super important and lives depend on it.

For me as a hobby, good enough is good enough.

That’s literally what I said.

Which begs the question of why you continuously project your context on hobbyists.

Do you think @5pins is testing so a military org can run wadcutters?

I think you’re great and the work you do is great.

But it’s inappropriate to apply that to hobbyist endeavors.

Your commentary, especially, ''Which begs the question of why you continuously project your context on hobbyists'', and ''But it’s inappropriate to apply that to hobbyist endeavors.'' suggests that you might be assigning to me issues that are your own and not mine.

Unfortunately, I am unable to help you with those.

This conversation is no longer productive and it's beginning to circle the drain, so I'll not participate here any further.