Thread: RBCD/LeMas...
View Single Post
Old 03-19-2010, 10:45   #3
357SIGFAN
Asset
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Reaper View Post
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.
357SIGFAN is offline   Reply With Quote