New "Hypercav" bullet design

[They1]

I'm curious about that as well. Being that the holes appear to be perpendicular to the bullet and not at a forward angle (direction of travel), the holes should have only a minor aerodynamic affect, if that.

You would think that the air pressure captured in the cavity would aid in it's expansion, like a small shaped charge. Wouldn't simply filling the cavity with wax, or a soft plastic tip, like TAP, accomplish the same thing?

*The angle of the ports are designed to offer the least resistance in flight, while the same angle will promote "plugging" of the channels after the cavity has been filled with target tissue.

An interesing observation about the air 'aiding expansion', but it's really not the case. rember, while the tissue is compressing the cavity, the bullet is also bleeding energy at an exponential rate. Once the cracking moment has begun, any potential benefit of the trapped/compressed air has long-since been nulified.

---

While I always thought the 'tipped' or filled cavities offer an improvement, wax-type mediums would be suceptable to heat (either by environment or from firing), and the silicones are still a "semi-solid", still needing compression, and still slower than simply filling an empty space.

One other thing to consider; Which costs less? Adding material, or simply drilling holes in the same bullet?

[MK108]

...about the travel in soft tissues or tissues simulant that the hollow point bullet needs to achieve a noticeable expansion (..when it expands..) ...I guess that it could be interesting to take a look at the tables from the BRL paper "Ammunition for the law enforcement Part II: data obtained for bullets penetrating tissue simulant" (..a part of the well known RII study..)... of mid/late 70's...

...while this study is faulty under some aspects, knowing that the density of the 20% ballistic gel is similar to those of body soft tissues or the now used 10% ballistic gel means that the bullet behaviour when its velocity is quite high is similar too....so I guess there were not so very different expansion rates on the same HP bullet type with the same impact velocity on testing it in these different media...

...in the case of HP bullets the shapes of the temporary cavities depicted show us that normally the max TC diameter happens more or less at a penetration distance near 2"... I don't know if the max TC happens exactly when the bullet is fully expanded....but I guess that it happens near the position of the max expansion....

..I guess too that it's useful to take a look at a drawing of measured TC shapes for the same bullet with different impact velocities...in the example it seems that the max TC diameter positions don't change so much for the same bullet at those different impact velocities...



All the best
Andrea

[They1]

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

[WS6]

...about the travel in soft tissues or tissues simulant that the hollow point bullet needs to achieve a noticeable expansion (..when it expands..) ...I guess that it could be interesting to take a look at the tables from the BRL paper "Ammunition for the law enforcement Part II: data obtained for bullets penetrating tissue simulant" (..a part of the well known RII study..)... of mid/late 70's...

...while this study is faulty under some aspects, knowing that the density of the 20% ballistic gel is similar to those of body soft tissues or the now used 10% ballistic gel means that the bullet behaviour when its velocity is quite high is similar too....so I guess there were not so very different expansion rates on the same HP bullet type with the same impact velocity on testing it in these different media...

...in the case of HP bullets the shapes of the temporary cavities depicted show us that normally the max TC diameter happens more or less at a penetration distance near 2"... I don't know if the max TC happens exactly when the bullet is fully expanded....but I guess that it happens near the position of the max expansion....

..I guess too that it's useful to take a look at a drawing of measured TC shapes for the same bullet with different impact velocities...in the example it seems that the max TC diameter positions don't change so much for the same bullet at those different impact velocities...



All the best
Andrea

Precisely. JHP's already expand fully by 1-2" penetration. Even if They's projectiles work, what will be gained? We may have the same problems he had, if it works. Over-expansion/underpenetration.

The only benefit I can see to his design is if JHP's can be designed with smaller mouths. However, the Corbon DPX has a mouth like the Staypuff marshmellow man and I have not heard of those clogging.

I will continue to remain skepticle until evidence of efficacy is presented.

[They1]

My best wishes to all of you.

A Merry Christmas and a happy new Year!

Be well.

[They1]

Ok folks, here's the deal; I've had these photos for some time now, test performed early on in the project's development.

I've not shared them to date for several reasons. The primary reason is I didn't think this was a valid test, considering the test medium proved to exceed the 'standards' of ballistic gel criteria. We used a medium from "Bullet Test Tube". The idea being it was reusable. (Thinking economy here)

Turns out though, that after measuring later, the BTT medium is almost TWICE the density of standadrized ballistic gel.
So, after learning this, we canceled any further tests as this seemed to be a "bad idea".
I tried to contact BTT, but no response to email, and their phone appears to be disconnected. (I think I know why)

The next reason, is the quality of the photos are severely lacking.

All things being equal, my goal has been to present clean, independent scientifically-based test result information with solid data, and quality photos.
While we're working on that as you read this, please keep in mind the unscientific nature of the pics here:









**NOTE: You'll notice the three port blast marks as the bullet enters the target.











To help put things into prespective, the following is a photo from BTTs' website, showing the same medium, but with a RIFLE round:

[geminidglocker]

Sorry, but I'm not into Role Playing Games. If it is not in stock and available, and I have not killed Humans or Animals with it, I don't really care how "Special" it is. End this silly thread already. OP, how many "Things" have you killed? How many samplings of ammo have you shot? You see, I should hope that both yourself and myself have spent enough time striking things in the head with bullets, to realize that no further designs are necessary. Try building a rail gun or something useful.

[They1]

Sorry, but I'm not into Role Playing Games. If it is not in stock and available, and I have not killed Humans or Animals with it, I don't really care how "Special" it is. End this silly thread already. OP, how many "Things" have you killed? How many samplings of ammo have you shot? You see, I should hope that both yourself and myself have spent enough time striking things in the head with bullets, to realize that no further designs are necessary. Try building a rail gun or something useful.

An 'interesting' response to say the least.

I suspect your comments alone speaks volumes about your thought processes.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." -Abraham Lincoln

No further comment is necessary...

[WS6]

I missed the picture of the path left by the OEM GDHP. All that is coming up for me is the wound left by the modified one.

[geminidglocker]

When it comes to ammo issues and unknown factors, think like Spock in Star Trek, You will be rewarded if you follow our strict rules of Logic, yet you shall fail by operating otherwise. Too, many variables. Seek the logic and use the statistic probability factors to determine the proper selection of munition. Their are plenty that are adequete and will keep you alive just fine, Provided you do your part!