New Hornady video: Critical Duty - Page 3

New Hornady video: Critical Duty

This is a discussion on New Hornady video: Critical Duty within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Airborne Falcon I am going to post another video of what I understand Hornady is shooting for (pardon the pun) with the ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 46
Like Tree40Likes

Thread: New Hornady video: Critical Duty

  1. #31
    Member Array JoeFriday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by Airborne Falcon View Post
    I am going to post another video of what I understand Hornady is shooting for (pardon the pun) with the new bullets. This is the Holy Grail I typed-of earlier (see first two minutes):
    I agree that the bullet and technology in the History Channel clip is ground breaking. I'm not sold that Hornady is on the same playing field, and I don't think they are alone. It just seems that many of the manufacturers are more focused on tweaks to re-market the same thing they have been doing. That is, there are only marginal changes that they then command premium prices from consumers. I don't know the size of the self-defense ammo market, but I am sure it is not inconsequential.

    I understand the business behind what Hornady and others are doing. Take a look at Schumpeter's product life cycle theory that has been around for years. In a nutshell, price flatlines unless there is 'innovation' to spur growth in demand and price. And, that is where I think the market is getting off the tracks of groundbreaking innovation because it's much cheaper and faster for R&D to tweak rather than re-think what they are doing.


  2. #32
    Member Array Airborne Falcon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Capital City, SC
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeFriday View Post
    I agree that the bullet and technology in the History Channel clip is ground breaking. I'm not sold that Hornady is on the same playing field, and I don't think they are alone. It just seems that many of the manufacturers are more focused on tweaks to re-market the same thing they have been doing. That is, there are only marginal changes that they then command premium prices from consumers. I don't know the size of the self-defense ammo market, but I am sure it is not inconsequential.

    I understand the business behind what Hornady and others are doing. Take a look at Schumpeter's product life cycle theory that has been around for years. In a nutshell, price flatlines unless there is 'innovation' to spur growth in demand and price. And, that is where I think the market is getting off the tracks of groundbreaking innovation because it's much cheaper and faster for R&D to tweak rather than re-think what they are doing.
    Amen to that - well stated, much appreciated.

    Here's the problem imho, and correct me if I am wrong. Unless we're talking pulse weapons and phasers (sic), there's not too much more we can do with modern bullet technology other than "tweaking."

    The entire history of small projectile design has been all about "tweaking" the same basic component - a lead core. Off the top of my head it went from ball, to conical miniball, to spitzer fmj to jacketed HP to copper solids to compressed composite to bonded jacketed compressed composites ... you get the idea, and I get your point it's just that "tweaking" is the acceptable methodology for everything from brain surgery to automotive design, agreed? So why the ball busting of the ammo industry?

    Let's face it, until they get the battery problem squared aware and higher efficiency mono crystal solar cells out there - cars are going to be powered by fossil fuels pretty much the identical same way they were the first day they rolled out of someone's shop somewhere. And until modern medicine comes up with one of those Star Trek scanners that can fix brain tumors ... they're still going to have to keep cutting into your skull, albeit these days they do it with lasers through small holes rather than cutting off the top of your skull with a saw and then going in there with a scalpel.

    Tweaking bullet design is what we've got, for now. And they are doing pretty good with it if you stop and think about it. Gold Dot was a tweak, Ranger T was a tweak, HST was a tweak ... and now so is this. But I get what you are saying, entirely and that's what I was trying to express earlier - if they don't keep selling product, then the money dries-up, everything goes stale and they either have to raise prices dramatically or they go out of business.

    Me, personally, I'm happy to see them out there still trying.
    Doghandler likes this.
    What you think about, you do ... what you do, you become.

  3. #33
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548

  4. #34
    VIP Member Array smolck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    3,120
    Zombies don't care if you shoot them with FMJ or hollow points. Hit em in the head, they go down. Just sayin.

