Qev wrote:Actually, standard firearm bullets can't really be hollowed and filled with mercury, as mercury at room-temperature will quite happily dissolve a lot of metals, including lead, leading to a solid amalgam that probably doesn't have terribly good ballistic properties.
Does anybody here know if that's accurate?
Has anybody used mercury rounds, or heard of anybody using/making them?
Or what the effects would be?
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)
"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell
Wikipedia wrote:Mercury and aluminium Mercury readily combines with aluminium to form an amalgam when the two pure metals come into contact. However, when the amalgam is exposed to air, the aluminium oxidizes, leaving behind mercury. The oxide flakes away, exposing more mercury amalgam, which repeats the process. This process continues until the supply of amalgam is exhausted, and since it releases mercury, a small amount of mercury can “eat through” a large amount of aluminium over time, by progressively forming amalgam and relinquishing the aluminium as oxide.
Aluminium in air is ordinarily protected by a molecule-thin layer of its own oxide (which is not porous to oxygen). Mercury coming into contact with this oxide does no harm. However, if any elemental aluminium is exposed (even by a recent scratch), the mercury may combine with it, starting the process described above, and potentially damaging a large part of the aluminium before it finally ends (Ornitz 1998).
For this reason, restrictions are placed on the use and handling of mercury in proximity with aluminium. In particular, mercury is not allowed aboard aircraft under most circumstances because of the risk of it forming amalgam with exposed aluminium parts in the aircraft.
If you use a hollow point style round and fill the cavity with mercury, a plug (wax?) would be necissary.
The toxiscity of mercury is real, but I think it's overstated. It's a gradual degredation rather than sudden collapse.
I suppsoe a hollow point with mercury filled cavity would expand faster, resulting in a greater wound channel, but it would decelerate fster, not penetrating so completely.
lather wrote:I agree with Jefffar; no matter what, the pay off does not seem worth the effort.
I totally agree. It has the potential to do massive shock damage over a large area. But has about zero pentration. Besides its a lot of work for only a so-so result.
Hale Chidduck: Do you believe in karma?
Joe Sarno: Karma's justice without the satisfaction. I don't believe in justice.
Rockwolf66 wrote:As far as Mercury filled Bullets go...Use a well designed hollow point and proper shot placement. the results are much better.
How so?
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)
"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell
Let's look at Handguns first. Even the most powerful handguns fall far short of the energy levels of a rifle. This is why hunters don't take to the field with handguns. A handgun bullet hits the target with and delivers blunt force trauma. Much like throwing a rock. The bullet penetrates because of its energy but this isn't a piercing. A handgun bullet crushes the tissue all the way through and leaves the permanent wound channel as pretty much the only damaged tissue.
thus there are only two ways to increase bullet damage in handguns.
1. Proper shot placement. a 40 grain* .22LR to the eye, beats my favorite 300 grain .44 magnum load to the foot.
*How bullets are weighed.
2. use a larger diameter and heavier bullet.
As far as Mercury bullets go, they are highly inaccurate and don't penetrate very well. Which means that you are more likely to tick your target off than kill him. Which is why we who kill living things( for whatever reason) do not use Murcury bullets.
Jefffar wrote:Basically a mercury round would have all the disadvantages of the Glaser, but none of the advantages.
it's funny I found an honestly good use for Glaser rounds the other week. Shooting the 2 1/2 foot long rattlesnake that is eyeing your boots like it wants a taste. 9mm Hardball is not the sort of ammo you want to be shooting at rocky ground. the shot from a glaser will at most sting when it bounces back at you. Then again they are just about the last thing you want to shoot a bear with...
Jefffar wrote:Basically a mercury round would have all the disadvantages of the Glaser, but none of the advantages.
it's funny I found an honestly good use for Glaser rounds the other week. Shooting the 2 1/2 foot long rattlesnake that is eyeing your boots like it wants a taste. 9mm Hardball is not the sort of ammo you want to be shooting at rocky ground. the shot from a glaser will at most sting when it bounces back at you. Then again they are just about the last thing you want to shoot a bear with...
How well do Glasers work on people?
Annual Best Poster of the Year Awards (2012)
"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -George Orwell
Reasonably well. It delivers a pretty broad, if shallow primary wound channel. The newer glaser rounds have a heavier class of shot in them meaning they will reach a little further into the body to do damage to the organs.
The good / bad news about the glaser is that it goes spalt when it hits soemthign, soft or not. On a soft target, like you or I, it's the aforementioend broad wound channel. On a hard target (like say, body armour or even drywall) it doesn't pentrate worth a dang.
The folks at glaser bill this lack of hard penetration as a great advantage of the round. In a building or other inclosed space, A miss won't penetrate the walls and kill an innocent on the other side. There's also no chance of a through and through on a bad guy dropping an innocent. There's also no harmful ricochetts.
Then again, considering glaser is only practical in medium to large calibre pistol rounds, the chances of a through and through or goign through a wall were already pretty low. Also, since the bad guys have started to wear body armour, it's not as effectve as it once was.
There are reports that the Air Marshalls are carrying glasers though. it's hard to get body armour onto an airliner and an errant round should stop in a seat rather than little timmy cowering behind it.
Jefffar wrote:Basically a mercury round would have all the disadvantages of the Glaser, but none of the advantages.
it's funny I found an honestly good use for Glaser rounds the other week. Shooting the 2 1/2 foot long rattlesnake that is eyeing your boots like it wants a taste. 9mm Hardball is not the sort of ammo you want to be shooting at rocky ground. the shot from a glaser will at most sting when it bounces back at you. Then again they are just about the last thing you want to shoot a bear with...
How well do Glasers work on people?
Well if you read the first Balistics Link you would find this image. The image is of the wound channel of a .357 Magnum Glaser round, and it only penatrates a grand total of four inches! if you are lucky you will hit something vital. As for a Jacketed Soft Point you get enough penatration to hit vital organs even with a less than ideal shot. Read the previous links provided as they do contain valid information. There are othe "Magic Bullets" on the market, and they just do not live up to the hype. If you are knowingly going into a gunfight get a rifle.
Jefffar wrote:Basically a mercury round would have all the disadvantages of the Glaser, but none of the advantages.
it's funny I found an honestly good use for Glaser rounds the other week. Shooting the 2 1/2 foot long rattlesnake that is eyeing your boots like it wants a taste. 9mm Hardball is not the sort of ammo you want to be shooting at rocky ground. the shot from a glaser will at most sting when it bounces back at you. Then again they are just about the last thing you want to shoot a bear with...
They make actual shotshells for pistol calibers just for that purpose. My pops has some for his .44 mag. I read a long time ago in guns and ammo or some similar publication. The author carried a .22 autoloader with the shotshells for snakes. I question the reliability of shotshells in an autoloader. For those who have not seen them. Instead of a conventional bullet it has a plastic capsule that is full of shot. But he seemed to think it wasn't a problem.
Hale Chidduck: Do you believe in karma?
Joe Sarno: Karma's justice without the satisfaction. I don't believe in justice.
Jefffar wrote:Basically a mercury round would have all the disadvantages of the Glaser, but none of the advantages.
it's funny I found an honestly good use for Glaser rounds the other week. Shooting the 2 1/2 foot long rattlesnake that is eyeing your boots like it wants a taste. 9mm Hardball is not the sort of ammo you want to be shooting at rocky ground. the shot from a glaser will at most sting when it bounces back at you. Then again they are just about the last thing you want to shoot a bear with...
They make actual shotshells for pistol calibers just for that purpose. My pops has some for his .44 mag. I read a long time ago in guns and ammo or some similar publication. The author carried a .22 autoloader with the shotshells for snakes. I question the reliability of shotshells in an autoloader. For those who have not seen them. Instead of a conventional bullet it has a plastic capsule that is full of shot. But he seemed to think it wasn't a problem.
I do know about snakeshot loads for handguns, it's made by CCI and it's not cheap. Still the stuff works, for more than just snakes. Mind you it does not fully cycle a Semi-automatic handgun. that's the one advantage of a Glaser round.
Rereading this post about shotshells makes me think a of a relativly new firearm from Winchester. Its call the Winchester 9410. Its winchesters classic model 94 lever action rifle chambered for .410 shotgun shells. I though it looked like it would be hell on wheels for small game gun. It might be ok for deer at close range (I say that because the slug of a .410 is about the same power wise as a .357mag.). I think it would be good for snakes too. At one point I looked at it for a home defense weapon for my then girlfriend. It would have been low recoil, and wouldn't over penetrate the walls and strike the neighbors.
Hale Chidduck: Do you believe in karma?
Joe Sarno: Karma's justice without the satisfaction. I don't believe in justice.
