It is currently Sun Jan 21, 2018 11:52 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 402 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 9:23 pm 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:04 am
Posts: 1460
Location: Augusta Georgia
Has thanked: 492 times
Been thanked: 72 times
Procyon, let me make sure I have all the details: 10 yards, par time 2 seconds, 12oz drink can on swinger, start at low ready. Is that about right?

_________________
Image

Team Beards&Irons MilCopp 2013

Browning 35 for ZS President 2016. Make Zombie Squad Great Again!


Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on TumblrShare on Google+
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 10:24 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Iowa, USA
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 106 times
I'm only worried about zombies that can run. If I can out walk them - I don't need a gun.

And I know that my 40 yard dash time is under 5 seconds. And I'm not a kid anymore.

At 19 feet, if the zombie can run, and you only figure how far it needs to close so that it can grab you (so probably only covering 16 feet) - I would be suprised if it takes 2 seconds.

ETA
Didn't catch your post Redeyes. But yes, that was our set up for both handgun and shotgun. We limited max shots to 5, but no one ever shot that many without just spraying them.

_________________
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 3:15 pm 
Offline
* * *

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm
Posts: 586
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 98 times
Just throwing this out there. The original intent was for a zombie weapon for walking speed zombies where any damage to the brain was sufficient.

Walker speed: 3 miles per hour/1.4 yards per second.
Brain size: 3.5 inches by 5.5 inches.


The moving target tests that are being done are looking at zombies moving at about 10 miles per hour (roughly 3 yards per second). This is all totally fine, but shooting a 3x3 target moving at 10 miles per hour is pretty different from any brain damage (roughly 3.5x5.5) to a 3 mile per hour (1.4 yards per second) target.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 8:57 pm 
Offline
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 10:05 am
Posts: 10834
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 260 times
We were at 19' so that's 6.3 yds divided by 1.4 equals 4.5s. So, going off that we were almost spot on.

_________________
Shrapnel wrote "nobody is trying to be a dick and give out warnings for every little thing" :|
Image
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS1icEssOUM


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 16, 2014 9:14 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Iowa, USA
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 106 times
We may run the test with our shooters using closer to a 5 second time.

Redeyes & GB test was pretty spot on for a 'walker'. The extra half second probaby makes up for the fact that the shots would (I think) get easier as the walker got closer.

I am just not to worried about the 'walkers'. To me, I just see it as more productive to continue to post the testing results in this thread than to start a second (for runners) as the ranges, patterning, penetration, etc apply to any type of zombie/target.

_________________
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:24 am 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 471
Location: Southern California
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 27 times
Just wanted to point out that the only movie/TV show I know of with fast zombies that required a headshot to stop, was the 2004 movie Dawn Of The Dead (which was a remake of the original 1978 movie Dawn Of The Dead).

Other fast zombies?

28 Days Later. But those were just infected crazy people that you could kill like any normal living person. Or just starve them to death.

Zombieland. Similar to the zombies of 28 Days Later. Though I never understood why they didn't just drop dead from starvation!

Return Of The Living Dead (and sequels). Ah, good 'ol trioxin poisoning. Scary zombies who feasted on living brains to quell the pain of being dead, nothing short of incineration could stop them. On the bright side only people who died from trioxin poisoning would reanimate.

Maybe people remember this fun graph of zombie doom?

http://pastorgear.com/wp-content/upload ... ombies.jpg

_________________
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.


Last edited by gunsandrockets on Mon Dec 01, 2014 5:23 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:36 am 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:04 am
Posts: 1460
Location: Augusta Georgia
Has thanked: 492 times
Been thanked: 72 times
zero11010 wrote:
Just throwing this out there. The original intent was for a zombie weapon for walking speed zombies where any damage to the brain was sufficient.

Walker speed: 3 miles per hour/1.4 yards per second.
Brain size: 3.5 inches by 5.5 inches.


The moving target tests that are being done are looking at zombies moving at about 10 miles per hour (roughly 3 yards per second). This is all totally fine, but shooting a 3x3 target moving at 10 miles per hour is pretty different from any brain damage (roughly 3.5x5.5) to a 3 mile per hour (1.4 yards per second) target.


The only way you are going to get a test done your way is to pay for it or do it yourself. Procyon is testing for effectiveness on fast zombies, I and GBM are testing for effectiveness on slow zombies with lots of head movement. :lol: All of us are individuals with various: commitments, our own ideas about what zombies are and what would make them dangerous, differing access to ranges, and differing levels of disposable income. So, if you don't think we are testing things correctly, by all means, do your own. We would love to see it and I am curious as to how you would achieve the conditions needed to test your theory. :)

_________________
Image

Team Beards&Irons MilCopp 2013

Browning 35 for ZS President 2016. Make Zombie Squad Great Again!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 4:40 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Iowa, USA
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 106 times
zero11010 wrote:
Just throwing this out there. The original intent was for a zombie weapon for walking speed zombies
where any damage to the brain was sufficient.


On the thought of original intent though, I don't really remember the subject of zombie speed being addressed until we were several pages in.
I don't think it was anywhere in the original post.
And you stated that 00 had minimal energy in the opening post, which kind of begs the question of just what would be an adequate level of 'damage'.

The original post was just about shotguns being overrated.
Which no one is arguing. Pretty much every weapon is inaccurately depicted.
To me, arguing which is most overrated is like arguing what is the best color for a car.

And, for better or worse, this has kind of become the 'just what weapons are effective on zombies and at what ranges' thread.
Which if it wasn't about zombies - almost feels like it should be over in the firearms section with the amount of data and thought it has gathered...
Which I see as a good thing. :clap:

_________________
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 6:28 am 
Offline
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 10:05 am
Posts: 10834
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 260 times
Since were talking fast zombies the best firearms defense would be to shoot them in the pelvic girdle which is a bigger target that moves less. With a shotgun anything below the waist would probably work or at least slow them down sufficently. Lather up the shotgun and give them another dose to the head. If they are fast moving zombie could we assume that the engine driving them is the heart? That would give us the upper chest, pelvic girdle and brain to hit.

The heart pumps oxygenated blood to the system and as far as I know that's the only thing that "drives" the muscles of the human body. I always assumed slow shuffling zombies were that way because they were either seriously diseased, dead, or lacking the things that make a human capable of faster movement. Shooting these 'slow' zombies in the body would be next to useless because something else is driving their locomotion therefore, head shots. Shooting 'fast' zombies in things that support human locomotion or human life would be effective therefore we'd have multiple locations on the human body.

My take anyway, who's got some more coconuts to shoot or do I just need to get some more myself? :clownshoes:

_________________
Shrapnel wrote "nobody is trying to be a dick and give out warnings for every little thing" :|
Image
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS1icEssOUM


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 9:58 am 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:38 pm
Posts: 272
Location: DFW-ish Texas
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 27 times
Sort of related, so I thought this thread would be a good place to throw this in:

New(ish) Hornady buckshot load that looks very interesting, though recoil may be a bit stiff. This should significantly increase the lethality and range of the typical riot gun.

Hornady Product Catalog wrote:
Product Information

Hornady Heavy Magnum, Coyote Ammunition was designed to deliver lethal results with minimal pelt damage out to 50 yards. Each shell is loaded with 1-1/2 oz nickel plated lead shot. This lead shot payload is delivered in a tight, dense pattern because of the VERSATITE wad which has a range-extending baffling system that strips the wad cleanly from the shot string for exceptional pattern density.

Technical Information
•Gauge/Bore: 12 Gauge
•Shell Length: 3"
•Shot Weight: 1-1/2 oz
•Shot Size: #00 Buckshot
•Shot Type: Nickel-plated lead
•Wad Type: VERSATITE

Ballistics Information:
•Muzzle Velocity: 1300 fps


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:24 pm 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 471
Location: Southern California
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 27 times
ShooterMike wrote:
Sort of related, so I thought this thread would be a good place to throw this in:

New(ish) Hornady buckshot load that looks very interesting, though recoil may be a bit stiff. This should significantly increase the lethality and range of the typical riot gun.

Hornady Product Catalog wrote:
Product Information

Hornady Heavy Magnum, Coyote Ammunition was designed to deliver lethal results with minimal pelt damage out to 50 yards. Each shell is loaded with 1-1/2 oz nickel plated lead shot. This lead shot payload is delivered in a tight, dense pattern because of the VERSATITE wad which has a range-extending baffling system that strips the wad cleanly from the shot string for exceptional pattern density.

Technical Information
•Gauge/Bore: 12 Gauge
•Shell Length: 3"
•Shot Weight: 1-1/2 oz
•Shot Size: #00 Buckshot
•Shot Type: Nickel-plated lead
•Wad Type: VERSATITE

Ballistics Information:
•Muzzle Velocity: 1300 fps


Interesting. And certainly an improvement over a more typical 'tactical' 00 buckshot load of 9 pellets.

But smaller size buckshot would still be preferable so as to produce a thicker pattern density for hitting the tiny zombie brain. Do you know if Hornady offers that magnum load with something like #1 or #4 buckshot?

_________________
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 9:57 am 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:38 pm
Posts: 272
Location: DFW-ish Texas
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 27 times
gunsandrockets wrote:

Interesting. And certainly an improvement over a more typical 'tactical' 00 buckshot load of 9 pellets.

But smaller size buckshot would still be preferable so as to produce a thicker pattern density for hitting the tiny zombie brain. Do you know if Hornady offers that magnum load with something like #1 or #4 buckshot?



No other buckshot sizes, but the Heavy Magnum Coyote load also comes in BB. I was thinking about getting some of each for anti-coyote duty, to see which works best.

http://www.hornady.com/store/Heavy-Magnum-Coyote


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:25 am 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 473
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 18 times
ShooterMike wrote:
gunsandrockets wrote:

Interesting. And certainly an improvement over a more typical 'tactical' 00 buckshot load of 9 pellets.

But smaller size buckshot would still be preferable so as to produce a thicker pattern density for hitting the tiny zombie brain. Do you know if Hornady offers that magnum load with something like #1 or #4 buckshot?



No other buckshot sizes, but the Heavy Magnum Coyote load also comes in BB. I was thinking about getting some of each for anti-coyote duty, to see which works best.

http://www.hornady.com/store/Heavy-Magnum-Coyote




HMMM, BB size shot - I wonder about penetration? My only 3" chamber is on a barrel that was shortened & cut for screw in chokes. It was at the drop dead minimum thickness for that and they told me NOT to shoot slugs thru it, and to use buckshot very sparingly if at all. I turned around and bought a 25" skeet barrel for buckshot, but it is only 2-3/4" chamber. That's OK, as my arthritic shoulder rebels after one round & I almost dropped the gun - so it's just fine. :!:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:56 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Iowa, USA
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 106 times
For us, in the zombie test, the BB's won't punch through 3/4" plywood past 10 yds (haven't tried 12, but it failed at 15).
But my kids load a 2 3/4" with 1 3/8 oz of BB's that will still bust coyote bones out to 70 yards. It hasn't been quite as successful as the same wt of 4 Buck, but it is close and WAY better than 00 Buck at that range.

_________________
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 11:20 am 
Offline
ZS Donor
ZS Donor

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 1:04 am
Posts: 1460
Location: Augusta Georgia
Has thanked: 492 times
Been thanked: 72 times
Soda can on swinger at 10 yards with Glock 19 starting at low ready. Par time 2 seconds.