  5. #35
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,442
    Well, the facts are that cartridge manufacturers have Research & Development people. Usually VERY intelligent people who are experts in projectile design, ballistics, etc.
    They are allocated money to experiment and test various bullet weights, configurations, alloys, bullet jacket materials, new propellents, hollow point designs, bullet alloy hardness....etc...etc...and it is their job to attempt to fabricate various combinations of the above in order to create cartridges that are better and more effective for their intended use or purpose.
    They don't ALWAYS hit a Home Run BUT, Cartridge Design and especially Handgun Cartridge Design HAS increased Terminal Effectiveness by Leaps and Bounds in recent years.
    And then it is their job to see how those cartridges will function, feed, perform, using various firearms and various barrel lengths and combinations of industry accepted test Media in order to determine comparative results and effectiveness in standardized test material like Ballistic Gelatin.

    SINCE (In The United States) they cannot just go to the local prison and select 20 prisoners....line them up...shoot them...and record how long it takes for them to bleed out and/or die.

    For example the .380 TODAY certainly is NOT the same .380 that it was years ago. And the 9mm of today ain't your Grandpas 9mm either.

    And then once extensive testing is completed - naturally the next step is called MARKETING - which includes a PRODUCT NAME and PACKAGING DESIGN.

    FOLKS! They have to NAME them Something!


    SO...please don't base cartridge performance on IF you like the name or not and automatically discount any ammunition brand or type because it's "Critical" or "EXTREME"


    Unless you would rather go into WALMART or your local Gun Store and see this (BELOW) on the shelves.


    Federal Cartridges .45 ACP A-B-C-D
    Buffalo Bore Cartridges .45 ACP A-B-C
    CCI Cartridges .45 ACP A-C-D
    Winchester Cartridges .45 ACP B-D
    Aguila Cartridges .45 ACP A-B-C-D
    Fiocchi Cartridges .45 ACP A-D
    Hornady Cartridges .45 ACP A-B-C-D
    PMC Cartridges .45 ACP A-B-D
    Remington Cartridges .45 ACP A-B-C-D-E
    Airborne Falcon likes this.

  6. #36
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,442
    Please try to have some respect for the OP who has obviously put up a VIDEO that is demonstrating a new handgun cartridge and its performance in industry accepted ballistic media (which is attempting to honestly simulate various possibly encountered bullet performance scenarios)

    I'm certain that the OP of this thread would like to hear a few intelligent comments from Gun People on how they believe the cartridge is performing rather than what it was named.


    I honestly don't care if it's named Hornady Little Bo Peeps.
    Airborne Falcon likes this.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Array Happypuppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Small Town USA
    Posts
    893
    It could be good, time will tell when independent tests start. I really like the polymer tipped bullet in 9mm, but I don't like the 115 grain size, too light IMO. The 135 sounds like a good comprise between the 127 ranger I carry and the 147 grain round.


    Sent from my 300 baud modem
    Airborne Falcon likes this.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Array SFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    757
    Personally I would like to shoot a round called Purple People Eaters. Why? No good reason.

    I'm still trying to figure out how many golden sabers are melted down to make golden saber bullets too.

    Why does federal care about shooting water? Immobilizing water seems like an impossible task. The Chippewa have a saying, "You never see the same river twice." Why? Well, the water is moving and a river is constantly changing after all.

    Ah, so many bad one liners can be had for marketing names. From what I've read about the new Critical Duty line is very positive. This round was designed to meet the one standard we have to measure against. The FBI standards. As a couple of people have mentioned, it is what Critical Defense should have been.

    I'm not knocking Hornady for going the wrong direction, in my opinion, at first. Every company makes mistakes from time to time.
    Airborne Falcon likes this.

  9. #39
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    2,308
    Meh.

    First off, I'll wait for independent tests to confirm Hornady's marketroid claims. They always gush that they have the best. ammo. EVAR...but for some reason, it doesn't live up to the hype.

    Second off--for the price, it doesn't do anything better than HST, Ranger-T, or Gold Dot, but costs twice as much.

