Flat Nose Bullets

[44MAG#1]

Where did that come from??.. I must have missed it.
Of course meplat diameter plays a significant role in the wound channel “crush” diameter in a non-expanding bullet… I haven’t seen anyone dispute that.
If you can show me, in this entire dead-horse-beating thread where that was said I’d appreciate it.

You insinuate that someone said such nonsense, so please, show me exactly where that happened instead of fishing for a make-believe argument.

This is what i am going by. Look at the SWC, TC and RN photos. Maybe a small difference in penetration but actually no difference in Defense Wound Mass.
Keep in mind this is figured from a 44 Special load at 700 fps and a 245 grain bullet.
This is the tool i used to determine that.
Keeping in mind SWC and TC are flat nose bullets.

[cainttype]

Are you serious?

You have spent days, and dozens of posts, because a simple program that doesn’t have the ability to differentiate between meplat diameters doesn’t differentiate between meplat diameters?
That’s insane.

So I’ll ask again…. Since you insinuate that someone, anyone, here has flatly stated meplat diameter is not a factor…. Please show me where the quote is…

[44MAG#1]

Are you serious?

You have spent days, and dozens of posts, because a simple program that doesn’t have the ability to differentiate between meplat diameters doesn’t differentiate between meplat diameters?
That’s insane.

So I’ll ask again…. Since you insinuate that someone, anyone, here has flatly stated meplat diameter is not a factor…. Please show me where the quote is…

It is inferred by that program.. Is it not???
Something can be inferred without being said directly cant it. i may have my terms confused. I have heard others smarter than me say that sometimes what isnt said can be as important what is said.
am i wrong?

[cainttype]

I’ll take that as, “No… I can’t show you where anyone said anything I’m claiming was said.”.
Good enough.

[44MAG#1]

I’ll take that as, “No… I can’t show you where anyone said anything I’m claiming was said.”.
Good enough.

So inferred cannot be a "tool" used by people to get across a point.?
Good enough.

[Daekar]

The amount of nutjob in this thread is breathtaking. 44mag, I don't know what put a bee in your bonnet, but I feel like you need to either drop this discussion or state a theory or position which you feel is the truth and go from there. I don't even know what this thread is about anymore.

[fenderman57]

Wasted bandwidth right from the start.

[pettypace]

This is what i am going by. Look at the SWC, TC and RN photos. Maybe a small difference in penetration but actually no difference in Defense Wound Mass.
Keep in mind this is figured from a 44 Special load at 700 fps and a 245 grain bullet.
This is the tool i used to determine that.
Keeping in mind SWC and TC are flat nose bullets.

44MAG#1,

You'd better check your communications system! It seems to have gone all transmit and no receive.

You and I have been over this before via PM. But I'll try again: VIRGEL is just a special-purpose calculator designed around the "wound trauma incapacitation" model in Duncan MacPherson's book Bullet Penetration. (To give credit where due, VIRGEL also uses ideas from Charles Schwartz's book Quantitative Ammunition Selection.)



As shown on the dust jacket, MacPherson tested lots of bullet types. But he couldn't test everything. So he made the recommendation below (which I forwarded to you via PM some time ago):

Bullet configurations with a large flat nose diameter near the caliber (e.g., Keith semi-wadcutters) are probably stable at zero angle of attack and the value of CD_c can be modeled as cylinders with a diameter of the flat nose face.

As I told you then, this workaround can be approximated with VIRGEL by changing the bullet shape to WC and using the meplat diameter as the bullet diameter. But, the results are not helpful unless the meplat diameter is very close to bullet diameter.

Outpost75's post on a recent and related thread sums up the situation clearly:

Observing from game results, using .44-.45 revolvers on deer, if the bullet does not expand, a meplat less than half of bullet diameter is no more effective than a round nose. A meplat 0.7 of the bullet diameter will rivet at 850 fps in soft 8-10 BHN alloy and give results similar to a wadcutter. The LBT wide flat noses and similar designs by Accurate are ideal.

I hope this helps.