Defensive Carry banner

RBCD Ammo controversy

83K views 115 replies 30 participants last post by  Tubby45 
#1 ·
#44 ·
Hi Howard - I read that article a while back. The most interesting thing to me is that while what they call a "pressure wave" can contribute to terminal effect, they still recommend the primary consideration be: hitting your target; and a minimum of 12" penetration.

The issue is that ammo like RBCD does not meet the 12" standard.

"Pressure wave" is also not the same thing as "hydrostatic shock." The latter refers to permanent wounds caused by the temporary stretch cavity (the tissue gets stretched too far and/or too fast) - generally happens only with rifle bullet-type energy levels.

"Pressure wave" refers to a wave that travels through the large arteries around the heart (so, shot placement in the upper chest is key) to the brain. IIRC, it only has enough energy to cause damage for about 18" or so, so hitting someone in the femoral artery in the leg isn't going to do it. The hits need to be near the heart.

Any bullet that stops inside the target will transfer all its energy, whether that happens via fragmentation or expansion.

The authors (to their credit) agree that "pressure wave" doesn't always happen, and doesn't always work to stop the threat - thus their recommendations.

In the end, this is a very fascinating discussion of terminal ballistics. But, it doesn't really change anything - hit your target in the high chest, and use a bullet with at least 12" penetration (that will hopefully stop inside the target).
 
#61 ·
WOW!



Well, since I live in Coral Gables and that's MY police dept, I'll have to check this out.
 
#55 ·
Jim Cirillo helped lend a hand in developing RBCD ammo...

Jim Cirillo of NYPD Stakeout Unit was one of the individuals involved in the concept behind RBCD ammo. Everything I have read of Mr. Cirillo, he was a great study of ballistics & the lethality of carry ammo. If Jim Cirillo was attached to its inception, I believe RBCD to be more than "smoke & mirrors."
 
#59 ·
I don't know about any of RBCD's claims and don't really care what Le Mas has said. I just want to know do they work. So I tested 9 mm RBCD, Corbon DPX and Glaser silver on pork roasts. The Corbon expanded well and penetrated at least 17 inches, a couple went through. Even with full expansion the diameter of the hole isn't the big, well less than an inch. The glasers produced holes that were about 5-8 inches deep and at the widest point about 2 inches in diameter. There were a couple of BBs that penetrated to about 10 inches. The RBCD produced a cone that was about 5 inches wide and about 7 inches deep with additional minor penetration out to 8-10 inches. The holes were very similar to the ones in the pictures in the article.

Was my test scientific? Nope. Should you rely on it? Nope. Do the test yourself. But from seeing it, I have to believe most BGs are going to be shocked by a hole 5 inches wide in them even if only 7 inches deep and I have to believe you are going to get a whole lot of bleeding from that kind of hole.

Glasers have been found effective against unarmored BGs. I have to believe from what I saw that RBCDs would be more effective.

So for my in house defence, I use three rounds of RBCDs with Corbon DPX
filling the magazine.
 
#64 ·
$$$

I don't know about any of RBCD's claims and don't really care what Le Mas has said. I just want to know do they work. So I tested 9 mm RBCD, Corbon DPX and Glaser silver on pork roasts.
I would love to test them on roasts. Or maybe a huge chunk of prime rib! But with the price of MEAT :rant: these days (which is almost more than ammo) I can't afford this test, so since I believe in RBCD already I'll just take your word for it. But I would truly love to see what a RBCD 454 Casull would do to such a roast! :image035:
 
#60 ·
I load RBCD in all my back up mags and Mag Safe in my primary (in the gun) mags. Why RBCD? I have a very good friend, retired as a senior officer in Special Operations who once told me that SOCOM buys the stuff by the pallet and he personally would never go with anything else when it's HIS neck on the line. I have heard this from other operators as well. I have heard a lot of folks on this form and on others offer a lot of negative comments on RBCD but I'll keep my own counsel. A lot of folks like to point to the famous BOX-O-TRUTH results but I never put any stock in gallon jugs of water simulating flesh. I can't stand that "test site." For grins I have also purchased RBCD in .223 and 454 Casull. I also have them in both 9mm and 45ACP and I'll probably buy some more boxes in both those calibers.
 
