Gunco Forums banner

9mm Jonson a 9mmx39?????? :)

2K views 13 replies 6 participants last post by  sjohnson 
#1 ·
#3 ·
And I thought Alexander Arms was a bunch of braggarts. At least they didn't claim copyrighted computer algorithm design... looks like the Wikipedia page was done by the same guy who did Jonson's web site.

Google returned bupkis on "jonson cartridge computer algorithm." Looks like they don't include Google Groups in the search results any more, (praise Baud) so I went to the Groups page, found rec.guns, searched for "jonson algorithm" and found nothing there, either.

Went to the US Copyright office, set the search parameters to "1990-2000" and "computer files" and found no results. Set it for any registrations from 1990 to 2000, found 9 results, none of them likely, unless it was buried in a screenplay called "Night of the Slimeoids."

Hmm.

"Show me your code."


I keep wondering what the gazintas of the program would be; you could play games with CFD algorithms, but you'd need detailed pressure-rise curves for the powders you expected to use, not to mention the primers, bullets, leade, and temperature - and the starting temp of the primer and powder make a *big* difference in pressure.

Then, with all this in hand, what final characteristics would you be looking for? Kinda depends...

Such a miracle algorithm, you'd think FN and Winchester and Weatherby would be sending Suits with checkbooks to this guy's door.

I have no idea how the cartridge performs, but I don't think there was any "algorithm" involved.


Five quatloos on "bullshit."
 
#5 ·
I earn a living as a codeslinger, sometimes. Magic algorithms, or claims to same (like the infamous secret "hockey stick" global warming algorithm) tend to set me off.

Don't worry, it's a mostly-harmless eccentricity.
 
#6 ·
Since a dimensioned .30 PPC design proved not viable, Jonson Labs authored a computer algorithm to optimize the round and in 1984, copyrighted the algorithm that produced The Jonson Factor and also the resulting case design. When the factor was applied to the Jonson .30 PPC-like design, the round proved to incorporate a perfected ballistic profile, designated parallactic precision. The main advantages to the design were improved accuracy through a more consistent powder burn and lower than expected realized recoil per caliber. An entire family of Jonson rounds has since been spawned based on the Jonson Factor.
Yeah I have to agree with you - a supposedly magic formula that feeds in "exhaustive ballistic data" and spits out a cartridge? Sounds like Superman 2 :D The cartridge looks like a .308 variant.
 
#7 ·
lol, I too coded. C, micro-assembly, BIOS programming, UNIX and UNIX internals, IBM mainframes (PL/1), SQL, plus various minor languages. I agree that some hype their abilities, but I have also seen some true genius at work in code and systems. I have more "fear and loathing" of end-users and upper management than of fellow coders - even those who are only paper tiger developers.

While I don't discount a claim that someone hyped the development of an iterative cartridge design method, I don't care if they did it via programming or via a rock and a sheet of brass - as long as it works for what I want to do.
 
#9 ·
ahhhhhh I learned how to copy amd paste and post pictures. whats a algo@#$$.

in 1984 computers were pretty basic. so im not any thing was desigend on it by these guys.

perhaps I should copyright some of my ideas that have not been built. Can you do that??
 
#10 ·
Cut and paste = good. Leave the al-gores alone; they'll eat your brain.

Back in ancient times, with hand-carved wooden circuit boards and knapped flint read-write heads, you had to get down and dirty with the hardware and software to do anything useful. Then it becomes an obsession. After a while, it sucks up all the time you could be using for your AK projects. If you're very unlucky, you'll encounter "enablers" (employers) who will keep you on the computer hamster wheel.

Fifteen years from now all your computer stuff will be a sad joke. But your AKs will still work just fine.

---

The Jonson may be a fine cartridge; it was just their hyper-BS marketing drivel that made me leery of it. That sort of thing turned me off on the Beowulf for a long time. I guess it annoyed me enough to have the chamber reamer made just out of spite, with their "we will sue anyone who infringes on our patent" routine. It's a 12.7 Schuler Short reamer, it just happens a Beowulf cartridge will also fit. Good thing, since I don't have any 12.7 Schuler brass... or Beowulf brass either. [sigh]

What was it about the Jonson that got your interest, other than the 2.81" overall length? It looked like just another "short magnum for .308 magazines" to me.
 
#11 ·
Nothing got my interest, and overall I can sympathize with your feelings toward an egotist.

It looks like a short magnum, which only means to me it might fit an AK magazine. I'm always interested in 9x39 type rounds, my hope is to one day build a suppressed VSS look-alike. Most of my shots (deer) are under 200 yards, and a hard-hitting, suppressed subsonic round appeals to me.
 
#12 ·
Most of my shots (deer) are under 200 yards, and a hard-hitting, suppressed subsonic round appeals to me.
You'll want at least a .45 if you want that combo. The 9x39 with its 250 grain [IIRC] bullet is pretty much equal to a .45 ACP so far as power. You can't really go heavier than that with the 9mm caliber, unless you go really long in bullets.

The only real way to get more POWAH out of subsonic rounds is to go with heavier bullets, and the 300+gr .458 bullets would be perfect I'd think for a hard hitting subsonic round.
 
#13 ·
444 marlin or the wildcat 444??? would be the ticket a 265 grain bullet is pretty potent at aropund 2000 FPS or so a 240 GR will go close to 2300 FPS about the same as a normal 125GR AK round. WTF are you allowed to hunt with a supressor Legaly ???? ;)

The 7.62x39 IMOO is barely powerfull enough at 200 yards and expansion gets really shacky at that range especialy with a short barrel. Trust me I have been lucky with mine at those ranges. I dont think a 9mm going under 1000 FPS is going to a very good deer round. Im not a big fan of the 30 whisper round either. Like bosted above if i were allowed to hunt with a supressor It would be a really big bullet like the 450 bushmaster or the beowolf in something like 400 grains. the trajectory of most subsonic rounds would require some pretty good range guessing.

a 35 remington or 358 winchester could be supressed as well and would be a easy build.

I know guys who hunt with 357 mag rifles occasionaly and they loose a lot of deer. and that with a bullet going around 1600 FPS.

Now if the law allowed supression and i was shooting 30 yards from a tree stand and could take a head or neck shot then Id be all for it. hell even a well placed vitals shot would kill but id hate to be off much. Id still like to build one and Id like to some day get a legal surpressor I thing it would make a awsome plinker for in back of the house an keep the neighbors happy.
 
#14 ·
I would NEVER use an illegal firearm for deer. ;)

But, I can dream. The biggest advantage a .45 has over the 9mm class is bullets with pistol velocity jackets. Everything else is shot placement. I'll go without if I can't put one down in one, quick-kill shot. The meat tastes gamey otherwise and it's not humane for the deer.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top