Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Badlands Precision Bullets thread - From BC to terminal ballistics
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="yorke-1" data-source="post: 2242670" data-attributes="member: 11960"><p>I see a benefit to both approaches. The petals from the Hammer bullets vary in size depending on the specific style of bullet, and there's some pretty good evidence on large/heavy game that having larger fragments radiate outwards provides some pretty spectacular results. Those petals separate at about the 8" mark and travel outwards from there in the gel. If that 8" mark puts them inside the chest cavity, then they do a ton of damage. The idea of the petal fragments traveling in more of a straight line is intriguing too. I imagine them behaving almost like buckshot. inside the chest cavity with a more gradual opening of the "pattern".</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's funny you'd mention the 10% vs 20% gel. My test medium has changed from the initial testing I did a few years ago when I was using suede leather soaked in water. The depth of penetration I saw in that testing was shallower than what you'd see in gel or animal tissue, but the bullet expansion actually matched up very closely with the same bullet recovered from game animals with similar impact velocities. I tested 64 different bullets in 10 different bore diameters that time around. </p><p></p><p>This time I started my testing using 20% gel blocks because I felt like they were a better match for dense animal tissue. The first tests I did with the gel were with handgun bullets fired from a pair of 10mm handguns. I tested them in both bare 20% gel and 20% gel with a layer of the same leather from the previous tests and a shoulder blade from a small (150#) black bear. That testing is posted here on LRH. Some of my initial rifle bullet tests were in the same 20% gel, but when it came time to buy additional gel blocks, I went with the 10% just because it gives a more "dramatic" impact on video. I compared the penetration of previously tested rifle and handgun loads in both the 10% and 20% gel and I found a slight difference in penetration and expansion with the 10% gel giving slightly greater permanent wound cavities and penetration, but it was less than 10% difference when compared the same loads fired into the 20% gel at the same impact velocity. Now all of the testings are done similar to how you described, with a 10% block in the front and two 20% blocks in the back to catch the bullets. </p><p></p><p>So am I understanding correctly that the intention is for the SB II bullets to retain most of their weight and hold the expanded petals while losing the tip, similar to a Barnes bullet? That would explain the very shallow HP cavity I saw in the recovered bullets. I wasn't sure if that was a result of the low impact velocities, a less than ideal barrel twist, or just the result of a very limited sample size. I need to stop wasting time and reach out to Badlands to see if I can order up a bunch of small quantity "sample size" packs of different bullets to test. I've been saying I was going to do that for nearly 2 months now and just haven't followed through.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="yorke-1, post: 2242670, member: 11960"] I see a benefit to both approaches. The petals from the Hammer bullets vary in size depending on the specific style of bullet, and there's some pretty good evidence on large/heavy game that having larger fragments radiate outwards provides some pretty spectacular results. Those petals separate at about the 8" mark and travel outwards from there in the gel. If that 8" mark puts them inside the chest cavity, then they do a ton of damage. The idea of the petal fragments traveling in more of a straight line is intriguing too. I imagine them behaving almost like buckshot. inside the chest cavity with a more gradual opening of the "pattern". It's funny you'd mention the 10% vs 20% gel. My test medium has changed from the initial testing I did a few years ago when I was using suede leather soaked in water. The depth of penetration I saw in that testing was shallower than what you'd see in gel or animal tissue, but the bullet expansion actually matched up very closely with the same bullet recovered from game animals with similar impact velocities. I tested 64 different bullets in 10 different bore diameters that time around. This time I started my testing using 20% gel blocks because I felt like they were a better match for dense animal tissue. The first tests I did with the gel were with handgun bullets fired from a pair of 10mm handguns. I tested them in both bare 20% gel and 20% gel with a layer of the same leather from the previous tests and a shoulder blade from a small (150#) black bear. That testing is posted here on LRH. Some of my initial rifle bullet tests were in the same 20% gel, but when it came time to buy additional gel blocks, I went with the 10% just because it gives a more "dramatic" impact on video. I compared the penetration of previously tested rifle and handgun loads in both the 10% and 20% gel and I found a slight difference in penetration and expansion with the 10% gel giving slightly greater permanent wound cavities and penetration, but it was less than 10% difference when compared the same loads fired into the 20% gel at the same impact velocity. Now all of the testings are done similar to how you described, with a 10% block in the front and two 20% blocks in the back to catch the bullets. So am I understanding correctly that the intention is for the SB II bullets to retain most of their weight and hold the expanded petals while losing the tip, similar to a Barnes bullet? That would explain the very shallow HP cavity I saw in the recovered bullets. I wasn't sure if that was a result of the low impact velocities, a less than ideal barrel twist, or just the result of a very limited sample size. I need to stop wasting time and reach out to Badlands to see if I can order up a bunch of small quantity "sample size" packs of different bullets to test. I've been saying I was going to do that for nearly 2 months now and just haven't followed through. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Badlands Precision Bullets thread - From BC to terminal ballistics
Top