Got any 10mm data?

[USSA-1]

Outdated? How about incredibly effective but misunderstood?

No hate here, I'm with ya brother!

Beautiful Delta! Definitely one of the best I've seen in a long time.

My next project is going to be a hi-cap 10mm on a STI/SVI frame.

Doc, if we got you a sampling of some ammo, would you be interested in testing it?

I've got some of the FBI load, a Winchester JHP, and some original Black Talons. Add to this the Silvertips, Hornady, Gold dots, and some other loads and you should have a good generational representation between some of the first JHP designs and the more modern offerings at all velocity levels.

USSA-1

[Low Drag]

I am a bit skeptical about the Double Tap ammo test results...

On the other hand, we have tested the ammo that "Federale" depicted--it has been a quite a while, but IIRC, out of a Colt Delta Elite it ran about 925 fps, penetrated in the 16" range with expansion around 60-62 caliber, with minimal changes against 4 layer denim and auto glass. A relatively mild, but good performing load.

I can't speak to the gel tests but I've chrono-ed the Double Tap loads I've purchased and McNett isn't embellishing on the velocity.

[d90king]

How different is 10mm verses 124gr 38Super? It has been a couple years since I compared the 2 and I thought they were pretty close......?!?!?!?

[DocGKR]

My concern is the gel test protocols--they were listed as FBI spec, but the description does not match the actual FBI protocols...

[sjc3081]

[QUOTE=DocGKR;300091]My concern is the gel test protocols--they were listed as FBI spec, but the description does not match the actual FBI protocols...[/QUOTE
Please be specific.

[DocGKR]

The test link states:

"All of these tests were done using 10% ballistic gelatin provided by Vyse gelatin using all FBI protocols and 4 layers of denim and two layers of light cotton T-shirt in front of the gelatin."

However, there is NO FBI protocol test event using "4 layers of denim and two layers of light cotton T-shirt" Likewise if the test was conducted using "all FBI protocols", as stated, then where are the bare gel, heavy clothing, auto glass, sheet steel, and wall board test results? What is "frag nasty"? That is most assuredly NOT an FBI protocol description of projectile performance--for an FBI protocol test, a more accurate description would include the % fragmentation. Finally, the FBI protocol requires 5 shots for each test event; it is not clear, but it appears most of these are single shot, with a few double shot events listed. It would also be nice to know the gel calibration results or at least if the blocks were within spec.

Because of these numerous discrepancies, I expressed my skepticism...

[Marcus L.]

It would also be nice if McNett posted pictures of the gel blocks after being shot with the calibration BB visible in the pic. Just little things he could do to give his tests a LOT more credibility. We really have no idea if these tests even took place.

Doc,
Given that the ideal performance for the 10mm was deemed by the FBI to be a 180gr Sierra JHP at 980fps, what point is there in using the 10mm when the .40S&W will do exactly that in a smaller package with lower manufacturing costs on ammunition. From my perspective, it makes little sense to use the 10mm for anti personnel use given that the common service calibers easily meet the penetration requirements in FBI protocols. The 10mm really offers nothing over the service calibers except excessive penetration with higher sectional density loads. The .40S&W usually equals the 10mm in total permanent crush cavity volume, and the .45acp exceeds the 10mms crush cavity volume given that the average attacker torso will only be 7-10" from front to back.

[sjc3081]

For those who repeatedly shoot living tissue, you will realize that gel is not flesh. Gel is the best we have ,but it is does not reflect the trauma caused by velocity. I will take velocity over penetration every time, as long as penetration is adequate. 357mag 125jhp at 1450 is proven people smoker and so is 9BPLE and they both do poorly in FBI tests. This is my personal expirance based conditions that can not be reproduced in a controlled laboratory test.

Also I don't have the writing skills to ague this out over the internet.

I think McNett is referring to FBI protocols in heavy clothing test only.

[Jim from Houston]

When you speak of 125 gr .357 Magnum as a "proven stopper", I would assume that the data you're using to back-up this claim is derived from the work of Marshall and Sanow (if you have another source of data, please share it).

You should read these articles which illuminate some of the many discrepancies/factual impossibilites which have, over the years, led the majority of reputable experts to regard Marshall and Sanow's research as, at best mistaken, and at worst, possibly fraudulent.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/mars...l-analysis.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/mars...crepancies.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm

With regard to the notion that ballistics gelatin data does not accurately reflect real world performance, Eugene Wolberg, through comparison of "real world" results and performance in ballistics gelatin was able to demonstrate that, in fact, ballistics gelatin give remarkably similar results to "real world" data.

If you have access to data which refutes Mr. Wolberg's research, again, please share it.

Velocity affects a human target through the creation of a temporary cavity...none of the practical self-defense handgun calibers, not even the hottest .357 Magnum loads, have anywhere near enough velocity to cause a temporary cavity that can overcome the elasticity of human flesh...in other words, pistol temporary cavities simply push flesh out of the way, and then it slides back into place, with minimal damage. Rifle bullets have enough velocity to create a temporary cavity that DOES cause damage to human tissue, but the velocity difference between such rifle rounds and any of the service handgun calibers is immense...

The following document written by the FBI's Urey Patrick explains the mechanisms by which handgun projectiles cause damage to human tissue:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

[ToddG]

When you speak of 125 gr .357 Magnum as a "proven stopper", I would assume that the data you're using to back-up this claim is derived from the work of Marshall and Sanow (if you have another source of data, please share it).

Just because M&S were proponents doesn't mean the cartridge's reputation is sullied. The M&S thing is a red herring.

...none of the practical self-defense handgun calibers, not even the hottest .357 Magnum loads, have anywhere near enough velocity to cause a temporary cavity that can overcome the elasticity of human flesh...in other words, pistol temporary cavities simply push flesh out of the way, and then it slides back into place, with minimal damage.

This is a leap in logic that is often made but not supported by the scientific evidence. Yes, it's true that at normal handgun velocities the stretch cavity will not permanently tear most tissues. I'm not aware of any reputable study which has proven that the rapid, violent disruption of internal organs (below the threshold at which they receive permanent injury discoverable post mortem) has zero impact on the efficacy of a handgun round.

What we do know, scientifically, is that wounds (permanent injury) cause stops.

What we also know, experientially, is that quite a few people are incapacitated without suffering the kinds of permanent injury associated with the "CNS or TBV loss" type of stop.

The vogue is to refer to all such incapacitations as "psychological," with the connotation that anyone who is tough enough or mean enough won't be affected by such things. And there is absolutely no doubt that at least some of these "stops" do in fact result from a conscious decision on the part of the target. But, and this is the key thing, there is no scientific basis to declare them all "psychological." It's a circular logic trap that has befallen much of the literature: the only good stop is a CNS/TBV stop; all other stops are psychological; thus anyone who didn't suffer CNS damage or massive TBV loss must de facto have been "psychologically" stopped.

The fact is that plenty of people are incapacitated without suffering permanent identifiable CNS damage or significant TBV loss. The reality is that in many of those cases, the cause of the incapacitation is simply unknown.

There is a huge leap being made from "unknown" to declaring that there are no other possible factors involved in incapacitation.

Don't get me wrong, I choose my handgun ammo based on DocGKR's recommended list just like every other sane person. The data he collects is, at present, the best indicator of the only proven method of causing incapacitation.

On the other hand, having talked to a lot of OIS survivors and people who've studied OIS events for decades, I tend to choose loads on the high velocity end of Doc's list.