RBCD Ammo controversy - Page 4

Majorlk · July 10th, 2009, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutoFan

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.

I have a hard time believing any police department would swallow this nonsense.

TX-JB · July 10th, 2009, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Majorlk

I have a hard time believing any police department would swallow this nonsense.

Maybe not believe it but could still adopt it, especially if they were given a large amount of this ammo, or made a "sweetheart deal" on it. Remember, most government purchases are from the lowest bidder.

Majorlk · July 10th, 2009, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TX-JB

Maybe not believe it but could still adopt it, especially if they were given a large amount of this ammo, or made a "sweetheart deal" on it. Remember, most government purchases are from the lowest bidder.

Isn't that how many departments wound up with Glocks - sold at below cost to "get their foot (I mean barrel) in the door"?

HowardCohodas · July 14th, 2009, 10:32 AM

DocGKR says that Bob Pilgrim, the author of the referenced article, is the pseudonym of a well respected retired FBI agent that he knows personally. M4Carbine.net Forums - View Single Post - More Lemas BS...

I don't think the observations of a man with Mr. Pilgrim's background that even DocGKR respects can easily be dismissed.

Randy · July 14th, 2009, 11:02 AM

Howard, I'm running a little slow this morning and don't understand what you mean in your post. Can you elaborate?

Randy

HowardCohodas · July 14th, 2009, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy

Howard, I'm running a little slow this morning and don't understand what you mean in your post. Can you elaborate?

Randy

There were several statements in this thread that seem to contradict the observations made by the article's author. My point is that these observations should not easily be rejected based on the reference that DocGKR provided.

10thmtn · July 14th, 2009, 11:33 AM

Howard - Man, I respect you from over at the USCCA, but I don't get what you trying to learn here? The folks who make this ammo have been shown to be liars - they lie about what their bullets are made of - as one of the other members here showed when he took the bullet apart.

Over at warriortalk, they ran some of these bullets through chemical analysis - no magic powdered metals, just plain old lead for the most part.

It's just a very fast, very light JSP bullet. No magic - just basic physics. You get a nasty, but shallow wound.

Might it work? Sure. Should you use something that doesn't meet the minimum 12" penetration? I don't. If someone is attacking you, your shots will likely hit their hands and/or arms before even reaching their torso. Penetration is important - second only to shot placement.

Why do folks/departments who should know better use this stuff? All I can say is, when things don't make sense...I suspect you would need to follow the money.

OPFOR · July 14th, 2009, 12:58 PM

I wouldn't use the stuff if it was a magic fairy ray of uber death, just based on the complete and utter LIES (and there is no other word for them) used in their claims and advertising. The makers/manufacturers are beneath contempt, and I won't use anything that they're a part of, period.

Randy · July 14th, 2009, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HowardCohodas

There were several statements in this thread that seem to contradict the observations made by the article's author. My point is that these observations should not easily be rejected based on the reference that DocGKR provided.

Who is DocGKR?

Randy

HowardCohodas · July 14th, 2009, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy

Who is DocGKR?

Randy

He is the lead "industry professional" in debunking the marketing hyperbole relative to this ammo. His report was referenced in my OP.

Part of what motivates me to continue poking at this issue is that nearly all the negative remarks about this ammo deal with their misleading marketing. I am intrigued by the observations of its performance made by the retired FBI agent who wrote the article referenced in the OP and observations made by Dr. Vail, a trauma surgeon. I am further intrigued by the fact that a respected PD chose this ammo.

I have asked DocGKR, who knows the retired FBI agent who wrote the article to contact him and get the back-story of his report. Also, as an "industry professional" he would have some credibility if he contacts the Coral Gables PD to see what due-diligence they performed in making this choice. Even though he is the leading detractor, I'm assuming he is sufficiently professional to report what he finds with minimum prejudice.

July 14th, 2009, 10:32 AM	#34
HowardCohodas Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Canton, OH Posts: 852	DocGKR says that Bob Pilgrim, the author of the referenced article, is the pseudonym of a well respected retired FBI agent that he knows personally. M4Carbine.net Forums - View Single Post - More Lemas BS... I don't think the observations of a man with Mr. Pilgrim's background that even DocGKR respects can easily be dismissed. __________________ Howard *I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop!!*

July 14th, 2009, 11:02 AM	#35
Randy Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Staunton, Va. Posts: 302	Howard, I'm running a little slow this morning and don't understand what you mean in your post. Can you elaborate? Randy __________________ Defensive Training Concepts, Inc. Staunton, Va.

July 14th, 2009, 11:33 AM	#37
10thmtn Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: USA Posts: 658	Howard - Man, I respect you from over at the USCCA, but I don't get what you trying to learn here? The folks who make this ammo have been shown to be liars - they lie about what their bullets are made of - as one of the other members here showed when he took the bullet apart. Over at warriortalk, they ran some of these bullets through chemical analysis - no magic powdered metals, just plain old lead for the most part. It's just a very fast, very light JSP bullet. No magic - just basic physics. You get a nasty, but shallow wound. Might it work? Sure. Should you use something that doesn't meet the minimum 12" penetration? I don't. If someone is attacking you, your shots will likely hit their hands and/or arms before even reaching their torso. Penetration is important - second only to shot placement. Why do folks/departments who should know better use this stuff? All I can say is, when things don't make sense...I suspect you would need to follow the money. __________________ The People ARE the Militia, and have a DUTY (not just a right) to be both armed and proficient in the use of said arms. Ex-Army officer; Hurricane Andrew Relief, FL, 1992; Operation Restore Hope, Somalia, 1993 NRA Life Member; Range Safety Officer Glock 26, CT Laserguard, Smartcarry

July 14th, 2009, 12:58 PM	#38
OPFOR VIP Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: DC, for the moment Posts: 2,760	I wouldn't use the stuff if it was a magic fairy ray of uber death, just based on the complete and utter LIES (and there is no other word for them) used in their claims and advertising. The makers/manufacturers are beneath contempt, and I won't use anything that they're a part of, period. __________________ "It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode