A test of thrusting and cutting strikes against a pig carcass with several different sword styles including European long sword, rapier, and a Japanese tachi. As would be expected, the European swords excelled at thrusting attacks and the tachi excelled at cutting, but the European swords (other than the rapier, of course) did very well at the cutting as well.
VIDEO: "Medieval swords are WAY MORE DEADLY than you think - TESTED"
Shadiversity (28 min.)
The other day, Anonymous Conservative posted this photograph of Charlie Kirk right before he was shot and at the instant the bullet impacted him in the neck. You can see the neck bulge out both in the front and at the back from the temporary stretch cavity.
You can get an idea of what happened by watching the video below, testing 110 grain VMax bullets from .300 BLK. I've read that the .300 BLK at a short distance like this is approximately what you would see from the same bullet shot from .308 at 100 to 150 yards. A .30-06 could have a bit more velocity depending on the load.
VIDEO: "Varmint Bullets For Defense? .300AAC 110gr V-Max gel test"
ARFCOM News (4 min.)
This second test is of a 125 grain SST shot from a .308 at a short distance. Note that relatively little penetration.
VIDEO: ".308 Win - Hornady SST 125 gr: AR-10 gel test 5/27/24"
Shasta Bean (2 min.)
This third test is of a bonded 180 grain bullet shot from a .30-06 into a gel block at 100 yards.
VIDEO: "DANGEROUS!! 30-06 Norma Bondstrike 180gr Ammo Test"
Mason Leather Outdoors (6 min.)
The ATF report on the bullet recovered from Kirk's body hasn't been released, so it may turn out that I'm completely wrong. But from what little we know, I suspect that the Kirk was shot with a light weight varmint type bullet that expanded quickly and fragmented when it struck bone, which would explain the lack of penetration everyone obsesses over.
This video compares the Federal Punch in .22 LR against a Federal Personal Defense in .38 Special +P, both out of snub nosed revolvers. Shots were initially taken into clear ballistic gel and then followed up with a heavy clothing barrier and a fiber board insert to simulate ribs. Surprisingly, the .22 Punch penetrated around 14"--just shy of the penetration depth of the .38 Special. This isn't an argument that the .22 will cause as much damage as the .38, but that the .22 Punch has much better penetration than other .22 LR out of a snub nosed revolver, and will reach the recommended FBI penetration depth against those barriers.
VIDEO: "Is a .22 LR Snub Nose Revolver Viable for Self Defense? This Ammo is a Game Changer! - Federal Punch" - Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (17 min.)
With how poorly standard pressure .38 Special hollow points generally perform out of a snub-nosed revolver, you might be wondering how inexpensive lead round nose works. This video tests that out, as well as some .32 S&W Long.
VIDEO: "Is Lead Round Nose Any Good for Defense in a Snub? Sellier & Bellot .38 Special VS .32 Long Gel Test" - Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (20 minutes).
A good video on why rifles will sometimes have far less penetration than you might think, and some rifles that shouldn't have all that much penetration do. The video is to address why the .30-06 used to shoot Charlie Kirk didn't blow through his spine like someone might expect whose only experience is using full power loads with heavy bullets against deer and elk, but also compares other bullets and other calibers, so it has broader application than just Kirk's assassination.
VIDEO: "When Rifles Don't Penetrate (And Why)"
TII Armory (13 min.)
To me, this video speaks more about the design of the Federal Punch than anything else. And the host--Sam--does speak highly of his confidence in Federal hollow points whether it be the HST or the Punch. What surprised me is that the velocity of the .44 Special was under 800 fps and it still had good expansion, even through the cloth barrier and fiber board. In any event, the comparison between the two resulted in the .44 Special having a final expanded diameter larger than the 9mm, but the 9mm had more penetration.
VIDEO: "Oldschool Fightstopper VS Modern Standard! .44 Special vs 9mm - Federal Punch - Ballistic Gel Test" - Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (18 min.)
In interesting 2022 article from Guns & Ammo comparing the 7 mm Remington Magnum against the .270 Winchester on a safari to Africa. The impetus for this article was a piece written in the 1980s by former Guns & Ammo Hunting Editor Jon Sundra comparing the two and concluding that the 7 mm Rem. Mag. was clearly superior. The author here--Eric Poole--wanting to see if modern bullet designs made any difference. The rest of the article recounts the different animals he shot with the two calibers and some of the bullets used. And while both performed well, his conclusion was ultimately the same as Sundra's: the 7 mm was the better hunting cartridge because the additional power resulted in higher velocities (and, therefore, a flatter trajectory) and more decisive wounding. And, as a side note, the author relates what a springbok’s tail smells like. So you get a bit of a safari hunting story mixed with some discussion of bullets and ballistics.
This is a good test as the author uses the same pistols (other than caliber) and the same brand and type of ammo (Federal HST in this case) to compare the .40 S&W and 9mm +P. Obviously, these results are only for the Federal HST and might be different for other ammo. Notably, the Federal HST was picked for the test because it is what the host would recommend for carry.
The results were interesting. Both the 9mm and .40 S&W had excellent expansion with the longer barreled pistols, giving the win to the .40 S&W: it started larger than the 9mm and so, fully expanded, it was still larger than the 9mm, and the penetration was basically the same. But the lower velocity out of the shorter barrel weighed against the .40 S&W such that the 9mm performed better both as to expansion and penetration when using the compact pistols.
The takeaway, then, was that with this ammunition, the 9mm was a better choice out of a compact pistol while the .40 S&W would be the better option for a full sized pistol. Selecting a round is about more than just how well it works in a ballistic test, though. One of the reasons 9mm has been so successful is that it hits a sweet spot balancing size, recoil, and effectiveness.
VIDEO: "As a Ballistic Tester - The 9mm and .40 S&W Ammo I Would Recommend - Worth Going up to .40 S&W?" -- Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (18 min.)
The host of Sam Gun Revolver Ballistics tells us what he really thinks of the Hornady Critical Duty load which is used by the FBI and compares it against his personal favorite defense load: the Federal HST in .40 S&W. He tests the two head-to-head in a heavy clothing gel test as well as shooting through a barrier designed to mimic a car door. Note that he also uses fiber board after the first few inches of ballistic gel to account for having to go through ribs, so there is an additional barrier built into his tests.
Spoiler: the .40 S&W load had a larger wound channel and expanded better than the 9mm load. However, because of its greater expansion, it did not penetrate as far as the 9mm--in fact, it was a few inches shorter. Sam thought this was a clear win for the .40 S&W but I'm not so sure. For the car door barrier test, the two had almost identical performance so that was a wash.
However, Sam brought up a good point--and one that has informed my choice of a 9mm defensive load--which is that as civilians the hard barrier penetration (such as through a car door) is probably less important to us than the performance against a bad guy wearing heavy clothing.
Overall, I don't think carrying a larger gun with more recoil is worth the marginal extra performance. But that's me. What do you think?
VIDEO: "The Current 9mm+P FBI Load is Junk - What Caliber/Ammo I would Have Picked Instead - Ballistic Test" - Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (23 min.)
So how good is the .300 BLK out for deer hunting? I have often heard the 7.62x39 compared favorably to the .30-30 from a ballistic point of view; and the .300 BLK is supposed to have similar ballistics to the 7.62x39. But how about the .300 BLK compared directly to the .30-30? This is a particularly good comparison because both rounds tested use the same bullet: 150 grain Federal Powershok. The gel blocks were shot at 100 yards and 30 yards. The .30-30 has slightly better performance based on the expansion, but it is not as great as you would think and may be a result of the barrel lengths: the .30-30 was shot from a 20-inch barrel while the .300 BLK was shot from a 16-inch barrel.
VIDEO: "30-30 and 300 BLK in Ballistic Gel. 100 yards and 30 yards"
Little River Outdoorsman (8 min.)
The Glaser Safety Slug is a frangible projectile consisting of compressed bird shot in a copper jacket with a polymer tip. The idea was to produce a projectile that would have little or no penetration through sheet rock (dry wall) or sheet metal. According to the manufacturer, "[t]he Glaser Safety Slug® was designed in 1974 in response to the possibility of having to use a handgun on an airplane by the Sky Marshals. The concerns at that time were over penetration on soft tissue and ricochets on hard surfaces and possible excess penetration."
There are two varieties of the Safety Slug: the blue tip version which uses compressed #12 bird shot and the "silver" (actually grey colored) version that uses a #6 bird shot and intended to give slightly better penetration. According to the manufacturer, CorBon, its test of the rounds "achieved soft tissue penetration of 5-7″ with the Glaser® Blue and 6-8″ with Glaser® Silver, with the bullet completely fragmented inside the gelatin." CorBon also claims that the projectiles "will begin to breakup when encountering hard surfaces to minimize ricochet and danger to people in adjacent rooms and structures." When I was younger and my wife and I were still living in apartments, I had my "nightstand gun" loaded with several rounds of the Glaser blue rounds for this very reason. (The remainder of the rounds were regular hollow point, with my reasoning being that if the Glaser did not stop an assailant, I would have worked my way down to the standard self-defense rounds).
At that time, I could only find them sold in 6-round blister packs, but it appears that CorBon is now selling them in 20-round boxes, and the price per round is actually much cheaper. If I remember correctly, when I bought mine in the early-1990s, they were basically $2 or $2.50 per round--an exorbitant amount for the time--but the price now works out to be $1.30/round.
It used to be offered in quite a few calibers. However, in looking at the manufacturer's website, it only lists 9mm Luger (9x19mm) and 9mm Makarov (9x18mm). Also, they currently only list the blue versions for sale.
In the tests below using handguns with 3" and 4.5" barrels, shooting Glaser blue through denim into a clear ballistic gelatin, the penetration was 6.5" from both weapons with the energy dump being fairly quick--i.e., exactly as advertised. This obviously does not meet the FBI standards, but that is not what the rounds are intended to do. I would expect that the Glaser silver rounds (if you can find any) would have slightly better penetration.
VIDEO: "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet!...9MM +P CorBon Glaser Safety Slug Ballistic Gel AMMO Test & Review!"--Tools&Targets (15 min.)
Tools & Targets puts two Federal Punch offerings up against each other in this new test: the .380 Punch ammo versus the 9 mm Punch ammo. The ammo he is using both feature nickel plated cases, but he notes that some are just plain brass jackets, the latter being all I've been finding in my neck of the woods. The test results are sort of what you would expect: excellent penetration and expansion from the 9 mm and adequate penetration and marginal expansion from the .380 (apparently a combination of the nose being plugged by the denim and the bullet turning sideways after hitting the gel).
The 9mm Federal Punch loads are intended for self-defense and not law enforcement, so they are not going to perform as well against hard barriers as loads specifically developed for law enforcement, which is fine for me. Particularly since a box of 20 of the 9mm Punch retails for around $17 in my area, versus $30 to $35 for most self-defense/law enforcement ammo.
VIDEO: "9MM VS .380!...Federal Punch Self-Defense AMMO Ballistic Gel Test!"
Tools&Targets (12 min.)
Federal has apparently released an HST personal defense (not bear defense) round in .44 Magnum. The round is advertised as being slightly less powerful than most .44 Magnum loads in order to facilitate faster follow up shots. The tests show that it indeed has less recoil than full power .44 Magnum loads, but it is still definitely a .44 Magnum based on velocity and the damage to the gel blocks. The producer of this video also tested it side-by-side with the Federal HST .45 ACP +P load as a comparison since the two loads use the same weight bullet. The .45 ACP round did very good, but the .44 Magnum was definitely more powerful which shows up in expansion even when shooting into the target with the heavy clothing and the fiber board inserts (to simulate bone).
VIDEO: "NEW Federal HST .44 Mag! Finally a .44 Mag Ammo for CCW! Federal HST .44 Mag VS .45 ACP+P - Gel Test"
Gun Sam Revolver Ballistics (14 min.)
Greg Elifritz has posted his weekly Weekend Knowledge Dump. Some of the articles and videos that caught my attention this week are:
Greg links to more stuff as well, so be sure to check it out.
Some articles that have caught my attention:
The third mechanism is injury to the brain. This will almost always result in instant incapacitation if the brain itself is penetrated and damaged. It is a much larger target than the cervical spine. It is armored, but the thickness of the skull varies by location.
And nearly every gun magazine article I’ve read—and most instructors— get the fundamentals wrong.
So what's the problem? The primary is what the author calls the "Myth of the Medulla": that you must strike the medulla for a "no reflex" shot where the person instantly drops like a sack of potatoes without being able to do more. But as the author relates:
I have searched the medical literature back to 1900 looking at gunshot wounds that penetrated the skull and did not result in immediate incapacitation. They are quite rare and typically involve underpowered handgun rounds or truly miraculous suicide attempts with a rifle. These rare cases involve a bullet that damages the edges of the brain (usually the frontal or temporal lobe) or that passes between the two hemispheres of the brain.
Moreover, he recommends trying to target the medulla, in any event, because it is small and, commensurate with its importance, enclosed in the most heavily armored portion of the skull.
The thickest, toughest bones of the skull are those near the eyes and around the base of the brain. A round aimed at middle face is directed at the part of the skull that is the most difficult to penetrate. With a full-frontal shot, those bones can readily deflect projectiles, especially handgun rounds.
This is also exactly where most have been taught to aim: the triangle formed by the eyes joined to the nose. The brainstem is narrow and also changes position every time the head moves and turns, just like the cervical spinal cord. If you aim at the nose when the head is turned even slightly to the side, the straight-line path will miss the medulla and brainstem.
So where to aim if shooting for the brain? The author recommends a location that offers a large target and thinner bone:
Assuming a full-frontal assailant, you should aim just between and above the eyes.
From the side (assailant looking directly to your left or right), aim just above the top of the ear. For other positions, you’ll need to mentally rotate this model, thinking about the position of the brain as the head turns. The key is getting the bullet to penetrate the skull and enter the brain, not the precise brain structure that is damaged.
Having seen the brim of a baseball cap deflect pistol and rifle rounds— and even 12-gauge slugs—keep in mind that bone and other objects may deflect a perfectly aimed shot. The brain must be penetrated and damaged for the shot to be effective.
Louis Awerbuck excels at making his students think about the orientation of the threat and how this changes where you need to aim. This is also true with the head.
If the threat is looking directly at you but upward, aiming at the nose will put the bullet’s intended path through the center of the brain. If the threat is looking downward, aiming for the upper forehead would be more appropriate.
So, back to the statement in the title to this blog entry. Can we just casually shoot the homicide bomber in the face and call it good? By now, I expect you know the answer to that.
To illustrate my point, I’ll give you a real life example: I once had a guy come into my ER who had been shot by police. Four times. All four police bullets (40 S&W caliber) hit this guy in the head, so that means he had taken four “head shots”, but was still actively fighting police and had actually returned fire after receiving these wounds. Two of those shots were in the so-called “T-zone”, as it is called by some internet gunfighting “experts”.
This case illustrates the folly of thinking that any/all “head shots” are equal… there is a huge potential for variance in outcomes! Again: if your pistol bullets do not transect the brainstem, your homicide bomber may still be able to kill you.
Part of the problem with taking “head shots” is that the shape and structure of the bones of the human skull are designed (or have evolved, if you prefer) to very efficiently protect the brain. The density of the bones and the curvature of the surface work very well to deflect any missile that comes at the skull unless the angle of incidence is very close to perpendicular to the skull’s surface. Pistol bullets striking the human head at angles less than 65-75 degrees will penetrate the skin/scalp, but will often just glance off the hard, smooth bone of the skull, tunneling under the skin to exit several inches from the entry wound without penetrating the skull. This is well-documented in the trauma literature, and it’s exactly what happened with the guy I saw in my ER with 4 bullet holes in his noggin.
The other part of the problem is that if you don’t know where the brainstem is, your chances of hitting it are really, really poor. Think about it: in frontal anatomic presentation, the human head has a target area of about 325-400 cm2. The brainstem has a target area of about 25 cm2. If you think you can hit the brainstem by randomly shooting the head, your chance of hitting it is about 6-7%.
Even if we round up to be generous and say your odds are 10%, that means that your chances of being blown to smithereens by a homicide bomber in that scenario are 90%.
I’m no brain surgeon. A guy shot through the head with a .308 round should be dead. Especially dead when a quarter of his skull is missing and some funky looking stuff is seeping through the ragged remains of his head wrap. Though, as I stood next to this life less looking body while watching members of my platoon search for a 2nd guy’s tracks and blood trail and the company clerk throwing up behind me, it came very shortly as a shocking surprise just how much the body intends to live despite injuries that occur.
The man, whom our sniper team had placed a round slightly off center of his dome, lay so still and lifeless that everyone had completely disregarded him. That was until I stopped to soak in the scene about two feet to the side of him. Without warning, this man kicked his arm and leg straight up into the air and scared the fuck out of me. The company clerk threw up again. He lowered his appendages back down, kicked up once more, lowered again, and then began to snore. Of course, I called for the corpsman and our LT, cause it was some freaky shit. Doc said the dude was done; there was nothing he was going to be able to do to fix the brain soup coming out of his skull. The LT still wanted to try and treat him. Meanwhile I’m just sitting there like, “Let me pump a burst into him and put him out for good”. Doc won. He was eventually picked up by a local ambulance and taken to the town’s morgue. Doc later explained to me what had happened in terms my dumb grunt mind could grasp. Since the bullet didn’t go through the medulla oblongata or the brain stem, his autonomic responses didn’t turn off. Part of the guy’s brain was still trying to tell him to breath, to bleed, and to move (reflex).
Why is this important? Just another story about how some Iraqi dirtbag got shot, right? He still wound up dead, yes, but what happens if that man had a hostage? Or a detonation device? Yeah, you kill him, but who and what does he take with him if he can still twitch the fuck out? That’s where a simple anatomy lesson and some precision shooting can make the difference.
The revolver has advantages in certain critical areas. As one example a short barrel revolver doesn’t offer much leverage for a gun grabber who grasps the barrel during a struggle. The handle however offers a good gripping surface.
One of my Lieutenants a very experienced officer carefully honed the sides of his ramp front sight as sharp as possible in case of a gun grab. Others had a thin gold line set into the revolver sight at a carefully arrived at hold over spot for long range fire. We qualified at fifty yards in those days.
An officer using a Combat Masterpiece, Combat Magnum, or Highway Patrolman was often a very good shot at long range. Another advantage is that the revolver may be pressed into an adversary’s body and fired repeatably without jamming.
A revolver may be fired from inside a coat pocket. (Those guys in the popular press don’t tell you that your knuckles will be singed but then I don’t recommend a tactic I have not tried.) The martial ability of the revolver cannot be overrated.
A revolvers smooth rolling action helps control recoil well as the break is a surprise you don’t anticipate recoil. I am not saying the revolver always trumps an automatic, but the revolver has clear advantages in some situations.
Given human nature, and the ever-American quest to “make a buck,” price-gouging is not only the be expected, but has been witnessed in the near past, even absent scarcity.1 Any kind of localized disaster will almost certainly see severe deleterious impacts on many families, from an economic perspective. Not having to deal with “scalper” prices on essential survival items like foodstuffs, can keep those impacts from being ruinous. Recent history has illustrated that, even in the most calamitous localized disasters, the worst of the emergency—at least to the point of outside assistance beginning to arrive—is largely past within about two weeks. That doesn’t mean everything is back to normal, and peaches and rainbows, it just means additional assistance is generally available by that time. Having a plan to subsist for that two weeks—aside from the obvious black swan events like your house being buried in a mudslide, or a tornado flattening your apartment complex, or a wildfire actually turning your house, specifically, into a pile of cinders and ash—will allow you not only the ability to survive without ruination, but will also often provide the psychological and physical security buffer to allow you to be useful to your friends, family, and neighbors.
But he also warns that storing more of what you normally eat may not work, such as storing items that require a lot of water to prepare (noodles, anyone?); and your standard kitchen utensils may not be safe to use over an open fire or on a Coleman stove. So you need to review what you have and see if it all works together. Anyway, tips on putting together a survival pantry as well as thoughts on food hygiene, so be sure to read the whole thing.
The EU wants every member state to develop a 72-hour survival kit for citizens to face any new crisis that might emerge as part of its Preparedness Union Strategy which also calls for more stockpiling of essential supplies and for improved civilian-military cooperation.
The strategy unveiled on Wednesday by the European Commission includes a list of 30 concrete actions it says EU member states need to take to boost their preparedness against potential future crises ranging from natural disasters and industrial accidents to attacks by malicious actors in the cyber or military domains.
So last week I posted a link to a video from the YouTube channel Tools & Targets comparing standard pressure 9mm HST versus standard pressure 9mm Gold Dot. The Gold Dot didn't fare too well. Tools & Targets did a follow up video comparing +P HST loads versus +P Gold Dot loads (marketed as their Law Enforcement or LE load) and the results were a bit different with the Gold Dot outperforming the HST, although not by much.
VIDEO: "Turnin' Up The HEAT!...+P HST vs GOLD DOT! 9MM Self-Defense AMMO Ballistic Gel Test & Review!"--Tools&Targets (12 min.)
Two primary differences. First, the HST had an average velocity of 1128 fps where as the Gold Dot was only 1087 fps. Second, and perhaps related, is that the HST had much better expansion and a bit more penetration than the Gold Dot.
VIDEO: "Let's Settle This! Which Is THE BEST?...HST vs GOLD DOT 124 Grain 9MM Ballistic Gel AMMO Test!"--Tools&Targets (12 min.)
This is a more comprehensive test than the Banana Ballistics video to which I had previously linked in that the host of this video tests a great variety of .22 LR in addition to the .21 Sharp load. But in this test, the .21 Sharp penetrated clear ballistic gelatin to roughly 50 inches with little or no disruption of the gel. Not exactly what you want in a load intended for hunting squirrels or rabbits. Conversely, the .22 LR rounds stayed in the first block and appeared to cause considerably more damage relative to the .21 Sharp. I guess the .21 Sharp is intended for those jurisdictions prohibiting the use of lead ammo, but it seems a poor substitute for .22 LR from what I'm seeing.
VIDEO: " .21 SHARP vs .22 Long Rifle GEL TEST ( VERY Surprising Results! )"
The Turkey's Opinion
Sam does his normal velocity and practical accuracy tests, but the focus of his discussion are the ballistic tests where he tries to demonstrate the advantage to a .45's greater mass and, therefore, momentum, when it comes to penetration.
VIDEO: "The .45 ACP is Better than the 9mm and that's NO Fudlore"
Gun Sam _Revolver Aficionado (28 min.)
