what's stronger for a bullet, boron nitride, or tungsten carbide?
if the two collide, who would come out on top?
>>29805153
Depends on shape, but my bet is on tungsten. Boron is going to shatter wheras tungsten deforms
Neither, dumbass.
>>29805153
Boron sintered tungsten carbide is the paragon of all materials.
>>29805282
>>29805268
>people that don't know shit about materials
>>29805153
boron...is most dense metal.
>>29805153
Honestly, for a conventional ~.30 calibre round it won't matter much because the difference would be negligible.
>>29805294
please enlighten the ignorant
>>29805153
You dont want a strong bullet. Cavities are better than pinholes
Boron sintered tungsten carbide is very dense, denser than lead even. If I remember correctly, its one of the hardest metals known, only surpassed by diamond and other materials not reasonably useful, or too rare to be considered useful.
Since its such a hard metal, it won't deform and will either punch through as the most solid slug, or it will shatter if it hits something hard enough to stop it.
Taufladermaus has shot tungsten carbide slugs from a shotgun. They work alright but I imagine they're easily $40 a slug to produce as a projectile.
>>29805153
Why would you want a "stronger" bullet? Leads ability to deform is actually pretty important to the function of firearms
>>29806105
If the bullet is non-expanding anyway, it might as well be harder.
>>29806124
You'd also have to jacket it with something soft so that it can form a gas seal for use in regular rifled barrels.
>>29806155
Barrier penetration and armor penetration needs a hard projectile combined with very high speeds.
Could you make bullets out of industrial diamonds?
>>29806167
Right, sabots or a shotgun cup will suffice. I'd imagine a polymer coating would do the trick as well.
>>29806179
Diamond isn't dense at all, though. It would be shit.
>>29806194
I considered that, but sabots don't work very well with pistol/rifle cartridges anyway. At least I've never heard of one.
>>29806124
I don't think Carbide tool scrap is $40 for a couple ounces.
I do have some big enough pieces of carbide to make a slug, but little to shape it with except more carbide.
>>29805153
>those new boron nitride tool bits
neat.jpg
>>29806217
diamond is the hardest metal known to man
>>29806258
hard =/= dense though
>>29806258
You mean dragonforce loser
Serious question I had last night, price aside, how would gold fair as a bullet compared to lead?
>>29806296
Pretty good afaik.
Soft, easily deforms (good terminal ballistics), nice and dense like lead. Doesn't tarnish, fouling left in the barrel would be shiny and easy to see.
>>29805254
I thought tungsten was brittle as shit too.
>>29806325
It would be fantastic. If only we didn't like shiny things.
>>29806325
That's what I was thinking last night, it's denser than lead, but very soft so it'd conform to rifling nicely and probably also expand really well
>>29806296
In terms of pure physical properties, not bad at all.
But it's too valuable to use as ammunition, and I don't mean that in in the arbitrary "humans like shinies" way. Gold's properties make it a fantastic electrical conductor where corrosion resistance is important.
>>29805153
Both too brittle.
Try a combination of tungsten and uranium. High mass and the hardness can be adjusted to suit the situation.
>>29806167
>You'd also have to jacket it with something soft so that it can form a gas seal for use in regular rifled barrels.
And also not eat your barrel in ten shots.
>>29806167
this made me picture a bullet being elastic in a barrel, compressing a bit and widening its diameter to close the chamber up for the expanding gases to not escape. is this what happens?
>>29806398
Only 10% of gold is used in commercial applications. 50% goes into jewelry and 40% goes into investments. Without humans liking shinies, all 90% of that goes away. Without jewelry, no one would use it for investment either.
>>29806482
It would eat it in one if it doesn't kaboom.
>>29806505
The lands press metal into the grooves, but the metal also expands because of heat.
>>29806505
Technically, yes, but only just a very, very, very tiny bit
>>29806398
Gold is scientifically the best element for currency.
I'm not arguing for the gold standard, just that properties of gold make it great.
>>29805153
Diamond, due to extensive research done by the University of Pittsburgh, diamond has been confirmed as the hardest metal known to man. The research is as follows. Pocket-protected scientists built a wall of iron and crashed a diamond car into it at 400 miles per hour, and the car was unharmed. They then built a wall out of diamond and crashed a car made of iron moving at 400 miles an hour into the wall, and the wall came out fine. They then crashed a diamond car made of 400 miles per hour into a wall, and there were no survivors. They crashed 400 miles per hour into a diamond traveling at iron car. Western New York was powerless for hours. They rammed a wall of metal into a 400 mile per hour made of diamond, and the resulting explosion shifted the earth's orbit 400 million miles away from the sun, saving the earth from a meteor the size of a small Washington suburb that was hurtling towards mid-western Prussia at 400 billion miles per hour. They shot a diamond made of iron at a car moving at 400 walls per hour, and as a result caused two wayward airplanes to lose track of their bearings, and make a fatal crash with two buildings in downtown New York. They spun 400 miles at diamond into iron per wall. The results were inconclusive. Finally, they placed 400 diamonds per hour in front of a car made of wall traveling at miles per iron, and the result proved without a doubt that diamonds were the hardest metal of all time, if not just the hardest metal known to man.
