I'm expressing my experiences messing with this kind of thing not arguing , this is a discussion.Originally Posted by rhyslightnin
The reason Is actually getting to the bottom of what is real and asking the correct questions to get the right answers., I believe that the "terracotta wax question" so to speak is the incorrect question as the subject matter (massive intentional pun) isn't correct on so many levels. I asked you "how do you know" purposely, not to prove you are wrong but to acquire the foundations of the statement that you made. I actually want to know the truth of this situation and the source so I can go look and experientially learn it for myself, I couldn't give a monkeys who is right or wrong.
It's funny how people in this type of discussion always get mixed up between belief and hard facts, then they use YouTube videos of someone elses inconclusive experiment to create more weight to there belief.
I'm here, right now, offering an opportunity to see exactly what is going on here by carefully thinking about the questions to ask, or presenting a reasonable reason or angle as to why possibly that we shouldn't believe what the YouTube video shows because it is easy to "Imagen" (this is an important word here) what it might be like if you apply what you see to a rabbits head, in our own heads... Which is just plain wrong.
Please don't argue with me I'm not here to do that, I just want to learn as I'm sure do you, what is exactly right
Rhys
You see I'm a complete geek who spends more time testing things than actually shooting!
I spent ages a number of years ago experimenting with different materials to see if hollowpoints worked, if pointed pellets worked etc
I tried plasticine, lard at different temperatures, gelatine (strawberry jelly), putty, clays, in the end I got a small box of ballistic gel off a guy on the net!
What did I learn ,
12ftlbs is not enough to properly deform a hollowpoint pellet unless the material was extremely dense, quite hard clay in my experiments.
that the results were mirrored no matter what the material I used, the more dense, the less the physical effect, and less dense the greater the effect but all behaved the same relative to each other, except the Ballistic gel which was great for testing penetration but without a high speed camera didn't give any other info.
what was clear was velocity was paramount, and the reason is simple if you take ten different pellets of the same calibre and look at them end on they are all the same area, and that's what the target is struck by, the frontal area, the different profiles flat, hollow, pointed etc varied the physical effect but the main criteria was speed!
I used a different measuring principle to the guy in the video , I used a syringe and measured the cc's of water each hole held , but the results the guy in the video has found is pretty much the same as what I did.
Rabbits heads are not made of terracotta wax, nor jelly or lard, but the results were the same relative to each pellet no matter what the material, and that's going to be the same for a rabbits head, their skulls are paper thin and their brains similar to gel, so yes you can use a similar material to get a picture of what does what.
As I said I'm not arguing I'm expressing my findings, I have tested this I suggest shooters try it to actually understand the principles, the problem is its a very long process and you have to have a very controlled system in place to eliminate errors.
Or in my case making a right old mess in the garage.
Reply With Quote