#65 ·
I have a very good friend, retired as a senior officer in Special Operations who once told me that SOCOM buys the stuff by the pallet...
Are you sure they use this ammo on operations? Or as a training round? (Fragments against steel plate targets)

Given the military's need to penetrate cover, I find it hard to believe that they use this ammo operationally. I wonder if there is a misunderstanding here?...
 
#63 ·
The issue with all shallow penetration rounds is that, frequently, your rounds will need to penetrate hands and/or forearms before even getting to the chest cavity.

Think of an attacker - his hands will almost always be outstretched towards you...either holding a weapon, or instinctively shielding himself from your return fire.

Think of your own shots - many will land on those outstretched arms and hands. You will naturally focus on the hands, since that is where the danger is. That is also where your shots will tend to go. Try it at the range with a target depicting a gun or knife wielding attacker.

If you use Glaser or RBCD ammo, the bullet will fragment upon hitting the forearms or hands. The chest will only get fragments - resulting in much less spectacular damage than seen in meat or gel tests.

Then there is the issue of angled, oblique shots. The upper chest cavity is not too deep front-to-back, but come in at an angle from the side, and penetration needs to go up to reach the vitals.

Can a fragmenting round work? Sure. Most thugs will likely stop if their arm is blown up. But...if it's a right handed motivated or drugged thug and his left arm is blown up...maybe not. Not before he kills you.

Shot placement. Penetration. No magic bullets.

JMHO.
 
#67 ·
I watched my 11 year old nephew arguing about pokeman trading cards this entire discussion is so similar. If you like the RCBS load it up, if you like tried and true load it up. This thread boarders on infantile; I can't wait till someone says "your mom".
 
#68 ·
So?



You're so critical, feel free to exit the discussion at any moment.
 
#70 ·
I was not going to add this,but I must. I have tested the .45acp 90gr. stuff through car windshields with no deflection at all, striking a 25lb block of clay. The round did not pass through the clay. Even shot the windshield,striking the dash next and the round still hit the clay without going through it. When we shot the door,the round went through the door striking the clay and stopping. Second round into the door struck the inside door beam and stopped without striking the clay. I don't think a .223 round would have passed through the inside door beam.Just grown men's curiosity satisified that day. Needles to say I carry RBCD in all the handguns and my SOCOM 16.
 
#71 ·
ExSoldier - Interesting. I wonder how JAG approved the use of expanding bullets for SOF?

I wasn't referring to body armor, so much as the need to penetrate cover. One of the reasons the military has stayed with FMJ for general use - in addition to the legalities.

Blademan - I have no doubt that a light and fast bullet (which means high kinetic energy) can penetrate light sheet steel and auto glass. My concerns are more related to penetrating flesh and bone (forearms) which starts the bullet fragmentation process, and then still needing to penetrate to the vitals in the chest cavity.

Maybe a block of clay behind another block of clay, with a few inches of space between?

Edit - One other question...have either of you taken one of these bullets apart? Not sure if you've read through this whole thread, but another member did cut one open. Instead of exotic "blended metals" it appears to be a rather ordinary JSP, with much of the lead removed and replaced by a light plastic plug. Thus an ultralight and ultrafast bullet. Whether these bullets can work or not, I really don't want to give $2 per round to a bunch of charlatans.

If you do cut one open, I'm sure we would be interested to see what you find - and your reaction. Maybe they make different kinds of bullets - I don't know. Just seems fishy to me.
 
#77 ·
Ah I do have a caveat. I am told that RBCD has a different load they sell to "civilians" than the one they sell to the military. Civilians do not have access to the military loads. So if one of you active duty guys can get your armorer or chain of command to make an "off the shelf buy" thru channels for experimentation it's something you might consider. When I was a G4 guy on active duty I did this all the time for other products, no problems. Part of getting the mission accomplished.
 
#78 ·
Both the "civilian" and the "military" loads are listed on their website as "TFSP" (Total Fragmenting Soft Point). One could presume they are very similar?

I think this analysis, referenced in the original post, really says it all.

LeMas/RBCD Ammunition Analysis - M4Carbine.net Forums

If you're willing to give your business to folks who "embellish" the truth, go right ahead.
 
#83 ·
"Can a fragmenting round work? Sure. Most thugs will likely stop if their arm is blown up. But...if it's a right handed motivated or drugged thug and his left arm is blown up...maybe not. Not before he kills you."

If you look at the stats, most BGs leave when they see a gun, most of those that don't, stop if they get shot anywhere. For those that will stop when shot, RBCD is just as effective as a standard JHP. For the 1 percent really tough guys, no hand gun round is going to be immediately effective unless it goes in the brain. But it seems to me a blown up hand or arm is more likely to shock them than a less than 1/2 inch hole through their hand or arm and into their body. Moreover with RBCD, you stand a good chance of hitting the artery in that hand or arm leading to bleed out.

Having said that I carry DPX after the first three rounds because if I have to make a head shot, I want to make sure it penetrates the skull.

The advantage of RBCD or any light bullet is that they are less likely to ricochet off hard surfaces and will lose velocity faster so that bystanders at a distance are less likely to be hurt. I understand that RBCD doesn't fragment when going through wallboard but it seems to me a light bullet would slow down faster going through wallboard than a heavier bullet and therefor be of less danger to a son or daughter behind the wall. I haven't seen that idea tested though.

Agree that there is no magic bullet. But different bullets may be better in different applications. Shot Placement and number is always key.
 
#84 ·
+1!

Well said and I agree 100%

Also I like your rationale of the DPX after a certain number of initial rounds. I may follow that logic and replace half my initial mag's capacity of 15 +1 in the tube with 6 magsafe (as usual) and go DPX with the rest.
 
#89 ·
ShooterX - Your proposal is exactly what I do. RBCD in the chamber and the top two rounds in the mag. The rest are Corbon DX although with my 9 mm Hipower it is more like 13 rounds in a 15 round mag. In my 9mm J Frame I use all Corbon DPX just because I trust that round better in that gun. In my Taurus 44 mag revolver, I have two rounds of Glaser Silver, just because I already had it followed by Corbon DPX.
 
#92 ·
Physics strikes again

Correct, no surprise there.

Barrier penetration is more related to kinetic energy, which increases exponentially with velocity. Thus, barrier penetration is best achieved with higher velocity projectiles.

Penetration in flesh, however, is more related to momentum, which is simply mass x velocity. This favors heavier projectiles.

If you want to penetrate body armor, RBCD may be a good choice. But, you still get a more shallow wound that may not reach the vitals.

Better bet may be the usual failure to stop drill - 2 to the chest followed by 1 to the head (aka Mozambique drill).
 
#93 ·
I don't want to penetrate body armor, if my gun were to get taken away during a struggle and used on me I want my vest to stop the round. I don't carry this ammo, I couldn't even if I wanted to. I am issued Federal HST. I ordered a few boxes a couple years ago just to see what the hype was about. I do keep a mag of it hid in my cruiser just in case I were to need such a round.
 
#94 ·
Rbcd performance plus ammo discussion

I'd like to address the PRACTICAL points about this ammo and hopefully, cast an experienced light on its use.
I have loved guns all my life, but in the last many years, I have refined my scope of interest to handguns, specifically, Glocks. By way of qualifying my opinion of RBCD ammo, I have the following "credentials", if you will:

I have been legally licensed to carry since the 70's when my Nursing School classmate was raped and murdered in Memphis, TN. I have been shooting for pleasure and in competitions for years, and own many handguns, all different calibers, as well as rifles and shotguns. I have been fortunate to attend two courses (60 hours) of study under Clint Smith at the Kerrville, Texas facility, THUNDER RANCH. In addition, I used what I've learned from a lifetime of shooting, but especially what I learned from Clint, to teach a Defensive Hangun Course while I lived in Texas. I also conducted Concealed Handgun Classes for both men and women. Before I would accept women into the CHL class, I REQUIRED them to take the Defensive Handgun Course first. I am not disparaging women; I just learned early on that women were somewhat intimidated by male handgun instructors, but they responded very well to a female teacher (yes, I am one of each). I actually was pressed into developing a CHL class for women by my local shooting range folks when I lived in Texas. It was a lot of hard work, little pay, but rich in reward, to see in one weekend's time, a woman go from a timid, insecure, frightened victim-in-waiting, to a confident, poised and ready "defender-in-waiting". She KNEW she could do it!

Now, for the ammo thing.
Regarding the testing done by 'Truth-In-A-Box', I have to challenge him on several levels. Respectfully, I feel that he has done a tremendous disservice to this ammo because he was simply[/I] unfamiliar with it on a practical level.[/I]I have conducted very similar tests in front of students, and have proved to them that, if their lives depend on a reliable handgun and reliable ammo, the combination of the Glock and RBCD ammo is one to be depended upon, without fail.

I have used the gallon jug demo many times, using Federal HydroShock ammo as my control (which is what I carried up until I found the RBCD Performance Plus). Needless to say, after my comparing both ammos, I quickly abandoned the Federal for the RBCD. After all, my life depends on reliability. I also divided a loaf of "Spam-Ham and shot each half with a Fed HydroShock JHP and an RBCD Performance Plus, both 9mm. The FHS blew a big hole in the first half, but the RBCD exploded its entire half into shreds. Which result would you like to have if your life is on the line?

Here are my practical reasons for using RBCD in my personal carry guns, as well as for ALL my home-defense weapons:

1. If your aim is to see how far into a line of water jugs a round will go, the test is adequate. What happens in real life situations, however, is much different. The "inadequate penetration" as you put it, is exactly why these rounds are made as they are. It is a FRANGIBLE round, you DON'T WANT OVERPENETRATION! When the RBCD PP strikes its target, a fluid medium (center mass), the round slows. The little ball behind the bullet continues its course forward, striking the bullet from behind, "exploding" it, and creating utter devastation! The gray tip that looks so unimpressive is actually a composite metal that is created under 40,000 pounds of pressure. When it disintegrates, it creates a "shock" to the nervous system and brings all activity ro an immediate halt. There are accounts under actual use, of seeing a "mist" emanated from the target when hit. Any hit to the upper torso will immediately shock the nervous system and bring all nervous innervation in the area to a standstill. Grown men have been dropped to the ground by being hit in the shoulder/upper arm area with one of these rounds.

2. If you achieve limited penetration upon hitting your target, there is no danger of the round going through your target and hitting an innocent person. After all, you accomplished your goal with your hit; you stopped the advance of your attacker without undue risk to bystanders. You'll have a lot rougher time in court defending yourself against whatever charge the prosecutor can think up than if you exercised prudence by controlling the environment as much as possible. The fact that you chose a round that offers this much more safety to innocent people will only go to your favor if you end up in court. This choice of round is much more defendable because of this one factor.

3. These rounds were developed by a former New York City Policeman (SWAT TEAM?) and Roscoe (?) in San Antonio, after the policeman's frustration at Bad Guys who kept on coming, bringing with them 8-9 rds of NYC-sanctioned ammo, usually Federal HydroShock. He sought to find a round that would absolutely STOP the BG. When he teamed up with Roscoe, who owned an ammo mfg co in San Antonio, a new breed of ammo was born. Unless you are willing to carry a .50 cal concealed, my firm belief is you can substitute an RBCD 9mm for anyone else's .45 cal. The result will be generally the same, with the edge going to the shock-value of the RBCD.

4. If you will search gun magazine articles going back several years, you will find an account of law officers shooting through the back of an SUV with this ammo. The rd went through the back door, the back seat, the front seat, and into the perp, killing him instantly. The reason for this is this round was DESIGNED not to "deploy" until it hits a FLUID MEDIUM. What would the human torso be considered other than a "fluid medium"?