1. 4.13 4 shots Fail
2. 10.75 Gave up after 10 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
3. 1.87 1 shot Pass
4. 7.28 Gave up after 6 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
5. 2.06 1 shot Fail
6. 4.67 4 shots Fail
7. 2.81 2 shots Fail
8. 2.58 2 shots Fail
9. 1.72 1 shot Pass
10. 4.11 4 shots Fail
11. 1.39 1 shot Pass
12. 4.55 Gave up after 4 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
13. 2.56 3 shots Fail
14. 3.00 3 shots Fail
15. 4.77 Gave up after 4 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
16. 3.92 4 shots Fail

So I can safely say that I can waste a shambler at 10 yards with a pistol. Ragers are going to have me for dinner.

_________________
Image

Team Beards&Irons MilCopp 2013

Browning 35 for ZS President 2016. Make Zombie Squad Great Again!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 5:59 pm 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 473
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 18 times
procyon wrote:
For us, in the zombie test, the BB's won't punch through 3/4" plywood past 10 yds (haven't tried 12, but it failed at 15).
But my kids load a 2 3/4" with 1 3/8 oz of BB's that will still bust coyote bones out to 70 yards. It hasn't been quite as successful as the same wt of 4 Buck, but it is close and WAY better than 00 Buck at that range.




HMMM, maybe 1/4" plywood is closer? 3/4" seems awful thick, when I stop to think about it.
Anybody else have any input on plywood thickness? :idea:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 6:00 pm 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 473
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 18 times
Redeyes wrote:
Soda can on swinger at 10 yards with Glock 19 starting at low ready. Par time 2 seconds.

1. 4.13 4 shots Fail
2. 10.75 Gave up after 10 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
3. 1.87 1 shot Pass
4. 7.28 Gave up after 6 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
5. 2.06 1 shot Fail
6. 4.67 4 shots Fail
7. 2.81 2 shots Fail
8. 2.58 2 shots Fail
9. 1.72 1 shot Pass
10. 4.11 4 shots Fail
11. 1.39 1 shot Pass
12. 4.55 Gave up after 4 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
13. 2.56 3 shots Fail
14. 3.00 3 shots Fail
15. 4.77 Gave up after 4 shots. Did not hit the can. Fail
16. 3.92 4 shots Fail

So I can safely say that I can waste a shambler at 10 yards with a pistol. Ragers are going to have me for dinner.




Thanks for this post! :oh:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:16 am 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 471
Location: Southern California
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 27 times
Mad Mike wrote:
procyon wrote:
For us, in the zombie test, the BB's won't punch through 3/4" plywood past 10 yds (haven't tried 12, but it failed at 15).
But my kids load a 2 3/4" with 1 3/8 oz of BB's that will still bust coyote bones out to 70 yards. It hasn't been quite as successful as the same wt of 4 Buck, but it is close and WAY better than 00 Buck at that range.




HMMM, maybe 1/4" plywood is closer? 3/4" seems awful thick, when I stop to think about it.
Anybody else have any input on plywood thickness? :idea:


I believe once upon a time projectile penetration of a 1/2" thick pine board was considered wounding enough to generate a casualty in warfare. Later on that standard was abandoned, and replaced with a 58 foot pounds of energy projectile standard. But the reality of wound generation is even more complicated than that. Suffice to say the penetration of wood test is today considered a fairly useless measure, as this excerpt attests...

-----------------------------------

The fallacy of the pine-board penetration as a criterion of missile effectiveness was strikingly demonstrated quite accidentally when a shrapnel projectile was detonated in a close group of observers. The only real casualty was the man holding the projectile for he lost a couple of fingers from one hand. The shrapnel balls were well sprayed amongst the group of observers at close range and, yet, only a few black and blue places resulted-without penetration of the clothing. This total inefficiency of shrapnel was further demonstrated by study of known battlefield occurrences. However, shrapnel balls had penetrated many pine boards in the usual tests. Needless to say, the manufacture and use of shrapnel was promptly discontinued. In passing, it is also interesting to note that there is evidence of few true shrapnel wounds in World War I in which many tons of shrapnel were used. So-called shrapnel wounds on investigation were usually found to be due to HE missile fragments (table 19).

