TexasCHLforum.com

Another "magic" bullet has been introduced by the company that produced the copper fragmenting round that was discussed here on the forum some time ago.

This one is designed to open like a flower and hold together on impact. It's overhyped description combined with its 9 - 10 inches of penetration in gelatin is hardly inspiring, but the flower petal like recovered slugs are pretty. At around $42 per box I don't expect even the armchair commandos to make a run on the supplies anytime soon.

Details here.

I'll be sticking with HST and Gold Dot.

AndyC wrote:I think I'll be staying away from this, too.

Me too. The cost and the ample supply of proven rounds make me say nope.

Besides, only magic bullet for me is practice.

If you plant the magic bullets, do they grow into a giant armory?

If the bullets are proven to work better than other self defense offerings, I wouldn't mind trying it.

I did shoot up some of the Ruger ARX ammo last weekend. I am not sure I like the 9mm version, but the 380 ammo shot accurate and reilable in my CZ83. It might be a good round for really light weight pistols.

I did want to try me some of these... I didn't exactly think 'another magic bullet' when I read/saw the article about them. So far I haven't seen them anywhere for purchase. Will be interesting to see some shots/testing in action of these rounds.

Ok after looking more closely I think it was the R.I.P ammo that I saw and was interested in trying...

Yeah 9-10 inches in gelatin doesn't translate well into bad guy. Maybe 6 inches if there's nothing to slow it down or spread it out on the way in. I think I'll pass at least until more info is available.

Magic bullet...a case that regrows powder and the bullet on its own.

I traded a cow for some magic beans once, but that ended up with me stealing a goose and chopping down a beanstalk....

I was not impressed with their RIP bullets, and the Civic Duty round looks and sounds just like another hyped-up projectile. Admittedly, some times the name and claim cause them to get the reputation, just like the Black Talon .357 Winchester round got in the '90's with it's 'magic' coating that the media claimed would slide right through body armor, even though it was untrue.

I think I will stick with my Corbon Pow'RBall 9mm and Hornady FTX Critical Defense .45 rounds. I know what they will do and they don't have the reputation of being a 'magic' bullet if I ever have an overzealous prosecutor that wants to paint me in a bad light after a good shoot.

If it ain't broke.......

Tough crowd here.

I would remind everyone that we would not have the excellent choice of bullets that we do today, if no one ever sought to experiment and improve upon them. This offering will prove itself (or not) as all others have. Let us not condemn it just yet.

I don't see the company promoting it as the 'perfect/do all' bullet. And you can find abundant hyperbole in nearly all advertising these days, we shouldn't be surprised at that.

Lastly, there are many bullets that fill a 'niche' or need. Not everything produced is meant to shoot through a windshield, four layers of denim and eleven inches of flesh.

Personally, I don't plan on trying any of it, but based solely on the manufacturers claims...I don't see it as being wholly unfit .

flintknapper wrote:Tough crowd here.

I would remind everyone that we would not have the excellent choice of bullets that we do today, if no one ever sought to experiment and improve upon them. This offering will prove itself (or not) as all others have. Let us not condemn it just yet.

I don't see the company promoting it as the 'perfect/do all' bullet. And you can find abundant hyperbole in nearly all advertising these days, we shouldn't be surprised at that.

Lastly, there are many bullets that fill a 'niche' or need. Not everything produced is meant to shoot through a windshield, four layers of denim and eleven inches of flesh.

Personally, I don't plan on trying any of it, but based solely on the manufacturers claims...I don't see it as being wholly unfit .

You are correct flintknapper, if it weren't for mavericks looking outside the box, we would still be firing round lead bullets through smooth bore guns, and I don't know that these will be unsuitable for their intended use. But I think a lot of folks will agree that there have been so many "newer and better" things come along that really weren't that most will at least take a wait and see attitude before dropping $42 per box. JMHO

flintknapper wrote:Tough crowd here.

I would remind everyone that we would not have the excellent choice of bullets that we do today, if no one ever sought to experiment and improve upon them. This offering will prove itself (or not) as all others have. Let us not condemn it just yet.

I don't see the company promoting it as the 'perfect/do all' bullet. And you can find abundant hyperbole in nearly all advertising these days, we shouldn't be surprised at that.

Lastly, there are many bullets that fill a 'niche' or need. Not everything produced is meant to shoot through a windshield, four layers of denim and eleven inches of flesh.

Personally, I don't plan on trying any of it, but based solely on the manufacturers claims...I don't see it as being wholly unfit .

I'm not against innovation, and I don't write off things just because they're new.

I also don't get starry eyed over reincarnations of concepts that have failed repeatedly in the past.

Light bullets that over-expand, splinter, or disintegrate on contact with a target and don't penetrate 12 - 18 inches in ballistic gelatin have repeatedly proven to be underperformers in gunfights. I'm open to seeing that changed by some really smart engineering, but I'm not holding my breath. I'd have to see an awful lot of credible data before I'd stake my life on such a design.

Nine to ten inches of penetration in bare ballistic gelatin with no denser materials (e.g.bone) in the wound track is not confidence inspiring. I'll sit out trying the new Civic Duty round for now and keep my eye out for more data which I don't expect to significantly change my initial assessment, but I could be wrong.

That's been known to happen from time to time.