If you search the threads, seems RBCD has been discussed as far back as '05. ExSoldier was using some of it, anyone else still using this stuff? Do you trust it?
Printable View
If you search the threads, seems RBCD has been discussed as far back as '05. ExSoldier was using some of it, anyone else still using this stuff? Do you trust it?
Total marketing nonsense.
Randy
We seem to have come full circle. It seems clear that any relation to a common understanding of the definition of "blended metal technology" and the construction of the RBCD bullet is marketing hyperbole at best and a terrible deception at worst. So what? What does that have to do with actual performance? Most of what I buy seems to be promoted this way on all of the media I'm exposed to. And, as a frequent "early adopter," I'm more often than not, disappointed by actual performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by shooterX
Trust this ammo?... The Florida LE department does. Why shouldn't we? What do we know that they don't know, or vice versa?
Frankly, I was inclined to dismiss this bullet from further consideration until this LE department endorsement. Now, I'm inclined to dig deeper than just the "conventional wisdom," since the conventional wisdom seems unable to answer this or the following questions.
Author's observation of damage?... What accounts for the profoundly different damage profiles of these bullets verses conventional HP? Is the reported damage, as implied, more likely to "stop" the assailant?
What accounts for the inability of standard tissue simulant to predict the tissue damage observed?
Velocity. When you strip away all the "blended metal" BS, the RBCD pistol ammo is just a very lightweight, high velocity load. 60 grain 9mm, 77 grain .40, and 90 grain .45, all going around 2000fps. RCBD is not the first company to try this (which is probably why their marketing is so misleading). The characteristics of lightweight, high velocity pistol bullets are well known: they produce large but relatively shallow wounds. They look nasty, and can, eventually, be lethal, but they don't do as good a job of incapacitating an assailant as a deeper penetrating hollowpoint will.Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardCohodas
No, they are much less likely to immediately stop an assailant.Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardCohodas
I didn't see the post claiming that a LE department is using the ammo so these questions may have already been addressed. Who made the claim? Someone from the company? Someone claiming to be from the actual department? Just wondering how the claim was verified.
I understand the rationale that "if a police department uses it, it *must* be good" but that doesn't necessarily have any basis in fact.
As for police departments and the ammo (or any equipment) they use....
Some departments hire independent outside testing organizations and/or consultants who specialize in the area of interest.
Some departments conduct their own testing and that can range anywhere between the most rigid scientific and exhaustive research and performance testing you can imagine to an officer shooting it through water-filled jugs or clods of dirt in his backyard.
Some departments select their ammo solely because another department selected it, regardless if the other department did any testing.
Randy
In the OP I linked to an article in the current issue of American Cop Magazine titled "Le Mas Handgun Ammo Rifle-Like Firepower" by Bob Pilgrim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy
The article begins as follows:Quote:
Recently, it came to my attention the highly respected Coral Gables, Florida police department has, after extensive study and research adopted light weight, high velocity Le Mas SPLP/SRAP (Law Enforcement Military Ammunition Special Purpose Limited Penetration/ Short Range Armor Penetrating) ammunition. The adoption applies across their small arms spectrum for its issue pistols and rifles. After reading their study and examining subsequent positive reports by medical professionals, at the request of American Cop magazine, I attended a live fire medical training demonstration involving this unconventional ammunition.
The demonstration was conducted at DARC training facility (Direct Action Resource Center) near Little Rock, Arkansas and involved military medical personnel training to treat and save battlefield casualties during the “Golden Hour.” The DARC advanced combat emergency medical training program includes the use of anesthetized animals under the care of a licensed veterinarian according to US government protocols. The animals were alive, but felt no pain or discomfort. In addition to thoracic and extremity gunshot wounds, the animals were exposed to other typical tactical traumas that Coalition Forces were experiencing in the two current theaters of conflict. Young men and women responded immediately and worked feverously by employing field or “Ditch” medical techniques. They made every attempt to stabilize, treat and sustain their “patients” for transport to advanced medical care facilities. However, when Le Mas (LM) handgun ammunitions inflicted wounds to either the thorax or an extremity, their valiant efforts proved futile.
Clever? Maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by OD
Amusing? So, so.
Illuminating the issue? Not!
I'm looking for informed feedback to help me analyze both sides of the issue. I am disappointed in posts like yours. Oh well.
I'm sure you are not the first Howard. Life must be a drag with out a sense of humor.Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardCohodas
Thanks for posting here. I did look at the article linked in your first post but admittedly stopped reading it word for word once I realized what it was about. That ammunition has been around for a while and the claims regarding performance have always been nonsensical.Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardCohodas
The DARC website looks a little questionable to me. Hard to judge a book by the cover though.
The animal testing bit reminds me of the story of the Strasbourg goat tests. Hey, it sold lots of "Guns and Blaster" magazines.
I wonder if anyone has contacted the department to verify the ammunition claim. I would like to believe that any credible LE agency wouldn't fall for a marketing spin but who knows...
Randy
I thought the (BS) meter don't lie :hand5:
I found it funny.
I think this nails it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackeagle
Maybe a call to that PD is in order to verify the story. Maybe they are willing to trade penetration in flesh for the ability to defeat body armor? IMHO, a better bet would be the Rhodesian drill (2 to the upper torso, 1 to the head) with more conventional ammo...
There is no controversy. It is marketing hype and junk science. Really light bullets with a very low sectional density traveling really fast will slow down really fast, especially after expanding. It will not penetrate deep enough to do any real damage. And the explanation about the bullets sensing the temperature or makeup of the target is BS. How does it sense these things? How does the bullet change its behavior as a result? And how does it do this in the milliseconds between firing and impact? The answers are it can't.
Let's see:Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardCohodas
- Loses credibility with marketing hype
- Loses credibility with long acronyms
- Improper research
- Is nothing but a light bullet at high velocity with high prices.
If you can't figure it out, there's no hope.