text:
A Natural History.
By Adam Bellow.
565 pp. New York:
Doubleday. $30.
Would it be unsporting to ask whether, in a perfect meritocracy, the first book on the subject of nepotism would be written by Adam Bellow? Well, never mind, because we don't live in a perfect meritocracy, as Bellow's ''In Praise of Nepotism'' demonstrates at some length. What's more, he argues, it is a good thing that we don't.
Early on, Bellow explains that he set out to write a ''short, polemical book'' that would ''make the case for nepotism as both natural and necessary.'' But he was surprised to find that no one had written a thorough overview of the subject, looking at nepotism through history and across many cultures. So he switched gears: ''I had to write the book I needed to read in order to write the shorter polemical work I had envisioned.'' Having acknowledged that he made up his mind before beginning his research, Bellow also notes that because he is the son of a well-known novelist -- Saul Bellow -- who grew up to work in the publishing business, ''my objectivity may reasonably be questioned.''
The book is thorough. Much of Western history is considered, along with sections on Confucian clans and the Hindu caste system. Particular emphasis, of course, is given to the United States, from its beginnings up through the 20th-century ''war on nepotism'' and on to the present day. One of Bellow's recurring points is that pretty much every figure that history treats as self-made -- Napoleon, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy -- was actually the beneficiary of familial help and support in one sense or another. We also find many examples of hypocrisy, particularly among the founding fathers. Even Benjamin Franklin, who practically invented the self-help idea that gives hope to millions of ill-connected strivers, repeatedly pulled strings to install relatives in public jobs.
Some of these particulars may be surprising, but the larger point is hardly a shock: yes, yes, human beings have a tendency to talk up lofty ideals while quietly working the system to their own benefit. So what? Where does the praise come in?
Part of Bellow's answer seems to be that if nepotism helped build the America we know and love, then it can't be that bad. And he does not just mean governmental nepotism: the same practice helped build unions and plays a role in many blue-collar professions. Moreover, almost 95 percent of all businesses in the United States are family owned or controlled.Continue reading the main story
At this point it's important to explain what Bellow calls the ''somewhat anomalous'' way that he uses the word ''nepotism'': he says he has ''defined it to mean not just 'undue preference for kin' but, more broadly, 'doing things with kinship.' '' This is a bold rhetorical leap. And it's more than ''somewhat'' anomalous: it's like setting out to praise lying and then explaining that by ''lying,'' what you mean is ''doing things with truth.'' On the other hand, this invented definition of nepotism is surely a winner, since plenty of people will praise the idea of ''doing things with kinship.'' Similarly, Bellow often puts nepotism in the context of parents wanting to do right by their kids -- which, again, no one seriously opposes. Through these various sleights of hand, the ''deep-dyed American prejudice against nepotism'' becomes a prejudice against family itself.
As evidence of this prejudice, Bellow points to criticism of the Bush dynasty, whose current standard-bearer has been characterized by some as living proof that the meritocracy idea is a sham. Readers are also reminded of the memorable characterization of George H. W. Bush, by the populist gadfly Jim Hightower, as ''a man who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.'' But clearly Hightower and others are not upset about parents supporting their children; they are annoyed by undue preference for kin, especially when those who benefit from it pretend not to have been the recipient of any such thing.
It is Bellow's belief that there is a New Nepotism afoot. It originates not with powerful parents pulling strings for hapless offspring but rather with ambitious sons and daughters. These ''nepotees,'' he maintains, are held to higher, more meritocratic standards -- thus the playing field remains reasonably level and the result for society is the best of both worlds. ''Time and again we hear that while a famous name may get you in the door, you have to prove your worth or face the consequences.'' Look at Edgar Bronfman Jr., Bellow suggests: sure, he got the chance to run his father's gargantuan corporation, Seagram, but he made a hash of it, and so has been a ''whipping boy'' in the press.
Anyone who has ever gone about the process of ''getting in the door'' in a highly competitive field can tell you that this is not a process to be airily dismissed. It tends to be the hardest part. Chances are good that a lot of executives might have liked to have had a go at running Seagram, but they were not, as it were, born on third base. And besides, proving one's worth or facing the consequences is not a circumstance that applies only to nepotees; it applies to everyone.
But it's probably true that the nature of nepotism has changed. We may not live in a meritocracy, but we do live in a culture that is dominated by the idea of the market. So in the context of a small family business, it is as true now as it ever was that the best person to take over Joe's Muffler Shop might be Joe Jr., because he grew up around the business and it means a lot to him -- but also because he's the only person in the market for the job.
In a more rarefied field like politics or entertainment, ''name recognition'' has a certain market value. Benefiting from this fact is not nepotism (under any definition) but it's not quite merit, either. It's just one more factor for a market participant to take advantage of, or squander. Bellow notes that this very book has benefited from ''the added value that my name brings to the project.''
A book on nepotism by the son of a famous novelist might not be any better than one by some talented but unknown writer or scholar -- but it certainly sounds more marketable. On this score, in other words, Bellow's point has a great deal of merit.Continue reading the main story


text:
Total Projects in the city of eindhoven: 18
Eindhoven is a major city in the province of North Brabant in the Netherlands. With a population of over 213,000 people, it's the fifth largest city of the Netherlands. It is by no means a main tourist destination in the country and most travel guides will devote no more than a page or two to it. Nevertheless, this bustling and modern city has a lot more to offer.
Eindhoven's history is dominated by industrial development and is inextricably linked to electronics giant Philips and, to a lesser degree, DAF Trucks. Although those industries have mostly disappeared, Eindhoven remains a European technology hub, hosting a technical university and many technically oriented companies and cooperation initiatives. In addition, over the past decade the city has become the capital of Dutch design.
Right until the beginning of the 20th century, Eindhoven was no more than a village. Less than a century later its number of inhabitants had boomed to over 200,000. The main reason for this tremendous increase in size was the the establishment of electronics multinational Philips, which was founded as a light bulb manufacturing company in 1891 and was headquartered in Eindhoven until 1997. As Philips grew, the city of Eindhoven grew with it to feed the company's constantly growing need for workers. Philips' strong presence in the city gained it the title of "Lichtstad" (City of Light) and is still prominent today, as many of its former buildings are considered valuable industrial heritage and have been renovated. Frits Philips (1905-2005), who lead the company for decades, was the city's main beneficiary and was extremely popular among the people of Eindhoven. When walking the streets of Eindhoven today, you'll find his and other names associated with Philips everywhere. Parks, theaters, sports facilities and many streets are named in their honor.
Although Eindhoven is an old city, with town and market rights already awarded in 1232, little of this long history is visible when exploring its center today. Large parts of the city were destroyed during air raids in World War II and post-war reconstruction was focused on ambitious, modernist plans with little respect for the historic heritage that was left. Nevertheless, there are 140 national heritage sites (Rijksmonumenten) in and directly around the city, including many 19th and early 20th century buildings and a handful of older ones.
Looks can be deceiving, when it comes to Eindhoven's history. Modern as the city is today, it is in fact one of the oldest towns in the Netherlands. Henry I, Duke of Brabant, already chartered the then little village of "Endehoven" in 1232, as part of his extensive town planning process. Eventually the town established itself as a trade location en route from Holland to Liège. Its industrial activities initially centered around tobacco and textiles.
The city was destroyed and rebuilt several times in its written history. Despite late 14th century improvements to its fortifications, and the establishment of a castle within the city walls in the 15th century, Eindhoven was plundered and burned by the Guelders in 1486. No more than 6 houses remained. Rebuilding took almost 20 years and left the town in poverty, with the fortifications being neglected. This resulted in another plundering in 1543. That same year a fire ruined most of the city. During the Dutch Revolt the city repeatedly alternated ownership between the Dutch and Spanish, was burned down again, besieged for 3 months and finally captured by Spanish troops in 1583. When the French armies took over the already weakened city some years later, large parts of it were destroyed yet again. In 1629 Eindhoven finally became part of the Netherlands, but its tumultuous history left it a damaged and minor city.
This would change with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Due to the presence of Philips, DAF trucks and some other major industry, Eindhoven has developed as a major player in the global technical and industrial design scene. It is considered to be the epicenter of Dutch design with such institutions as the Design Academy and the Dutch Design Week that takes place every October.
Featured Projects
- Project Name: Boiler House Ceres
- Construction year: 2012
- Architect(s): diederendirrix architecten
- Project Category:
- Address: Ceres, Den Dolech 2, EINDHOVEN, Netherlands
- Latitude: 51.447
- Longitude: 5.48889
- Project Name: Cascade Laboratory
- Construction year: 1999
- Architect(s): Rudy Uytenhaak
- Project Category:
- Website: web.phys.tue.nl
- Address: De Wielen 1, EINDHOVEN, Netherlands
- Latitude: 51.4468
- Longitude: 5.48735
- Project Name: Christiaan Huygens College
- Construction year: 2010
- Architect(s): RAU
- Project Category:
- Website: www.huygenscollege.nl
- Address: Botenlaan 38, EINDHOVEN, Netherlands
- Latitude: 51.4377
- Longitude: 5.45001
- Project Name: Dynamo
- Construction year: 2005
- Architect(s): diederendirrix architecten
- Project Category:
- Address: Catharinaplein 21, EINDHOVEN, Netherlands
- Latitude: 51.4376
- Longitude: 5.48069
- Project Name: Effenaar
- Construction year: 2005
- Architect(s): MVRDV
- Project Category:
- Website: www.effenaar.nl
- Address: Dommelstraat 2, EINDHOVEN, Netherlands
- Latitude: 51.4415
- Longitude: 5.48383
Fisketorvet by Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects04/07/2017
Human Trafficking Competition Results03/07/2017
Valley House by David Guerra Architecture30/06/2017
Media City by GAD27/06/2017
Breeze House by Fran Silvestre Arquitectos22/06/2017

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Luxury Sheets
$ 135.00
Our microfiber luxury sheets are buttery soft and luxuriously durable. Sheet sets include two pillowcases, one flat sheet, and one 18" deep fitted sheet-except for twin and twin x-long sizes, which only includes one pillowcase per set.
Available in Cal King, King, Queen, Full, Twin and Twin Extra Long.
Colors - white, grey, cream, chocolate, tea green, silver blue and lavender.


