He didn't call out jack shit. He's being an pompous prick. The RPM of the round is irrelevant. The fluid dynamics apply regardless of the RPM of the projectile. The rep never claimed it was spinning like a top. If the round weren't spinning at all it would start to spin inside a fluid environment based on that design. Why be dubious? There are videos on RUclips right now. They've gone from nerds to some kind of weird pompous know-it-alls that reveal themselves to not be very well informed.
I was more talking about "Copper Polymer Matrix". The company could have some something like "polymer-coated copper" or "copper-polymer mixture" but they had to give it another cool and high-tech sounding name and I think Ian was subtle in the way he was like, "okay". As far as the spinning remark, I think Ian was thinking that it was the bullet spinning leaving the barrel that caused it instead of the shape of the bullet once it hits soft tissue.
a "matrix" is a mixture of different media where one media is suspended in the other. think of jello. the jello is the polymer and the fruit suspended inside is the copper. except the fruit is the size of a pinhead and the pieces are really close together
I don't think Ian was a prick at all actually, he very respectful here. You could certainly tell what he was thinking but he didn't get into a pissing contest with the guy about it. And yeah to me the barrier penetration claims seem suspect. No way a polymer bullet that weights 65 grains and also has a frangibility factor is gonna penetrate up to par with lead bullets which already have problem through certain barriers as we know. Which is why they make bonded bullets etc. Needs some independent testing.
North Florida Gun Guy They called it exactly what it is. It's copper powder mixed with a polymer. Do you not know what a matrix is? If that's what Ian thought he doesn't know much about firearms or physics for that matter.
I am a big fan of shrewdness when things seem suspicious. The fact you guys stay independent and sponsor free, is part of what makes you guys so great. Don't ever sell out, and keep, "keeping it real."
You guys asked ALL the right questions instead of just parroting the marketing babble like so many other channels do. You guys make me proud to be a subscriber!
Those are drillbits. also Buzzwords. goddamn the buzzwords. These use a Hyper-Carbon Polyalloy Introcomposites to oscillate the projectile at mach speeds.
I love how Ian comes in and just wrecks these guys with actual correct information. That's why you guys are the best shot show coverage there has been this week.
I don't think (in theory) the bullet needs to be spinning or "turning" as fast as you would think. I say that because the "flutes" on the bullets are actually ramp shaped. So EVEN IF the bullet had zero spin at all, material entering the "flute" axially, will be directed out radially. That is to say, fluid entering the flutes parallel to the bullets trajectory will be directed outward (at the very least) at a 45 degree angle simply due to the ramp/incline at the end of each flute. So even with minimal spin, there is potential for that effect to be exacerbated and cause this concept to be half functional, in my opinion.
Not just "minimal" spin. Zero spin would be enough, if the ramp cutouts actually do what they are designed to do. The jets of fluid ejected by the ramps would be like three blades cutting into the target's flesh. Rotation is therefore not needed to inflict severe damage. However, regardless of whether it is needed, these cutouts would _cause_ the projectile to rotate, as the ejected jets of fluid are off-center, creating an effect like three spinning blades. Assuming sufficient kinetic energy in the projectile, these fuckers would _blend your insides._ Question is: do these ramps function as intended, and does the bullet carry enough kinetic energy to cause that amount of additional damage?
@@theuncalledfor And if they do, should this be legal ammunition? Ammunition that causes wounds impossible to patch up is against the geneva convention.
@@Qureas Tear gas and hollow points are also against the Geneva Convention. Doesn't mean they aren't fair game against your fellow countrymen.. 'Murica
I love how these representatives get so caught up by Ian simply questioning what they have to say, you can tell they are used to bloggers coming by with snazzy cameras going "oooooo woooowwwww neeeeaaattt" and then moving on to the next mundane thing. Not my InRange boys, they don't roll like that
I've personally tested the polycase ammo in 9mm and 45ACP, and it's GREAT. I'm frankly surprised you guys are so flummoxed by this, as this product is not new at all. It goes through 2x4, drywall, layers of denim great, without getting stopped up like a hollowpoint. It then appears to begin tumbling (not breaking up--I've never had one break up) in ballistic gell. Almost all my rounds I shoot in the gell end up flipped backwards. This is where it dumps all the energy, which it does to great effect on the block. The only time the round breaks up is on steel, where it turns to powder during close-range match type shooting.
+PristineTX We know it's not entirely new, but we have no personal experience with it either. We do plan on acquiring some and doing some of our own testing and experimentation. ~Karl
Wasn't a criticism, Karl. I'm a big fan. Just surprised. I would have thought it would have been hard to miss at the show last year when they were trying to make a splash. Looking forward to seeing your thoughts when you test it. I was really surprised by how well it performs for me. I had a lot of skepticism too, until we dragged out a block and shot it. When you realize it isn't really a frangible round, (at least not in soft tissue--we never had one break up) it makes more sense.
It would be fast if you are thinking about it as a stationary object. But as a moving projectile you have to think of it differently. Think penetration depth and twist over time. Use a shot to the chest as an example: a 3-6 inch penetration with a 1:10 twist. this is only 1/3 to 2/3 of a full rotation. a shot into gel would be 10-12 inches, on average, so about only 1 full rotation. so the analogy used " a boat propeller in the water" seems to be just jargon. I would love to see test videos if anyone has made any.
I remember Peter Lynch saying to never buy shares in a company you can't explain with a crayon sketch, and I feel like that applies to wild ammunition claims as well.
I love the critical eye you guys have during this coverage, not just kissing ass. It really helps wade through the marketing bullshit. Keep up the good work!
You guys are perfect at this, because you just don't sit back and go 'oh that's cool and i can't wait for it" but you dig your talons of knowledge into the item. And start calling out the bullshit you are hearing, which is fantastic.
Glad to see reasonable skepticism and questioning of the reps with a willingness to testing their claims and the opportunity for the rounds to convince open minds. Looking forward to the testing guys!
Ian your not afraid to ask the hard questions, you are keeping it real. The people at shot must being running when they see u coming. I luv it. keep up the good work. thank yoy
After hearing their claims about effect on soft tissue, it got me wondering about spin rates. Here's a hypothetical 9mm load using easy numbers. This doesn't represent terminal ballistics, just external in-flight ballistics. 1:10 twist Distance: 10 ft/120 in Velocity: 1200 ft/sec Revolutions in flight: 12 Time: 10 ft/1200 ft/sec = approx .0083 sec 12rev/.0083 sec * 60sec/1min = 86,400RPM Keep in mind this only represents the initial RPM at the muzzle in a vacuum. It doesn't take into account drag from air resistance (leading to slowing down over distance) lateral wind shear, air density, barrel length, type of barrel crown etc. So most likely it will hit the target at a slower RPM. So the spin of the bullet is still significant, but that's the case regardless of projectile type. What I find interesting is their analogy to a propeller blade, when the negative cuts they've made to the projectile seem to suggest it's more akin to a drill bit. That to me says it might have a harder time stopping in soft tissue because it will make a cleaner hole, not a bigger one (if it does stay together upon impact).
