Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
From: nstar!bluemoon!jamaass@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Jeffrey A. Maass)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Ordinance Gelatin, where to get it?
Message-ID: <35123@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 1 Jun 91 15:14:56 GMT
Sender: magnum@mimsy.umd.edu
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[0][2][4])
Lines: 25
Approved: gun-control@cs.umd.edu

# The wound ballistics field is in desparate need of good science.  A
# good start would be to eliminate no-brain bozos who think that
# "Hydro-Shok ammo expands reliably" is inconsistent with "The post in
# Hydro-Shok ammo doesn't affect its expansion characteristics."  (Hint:
# Hydro-Shok ammo may expand reliably both with and without the post.
# Reliable expansion is demonstrated by testing Hydro-Shok ammo.  The
# post's effects are demonstrated by comparing the expansion of
# Hydro-Shok ammo with the post with Hydro-Shok ammo without the post.
# Coming up with the latter is left as an exercise for the reader.)
# 

There is an article in the June 1991 issue of "Handguns for Sprot and 
Defense" ( a Petersen publication) which describes FBI tests of 
Hydra-Shok with and without the post (in 10mm). Conclusions were 
that the post helped in every evaluation category.

Oooops, I see now that they evaluated it in 9mm, 10mm, and .45
calibers.

The article describes the methodologies applied.

 This is from
     jamaass@bluemoon.uucp
     jamaass%bluemoon@nstar.rn.com
who doesn't have their own obnoxious signature yet