24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 7 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
D
Campfire Ranger
OP Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
tex n cal...

The problem we're dealing with here is not that the 5.7mm doesn't perform as well as some other pistol calibers, it's that the fans of the round will not be convinced of its underwhelming performance by whatever evidence that's been put up here and elsewhere.

Our resident 5.7mm fan has given us 3 examples of the round being used in gunfights. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to find another three, or maybe a half dozen.

The problem is that pointing to this or that shooting, or even a handful of shootings, as "proof" that a round is adequate for serious social purposes is completely lacking in any meaningful validity, statistical or otherwise. I could post specific examples of the 5.7mm failing to perform as intended from OIS's I've analyzed (if authorized to do so by the principals, permission for which was denied), but that would be no more valid than the positive examples. For that matter, I could give you several dozen examples of failure of 9mm, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP bullets. None of these examples prove anything.

Proof is a lot harder to get your hands on. People like Marshall & Sanow tried, with all good intentions as far as I am concerned, to prove which ammo works well in gunfights with their One-Shot Stop data. They've been vilified in the press, on the internet, and in real life for being "unscientific". I'm not convinced their results are all that bad, as time goes by, because their results generally trend well with proven ballistic performance in gelatin (with some glaring and obvious exceptions) and with accumulated data from OIS's in other databases.

The reason I and others are so confident of the value of the best ammunition in the standard service calibers (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP, and to a lesser extent 38 Special and 357 Magnum, 41 Magnum, and 44 Special/Magnum) is that they all meet the FBI gelatin testing requirements, but also that real-world OIS results tend to prove that these bullets perform as expected in real shootings, and bullets that fail to meet the FBI standards tend to perform less effectively in real shootings.

You can't "prove" these data. You can only look at trends over time. And most of the real world data is virtually impossible for a non-professional with a LOT of goodwill in the industry to even get a look at, let alone spend time analyzing. There are a lot of good and bad reasons for that. For example, I am told that there is a database somewhere in California with more than 14,000 shootings detailed in it. I've talked to 2 industry professionals who have seen it and used it. But the chances I will ever see it or use it, even with my credentials, is infinitesimal. The FBI has tens of thousands of gelatin tests on file, and while you might get your hands on some of it that's leaked out here and there, it's all summary information and not raw data.

This is why I've had to back off from my original post's assertions. A lot of people are willing to talk to me in general terms, but that's about it. Getting access to bench data is relatively easy, and I've got some data coming from contacts in two ammunition companies; getting people who do ammunition evaluations for a living and advise the Pentagon and other major players to talk about the 5.7mm FN is harder, and I've got a couple of them to at least comment in a general sense, but none of them are willing to go on record and none of them will share with me any specific details of any shootings. Yet. I'm still working on that. The third level of research, i.e., interviewing SWAT and SF people who've used the FN round in multiple engagements, I'm working on, and while I've been given hints that solid information may be forthcoming, nothing has come out yet, and again, nobody wants to speak on the record.

Let's just say this: the discussion that has blossomed out of my original post, which I typed out off the cuff in a moment of pique, has really impressed me. I'm genuinely interested in learning whether the 5.7mm round is the tactical weiner-dog many people say it is, or whether it's a much better round than its reputation to date. Either way, it's a worthy investigation.

I've recently started writing again, and I've contacted a couple of editors I know about this topic and one or two others. If I get the green light from one of them, I expect this will make a whale of a magazine article. We shall see.


"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
BP-B2

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,264
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,264
Thanks for providing an articulate and fresh perspective smile I'll be very curious to see such an article smile

I deal with enough statistics to know that in complex processes, variations occur, and absolutes are rare. The .357 magnum almost always stops fights, but once in a while, it doesn't. 9mm +P, good .40, and good .45 ACP loads do most of the time - but occasionally they don't. Marshall and Sanow tried to come up with some clean percentages to rate ammo, and their results are controversial, but as you say, the trends are useful.


"...the designer of the .270 Ingwe cartridge!..."

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 17
B
New Member
Offline
New Member
B
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 17
Originally Posted by DocRocket
The problem we're dealing with here is not that the 5.7mm doesn't perform as well as some other pistol calibers, it's that the fans of the round will not be convinced of its underwhelming performance by whatever evidence that's been put up here and elsewhere.

That "evidence" consists of internet hearsay and obsolete papers written about outdated ammunition. You haven't even made a case against the SS190 (which dates back to the last century), let alone EA's current 5.7x28mm loads.



Originally Posted by DocRocket
You can't "prove" these data. You can only look at trends over time.

