Christ. Now I have dig out a bunch of pre-Internet dead tree pubs to defend a simple statement of my general, uncontroversial recollection of something?
Where's my ignore button?
Christ. Now I have dig out a bunch of pre-Internet dead tree pubs to defend a simple statement of my general, uncontroversial recollection of something?
Where's my ignore button?
Ken in Texas
What seperates this site from others, especially this particular section, is that we prefer to deal with facts. The study of terminal ballistics is extremely important, and many people take it very seriously. Hence why when assertions are made that dont always "jive" questions will be asked. When you make an assertion, its always best to be prepared to acknowledge it, and present data supporting it. It's not meant to be personal, but it needs to be professional.
ETA:
When someone says "it was one of the best loads" that person shouldnt be offended when someone else asks for facts that support such a statement. It is not up to the person questioning the assertion to provide data. Saying XXXXXX City PD uses the load isnt data.
Last edited by Fail-Safe; 02-02-11 at 16:24.
It's under "User CP/Edit Ignore List."HeavyDuty: Where's my ignore button?
My usual rule for joining new fora such as this is to look at several multi-page (and therefore controversial) threads and find - easily - several people to populate initially my "Ignore" lists. It saves effort by not having to waste time on them in the future. I'll not forget again.
A simple observation from the past, about a generally held view, turns into an exercise in nit picking.
In order to maintain the high standards of this website, it would be best if we limit the 'cite your source' requests to more substantial claims.
Jwalker, sorry you had to go through this inquisition. This place is usually better behaved.
Doc, you should lock this thread.
200, before you pile on, maybe you should ask Doc if the 9BP was "one of the best loads available throughout the 90's", in the view of the wound ballistic community. I can tell you the IWBA folks I know sure didn't think so.
Sometimes "generally held views", aren't generally held, by those who actually know what they were talking about.
Compare the data on the 9BP posted here from Evan Marshal's site, or the opinion of this loads effectiveness, with the data and opinion posted by Doc. Notice the discrepancies?
9BP was the darling of gun magazine writers throughout the 90's who touted it in opposition to much better performing 147 grain loads that were available. It became legendary for it's "street performance" pushed by the same writers. That legend continues on today for many who haven't familiarized themselves with the work of folks like Fackler, Wolberg, and Roberts, or the experiences of agencies that switched from 115 grain loads to 147 grain loads in the 1980's or 1990's.
That's why I asked the simple questions that seemed to upset a couple posters, and made them so defensive.
I carried and was issued 9BP and 9BPLE back in the mid to late 1980's--it was better than some of the other options available back then, as it was accurate, reliable, and penetrated better than loads like the Silvertip, Glasser, and other such nonsense. With the advent of Dr. Fackler's work, the wound ballistic workshops at Quantico and founding of the FBI BRF, as well as the work of the IWBA, improved loads were developed that offered better penetration, improved intermediate barrier performance, and enhanced terminal performance consistency.
As I have stated before, bullet designs like the 9BP/BPLE, Silver Tip, Hydra-Shok, and Black Talon were state of the art 15 or 20 years ago. These older bullets tend to plug up and act like FMJ projectiles when shot through heavy clothing; they also often have significant degradation in terminal performance after first passing through intermediate barriers. Modern ammunition which has been designed for robust expansion against clothing and intermediate barriers is significantly superior to the older designs. The bullets in the Federal Classic and Hydrashok line are outperformed by other ATK products such as the Federal Tactical and HST, as well as the Speer Gold Dot; likewise Winchester Ranger Talons, Ranger Bonded, and Ranger Partition are far superior to the old Black Talons or civilian SXT's.
It is time to move on...
Bookmarks