Testing with handgun calibers?

[joe16]

He's trying to pick an argument

Too many variables

 

[joe16]

Our friend from Down Under must be really down and out. Calving is particularly tough down one man.I know he is physically broken and mentally tasked for him to concede with a simple.

So I'll help him out and go "what do you mean flip flop" ? And I'll respond with

How do we give a numerical value to ENERGY used/lost during transition to it's lethal form to all hammers big or small, light or heavy all the while stating a numerical value of ENERGY doesn't apply to Hammers?



This place is awesome.

Edited because I can't spell

 

[gltaylor]

We can chronograph a bullet in flight.
We could also chrony a bullet as it exits a gel block.
We'd have a starting and finishing velocity, and can calculate "energy" and percentage used in deforming to become a finished cylinder.
"Energy" in and of itself is not the topic in my mind. It's only a means to express what the bullet uses in transition from flight to terminal form.
Yes, Joe,it would probably have to be bullet-specific (at least to me)? And no, I don't pay much attention to "energy" as a general rule.
Jm2cw.

 

[HARPERC]

How do we give a numerical value to ENERGY used/lost during transition to it's lethal form to all hammers big or small, light or heavy all the while stating a numerical value of ENERGY does apply to Hammers?

First we ask the question?

Second we concede it too many variables, and out of our personal skill set, but someone else may have the answer.

Third "IF" energy is used as it has been historically in evaluating terminal performance, its fair to ask how that energy is distributed. The assumption it all goes into the animal just doesn't make sense to me. Folks who don't like pass throughs due to energy loss ( in my experience) just blink and move on at the question.

Fourth I can't do it, and I've tried. I would agree lots of variables, way out of my skill set. I've been asking that question probably 3+ decades, and this is the first time its been responded to to this degree. 100 pages on energy arguments other places, and not even a response.

Fifth, I don't expect an answer actually, or an actual answer, I just think its a fair question if we are considering the role of energy in lethality.

I don't find energy a useful component in discussing lethality. Hammers or otherwise.

 

[joe16]

I like the idea of chronographing prior to impact and chronographing after exit from the block.We could probably use Mountainman's $1,200 radar put it right behind it, say 10ft. What could go wrong???

 

[HARPERC]

Might take some kind of press. I'm not as concerned with exits, as I am with what does it take to completely or nearly destroy some of the other bullets only penetrating a few inches.

 

[joe16]

A hardness value must be considelred first. Maplet diameter vs bullet diameter %, weight of bullet. And then the greatest determining Factor is impact velocity.

 

[HARPERC]

A hardness value must be considelred first. Maplet diameter vs bullet diameter %, weight of bullet. And then the greatest determining Factor is impact velocity.

But now you're engaged in the conversation. Maybe that's as far as we can go?

 

[joe16]

Too many variables

 

[Handgun400]

Somewhere along the lines this thread went from physically testing bullets on meat to physics.

 

[HARPERC]

Physics as it pertains to what we see on meat. LOL!

Or its Sunday and I'm not much for football.

Somewhere along the lines this thread went from physically testing bullets on meat to physics.

 

[gltaylor]

Don't care much for pro ball either, but this discussion has some Real possibilities
Edit:
I'm still stuck on the idea of percentage.
If a bullet can use a lesser percentage of available energy, then speed stays up so the shank can penetrate better and the 90 degree edges of the shank can displace/tear more tissue, ie, kill more efficiently!?!