text:
Basically If I have dollars to invest; what do i need to do today to guarantee I recieve profits but in addition put personally in collection to actually make big profits occasionally? invest in waste
The response to that really good question for you is that you will likely have to check out anything unorthodox as the expense options, ever since the clear purchase vehicles are in fact evident for the cause.
- It really is becoming a typical trend to recycle electrical squander rather than just discarding.
- Once you know how to consider opportunities, you will possess absolutely.
Absolutely nothing remarkable will come in the typical information. You could possibly make a comfortable income and also even attain fiscal freedom, but then chances are you will continually have to be involved in the terrain stage functional jobs, efficiently causing you to personal-employed rather than an outright entrepreneur.
What exactly is intended by getting into unorthodox assets actually?
Exactly is
To resolve that question, we will initial need to discuss what orthodox purchases are and those include something which is known as the standard in the world of purchases.
Such things as stepping into the carry markets and gives forex trading, forex currency trading, establishing income sites, getting up connections, stepping into property, stepping into harvesting and agriculture and other things imaginable, from the top of the the head, as being an investment folks enter into each day, numbers as an orthodox purchase.
Lots of security and familiarity is offered through the orthodox ventures, therefore the allure is personal-explanatory. waste recycling
And familiarity is offered through the
Unorthodox ventures have got a different type of appeal however, as they come with a whole lot of extra dynamics.
The thrill of knowing that probably no two time is definitely the very same provides some very worthwhile occasions, in the numerous phases of your expenditure functions, if you are going the unorthodox route.
There are actually various levels of unorthodox investments and some circumstances are really severe, while some aren't all of that a great deal of vary from the conventional ventures. The sole big difference is the unorthodox expense systems have twists for them that make them slightly unconventional, using this world and unique in a way.
Examples of unorthodox assets include those places that a lot of people don't have any idea it comes with an option to generate money.
People don't have any idea it
It really is becoming a popular craze to recycle digital spend rather than just disposing it simply because first, this helps to ensure that resources within the surroundings are pretty and cost-efficiently conserved. This is because a few of the elements and components of electronic waste materials are generally reusable, as an example plastic-type parts, metals within the small-circuit panels, window inside the cathode ray tubes etc. profit from waste
Secondly, electrical waste is one of the primary reasons for enviromentally friendly air pollution. Besides visible air pollution several of the pieces and elements of the electronics, as an example cathode ray pipes, include dangerous materials like steer which if still left haphazardly from the atmosphere might discover their distance to man intake creating harmful effects on overall health. Trying to recycle as a result ceases this from going on and goes one step in the direction of building a cleaner surroundings significantly less prone to the danger of hazardous chemical contact with people.
When you know how to search for opportunities, you will get simply no problem recognizing ventures in every unorthodox installation along with an instance may be the enjoys of waste materials administration, natural rich compost farms and everything else that is just beyond the thoughts of many excited brokers.
An instance may be the
Taking a good look with the illustrations we touched on, waste administration is a thing generally left to the federal government or local municipality.
Look with the illustrations we touched on
For those who have a few modest vehicles available, or you can get a few, you may get in the recycling business.
You can go about collecting people's trash then searching it into recyclable products, to get sold again to recycling vegetation, after which getting rid of of your remainder in the waste materials.
With regards to the organic and natural compost farm, if you have a piece of property some way away from any home location, it is possible to shop several of the natural waste materials from your trying to recycle business and allow it to break down being packaged and marketed as organic and natural fertilizer. money from waste
- You can find varying degrees of unorthodox assets and a few cases are.
- In case you have a couple of little trucks readily available, or get.
- The thrill of with the knowledge.


text: Now that we see a parallel in Locke's story to Christian's, was Christian a chosen one as well, or did he know about the island before, in which someone told him he "had to die" in order to maintain stability in some things? Some one plese suggest some theories. :)


text:
Thursday 27 April 1905
It was Thursday, under the sign of Taurus. The US president was Theodore Roosevelt (Republican).
Famous people born on this day include Julian Stryjkowski and Philip Radcliffe.
But much more happened that day: find out below..
You can also have a look at the whole 1905 or at April 27 across the years.
Old Newspapers
Have a look at the old newspapers from 27 April 1905 and get them!
Which were the most popular movies released in the last months ?
TV Series
Which were the most popular TV series released in the last months ?
Find out your future
Get a FREE Numerology report based on the digits of 27 April 1905!
Wish him/her..
Historical Events
Which were the important events of 27 April 1905 ?
- Saint Liberalis
- Saint Mariana
- Saint Floribert
- Rochester, NY: Al Franken Day.
- Catalonia: Montserrat's Day (see Montserrat).
- South Africa: Freedom day.
- Slovenia: Day of Uprising Against Occupation.
- Saint Zita Lombardo
Famous Birthdays:
- Julian Stryjkowski: writer.
- Philip Radcliffe: composer.
- John Kuck: American javelin thrower and shot putter (d. 1986).
- World Exposition opens in Luik.
Music Charts
Which were the top hits in that special week of April 1905 ?
Top #1 songs in the USA
- In the Shade of the Old Apple Tree - Henry Burr (aka Irving Gillette)
Search For Your Ancestors
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Don't miss our monthly news, no spam guarantee Click here to Subscribe
...and if 27 April 1905 was your Birth Date then Join our Birthday Club!
Make this date unforgettable
Genealogy: find out your family heritage
Magazine Covers
What news were making the headlines those days in April 1905?
Which were the most popular books released in the last weeks ?
Remember when
What videogames would you be playing back in the days ?


text:
We arrived by private driver, our car was stopped and security checked on the way in. Then our bags were taken for further security checks - we were not too happy with this as we did not like to leave our bags out of our sight, we were backpacking and had splashed out for the final leg of our trip so were very unused to this kind of treatment! We received a really warm welcome and cool drink. We were then shown to our room where we had our first view of the Taj. Our bags appeared and we began to relax. From there everything was amazing. The room was huge and perfect, the food was heavenly, the service was unlike any we ever had, very impressive hotel. Thumps up from us. Would recommend.
- Official Description (provided by the hotel):
- ABOUT THE GATEWAY HOTEL FATEHABAD ROAD AGRA: Set amidst six acres of landscaped gardens, The Gateway Hotel Fatehabad Road Agra offers an excellent view of The Taj Mahal from many of its rooms. GETTING THERE & AROUND:• 5 km from the railway station• 10 km from the airport• 3 km from The Taj Mahal. STAY:• 100 rooms including suites• Wi-Fi internet throughout the hotel• Television with cable/satellite channels• Electronic safe. Standard City/Pool View Rooms: Well-appointed rooms. Superior Taj View Rooms: With a mix of contemporary and Mughal design, these rooms offer an excellent view of the Taj Mahal. Executive Taj View Rooms: An elevated sitting area in these rooms on higher floors offers a breath-taking view of the Taj Mahal. Executive Suites: These have a private library, a DVD Player and a spectacular view of the Taj Mahal. HANGOUTGAD - All Day Dining: The all day dining restaurant serves Indian and International cuisine. Jhankar: For traditional Indian cuisine(19:30 till 23:30 hrs only) Saqui: For a fine selection of wines, spirits and cigars. ... more less
- Reservation Options:
- TripAdvisor is proud to partner with Expedia, Prestigia, HostelWorld, Hotels.com, Orbitz, Booking.com, Travelocity, Priceline, Cancelon, TripOnline SA, HotelQuickly and Hotwire so you can book your The Gateway Hotel, Agra reservations with confidence. We help millions of travelers each month to find the perfect hotel for both vacation and business trips, always with the best discounts and special offers.
- Also Known As:
- The Gateway Hotel, Agra Hotel Agra
- Gateway Hotel Agra


text:
Reprise: It's Not the Length of Your Barrel, It's How You Use It
My friends over at the Liberal Gun Club asked if they could have my BBTI blog entries cross-posted on their site. This is another in an occasional series of revisiting some of my old articles which had been published elsewhere over the years, perhaps lightly edited or updated with my current thoughts on the topic discussed. This is an article I wrote for Guns.com, and it originally ran 3/7/2011. Some additional observations at the end.
"What is the best barrel length?"
It's a question I get a lot, thanks to my involvement in Ballistics By The Inch. And invariably, I say in response: "it depends." As in, it depends on what you're going to use it for.
OK, first thing: I'm talking about pistol cartridges, not rifle cartridges. Got that? Pistol cartridges.
That's what we studied with our BBTI project (actually, continue to study, since we've done several expansions of the cartridges and ammunition tested already, and have another big expansion coming up the beginning of May.) Now that we've cleared that up . . .
Different barrel lengths are good for different purposes. The longer the barrel, the longer the sight radius, and so the easier it is to be accurate with the gun. The shorter the barrel, the easier it is to conceal.
And barrel length has an effect on the velocity of a bullet (and hence the power of that bullet.) How much of an effect? Well, it depends.
No, seriously, it depends. Do not believe it when someone tells you "oh, the rule of thumb is about 75 (or 25 or 100 or any other number) feet per second for each inch of barrel." That number may be right for one given ammunition in one given gun for one given inch of barrel length – but it will not hold true as a general case. Don't just take my word on this – look at the actual numbers from tests we conducted, using almost 10,000 rounds of ammunition. You can go to the BBTI site and see the data for yourself (it's all free, with no advertising or anything), but here are two examples:
Cor Bon 165gr JHP +P .45 ACP ammo was tested at 1001 fps with a 2″ barrel. That jumps to 1050 fps with a 3″ barrel, or an increase of about 50 fps. Going to a 4″ barrel you get 1163 fps, or an increase of 113 fps. But when you go from an 10″ barrel to a 11″ barrel, you only get an increase of 23 fps.
Let's look at Federal Hydra-Shok 230gr JHP .45 ACP. It starts at 754 fps with a 2″ barrel, and jumps to 787 fps out of a 3″ barrel – an increase of 33 fps. Go to the 4″ barrel and it tested at 865 fps – an increase of 78 fps. And when you go from an 10″ barrel to a 11″ barrel, you only get an increase of 4 fps.
Do you see my point? It not only varies by ammunition, it also varies by which inch of the barrel you are talking about – the inch between 3 and 4 sees a lot more increase than the inch between 10 and 11.
Almost all handgun cartridges show this effect, and it makes sense: pistol cartridges use a fast burning powder, but it still needs a little bit of time to completely combust. The highest acceleration comes at first, and then usually handgun bullets plateau out somewhere between 6″ and 10″, with little additional velocity with longer barrels past that point. The graph of our first example shows this very well:
Some cartridges even show velocity starting to drop off with longer barrels, as the friction of the bullet passing through the barrel overcomes any additional boost from the gunpowder. Notably, the "magnum" cartridges (.327, .357, .41, and .44) all show a continued climb in velocity/power all the way out to 18″ of barrel length (the maximum we test), though the amount of increase tends to get smaller and smaller the longer the barrel.
So, back to "it depends": if you want a lever-gun or carbine, which uses a pistol cartridge, you're best off using one of the magnums if you want maximum power. If, however, you want to use a carbine for an additional power boost and better aiming, one with a barrel length somewhere in the "plateau" for a given cartridge makes sense (and this is why subguns typically have barrels in the 8 – 10″ range).
For a hunting pistol, you probably want to have a barrel of 6″ to 8″ to get a lot of the additional power and still have it manageable. This barrel length will also give you a nice big sight radius for accuracy, making it good for hunting or target shooting.
How about for concealed carry? The shorter the barrel, the better, right? Well, if you look through all our data, you'll see that usually, most cartridges see the greatest jump in velocity (and hence power) from 2″ to 4″. Now, the smaller the caliber and the lighter the bullet, the more the big jump tends to come right up front – from 2″ to 3″. The larger the caliber and the heavier the bullet, the more it tends to come a little later, from 3″ to 4″. Still, you can decide for yourself whether the trade-off in less power for ease of carry is worth it.
And good news for the revolver fans: because the cylinder basically functions to extend the barrel, your 2″ snubby actually functions more like a gun with a 3.5″ – 4″ barrel. Though there is some velocity/power loss due to the cylinder gap. How much loss? That is actually the next thing we'll be testing, but I'd bet that . . . it depends.
Since I wrote that six years ago, we've done a LOT more testing at BBTI, and have now shot more than 25,000 rounds and greatly expanded our data. The cylinder gap tests mentioned above did indeed show that the amount of loss did vary according to a number of factors, but for the most part established that the effect wasn't as large as many people thought. And we found an interesting exception to the "magnum" rule in one of our most recent tests: it turns out that the .45 Super cartridge behaves like a true magnum, by continuing to gain more power the longer the barrel, until at carbine lengths it is on a par with (or even exceeds) the .460 Rowland cartridge. Since the .45 Super is based on the .45 ACP cartridge, we expected it to perform like that cartridge and level off at about 10″, but it clearly continues to gain out to at least 18″.
I also want to add a couple of quick comments about how concealed-carry guns have changed, though this is more just personal observation than any kind of rigorous research. I think that as concealed-carry has continued to expand, more gear is on the market to make it easier to do, and I think for that reason some people are able to carry slightly larger guns and there are more guns available with barrel length in the 4″ – 5″ range. In addition, sight/optics/laser options have continued to improve, making simple sight radius less of a factor — meaning that for those who do want to carry a smaller gun, it is easier to use it well (though having better sights/optics/lasers is NOT a substitute for practice!) I expect that both these trends will continue.
Jim Downey
Comparison shopping.
Remember this graph comparing Muzzle Energy (ME)?
Well, a discussion elsewhere got me to thinking …
So, let's take a look at .45 Super:
See what I see? Yeah, at 3″ and 4″ all the .45 Super loads are superior in terms of ME over all the other cartridges in the top graph. At 5″ the .357 Mag catches up with some of the .45 Super loads, and at 6″ it is in the center of the pack.
To really do the comparison right, I'd need to average all the .45 Super loads, then add them directly to the first graph, but that's more time and trouble than I want to take. But my point is that of all the 'conventional' CCW-caliber/size guns, it looks like the .45 Super is at the top of the pile. We did formal testing of just one .460 Rowland, and it is comparable to the .45 Super at those barrel lengths (though I know from informal testing that some other loads are more powerful). You have to step up to full .44 Mag to beat either the .357 Mag or .45 Super.
Jim Downey
Join the party.
All along, we've said that if someone wanted to take the time, trouble, and expense to do some additional research along the lines of our protocols, that we'd be happy to include their data on our site. This is particularly true if it helped expand the selection of "real world guns" associated with the data for a given caliber/cartridge. Well, for the first time someone has expressed an interest in doing just that, prompting us to come up with an outline of what standards we feel are required for making sure it relates to our previous tests.
The biggest problem is that ammo manufacturers may, and do, change the performance of their products from time to time. This is why we have on occasion revisited certain cartridges, doing full formal chop tests in order to check how specific lines of ammo have changed. That gives us a benchmark to compare other ammo after a period of several years have passed, and shows how new tests relate to the old data.
But without going to such an extent, how can we be reasonably sure that new data collected by others using their own firearms is useful in comparison to our published data?
After some discussion, we feel that so long as any new testing includes three or more of the specific types of ammo (same manufacturer, same bullet weight & design) we had tested previously, then that will give enough of a benchmark for fair comparison. (Obviously, in instances where we didn't test that many different types of ammo in a given cartridge, adjustments would need to be made). With that in mind, here are the protocols we would require in order to include new data on our site (with full credit to the persons conducting the tests, of course):
- Full description and images of the test platform (firearm) used in the tests. This must specify the make, model number, barrel length, and condition of the firearm. Ideally, it will also include the age of the firearm.
- That a good commercial chronograph be used. Brand isn't critical — there seems to be sufficient consistency between different models that this isn't a concern. However, the brand and model should be noted.
- Chronographs must be positioned approximately 15 feet in front of the muzzle of the firearm used to test the ammo. This is what we started with in our tests, and have maintained as our standard through all the tests.
- That five or six data points be collected for each type of ammo tested. This can be done the way we did it, shooting three shots through two different chronographs, or by shooting six shots through one chronograph.
- All data must be documented with images of the raw data sheets. Feel free to use the same template we used in our tests, or come up with your own.
- Images of each actual box of ammo used in the test must be provided, which show the brand, caliber/cartridge, and bullet weight. Also including manufacturer's lot number would be preferred, but isn't always possible.
- A note about weather conditions at the time of the test and approximate elevation of the test site above sea level should be included.
We hope that this will allow others to help contribute to our published data, while still maintaining confidence in the *value* of that data. Please, if you are interested in conducting your own tests, contact us in advance just so we can go over any questions.
Jim Downey
Dealing with power.
About 40 years ago, when I was an idiot teenager (yeah, I know — redundant, particularly in my case), we got this '48 Willys Jeep. Since the engine was shot, we dropped an Olds V-6 in it. This was, essentially, like strapping a rocket to a skateboard. And it was too much power for idiot teenage me to handle. Twice I snapped the driveshaft on the thing, just dumping the clutch too damned quickly. Twice. My uncle (who I lived with) was certain that I had been racing or something similar. The truth was, I didn't even have that much of an excuse; I had simply goosed the engine too much and popped it into gear too fast. The original driveshaft just couldn't handle that much of a power spike.
This is kinda what happens to your poor .45 ACP firearm when you decide to run some .45 Super through it.
With the Jeep, we wound up putting a more robust driveshaft in it. And I learned that if I wanted to keep driving it, I needed to be less of an idiot.
This analogy holds to how you should approach handling .45 Super power out of your .45 ACP gun. Chances are, very occasional use of these much more powerful loads won't cause any problem in a quality, modern-made firearm. But if you're smart, you'll either greatly limit how many times you subject your gun (and your body) to that amount of power, or you will take steps to help manage it better and extend the life of your gun.
Typical 'standard' (non +P) .45 ACP loads tend to have a maximum pressure of between say 15,000 PSI and about 18,000 PSI. When you get past that, you get into 'over-pressure', or +P territory, up to about 23,000 PSI. This is the range most common modern firearms are built to handle safely.
But .45 Super generates more chamber pressure than that. How much more? Well, it's a bit difficult to say, since there is a surprising dearth of data readily available. Neither my 49th Edition of Lyman's Reloading Handbook nor my 13th Edition of Cartridges of the World have data for the .45 Super. Real Guns has some reloading formulas for .45 Super which give results consistent with our tests, but there are no pressure specs listed. Hodgdon Reloading has some pressure specs (in C.U.P.), but all their listed results for .45 Super are well below what our tests results were. Wikipedia lists .45 Super as having a maximum pressure of 28,000 PSI, and given that .460 Rowland is usually considered to run 35,000 – 40,000 PSI, that is probably in the correct ballpark.
I have written previously about converting a standard Glock 21 from .45 ACP over to .460 Rowland, and what is involved with that. Specifically, a new longer barrel with a fully-supported chamber which accommodates the longer case of the .460 Rowland, a 23 pound recoil spring, and a nice compensator to help tame the recoil. I also changed out the magazine springs, using an aftermarket product which increases the spring power by about 10%. This is because even with the other changes, the slide still moves much faster than with .45 ACP loads, and the increased mag spring power helps with reliability in feeding ammo. But even with all of that, shooting full-power .460 Rowland loads tends to cause damage to my magazines (as seen in the linked post).
Do you need to do all that in order for your firearm to handle frequent use of .45 Super loads? Well, I think that if you want to use a .460 Rowland conversion kit, it *will* tame the amount of recoil more than enough, but I don't think that it is necessary to go quite that far. I should note that I have now run several hundred .45 Super loads through my Glock 21, and the gun has operated flawlessly — WITHOUT any damage to the magazines.
Rather, I think that the smart thing to do is to start off with going to a heavier recoil spring, perhaps swapping out a metal guide rod for a plastic one (if your gun comes with a plastic guide rod). Stronger magazine springs are probably still a good idea, to aid with reliable feeding. If suitable for your gun, add in a recoil buffer. These are the steps I have taken with my Glock 30S, and am planning for my Beretta Cx4 Storm. So far I have put a couple hundred .45 Super loads through the G30S with this configuration, and it has operated without a problem — again without any damage to the magazines.
As I said in my previous blog post, I still think that the .460 Rowland is a hell of a cartridge. But I think that the .45 Super offers almost as many advantages to the average shooter, with less hassle. I would still recommend that anyone who intends on shooting more than the very occasional .45 Super loads out of their gun consider making some simple changes to handle the additional power and extend the life of their gun. Don't be like the idiot teenage me; deal with the power intelligently.
Jim Downey
.45 Super data now published.
At long last, we've now put up the page with the results of our .45 Super/.450 SMC tests earlier this year! We've also published the additional .45 ACP rounds tested at the same time, which doubles the amount of data for that cartridge available on our site.
As noted on the new .45 Super page:
.45 Super and .450 SMC (Short Magnum Cartridge) are two relatively recent variations on the classic .45 ACP cartridge. They were designed to gain more power from the cartridge than it was originally designed to produce, using modern smokeless powder and more robust case specifications. And these rounds achieve this goal, producing about 100% greater muzzle energy for a given bullet weight over standard pressure .45 ACP rounds, and about a 50% increase over .45 ACP +P (over-pressure) rounds.
Take a look at the Muzzle Energy graph for .45 Super:
One thing I notice right away is that in general, the energy curve for this cartridge is much more pronounced and consistent than the energy curve for .45 ACP loads (whether standard pressure or +P). In other words, this is a round which continues to see impressive gains in energy over a longer barrel length, rather than flattening out starting at 8 – 10″. That's more like the behavior you see from a magnum revolver round. Even the .460 Rowland tends to not see much gain after about 10″ — with the result that while the .460 Rowland is clearly a superior round for shorter barrels over the .45 Super, most loadings of the .45 Super meet or exceed the energy of the .460 Rowland by the time you get to carbine-length barrels. And you don't need to rechamber your gun to shoot it.
Seeing this performance out of the Cx4 Storm actually prompted me to act on something I had just been thinking about: to go out and buy one of the remaining new Cx4 Storms out there (Beretta decided to discontinue the gun in that caliber earlier this year). In a future blog post I'll talk about the alterations I am making to that gun, and that I have made to a Glock G30S, to handle the additional power of the .45 Super cartridge.
For now, enjoy playing with the data. And please be sure to share it with others! Because while I have long been an advocate for the .460 Rowland — a cartridge I still like very much — I now think that the .45 Super is a better choice for most people. Further discussion of that next time.
Jim Downey
Does primer size make a difference?
Following the success of our .45 Super/.450 SMC tests this summer, I sat down to work up some reloads which would mimic the factory ammo we had tested.
Since both of these cartridges are fairly unknown, there isn't a whole lot of good information out there to draw upon. But there is some, at least for the .45 Super, and late last year/earlier this year I had worked up some preliminary loads, starting with .45 ACP +P (overpressure) published load data. But that was done using .460 Rowland cases and shot through my converted Glock G21, which I knew could handle the extra power. When reloading, it pays to be careful and conservative.
After I had seen the results from the extensive .45 Super/.450 SMC tests (some of which has already been published), I had a pretty good idea of where the power band for these loads was, and how different guns could handle it. Since I had previously worked up loads for .460 Rowland as well as done a lot of .45 ACP reloading over the years, I figured that I could come up with some pretty reasonable load levels to match what we had seen in the factory ammo.
So I sat down, looked through all my results and what was available elsewhere, and came up with loads* for three different bullet weights I had on hand: 185gr XTP, and 200gr & 230gr FP. I chose to use Longshot powder, which I have used successfully for both .45 ACP and .460 Rowland loads. (This is not an endorsement of any of these products, and I have not been compensated from these manufacturers in any way. This is just stuff I have on hand and know has worked previously.) I loaded 50 rounds each in .45 Super cases, using standard Large Pistol Primers.
But as I was doing so, I also realized that I had a bunch of .450 SMC cases left from the tests. And I figured that it might be an interesting experiment to load those cases to the exact same specs, other than the difference in primer size. To give the cartridge the benefit of better ignition, I used Small Magnum Pistol primers. Again, I loaded 50 rounds of each bullet weight.
Again, other than the difference in primers, the reloads I worked up were identical.
OK, before I go any further, I want to toss in some caveats and explanations:
- This was an informal test, using only one chronograph and under less rigorous conditions than the formal BBTI tests. It was just me shooting a string of five shots, keeping mental track of what the numbers were for each, and then writing down a ballpark figure which seemed to best represent the overall performance. Also, I wasn't using the BBTI light-frame which gives us more consistent chrono results.
- I was using my personal firearms, two of which (the Cx4 and Glock G30S) were brand new — this was their very first trip to the range. Yeah, I got them after seeing how similar guns performed in the .45 Super/.450 SMC tests earlier.
Now, about the guns used:
- Glock G30S with a Lone Wolf 23lb recoil spring and steel guide rod package. 3.77″ barrel
