Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 3/11/2006 4:35:01 AM EST
Neo1 asked in a thread about 38/357 if anyone had jello tested Cor-bon DPX ammo. I responded by directing Neo1 to Evan Marshall's stopping power forum where that has been discussed. Forest and somebody else talked about, or made reference to a controversy about Evan's stopping power data and conclusions.

Frankly, I didn't know anything about a controversy with Evan's studies until now. Can you guys tell me more about all of this, or refer me to a web-page that discusses this? I'd like to know more. I have sensed a "strange vibe" at Evan's site, but couldn't put my finger on what it was, or why. I figured that if he was paying for the server space, he could make whatever rules he wanted to make, but maybe it has to do with this controversy and Evan's not wanting to have any discussion about it. Thanks,

Link Posted: 3/11/2006 4:58:04 AM EST
As I recall, the controversy was over whether or not he and Sanow did the goat testing.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 5:07:04 AM EST
The whole "one shot stop" thing is a bunch of unscientific BS, basically.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 5:59:08 AM EST
I believe there are several questions about the validity of his findings, how he got his numbers, and how the one shot stop is achieved.

To his credit, he has distanced himself from Ed Sanow, who in my opinion, is the biggest POS and internal threat to gun owners.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 6:49:14 AM EST
This is in reference to the "Stopping Power" books that were the rage in the 90s.

1. The database was WAY too small. The conclusions drawn from such a small database couldn't be viewed as terribly meaningful.

2. The data favored cartridges used in more accurate platforms. In other words, .45 ACP was typically fired from full-sized duty weapons, capable of more precise fire. However, guns like the .25 and .32 are usually fired from back-up, concealed guns. This uninentionally mixed variables, which is the biggest no-no in a "scientific" test.

3. The whole notion of a one-shot stop is flawed. What caused the "stop?" How immediate was it? Was it a one-shot stop only because the shooter wasn't accurate enough to get in a second hit or because his/her gun jammed? How big was the psychological effect (which in humans can range from none to fainting just at the sight of muzzle flash)? Did a shot in the upper thigh count as a one-shot? It's just a bad idea that's difficult to correlate to a cartridge's "stopping power."

4. The numbers were too good to be true. Statisticians who viewed the data often concluded that it looked faked...pre-conceived notions led to a skewing of numbers that promoted certain cartridge/bullet/velocity combinations.

You'll notice that the most accepted terminal performance testing involved today looks at observed data...depth of penetration, diameter of expanded bullet, % fragmentation, etc. However, you'll NEVER see anybody worth two licks try to correlate that observed data to a magical number such as "one-stop shot percentage." The best you'll get is a "this is how this particular round performs through the various FBI criteria tests." It's your job to conclude what you will from that.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 8:37:48 AM EST
GOATS are better than JELLO
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 7:07:18 AM EST
Not if the goat tests where never performed.

There still isnt any proof that the tests happened.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 7:21:50 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 7:23:21 AM EST by FMJ]

Dont forget that HUMAN BODY HAS CHANGED since then
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 4:41:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 3/12/2006 5:01:13 PM EST by FAIL-SAFE]
Prove these goat tests occured. Put up or shut up.

Read This

Now Read This One
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:05:00 PM EST
FMJ is basically a troll spreading lies in this forum... people who read his posts already recognise this. Dont feed the troll. I mean look at his screen name.
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 9:11:48 PM EST

Originally Posted By DevL:
FMJ is basically a troll spreading lies in this forum... people who read his posts already recognise this. Dont feed the troll. I mean look at his screen name.

you think? I think he's kind of entertaining. you do realize he spends more time at the range than on the internet, right?
Link Posted: 3/13/2006 3:09:50 PM EST
The big problems were:

1) Lack of significant datapoints to be meaningfull. For example, as I recall a particular .44 mag round came in at around 70%, but there were only around 8 rounds of this type fired. You need several hundred for statistical significance.

2) The rounds were cherrypicked to be center of torso shots without penetrating any other barriers, such as say, the goblins arm or shoulder.

3) No real deffinition of what constituted a "Stop"

4) no real controlling for firearm/barrel. I submit that a .357 fired from a Highway Patrol model Smith will be travelling a bit faster than a 2" snubby.
Top Top