Indeed, and the trend is that the 5.7x28mm is generally effective; that trend was established by dozens upon dozens of verifiable shootings with it (the U.S. police shootings make up a small portion of the total number, as I've made clear from the beginning).

No one has been trying to establish a "one shot stop percentage" or "effectiveness rating" for the caliber, ala Marshall & Sanow. The simple fact is that the caliber has been generally effective, just like the common pistol calibers.



Originally Posted by DocRocket
I'm genuinely interested in learning whether the 5.7mm round is the tactical weiner-dog many people say it is, or whether it's a much better round than its reputation to date.

On the contrary, you've been actively fishing for "ammo" that supports your original assertion in the OP:

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=92823

Quote: "These guys have drunk deeply of the 5.7mm kool-aid, and nothing short of nuclear warhead class information is going to shut them up." (11/19/11)

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 923
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 923
No, I'm not an internet "ninja" as you call me. I'm just a guy. I've got a PS90 and I like it. I love it, actually. And guess what? Believe it or not, my neighbor really is SS. He's not "ex", he's active. And he carries the P90 on occasions, depending on the assignment. I know he really likes it, and I've only heard him speak good things about it. I guess he's also had a drink of the "kool-aid?"

If you ask guys on an M4carbine forum about the 5.7, what kind of information do you think you'll get back?

Likewise, if you ask guys on a 5.7 forum about the cartridge, what do you think they'll tell you?

Last edited by dryflyelk; 11/23/11.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 923
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 923
Also, I found your website through a little digging. I have no doubt that you have forgotten more about ballistics than I'll ever learn in my lifetime. If you do find good information, I really would like to hear it.

It just seems like you're pulling from the "it worthless!" side and BT927 is championing the "it's the best!" side. BT927 may have a vested interest (elite ammo guy?) and it seems you have a preconceived bias. I'm sure the truth lies in the middle.


IC B2

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
D
Campfire Ranger
OP Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
Actually, I've read a bunch of stuff on a bunch of sites about the 5.7mm since this thread started, and like I said earlier I'm intrigued. Am I biased? Probably, but who isn't? Am I open to having my mind changed? Absolutely.

Yes, I've asked for input at sites like M4carbine.net where anybody can log in(no answers of any value yet, as it happens) but also a few other sites where it's not possible to log on unless you've BTDT. I'll get some good information in time, and I'll do the best I can to be as unbiased as possible as it comes in.


"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 16,000
R
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 16,000
I have seen a number of references in this thread to the military using this itty bitty caliber. From my perspective small diameter ammo requires high performance bullets.
Military is limited, at least in the non specialty branches to ball ammo. Thus it reminds me of a .22
Hard for me to think it would ever be wide spread in the military


THE BIRTH PLACE OF GERONIMO
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,202
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,202
Here is my take on caliber choice, any caliber choice.

If you have a firearm that you are confident in and can put shots on target accurately while under stress, then that is the firearm you should use. All the ballistic gelatin in the world shouldn't sway your opinion. I'd rather be armed with a 22lr that I can trust than some super boomer that makes me flinch at the mere thought of pulling the trigger. Go with what works for you. In the end, isn't that the most important factor - confidence and accuracy - that will tip the scales in your favor?

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
Originally Posted by RoninPhx
I have seen a number of references in this thread to the military using this itty bitty caliber. From my perspective small diameter ammo requires high performance bullets.
Military is limited, at least in the non specialty branches to ball ammo. Thus it reminds me of a .22
Hard for me to think it would ever be wide spread in the military




That is not true today, the Marine Corp purchased 2 million rounds of open tip ammo to issue to their troops a year or so ago



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 18,881
E
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
E
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 18,881
Quite so. And that's the big reason why I consider the 5.7 a choice for some people under some circumstances.
It's a very light gun for people who refuse to carry heavier ones. More important, I can shoot it alot better than I can anything else even remotely close to that weight.
It's 20 rd. magazine is worth having as well. E

IC B3

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,933
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,933
Boy you guys are going at it,,, I'm not a ballistics expert, and I have not shot anybody with a handgun,, but I have shot alot of people sized animals with handguns, from large dogs, deer and wild hogs up to medium bears. 22lr, 22wmr, .40sw, .45auto, 357mag and 10mm, were all the cals used and actually preferred in that order. For killing the 10mm glock will be my choice from now till something better comes along,, the 5.7 seems like a great round where you need alot of rounds down range well controlled and a on target, perhaps where a single or multiple wound is enough to stop an attacker, or you want to zip a small hole through body armor, people after all are easier to drop than any of the above animals,