In case anyone was wondering, at the claimed muzzle velocity of their ammo, and 1:10 twist the actual rotational speed of their bullet is: 1500 fps x (12/10) x 60 = 108,000 RPM.
Well we've seen one half decent thing in these videos (so far). That integrally suppressed pistol seems to live up to some of it's hype (can't be 100% certain until there's some independent 3rd party tests done, away from the devs)...
I will say through my own testing of the 9mm ARX, feeding was flawless and barrier penetration is adequate. You'd think they'd blow apart like dust, but I was satisfied with the results against a car door and drywall/lumber. As far as effectiveness on a live target, I can't really say. Long story short, I wouldn't immediately discount these rounds. That said, i'm not going out of my way to buy them either.
Working for a company we were doing load test development on an R&D rifle and came to the realization that about 20,000 RPM is the sweet spot for the projectile being fired. Our chosen twist rate 1:8. So you would probably get plenty of rotation out of a 9mm for what he states. Obviously not as effective as its hyped up to be however. Also frangible rounds do penetrate better up until they hit a surface with a higher hardness such as steel plates. The downside is that they wear out weapons faster. Ie feed ramps on M4s.
These bullets don't rely on spin to create hydraulic damage. The energy due to the forward motion of the projectile through the fluid is transferred laterally into the target. The spin causes the flutes to also act as a cutting surface and ensure the lateral energy is spread evenly throughout the wound channel.
I would love to see more of these Myth Busting Shot Show segments from InRangeTV. I am sure there are many vendors selling stuff based on looks and not actual science!
Just watched it. That is the worst I have seen so far. Hold on while I assembly my CCW! Either last year or the year before there is a video of a Company called Oversight Shooting Technologies ( which is rather funny in itself ) they made a sight called the SeeAll and the guy that was giving the demo said that unlike other companies their sights use twice as much Tritium as the competitors so they are hoping to get closer to 20yrs of illumination out of it! Now I am not saying the guy filming should be disrespectful but it was definitely worth a "WHAT"? That's not how a half life works!
Thanks guys for your honest and open minded approach to these products. It's easy to be sucked in by hype, but it's also easy to be a gun snob, and hate on everything new and strange. kudos.
This may have been noted in an earlier comment. (I didn't go through the entire comment section). There is an assumption being made by Karl & Ian in this video that the fluid displacement only occurs if the bullet is actually spinning at a high rate - the propeller analogy. I think the fluting will create a high degree of fluid displacement even without spin, simply due to the forward motion of the bullet. Here one should imagine what happens to water if a non-spinning propeller is dropped into a fluid at high speed. There will be considerable water displacement from this non-rotating propeller as the fluid is forced over the propeller blades at high speed. (This is why if a propeller aircraft loses an engine in flight the propeller blades are 'feathered' - blades turned perpendicular to flight direction - to reduce the drag that is otherwise produced).
Ian and Karl take no prisoners in their interviews! I think every marketing person they talked to is going to put them on their blacklists. LOL!!! -Jen
We shot something similar in the late 90's called Longbow... in that it was a copper resin molded bullet, not the fluid dynamics thing. The shotgun stuff wad cool because you could use it for door breaching without a stand-off device.
The defensive rounds do **not** need to have a high twist rate in order to deal substantial damage to soft tissue. That is not how they displace soft tissue, regardless of whether the projectile is spinning or not(say hypothetically it could not twist at all and still be accurate) when the projectile is travelling through the body, it forces the tissue into the fluted channels and directs it outward, since the tissue is compressed while it's in the flutes, when it's directed out and away from the projectile it is moving very fast and is very high pressure, it pretty much acts like a jet, which produces hydrostatic shock. The temporary wound cavity from rounds like these speak for themselves, there are many ballistics gel tests using these projectiles, captured in slow-motion, that you can find here on youtube. These rounds work off the same principle as the Lehigh/Underwood Xtreme Defense and Xtreme Penetrator rounds which are some of the very best defensive rounds you can buy for a pistol. The primary difference is that with the Lehigh/Underwood rounds, it's a solid copper fluted projectile and with this it's a copper/polymer blend fluted projectile. The polymer part may or may not work well, but the fluting has been proven time and time again to produce massive hydrostatic shock/soft tissue displacement, and in the case of the solid copper projectile it does a great job of penetrating barriers and retaining it's weight and shape, so much so that often you could re-use the projectile if you can recover it.
The hydrostatic shock aspect comes not from the rotation but the redirection of liquids and mass impacting the flutes. As for the barrier penetration, well a round nose is going to be better that a flat point.
Considering normal frangible ammunition is a pain to deal with this product may have some serious interest in that market. I would be highly skeptical of it being great for much else. Ian your questions are refreshing and absolutely necessary for today's gun industry. This kind of media is what's needed to keep manufacturers honest about product and drives these group to make effective products rather than effective marketing.
Weird to see them get so caught up on how much it would be spinning as if that would significantly impact the effectiveness of the flute ejecting material to the side. Barrier and gel test videos for this and Lehigh's similar projectile have been out for months so I'm not sure how jumping on it not literally rotating at power drill rpms is some kind of gotcha when there's already proof of the round's general terminal performance.
Just going off assumptions: I would assume that the spiral fluting is the "magic" you are trying to find, on impact with "fluid", the tissue/etc. will be forced into the fluting and the flutes fill as the bullet continues it's path( losing linear velocity because of the resistance, while gaining angular velocity due to the helical flutes). The helical flutes kind of convert linear velocity into angular velocity, and at the same time, direct contacted tissue relatively perpendicular to the axis of travel of the bullet. Instead of thinking of it like a propeller, imagine it as a screw in wood. You start the drill out slow and it digs in fairly fast, but once you crank up the drill, the screw stops digging in and starts to dick up the threads(it's spinning too fast with not enough downward speed to thread, so it just eats away at the wood).
I love the honest criticism. I remember when these showed up in guns and ammo years ago. they marketed it as a round that could NOT be collected and reused. It was marketed for military purposes so that enemy couldn't collect fired lead and make new bullets. Im really skeptical about this ammo.
So, you don't get feed failures like you do with FMJ? I haven't done a lot of shooting, is that actually a thing? Anyway, 5:38 oh yeah, no feed failures at all... not a single one... O.o
You have to look at it as the opposite of how a boat prop works. It turns tremendous roational velocity into two lesser lateral momentums of different objects. The prop spins very fast through water, it moves the water, but since the mas of the water is greater and water by its very nature absorbs a lot of this energy, the velocity imparted to the water is not quantitatively equal to the velocity of the prop, until you figure out the mass of water being moved and break every thing down into base equivalent energy units. Since the prop has pressure exerted on it from overvomming the inertia of the water and its fixed to a movable object, the boat, it causes movement in the boat. Imagine now to see what the bullet does , taking an aquarium of water full to the top and slowly moving the bowl of a spoon across the surface half way submerged. Its gonna move some water out of its way. Do it faster and it will move more water and that water will be moving faster. Do it really really fast and its moving a lot of water really fast. The spin rate of the bullet isnt really important because the energy is all thats really needed here. It has tremdous energy moving forward and a shape that naturally channels fluid through it in a specific direction. This will transfer momentum from the bullet to the fluid, slowing the bullet the same way hollow point expansion does. Im not even sure the direction of the spin matters all that much other than opposed spin directions would actually serve to slow the bullet more but for less of the inteded hydraulic effect. Its something they should look at but i dont think its that significant. It turns forward bullet momentum into lateral fluid motion. Now. Does it work well much less AS well as the manufacturers claim? We can look at a perfect world example of fluted bullets that are intended to derive spin stabilization from traveling through the air to see that they do NOT really derive much effect from this design. However this is because they have small surface areas and are trying to ustilize whats typically considered a poor working fluid, air. Water based fluids are orders of magnitude more efficient than air. Think of the overall surface area of a boat prop compared to the overall surface area of a sail designed to propell the boat at similar speeds. Its much smaller. Yes some of this is because the surface area of the prop is used iteratively, meaning many many times in succession, but that is equivalent to the energy of a constant breeze. The difference is that the prop rotation is internally induced while the wind is external. The sail has to be big because air is not very dense and cant carry much energy per unit volume. Denser fluids are more efficient.
Ian bringing the heat! I like the idea of the frangible training bullets if the price is right. Check out the TN Outdoors video on those defense rounds though. They are total BS.
Here's my prediction: They go through 'intermediate' barriers such as clothing, soft wood and glass. The glass will probably deflect / frang it at some point. As for creating wounds, it's not dependent on spinning to work. I think that design is just differentiate it from other similar rounds. It's simple physics to know that it will mess up flesh more than a RN, probably to a similar extent as said similar rounds.
I wouldnt be too quick to dismiss these. I think the theory is sound and I can understand what it's trying to do. Whether or not it's actually more effective than an expanding projectile is still up in the air. I would really like to see a side by side comparison.
I've been watching the testing of both these and the solid copper fluted bullets and the performance of both is impressive in gel even through light barriers ( drywall, 1/2" plywood, etc.). My concern is how the wound mechanism will translate to less hydrous and less consistent material like muscle. While gel gives a pretty good indication of what a hollow point will do in flesh, it is not analogous in every matrix and I'm not entirely convinced this wound mechanism will translate, but is love to find out.
Well, for one thing, the hardened steel plate that they make targets out of is a totally different beast from car door sheet metal, etc. Windshields are a notoriously destructive/disruptive barrier to shoot through. Higher velocities, over a certain threshold,will increase the damage of a round in tissue. Whether or not the claims are true, however, is an open question.
If you look at how it is fluted it doesn't have to be spinning at all because the fluid will make it spin and the fluid will be pushed out at the same rate
I suspect that it could be a different mix between the frangible training rounds and the defense rounds, you have a difference in volume because of the flutes, yet he says there is no change in mass, that would suggest to me that the defensive rounds are made from a slightly denser materiel, hopefully giving it more strength and less frangible characteristics
The rotation speed of the bullet after it engages the rifling isn't the point. It's about the fluid entering the channels in the projectile and being forced out at a somewhat perpendicular direction to the axis of travel. This causes more cavitation. It seems like their marketing guys didn't even understand what they were trying to sell.
Sounded like they meant it'll react as a frangible bullet on steel targets, but should penetrate typical barriers for defensive shooting without losing integrity. Steel used in targets is obviously significantly tougher than the panels in a car door, so I can see where they're coming from. It's a neat idea if it works and I'm very interested in shooting it at steel if they can get the cost per round down, but I'm pretty skeptical of its performance as a defensive or hunting bullet - I'll stick with traditional expanding bullets until there's a large body of evidence that it consistently outperforms expanding bullets (and I mean hunting and real world defensive use, not just ballistics gel).
I'm pretty sure it isn't the rotation that causes the hydraulic reaction, but rather the shape itself. The "ramps" on the bullet would force the body mass sliding over it to change direction outward. I have no idea if these work or not, never fired them. I'm just thinking about it should work. I want high speed footage of one of these hitting ballistic jell before I'd ever think about buying some. Even if they did work I'm not sure I'd go with them over traditional hollowpoint
I've seen several ballistics gel reviews of this stuff and it seem about even on standard hollow points for wound channel, its pretty I teresting stuff, I garners admirable penetration though not a super deep expansion cavity, and from.what little I've been able to test with it the recoil from.smaller gun is a huge advantage for things like a ruger lcp (what I fired with this ammo) and for guns with feeding issues on jhp these should be nearly as reliable as ball. so I think there's tradeoffs but I do think its potentially quite viable especially in compact firearms, and might represent the wave of the future. and it may be worth noting the leiheigh extreme penetrator hunting rounds in larger pistol calibers use the same principle of tissue disruption but in a typical lead and copper configuration
I'm not a big fan of their defensive stuff made of polymer with some copper powder sprinkled in. I prefer the Lehigh Defense bullets, the Xtreme Penetrator and Xtreme Defender. They use the same physics to do massive damage in a fluid medium, but they are solid copper and can penetrate barriers better than any lead round. However, I do like the idea of polymer bullets for range ammo. If all you are doing is shooting at paper or steel targets, then what does it matter if the bullets are plastic? I am interested enough to buy a few boxes to give it a shot. If they run through the gun, than that works for me.Plus, they are much cheaper than lead rounds, as well as not being toxic.
Given the low weight of the projectile I think the rotation due to the rifling will be almost negligible, since it will amount to very little rotational inertia. The part the salesperson apparently didn't understand himself, is that if a non-rotating propeller moves through a fluid at high forward velocity the fluid will slow the bullet, but in doing so will start to rotate it. Look up auto-rotation on a helicopter for example, same idea. So I think that effect will contribute much more to the potential fluid dynamics. But I can't possibly tell if the effect is strong enough to cause any significant improvement in terminal ballistics. So I would very much look forward to your video on it. Then again I wonder if a nasty wound canal is really a good thing in the hands of a layman...
Ian, I have a question. I see that you have bag on shoulder, I think is a gasmask bag. I suppose that inside are some markings, writings - can you write, how its looks? Maybe it will be name of my city and shop, where was made. Thanks.
It doesn't actually work like a propeller, and it doesn't need to be spinning too fast initially to form a grievous wound. The cuts are angled to accept the fluid from the front, and the act of it moving through the body will redirect the fluid through the angled cuts, and if it's cut a certain way it's movement through the body will actually accelerate the rotation, like a windmill.
Does he means some sort of hydrostatic shock when he said it uses hydro whatever to create the wound. If so, in addition to Ian's objection that the rifling twist is pretty slow; it is also worth noting that, barring the shockwave hitting organs, it won't do much. My understanding is that the wounds caused by the shock tend to seal up and only the primary wound channel, i.e. the area where the bullet physically went through remains bleeding enough to disable the target.
The first sales guy is definitely spouting marking talking points way above his pay grade. For reference, in terms of materials science and engineering: A copper-polymer matrix most likely refers to powder metallic copper suspended in a plastic (polymer) material. Similar aggregate and cement in concrete, it can produce a material with properties more desirable and controllable than either raw material. In this case, the ability to make an intricately shaped projectile using injection molding techniques which are cheap and fast without having to resort to slower and more expensive machining or casting as would have to be done with a solid metallic bullet. The properties of the finished projectile will depend on how much copper is used and what polymer acts as a binder. We can get a rough idea of how much copper is used based on the quoted weights. I believe he said the 9mm was 65 grains. We can roughly compare that to a FMJ made mostly of lead at 125 grains. The specific gravity of lead is right around 11.3. The specific gravity of copper is about 9. This means that a solid copper bullet the same shape and volume of the 125 grain FMJ should weigh just under 100 grains. This means that the polycase bullet is likely around 65-70% copper, depending on the volume lost to the cuts. The rest is plastic. To be fair, some plastics can be as strong as aluminum, but I doubt they use glass fiber reinforced nylon, its probably some cheaper plastic like polystyrene. Now, powdered metals in plastic are nothing new. The MIM parts in newer guns are similar, and powdered metal parts are used in a variety of industries. The difference is that the metal makes up 98-99% of the mixture and the parts are sintered after molding to fuse the metal together and burn off the plastic. This causes the parts to shrink slightly and unless they are molded over-sized and pressed into shape at the same time they are heated (expensive), I don't think you could hit the close tolerances required for use as a bullet. So the percentage of copper is probably dictated by how much they could cram into the plastic and still have a injectible, moldable composite that would meet dimensional requirements. The wounding characteristics are likely complete marketing wank.
I'm pretty sure the hydraulic effects are from the bullet geometry, and not any rotational inertia due to rifling. The cuts look like they are meant to redirect compressed fluid in front of the round into three separate jets via the ramping surfaces. A smooth bore would theoretically be able to take just as much advantage of this design. The bullet material is interesting, but those kinds of composites tend to be extremely fragile and brittle. Great for frangibility, but I would expect this to blow up like it's made of glass as soon as it hits anything hard between it and the intended target.
Using the propeller analogy isn't the best way of explaining it, makes it seem like the bullet's rotation is what pushes the meat/fluids sideways. It's not. It's the "J" shape of the "cutouts". When the bullet passes into material the grooves near the nose are parallel to the velocity of the bullet. Then the groove changes direction 90 degrees (or whatever) to the direction of the bullet's travel, changing the direction that the meat/fluid gets pushed by the groove to sideways. It should actually work better if the bullet is NOT spinning quickly. Well, up to a point because then you may get fluid separation and early cavitation which makes the grooves useless.
ChesapeakeWahido This is how I understood it worked until the promoter starting rambling. Seems possible even if it doesn't cause much rotation. It is obviously similar to the Underwood Xtreme defender but lighter.
I am curious on arc length/spread of projectile(wind/rain/snow included, velocity of round, twist/reverse twist and expansion of Poly round and channel groove on projectile. Does temperature effect the round with -10 vs 50 degrees Celsius? Normal propellant or lesser than usual load? Will suppressor's work or the turbine effect make it dangerous? Will it's water cutting action make it viable for underwater usage or will it float? Similar to H.E.A.T Anti-tank rounds that were banned? Have fun blokes ;)
I am wondering what maximum speeds of this type of projectile in the 45 long Colt diameter. This intrigues me as a potential option for the incredibly limited selection of available products for the 450 Bushmaster cartridge, which uses nearly identical reloading data as the 460 S&W magnum. I know there are factory loads of 458 SOCOM and 45-70. Just makes me curious about the specific mechanics between pistol vs rifle bullets and potential differences
tnoutdoors9 did a couple videos on it for 9mm and it averaged around 15 - 17" in the clear gel from personal testing the recoil is significantly reduced, and has functioned flawlessly in the firearms i've tested it in, even after accidentally putting a mag of it in the washing machine. haven't tried shooting steel with it, so don't know about the frangibility of it. Inrange should try it
I would assume that the flutes would generate torque in the process of hitting tissue and forcing it outward, with the forward momentum producing the wound instead of the angular momentum the bullet gets from the rifling.
How glad are they that not EVERY person that comes up and talks to them at Shot show is a mechanical engineer... very.
It doesn't take a mechanical engineer to learn how their own product actually functions.
I love how Ian subtly calls out the industry jargon.
He didn't call out jack shit. He's being an pompous prick. The RPM of the round is irrelevant. The fluid dynamics apply regardless of the RPM of the projectile. The rep never claimed it was spinning like a top. If the round weren't spinning at all it would start to spin inside a fluid environment based on that design. Why be dubious? There are videos on RUclips right now. They've gone from nerds to some kind of weird pompous know-it-alls that reveal themselves to not be very well informed.
I was more talking about "Copper Polymer Matrix". The company could have some something like "polymer-coated copper" or "copper-polymer mixture" but they had to give it another cool and high-tech sounding name and I think Ian was subtle in the way he was like, "okay".
As far as the spinning remark, I think Ian was thinking that it was the bullet spinning leaving the barrel that caused it instead of the shape of the bullet once it hits soft tissue.
a "matrix" is a mixture of different media where one media is suspended in the other. think of jello. the jello is the polymer and the fruit suspended inside is the copper. except the fruit is the size of a pinhead and the pieces are really close together
I don't think Ian was a prick at all actually, he very respectful here. You could certainly tell what he was thinking but he didn't get into a pissing contest with the guy about it. And yeah to me the barrier penetration claims seem suspect. No way a polymer bullet that weights 65 grains and also has a frangibility factor is gonna penetrate up to par with lead bullets which already have problem through certain barriers as we know. Which is why they make bonded bullets etc. Needs some independent testing.
North Florida Gun Guy
They called it exactly what it is. It's copper powder mixed with a polymer. Do you not know what a matrix is? If that's what Ian thought he doesn't know much about firearms or physics for that matter.
I am a big fan of shrewdness when things seem suspicious. The fact you guys stay independent and sponsor free, is part of what makes you guys so great. Don't ever sell out, and keep, "keeping it real."
I use a peanut butter and jelly matrix between two slices of bread to sufficiently quell my hunger.
salesman "it moves right through barriers"
Ian "OK"
lololololololololo
I was reading through comments and read this at the same time they said it. What a coincidence 😂
😂
@@McDylanNuggets lol me too
you don't understand, it uses "hydrologenistanium" that turns moisture in the air into lava that disintegrates the target.
Science.
I was excited at the title cause I thought the guys who made polymer-CASED ammo showed up... That would've been a reeeeaally interesting conversation.
Indonesian Sasquatch Already did come up, just about kicked the TFB dudes into the hospital.
Yeah "military" ammo that blows appart your military rifle sounds really fun and works great.....