-------------------------------------

http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs ... apter2.htm

_________________
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.


Last edited by gunsandrockets on Mon Dec 01, 2014 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:27 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Iowa, USA
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 106 times
gunsandrockets wrote:
I believe once upon a time projectile penetration of a 1/2" thick pine board was considered wounding enough to generate a casualty. Later on that qualifier was abandoned for the 58 foot pounds of energy rule. But in fact the subject of wound generation is much more complicated than that. Suffice to say the penetration of wood test is today considered a fairly useless measure, as this excerpt attests...


Well, plywood is the best material I have that is likely to be somewhat consistent and not to expensive.
And easy to tack targets to. :crazy:

As for whether it accurately models the skull, I have no idea. But having worked with plywood rather extensively, I am pretty sure in a torture test between my skull and a sheet of 3/4" plywood, that my skull will give before the board. Not that I intend to find that out for sure.

Redeyes wrote:
Soda can on swinger at 10 yards with Glock 19 starting at low ready. Par time 2 seconds.


Wow, you got that done quick.
Weather and work has been against me. (That and the fact that most of my 'shooters' are busy hunting rabbits/deer/pheasant right now...)

It looks like you had about 3 times better results for effective engagements than we did - with almost 19%. Which is impressive.
But it is far closer to our numbers than the other test, so I feel that this is reasonably supportive data for what we were looking at.
It looks like even with trained shooters, that about 4 out of 5 encounters at close quarters with a 'rager' will go against a pistol shooter.
So far, it looks like it is going to be about 1 in 3 will result in a fail for a shotgun armed person.
Now, we just need to pile up some data for the rifles.

Sadly, the weather (freezing rain, or rain at 40 F, etc) for the weekend isn't going to give me much chance.

_________________
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 11:07 am 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:33 pm
Posts: 473
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 18 times
procyon wrote:
gunsandrockets wrote:
I believe once upon a time projectile penetration of a 1/2" thick pine board was considered wounding enough to generate a casualty. Later on that qualifier was abandoned for the 58 foot pounds of energy rule. But in fact the subject of wound generation is much more complicated than that. Suffice to say the penetration of wood test is today considered a fairly useless measure, as this excerpt attests...


Well, plywood is the best material I have that is likely to be somewhat consistent and not to expensive.
And easy to tack targets to. :crazy:

As for whether it accurately models the skull, I have no idea. But having worked with plywood rather extensively, I am pretty sure in a torture test between my skull and a sheet of 3/4" plywood, that my skull will give before the board. Not that I intend to find that out for sure.

Redeyes wrote:
Soda can on swinger at 10 yards with Glock 19 starting at low ready. Par time 2 seconds.


Wow, you got that done quick.
Weather and work has been against me. (That and the fact that most of my 'shooters' are busy hunting rabbits/deer/pheasant right now...)

It looks like you had about 3 times better results for effective engagements than we did - with almost 19%. Which is impressive.
But it is far closer to our numbers than the other test, so I feel that this is reasonably supportive data for what we were looking at.
It looks like even with trained shooters, that about 4 out of 5 encounters at close quarters with a 'rager' will go against a pistol shooter.
So far, it looks like it is going to be about 1 in 3 will result in a fail for a shotgun armed person.
Now, we just need to pile up some data for the rifles.

Sadly, the weather (freezing rain, or rain at 40 F, etc) for the weekend isn't going to give me much chance.




