Have there been gelatin tests of any of the new(ish) bullets on the market?

[Zhukov]

Bullet manufacturers continue to tinker with new designs, but there's been a real lack of any ballistic gelatin test data that I'm aware of. There was a time when law enforcement agencies published test data and ammo manufacturers did too - but that has completely dried up. Either that, or I'm not plugged into good sources of information anymore.

[the Schwartz]

Bullet manufacturers continue to tinker with new designs, but there's been a real lack of any ballistic gelatin test data that I'm aware of. There was a time when law enforcement agencies published test data and ammo manufacturers did too - but that has completely dried up. Either that, or I'm not plugged into good sources of information anymore.

I've had the same thoughts.

It would seem that domestic ammunition manufacturers have nearly eliminated the practice of publishing their 10% ordnance gelatin data for public consumption. What manufacturer data that does leak out seems to be very limited in scope and volume these days; I see it as a missed marketing opportunity even if the current supply is quickly snapped up by the high demand we're seeing.

There's a lot of amateur testing on the 'net, but almost all of it seems to cater to the lowest common denominator (revenue generation through ''clicks'') that relies upon the use of the Clear Ballistics Gel product rather than using 10% ordnance gelatin to produce accurate empirical content.

Making 10% ordnance gelatin isn't any harder or more expensive than using the CBG stuff; it's just a different process. I've done quite a bit of it myself and it's really quite easy once one gets the hang of it. Not having to inhale the volatiles that accompany melting hydrocarbons is just one benefit of working with 10% ordnance gel.

Regrettably, most of those who have made the transition from the CBG stuff to the valid test medium of 10% gelatin after discovering that the CBG stuff doesn't produce accurate results (less projectile expansion, correspondingly greater terminal penetration) are no longer doing so because they're being drowned out in a sea of CBG videos.


There's also water testing, which can yield data equivalent to 10% ordnance gelatin data, but one must be willing to learn and use any of the five mathematical bullet penetration equations that exist presently.

[Zhukov]

I probably need to re-read my copy of Duncan McPherson's book.

On a positive note, I recently reorganized all my collected articles from Doc and various symposiums. It's all very tidy now.

[Molon]

There was a time when law enforcement agencies published test data and ammo manufacturers did too - but that has completely dried up.

.....

[Zhukov]

Fancy meeting you here.

I just saw those not too long ago - seems like the Ranger-T is a better design. They seem to be copying the Hornady Critical Defense/Duty concept or something like that.

[CZ Man]

I've done a bunch of clear ballistics testing for fun and to see how one round compares to another in the same medium.

If I were to dabble in the actual 10% gel ( I have a chronograph and a .177 BB gun that I could use to validate the gel), what are some recommended brand options for gelatin to use? At Walmart a guy can pick up some Knox Gelatin and the cheaper 'Great Value' brand gelatin. Would these work? I don't know what their bloom number would be and don't know if they are close enough to official gelatin to get an accurate result if properly made.

[the Schwartz]

I've done a bunch of clear ballistics testing for fun and to see how one round compares to another in the same medium.

If I were to dabble in the actual 10% gel (I have a chronograph and a .177 BB gun that I could use to validate the gel), what are some recommended brand options for gelatin to use? At Walmart a guy can pick up some Knox Gelatin and the cheaper 'Great Value' brand gelatin. Would these work? I don't know what their bloom number would be and don't know if they are close enough to official gelatin to get an accurate result if properly made.

Both Knox & Kind and VYSE ordnance gelatin are acceptable test mediums; ''store bought'' gelatin can be made to work, too, so long as it shear validates correctly when struck by a 0.177-caliber steel BB at 591 ± 13 fps that penetrates to a depth of 8.50 ± 0.40 cm. Proper shear validation ensures that the gelatin possesses the same shear force resistance in the non-cavitation velocity regime as mammalian soft tissues. Once that requirement has been met, you should be ready to start testing.

Good luck!

[cosermann]

I kind of wonder, have we reached the limits of bullet performance given current engineering/technology?

If that’s the case, then it could benefit manufacturers to NOT publish their gel tests, since the new bullets would either simply perform as good as current options (in which case, why buy them) or be a step backwards (in which case why buy them).

IF we’ve reached a bit of a plateau in this area, then ammo companies may feel it’s in their best interest to just sell ammo based on marketing and hype.

I don’t know whether this is the case or not. Obviously, I’m just engaging in wild speculation for my own entertainment purposes.

[Noah]

I kind of wonder, have we reached the limits of bullet performance given current engineering/technology?

If that’s the case, then it could benefit manufacturers to NOT publish their gel tests, since the new bullets would either simply perform as good as current options (in which case, why buy them) or be a step backwards (in which case why buy them).

IF we’ve reached a bit of a plateau in this area, then ammo companies may feel it’s in their best interest to just sell ammo based on marketing and hype.

I don’t know whether this is the case or not. Obviously, I’m just engaging in wild speculation for my own entertainment purposes.

We're at a point of tiny diminishing returns, sure, but I think we'll see tiny gains for years to come. Look at the last 5 or 10 years of 9mm- more consistent expansion, better barrier performance, better short barrel performance, etc.

All these gains will be tiny vs good HST and Gold Dot, but we might at least see more choices that match those standards.

[CZ Man]

Both Knox & Kind and VYSE ordnance gelatin are acceptable test mediums; ''store bought'' gelatin can be made to work, too, so long as it shear validates correctly when struck by a 0.177-caliber steel BB at 591 ± 13 fps that penetrates to a depth of 8.50 ± 0.40 cm. Proper shear validation ensures that the gelatin possesses the same shear force resistance in the non-cavitation velocity regime as mammalian soft tissues. Once that requirement has been met, you should be ready to start testing.

Good luck!

Thanks for the tip.
Sounds like it'll be a bit of trial and error with the 'store bought' brand gelatin. Well, it'll be fun to try! Does anyone have any particular store bought brands that have done well? Or bad ones that tend to do poorly that I should stay away from when it comes to validation? The great value Walmart brand appears to be the cheapest, so perhaps I'll start with that and see how it goes. Is there any way to find out the bloom for the common brands before purchasing?