OutDoorPegasus it works fine on attack helicopters and jets in the US Air Force
You guys asked ALL the right questions instead of just parroting the marketing babble like so many other channels do. You guys make me proud to be a subscriber!
I like how you guys are treating manufacturers skeptically and critically (in the case of Colt) and not just gushing over gear porn.
Ian and Karl...... skeptics at large in the marketplace. No sacred cow is safe.
Those are drillbits. also Buzzwords. goddamn the buzzwords. These use a Hyper-Carbon Polyalloy Introcomposites to oscillate the projectile at mach speeds.
TheGM or to translate "them bullets git it fast and make big yeeyee holes in stuff"
I love how Ian comes in and just wrecks these guys with actual correct information. That's why you guys are the best shot show coverage there has been this week.
Ian and karl, it is truly a joy seing you debunk bullshit while being polite. Such a relief from softball questions.
I don't think (in theory) the bullet needs to be spinning or "turning" as fast as you would think. I say that because the "flutes" on the bullets are actually ramp shaped. So EVEN IF the bullet had zero spin at all, material entering the "flute" axially, will be directed out radially. That is to say, fluid entering the flutes parallel to the bullets trajectory will be directed outward (at the very least) at a 45 degree angle simply due to the ramp/incline at the end of each flute. So even with minimal spin, there is potential for that effect to be exacerbated and cause this concept to be half functional, in my opinion.
Derelict it looks like the ramp angle from those cut outs is whats causing tissue tearing
Not just "minimal" spin. Zero spin would be enough, if the ramp cutouts actually do what they are designed to do. The jets of fluid ejected by the ramps would be like three blades cutting into the target's flesh.
Rotation is therefore not needed to inflict severe damage.
However, regardless of whether it is needed, these cutouts would _cause_ the projectile to rotate, as the ejected jets of fluid are off-center, creating an effect like three spinning blades. Assuming sufficient kinetic energy in the projectile, these fuckers would _blend your insides._
Question is: do these ramps function as intended, and does the bullet carry enough kinetic energy to cause that amount of additional damage?
@@theuncalledfor And if they do, should this be legal ammunition? Ammunition that causes wounds impossible to patch up is against the geneva convention.
@@Qureas My understanding is that the Bush Jr administration exited that treaty and it only applies to militaries anyway.
@@Qureas Tear gas and hollow points are also against the Geneva Convention. Doesn't mean they aren't fair game against your fellow countrymen.. 'Murica
I love how these representatives get so caught up by Ian simply questioning what they have to say, you can tell they are used to bloggers coming by with snazzy cameras going "oooooo woooowwwww neeeeaaattt" and then moving on to the next mundane thing.
Not my InRange boys, they don't roll like that
So, was this stuff tested? Any updates?
...glue mixed with copper filings...
I've personally tested the polycase ammo in 9mm and 45ACP, and it's GREAT. I'm frankly surprised you guys are so flummoxed by this, as this product is not new at all. It goes through 2x4, drywall, layers of denim great, without getting stopped up like a hollowpoint. It then appears to begin tumbling (not breaking up--I've never had one break up) in ballistic gell. Almost all my rounds I shoot in the gell end up flipped backwards. This is where it dumps all the energy, which it does to great effect on the block. The only time the round breaks up is on steel, where it turns to powder during close-range match type shooting.
+PristineTX We know it's not entirely new, but we have no personal experience with it either. We do plan on acquiring some and doing some of our own testing and experimentation. ~Karl
Wasn't a criticism, Karl. I'm a big fan. Just surprised. I would have thought it would have been hard to miss at the show last year when they were trying to make a splash. Looking forward to seeing your thoughts when you test it. I was really surprised by how well it performs for me. I had a lot of skepticism too, until we dragged out a block and shot it. When you realize it isn't really a frangible round, (at least not in soft tissue--we never had one break up) it makes more sense.
Kevin Sullivan o
Seems like a ripoff of the stuff lehigh puts out.
It would be fast if you are thinking about it as a stationary object. But as a moving projectile you have to think of it differently. Think penetration depth and twist over time. Use a shot to the chest as an example: a 3-6 inch penetration with a 1:10 twist. this is only 1/3 to 2/3 of a full rotation. a shot into gel would be 10-12 inches, on average, so about only 1 full rotation. so the analogy used " a boat propeller in the water" seems to be just jargon.
I would love to see test videos if anyone has made any.
I remember Peter Lynch saying to never buy shares in a company you can't explain with a crayon sketch, and I feel like that applies to wild ammunition claims as well.
I hadn't heard that before but it makes sense, thanks
Dude this is the best Shot Show commentary. Please don't stop
Gun Jesus see`s thru your marketing.
Hallelujah!
Brian Anderson Re: gun Jesus & his camera-man. Excellent episode!
I love the critical eye you guys have during this coverage, not just kissing ass. It really helps wade through the marketing bullshit. Keep up the good work!
You guys are perfect at this, because you just don't sit back and go 'oh that's cool and i can't wait for it" but you dig your talons of knowledge into the item. And start calling out the bullshit you are hearing, which is fantastic.
Damn the marketing wankers for these companies need to come up with some better talking points for these droids.
Sam Harsha
Bernadelli and CZ always had the hottest spokesmodels.
Who needs a decent product when you have super hot booth chicks?
Its metal powder being held together by polymer so I don't see how that would be an issue in finding fragments.
Inhumane bullets eh?
INF nice edit. Congratulations you recognized your own silliness.
Glad to see reasonable skepticism and questioning of the reps with a willingness to testing their claims and the opportunity for the rounds to convince open minds. Looking forward to the testing guys!
Ian your not afraid to ask the hard questions, you are keeping it real. The people at shot must being running when they see u coming. I luv it. keep up the good work.
thank yoy
After hearing their claims about effect on soft tissue, it got me wondering about spin rates. Here's a hypothetical 9mm load using easy numbers. This doesn't represent terminal ballistics, just external in-flight ballistics.
1:10 twist
Distance: 10 ft/120 in
Velocity: 1200 ft/sec
Revolutions in flight: 12
Time: 10 ft/1200 ft/sec = approx .0083 sec
12rev/.0083 sec * 60sec/1min = 86,400RPM
Keep in mind this only represents the initial RPM at the muzzle in a vacuum. It doesn't take into account drag from air resistance (leading to slowing down over distance) lateral wind shear, air density, barrel length, type of barrel crown etc. So most likely it will hit the target at a slower RPM. So the spin of the bullet is still significant, but that's the case regardless of projectile type.
What I find interesting is their analogy to a propeller blade, when the negative cuts they've made to the projectile seem to suggest it's more akin to a drill bit. That to me says it might have a harder time stopping in soft tissue because it will make a cleaner hole, not a bigger one (if it does stay together upon impact).
I love how he talks about not having feeding issues, and the stuff proceeds to jam up a levergun.
In case anyone was wondering, at the claimed muzzle velocity of their ammo, and 1:10 twist the actual rotational speed of their bullet is: 1500 fps x (12/10) x 60 = 108,000 RPM.
Why does every spokesperson at Shot show sound so uncomfortable?
Maybe because they are lying
And they know they are lying
Because they've heard InRange is on the prowl and asking questions...
I love how in all these video's your guys are just calling these people out!
Lemme guess. You guys primarily went to Shot17" to rag on all the products? I so approve.
Well we've seen one half decent thing in these videos (so far). That integrally suppressed pistol seems to live up to some of it's hype (can't be 100% certain until there's some independent 3rd party tests done, away from the devs)...
SHOT Show was a bit of a SHIT Show this year. There were very few interesting products, sadly.
Europeans: it delivers 300J of energy
Americans: it will go through plywood
Americans are practical.
@@R281 i agree, plywood per bullet-just another American unit of measurement 🤣
@@radogost1536 touche
Doesn't look like it feeds in a lever gun worth a damn.
+LoneWanderer360 I don't think that was the ammo as much as the gun, actually. ~Karl
I will say through my own testing of the 9mm ARX, feeding was flawless and barrier penetration is adequate. You'd think they'd blow apart like dust, but I was satisfied with the results against a car door and drywall/lumber. As far as effectiveness on a live target, I can't really say. Long story short, I wouldn't immediately discount these rounds. That said, i'm not going out of my way to buy them either.
Roll up, roll up, come and taste the magic snake oil
Working for a company we were doing load test development on an R&D rifle and came to the realization that about 20,000 RPM is the sweet spot for the projectile being fired. Our chosen twist rate 1:8. So you would probably get plenty of rotation out of a 9mm for what he states. Obviously not as effective as its hyped up to be however. Also frangible rounds do penetrate better up until they hit a surface with a higher hardness such as steel plates. The downside is that they wear out weapons faster. Ie feed ramps on M4s.
These bullets don't rely on spin to create hydraulic damage. The energy due to the forward motion of the projectile through the fluid is transferred laterally into the target. The spin causes the flutes to also act as a cutting surface and ensure the lateral energy is spread evenly throughout the wound channel.
I would love to see more of these Myth Busting Shot Show segments from InRangeTV. I am sure there are many vendors selling stuff based on looks and not actual science!
Just watched it. That is the worst I have seen so far. Hold on while I assembly my CCW! Either last year or the year before there is a video of a Company called Oversight Shooting Technologies ( which is rather funny in itself ) they made a sight called the SeeAll and the guy that was giving the demo said that unlike other companies their sights use twice as much Tritium as the competitors so they are hoping to get closer to 20yrs of illumination out of it! Now I am not saying the guy filming should be disrespectful but it was definitely worth a "WHAT"? That's not how a half life works!
Thanks guys for your honest and open minded approach to these products. It's easy to be sucked in by hype, but it's also easy to be a gun snob, and hate on everything new and strange. kudos.
This may have been noted in an earlier comment. (I didn't go through the entire comment section). There is an assumption being made by Karl & Ian in this video that the fluid displacement only occurs if the bullet is actually spinning at a high rate - the propeller analogy. I think the fluting will create a high degree of fluid displacement even without spin, simply due to the forward motion of the bullet. Here one should imagine what happens to water if a non-spinning propeller is dropped into a fluid at high speed. There will be considerable water displacement from this non-rotating propeller as the fluid is forced over the propeller blades at high speed. (This is why if a propeller aircraft loses an engine in flight the propeller blades are 'feathered' - blades turned perpendicular to flight direction - to reduce the drag that is otherwise produced).
I love how InRange will call BS when they hear or see BS
I wonder how much of the plastic stuff stays in your barrel.
I love the way you take the piss out of the poly round huckster.
Are these the same dudes that made those weird polymer cased rounds that blew up peoples guns because fluted barrels or somesuch?
Every time I try watching a bit more I get downed with laughter just seeing Ian's expression when the ammo guy talks.
Ian and Karl take no prisoners in their interviews! I think every marketing person they talked to is going to put them on their blacklists. LOL!!!
-Jen
I love how Ian grills these guys
We shot something similar in the late 90's called Longbow... in that it was a copper resin molded bullet, not the fluid dynamics thing. The shotgun stuff wad cool because you could use it for door breaching without a stand-off device.
I'm so glad Ian and Carl don't need sponsorship from gun companies.
The defensive rounds do **not** need to have a high twist rate in order to deal substantial damage to soft tissue. That is not how they displace soft tissue, regardless of whether the projectile is spinning or not(say hypothetically it could not twist at all and still be accurate) when the projectile is travelling through the body, it forces the tissue into the fluted channels and directs it outward, since the tissue is compressed while it's in the flutes, when it's directed out and away from the projectile it is moving very fast and is very high pressure, it pretty much acts like a jet, which produces hydrostatic shock. The temporary wound cavity from rounds like these speak for themselves, there are many ballistics gel tests using these projectiles, captured in slow-motion, that you can find here on youtube.
These rounds work off the same principle as the Lehigh/Underwood Xtreme Defense and Xtreme Penetrator rounds which are some of the very best defensive rounds you can buy for a pistol. The primary difference is that with the Lehigh/Underwood rounds, it's a solid copper fluted projectile and with this it's a copper/polymer blend fluted projectile. The polymer part may or may not work well, but the fluting has been proven time and time again to produce massive hydrostatic shock/soft tissue displacement, and in the case of the solid copper projectile it does a great job of penetrating barriers and retaining it's weight and shape, so much so that often you could re-use the projectile if you can recover it.
The hydrostatic shock aspect comes not from the rotation but the redirection of liquids and mass impacting the flutes.
As for the barrier penetration, well a round nose is going to be better that a flat point.
y'all are great never change
Considering normal frangible ammunition is a pain to deal with this product may have some serious interest in that market. I would be highly skeptical of it being great for much else. Ian your questions are refreshing and absolutely necessary for today's gun industry. This kind of media is what's needed to keep manufacturers honest about product and drives these group to make effective products rather than effective marketing.
i just want to say you guys are doing a great job with the audio. alot of these other shmucks who are coverong shot show have horrible audio. 👍
This reminds me of the people who call a fuller a "blood groove"
I loved it when Ian plays stump the salesman. LOL
Weird to see them get so caught up on how much it would be spinning as if that would significantly impact the effectiveness of the flute ejecting material to the side.
Barrier and gel test videos for this and Lehigh's similar projectile have been out for months so I'm not sure how jumping on it not literally rotating at power drill rpms is some kind of gotcha when there's already proof of the round's general terminal performance.
Just going off assumptions:
I would assume that the spiral fluting is the "magic" you are trying to find, on impact with "fluid", the tissue/etc. will be forced into the fluting and the flutes fill as the bullet continues it's path( losing linear velocity because of the resistance, while gaining angular velocity due to the helical flutes). The helical flutes kind of convert linear velocity into angular velocity, and at the same time, direct contacted tissue relatively perpendicular to the axis of travel of the bullet.
Instead of thinking of it like a propeller, imagine it as a screw in wood. You start the drill out slow and it digs in fairly fast, but once you crank up the drill, the screw stops digging in and starts to dick up the threads(it's spinning too fast with not enough downward speed to thread, so it just eats away at the wood).
Btw: big fan, you guys are great
it's on the selves at the Academy Sporting goods store chain here in TX. the Ruger ARX "cutters" are at any rate.
I love the honest criticism. I remember when these showed up in guns and ammo years ago. they marketed it as a round that could NOT be collected and reused. It was marketed for military purposes so that enemy couldn't collect fired lead and make new bullets. Im really skeptical about this ammo.
So, you don't get feed failures like you do with FMJ? I haven't done a lot of shooting, is that actually a thing? Anyway, 5:38 oh yeah, no feed failures at all... not a single one... O.o
You have to look at it as the opposite of how a boat prop works. It turns tremendous roational velocity into two lesser lateral momentums of different objects.
The prop spins very fast through water, it moves the water, but since the mas of the water is greater and water by its very nature absorbs a lot of this energy, the velocity imparted to the water is not quantitatively equal to the velocity of the prop, until you figure out the mass of water being moved and break every thing down into base equivalent energy units. Since the prop has pressure exerted on it from overvomming the inertia of the water and its fixed to a movable object, the boat, it causes movement in the boat.
Imagine now to see what the bullet does , taking an aquarium of water full to the top and slowly moving the bowl of a spoon across the surface half way submerged. Its gonna move some water out of its way.
Do it faster and it will move more water and that water will be moving faster. Do it really really fast and its moving a lot of water really fast.
The spin rate of the bullet isnt really important because the energy is all thats really needed here. It has tremdous energy moving forward and a shape that naturally channels fluid through it in a specific direction. This will transfer momentum from the bullet to the fluid, slowing the bullet the same way hollow point expansion does. Im not even sure the direction of the spin matters all that much other than opposed spin directions would actually serve to slow the bullet more but for less of the inteded hydraulic effect. Its something they should look at but i dont think its that significant.
It turns forward bullet momentum into lateral fluid motion.
Now.
Does it work well much less AS well as the manufacturers claim?
We can look at a perfect world example of fluted bullets that are intended to derive spin stabilization from traveling through the air to see that they do NOT really derive much effect from this design.
However this is because they have small surface areas and are trying to ustilize whats typically considered a poor working fluid, air. Water based fluids are orders of magnitude more efficient than air.
Think of the overall surface area of a boat prop compared to the overall surface area of a sail designed to propell the boat at similar speeds.
Its much smaller. Yes some of this is because the surface area of the prop is used iteratively, meaning many many times in succession, but that is equivalent to the energy of a constant breeze. The difference is that the prop rotation is internally induced while the wind is external. The sail has to be big because air is not very dense and cant carry much energy per unit volume. Denser fluids are more efficient.
Are you high on adderall or something?
Ian bringing the heat! I like the idea of the frangible training bullets if the price is right. Check out the TN Outdoors video on those defense rounds though. They are total BS.
Is that Boge Quinn in the background at 1:35 ?
Here's my prediction: They go through 'intermediate' barriers such as clothing, soft wood and glass. The glass will probably deflect / frang it at some point.
As for creating wounds, it's not dependent on spinning to work. I think that design is just differentiate it from other similar rounds. It's simple physics to know that it will mess up flesh more than a RN, probably to a similar extent as said similar rounds.
I'm not sure I want my HD ammo advertised as going thru plywood/drywall ect. Doesn't seem like what I really want.
Moonbase Alpha was thinking the same thing.
BBs go through walls.
I look forward to further testing of this bullet, I've been curious about them since they first starting appearing in the last year or so.
Ian, stumping that dude and making it look easy.
I wouldnt be too quick to dismiss these. I think the theory is sound and I can understand what it's trying to do. Whether or not it's actually more effective than an expanding projectile is still up in the air.
I would really like to see a side by side comparison.
I've been watching the testing of both these and the solid copper fluted bullets and the performance of both is impressive in gel even through light barriers ( drywall, 1/2" plywood, etc.). My concern is how the wound mechanism will translate to less hydrous and less consistent material like muscle. While gel gives a pretty good indication of what a hollow point will do in flesh, it is not analogous in every matrix and I'm not entirely convinced this wound mechanism will translate, but is love to find out.
Well, for one thing, the hardened steel plate that they make targets out of is a totally different beast from car door sheet metal, etc. Windshields are a notoriously destructive/disruptive barrier to shoot through. Higher velocities, over a certain threshold,will increase the damage of a round in tissue. Whether or not the claims are true, however, is an open question.
If you look at how it is fluted it doesn't have to be spinning at all because the fluid will make it spin and the fluid will be pushed out at the same rate
I suspect that it could be a different mix between the frangible training rounds and the defense rounds, you have a difference in volume because of the flutes, yet he says there is no change in mass, that would suggest to me that the defensive rounds are made from a slightly denser materiel, hopefully giving it more strength and less frangible characteristics
I appreciate the scepticism.
The rotation speed of the bullet after it engages the rifling isn't the point. It's about the fluid entering the channels in the projectile and being forced out at a somewhat perpendicular direction to the axis of travel. This causes more cavitation.
It seems like their marketing guys didn't even understand what they were trying to sell.
Sounded like they meant it'll react as a frangible bullet on steel targets, but should penetrate typical barriers for defensive shooting without losing integrity. Steel used in targets is obviously significantly tougher than the panels in a car door, so I can see where they're coming from. It's a neat idea if it works and I'm very interested in shooting it at steel if they can get the cost per round down, but I'm pretty skeptical of its performance as a defensive or hunting bullet - I'll stick with traditional expanding bullets until there's a large body of evidence that it consistently outperforms expanding bullets (and I mean hunting and real world defensive use, not just ballistics gel).
I'm pretty sure it isn't the rotation that causes the hydraulic reaction, but rather the shape itself. The "ramps" on the bullet would force the body mass sliding over it to change direction outward.
I have no idea if these work or not, never fired them. I'm just thinking about it should work. I want high speed footage of one of these hitting ballistic jell before I'd ever think about buying some. Even if they did work I'm not sure I'd go with them over traditional hollowpoint
I've seen several ballistics gel reviews of this stuff and it seem about even on standard hollow points for wound channel, its pretty I teresting stuff, I garners admirable penetration though not a super deep expansion cavity, and from.what little I've been able to test with it the recoil from.smaller gun is a huge advantage for things like a ruger lcp (what I fired with this ammo) and for guns with feeding issues on jhp these should be nearly as reliable as ball. so I think there's tradeoffs but I do think its potentially quite viable especially in compact firearms, and might represent the wave of the future. and it may be worth noting the leiheigh extreme penetrator hunting rounds in larger pistol calibers use the same principle of tissue disruption but in a typical lead and copper configuration
cannot wait to see ballistics gel high speed tests with this. If the solid round nose rounds become super cheap I will be interested.
