I stumbled across this the other day-

Quantitative Ammunition Selection

and I am thinking of buying it.

Has anyone read this book?

Just looking before I leap.

Or select an approved loading from this site's ammo FAQ , ensure that it works well in your gun, practice with it, and carry that round.

Fine advice, but I've already chosen a carry load. Just because I have done so doesn't mean that I must stop trying to learn about terminal ballistics.

I was looking for the input of someone who has read the book.

Thanks for the link, Meche_03. I must've missed it.

That's pretty inexpensive so if I do end up buying it, it probably won't blow this month's grocery budget.

I'm not so sure of that, Bones. I was once attacked during spring break (very long ago) by a drunk girl holding a can of beer and we only dated briefly after that.

IIRC, Duncan MacPherson, the author of Bullet Penetration (which is a very good read, BTW) validates the use of water as a ballistic test medium even going so far as to explain why it is suitable for this purpose on pages 69-71 of his book.

Wolberg seems to go into the analysis of expansion pretty thoroughly in that article- he explains the strong correlation of expansion ratios in gelatin and soft tissue and even provides a graph on the third page of the article that shows how expansion effects penetration depth. He states on the third page that he got an expansion ratio of 1.2 for gelatin and an expansion ratio of 1.15 for human tissue and that both mediums had average penetration depths of 13 inches. Looks like he got both metrics (expansion and penetration) taken care of.



I agree- I'd like to see how he gets there, too.

His correlation looks pretty decent, too, given what little I remember of my college stats classes. .94 aint too shabby.



I mean, proving the model's validity wouldn't be hard to do. Just run it against calibrated test data- either it works or it doesn't and it looks like Schwartz did that already.

Cheap steel case for plinking and federal hst or ranger t for carry. Saved you some money.

Oh, stop with your crazy logic and common sense!

I finished the reading Quantitative Ammunition Selection about 5 days ago. It is “short” at 88 pages and took about a day and a half to complete. That includes re-reading certain sections that I found interesting. After that, I set up an Excel spreadsheet that allows me to use the model while saving me the trouble of punching calculator keys all day long. For those unfamiliar with Excel- all you have to do (once it is set up) is enter a couple constants, the expansion diameter, weight, and velocity of the bullet and you have your answer. I spent the last five days messing with the Schwartz model and, in a word, I am impressed.

When compared against the MacPherson model (long ago set up on Excel) using the same calibrated test data, the Schwartz model does an excellent job of “predicting” maximum penetration depth and mass of the permanent cavity. In every case that I used, it either matches or comes very, very close to the MacPherson model’s result.

Unlike MacPherson, Schwartz has laid out his model’s equations all in one place and they seem to be extremely accurate. There is no need to dig through the book to find the equations and then rearrange them into usable form. They are “right there” (in Chapter 3) and they all are explained very clearly. In comparison, it took me almost 2 days to extract and rearrange MacPherson’s equations and my math (algebra, calculus) skills are solid.

The reason for buying books like these is to use the models they offer and my guess is that many people are “left in the dark” when it comes to the way MacPherson presents his model. Schwartz even goes as far as to provide several examples of how to apply his model in Chapter 4 in a way that reminds me a lot of my high school algebra textbook.

While I won’t be throwing out my copy of Bullet Penetration anytime soon, I will be using the Schwartz model as a quick and easy way to get the same answer that I’d get from the MacPherson model when I have to use a calculator to get it.

It was definitely worth the price of admission.