- Glock 21 converted to .460 Rowland (heavier recoil spring, compensator, and Lone Wolf .460 R barrel). 5.2″ barrel
- Beretta Cx4 carbine, standard right out of the case. But I am going to install a steel guide rod and heavy buffer in it. 16.6″ barrel
Ammo G30S G21 Cx4
.45 Super 185gr 1185 fps / 577 ft-lbs 1250 fps/ 642 ft-lbs 1550 fps / 987 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 185gr 1125 fps / 520 ft-lbs 1200 fps / 592 ft-lbs 1500 fps / 925 ft-lbs
.45 Super 200gr 1130 fps / 567 ft-lbs 1225 fps / 667 ft-lbs 1420 fps / 896 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 200gr 1090 fps / 528 ft-lbs 1180 fps / 619 ft-lbs 1420 fps / 896 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr 1080 fps / 596 ft-lbs 1160 fps / 687 ft-lbs 1310 fps / 877 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 230gr 1060 fps / 676 ft-lbs 1130 fps / 652 ft-lbs 1310 fps / 877 ft-lbs
Interesting, eh? What seems to be happening is that full ignition of the powder takes longer with the .450 SMC loads. That would explain why there's more of a discrepancy with the lighter bullets and shorter barrels, so the bullet clears the barrel faster — some of the powder hasn't yet ignited with the Small Magnum Primer. But with the heavier bullets and longer barrel of the Cx4, there more time for more of the powder to ignite, reducing or eliminating the difference in performance.
That's my take on it. If you have another one, please comment.
Also, I want to note just how well I managed to emulate the performance of the factory ammo. Compare the numbers above with what I have already published for the Glock 21 and Cx4 used in the tests earlier. And it isn't published yet, but the G30S numbers are also right on-the-money for how the G36 used in the tests earlier performed (the two guns have the same barrel length). In all instances, my reloads* performed within 10-15 fps of the factory loads.
Jim Downey
*So, what exactly were those loads specs? OK, here's the data, but provided with the understanding that you should WORK UP YOUR OWN LOADS starting below these amounts, and accepting that you do so on your own responsibility. Also note that any changes in bullet weight, bullet brand, or powder type may/will alter the results you can expect. AGAIN: you use this data on your own responsibility. Be safe.
All bullet weights had a 1.250″ O.A.L.
All were given a slight taper crimp.
185gr XTP rounds had 11.0gr of Longshot powder.
200gr FP rounds had 10.5gr of Longshot powder.
230gr FP rounds had 10.0gr of Longshot powder.
Do you want good data, or useable data?
Got a question I haven't seen for a while. Here it is, with my answer (and a little bit of additional explanation) to follow:
Thanks for the site! You do not post the altitude and temperature of your results (unless I missed that). Can you let us know what your reference points are? Also, what effect would altitude and temperature variation have on your results?
Here's the answer I gave:
Well, it's been a while since anyone asked about that … thanks!
We did discuss this early on, and decided pretty quickly that while both of those would indeed have an effect (as would the changes in barometric pressure), that it would be so small as to not matter for the degree of accuracy of our testing equipment and the limited number of rounds tested. If you were trying to get really good data, everything would have to be much more rigorous and controlled … and we would never ever have gotten the data that we did. So as I remind people: consider the results to be *indicative*, not definitive. In other words, don't try to read too much into variances of a few feet-per-second, or convince yourself that such minor differences really matter.
Hope that helps to give a little perspective.
Oh, and I can answer one of your questions: almost all the testing was done at an elevation of approximately 744′ above sea level, according to commercial GPS systems.
I think that's pretty clear, but I want to emphasize one part of it: that if we had set out to provide really rigorous and statistically-significant data, the chances are that we would never have even gotten past the first test sequence. And that means there would be NO BBTI.
As it is, we have tested something in excess of 25,000 rounds over the last 7 years. At a personal cost of more than $50,000. And that doesn't begin to include the amount of labor which has gone into the project. To get really solid data which was statistically significant, we probably would have needed to do at LEAST three or four times as many rounds fired. With three or four times the amount of time testing. And crunching the data. And cost out of pocket.
Which would have meant that we probably would never have gotten through a single test sequence.
So it's a matter of perspective. Do you want some data which is reasonably solid, and gives a pretty good idea of what is going on with different cartridges over different barrel lengths? Or do you want very accurate, high rigorous data which would never have been produced?
Hmm … let me think about that … 😉
Jim Downey
PS: We haven't forgotten about the .45 Super/.450 SMC tests — it's just been a busy summer. Look for it soon.
Ammo test results for a pair of 1911s
This is the second in a series of informal blog posts about the .45 ACP/Super/.450 SMC testing sequence we conducted over the Memorial Day weekend. You can find the previous post here.
Today we're going to see what the results are for a couple of different high-end 1911 platform guns. The first is an Ed Brown Kobra Carry (reviewed here), a Commander-sized (4.25″ barrel) single stack designed as a concealed-carry gun. We made no modifications of it for the more powerful loads. Here it is during our testing:
The second is a Wilson Combat Hunter set up for the .460 Rowland cartridge with a 5.5″ barrel. Here's my review of it, and here it is on the day of testing:
As I said with the other two posts about these tests, it'll be a while before we have all the data crunched and the website updated, but I thought I would share some preliminary thoughts and information through a series of informal posts.
Quick note about the data below: All the ammo used, with the exception of the four * items, were part of our overall test sequence and had three shots made over the Oehler chronograph (which is a double-unit, and automatically records and then averages the two readings), representing a total of 6 data points. I'm just giving the overall averages here; the full data will be available on the website later. The four * ammunition types only include two shots/four data points through the Ed Brown Kobra Carry, since it is a typical length for a self-defense gun. That's because we only had one box of each of this ammo, and were wanting to get data which would be of the greatest use to the largest number of people.
Ammo Ed Brown Kobra Carry Wilson Combat Hunter
Buffalo Bore
.45 ACP Low Recoil Std P 185gr FMJ-FN 798 fps / 261 ft-lbs 791 fps / 256 ft-lbs
.45 ACP Std P 230gr FMJ-RN 811 fps / 335 ft-lbs 819 fps / 342 ft-lbs
.45 ACP +P 185gr JHP 1130 fps / 524 ft-lbs 1139 fps / 532 ft-lbs
.45 ACP +P 230gr JHP 952 fps / 462 ft-lbs 970 fps / 480 ft-lbs
.45 Super 185gr JHP 1257 fps / 648 ft-lbs 1312 fps / 706 ft-lbs
.45 Super 200gr JHP 1175 fps / 613 ft-lbs 1216 fps / 656 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr FMJ 1067 fps / 581 ft-lbs 1105 fps / 623 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr JHP 1084 fps / 600 ft-lbs 1109 fps / 627 ft-lbs
.45 Super 255gr Hard Cast 1061 fps / 637 ft-lbs 1074 fps / 653 ft-lbs
Double Tap
.45 ACP +P 160gr Barnes TAC-XP 1121 fps / 446 ft-lbs 1162 fps / 479 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 185gr JHP 1310 fps / 704 ft-lbs 1350 fps / 748 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 185gr Bonded Defense JHP 1254 fps / 645 ft-lbs 1294 fps / 687 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 230gr Bonded Defense JHP 1103 fps / 621 ft-lbs 1108 fps / 626 ft-lbs
Critical Defense .45 ACP Std P 185gr FTX 969 fps / 385 ft-lbs 976 fps / 391 ft-lbs
Critical Duty .45 ACP +P 220gr Flexlock 932 fps / 424 ft-lbs 936 fps / 427 ft-lbs
.45 Super 170gr CF 1249 fps / 588 ft-lbs 1259 fps / 598 ft-lbs
.45 Super 185gr XTP JHP 1285 fps / 678 ft-lbs 1339 fps / 736 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr GD JHP 1071 fps / 585 ft-lbs 1099 fps / 616 ft-lbs
*Federal HST .45 ACP Std P 230gr JHP 815 fps / 339 ft-lbs
*G2 Research RIP .45 ACP Std P 162gr JHP 961 fps / 332 ft-lbs
*LeHigh Defense .45 Super 170gr JHP 1165 fps / 512 ft-lbs
*Liberty Civil Defense .45 ACP +P 78gr JHP 1843 fps / 588 ft-lbs
As with the other guns I've posted about, the general trends are pretty clear with the power rising as you go from standard pressure to +P to Super/.450 SMC, and topping out at about 750 foot-pounds of energy in a couple of loads. And it is interesting to note that the 185gr loads seem to be the "sweet spot" in terms of power across the board.
Of course, pure power is just one component for what makes a good ammunition choice. Bullet design & penetration is extremely important when considering a self-defense load. Shootability in your gun is also critical — because if you can't recover quickly from shot to shot, then you may limit your ability in a stressful situation. Likewise, if the ammo doesn't function reliably, or damages your gun, that is also a huge factor.
Most of the ammo we tested functioned very well in both 1911 platforms. Interestingly, while we had experienced FTFs (failure-to-fire) with a number of the different Double-Tap rounds in both the Bobergs and the Glocks, we didn't experience any such problems with either 1911.
The larger platform of the Wilson Combat Hunter handled the recoil very well, even from the hottest loads. Recoil was a little more noticeable with the Ed Brown, but only by a slight amount. As I noted with the Glock 21 converted for the .460 Rowland, I was impressed that The Wilson Combat Hunter didn't have any problems cycling even the lightest loads reliably.
Another note: we were unable to detect any damage or unusual wear to either gun, though it is possible a steady diet of loads of that power could cause some over the long term.
Lastly, I ran some .460 Rowland Buffalo Bore 230gr JHP cartridges through the Wilson Combat Hunter, since we had only had one type of ammo for that gun when we did the .460 Rowland tests. That had been Cor-Bon Hunter 230gr JHP. The Cor-Bon tested at 1213 fps / 751 ft-lbs, and the Buffalo Bore tested at 1349 fps / 929 ft-lbs of energy.
Look for more results, images, and thoughts in the days to come.
Jim Downey
Ammo test results in two versions of the Glock 21
This is the first in a series of informal blog posts about the .45 ACP/Super/.450 SMC testing sequence we conducted over the Memorial Day weekend.
Here's a pic of getting set the first day of shooting:
It'll be a while before we have all the data crunched and the website updated, but I thought I would share some preliminary thoughts and information through a series of informal posts. In this post, we'll see how two different versions of a Gen 4 Glock 21 performed with the ammo. The first version was with the Glock in the standard .45 ACP configuration, the second was with my .460 Rowland conversion kit in place.
The standard configuration has a 4.61″ octagonal polygonal rifling, while the conversion barrel is 5.2″ overall with conventional rifling, threaded, and with a compensator. The .460 conversion also has a heavier recoil spring.
Quick note about the data below: All the ammo used, with the exception of the four * items, were part of our overall test sequence and had three shots made over the Oehler chronograph (which is a double-unit, and automatically records and then averages the two readings), representing a total of 6 data points. I'm just giving the overall averages here; the full data will be available on the website later. The four * ammunition types only include two shots/four data points through the standard Glock 21 configuration — we only had one box of each of this ammo, and were wanting to get data from a range of guns.
Ammo Glock 21 Standard Glock 21 .460 Rowland
Buffalo Bore
.45 ACP Low Recoil Std P 185gr FMJ-FN 801 fps / 263 ft-lbs 792 fps / 257 ft-lbs
.45 ACP Std P 230gr FMJ-RN 829 fps / 350 ft-lbs 826 fps / 348 ft-lbs
.45 ACP +P 185gr JHP 1132 fps / 526 ft-lbs 1168 fps / 560 ft-lbs
.45 ACP +P 230gr JHP 951 fps / 461 ft-lbs 974 fps / 484 ft-lbs
.45 Super 185gr JHP 1279 fps / 671 ft-lbs 1299 fps / 693 ft-lbs
.45 Super 200gr JHP 1178 fps / 616 ft-lbs 1203 fps / 642 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr FMJ 1069 fps / 583 ft-lbs 1085 fps / 601 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr JHP 1094 fps / 611 ft-lbs 1116 fps / 635 ft-lbs
.45 Super 255gr Hard Cast 1063 fps / 639 ft-lbs 1061 fps / 637 ft-lbs
Double Tap
.45 ACP +P 160gr Barnes TAC-XP 1103 fps / 432 ft-lbs 1103 fps / 432 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 185gr JHP 1328 fps / 724 ft-lbs 1351 fps / 749 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 185gr Bonded Defense JHP 1301 fps / 695 ft-lbs 1314 fps / 709 ft-lbs
.450 SMC 230gr Bonded Defense JHP 1097 fps / 614 ft-lbs 1132 fps / 654 ft-lbs
Critical Defense .45 ACP Std P 185gr FTX 984 fps / 397 ft-lbs 979 fps / 393 ft-lbs
Critical Duty .45 ACP +P 220gr Flexlock 945 fps / 436 ft-lbs 943 fps / 434 ft-lbs
.45 Super 170gr CF 1239 fps / 579 ft-lbs 1253 fps / 592 ft-lbs
.45 Super 185gr XTP JHP 1329 fps / 725 ft-lbs 1348 fps / 746 ft-lbs
.45 Super 230gr GD JHP 1075 fps / 590 ft-lbs 1081 fps / 596 ft-lbs
*Federal HST .45 ACP Std P 230gr JHP 813 fps / 337 ft-lbs
*G2 Research RIP .45 ACP Std P 162gr JHP 942 fps / 319 ft-lbs
*LeHigh Defense .45 Super 170gr JHP 1146 fps / 495 ft-lbs
*Liberty Civil Defense .45 ACP +P 78gr JHP 1768 fps / 580 ft-lbs
The general trends are pretty clear with the power rising as you go from standard pressure to +P to Super/.450 SMC, and topping out at about 750 foot-pounds of energy in a couple of loads. And it is interesting to note that the 185gr loads seem to be the "sweet spot" in terms of power across the board.
Of course, pure power is just one component for what makes a good ammunition choice. Bullet design & penetration is extremely important when considering a self-defense load. Shootability in your gun is also critical — because if you can't recover quickly from shot to shot, then you may limit your ability in a stressful situation. Likewise, if the ammo doesn't function reliably, or damages your gun, that is also a huge factor.
Most of the ammo we tested functioned very well in the Glock in either configuration. This isn't surprising to anyone who has much familiarity with Glocks which typically will handle just about any ammo under all conditions. We did experience FTFs (failure-to-fire) with a number of the different Double-Tap rounds. Those seemed to have been due to light strikes on the primer, which could have been due to improper primer seating, 'hard' primers, or some other factor.
The larger platform of the Glock 21 handled the recoil very well, even from the hottest loads. I was impressed that even with the .460 Rowland conversion in place, with the additional weight of the compensator and the heavy recoil spring, the Glock didn't have any problems cycling even the lightest loads reliably.
One other note: as discussed in my blog post about the .460 Rowland conversion, full-power .460 Rowland loads tend to cause damage to the magazines. As far as we could tell, the same isn't true of the full-power .45 Super/.450 SMC loads. Just one magazine (a new one) was used for all these tests, and there was no detectable damage. Nor was there any other damage detected to the gun otherwise, though it is possible a steady diet of loads of that power could cause some over the long term.
Look for more results, images, and thoughts in the days to come.
Jim Downey
Six shooter.
Well, well, well, BBTI made it to six years of shooting fun and research!
Yup, six years ago today we posted the first iteration of Ballistics By The Inch, and included data for 13 different handgun cartridges. Since then we've continued to expand on that original research, including some extensive testing on how much of an effect the cylinder gap on revolvers has, what performance differences you can expect from polygonal over traditional land & groove rifling, and added another 9 cartridges, as well as going back and including a very large selection of real world guns in all the different cartridges. This blog has had 100,000+ visitors and the BBTI site itself has had something like 25 – 30 million visits (the number is vague because of changes in hosting and record-keeping over time).
We've had an impact. I've seen incoming links from all around the world, in languages I didn't even recognize. There's probably not a single firearms discussion group/blog/site out there which hasn't mentioned us at some point, and our data is regularly cited in discussions about the trade-offs you make in selecting one cartridge or barrel length over another. I've answered countless emails asking about specific points in our data, and have been warmly thanked in return for the work we've done. And on more than a few occasions people have pointed out corrections which need to be made, or offered suggestions on how we could improve the site, sometimes providing the results from their own crunching of our data.
When we started, it was fairly unusual to see much solid information on ammo boxes about how the ammunition performed in actual testing. Now that information is common, and expected. Manufacturer websites regularly specify real performance data along with what kind of gun was used for that testing. And the data provided has gotten a lot more … reliable, let's say. We've been contacted by both ammo and firearms manufacturers, who have asked if they can link to our data to support their claims of performance — the answer is always "yes" so long as they make it clear that our data is public and not an endorsement of their product. And we've never taken a dime from any of those companies, so we can keep our data unbiased.
And we're not done. We have specific plans in the works to test at least one more new cartridge (and possibly revisit an old favorite) in 2015. I try to regularly post to the blog additional informal research, as well as sharing some fun shooting and firearms trials/reviews. There's already been one firearms-related patent issued to a member of the BBTI team, and we'll likely see several more to come. Because we're curious guys, and want to share our discoveries and ideas with the world.
So, onward and upward, as the saying goes. Thanks to all who have cited us, written about us, told their friends about us. Thanks to all who have taken the time to write with questions and suggestions. And thanks to all who have donated to help offset the ongoing costs of hosting and testing — it makes a difference, and is appreciated.
Jim Downey
Confirmation of the .460 Rowland performance.
John Ervin at Brass Fetcher Ballistic Testing has just put up a new page about his testing of the .460 Rowland cartridge. As I have explained in the past, our work at BBTI is intended to be an overview of how ballistic performance varies over barrel length — it is just a quick survey to get an idea of the general trends, not meant to be an in-depth examination of a specific cartridge.
But in-depth testing is exactly what Ervin does, using a larger sample size, ballistic gelatin, and high-speed videography. And as a result, his much more detailed analysis is more useful for getting into the details of a given cartridge out of a specific barrel length. And it is really good to see that his results confirm what I have been saying all along: that if you carry a .45, you should instead be carrying a .460 Rowland.
What specifics? Take a look at the performance of Speer 230gr Gold Dot HP .45ACP in terms of foot-pounds of kinetic energy transfer into 20% ballistic gel:
Pretty good, eh? It's what we expect from the .45ACP: a solid energy dump and reasonable penetration.
Now let's take a look at the same chart, but with the Speer 230gr Gold Dot HP in .460Rowland:
The curves don't look that different on first glance, but pay close attention to the scale there on the left axis of each one: where the .45ACP tops out at about 72 ft/lbs about 2″ into the gel, the .460Rowland tops out at about 335 ft/lbs just before 2″. That's more than 4x the energy transfer.
In fact, at 5″ of penetration, the .460Rowland is still dumping about as much energy as the .45ACP does at the maximum.
But there's more than simple energy transfer involved in terminal ballistic performance. There's also how well the bullet is designed, and whether it expands properly. This can be a big concern in "over-driving" a bullet, so that it breaks apart. Well, Ervin's data also covers these comparisons quite well. For the two specific rounds cited above, the .45ACP expanded to 0.344 square inches of frontal surface, and was still 229.5gr of weight. And the .460Rowland expanded to 0.526 square inches of frontal surface, and was still 221.3gr of weight.
There's a *LOT* more information at Brass Fetcher Ballistic Testing. Ervin has an extensive 17 page Ammunition Performance Data report in .pdf format which contains a ton of images, video, and data — more than enough to keep even a data-junkie like me busy for a long time. I urge you to take a good look at it, and to consider the thoughts which Ervin shares about this cartridge. But I will leave you with his opening sentence which sums it up very nicely:
The 460 Rowland represents the pinnacle of handgun calibers for self-defense.
Jim Downey
.460 Rowland case wall thickness.
A friend dropped me a note, after looking over my previous experiments with putting .460 Rowland load power into .45 ACP cases, and asked a fairly simple question: Do you think that the case walls are actually thicker in the .460 Rowland?
Now, I have read several articles over the years which mentioned that the .460 Rowland cases were "stronger" with others saying that the cases were "thicker". In fact, in the blog post cited above, I myself said:
Even shooting them in a gun designed to handle .460 Rowland power was risky, since the .45 ACP cases do not have the same strength as the .460 Rowland cases.
But is that actually true?
Good question. My Lyman 49th Edition Reloading Handbook doesn't give case wall thickness for the .45ACP, and doesn't list .460 Rowland at all. A quick check online also didn't turn up any case wall thickness specs for either cartridge. As noted above, there are some gun writers out there who claim that the .460 Rowland case has thicker walls "for strength" but this claim isn't made on the 460Rowland.com site that I could find.
So, being the data-curious guy that I am, I decided to just take some measurements and see what I found.
The only .460 cases I have are all Starline brass (I ordered 500 from them, and supplemented with other brass from factory Buffalo Bore ammunition – again, all of it marked as Starline), and I went through and checked a bunch with my simple calipers. Now, those calipers aren't the pincer type, just the standard parallel-jaws type, so I only trust the measurements to about halfway down the case. And they all fell into a range of wall thickness from 0.012″ to 0.014″.
Doing the same measurement with ten different 'marked' sets of .45 ACP brass I also have readily to hand, the results were almost identical, with the vast majority of cases being 0.012″ or a thousandth of an inch on either side of that. It didn't matter whether the cases were nickle-plated or marked "+P". The 'marked' brass was as follows:
- Cor Bon +P
- Federal Brass
- Federal Nickle
- Speer Brass
- Speer Nickle
- Starline
- Winchester
And when you stop to think about it, there would be no reason or way for the case walls to be significantly thicker in the .460 Rowland cartridge, and still allow you to use standard .45 ACP reloading components and dies. If the case walls were substantially thicker, then you'd have to have slightly smaller bullets, if nothing else, and would probably need a different resizing die and/or neck expanding die.
Also, when I was conducting those experiments last summer, I didn't note any differences in how the .45 ACP cases looked or functioned (when being reloaded) after being shot with .460 Rowland power loads.
My conclusion? That the .460 Rowland cases are no thicker walled than .45 ACP cases. They may still be "stronger", if there is some metallurgical difference, but I doubt it. The real difference is in whether or not the chamber of the gun in which the ammo is being used is strong enough to handle the much-greater pressure of the .460 Rowland loads. Because remember, the maximum pressure for standard .45 ACP is just 21,000 PSI, and 23,000 PSI for .45 ACP +P — while the .460 Rowland cartridge reaches pressures of 40,000 PSI.
Of course, there are additional factors to consider (like recoil and timing) with the .460 Rowland cartridge, so you can't just make the chamber of the gun stronger and then start putting those kinds of loads into .45 ACP cases. And you really wouldn't want to accidentally put such power into a 'normal' .45 ACP gun — that could lead to catastrophic failure of the gun, and result in serious injury or death. So it still makes ALL KINDS OF SENSE to only load the longer .460 Rowland cases with that much power.
Jim Downey
Wait … it's 2014?? How did THAT happen?
2013 was a busy year for BBTI.
We did the .22Mag tests. We did the 9mm Glock Tests. I got my .460 Rowland conversion up and running. And I found some really fun .44Mag +P+ loads, then figured out a simple hack so that they would feed reliably in my lever gun. Like I said, a busy year.
And we couldn't have done it without help. Of several types. To see the list of those donors who have helped offset some of our operating costs, pop over to the BBTI site. And here's a list of the top-10 referring sites (excluding search engines and Wikipedia):
- thefiringline.com
- defensivecarry.com
- guns.com
- thefirearmblog.com
- ar15.com
- thetruthaboutguns.com
- survivalistboards.com
- glocktalk.com
- reddit.com
- rimfirecentral.com
Altogether, we had 243,230 visitors to the BBTI website, and some 12,000+ views of this blog. Since we've gone through several iterations of the site over the last five years, it's hard to say exactly how many visitors or pageviews or hits we've had in total — but it's more than we ever really expected. Thanks, everyone.
And particular thanks to my Good Lady Wife, who has done all the webwork and most of the number crunching over the years.
We don't currently have any concrete plans for new tests in 2014. But who knows? Keep an eye here and on our Facebook page for news.
Happy New Year, everyone!
Jim Downey
Now, about those thunderbolts…
Some weeks back I put up a post about my preliminary experiences with a .460 Rowland conversion for my Glock 21 Gen 4. In it I mentioned how much I like the resultant gun, but also how I was having some problems with magazine wear when shooting full-force .460 loads.
Well, after thinking a lot more about it, as well as discussing it with people online and with the other BBTI members when they were here for the recent tests (one of whom has been a Glock armorer for 15+ years) a couple different strategies emerged for me to test. Briefly, those were:
- See whether putting in a heavier mag spring would help
- See whether the problem was due to the case length of the .460 Rowland cartridges (they're 1/16″ longer than .45 ACP).
- See whether the problem was due to the *power* of the cartridges rather than the length of the cases.
To test the first, it was a simple matter to get a more powerful mag spring and test it in one of the magazines. I picked up a Wolff magazine spring from Midway and did so.
To test whether it was the simple case length of the .460 Rowland cases, I made up some .460 Rowland rounds using .45 ACP reloading standards.
To test whether it was the *power* of the .460 loads but not the case length was another matter. Here's where we get to the Don't Try This At Home part of today's blog post: I made up a number of .45 ACP rounds which were loaded to .460 Rowland specs.
Let me repeat that again: Don't Try This At Home. These are wildcat rounds, and potentially dangerous. Shooting them in a gun not rated for .460 Rowland stresses could very well result in catastrophic failure of your gun, of the "KABOOM!" variety. Even shooting them in a gun designed to handle .460 Rowland power was risky, since the .45 ACP cases do not have the same strength as the .460 Rowland cases. I made up just 10 rounds of each of these loadings, and was careful to make sure I shot them all, so that they didn't accidentally wind up in a .45 not strong enough to take the punishment.
Here are each of the loadings I made up, just for reference, along with their approximate chrono results:
- 185gr XTP bullet, .45 ACP case, .460 Rowland power 1480fps
- 200gr RNFP bullet, .45 ACP case, .460 Rowland power 1440fps
- 230gr RNFP bullet, .45 ACP case, .460 Rowland power 1350fps
- 250gr LFN bullet, .45 ACP case, .460 Rowland power 1250fps
- 230gr RNFP bullet, .45 ACP case, .45 ACP power 920fps
- 230gr RNFP bullet, .460 Rowland case, .45 ACP power 925fps
- 185gr XTP bullet, .460 Rowland case, .460 Rowland power 1490fps
- 200gr RNFP bullet, .460 Rowland case, .460 Rowland power 1420fps
- 230gr RNFP bullet, .460 Rowland case, .460 Rowland power 1355fps
- 250gr LFN bullet, .460 Rowland case, .460 Rowland power 1265fps
No, I'm not going to give the specific powder amounts for any of those. I used Hodgdon Longshot powder, and you can look up the specs if you want to know more.
In addition, I had these factory loads on hand for comparison, along with their approximate chrono results:
11. 185gr DPX .45 ACP +P 1110fps
12. 230gr GDHP .45 ACP 850fps
13. 230gr JHP .45 ACP +P1040fps
14. 230gr JHP .460 Rowland 1380fps
15. 255gr LFN .460 Rowland1260fps
OK, a couple of comments before I go further: those are "approximate" chrono readings because I wasn't being anywhere near as careful as we are when we do formal BBTI testing. To wit: I was just using one chrono; I wasn't worried about getting the exact same number of readings (so long as I got three or four, I wasn't too worried about it); and I didn't do anything to control for consistent lighting or suchlike. But they should all be in the right ballpark.
So, looking over all those, you will see what I see: that there was a remarkable consistency in power levels, whether you're looking at my reloads or factory loads, and between those rounds which used either .45 ACP cases or .460 Rowland cases. That tells me that following the published data for .460 Rowland reloads, and making some intelligent decisions on how to adapt those to the .45 ACP cases for purposes of this experiment, was by and large successful. Meaning that I can use those loads to fairly evaluate what makes a difference on the basic problem I was investigating: what is causing the magazine damage and how to resolve it.
So, what conclusions did I draw from all this?
First, the more powerful magazine spring seemed to help with consistent loading. I will be swapping out all the Glock 21 mag springs I have. This makes intuitive sense, since the slide is moving faster when shooting the more powerful rounds.
That doing a little customizing on the magazines also seems to help a great deal. Here's a pic showing an unaltered magazine and one I have taken a Dremel tool to:
Note that these are just the magazine 'boxes' — the guts (spring, follower, etc) have all been removed for clarity.
With the altered magazine and stronger spring, any problems I had with Failure To Feed was minimized.
And most important, it is the *power* of the round, not the case length, which seems to cause damage to the unaltered magazines. Shooting the .460 Rowland power loads in the .45 ACP cases demonstrated this. Conversely, shooting the .45 ACP power loads in the .460 Rowland cases didn't cause any magazine damage at all.
Two additional notes I want to add: the first is that I had pretty consistent problems with the heavy Lead Flat Nose rounds in all configurations. They kept getting jammed up in transitioning from the magazine into the chamber. I'll probably continue to experiment with this in the future, but I'm not too worried about it, since many guns run into some ammo specific problems.
The second is that once again I was really impressed at just how well this reconfigured Glock 21 did with .45 ACP loads. Seriously, with the .460 Rowland conversion in place, there was very minimal recoil (more than a .22, but not much) and it was VERY easy to control and shoot the gun well. I suspect that going forward the vast majority of the shooting I will do with this will be using standard .45 ACP reloads, saving the much more powerful .460 Rowland rounds for occasional practice. In this sense, I am thinking of the .45/.460 relationship the way I think about .38/.357 — it seems to be a perfectly appropriate analogy.
Now that I have all this sorted, I can go ahead and write up a formal review. But I thought I would share a little of the process of how I got to this point.
Jim Downey
It's like flinging thunderbolts.
You may remember that I have a small bit of an obsession with the .460 Rowland cartridge. Ever since we tested it for BBTI, I've wanted one. As I noted in one of those articles:
I said it before and I'll repeat it here: if you carry a .45, you should instead be carrying a .460 Rowland.
So, early this year I put in an order for a .460 Rowland conversion kit for a new Gen 4 Glock 21.
I'm planning on doing a full formal review of the kit and the resultant gun, but I thought I'd share some of my experience so far. Why "so far"? Well, because I haven't worked out all the minor kinks yet.
OK, first thing: it didn't just take the 3 weeks for delivery which was promised. It wasn't even 3 months. It was almost six months. And a buddy of mine who ordered his before I ordered mine still hasn't gotten his. So, there's that.
Second, and part of the reason for the delay, I didn't receive a new barrel which was marked .460 Rowland. Rather, I got what looked like a standard Wolff .45 barrel. But it had indeed been rechambered to handle the .460 Rowland cartridge. Before I received the kit I got an email advising me of this problem, and I figured I could just roll with it. This is what I got in the kit:
Going clockwise from the top: That's the threaded barrel, a screw-on compensator, spring assembly adapter, small serving of red loc-tite, and the heavy spring assembly (which is actually the Gen 3 design, but with the adapter works just fine in my Gen 4).
As advertised by .460 Rowland, the conversion takes like 30 seconds. If you can field strip your Glock, you can do the conversion. I've opted for using blue loc-tite rather than red, since it still works well but allows me to remove the compensator easily if I need to.
How does it work? Well, I've taken it out to the range several times now, shooting both factory rounds as well as my own reloads. Doing some informal chrono tests, I have gotten exactly the kind of performance promised and expected. The Buffalo Bore 230gr JHP were right at 1300 fps. 200gr RNFP reloads were at 1380 fps, and 185gr XTP (JHP) reloads were at 1410 fps. And those reloads are actually fairly mild — just 12.5gr of Longshot powder — based on what data I've seen, I could probably push that to 13.5gr without any risk. (Don't consider this an endorsement — do your own research, and work up your own loads using published data and standard safety practices.)
Shooting the .460 loads out of the Glock is like shooting a .44 magnum (which I have a fair amount of practice with), but having 13 rounds on tap. Seriously, it's like flinging thunderbolts with each shot. And the recoil is surprisingly manageable, though I'm not someone who is very recoil shy.
So, why did I say I was still working out the kinks?
Well, there's a problem with the magazines. Here's what happened after the first outing:
Look closely on the left side of that magazine, and you'll see that there's a tab which has been torn a bit loose and pushed forward. That's from the force of the .460 cartridges slamming forward. At about this point the magazine would no longer release or insert smoothly. That was after my first outing, with about 60 .460 Rowland shots fired. And actually, I damaged two magazines to that extent with those 60 rounds.
So after that first outing, I took a Dremel tool to the magazines and cut away about 1/8″ of material, and flattened the whole face back into position. Today I took those two magazines back out to the range, and ran about another 50 rounds through the gun using the two of them. Here's one of them after today's outing, next to a new unaltered magazine:
More problems. This time, the little metal tab snapped off, as well as distorting the face of magazine again. Clearly, I need to sort out how to fix this.
Two other things I want to mention. One, I tried shooting standard .45ACP cartridges out of the .460 Rowland conversion. They work wonderfully. Seriously, there's almost no recoil, the gun cycles just fine (with my mild reloads as well as factory +P self defense ammo), and there's no accuracy loss that I could determine casually shooting the gun. So, that's a plus.
But the other thing? Heh — take a look at what happened with my front site today:
Yeah, it really shouldn't be facing that way, nor sticking up quite so much. But I can fix that easily enough.
If you have thoughts on how I can correct the magazine problem, I'd love to hear 'em.
Jim Downey
Last chance.
So, we have a new winner! Kyle won the all-leather IWB of unknown make.
The next, and final, holster in our drawing is very much a known brand: a High Noon Holsters "Skin Tite" model leather OWB. This is a right-handed almost new holster which has a $54.95 value (plus shipping).
This particular holster is marked for a Steyr M. But just about any medium-large semi will fit (though the retention snap may not be in the perfect position). Interestingly, both a full-size 1911 and my Ruger Mark I fit perfectly (with the barrel protruding out the bottom).
Rules are the same as previously:
So, here's the deal: make any kind of contribution to the Kickstarter (as little as $1.00 – I won't mind), and enter into this drawing for a holster. Please note that this is *IN ADDITION* to the other rewards there on the Kickstarter – all perfectly good and valuable rewards. Then just come here and leave a comment, or post it on the BBTI Facebook page, or send me a Tweet. I'll enter your name into a completely separate drawing. And next Wednesday after the Kickstarter is over I'll select a name and send that person this holster is up for grabs.
If you've already contributed to the Kickstarter, just let me know and your name will go in the hat for this drawing.
Last chance – get your entries in and help me out with making the Kickstarter a success! Thanks!
Jim Downey
…bring May flowers.
Well – I see that I didn't post stats last month for March. Sorry about that – a combination of being busy promoting my novel as well as getting together with some of the other BBTI guys to do some fun shooting (and to try out a .460 Rowland conversion kit for a Glock 21!).
So, first things first: March had a total of 21,499 visitors, and April had 19,918 visitors. Just a bit of a slow period there.
Next, remember that we're now linking from the BBTI page on Real World Guns to reviews of said guns I've written for Guns.com. There are usually a couple new each week, so check back often!
And here is the first of some additional reviews from my shooting expedition the beginning of April: Wise Lite Arms Sterling 9mm. Coming weeks should see more than a dozen other reviews of handguns and PCCs (pistol caliber carbines).
A quick note that things with my novel have been going great, and so far some 14,000 people have downloaded the Kindle edition. If you enjoy my reviews and articles, then you may want to check out the book – it's been getting a lot of really good discussion and reviews.
A little chat.
Here's something for the .460 Rowland fans and those curious: Dear Santa: I want a .460 Rowland AR Upper
Had a bit of fun with that. Though admittedly, I have an offbeat sense of humor…
Jim Downey
It's Up!
The new Ballistics By The Inch site is now up and running! Bigger, Faster, And with More DATA! Take a look, spread the word, let us know if there are any glitches or problems.
Jim Downey
8 million hits in the naked city.
Hey everyone –
Long time, no posts. Sorry about that. The summer and fall were filled with a lot of different high-intensity projects. But I have several things to share this morning…
One, we broke 8 million hits to the BBTI website about a week ago. That's in just under 3 years time. Congrats to one an all, and thanks.
Two, barring unforeseen complications and general catastrophe, *tomorrow* we'll launch the completely revamped BBTI. It will contain all the data that you know and love, but there will be a lot more. Like:
- Data on our .22 chop tests this summer – 10 different ammos, and also 20 'real world' .22 guns.
- Data on our .460 Rowland chop tests last spring – an impressive cartridge!
- Data on our .223 chop tests this last spring – Yup, it is definitely a rifle cartridge.
- Data on our HUGE 'Cylinder Gap' tests this last spring, involving over 6,000 rounds fired. Some very interesting results.
- Revised means of navigating the site, to reflect the way people have been using it, in order to make it faster and easier.
- A comprehensive list of the 99 different 'real world' guns we've tested so far.
- A bunch of new graphs and charts and data sets for your inner ballistic geek.
- Some new links and other goodies.
So, get the champagne on ice, find your party hats – there's gonna be a celebration tomorrow as we launch this new ship!
Jim Downey
- August 2017 (1)
- July 2017 (3)
- April 2017 (3)
- March 2017 (3)
- January 2017 (1)
- December 2016 (1)
- November 2016 (1)
- October 2016 (2)
- September 2016 (1)
- July 2016 (1)
- June 2016 (1)
- January 2016 (1)
- .22
- .223
- .30 carbine
- .327 Federal Magnum
- .357 Magnum
- .38 Special
- .41 Magnum
- .44 Magnum
- .44 Special
- .45 Colt
- .45 Super
- .460 Rowland
- 10mm
- 6.5 Swedish
- 9mm Luger (9×19)
- 9mm Mak
- 9mm Ultra
- Anecdotes
- black powder
- Boberg Arms
- Data
- Discussion.
- General Procedures
- Links
- Revolver
- Shotgun ballistics
- Uncategorized
RSSEntries RSS
Comments RSS


text: Nuverra Environmental Solutions (NYSE:NES), a leading provider of full-cycle environmental solutions to energy and industrial end-markets, reminds investors that a previously approved and announced 1-for-10 reverse split of its common stock is effective today at the open of the U.S. markets. Shares of Nuverra common stock will begin trading on a split-adjusted basis today on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol NES. The new CUSIP number for the common stock is 67091K203. With the effect of the reverse stock split, every ten (10) shares of common stock outstanding automatically combine into one (1) new share of common stock with no change in par value per share. The number of shares outstanding is reduced from approximately 260 million to 26 million. No fractional shares will be issued in connection with the reverse stock split. Stockholders who would otherwise hold a fractional share of Nuverra common stock will receive a cash payment in lieu of such fractional share. Holders of shares of common stock held in book-entry form or through a bank, broker or other nominee do not need to take any action in connection with the reverse split, and will see the impact of the reverse split automatically reflected in their accounts. Beneficial holders may contact their bank, broker or nominee for more information. For those few shareholders who hold physical stock certificates, the Company's transfer agent, American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, will send instructions for exchanging those certificates for new certificates representing the post-split number of shares. American Stock Transfer & Trust Company can be reached at 800-937-5449. About Nuverra Environmental Solutions, Inc. Nuverra Environmental Solutions is among the largest companies in the United States dedicated to providing comprehensive and full-cycle environmental solutions to customers in energy and industrial end-markets. Nuverra focuses on the delivery, collection, treatment, recycling, and disposal of restricted solids, water, wastewater, used motor oil, spent antifreeze, waste fluids and hydrocarbons. The Company continues to expand its suite of environmentally compliant and sustainable solutions to customers who demand stricter environmental compliance and accountability from their service providers.


text: London (ANI): Hollywood actress Reese Witherspoon is said to have ended her two-year romance with Jake Gyllenhaal because of the pressure to get married. According to new reports, the Walk the Line star ended the relationship to concentrate her children, Ava, 10, and six-year-old Deacon, from her marriage to Ryan Phillippe.However, Gyllenhaal has been left devastated by the split, which broke his heart, reports US Weekly magazine. No one cheated. There was no drama. She felt pressured to wed again but she wasnt ready. She couldnt give Jake enough and she got cold feet. Jake wanted all of her, the Daily Express quoted a source as saying."She really worried that they didnt have enough in common. When she was giving all of her energy to Jake, she felt like she wasnt giving her kids enough. He was great with the kids, but she felt like he didnt get the whole scope of what that entailed, the source added.


text:
Need a cheap blood test in Ferndale, MI? Simply order online and get a cheap blood test at a lab near you (Find More Locations):
What is a Cheap Blood Test?
A Cheap Blood Test is a blood test that checks your health in a low cost way. People in Ferndale, MI order a Cheap Blood Test for general screening or ongoing tracking.
How much does your Cheap Blood Test cost?
Our Cheap Blood Test prices include the doctor's order that you need to get tested in Ferndale, MI, all lab fees and taxes, and a pdf copy of your results. For current Cheap Blood Test prices, please CLICK HERE.
What does a Cheap Blood Test lab report look like?
For a sample report of a popular Cheap Blood Test panel in Ferndale, MI, please CLICK HERE.
In a time of rising healthcare costs, we can help people in Ferndale, MI get a Cheap Blood Test. We are delighted to offer our Cheap Blood Test service in Ferndale, MI.
Cheap Blood Test in other cities near Ferndale, MI:Berkley | Clawson | Detroit | Hamtramck | Hazel Park | Highland Park | Huntington Woods | Madison Heights | Oak Park | Pleasant Ridge | Royal Oak | Southfield | Troy | Warren


text:
Febreze Car Vent Clips
Eliminates odours for continuous freshness for up to 30 days
By Febreze
We're sorry! This product is not available.
Description & Features+
Odours can overstay their welcome. You know the ones—fast food carryout, sweaty gym clothes, or muddy dogs. Febreze CAR Vent Clips sends odours packing and adds a welcome note of freshness to your vehicle. These new car air fresheners eliminate odours and replace them with a refreshing scent. So you and your passengers all can breathe happy. And it's so easy to control. The Febreze CAR Vent Clips eliminates odours for continuous freshness for up to 30 days,* and it features an intensity-control dial to help adjust the amount of scent. Available in five odour-eliminating scents—pick up your new favourite car air freshener, and test-drive the freshness of the new Febreze CAR Vent Clips.
* On low and under ambient conditions.
From the Manufacturer +


text:
I'm about ready to call it a day. I'll keep this short so I can get some sleep. I need it badly.
I'm not sure what to expect tomorrow. Dad tells me to just relax and have a good time. I hope I have a good time. As for relaxing, get serious.
I want to thank everyone that has sent me encouraging comments. I'm amazed that so many people are reading our diaries. Wish me luck. I'll need it.


text:
Ghost Volley - Try a new style of volleyball.
Phantom of the volleyball offers a new style of volleyball. Easy to play, hard to master. Challenge yourself with the computer opponents!
• Realistic physics.
• Beautiful schedule.
• Slide control.
• Tracking the ball.
• Three levels of difficulty.
• Multitouch
• Move to SD card
Changed the ball on the acid
Сhanged the skins
Improved UI
Added personal performance tuning
|date of download
|The size
|no viruses
|inspection date
| View report
(Proverechno using the service virtustotal.com)
| full network access
Allows the app to create network sockets and use custom network protocols. The browser and other applications provide means to send data to the internet, so this permission is not required to send data to the internet.
| read phone status and identity
Allows the app to access the phone features of the device. This permission allows the app to determine the phone number and device IDs, whether a call is active, and the remote number connected by a call.
| view network connections
Allows the app to view information about network connections such as which networks exist and are connected.
| modify or delete the contents of your USB storage
Allows the app to write to the USB storage.
| prevent device from sleeping
Allows the app to prevent the device from going to sleep.
| control vibration
Allows the app to control the vibrator.
Attention! All files represented on this site either were found freely distributed on the internet or by their authors' permission. If any of materials on this site violates your rights, report us
Rating:(33) 4.26★ 85.13%
Rate the game:Plot


text:
BOSTON, April 30 (Reuters) - Fidelity Investments' two largest U.S. stock funds bet big on a foreign name -- Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) of South Korea -- in March, data from the world's biggest mutual fund company showed on Wednesday.
But while sharing similar views on Samsung -- the world's top maker of large liquid crystal display screens and the No. 2 mobile phone manufacturer -- the two Fidelity funds differed in their views on the U.S. financial sector, the data showed.
Fidelity's biggest stock fund, the $71.5 billion Contrafund, and its best-known Magellan fund raised their ownership of Samsung by about 62 percent each in March, according to data posted on Fidelity's Web site.
Privately owned Fidelity, which manages about $1.5 trillion in assets, usually doesn't publicly explain its portfolio changes but its moves are watched closely by investors. A spokesman declined to comment on reasons for the changes.
Contrafund, a multi-cap growth fund managed by Will Danoff, raised its ownership of Samsung to $157.4 million at the end of March from $97.3 million at end-February, the data show.
The $38.4 billion Magellan, a large-cap growth fund run by Harry Lange, hiked its holdings of Samsung over the month to $481.4 million from $298.2 million. It had bought a new stake in Samsung in January worth $315.2 million at the end of that month.
Shares of Samsung rose 11.3 percent in March. The firm beat forecasts with a 37 percent rise in quarterly profit last week.
Both Contrafund and Magellan are domestic stock funds but are allowed to have exposure to foreign companies. They had 26.5 percent of their portfolios in foreign holdings as of end-March, according to the company Web site.
Magellan showed new holdings worth $408 million and $190 million in banking firms JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) and Bank of America (BAC.N), respectively, at the end of March, raising its financial sector exposure to 10.2 percent of its total portfolio from 8.3 percent at end-February.
But Contrafund's exposure to the financial sector fell to 11.2 percent from 12.1 percent over the same period, the data showed. Its holdings of JPMorgan rose 5.2 percent to $268.2 million at the end of March, a shade lower than the 5.7 percent increase in the stock for the month.
Editing by Richard Chang


text:
...on public issues | post-colonial faith | reconciliation | anti-racism in general. Basically, my take on what happens around me...(and your response)
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Angelina Jolie is in the Bible !
Finally, my spiritual sense has been vindicated ! I always knew that there is something more to Angelina Jolie. She must be an angel of sorts. Now it is reported that a new Bible translation has included an image of this superstar in an illustrated Bible. Apparently this edition is a blockbuster !
Seriously though, whilst I find Angelina to be some of the few superstars, who has been an inspiration in terms of compassion and caring, this type of contextualization need to be questioned. It need to questioned when American images of stardom, are sold as the latest incarnation of God's word. In a world where the majority could care less, or don't even know, the lifestyles and antics of Hollywood, or where the USA is perceived to be the source of so much pain and mystery in terms of economic and ecological instability and imperialism in the rest of the world, this decision has to be questioned and resisted. It might sound utterly pious, yet it might be closer to the Bible to maintain that Brangelina is indeed in the Bible, where all of us are... typified as a sinner in need of grace. And it is at this place where angels are made, as normal human beings trying to make a positive change.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
- ► 2011 (13)
- ► 2010 (43)
- ► 2009 (54)
- ▼ October (6)
- ► 2007 (51)


text:
Skip to comments.Chinese Spies Friended NATO Officials With a Fake Facebook Account
Posted on 03/12/2012 3:02:09 PM PDT by James C. Bennett
Last year, a huge swath of senior British military officers and Defense Ministry officials became friends with who they thought was United States Navy admiral James Stavridis. While Stavridis is a real US Commander, sadly it now turns out that the man behind the Facebook profile wasn't him; it was actually a Chinese spy.
In friending the spy, those British officials obviously leaked their own personal information reports ZDNet. That includes e-mail addresses, phone numbers, pictures, the names of family members, and possibly even the details of their movements.
Perhaps understandably, NATO is recultant to state exactly who was behind the attack, but The Telegraph reveals that it was almost certainly someone inviolved in Chinese intellgience. A spokesperson from NATO said in a statement:
"There have been several fake supreme allied commander pages. Facebook has cooperated in taking them down. We are not aware that they are Chinese. The most important thing is for Facebook to get rid of them. First and foremost we want to make sure that the public is not being misinformed. Social media played a crucial role in the Libya campaign last year. It reflected the groundswell of public opposition, but also we received a huge amount of information from social media in terms of locating Libyan regime forces. It was a real eye-opener. That is why it is important the public has trust in our social media."
While it's one thing ensuring that Facebook cooperates with these kinds of problems, I can't help but think that a little more caution on the part of these Facebookin' officials might help rather more.
Regardless of whether they believed he was the real deal or not, I might suggest that using a social media website to communicate classified information would make one too stupid to be in a position of responsibility. The British military is already top-heavy with senior brass. A great excuse to pension off a few superfluous colonels, brigadiers and generals I think...
Stupid people in high places. But the use of social media makes such mistakes common.
The head of Mossad told all his agents not to have Facebook (after the Dubai assasination fiasco) but there was great resistance, because all the young agents are really into it.
The picture is actually from his OKCupid profile.
If someone wanted to weed through my 30,000+ posts here, do a bunch of homework and a little PI work, they could lock down exactly who I am, where I live, etc., but they'd have to work for it a little.
Still, I don't 'Facebook'.
If Government becomes more invasive and pervasive, it will not be long before the general public will fear their own statements in the social media, and they will be used to screen for reeducation candidates.
All true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.