So, in summary, I would carefully consider this ammo again, in light of the experience of someone very familiar with it, your open-mindedness and willingness to get some of this ammo and check it out for yourself. The recoil IS less, the results are SPECTACULAR, and the confidence you have once you see what it will do is worth any amount of money. End game is, you STOPPED THE ATTACKER even if you did not kill him.

See you on the Range,
Andy
 
#96 ·
I'd like to address the PRACTICAL points about this ammo and hopefully, cast an experienced light on its use.
I have loved guns all my life, but in the last many years, I have refined my scope of interest to handguns, specifically, Glocks. By way of qualifying my opinion of RBCD ammo, I have the following "credentials", if you will:

I have been legally licensed to carry since the 70's when my Nursing School classmate was raped and murdered in Memphis, TN. I have been shooting for pleasure and in competitions for years, and own many handguns, all different calibers, as well as rifles and shotguns. I have been fortunate to attend two courses (60 hours) of study under Clint Smith at the Kerrville, Texas facility, THUNDER RANCH. In addition, I used what I've learned from a lifetime of shooting, but especially what I learned from Clint, to teach a Defensive Hangun Course while I lived in Texas. I also conducted Concealed Handgun Classes for both men and women. Before I would accept women into the CHL class, I REQUIRED them to take the Defensive Handgun Course first. I am not disparaging women; I just learned early on that women were somewhat intimidated by male handgun instructors, but they responded very well to a female teacher (yes, I am one of each). I actually was pressed into developing a CHL class for women by my local shooting range folks when I lived in Texas. It was a lot of hard work, little pay, but rich in reward, to see in one weekend's time, a woman go from a timid, insecure, frightened victim-in-waiting, to a confident, poised and ready "defender-in-waiting". She KNEW she could do it!
I mean no disrespect here but these are hardly "credentials" with respect to the current topic; terminal ballistics and the study of ballistic wounding.


Now, for the ammo thing.
Regarding the testing done by 'Truth-In-A-Box', I have to challenge him on several levels. Respectfully, I feel that he has done a tremendous disservice to this ammo because he was simply[/I] unfamiliar with it on a practical level.[/I]I have conducted very similar tests in front of students, and have proved to them that, if their lives depend on a reliable handgun and reliable ammo, the combination of the Glock and RBCD ammo is one to be depended upon, without fail.
"Without fail" is a hard and absolute statement, one that no firearm or ammunition could withstand. You are doing a disservice to your students by telling them otherwise.

I have used the gallon jug demo many times, using Federal HydroShock ammo as my control (which is what I carried up until I found the RBCD Performance Plus). Needless to say, after my comparing both ammos, I quickly abandoned the Federal for the RBCD. After all, my life depends on reliability. I also divided a loaf of "Spam-Ham and shot each half with a Fed HydroShock JHP and an RBCD Performance Plus, both 9mm. The FHS blew a big hole in the first half, but the RBCD exploded its entire half into shreds. Which result would you like to have if your life is on the line?
Shooting into a jug of water is not the same as shooting into living tissue.

Here are my practical reasons for using RBCD in my personal carry guns, as well as for ALL my home-defense weapons:

1. If your aim is to see how far into a line of water jugs a round will go, the test is adequate. What happens in real life situations, however, is much different. The "inadequate penetration" as you put it, is exactly why these rounds are made as they are. It is a FRANGIBLE round, you DON'T WANT OVERPENETRATION! When the RBCD PP strikes its target, a fluid medium (center mass), the round slows. The little ball behind the bullet continues its course forward, striking the bullet from behind, "exploding" it, and creating utter devastation! The gray tip that looks so unimpressive is actually a composite metal that is created under 40,000 pounds of pressure. When it disintegrates, it creates a "shock" to the nervous system and brings all activity ro an immediate halt. There are accounts under actual use, of seeing a "mist" emanated from the target when hit. Any hit to the upper torso will immediately shock the nervous system and bring all nervous innervation in the area to a standstill. Grown men have been dropped to the ground by being hit in the shoulder/upper arm area with one of these rounds.
With respect to citizen self-defense shootings, over-penetration is largely myth and urban legend. A greater concern are the rounds that totally miss the intended target. Of course, no one has a magic bullet to sell that will fix that problem.

Your claims about the performance of the ammunition are baseless without example. It reads like fantasy and an over-active imagination, not to mention the laws of physics that would have to be violated.

2. If you achieve limited penetration upon hitting your target, there is no danger of the round going through your target and hitting an innocent person. After all, you accomplished your goal with your hit; you stopped the advance of your attacker without undue risk to bystanders. You'll have a lot rougher time in court defending yourself against whatever charge the prosecutor can think up than if you exercised prudence by controlling the environment as much as possible. The fact that you chose a round that offers this much more safety to innocent people will only go to your favor if you end up in court. This choice of round is much more defendable because of this one factor.
Okay - you're shot someone with essentially an "exotic" bullet that, by your own words "explodes" upon impact, resulting in "utter devastation". You believe this is going to help your case in court? Tell us about your court room experiences and how that experience helped you arrive at your conclusion.

3. These rounds were developed by a former New York City Policeman (SWAT TEAM?) and Roscoe (?) in San Antonio, after the policeman's frustration at Bad Guys who kept on coming, bringing with them 8-9 rds of NYC-sanctioned ammo, usually Federal HydroShock. He sought to find a round that would absolutely STOP the BG. When he teamed up with Roscoe, who owned an ammo mfg co in San Antonio, a new breed of ammo was born. Unless you are willing to carry a .50 cal concealed, my firm belief is you can substitute an RBCD 9mm for anyone else's .45 cal. The result will be generally the same, with the edge going to the shock-value of the RBCD.
A career police officer who happened to have an engineering background sufficient enough to allow him to develop bullets. Okay.....

What does a ".50 cal concealed" have to do with a 9mm or 45?



4. If you will search gun magazine articles going back several years, you will find an account of law officers shooting through the back of an SUV with this ammo. The rd went through the back door, the back seat, the front seat, and into the perp, killing him instantly. The reason for this is this round was DESIGNED not to "deploy" until it hits a FLUID MEDIUM. What would the human torso be considered other than a "fluid medium"?
When someone is paid to write an article, said article can be what you whatever the person writing the check desires it to be. Just saying....

Guns and Blaster magazines are there for one single purpose and, contrary to perhaps popular opinion, that purpose isn't to educate the masses who read them.

Please cite the police department using the ammo. I find the details of that story highly suspect. A "frangible" bullet will not do that.

So, in summary, I would carefully consider this ammo again, in light of the experience of someone very familiar with it, your open-mindedness and willingness to get some of this ammo and check it out for yourself. The recoil IS less, the results are SPECTACULAR, and the confidence you have once you see what it will do is worth any amount of money. End game is, you STOPPED THE ATTACKER even if you did not kill him.

See you on the Range,
Andy
An open mind is important but one so open that brains are allowed to fall out is dangerous. One cannot ignore the laws of physics, regardless of how compelling the story.

Are you on the payroll for this company? It seems odd that you signed up just to reply to a thread dead for over two years. Even bad publicity is good for business though, eh?

Randy
 
#95 ·
Holy thread coming back from the dead, Batman!

No - these bullets are not made from any fancy blended metals. They've been tested by independent labs - they are just plain old lead. The link was posted earlier in this thread. The makers of this ammo are apparently - liars. This is nothing more than a light weight JSP. That's all.

No - it is not possible for a polymer ball, which weighs less than the lead in front of it, to "push" the metal from behind. The lead has more inertia than the lighter plastic behind it.

You need penetration. Not all your shots will be from straight in the front. Put hands and arms in the way (like they would be if holding a weapon), and you can see the need for penetration clearly. This is the reason the FBI calls for a minimum of 12 inches, with 15 preferred.

Let this thread die.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aus71383
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top