    I'm sure folks will fall in love with the marketroid ads, and simply have to have it...but until I see real proof it does better than what's already out there (for cheaper), I see no point in it.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  10. #40
    Member Array JoeFriday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by Airborne Falcon View Post
    Here's the problem imho, and correct me if I am wrong. Unless we're talking pulse weapons and phasers (sic), there's not too much more we can do with modern bullet technology other than "tweaking."
    I would call the metallurgy in the History Channel more than a tweak. That is re-thinking what the bullet is. It is almost a smart bullet in that it detects the point of impact hardness and adjusts accordingly. I would see Critical Duty as a tweak and an answer to Winchester's PDX1.

    The human condition is that we think in terms of where we are rather than re-think what things should be many times. Glock is example of someone that basically approached the pistol from the ground up rather than making adjustments to past designs. Rifling is yet another. How many years were firearms around before someone thought of that, yet it is so simple in our eyes now. Often times when we see something ground breaking, we get that, 'It's so simple, why didn't I think of that?' feeling.

    While we are seeing advancements in ammunition, I think we are seeing more of the business side of the ammo world about branding and moving into the 'premium' category to justify prices rather than true innovation, and that is introducing the cynicism you see here and other places toward the ammo manufacturers. They are chasing the money at this point; however, someone will come along at some point with the one idea that will set the ammo world on its end. I just don't think we have seen it yet in the market.

  11. #41
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,098
    "It is almost a smart bullet in that it detects the point of impact hardness and adjusts accordingly."

    JoeFriday; I like your post but simply don't believe bullet technology is truly capable of this no matter what sort of metallurgy or "bonding technology" of metals is involved.

    The Hornady clip really doesn't really show anything astounding, in the literal sense of the word. It shows bullets penetrating head on through various types of barrier material that is snugged up against blocks of jello. It doesn't show that the bullet can defeat barriers any better than some other bullets. It doesn't show that the bullet out-expands or more reliably expands than other possible ammunition selections for we don't see other offerings similarly tested on the clip. We didn't see a comparative test on the other bullets available out there. The clip (along many here in the Forum) also assumes that the end user is pre-programed to buy into the whole "FBI test" as the standard. We crave a "standard" but can we realistically attain a standard? The clip makes no allowances for possible bullet deflection off target and bullet deflection occurs, sometimes in spades, even if the target is close behind the barrier. Bullet deflection can occur inside of a live target. What about oblique angles? Is striking the hard barrier at an angle going to change the bullet's path or its expansion characteristics?

    There are so many aspects of shooting and terminal ballistics that are outside the control of a projectile that its design cannot compensate for every possibility.

    Seeking magic bullets is an admirable thing to do. Problem is, it's much like seeking potions claiming to cure baldness, banish cellulite, contribute to male enhancement, increase bust size, cure poor vision, or any other "snake oil" that's been sold to the desperate and gullible of the world. Sort of like those X-Ray glasses advertised in the back of comic books of the 1960s. It's also close kin to Facebook IPOs. Bullet marketing is dependent on an ill-informed yet concerned customer wanting a magic "potion" that achieves reliable results and relieves his anxieties about his own capabilities. He's wanting to compensate.

    "They are chasing the money at this point; however, someone will come along at some point with the one idea that will set the ammo world on its end. I just don't think we have seen it yet in the market."

    This is an excellent observation!

    Accurate shot placement is vastly more important than bullet performance. I'm not saying I can reliably achieve accurate shot placement under the stress of fending off an assailant but I'd better be for trying my very best to shoot straight. Another way to put it would be to ask the question: "How many here believe that they can truly depend on a bullet's terminal performance to make up for bad hits? And no, spray and pray with multiple magic bullets will not necessarily keep the axe from falling.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,021
    Something to consider...

    If you are a LEO and carry off-duty under LEOSA, and want to carry in places like NJ (where JHPs are illegal off-duty), then rounds like Critical Duty, Critical Defense, Federal's EFMJ (hard to find lately) and PowRBall may make a lot of sense. I don't buy that JHPs are vastly better "stoppers" than a similarly placed FMJ (talking handguns here) - but the expanding rounds will have less risk of over-penetration.