>>29805153
Im sure they would both break.
I've always liked the idea of using a very dense/hard ceramic, myself.
>>29806598
Gold is only good for currency because people want it and they trust that people will want it for as long as they live.
>>29806371
>If only we didn't like shiny things.
Gold is too scarce of a metal to even consider being used in such novel applications like bullets.
>>29806598
>Gold is scientifically the best element for currency
Way too scarce and again your currency should never be a commodity that holds its own value. Cotton and Plastic money are the best because they are inherently worthless.
>>29806603
Fun fact.
Diamond actually burns just like coal.
If you house burns down don't bother to go looking for your diamonds.
>>29806731
Also, they should be common as fuck, but lolDeBeers.
>>29806709
>>29806719
No you don't understand.
If civilization where wiped out, and restarted. Chances are gold would be the staple for currency. If there where AYY LMAOs who had the will for currency, gold would probably be there currency element.
It scientifically the best element for currency. It's not just because it's shiny and people like it, if tin had the properties of gold, it would be the best currency element.
>>29806776
Elaborate please. I understand it's value in science applications, and electrical applications, and factoring it's rarity (here on earth, at least), but explain your ayy theory
What if on the ayy's home planet gold were as common as iron is on Earth?
I read that scientists believe most of Earth's gold that was there during it's formation sank further towards the core than we can ever reach it, and most of what we've found was deposited here after the formation by meteors, much in the same way we believe Iridium was, so what if the ayy's found a nice fat body of gold orbiting their star system that they could easily mine, would it then still be as valuable?
>>29806731
Well, it IS pure carbon. Aren't the covalent bonds strong enough that it would take a much hotter fire to burn diamonds, though?
>>29806871
PS not trying to argue or say you're wrong, just want to know more about your opinion as to why it's universally valuable
>>29806763
Unlike gold, diamonds are actually easy to manufacture to gem quality now. DeBeers scoffs at manufactured diamonds since they are far too perfect :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZOcNlFhzSM
I have a large ruby gemstone that would be worth about $50,000 but it was grown in a lab so it is worth about $23. Almost all the cost in mine went into cutting it to the pretty shape :D
>>29806889
>Aren't the covalent bonds strong enough that it would take a much hotter fire to burn diamonds, though?
It's a little harder to get started due to the smooth edges (use charcoal starter :D ). But once going, its just fancy coal.
>>29806905
Any idea how much it would cost to grow something ridiculous like the Hope diamond?
I think somebody out there does sell bullets made out of pure silver. Probably no advantage at all other than the vampire/werewolf gimmick thing.
>>29806871
>>29806893
not that anpn, but gold is stable as fuck. it doesnt corrode like pretty much everything else
>>29806930
According to jewtube, diamond won't burn unless you blast it with pure oxygen.
>>29806871
It's not that it's universally valuable, it's just that it's properties through the periodic table make it great for currency.
So going down the table for the element best for currency: all gases and liquids are gone because they need storage and handling.
The all the alkali earth and alkali metals are gone, because they're not stable enough. Same with all the radio active elements, not stable.
Then we're left pretty much only with transition metals. Things like iron, tin and a bunch are kicked because they corrode too easily. Then stuff like chromium, tungsten and the like are removed for being too hard to work with and process. Then stuff that is too common like copper and aluminum is removed. Eventually through deduction you're left with a few elements, platinum, silver, gold, iridium and few nearby elements.
Now it's trickier, silver is removed for not being as hard to corrode as the others. And the others except gold are too hard to find, process and so on.
Eventually you're just left with gold. It's not a gas so you can work with it, stable so the currency is litteraly stable, it doesn't corrode very easily so the money doesn't rust away, and also isn't too hard to work with so you can make small pieces of it to work with. And finally it's rare enough that if some is found it doesn't inflate the economy too hard, while also being common enough that it is usable.
This is a pretty short hand list btw, there's a video where a guy goes through all the elements for why they don't work as currency.
>>29805153
you're better off using the hard material as a penetrator instead of the entire round. for example, putting a piece of TIG rod into a 12ga slug.
>>29806955
A whole lot less than the real one. Several diamond growing methods are not really limited in the size of diamonds that can be grown other than needing larger equipment and more time.
Of course DeBeers has been fighting tooth and nail against it.
Here is what ruby is worth now...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/7mm-Round-Lab-Grown-Ruby-Wholesale-Lot-of-25-/121118111634?hash=item1c3333b792
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RUBY-SAPPHIRE-150-CTS-LAB-GROWN-FACET-ROUGH-/391277701052?hash=item5b19f7e7bc
Somebody should make ruby bullets since they are like 90% as hard as diamond.
>>29807090
>And the others except gold are too hard to find, process and so on.
Gold is extremely hard to find. It is precious partially because it is so scarce.
Silver or Aluminum are much better choices.
>>29807570
I already explained aluminum and silver. Reading comprehension.
Silver is more common and corrods easier. Aluminum corroded easier is harder to extract from ore and is way too common.
I already explained why it's important to be hard to corrode and rare above.
>>29806124
tungsten carbide is definitely not shatterproof. Any jeweler will tell you that.
>>29807120
>Of course DeBeers has been fighting tooth and nail against it.
How? How the fuck do you fight against growing rocks?
>>29805416
I thought that was metallica?
It is interesting that if you make a bullet out of aluminum you can boil it in water to super harden the outside of it (Aluminum Oxide). But the core is still soft raw aluminum for expansion and all. Very light weight so only good at very close range and will not penetrate walls and such.
For close range it might be very effective and then it would loose energy very fast if you miss that guy in front of you. It's velocity would be very high with sharp fragmentation which might be funny into say Kevlar vest.
>>29807816
Your discounting of alloys as currency makes your entire post non-nonsensical. Having an element be common would be a good trait of a currency because it means that it would be less difficult to mine and mint. Aluminum or silver alloy would be by far the best choices.
Gold is simply too scarce in the universe to be considered a good candidate for a currency.
A currency as a commodity doesn't make sense at all either with a fiat-currency system either way.
>>29808011
you don't want materials easy for people to just find and mint themselves.
Barley was one of the first "currency-backing resources" back in old ancient Egypt... because you can't grow Barley in Egypt. It literally had to come down the Nile, which the government controlled -- so that the Egyptian government knew, at all times, how much barley was in the country.
>>29806258
>Due to extensive research done by the University of Pittsburgh, diamond has been confirmed as the hardest metal known to man. The research is as follows:
>Pocket-protected scientists built a wall made of iron and crashed a diamond car into it at 400 miles per hour, and the car was unharmed. They then built a wall out of diamond and crashed a car made of iron moving at 400 miles an hour into the wall, and the wall came out fine. They then crashed a diamond car made of 400 miles per hour into a wall, and there were no survivors. They crashed 400 miles per hour into a diamond travelling at iron car. Western New York was powerless for hours. They rammed a wall made of metal into 400 miles an hour made of diamond, and the resulting explosion shifted earths orbit 400 million miles away from the sun, saving the earth from a meteor the size of a small Washington suburb that was hurtling towards mid-western Prussia at 400 billion miles an hour. They shot a diamond made of iron at a car moving at 400 walls per hour, and as a result caused over 10000 wayward planes to lose track of their bearings, and make a fatal crash with over 10000 buildings in downtown New York. They spun 400 miles at diamond into iron per wall. The results were inconclusive. Finally, they placed 400 diamonds per hour in front of a car made of wall travelling at miles per iron, and the result proved with out a doubt that diamonds were the hardest metal of all time, if not just the hardest metal known to man.
>>29807993
You would want a copper jacket since the AlO2 would very quickly tear the shit out of a gun barrel!
>>29806217
>sabots don't work very well with pistol/rifle cartridges anyway.
Best I can think of would be the special snowflake 6.5 CBMJ
>>29806398
>it's too valuable to use as ammunition
Just wait till soace mkning becomes a thing
>>29808011
Alloys have not always been common, especially ones with qualities of gold.
And no, you don't want currency to be easy to manufacture. Like economics 101, inflation. The easier it is for new currency to enter circulation the harder it is to control value of currency.
>>29806217
You can buy .308" to .224" sabots for reloading
>>29808058
top kek
>>29808049
Comparing primitive economies with advanced ones makes no sense. Ayy Lmaos would have advanced economies with stock exchanges, banks, reserves, etc.
Fiat-Currency system for advanced economies wants money that shouldn't really be a widely traded commodity, have no value on its own, and be only minted from a reserve-controlled mint monopoly. Gold easily fails the first two requirements. It can pass the third one, but so can any other alloy or paper or plastic.
>>29808238
Are you retarded?
No one is arguing for which economic system is best in current year.
Litteraly all the world had a primitive economy at one point. All the world needed money to use eventually cos you can't keep trading for things. Gold is scientifically the best element for currency.
It doesn't corrode
It's easy to work with
It doesn't react
It doesn't float away
It's not too rare while also being rare enough.
It is best element of currency.
>>29805153
the diamond bullet because diamond are the hardest metal known to mankind
>>29808238
>We should all be walking around using nothing but gold coins!
If this isn't your argument, what exactly is it? Because you're literally shitting on the idea of a reserve/backed currency in favor of... fucking gold fucking coins... in the modern world.
>>29807962
buying patents or the companies that do the growing and putting a stop to it. rather than oh say embracing it.
>>29808419
No one has argued for this. Go back read everything over, work on your reading comprehension, maybe get sober.
