Chuck R.
Member
Goes a long ways to explain why gel testing works and why SD caliber once you reach a certain threshold doesn't matter:
Several years ago, ShootingTheBull410 made many YouTube videos of gel tests on .380 and 9 mm self defense ammunition. I believe he is active again.
He made the argument that expansion is good but penetration is vital. Therefore, with a weak caliber like .380 which doesn't have enough energy for both, you should forego expansion to preserve penetration.
But they are also off base on something. One of the reps from Federal makes the case when discussing wounding capabilities of handgun bullets that there is no difference between the wounds and wounding potential between a 180 gr. bullet from a 40 S&W at 950 fps. and a 244 gr. bullet from a 44 Magnum at 1400 fps. We know that this is not accurate. We know, for example, that the 44 Magnum round discussed has the greater potential to break bone, to mention only one thing.
This might come in to play when using a handgun for hunting, but doesn't the ballistics gel take this into account when the bullets are used against humans?
This might come in to play when using a handgun for hunting, but doesn't the ballistics gel take this into account when the bullets are used against humans?
It's ironic that people seem to only want to use this video to justify NOT carrying a .45 (or other large caliber) but do not want to use it to justify switching to say a .22 for self defense.
"This video is dead on" but I'll stick with my 9mm, what I carried and trusted before I watched the video
Your "irony" does not apply to this video. The suggestion from the video is that until you reach rifle velocities, excess energy from larger or faster rounds has no additional effect other than penetration and expansion.
Taking that logic and simply looking at gel tests indicates that most major service caliber hollowpoints are engineered to penetrate roughly the same in gel and expand in a similar size range (.50 to .80 mostly, with a few outliers on either end). So it makes sense to conclude that these all are within effective range, especially when paired with the real world results they receive from LEOs they work with.
How you equate that to "well just poke .22 sized holes in the bad guy then!" is slightly confusing, leading me to wonder if you actually watched the video.