As far as the 20 round mags of the 5.7, I really don't see that as an advantage unless you are in an extended firefight with limited mags,and the people that are heading into those fights usually have plenty of mags on hand, and the Glock 20 and 29 both take a 15 round mag in 10mm,,,, sure the larger round is heavier and kicks harder,,, on both ends as well. If Glock would just make a 10mm carbine that used the same mags as my mod 20 and 29 I could die gun happy,,,,

OK you guys get back at it,,,,,,


Location Western NC,
after alot of other places
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 17,213
Campfire Ranger
Online Content
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 17,213
Originally Posted by Eremicus
First of all, this is the handgun forum, not the "machine gun" forum.
Second, the 5.7 round was designed to shoot through body armor from a handgun. To my knowledge, no 9mm round does that from a handgun.
3rd, try shooting the so called 5.7 FMJ, non expanding, underloaded, practice round into a simple 2.5 gallon jug of water. Then try it with any 115-124 gr. FMJ 9mm round. The results aren't even remotely close. So believe whatever you want. E




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sh2gPz-KdQ



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXmQbX4VJYo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4w8PFFP67U

Just a little interesting fun video.


https://thehandloadinglog.wordpress.com
μολὼν λαβέ

"Weatherby was too long so I nicknamed it "Bee""
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
W
New Member
Offline
New Member
W
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
^^ I assume you're demonstrating standard handgun calibers (9mm, .45ACP) do not penetrate the CRISAT armor as evident in the videos. There is a fair amount of blunt force trauma.


DocRocket, if you are who you seem to be (by linking these posts over here to those over at m4carbine), you and Doctor Roberts certainly don't sound like friends and or Colleagues for that matter, unless on the assertion that you both belong to the same gun forum, and have exchanged PMs with each other.

Regardless of that fact, what intrigues me about this entire debate is, all you find against the 5.7x28mm caliber use refers to the P90, and snippets of articles written xx years ago. Yet Doc Roberts, will certainly post gel tests of common calibers and other testings on the internet. Why doesn't he post testings of the 5.7x28mm failures? Even if some of the testing were classified, a man of such stature, could easily do open testing on this caliber as he has done so on other calibers.

People who I know that carry the FSN, certaily don't carry ball (ss190) ammunition. It is what it is, ball ammunition. Designed for penetration, and mimimal deformation.

I found one youtube collection of calibrated gel tests with the 5.7x28mm when used in both an AR57, and a FiveSeveN Pistol. His tests include SS190. He seems to have no issues reaching minimum penetration depths from the handgun. Remember penetration is above expansion, and shot placement above those two.


Last edited by whitepaper; 12/13/11.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,324
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,324
The limit of pressure with most rimless cartridges is loose primer pockets. The 6mmBR class has primer piercing as a limit, as do many rimmed cases.

The weakest cartridge case head hall of shame:
1) 10mm has .334" extractor groove -.132" pocket/2 = .101" wall
2) 5.7mm has .254" extractor groove - .123" pocket/2 = .0655" wall
3) 30 carbine has .304" extractor groove - .123" pocket/2 = .0905" wall
3) 25acp has .247" extractor groove - .123" pocket /2 = .062" wall

The reason the shame is not in order of wall thickness is because the shame is proportional to case cross section area divided by wall area.


There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 25
S
Campfire Greenhorn
Offline
Campfire Greenhorn
S
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 25
Caliber wars are a waste of time. So is all the misinformation in this thread. What is most important is YOUR ability with YOUR handgun. Can't hit a broad side of a barn with a .45 - then it's not the gun for you. Same with the 9mm, .357, .40 Cal, 357 Sig, .......

Fact of the matter is that the FiveseveN can and does the job necessary if used properly. Same for the .45 Cal.

Use what works for you and leave it at that. A good shot with a puny .22 Short is better than a missed shot with a .50 BMG.

FOR THE RECORD: I own lots of handguns and yes the FiveseveN is one of them. I load for lots of handguns/rifles and yes the FiveseveN, PS90 SBR, and PS90 are three of them. You can't compare dumbed down 5.7 ammo (as required by the ATF because of it's penetration potential - if you don't believe me just compare SS195LF white box to the current blue box stuff) to optimum loaded .45 Cal ammo vs. Elite stuff. Apples and oranges and bananas. Both of these guns have their uses and both have good and bad points. Bottom line: Use what works for you because one good shot placed is better than 5 missed shots anyday, anytime, in any occurance.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
D
Campfire Ranger
OP Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
whitepaper: first off, thanks for posting the youtube link.

