Is G2 RIP like a "buzz saw"?

[AndrewWiggin]

https://youtu.be/SH9wD5T6UfQ
https://youtu.be/SH9wD5T6UfQ


The results may shock you!



(probably not)



Part of G2's marketing pitch on the RIP was that it acted like a "buzz saw," whatever that is. I tested that claim and the results are probably not surprising, but definitely entertaining.

[WickedWillis]

It's gimmick ammo that people think (and still think) looks super scary. And to most of the dirt-clod shooting bubba's out there, performance doesn't matter.

[AndrewWiggin]

Yup. Just trying to do my part to bring the knowledge. Who am I kidding? I'm just having a blast making fun of gimmick ammo.

[WickedWillis]

Yup. Just trying to do my part to bring the knowledge. Who am I kidding? I'm just having a blast making fun of gimmick ammo.

I watched the video, just like I watch nearly all of the videos you guys put up.

[AndrewWiggin]

Thank you. Just me, though. Unless that was a fat joke. I'm a biggun.

[DirectTo]

Thanks for the laugh this morning.

[WickedWillis]

Thank you. Just me, though. Unless that was a fat joke. I'm a biggun.

I assumed there was a production crew behind the scenes lol

[AndrewWiggin]

Nope. Just me.

[kerplode]

LOL! That was awesome. :-)

[whilst]

shoot some critters with it and see if you are still scoffing. I dont favor this bullet, but gel testing doesn't mean much.

[AndrewWiggin]

*sigh*

The fact that a bullet wound can eventually kill an animal indicates nothing about the relative capability of a given load to incapacitate in a timely manner. Conversely, the penetration, retained weight, and expansion and/or fragmentation measurements observed in properly prepared and calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin correlate strongly with those observed from the same loads in human beings.


ETA: please note that the gel used in this test was clear gel, which can be inaccurate, though close, and amateur tests like my own generally include small sample sizes.

[WickedWillis]

shoot some critters with it and see if you are still scoffing. I dont favor this bullet, but gel testing doesn't mean much.

How does that prove anything at all?

[MegademiC]

shoot some critters with it and see if you are still scoffing. I dont favor this bullet, but gel testing doesn't mean much.

Actually, if you know how to interpret it, it's the most useful info out there... if you want to actually have quantifiable scientific data.

*assuming gel made to fbi specs and a controlled, standard test method.

[whilst]

so you "think" that flesh and blood is not flesh and blood? You'll see the same overpenetration and non-expansion (of most hp's) in animals that you'll see in people. Blood loss always takes 4-5 seconds to actually (reliably) incapacitate, and that's far too slow. Fortunately, if you hit them hard enough, psychological quitting occurs, nearly instantly, up to 98% of the time, with something like a 223 Softpoint or 12 ga slug, and 90% of the time with a good 357 jhp. There's always a few, however, that are not stopped by any sort of body hit. That beats the hell out of the 4-5 seconds needed for blood loss to take effect.

a far better solution is a 2 segmented, hollowbased, solid copper .45 hp, at 2200 fps from a 4" barrel. That's 750 ft lbs, and a diverging wound track of adequate depth.

[MegademiC]

Yea, your right. Why don't you share your library of data accumulated over the years of testing you've done? I'm sure it has your percentages in there backed up by solid data.

[jekbrown]

this ammo has one thing going for it: you know how in the movies when our hero gets shot and then there's a dramatic scene where another person, which usually isn't a doctor, rams a pair of needle-nose or something into the bullet hole, grabs the bullet, and yanks it out...somehow saving the guy that got shot? With this ammo you really would need a highly skilled surgeon to find/safely remove all those little pieces. Armchair doc ain't gonna get it done. The hero dies. Hmmm...not good.

One other advantage: if your bullet placement sucks, there's still a chance with this ammo that a fragment could fly off and hit something critical (heart etc.). An HST to the man-boob doesn't do jack (in profile), but if a fragment flies off, shoots between a couple ribs and hits the heart? Much more effective.

:p

[williejc]

This reminds me of a project that I've entertained for years. Have a custom mold made that would cast a wadcutter bullet. Front end shape would have notched indentations positioned such that the cutting edges while spinning would function as saw teeth. Bullet alloy would be preacher dick hard. My opinion is that a 44 or 45 bullet loaded to standard pressure would be the basis for a good self defense load for large caliber revolvers like Ruger's Gp100 in .44 Spl. Bullet would be blunt and have teeth too. I would cast 1000's and sell them on the net labeled as the WWM(WillieWidowMaker). I'd make so much money that I'd need to hire Eurodriver to count it. All jokes aside, the design makes sense. Its main advantage would be funding me.

[Eurodriver]

This reminds me of a project that I've entertained for years. Have a custom mold made that would cast a wadcutter bullet. Front end shape would have notched indentations positioned such that the cutting edges while spinning would function as saw teeth. Bullet alloy would be preacher dick hard. My opinion is that a 44 or 45 bullet loaded to standard pressure would be the basis for a good self defense load for large caliber revolvers like Ruger's Gp100 in .44 Spl. Bullet would be blunt and have teeth too. I would cast 1000's and sell them on the net labeled as the WWM(WillieWidowMaker). I'd make so much money that I'd need to hire Eurodriver to count it. All jokes aside, the design makes sense. Its main advantage would be funding me.

"preacher dick hard"
"Eurodriver to count it"

This post is hilarious!

[C-grunt]

Shooting critters with bullets is a lot more realistic than gel. That's why shotgun birdshot is so effective for defense..... It's devastating on birds.

[AndrewWiggin]

No, and no. And also no.

I feel like you're just trolling but in case you're actually serious, I guess I'll explain. Properly calibrated gel is far more useful than critters because it yields consistent measurable data. And no, birdshot is not useful for defense against anything but a bird. A small one.

[TexHill]

Shooting critters with bullets is a lot more realistic than gel. That's why shotgun birdshot is so effective for defense..... It's devastating on birds.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v285/Tex_Hill/bsmeter.gif (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Tex_Hill/media/bsmeter.gif.html). :cool:

[pyrotechnic]

Had a guy bring some of these to a class recently where we shot through a couple windshields to see the effect on POI. Only a couple small fragments made it to the target 5ft behind the windshield.

The only thing this round does well is spend idiots' money.

[C-grunt]

No, and no. And also no.

I feel like you're just trolling but in case you're actually serious, I guess I'll explain. Properly calibrated gel is far more useful than critters because it yields consistent measurable data. And no, birdshot is not useful for defense against anything but a bird. A small one.

I feel you missed the sarcasm from my post.

[AndrewWiggin]

You definitely got me. I thought I had remembered you saying smart stuff.