RBCD/LeMas...

357SIGFAN · 03-19-2010, 00:20

I have seen more information on RBCD/LeMas on this site than anywhere else.

I bought some of the ammo around 2000, and never really viewed it as more than a novelty round, based on reading reports of erratic performance and velocity.

From what I understand, if the round performs as advertised, it virtually disentegrates upon impact with hydraulic (human/animal) targets.

Regardless of whether it does this or not (I have heard both sides of the story, and taken both with a good bit of salt), wouldn't this fragmentation be more of a liability than an asset?

I say this because it is not at all uncommon to strike appendages before the thoracic cavity is encountered. If this occured, the round would (again, if it performed as billed), destroy the appendage, and leave everything behind it virtually un-harmed.

"But the guy/girl would be missing an arm!"

Well...maybe/maybe not. Either way, an arm is not essential, as one hiker proved by cutting his off with his pocket-knife, sans anesthesia, when it was pinned by a boulder.

Basically, my question is this: Why is LeMas so popular with this forum when everywhere else I look, it is being dismissed as exotic at best, and completely flamed at worst?

I have reviewed some of the pictures of the damage it has done to tissue on this site, but it is unclear if exploratory cutting has been done prior to the picture-taking, there is no frame of reference, etc. I could not determine much at all from these pictures. In gel, I have seen very poor performance, and very "as advertised" performance. The poor performance was showcased by an uninterested 3rd party, the "as advertised" performance was on RBCD's website. When it performed as advertised, it looked about like it did about what a 40gr VMAX in .223 does. Again, concern with the under-penetration/obstructed shots.

Is there anything that should sway me away from my Gold Dots to this ammunition from RBCD. My chosen caliber is evidenced by my screen name.

**The Reaper** · 03-19-2010, 07:54

Maybe the posters on the other sites had not shot any into live tissue. We have.

Or maybe the comments were from people who were not trauma surgeons. Some of those here are.

I am not sure that you fully understand human physiology, but if you have a leg or an arm shredded by LeMas, absent competent medical intervention, you are going to quickly become unconscious from blood loss. Conventional rounds may puncture or break portions of the appendage, but will likely not shatter and shred it the way LeMas does. A torso shot and you are going to be incapacitated and quickly dead due to tissue damage and exsanguination, regardless of medical treatment.

I really don't care if you believe it or not. It is my experience, and that of others here who have fired it into live tissue, including trauma surgeons. Ask the others how many rounds they have fired and what they shot with it. Few of the posters have actually fired the LeMas, and fewer still, if any have shot live tissue with it.

TR

357SIGFAN · 03-19-2010, 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Maybe the posters on the other sites had not shot any into live tissue. We have.

Or maybe the comments were from people who were not trauma surgeons. Some of those here are.

I am not sure that you fully understand human physiology, but if you have a leg or an arm shredded by LeMas, absent competent medical intervention, you are going to quickly become unconscious from blood loss. Conventional rounds may puncture or break portions of the appendage, but will likely not shatter and shred it the way LeMas does. A torso shot and you are going to be incapacitated and quickly dead due to tissue damage and exsanguination, regardless of medical treatment.

I really don't care if you believe it or not. It is my experience, and that of others here who have fired it into live tissue, including trauma surgeons. Ask the others how many rounds they have fired and what they shot with it. Few of the posters have actually fired the LeMas, and fewer still, if any have shot live tissue with it.

TR

Has LeMas gotten this stuff to be more consistant, velocity-wise? I am tempted to buy a few rounds and try it myself. The rounds I previously bought are in calibers I no-longer have/I sold them.

So far, I have been very opposed to the ammunition because of what others have said. However, you raise a valid point.

What others say mean a lot less than what the round actually DOES.

Seeing is believing, for me, and I want to see.

However, I still would like a round capable of penetrating 12" or more. I am not, and never will be a fan of the FN 5.7 or of using 40gr VMAX over 75gr T2.

That is my main hang-up with RBCD. However, I have been trying to go on a hog hunt for quite some time, and if I can ever get around to it, I would like to compare the 125gr GDHP to RBCD's offering. If it drops the hog and creates a massive wound, well, the facts are what they are.

BrainStorm · 03-20-2010, 01:38

I wrote this in another forum under a different name. Hopefully you will find it useful here. I reference Dr. Vail, who we all know as SwatSurgeon here.

Quote:

Generally this level of passion is reserved to political views, computer type (IBM vs. Apple), sports team preference, and religion. They are usually interesting threads when ad hominem attacks can be avoided.

Some thoughts on this discussion, hopefully helpful.

Advertising and promotional materiel always leaves me amused. I am surprised at how some of it is so devoid of reality. Political candidates, cars, ammo, ... All are problematic when making a choice. Hopefully some due diligence in involved in the decision making process some time before the final decision is made. I find the promotional material for RBCD/Le Mas problematic, but not dispositive. Observations of results by professionals capable of making those observations have great weight with me.
When I pressed Dr. Roberts about the contents of the "secret" report, he suggested that I file a FOIA (Freedom of Information ACT) request. He is very careful in his formulation of his characterization of how the report supports his observations. That begs the question of "What about the observations of others regarding the performance of this ammo?"

I started to file a FOIA request several times, but governments BS along the way always distracted me. Perhaps someone here has more stomach for this kind of thing.
When I spoke with Stan Bulmer (he called me) about this report he told me a lot about its faults in general terms and the faults in the evaluation process, but refused to be specific, citing retribution for revealing the results of a secret report.
I have corresponded with Dr. Vail on several subjects and have found him smart, serious and knowledgeable. I'm impressed with the man and have no reason to doubt his observations. Understand, what he provided was observations, not any suggestion of the underlying science that produced those results.
From my background in science and engineering, I believe Dr. Roberts analysis has several flaws. The most egregious is that he ultimately resorts to the "fact" that ammo has performed well in the field and thus has validated the ballistic gel predictions. Therefore ballistic gel is a good predictor of performance. However, it should be noted that ammo is evaluated by ballistic gel tests before it is accepted by the professional community. This is a circular argument. It begs the question of "What if there were other modes of performance that might be useful, but are not part of any testing regime?" Perhaps RBCD/Le Mas ammo is just the candidate to break out of this insular evaluation technique?
The Coral Gables police department did an evaluation of LeMas and chose it. See article in American Cop Magazine. That article was written by a respected retired FBI agent under a pseudonym. Does anyone here know of any faults with their evaluation process? I'm assuming with the great liability exposure that Police Departments have, they would have done their due diligence.
Like any boutique manufacturer, RBCD must continue to challenge themselves with respect to quality management. I have heard several anecdotal reports of indicators of overpressure and seen several reports of measurements of pressure and they concern me. I would be cautious. With the cost of this ammo and the chances that there may be pressure issues, I would not think it is ammo that would be frequently shot through any given gun. In a self-defense situation, I'm not concerned about damage to my handgun, just reliability and effectiveness. Given, that perspective, I am giving RBCD some serious consideration.

357SIGFAN · 03-20-2010, 13:27

The article linked seems to imply that LeMas is temperature sensing. I don't buy that.

I need to do further research with regard to the department that has issued it to comment with that regard.

I DO care if the ammunition is loaded to a pressure that will damage my firearm. This may not concern the above poster, but it is worrysome to me.

The wounds pictured do look severe, and I guess it's just something I am going to have to see with my own eyes. I googled and googled and couldn't find any record of someone losing a finger to the stuff, so I guess I will buy some 9mm RBCD and find an oppossum or hog or some other vermin to shoot and see if my results are similar.

You seem to imply that Dr. Roberts "has an agenda". Word it how you want, but that seems to be the implication. Does he? I can't speak for the man, but if we are to presume that he does, it would be faulty logic to presume that those opposite of him did not have their own.

**The Reaper** · 03-20-2010, 14:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by 357SIGFAN

You seem to imply that Dr. Roberts "has an agenda". Word it how you want, but that seems to be the implication. Does he? I can't speak for the man, but if we are to presume that he does, it would be faulty logic to presume that those opposite of him did not have their own.

I don't buy that either. There are a lot of explanations about HOW the LeMas/RBCD works. Frankly, I could care less if there are a bunch of nanobots inside with micro-mini chainsaws. Some say it is the light bullets at extreme velocities. Whatever. I just know that every round I have fired, or seen fired, has worked as advertised in live targets.

Let's just say that no one here has as their agenda items, the continuation of ballistic gelatin as the premier tissue simulant for ballistic testing, or the establishment of a dentist as the preeminent ammunition tester and wound ballistician in the world.

Stan Bulmer is affiliated with LeMas. To my knowledge, no one else here has any business interest with them or RBCD.

TR

357SIGFAN · 03-20-2010, 17:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I don't buy that either. There are a lot of explanations about HOW the LeMas/RBCD works. Frankly, I could care less if there are a bunch of nanobots inside with micro-mini chainsaws. Some say it is the light bullets at extreme velocities. Whatever. I just know that every round I have fired, or seen fired, has worked as advertised in live targets.

Let's just say that no one here has as their agenda items, the continuation of ballistic gelatin as the premier tissue simulant for ballistic testing, or the establishment of a dentist as the preeminent ammunition tester and wound ballistician in the world.

Stan Bulmer is affiliated with LeMas. To my knowledge, no one else here has any business interest with them or RBCD.

TR

How has RBCD done in OIS's? I saw that one PD has adopted it, have they provided any data one way or another?

BrainStorm · 03-20-2010, 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

To my knowledge, no one else here has any business interest with them or RBCD.

TR

Full disclosure: As I have written elsewhere, about six months or so ago I received paperwork to become an RBCD distributor, however I have not acted on it. At the moment, I have no plans to do so.

dr. mabuse · 03-20-2010, 21:05

*

357SIGFAN · 03-20-2010, 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr. mabuse

That someone would continue to try to morph a "qualitative" media such as gelatin into a "quantitative" indicator is , um, interesting.

357SIGFAN, you might find it useful to do a little more lurking and searching to see what environment you are in and the backgrounds of the Been There Done That crowd herein contrasted with the "Haven't been there, wish they could do that" crowd at tacticalforumbabies.com and others.

IMHO, show a little more respect here. The QP's here are way, way, way beyond
the monkeys on the other forums ( not that the QP's need my help ).

BTW, Dr. Roberts, according to what his gelatin tells him, doesn't seem care for 357 SIG at all.

Have a good 'un.

Back to my lane....

I do not mean any disrespect at all. I think mature adults should be able to discuss differeing opinions/question each others viewpoints politely, and so far, it appears that this is occuring.

No, Dr. Roberts does not care for the 357SIG, we have gone round and round about it. Hence why I am curious what "the other side" has to say about RBCD. I don't accept his word as gospel, or I would not hold the opinions that I do, nor would I be curious about RBCD, I would "already know".

It is not my goal, or concern, what anyone thinks of Dr. Roberts, or what he thinks of others. I think that the truth of the matter--whatever it may be--is not at all reliant upon anyone's beliefs regarding the politics of the matter.

My further questions:

-Are the photos on this site in other threads taken before or after any kind of exploratory cutting was done?

-Has anyone from this site used RBCD in the field, hunting, etc. etc. enough to consistantly see these kinds of results on varying animals (or people, if an OIS is to be cited)?

-The spectrum analysis done by Dr. Roberts, or at least quoted by him, is claimed to be deceptive because it was done on RBCD ammunition, and not LeMas ammunition. Is there a difference? Can I as a member of the general populace acquire LeMas? I am foggy on the difference here.

-Do those of you who carry LeMas feel that it is not a problem that it could potentially be "thwarted" by a limb, before reaching the thoracic cavity? If not, do you also prefer 40gr VMAX, etc to 75gr TAP T2, and the like in an AR/M4?

Again, no disrespect, just asking questions, learning from the other side of the argument, as it were.

BrainStorm · 03-20-2010, 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by 357SIGFAN

The wounds pictured do look severe, and I guess it's just something I am going to have to see with my own eyes. I googled and googled and couldn't find any record of someone losing a finger to the stuff, so I guess I will buy some 9mm RBCD and find an oppossum or hog or some other vermin to shoot and see if my results are similar.

This is how I bought my RBCD ammo and from the same vendor. I had a good experience with both Gunbroker and the vendor. Buffalo Creek Firearms on Gunbroker.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by 357SIGFAN

You seem to imply that Dr. Roberts "has an agenda". Word it how you want, but that seems to be the implication. Does he? I can't speak for the man, but if we are to presume that he does, it would be faulty logic to presume that those opposite of him did not have their own.

Deciding if someone has an agenda is largely in the eyes of the beholder. You must be the judge. This is Dr. Robers "report" on RBCD. Enjoy. LeMas/RBCD Ammunition Analysis by DocGKR

357SIGFAN · 03-20-2010, 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrainStorm

This is how I bought my RBCD ammo and from the same vendor. I had a good experience with both Gunbroker and the vendor. Buffalo Creek Firearms on Gunbroker.com

Deciding if someone has an agenda is largely in the eyes of the beholder. You must be the judge. This is Dr. Robers "report" on RBCD. Enjoy. LeMas/RBCD Ammunition Analysis by DocGKR

I have had conversations with Dr. Roberts before, and read his work, and skimmed the linked article (I am going to READ it now). I have noted that he does have a very strong opinion regarding some things. I disagree with him on some things, as well, as many police departments are quite happy with the 357SIG, and do feel/have experienced that it does have enhanced penetration, as compared to other service pistol rounds. I feel that a multitude of OIS's > gel.

That is a lot more $ than I want to spend on this project. I think I will probably end up buying the 6 round blister-pack or maybe a 20 round box or something, IIRC the 20 round box used to sell for $37 or so at a local gun store where I used to live. I bought blister packs off of a guy that was left with a bunch of stock a long time ago. I am fuzzy on that as it was a long time ago, but he was ticked at having a lot of ammo he couldn't move or something of the sort and sold it at $1/round to me.

357SIGFAN · 03-20-2010, 22:33

Not to cheap-out on actually hunting down some critter, but do you feel that shooting a butterball turkey or chunk of ham or something (at ambient out-door temp) would show the LeMas/RBCD ammunition in its reputed glory? I know it obviously isn't the same as living/freshly deceased tissue of course, but it would provide a comparison to the turkey I shot with M193 a few years ago, if nothing else. Thoughts?

**The Reaper** · 03-20-2010, 22:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by 357SIGFAN

Not to cheap-out on actually hunting down some critter, but do you feel that shooting a butterball turkey or chunk of ham or something (at ambient out-door temp) would show the LeMas/RBCD ammunition in its reputed glory? I know it obviously isn't the same as living/freshly deceased tissue of course, but it would provide a comparison to the turkey I shot with M193 a few years ago, if nothing else. Thoughts?

Not as well as live tissue, with actual vascular activity, IMHO.

Ask Swatsurgeon.

TR

357SIGFAN · 03-20-2010, 23:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Not as well as live tissue, with actual vascular activity, IMHO.

Ask Swatsurgeon.

TR

I understand completely (turkey is probably pumped full of saline and all sorts of crap knowing today's food), but would the "experiment" be completely without merit? I just want to see if it blows a large hole through it 3" across.

What about a block of ham or something? I have heard pork is very similar to human muscle, don't know if that's true or not.