previous post next post  

What is it?

By The Armorer on January 7, 2005 | | Comments (14) | TrackBacks (3)

This ain't a contest. I've been asked to help ID this bullet, and I haven't a clue, nor a reference that mentions anything remotely like it.

Anybody out there got some idea of what it is?

Another shot here.

From the email asking for help:

So now that I have the bullet in my hands I can tell you a few more things about it. The rear of the bullet is not solid copper like Tom told me. The "wires" are also not steel like he thought. They are not lead nor aluminum, they appear to be a stiff alloy that is not magnetic. I tried to scrape them with a knife blade and they are very hard. I also measured the bullet diameter with my calipers and took several readings at the base and about 1/4" from the base, I came up with three readings of .350, .351 and .352. The jacket is scored by the 5 groove rifling from the base to approx .365" forward of the base. By now you've noticed the "wires." This bullet consists of 7 "wires" forming the core which is spirally wrapped by 5 more "wires" that are the wire fingers you see sticking out, one of which is broken off. The bullet as you see it weighs 92 grains.

So, what about it smart guys? Got any ideas?

Update: Right now the working hypothesis is a Ballisticlean round.

Like this description.

If that holds up, SangerM wins the non-existent prize! Oh, heck, I've got the Arsenal Store - Sanger, pick a pic of something you like, mug or mousepad on the Castle!

Update 2. I think we can move beyond working hypothesis. The Sheepdog found this (and you should go there to see it - so he can have the traffic bump!)

Having gone the extra mile and found confirmatory photographs - I'll extend him the same offer I did SangerM.

Share This Article:

Categories:

3 Trackbacks

TrackBack this entry at http://www.thedonovan.com/cgi-bin/mt41/mt-tb.cgi/3364

Name that bullet 07JAN05 from Airborne Combat Engineer on January 7, 2005 12:32 PM

John of Argghhh is looking for help in identifying THIS. (Ouch!) I'm guessing if anybody knows, Daniel does. Read More

So John what do I win? ^_^ from sheepdog.blog-city.com on January 7, 2005 4:01 PM

John from Argghhh! has a question: Name is this roundAbout 90% sure that fromt he mesasurements he listed, grain weigh, etc that its this: 9mm 100 grain Federal JCQT Zink So John what did I win? Maybe some super sweet blogrollage? ;) Read More

Gun Links #29 from Les Jones on January 13, 2005 7:24 AM

This is the first new Gun Links since August, when I announced I was quitting through at least the end of 2004 because of the impending bambino. I'll be posting gun links every now and again but I won't promise any regularity -LJ For F-Stop and other f... Read More

14 Comments

By Laughing Wolf on January 7, 2005 8:35 AM
I am stumped right now, but seem to recall some tests being done years ago on different types of cores for bullets that included strands, strands and solid cores, etc. Some of these were done to support hydrostatic shock, some for a better mushroom, some for penetration, and so forth. Let me see if I can find anything in the files...
 
By SangerM on January 7, 2005 10:03 AM
No pic available, but could it be a "Ballisticlean" Training Round??? See links: www.le.atk.com/Interior.asp?section=1&page=pages/federal/fed_rifle_ballisticlean.asp www.le.atk.com/Interior.asp?section=1&page=pages/federal/fed_pistol_ballisticlean.asp
 
By SangerM on January 7, 2005 10:04 AM
And just for grins, here's a new use for bullets... www.bullworks.net/virtual/armory/bullets.htm
 
By Imperial Firearms Advisor on January 7, 2005 12:08 PM
I seem to recall some tests made using bullets which incorporated bound tungsten strips (are any of the strands tungsten, perhaps?), but I'm completely at a loss as to the purpose of the tests. What puzzles me is the caliber. Every test I've ever seen on something like this has involved using bullets of a "military"-style caliber: .223, .30, 7.62mm etc -- but NEVER a .35-cal bullet. I'm going to post a link to this on my Forum; those geeks are going to go nuts about this one.
 
By A.C.E on January 7, 2005 12:39 PM
I don't know what is, John, but I know what I'd name it: "The Human Rototiller." Argghhh! That's nasty! I've posted a link to your post at A.C.E. If anybody who visit there knows, Daniel E. Waters, a very knowledgeable firearms historian who visits there (and maybe here as well) will know.
 
By a curious reader on January 7, 2005 12:46 PM
Interesting. There are rounds in current use that have a similar design to this one, but a different composition. I'm thinking in particular of a round that SWAT snipers/long-riflemen use, consisting of a jacketed projectile with a tightly-compressed stranded lead core. The round is designed specifically for situations where single-shot-to-the-head instant incapacitation is required. As the bullet penetrates the inner table of the skull, it sheds the jacket and fragments violently, with virtually no penetration out the other side. Judging by the stated composition of the bullet you describe, I'd guess it to be a more-penetrative implemention of the same concept, perhaps with an eye toward game larger than man? Surely someone here can provide additional illumination.
 
By DrMark on January 7, 2005 1:12 PM
Sounds like 9mm (.355 cal) and the bullet weight bears that out. I think SangerM is correct: http://www.miragetechnologies.net/Federal%20Ammunition.htm "BallistiClean is available in our jacketed, stranded zinc core bullet- designed to break up on hard targets-and in our Close Quarter Training (CQT) round. "
 
By Chris Byrne on January 7, 2005 1:14 PM
I have seen a bullet that looked just like this on what I remember to be a discovery channel documentary, though I may be wrong. The "wires" were tungsten formed in a spiral over a penetrator core,swaged into a spire pointed hollowpint with a very thin jacket over them. It was designed to produce damage similar to a prefragmented bullet, without breaking up.
 
By Coolhand77 on January 7, 2005 1:25 PM
.35 cal is very close to .357 and/or 9mm (its about 8.9mm). Is it possible this could be an attempt for an 9mm winmag or .357 mag improved manstopper? Do we know if the tip was elongated or if the wires were curled up so that it would fit in a standard pistol cartridge? IMHO the "fingers" being wrapped around the core like they are poionts in this direction. The base looks a little long for a pistol cartridge, but anything is possible. Were was it found? I know I am asking more than I am answering, but that kind of information might be handy in identifying the ammunition.
 
By Imperial Firearms Advisor on January 7, 2005 1:42 PM
DrMark is right. It's a BallistiClean bullet, or a derivative thereof. Ow. That thing has GOT to leave a bruise, although I suspect the one in the pic was fired into hard media -- the "spokes" will slow penetration, big time. In soft media (eg. flesh), the expansion probably isn't that radical.
 
By cw4billt on January 7, 2005 3:28 PM
Obviously a frangible round, and my initial thought was that it was used for training aerial gunners in WWII. Caliber and rifling are all wrong for that, though--methinks SangerM has nailed it. Again. The lad is good...
   
By sheepdog on January 7, 2005 4:10 PM
Flip sweet John! Thanks
 
By BULLSEYE on January 8, 2005 6:21 PM
It's a .308/7/4 or a .223/12/31 caliber. This is what happens to a round fired at random into the air upon striking a magnesium laden firework by some IDIOT on the 4th of July (7/4) or New Years Eve (12/31). All kidding aside, I have no clue as to what kind of round it is. Yer pal BULLSEYE.
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.