Seriously.Originally Posted by C-grunt
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Senior Member
Seriously.
--British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
Senior Member
Seriously is right. I mean getting called out by multiple knowledgeable people that he is wrong, then proceeds to double down on his completely wrong ideas while throwing in completely made up BS.
Last edited by vicious_cb; 08-31-22 at 10:05.
Forward Ascertainment Group
Senior Member
Truth isn't determined by consensus. If it were, I would be a chick and Joe Biden would be the most eloquent president since Kennedy.
But if you want to play that game to determine who's right, I win by default. Nobody is going to deny that bonded bullets are overwhelmingly preferred by LE pros over gimmicky fragmenting bullets. The ultimate authority on ballistics is the FBI, and they chose (drumroll)...a bonded 223 renowned for what...that's right, it's famous for its perfect weight retention (i.e. its tendency not to fragment). I can't even believe we're having this conversation. It's not even debatable.
Last edited by okie; 08-31-22 at 13:04.
Site Sponsor
OTOH, it is also worth noting--and I am NOT taking a side in the argument so don't dogpile on me--that more LEA purchasing decisions than one would like, at least from what the cops I know have said, are made by beancounters not triggerpullers, who steer the ammo buys to "who offers us the lowest price per round today" or "who's promising me the biggest kickback."
It's like trying to explain to an EPA or FAA bureaucrat why vintage piston-engine planes need high-octane leaded fuels to be able to fly high enough to get over the Rockies when all they see is "MUH NUMBUHRZ!"
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>YOU IDIOTS! I WROTE 1984 AS A WARNING, NOT A HOW-TO MANUAL!--Orwell's ghost
Psalms 109:8, 43:1
LIFE MEMBER - NRA & SAF; FPC MEMBER Not employed or sponsored by any manufacturer, distributor or retailer.
Senior Member
Bonded bullets are about the most expensive options out there, right on par with solid copper lathe turned bullets. They could have had virtually anything else on the market for about the same price or less, which is notable since there are bullets in that price range that offer both barrier blindness and fragmentation on impact with tissue.
Site Sponsor
“I win by default.” That’s always your problem dude. You could try to stop being the smartest guy in the room and not make everything a hill to die on. Maybe dial back the savior/persecution complex a bit.
Do you even get down innagrass, bro?
Senior Member
You missed the point entirely. The point I was making is that his appeal to authority was a fallacy. And that if he wanted to go down that road of appeal to authority the actual authorities support my argument, not his.
Not that he even has an argument, mind you. His argument was a drive by "You're wrong I'm right" response to my multiple paragraphs of thoughtful response.
Not to mention I thought we were supposed to have higher standards in these non GD forums.
Last edited by okie; 08-31-22 at 16:14.
Senior Member
Hornady TAP and Federal TRU are both VERY popular ammo choices by LEOs nationwide. Both have fragmenting bullet designs. Not to mention the OTMs used.
C co 1/30th Infantry Regiment
3rd Brigade 3rd Infantry Division
2002-2006
OIF 1 and 3
IraqGunz:
No dude is going to get shot in the chest at 300 yards and look down and say "What is that, a 3 MOA group?"
Senior Member
Id also like to see the information that shows that LE pros (could you also define that for me?) overwhelmingly prefer the bonded bullets over gimmicky fragmenting types. Do you have a link to this poll or study?
C co 1/30th Infantry Regiment
3rd Brigade 3rd Infantry Division
2002-2006
OIF 1 and 3
IraqGunz:
No dude is going to get shot in the chest at 300 yards and look down and say "What is that, a 3 MOA group?"
Senior Member
TAP comes in a bonded version, first off. TAP and TRU both come in "urban" versions that are designed to fragment so as NOT to pass through targets/barriers intact, with the assumption that's safer for bystanders. It has nothing to do with terminal performance, and rather everything to do with sacrificing terminal performance in the interest of potentially mitigating collateral damage.
I say potentially because the overwhelming body of evidence suggests that the tradeoff is, one, not profitable, and, two, an answer to a problem that generally doesn't exist. I.e. the loss of terminal performance is extreme, and the increased safety to bystanders is generally way overestimated. And collateral damage due to rounds overpenetrating is rare in the literature, whereas rounds failing to drop a bad guy due to underpenetrating is an alarmingly common problem.
If by OTM you're referring to Mk262, it retains well over 50% of its weight on average. It's not a "fragmenting" round. It's a match bullet made for long range precision shooters that has acceptable weight retention in light of its primary attribute. So basically it's in the same category as M855A1, in that it's a specialized round made to do one thing well, and can be forgiven for lackluster performance in other areas.
I say again, niche needs notwithstanding, retained weight is king and fragmenting bullets are not generally favored. This is fact, and it is indisputable. I am both amazed and disheartened we're having this argument in a tech forum.
Last edited by okie; 08-31-22 at 23:50.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks