That sounds reasonable.

Quote from: Raggedyman on May 14 2013 01:03:34 PM MDTDr. Roberts tells us that calibrated ordnance gelatin is remarkably consistent with human tissue, except for bone,...

The only type of human tissue it is meant to represent is muscle.  And even that they derived via swine.  Bottomline is, at best, the calibrated ordnance gelatin will only give an idea of bullet penetration depth in muscle and only muscle, and even that's not exact.  I wonder how much bullet penetration depth varies between penetrating either red or white muscle?  Not that that would give us any meaningful data toward terminal ballistics.

What the gel excels for is simply a consistent medium to test any available bullet in for a consistent comparison to any other available bullet.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I can't compare pistol bullets and the damage they do inside a human, but after years of hunting deer with a .270, my bullet of choice is a bullet that breaks up, never leaves an exit and destroys the shoulder you hit it on.  My ex BIL used a .270 that would mushroom well, never destroy meat, and ALWAYS exited the other side.  My deer 9 times out of ten dropped dead in their tracks with a good boiler room shot.  His usually ran off 50-100 yards before dying.

Taking that to pistol bullets, for personal defense I will take a pistol bullet that tranfers its energy almost immediately and fragments in short order.  More wound channels, more hydrostatic shock.  I am not looking for penetration, it's a 10mm, it WILL get inside a human and do massive damage even if it doesn't penetrate 14 inches.  I want a bullet that dumps all of it's energy in the first few inches so all those nice soft tissues turn to mush, then get shredded by copper and lead fragments while the bulk of the bullet keeps plowing.

With all due respect bullets at handgun velocities behave very different than rifle velocities.
Hydrostatic shock does not come into play very much if at all and you need to penetration.
The velocity and energy just aren't there.

Insufficient penetration in 10mm or any other service handgun can get you killed.

What are handgun velocities and what are rifle velocities?  Some handguns launch bullets at over 2000 FPS and some rifle loads won't get you to 2000 FPS, to use a loose number.

More energy does do more damage assuming the same bullet construction is being compared, period.  The difference between 450 ft-lbs and 700 ft-lbs is easily noticeable whether shooting deer or water filled jugs.

Clarinath compared a rifle load to another rifle load using the same cartridge, with the main difference being bullet construction.  I don't see what's wrong with that even when bringing handgun rounds separately into the discussion.

I also agree with Clarinath in that I have no interest in a defense round that regularly leaves an exit wound.  But that's just my own reasoning for myself and I wouldn't tell anyone they're wrong for using a bullet that does more commonly leave an exit wound.

No question the bullet should be capable of reaching the vital organs the vast majority of the time.

I was able to get the Nosler 200gr and 180 gr Hp's shot in wet pack today even a few 135's. I am still at the land hog hunting but will post pics and data  Monday.

Sean

Sweet!  Excited to see the results.

Quote from: REDLINE on May 17 2013 12:50:36 AM MDT

Quote from: Raggedyman on May 14 2013 01:03:34 PM MDTDr. Roberts tells us that calibrated ordnance gelatin is remarkably consistent with human tissue, except for bone,...

The only type of human tissue it is meant to represent is muscle.  And even that they derived via swine.  Bottomline is, at best, the calibrated ordnance gelatin will only give an idea of bullet penetration depth in muscle and only muscle, and even that's not exact.  I wonder how much bullet penetration depth varies between penetrating either red or white muscle?  Not that that would give us any meaningful data toward terminal ballistics.

What the gel excels for is simply a consistent medium to test any available bullet in for a consistent comparison to any other available bullet.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Not quite. As I mentioned, Dr. Roberts noted a very consistent relationship between calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin tests and actual wounds in real human beings. I used to think the same thing but having read his opinions on the subject, I understand that gelatin is a fairly decent analog. Nothing is perfect and there will be some variations but it is actually a fairly decent predictor of how a bullet will perform in real tissue.

That said, my own testing could very easily be flawed. It does not take place in a lab so there is significant potential for temperature change. The media I use is gelatin and I do calibrate it with a BB but it is not 250A bloom photographer's gelatin. I only fire1-3 shots per test, whereas it is recommended to fire at least five to get a good statistical sample. I am a relatively uneducated novice so there are probably numerous other variables that could produce inaccurate results from my own tests. I do not claim that my own tests are good for anything other than VERY general information and entertainment. I am claiming that properly conducted professional tests are a reasonably good way to predict how bullets will perform in tissue.

