View Single Post
Old March 9th, 2010, 15:55   #22
Brian McIlmoyle
Brian McIlmoyle's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Toronto
Originally Posted by Lestat_d View Post
While 'force' from a pure physics perspective may be equal -- the test/pictures posted would seem to indicate the clear rounds act like "FMJ penetrators" , compared to the std rounds which spread the force on impact across a wider area?

If all things were truly equal - the impact pictures & wounds would tell an identical story no?
no I don't think so ... 2 different forearms .. and no certainty if the angle of incidence of the shot was the same .. this was at best an informal test with anecdotal results.

these are facts.

the size of the projectile is the same
the mass of the projectile is the same
the velocity of the projectile is the same

therefore the kinetic energy of the object in motion would be identical.

the question is .. what is the energy transfered to the target upon impact?

I'll concede that plastic to hard surface some energy is dissipated to the deformation of the plastic bb that would not be dissipated in the silica bb

but on a plastic or glass to soft surface ( such as skin ) the fact that the material is harder than the impact surface indicates that no energy would be dissipated to the deforming of the BB .. because it does not deform.

Deceleration and energy transference to the soft surface would be the same for either projectile.

Therefore these bbs are no more or less safe than their plastic counterpart.

Except in the impact to teeth.. where I expect they will shoot out more teeth than plastic bbs

Ballistic Jelly would be a good way to illustrate this
Brian McIlmoyle
TTAC3 Director
CAPS Range Officer
Toronto Downtown Age Verifier


If the tongue could cut as the sword does, the dead would be infinite
Brian McIlmoyle is offline   Reply With Quote