7/12/2010 6:49pm, #21
7/12/2010 7:27pm, #22
7/12/2010 7:30pm, #23
7/12/2010 7:59pm, #24
1) Are one or two hundred instances, given so many variables, enough to build a true statistical profile? This turns into 30 or 40 discrete questions, if explored...
2) Are better-educated shooters likely to use better ammo (and probably be better shots), skewing the results towards a particular conclusion? Likewise, is thrift a factor possibly skewing results in the other direction?
3) Did the study enter with a potentially preconceived notion, and were data drawn (inadvertently or not) that overwhelmingly supported that conclusion?
4) Again with the variables - there are so many - but I'm not convinced that an over/under 4" barrel segmentation is detailed enough considering the wide range of firearms available in the many calibers. It's a curious distinction to draw when the data shown don't segregate by things like entry wound location or vector.
I recognize that these results are hard to get to without, ya know, basically maiming/killing a bunch of people in the name of science. But, I shudder to think that my evangelism of hollow points could possibly be based on what (without reading) I perceive as a potentially weak study - hence my interest.
7/13/2010 4:39pm, #25
I was just pointing out that particular calibers well earned reputation for ruining an otherwise healthy individual with monotonous regularity. As it has demonstrated since it's adoption in 1911, long before hollow points were even an issue.
7/13/2010 7:02pm, #26
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Kansas City
- Filipino Martial Arts
YouTube- AK-47 vs AR-15 Part 2, by Nutnfancy
Edit: There IS a difference between .223 and 5.56, but not still not enough to merit saying the 7.62 x 39 hits harder.
Last edited by Mutt; 7/13/2010 7:05pm at .
7/13/2010 11:20pm, #27
I've heard the hollow point vs. ball argument several times, from people that should be qualified to elicit an opinion on the subject. Hollow point always wins. I'm just hoping that the argument isn't based solely on Marshall / Sanow, which I'm beginning to suspect is just flawed enough to be irresponsible, even if it does come to the correct conclusion.
At any rate, my third clip (the "storage" mag) is loaded with Hydra Shoks. Here's hoping I never have to find out first-hand how good (or bad) they are.
7/13/2010 11:31pm, #28
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Krav Maga/ Judo noob
hey daddy i can make this real easy for you. Once i find another property that will let me shoot boar on it, you can go with me. You can go ahead and take down a boar or two with regular ball and I'll shoot it with JHP hunting rounds, and then compare. Then while were cleaning it you can get a nice clear view of the different wound channels and internal damage.
7/14/2010 1:58am, #29
Hollow point ammunition is "overrated" in the sense that there are many conditions that prevent it from opening as designed, which essentially turns it into a blunt-nosed FMJ equivalent.
Notice, however, that this is NOT a problem that is solved by FMJ, and that's why FMJ is still not taken seriously. JHP fixes some of FMJ's shortcomings when it works correctly (when it's going fast enough, when it doesn't get plugged with cloth, when it hits enough fluid to expand, etc. etc.) But FMJ shares all those shortcomings no matter what happens.
7/14/2010 10:02am, #30
BUY HOLLOW POINTS - BALL AMMO IS ONLY BETTER FOR SHOOTING PAPER TARGETS.
There, is it clear where I stand, now? I'm not questioning the validity of the claim; I have concerns about the Marshall / Sanow study's ability to support the claim in a scientific manner.