One time - and one time only - I tested my head against 1/4" plywood neither broke but I absolutely lost that contest. The plywood wasn't well supported where I hit it, and it flexed somewhat, I'm pretty sure that made a BIG difference! :shock:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Nov 23, 2014 10:50 pm 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 471
Location: Southern California
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 27 times
procyon wrote:
gunsandrockets wrote:
I believe once upon a time projectile penetration of a 1/2" thick pine board was considered wounding enough to generate a casualty. Later on that qualifier was abandoned for the 58 foot pounds of energy rule. But in fact the subject of wound generation is much more complicated than that. Suffice to say the penetration of wood test is today considered a fairly useless measure, as this excerpt attests...


Well, plywood is the best material I have that is likely to be somewhat consistent and not to expensive.
And easy to tack targets to. :crazy:

As for whether it accurately models the skull, I have no idea. But having worked with plywood rather extensively, I am pretty sure in a torture test between my skull and a sheet of 3/4" plywood, that my skull will give before the board. Not that I intend to find that out for sure.



I didn't intend to denigrate your use of plywood as a test media. Measurable data is invaluable and I appreciate your contribution. I also agree with your 3/4" plywood penetration benchmark for judging adequate anti-zombie ballistics.

I do wonder though if the Hornady Heavy Magnum BB load might best the penetration range of your own .410 handloads. Since Heavy Magnum load uses nickel plated shot and deformation (and therefore drag induced loses) can be pretty bad with plain shot.

One youtouber recovered some fired #4 lead buckshot and I was very impressed by how much deformation that buckshot endured. The pellets almost resembled regular polygons instead of spheres!

_________________
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 12:25 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Posts: 1101
Location: Iowa, USA
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 106 times
We tried the BB's out of the .410 at 1200 fps. Not sure that throwing more of them at one time will make them penetrate deeper.

But if the pellets are harder and the initial velocity higher - the pellets might pass our test at 15 yards. Ours are just standard lead shot I purchased and they left bulges in the back of the plywood at 15 yards - so they were close.

We did notice a difference in the recovered 4 Buck and 00 Buck in our tests. The pellets we cast from wheel weights were almost always nearly round and intact. Loads that others bought and tried (Federal & Remington loads) were almost always dimpled from firing and deformed from hitting the targets.
There was also a difference in penetration. The hard cast buckshot penetrated almost twice as deeply into the spruce backstop as what the commercial pellets did (but we didn't grab exact measurements).

So the plated BB's could perform well enough to pass our tests at 15 yards. The heavier load would definitely ensure it passed our total wound area and energy (which the .410 nearly did). We only failed it on penetration.

_________________
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 6:47 am 
Offline
* *

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:59 pm
Posts: 109
Location: Silicon Valley
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 7 times
Sworbeyegib wrote:
zero11010 wrote:
Sworbeyegib wrote:

They are 4" in diameter, which is close enough to what we are looking for. Just gotta keep shooting it until it bounces far enough away that the hits aren't connecting. Maybe to simulate an approaching target, we could tie some cordage to it, and have a buddy standing behind me yank and pull it. We can do "walker" speed, "runner" speed, and random yanks to simulate random lunges. Then do the same with a carbine and pistol.


This sounds pretty awesome!

I saw a video online years ago of people standing in a semi circle of zombie forms on wheels which were being pulled at the shooter in the center. It was a very interesting test. Most people were not as accurate as they anticipated. I want to say it was Mythbusters, but it seems like the Discovery Channel is pretty good about removing content from YouTube.


I think I've seen what you are talking about, I don't think it was mythbusters though. I believe that for their zombie episode, they used paintball guns and real people.

I'm sure someone, somewhere out there will eventually set up a rig that will be as true to life as possible. Til then, I'm sticking to a low tech. A ball on a string is about as low tech as it gets.


Was it Immersion by Rooster Teeth?

_________________
Disclaimer: For anonymity and security's sake, this poster may alter, omit, or fabricate details of his personal life and circumstances.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 26, 2014 7:28 pm 
Offline
* * *

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm
Posts: 586
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 98 times
Abuhin wrote:
Was it Immersion by Rooster Teeth?


That looks like it! It's been years so I'm not 100% sure, but that looks about right.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 402 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group