    Note - I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice about what is or is not legal in the screwed-up PRNJ.

    Personally, I like Federal's EFMJ, but only in the heavier 124 gr +p 9mm version. If I cannot find any more, I will probably give the Critical Duty loads a try. No, I do not think they are "better" than other JHPs, but I do like the concept of not having a cavity to get crushed, wrapped by fibers, or plugged. I also like that these loads are on the heavy-for-caliber side of things.
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger SP101, LCR, LCP (2), Mini 14; Marlin 336 .30-30; Mossberg 500
    CT Lasers

  13. #43
    Member Array framedcraig1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Mapleton, Ut
    Posts
    146
    IMO ..I'm going to stick with FTX critical defense. Being a civilian, I don't think I'm going to have to shoot through the engine block of a Buick..but I do like the idea of a round that will punch through denim and leather, and then do it's cavitation thing in the BG. Speer defense round is pretty there also.
    All men are equal...CC makes us equal-er.

  14. #44
    Member Array JoeFriday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    "It is almost a smart bullet in that it detects the point of impact hardness and adjusts accordingly."

    JoeFriday; I like your post but simply don't believe bullet technology is truly capable of this no matter what sort of metallurgy or "bonding technology" of metals is involved.
    I can't confirm or deny what the bullet in the History Channel clip can or cannot do. I just reported what they claimed it could do and showed in their tests. They claimed their four metal process was the secret.

    If you would have told a WWII soldier that in the future they could fire a grenade from a semi-auto gun and have the round explode above the target behind a barricade, they would have thought you insane. That was behind my last post. At this point, we can't see past current bullet designs and capabilities to comprehend what the future game changer will be.

  15. #45
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    2,308
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeFriday View Post
    I would call the metallurgy in the History Channel more than a tweak. That is re-thinking what the bullet is. It is almost a smart bullet in that it detects the point of impact hardness and adjusts accordingly. I would see Critical Duty as a tweak and an answer to Winchester's PDX1.

    The human condition is that we think in terms of where we are rather than re-think what things should be many times. Glock is example of someone that basically approached the pistol from the ground up rather than making adjustments to past designs. Rifling is yet another. How many years were firearms around before someone thought of that, yet it is so simple in our eyes now. Often times when we see something ground breaking, we get that, 'It's so simple, why didn't I think of that?' feeling.

    While we are seeing advancements in ammunition, I think we are seeing more of the business side of the ammo world about branding and moving into the 'premium' category to justify prices rather than true innovation, and that is introducing the cynicism you see here and other places toward the ammo manufacturers. They are chasing the money at this point; however, someone will come along at some point with the one idea that will set the ammo world on its end. I just don't think we have seen it yet in the market.
    Except they don't.

    The LeMas bullets have been debunked; their "4-metal voodoo alchemy" bullet was shown to be nothing more than standard bullets (I think the rilfe bullet initially pictured was just a V-max or A-max with a moly coat).

    Their pistol bullets were just plain ol'lead over a polymer ball.

    Read all about it here: LeMas/RBCD Ammunition Analysis - M4Carbine.net Forums

    There's a reason LeMas isn't around anymore...their lying about their ammunition being a major part of it.

    Final proof is now available, as noted, as after a 3 year, $1,050,000.00 Congressionally mandated multi-agency testing effort, the United States government has come to exactly the same conclusion about the duplicitous nature of LeMas's claims, as documented in the recently released USSCOM/ARDEC report: “ARAET-TR-07009 Blended Metal Technology Review and Analysis”.
    Source: http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Exotic_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm
    10thmtn and Airborne Falcon like this.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

critical duty
,

critical duty 9mm review

,
critical duty review
,

critical duty vs hst

,
federal hst 9mm vs hornady
,
federal hst vs hornady critical duty
,

hornady critical duty 9mm

,
hornady critical duty 9mm p
,

hornady critical duty 9mm review

,

hornady critical duty review

,

hornady critical duty vs federal hst

,
hornady hst
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors