#Ballistics

The days of the old “levels” of body armor are coming to an end. Finally, the National Institute of Justice released their long-awaited new armor classification guide. Let’s take a look at NIJ 0101.07 and NIJ 0123.00 to see what the new ratings look like. 

There are a lot of new, first-time gun owners out there, and I thought I’d take a moment to make ballistics visualized to help new gun owners with explaining how ballistics work with an easy-to-see and do object lesson. This article isn’t exactly meant for our faithful readers that are already aware of how ballistics work, but they’re certainly free to comment if I’ve missed anything or if they have other suggestions on how they explain the topic. Without further ado, if you’ve recently joined the masses in exercising your right to own firearms and you’d like to know how to get your bullets on target, here are some things to consider.

Ballistics gel or ballistic gelatin is a fairly common and familiar substance that is often used to test the efficacy and performance of various projectile or bladed weapons. Ballistics gel is quite often used by independent persons and professionals alike to either test ammunition or view the effects of said ammunition on what amounts to a close simulation of human and animal tissue. After the infamous Miami Dade shootout, the FBI established a set of testing protocols to determine the performance of ammunition. It’s generally understood that on a bare “10% Ordnance Gelatin” block a bullet should penetrate no less than 12 and no more than 18 inches into the target otherwise it begins to lose points in the FBI’s complex formula for determining whether or not the ammunition is suitable for law enforcement applications.

Although the results are noted as unofficial, DSG Inc and  Edwin Sarkissian have just posted a video of what they are calling a World Record Gel Penetration Test. Using DSG’s specially designed bullets that are designed to supercavitate, the below video shows a 7.62×51 projectile passing through 13 feet of clear ballistic gel before hitting a watermelon. As a comparison, a “standard” round was fired into the gel demonstrating a devastating temporary cavity.

Welcome to the first installment of First Firearm series. We’re starting off in a slightly predictable way with considerations for your first Home Defense (HD) handgun. However, for those that aren’t ready or able to jump into concealed carry, having the ability to protect one’s self in their castle is a reasonable place to start gun ownership. I couldn’t even count the number of bumps in the night my wife or I have woken up to and felt the need to investigate. I imagine others have had such rude awakenings at some point in their life. One doesn’t need to look too deep in a newspaper or watch much nightly news to understand that break-ins are a thing.

The Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test’s first batch of 6 rounds is through, but there’s more to come. In the last post, we reflected on the test methodology, and some possible solutions. In this post, we’ll talk about what you can expect in the future.

We’ve seen how the 6 different .223 Remington and 5.56mm loads have fared in the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test, but we still have more to talk about. Specifically, we need to discuss what I did wrong (or what I am not satisfied with), and what I plan to do next. This post will concern the former, and a second installment will cover the latter.

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is RUAG Ammotec’s version of the NATO-standard SS109 round (equivalent to US M855). I believe the ammunition I tested may have been made in RUAG’s facility in Thun, Switzerland, although I have not confirmed that.

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is RUAG Ammotec’s version of the NATO-standard SS109 round (equivalent to US M855). I believe the ammunition I tested may have been made in RUAG’s facility in Thun, Switzerland, although I have not confirmed that. The test procedure was as follows:

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is Federal’s T556TNB1 load, which is the civilian market name for the Mk.318 SOST projectile developed by US SOCOM as a “barrier blind” round for the M4 Carbine and Mk. 18 CQB upper receiver. This ammunition uses a reverse drawn jacket to improve accuracy, and couples a fragmenting front end with a solid gilding metal base that improves penetration through tough barriers. I love this ammunition and use it religiously for home defense.  Continuing on from the last installment, we are now looking at the velocity test results for the 20″ barrel (more on the 16″ later).

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is Federal’s T556TNB1 load, which is the civilian market name for the Mk.318 SOST projectile developed by US SOCOM as a “barrier blind” round for the M4 Carbine and Mk. 18 CQB upper receiver. This ammunition uses a reverse drawn jacket to improve accuracy, and couples a fragmenting front end with a solid gilding metal base that improves penetration through tough barriers. I love this ammunition, and use it religiously for home defense. The test procedure was as follows:

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is Korean manufacturer PMC’s clone of M855, called X-TAC M855 LAP. This ammunition features very uniform-looking external dimensions, attractively finished brass cases and projectile jackets, and a reasonable price. I formerly used M855 as a stockpiling round, although I have since switched to other rounds like Federal’s T556TNB1.

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is Korean manufacturer PMC’s clone of M855, called X-TAC M855 LAP. This ammunition features very uniform-looking external dimensions, attractively finished brass cases and projectile jackets, and a reasonable price. I formerly used M855 as a stockpiling round, although I have since switched to other rounds like Federal’s T556TNB1. The test procedure was as follows:

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is Korean manufacturer PMC’s clone of M193 Ball, called XP193. This ammunition features very uniform-looking external dimensions, attractively finished brass cases and projectile jackets, and a reasonable price. Interestingly, XP193 appears to use a lower drag 55gr bullet, possibly based on the Sierra 55gr, instead of the somewhat draggier Remington-style projectiles used by Federal, IMI, and others for their M193 clones. I like to use XP193 when I need full-power ammunition without spending too much.  Continuing on from the last installment, we are now looking at the velocity test results for the 20″ barrel (more on the 16″ later).

Next up for  the Big Freakin’ Cartridge Test is Korean manufacturer PMC’s clone of M193 Ball, called XP193. This ammunition features very uniform-looking external dimensions, attractively finished brass cases and projectile jackets, and a reasonable price. Interestingly, XP193 appears to use a lower drag 55gr bullet, possibly based on the Sierra 55gr, instead of the somewhat draggier Remington-style projectiles used by Federal, IMI, and others for their M193 clones. I like to use XP193 when I need full-power ammunition without spending too much. The test procedure was as follows: