Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zombietactics:
It should be noted that this method has not been verified by (or even submitted to, last I heard) a single peer-reviewed journal of physics or metrology. Schwartz' book is self-published, and therefore doesn't have the authoritative weight of something reviewed and edited by a publisher of scientific works.
It may be 100% accurate, or it may be just the latest in a long line of "fad physics" testing methods, which later turn out to be hokkum dressed up in numbers. I make no claim one way or the other, just to be clear. Schwartz' qualifications seem pretty consistent with at least having a clue, so it's a perspective worth consideration.
Even so, unproven methodologies should be viewed as "interesting perspectives" until such time as their claims have independent verification from qualified, disinterested parties.
|
According to the website, it appears to have been vetted by a munitions engineer- that's a heckuva lot better than all of the anonymous crap and opinions that I've seen on the 'net over the years.
I know that there are those who will 'poo-poo' the munitions engineer's statement, but run against actual testing in gelatin that our department conducted about seven years ago when they were researching replacement issue ammo, I have been amazed at just how close this model comes to matching that data. The other model that I use occasionally, by MacPherson, is also a self-published work and fits quite well with the data that I have compared it against.
Much like the old platitude, "Money talks, B.S. walks", the proof of both models' accuracy/validity is how well they work in the real world against real gelatin data- not how they were printed.
By way of example, I've compared the Schwartz bullet penetration model's prediction against a couple of well-known examples that I am sure most folks here on TFL have seen before:
Example #1:
This .45ACP 230 gr FMJRN @ 869 fps has a total penetration depth of about 65cm or
25.6 inches:
The Schwartz bullet penetration model predicts a penetration depth of
25.7 inches.
Note: The MacPherson model predicts
30.4 inches of penetration.
Example #2
This 9mm 124 gr FMJRN @ 1189 fps has a total penetration depth of about 71-72cm or
28.3 inches if you "straighten out" the upward curve at the end of the bullet's path:
The Schwartz bullet penetration model predicts a penetration depth of
28.7 inches.
Note: The MacPherson model predicts
30.9 inches of penetration.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zombietactics:
I'd find it interesting to see a comparison between typical ball rounds used by the military ... NATO spec 124gr. 9mm @ ~1300fps vs. milspec 230gr .45ACP @ ~850fps
|
I'll be happy to do one for you if you want- just say the word.