Well, whitepaper, as I stated to begin with, it looked to me like you came to this forum spoiling for a fight, and against my better judgment (having chosen to NOT carry on any further indictments of the 5.7x28mm round already)I replied to your post as clearly and non-judgmentally as I could.
You appear to be set on having a fight, though, and I'm afraid I will not oblige you. I will respond to a couple of your points as they do make some sense.
Nope merely trying to get some solid answers as you are.
You're right, I cannot say one way or another what the temperature of the blocks might have been.
But the video producer posts the ambient temperature as being 94 degrees, and he's shooting at an outdoor range, and you can clearly see he's shooting in the sun. He doesn't provide video evidence of the blocks' temperatures. He doesn't explain how he safeguarded the blocks' temperatures during the tests. All that that tells me is that we have no idea whether the blocks were stored and shot at 4C or not, due to the video producer's failure to provide that information.
BB calibration was "to spec", you say, and I might concur. But when was the gelatin calibrated? How long before shooting the first bullet into the gelatin? Was he monitoring the temperature? No? Yes? We can't tell. He doesn't provide that information.
You're right. I'll send him a youtube message and ask for verification. At that point, it would be taking his word for it. I don't have any detail tech information available, as most of the listed FBI protocols say that it has to be shot within 20 minutes of being removed from stored temperature. It doesn't state whether at XX outside temp if it's only good for XX minutes..
As I said, this video "proof" is only a demonstration, and while entertaining, it really doesn't prove anything one way or another.
I'd have to agree. It proves nothing, but it seems some people have it stuck in there head, that they equate this round to be the most ballistically inefficient round ever created, however even these basic gel tests prove this round is capable of meeting min penetration values. This isn't some .380 ACP round that needs FMJ's to reach 12"..
Bullets that fragment explosively, like varmint rounds such as the V-Max, do not penetrate very deeply. Tissue damage in human-size thoraces is typically shallow and non-lethal, or at least not quickly lethal. Bullets that penetrate more deeply into tissue before fragmenting, and particularly bullets that break up into a small number of larger fragments (as opposed to bullets that break up into a large number of small fragments) have proven over the years to be more effective in terms of terminal effectiveness. In order to assess the effectiveness of fragmenting bullets, you need to demonstrate the depth at which the bullet begins to break up, the number of fragments typically produced, and the depth to which these fragments penetrate.
Again that's based on higher velocities achieved in these rounds, when shot from a AR15. I've seen the 40gr Vmax style bullets in gel from a 5.56 round, and you're right, they clearly only penetrate 6-8" in bare gel. However at lower velocities this round doesn't seem to have issues penetrating to min depths as shown in the video.
The video footage provided does not give us clear enough photographic evidence of the fragmentation pattern. The testers do not provide weights of the fragments.
I would agree. I would have liked to see them melt the gel down and collect and weight fragments. Perhaps they didn't think testing needed to carried to that point of degree.
Again, I reiterate: the "tests" in these videos don't prove much of anything, one way or another. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?
I would certainly agree to that, if you would agree the snippets of information provided on the 5.7x28mm on sites like M4, don't really proove much of anything either
Well, the fact is that there is a LOT of stuff you're not allowed to see, and all I can say to that is "too bad". Learn to deal with it.
I certainly have learned to deal with it. It's one of the reasons I seek out as much data as possible. I was able to make my conclusion on what carry rounds I carry in my major calibers (9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP) because of such data.
Now, I am DONE with this discussion. As stated previously, I have some serious research on this 5.7mm thing in the works and I will not waste any more time on this discussion.
And again if I haven't already mentioned it, I will greatly welcome any further data and testing on this round, as long as it isnt' 20yrs old, and about a discontinued bullet
