Compiled Official HST,Gold Dot,Critical Duty w/Tissue Crush Values Comparing Calibers

[the Schwartz]

None of this is correct—

And YET AGAIN, that is not what I compiled in the video. AND YET AGAIN I have to say I am pointing out a WAY, with 4 layer AND a Medium Density Fiber board inserted it Can give VERY similar TISSUE CRUSH VALUES in different calibers compared to OFFICIAL 4 LAYER REAL GEL FBI protocol results from Federal/Vista.

I go off their OFFICAL results and DrGkr Results. Listen to the video.

Extensive research, produced by numerous SMEs, has shown conclusively that the CBG product under-represents projectile expansion and over-represents projectile terminal penetration depth unlike correctly prepared 10% ordnance gelatin. Since the CBG product incorrectly represents projectile expansion, it cannot correctly represent the volume (and the mass of tissues contained therein) of the permanent cavity. It has also been authoritatively demonstrated that ''test'' data obtained in the CBG product cannot be converted to an equivalent value in 10% ordnance gelatin and vice versa (Haag, LC, AFTE; Spring 2020 52;2) rendering any comparison between ''data'' obtained in the CBG product and 10% ordnance gelatin totally invalid.

I'd encourage you to read those sources and carefully study their research before posting anymore.

[DanTheWolfman]

None of this is correct—




Extensive research, produced by numerous SMEs, has shown conclusively that the CBG product under-represents projectile expansion and over-represents projectile terminal penetration depth unlike correctly prepared 10% ordnance gelatin. Since the CBG product incorrectly represents projectile expansion, it cannot correctly represent the volume (and the mass of tissues contained therein) of the permanent cavity. It has also been authoritatively demonstrated that ''test'' data obtained in the CBG product cannot be converted to an equivalent value in 10% ordnance gelatin and vice versa (Haag, LC, AFTE; Spring 2020 52;2) rendering any comparison between ''data'' obtained in the CBG product and 10% ordnance gelatin totally invalid.

I'd encourage you to read those sources and carefully study their research before posting anymore.

I agree and pointed out all the first parts of that in my video. I never suggested it is as good. The last part however, I did say I have computed tissue crush numbers in multiple calibers across hst,gold dot, and critical duty ONLY IN ONE TESTERS 4 layer Medium Density Fiberboard added test protocol that is a small mention of the video which gives the REAL GEL Official data compiled. I can show the comparative numbers. I did not say that trumps real gel testing or drgkr findings...again ALL IN THE VIDEO posted which gives all the OFFICIAL DATA VISTA/HORNADY Gives (though that seems pre hst changes to now less expansion farther penetration 2 cannelures-data seems to be OG HST) .

[DanTheWolfman]

Literally the vid is the compilation of the Real data. But apparently everyone wants to fight and have whose Schwartz is bigger fights. As to similar TC values that seem somewhat promising AS AN INDICATOR if no access to Official or DrGkr Data for a particular load

HST MDF Results 9mm=3.734 cu " TC(Vista Real Gel=3.799), .40=5.665 cu" TC(Vista Real Gel=6.283), .45=8.105 cu" TC (Vista Real Gel=8.08). Vista Data these rounds .45 is 2.126X more Damaging than the 9mm round, & 1.286x More TC damage than the .40. Gun Sam's MDF Data this .45 round is 2.17X more than this 9mm, and 1.43x More than this .40 round. Vista's 180 gr .40 Data is 1.653X more TC then this 124plus P 9mm, and Gun Sam's MDF Data 1.517x More than this 9mm round. Overall very Similar Results as to the VERY REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN Expanded Bullets THROUGH THE ENTIRE PATH through the body. ALL GREAT Rounds, probably the very best...but there is a very REAL DIFFERENCE!


Gold Dot data More MDF 9mm 124+p ur 3.2" 16.5 .544=3.84 cu in" Tissue Crush compares to 4" Vista REAL GEL 14.13 .60=4.04 cu in" TC . This .38 gold dot load 2" 12" .508=2.43" vs Vista Real Gel 11" .576=2.87 from 4v"

More Gold Dot data Ur 165gr .40 5" barrel 19" .616=5.66 cu in" Tissue Crush vs Spear REAL GEL 4 Layer Data from 4" Barrel 18" .618 5.4 cu in" Tissue Crush. Underwood 125gr .357 GD 21" .594= (only 18" Given per FBI Protocol) 4.99 cu in TC" (compared to Critical Duty TC 3.67").

Critical Duty Data .45 MDF Protocol 17" .615=TC Adj Volume 5.05" Compared to Official Hornady REAL GEL 14.5 .69=5.42 cu in" .357 MDF 14.5 .558-TC Adj Volume 3.55" Compared to Hornady REAL GEL 14.4 .57=3.67" (8V" barrel).

(Additional DATA points for others that might want it 9bple MDF=9.5" .669=3.34 TC. OFFICIAL FBI TEST 125 sjhp 3" S&W13=1265 Velocity 4 layer 11.75" .51. OFFICIAL FBI TEST Federal 158 gr S&W19 4"=1200 fps 4 layer 15.9" .64=5.12 cu in" Tissue Crush.). There are early IWBA 9bple numbers I believe but was Bare Gel not 4 layer.

[SwampDweller]

YouTube Clear Gel/Synthetic testing is the gun world equivalent of watching fireworks. Pretty and showy, but there is no science behind it. It’s been proven many times over that it is impossible to accurately convert data from clear/synthetic gel into being comparable to properly calibrated and prepared FBI spec ordnance gel. No valid comparisons can be made. I’m not aware of any YouTuber doing scientifically valid gel testing, it’s just entertainment at best and pseudo science at worst.

[the Schwartz]

Literally the vid is the compilation of the Real data. But apparently everyone wants to fight and have whose Schwartz is bigger fights. As to similar TC values that seem somewhat promising no access to Official or DrGkr Data for a particular load

It's quite odd that in posts #2 and #3 of this thread that you've actively solicited the opinions and input of others here yet insist on accusing those who offer input of ''fighting'' and ''chest puffing'' whenever they do so. I've simply offered you some research that might serve you better in your comprehension of what clearly is your comparison of the CBG product as evidenced in this post by your own hand in which you describe your attempt to render relevant testing conducted in the CBG product--

May get into my own ballistics testing. While I know it is not real gel...I have compared all of Gun Sam's data on HST, Gold Dots, and Critical Duties in his new this past year MDF Medium Density Fiberboard testing.....4 Layer Denim...3" CLEAR Gel 1/4" MDF....clear gel. The Tissue Crush Values in all of those in all calibers is VERY Similar...making Clear gel this way relevant.

I am thinking my first test if I get some may try 2 layer denim 2 T-shirt...for ease and to split the FBI/IWBA clothing protocol...and just shove MDF in 2" instead of 3" separate....based on actual thickness of pecs/RMCP putting in pig ribs. Not sure if that would make my results closer to VISTA/Hornady's 4 layer FBI protocol results or get me closer to DrGkr results or nicely inbetween. IF not, can use his protocol. It does seem to make Clear Ballistics Relevant when compared and I think similar could be found.

While I have no desire to wade through whatever this is--

HST MDF Results 9mm=3.734 cu " TC(Vista Real Gel=3.799), .40=5.665 cu" TC(Vista Real Gel=6.283), .45=8.105 cu" TC (Vista Real Gel=8.08). Vista Data these rounds .45 is 2.126X more Damaging than the 9mm round, & 1.286x More TC damage than the .40. Gun Sam's MDF Data this .45 round is 2.17X more than this 9mm, and 1.43x More than this .40 round. Vista's 180 gr .40 Data is 1.653X more TC then this 124plus P 9mm, and Gun Sam's MDF Data 1.517x More than this 9mm round. Overall very Similar Results as to the VERY REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN Expanded Bullets THROUGH THE ENTIRE PATH through the body. ALL GREAT Rounds, probably the very best...but there is a very REAL DIFFERENCE!