Food for thought...I like the gel testing so don't take this wrong.  The Human body as well as animals have muscle, bone and organs...
Muscle's are fairly solid fibrous tissues-
Bones are dense harder but somewhat porous-
Organs come as solid and hollow, heart & lungs being both, liver, kidneys being solid and stomach, Blood vessels, guts, bladder being hollow type organs.

Bullets which rip into the lungs cause bleeding & force trauma to the tissues and interruption of air exchange.
Bullets hitting the heart can cause trauma to the and bleeding and may incapacitate its function.
Bullets hitting the spine can cause paralyzation or immobilization.

The hydraulic displacement and damage is usually caused by very high velocity impacts...   

Quote from: Raggedyman on May 19 2013 12:02:16 PM MDTDr. Roberts noted a very consistent relationship between calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin tests and actual wounds in real human beings.

Based on what I quoted you on the question becomes;  Noted based on what data/study/experimentation?

Eugene J. Wolberg reviewed 27 shootings that all involved the Winchester 9mm 147gr Subsonic JHP (all officer involved shootings).  He compared the penetration and expansion of those bullets in human tissue at autopsy (only shots into the torso that remained in the body for their entire penetration depth were included in this study and all shots that hit bone were eliminated from the study) to the same bullet's penetration and expansion in 10% ordnance gelatin at 4 degrees C (preparation method of the Letterman Army Institute of Research).

Penetration depth in the gel ranged from 12-14 inches.
Penetration depth in human torsos that didn't contact bone ranged from 10-17 inches.

Eugene J. Wolberg, in 1991 when he did this study, was a Senior Firearms Criminologist at the San Diego Police Crime Laboratory.  This study was published in the Journal of the International Wound Ballistics Association, of which Martin L. Fackler was the Editor-in-Chief.

You and Dr. Roberts may consider that a consistent relationship.  I don't, even beyond shots hitting any bone not being included at all and some shots being stopped early by human hide at the far end of bullet penetration depth that were included, therefore fudging the numbers even further.  As far as I'm concerned at this point we can agree to disagree, as it can be argued that any aftermath of the data can realistically be open to opinion at this point.

"The IWBA published some of Gene Wolberg's material from his study of San Diego PD officer involved shootings that compared bullet performance in calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin with the autopsy results using the same ammunition. When I last spoke with Mr. Wolberg in May of 2000, he had collected data on nearly 150 OIS incidents which showed the majority of the 9mm 147 gr bullets fired by officers had penetrated 13 to 15 inches and expanded between 0.60 to 0.62 inches in both human tissue and 10% ordnance gelatin. Several other agencies with strong, scientifically based ammunition terminal performance testing programs have conducted similar reviews of their shooting incidents with much the same results--there is an extremely strong correlation between properly conducted and interpreted 10% ordnance gelatin laboratory studies and the physiological effects of projectiles in actual shooting incidents."

- Dr. Roberts in a discussion found here: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=106470&page=5

When coping and pasting you need to beware of certain characters as that is where the past will stop.
Here are but a few that will cause an issue "  -  degree an a few other symbols

I figured it had something to do with the software parsing punctuation as code but I wasn't sure what exactly was happening. I even pasted into Notepad and re-copied it to be sure it was sanitized ASCII characters with no formatting but still had trouble.

I found (with help) the quote I was looking for. Turns out it was from Dr. Fackler, not Dr. Roberts but is nevertheless relevant.

QuoteThe test of the wound profiles validity is how accurately they portray the projectile-tissue interaction observed in shots that penetrate the human body.  Since most shots in the human body traverse various tissues, we would expect the wound profiles to vary somewhat, depending on the tissues traversed.  However, the only radical departure has been found to occur when the projectile strikes bone: this predictably deforms the bullet more than soft tissue, reducing its overall penetration depth, and sometimes altering the angle of the projectile's course. Shots traversing only soft tissues in humans have shown damage patterns of remarkably close approximation to the wound profiles.

The bullet penetration depth comparison, as well as the similarity in bullet deformation and yaw patterns, between human soft tissue and 10% ordnance gelatin have proven to be consistent and reliable.  Every time there appeared to be an inconsistency a good reason was found and when the exact circumstances were matched, the results matched.  The cases reported here comprise but a small fraction of the documented comparisons which have established 10% ordnance gelatin as a valid tissue simulant.

From "The Wound Profile & The Human Body: Damage Pattern Correlation." (Martin L Fackler, MD, Wound Ballistics Review, 1(4): 1994; 12-19)

Thanks for your help, Shadow. I think I got it figured out. Oddly, it seems to accept manual input of the characters (apostrophe, in this case) but not pasting.