Second thing: I see this is your first post, which suggests that you've come here to make your case after hearing about it from a friend. Welcome to the 'Fire; but please don't presume you know me, or the people I know, by your reading of posts here or elsewhere. Draw whatever conclusions you care to but don't expect me to respond to your speculation.

If you have been reading this thread carefully, you will have read my post several weeks ago in which I expressed my sincere regret for having started this thread without sufficient evidence in hand to prove a point, one way or another. You will have further read that I am in the process of an in-depth research project which will prove to me (if no one else) whether the 5.7x28 cartridge is a suitable one for self-defense and LE/military use.

As for the video link posted: thanks, again. But I will reiterate comments I made about these "balllistic research" videos on a different thread. The videos are interesting, and they are to some degree entertaining, but they should not be taken as "proof" of anything. The gelatin blocks were shot at too high a temperature, the placement of denim was not according to protocol, and so forth.

This is not to say there isn't useful information in the videos. Since you didn't take the time to summarize the results (which would save a lot of time on the part of readers of this forum, next time you want to post video as "proof", do us a kindness and summarize the data so those who don't have the time or inclination to sit through 25 minutes of video can review the information).

So, summarizing the video results:

1. All rounds were chronographed 5 times.
2. All rounds were tested in gelatin only 3 times (7 less than the minimum number required for validity in most test protocols).
3. Protector bullets all fragmented dramatically. Fragments penetrated 11" to 14".
4. SS190 bullets all penetrated 14" to 15+", and did not fragment.
5. SS197 bullets exhibited dramatic fragmentation again, with fragments penetrating 14-18".
6. S5 bullets did not fragment, and penetrated 16-18".
7. S4M bullets (3 of 4 test shots were shot through denim, unlike the other tests, so comparison to the other tests is really not possible) penetrated 11-15", without fragmentation.

IF, and it is a big IF, the 3-shot tests truly represented the manner in which the ammunition will and should perform in real shootings, IMHO none of these rounds would be acceptable for LE/military use.

Two of the five rounds tested demonstrated fragmentation into many small pieces, very much like a varmint bullet. Real world use has shown that varmint bullets work well on varmints, but work poorly on armed felons, which is why all LE ammunition for the past 25 years has been designed to hold together so that the greatest proportion of the bullet's mass penetrates the most deeply. A bullet that penetrates through armor and then dissipates its force in 100+ pieces thereafter isn't going to get the job done.

Three of the five rounds presented did not fragment, but they did not expand, either, nor did they fragment into 2 or 3 large pieces. I have done analysis on several LE shootings where failure of bullets (5.56 caliber) to expand/fragment has been a major contributing factor to the failure of said rounds to stop the violent actions of the felon receiving those bullets.

In sum, these videos show me bullets/ammo that I would not care to take into combat myself.

But I am continuing my research and will report findings when they are ready. In the meantime, as I stated before, I have withdrawn any general criticisms I may have made against the 5.7mm round. Specifics will tell the tale soon enough.

Last edited by DocRocket; 12/18/11. Reason: corrected the comment on the S4M demonstration

"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
D
Campfire Ranger
OP Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,005
Originally Posted by Savage_The_Barbarian
What is most important is YOUR ability with YOUR handgun. Can't hit a broad side of a barn with a .45 - then it's not the gun for you. Same with the 9mm, .357, .40 Cal, 357 Sig, .......


Thanks for posting that, I agree completely. My only caveat would be that if you're using YOUR handgun in a defensive/offensive scenario, YOUR handgun should be chambered in one of the standard service calibers and loaded with proven effective ammunition.

Originally Posted by Savage_The_Barbarian
Bottom line... one good shot placed is better than 5 missed shots anyday, anytime, in any occurance.


Better than 100 missed shots. Or 1000 missed shots. You can't miss fast enough to win in a gunfight.


"I'm gonna have to science the schit out of this." Mark Watney, Sol 59, Mars
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
W
New Member
Offline
New Member
W
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by DocRocket
whitepaper: first off, thanks for posting the youtube link.
As for the video link posted: thanks, again. But I will reiterate comments I made about these "balllistic research" videos on a different thread. The videos are interesting, and they are to some degree entertaining, but they should not be taken as "proof" of anything. The gelatin blocks were shot at too high a temperature, the placement of denim was not according to protocol, and so forth.


You can deduce that the temperature of those blocks were too high, just from looking at them? protocol calls that they be stored at 39.x *F, and shot within 20 minutes of removing. BB calibration was to spec.