Gold Dot data More MDF 9mm 124+p ur 3.2" 16.5 .544=3.84 cu in" Tissue Crush compares to 4" Vista REAL GEL 14.13 .60=4.04 cu in" TC . This .38 gold dot load 2" 12" .508=2.43" vs Vista Real Gel 11" .576=2.87 from 4v"

More Gold Dot data Ur 165gr .40 5" barrel 19" .616=5.66 cu in" Tissue Crush vs Spear REAL GEL 4 Layer Data from 4" Barrel 18" .618 5.4 cu in" Tissue Crush. Underwood 125gr .357 GD 21" .594= (only 18" Given per FBI Protocol) 4.99 cu in TC" (compared to Critical Duty TC 3.67").

Critical Duty Data .45 MDF Protocol 17" .615=TC Adj Volume 5.05" Compared to Official Hornady REAL GEL 14.5 .69=5.42 cu in" .357 MDF 14.5 .558-TC Adj Volume 3.55" Compared to Hornady REAL GEL 14.4 .57=3.67" (8V" barrel).

(Additional DATA points for others that might want it 9bple MDF=9.5" .669=3.34 TC. OFFICIAL FBI TEST 125 sjhp 3" S&W13=1265 Velocity 4 layer 11.75" .51. OFFICIAL FBI TEST Federal 158 gr S&W19 4"=1200 fps 4 layer 15.9" .64=5.12 cu in" Tissue Crush.). There are early IWBA 9bple numbers I believe but was Bare Gel not 4 layer.

--the idea of computing the volume of a permanent cavity resulting from a bullet's passage through a test medium (ss the volume of a right cylinder having the diameter of the expanded bullet and the length of the entire cavity) is nothing new.

It's been done by several researchers so the presentation of this ''data'' is not a particularly novel idea. If this presentation of computed volume data is meant to have any significance, perhaps you can enlighten us all as to how the embolization of tissues adjacent to and surrounding the bullet's pathway are accounted for in your computations?

How do you account for effects resulting from the shape of the projectile's nose?

[03RN]

Thanks. I won't be wasting my time on those videos

[DanTheWolfman]

YouTube Clear Gel/Synthetic testing is the gun world equivalent of watching fireworks. Pretty and showy, but there is no science behind it. It’s been proven many times over that it is impossible to accurately convert data from clear/synthetic gel into being comparable to properly calibrated and prepared FBI spec ordnance gel. No valid comparisons can be made. I’m not aware of any YouTuber doing scientifically valid gel testing, it’s just entertainment at best and pseudo science at worst.

IF you don't see the relative comparisons I showed in the numbers post fine but not of them were given in the video that is THE OFFICIAL VISTA/Hornady 4 layer REAL GEL testing. That is the Video.

[DanTheWolfman]

It's quite odd that in posts #2 and #3 of this thread that you've actively solicited the opinions and input of others here yet insist on accusing those who offer input of ''fighting'' and ''chest puffing'' whenever they do so. I've simply offered you some research that might serve you better in your comprehension of what clearly is your comparison of the CBG product as evidenced in this post by your own hand in which you describe your attempt to render relevant testing conducted in the CBG product--



While I have no desire to wade through whatever this is--



--the idea of computing the volume of a permanent cavity resulting from a bullet's passage through a test medium (ss the volume of a right cylinder having the diameter of the expanded bullet and the length of the entire cavity) is nothing new.

It's been done by several researchers so the presentation of this ''data'' is not a particularly novel idea. If this presentation of computed data is meant to have any significance, perhaps you can enlighten us all as to how the embolization of tissues adjacent to and surrounding the permanent cavity are accounted for in your computations?

The Video is a compilation of all the OFFICIAL REAL GEL 4 layer testing in one place to compare to each other in each caliber.

Whether or not you ignore that because you want to ignore the comparative numbers I gave as an Aside is up to you. But ignoring the contents of the video, which is the main part of the thread, the main data compiled because of that is rather strange.

If one wants to say HALF the numbers I posted don't matter...well...ok...but to completely ignore the similarities in the Real Testing vs other based on past thoughts is also strange. ALL THE NUMBERS in the Video are the Official numbers. The numbers I posted for you...half are either OFFICIAL VISTA/HORNADY OR past FBI Official numbers and noted accordingly.

[the Schwartz]

If one wants to say HALF the numbers I posted don't matter...well...ok...but to completely ignore the similarities in the Real Testing vs other based on past thoughts is also strange.

If half of your ''data'' consists of that obtained from testing in the CBG product, then yes, half of your ''data'' does not matter.

Since the CBG product is an invalid test medium (supported by research cited above), then any ''comparison'' of ''data'' or ''similarities'' taken from an invalid media (in this case, the CBG product) to that obtained in 10% ordnance gelatin is worthless and should be ignored.

[DanTheWolfman]

If half of your ''data'' consists of that obtained from testing in the CBG product, then yes, half of your ''data'' does not matter.

Since the CBG product is an invalid test medium (supported by research cited above), then any ''comparison'' of ''data'' taken from an invalid media (in this case, the CBG product) to that obtained in 10% ordnance gelatin is worthless and should be ignored.

Okay, but again that is not what is presented in the video. Matters as in for a dept to choose? No. Matters...and not talking clear w no clothing, nor clear with some clothing, But I gave half the numbers of ONE testers data w 4 layer AND a 1/4" medium density fiberboard as it compares VERY FAVORABLY to the official data. I would say that shows promise to get a relative idea of loads no official data is available....say for Underwood.

I would say these numbers show a certain similarity, and perhaps promise to get an idea of loads one has no official fbi, manufacturer, or drgkr/iwba data on.

Are these not relatively similar Tissue Crush values? This part of it was an ASIDE from the video, in case I start doing my own easy to do testing. I would say it provides a clue when no other data available. Look again, MDF 4 layer clear results are listed compared to Official Vista or Hornady Data. I'm sure since often a bit more penetration and less expansion would compare favorably to drgkr results. Again I am not saying as good as or anything to that effect.

HST MDF Results 9mm=3.734 cu " TC(Vista Real Gel=3.799), .40=5.665 cu" TC(Vista Real Gel=6.283), .45=8.105 cu" TC (Vista Real Gel=8.08). Vista Data these rounds .45 is 2.126X more Damaging than the 9mm round, & 1.286x More TC damage than the .40. Gun Sam's MDF Data this .45 round is 2.17X more than this 9mm, and 1.43x More than this .40 round. Vista's 180 gr .40 Data is 1.653X more TC then this 124plus P 9mm, and Gun Sam's MDF Data 1.517x More than this 9mm round. Overall very Similar Results as to the VERY REAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN Expanded Bullets THROUGH THE ENTIRE PATH through the body. ALL GREAT Rounds, probably the very best...but there is a very REAL DIFFERENCE!


Gold Dot data More MDF 9mm 124+p ur 3.2" 16.5 .544=3.84 cu in" Tissue Crush compares to 4" Vista REAL GEL 14.13 .60=4.04 cu in" TC . This .38 gold dot load 2" 12" .508=2.43" vs Vista Real Gel 11" .576=2.87 from 4v"

More Gold Dot data Ur 165gr .40 5" barrel 19" .616=5.66 cu in" Tissue Crush vs Spear REAL GEL 4 Layer Data from 4" Barrel 18" .618 5.4 cu in" Tissue Crush. Underwood 125gr .357 GD 21" .594= (only 18" Given per FBI Protocol) 4.99 cu in TC" (compared to Critical Duty TC 3.67").

Critical Duty Data .45 MDF Protocol 17" .615=TC Adj Volume 5.05" Compared to Official Hornady REAL GEL 14.5 .69=5.42 cu in" .357 MDF 14.5 .558-TC Adj Volume 3.55" Compared to Hornady REAL GEL 14.4 .57=3.67" (8V" barrel).