I'm not a big fan of their defensive stuff made of polymer with some copper powder sprinkled in. I prefer the Lehigh Defense bullets, the Xtreme Penetrator and Xtreme Defender. They use the same physics to do massive damage in a fluid medium, but they are solid copper and can penetrate barriers better than any lead round. However, I do like the idea of polymer bullets for range ammo. If all you are doing is shooting at paper or steel targets, then what does it matter if the bullets are plastic? I am interested enough to buy a few boxes to give it a shot. If they run through the gun, than that works for me.Plus, they are much cheaper than lead rounds, as well as not being toxic.
Given the low weight of the projectile I think the rotation due to the rifling will be almost negligible, since it will amount to very little rotational inertia. The part the salesperson apparently didn't understand himself, is that if a non-rotating propeller moves through a fluid at high forward velocity the fluid will slow the bullet, but in doing so will start to rotate it. Look up auto-rotation on a helicopter for example, same idea. So I think that effect will contribute much more to the potential fluid dynamics. But I can't possibly tell if the effect is strong enough to cause any significant improvement in terminal ballistics. So I would very much look forward to your video on it.
Then again I wonder if a nasty wound canal is really a good thing in the hands of a layman...
Thou shalt not spew gun bull$&!- Gun Jesus
Ian, I have a question. I see that you have bag on shoulder, I think is a gasmask bag. I suppose that inside are some markings, writings - can you write, how its looks? Maybe it will be name of my city and shop, where was made. Thanks.
It doesn't actually work like a propeller, and it doesn't need to be spinning too fast initially to form a grievous wound. The cuts are angled to accept the fluid from the front, and the act of it moving through the body will redirect the fluid through the angled cuts, and if it's cut a certain way it's movement through the body will actually accelerate the rotation, like a windmill.
Are the knodgules on the bullet are getting the way in a fast manual loading.
It's the shape of the flutes that act as ramps to divert the fluid of the target, not the spin of the bullet.
Does he means some sort of hydrostatic shock when he said it uses hydro whatever to create the wound. If so, in addition to Ian's objection that the rifling twist is pretty slow; it is also worth noting that, barring the shockwave hitting organs, it won't do much. My understanding is that the wounds caused by the shock tend to seal up and only the primary wound channel, i.e. the area where the bullet physically went through remains bleeding enough to disable the target.
The first sales guy is definitely spouting marking talking points way above his pay grade. For reference, in terms of materials science and engineering: A copper-polymer matrix most likely refers to powder metallic copper suspended in a plastic (polymer) material. Similar aggregate and cement in concrete, it can produce a material with properties more desirable and controllable than either raw material. In this case, the ability to make an intricately shaped projectile using injection molding techniques which are cheap and fast without having to resort to slower and more expensive machining or casting as would have to be done with a solid metallic bullet. The properties of the finished projectile will depend on how much copper is used and what polymer acts as a binder. We can get a rough idea of how much copper is used based on the quoted weights. I believe he said the 9mm was 65 grains. We can roughly compare that to a FMJ made mostly of lead at 125 grains. The specific gravity of lead is right around 11.3. The specific gravity of copper is about 9. This means that a solid copper bullet the same shape and volume of the 125 grain FMJ should weigh just under 100 grains. This means that the polycase bullet is likely around 65-70% copper, depending on the volume lost to the cuts. The rest is plastic. To be fair, some plastics can be as strong as aluminum, but I doubt they use glass fiber reinforced nylon, its probably some cheaper plastic like polystyrene. Now, powdered metals in plastic are nothing new. The MIM parts in newer guns are similar, and powdered metal parts are used in a variety of industries. The difference is that the metal makes up 98-99% of the mixture and the parts are sintered after molding to fuse the metal together and burn off the plastic. This causes the parts to shrink slightly and unless they are molded over-sized and pressed into shape at the same time they are heated (expensive), I don't think you could hit the close tolerances required for use as a bullet. So the percentage of copper is probably dictated by how much they could cram into the plastic and still have a injectible, moldable composite that would meet dimensional requirements. The wounding characteristics are likely complete marketing wank.
I'm pretty sure the hydraulic effects are from the bullet geometry, and not any rotational inertia due to rifling. The cuts look like they are meant to redirect compressed fluid in front of the round into three separate jets via the ramping surfaces. A smooth bore would theoretically be able to take just as much advantage of this design.
The bullet material is interesting, but those kinds of composites tend to be extremely fragile and brittle. Great for frangibility, but I would expect this to blow up like it's made of glass as soon as it hits anything hard between it and the intended target.
Seems it actually does reliably go through stuff softer than steel, so I stand corrected.
I'm extremely interested in the 'spinning' composite 9mm round.
Using the propeller analogy isn't the best way of explaining it, makes it seem like the bullet's rotation is what pushes the meat/fluids sideways. It's not. It's the "J" shape of the "cutouts". When the bullet passes into material the grooves near the nose are parallel to the velocity of the bullet. Then the groove changes direction 90 degrees (or whatever) to the direction of the bullet's travel, changing the direction that the meat/fluid gets pushed by the groove to sideways. It should actually work better if the bullet is NOT spinning quickly. Well, up to a point because then you may get fluid separation and early cavitation which makes the grooves useless.
This is as opposed to a regular hollow point which just shoves the material forwards and THEN it has to flow out of the way
ChesapeakeWahido This is how I understood it worked until the promoter starting rambling. Seems possible even if it doesn't cause much rotation. It is obviously similar to the Underwood Xtreme defender but lighter.
Can't wait to see some testing
excited for this testing.
I am curious on arc length/spread of projectile(wind/rain/snow included, velocity of round, twist/reverse twist and expansion of Poly round and channel groove on projectile. Does temperature effect the round with -10 vs 50 degrees Celsius? Normal propellant or lesser than usual load? Will suppressor's work or the turbine effect make it dangerous? Will it's water cutting action make it viable for underwater usage or will it float? Similar to H.E.A.T Anti-tank rounds that were banned? Have fun blokes ;)
I am wondering what maximum speeds of this type of projectile in the 45 long Colt diameter. This intrigues me as a potential option for the incredibly limited selection of available products for the 450 Bushmaster cartridge, which uses nearly identical reloading data as the 460 S&W magnum. I know there are factory loads of 458 SOCOM and 45-70. Just makes me curious about the specific mechanics between pistol vs rifle bullets and potential differences
tnoutdoors9 did a couple videos on it for 9mm and it averaged around 15 - 17" in the clear gel
from personal testing the recoil is significantly reduced, and has functioned flawlessly in the firearms i've tested it in, even after accidentally putting a mag of it in the washing machine.
haven't tried shooting steel with it, so don't know about the frangibility of it.
Inrange should try it
I would assume that the flutes would generate torque in the process of hitting tissue and forcing it outward, with the forward momentum producing the wound instead of the angular momentum the bullet gets from the rifling.
I like your new hairstyle, Karl
The design has been around a few years tn outdoors 9 did a review. Lehigh defense has the same idea but brass. Iraq veteran 8888 loves Lehigh ammo
TNOutdoors9 did some gel testing with this a while back, it isn't the best but certainly not the worst.