Originally Posted by DocRocket

This is not to say there isn't useful information in the videos. Since you didn't take the time to summarize the results (which would save a lot of time on the part of readers of this forum, next time you want to post video as "proof", do us a kindness and summarize the data so those who don't have the time or inclination to sit through 25 minutes of video can review the information).


Sorry, I left the video as a tool in aiding further education. If you're too lazy to watch all of the videos to further your education/knowledge (as you were the one who originally claim this round is a complete failure), that's your own boat to float. Last I checked, when handed a text book, you don't get a summarized paper with it.

Originally Posted by DocRocket
So, summarizing the video results:

1. All rounds were chronographed 5 times.
2. All rounds were tested in gelatin only 3 times (7 less than the minimum number required for validity in most test protocols).
3. Protector bullets all fragmented dramatically. Fragments penetrated 11" to 14".
4. SS190 bullets all penetrated 14" to 15+", and did not fragment.
5. SS197 bullets exhibited dramatic fragmentation again, with fragments penetrating 14-18".
6. S5 bullets did not fragment, and penetrated 16-18".
7. S4M bullets (shot through denim, unlike the other tests, so comparison to the other tests is not valid) penetrated 11-15", without fragmentation.

IF, and it is a big IF, the 3-shot tests truly represented the manner in which the ammunition will and should perform in real shootings, IMHO none of these rounds would be acceptable for LE/military use.
You seem to be quite the picker and chooser of information. FBI mandated protocol calls for anywhere from 12-15" as more than enough penetration, and I do believe even your "friend" Doc Roberts, says 18" is the maximum amount of desired penetration. Although FBI protocol, does not define maximum. You're summary of the S4 is incorrect, as they took shots sans denim.

So you have rounds tested that all meet recommended penetration depths, but you think they lack merit for acceptable LE use? I'm sure the maker of that video would gladly test all rounds again with all protocols (Steel, Glass, the "proper" denim cover), but individuals taking the time to perform this tests, pay for this out of pocket..

Originally Posted by DocRocket
Two of the five rounds tested demonstrated fragmentation into many small pieces, very much like a varmint bullet. Real world use has shown that varmint bullets work well on varmints, but work poorly on armed felons, which is why all LE ammunition for the past 25 years has been designed to hold together so that the greatest proportion of the bullet's mass penetrates the most deeply. A bullet that penetrates through armor and then dissipates its force in 100+ pieces thereafter isn't going to get the job done.

Three of the five rounds presented did not fragment, but they did not expand, either, nor did they fragment into 2 or 3 large pieces. I have done analysis on several LE shootings where failure of bullets (5.56 caliber) to expand/fragment has been a major contributing factor to the failure of said rounds to stop the violent actions of the felon receiving those bullets.




Wait you just said fragmentation from above was bad, but now it's okay. Remember the 5.7x28mm is not a typical pistol round that relies on large expansion. Typically mimics rifle rounds, in terms of yawing, fragmentation and expansion. 5.56x45mm, 75gr BTHP/WC T2 which is a highly regarded SD round in the AR platform exhbits extreme amounts of fragmentation. Must be a varmit bullet.. [Linked Image]


The way I see it, is there seems to be quite a few examples of this cartridge being proven in the pistol plaform. Someone can easily pull up the 5+ pages of all the drug cartels using it. What have we seen over the past 5yrs or so from the camp that opposes it? Not a single shred of any analysis done on the round. It's the same copy/paste articles, that put tidbits of information together. Like the referenced 9mm HP vs the discontinued SS90 round. Where are the gel tests of this plaftform showing it's failures. Never seen any. Then again I'm not LE, so apparently we're not allowed to see just these results from just this caliber, but every other caliber is free for us to see the analysis..

Last edited by whitepaper; 12/18/11.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,324
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,324
[Linked Image]

I don't think talk about the 5.7 is going to go away, I saw cops on TV complaining about how it was meant to go through body armor.

I would put it in the same category as "Black Talon".

It has permanently broken into the lexicon of trivial pursuit for guns.


There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. -Ernest Hemingway
The man who makes no mistakes does not usually make anything.-- Edward John Phelps
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812



Martin Fackler has stated that 12" penetration is minimum, not more than enough



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Page 7 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
404 members (007FJ, 1lesfox, 1lessdog, 06hunter59, 01Foreman400, 10Glocks, 38 invisible), 2,363 guests, and 976 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,731
Posts18,400,902
Members73,822
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.098s Queries: 15 (0.005s) Memory: 0.9278 MB (Peak: 1.1220 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 11:57:55 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS