Why do we choose rounds differently? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Why do we choose rounds differently?


thegriz18
01-18-2010, 20:44
For rifles used for hunting and tactical or other purposes we look for loads that are fast, penetrate and expand. Then for handguns I see the same guys advocating heavy and slow 45's. Seems to me that terminal ballistics work the same for rifles as they do for handguns. Rifles that shoot bullets at higher velocity do more damage on target than bullets fired at lower velocity. Example: .308 vs 10mm, both with 180 grain bullets. When it comes to damage which one wins? Duh, the .308. It just doesn't make sense to me. If I were to make a conclusion I'd say velocity is a very important part of terminal ballistics. For those who say that BPW isn't valid, explain why a 180 grain .308 does more damage than a 180 grain 10mm. Same weight bullet, the 10mm is even larger in diameter, but the .308 wins because it has a higher velocity. If all we are doing is punching lead through tissue it seems that the two rounds would perform the same. I guess the fact that .308 beats 10mm with the same weight bullet has something to do with a pressure shock. I dunno, not tying to start a fight, but I want to point out how silly it gets on here when we debate BPW and people say it doesn't exist. If it didn't exist 10mm 180 grain loads would equal 180 grain .308 loads every time, but they don't.

JBP55
01-19-2010, 06:16
Popcorn anyone?

thegriz18
01-19-2010, 06:46
Popcorn anyone?

:popcorn: I'll pass you some.

dosei
01-19-2010, 08:11
Most handgun calibers cannot create more BPW than a body can handle...most bottle-neck rifle calibers create a lot more BPW than a body can handle. This is why BPW is considered irrelevant when discussing handgun caliber, because the BPW they are able to create is within the levels that a body can reasonably absorb and is thus irrelevant. And most people will not say that slower is better, but rather that slower is acceptable in exchange for bigger/heavier. Larger bullets make larger holes. The larger & longer a hollow point bullet is, the larger a size it can expand to. The heavier a bullet is, the more inertia it has and thus will typically penetrate deeper. It takes all three...size, weight, and velocity...there is no "one" that trumps all. Since handguns typically do not have the velocity to deliver damaging BPW, one is left with the initial bullet size, it's maximum expanded size, and it's penetration capacity for creating adequate damage. Most of the 45 crowd are not advocates of "big and slow"...most 45acp defencive ammo is loaded hot (+P). I think the 45 crowd is really more of a "biggest, heaviest, fastest" crowd...use the biggest, heaviest bullet and push it as fast as possible.

:popcorn:

Brucev
01-19-2010, 09:00
Most handgun calibers cannot create more BPW than a body can handle...most bottle-neck rifle calibers create a lot more BPW than a body can handle. This is why BPW is considered irrelevant when discussing handgun caliber, because the BPW they are able to create is within the levels that a body can reasonably absorb and is thus irrelevant. And most people will not say that slower is better, but rather that slower is acceptable in exchange for bigger/heavier. Larger bullets make larger holes. The larger & longer a hollow point bullet is, the larger a size it can expand to. The heavier a bullet is, the more inertia it has and thus will typically penetrate deeper. It takes all three...size, weight, and velocity...there is no "one" that trumps all. Since handguns typically do not have the velocity to deliver damaging BPW, one is left with the initial bullet size, it's maximum expanded size, and it's penetration capacity for creating adequate damage. Most of the 45 crowd are not advocates of "big and slow"...most 45acp defencive ammo is loaded hot (+P). I think the 45 crowd is really more of a "biggest, heaviest, fastest" crowd...use the biggest, heaviest bullet and push it as fast as possible.

:popcorn:
+1. Sincerely. brucev.

fredj338
01-19-2010, 10:09
For rifles used for hunting and tactical or other purposes we look for loads that are fast, penetrate and expand. Then for handguns I see the same guys advocating heavy and slow 45's. Seems to me that terminal ballistics work the same for rifles as they do for handguns. Rifles that shoot bullets at higher velocity do more damage on target than bullets fired at lower velocity. Example: .308 vs 10mm, both with 180 grain bullets. When it comes to damage which one wins? Duh, the .308. It just doesn't make sense to me. If I were to make a conclusion I'd say velocity is a very important part of terminal ballistics. For those who say that BPW isn't valid, explain why a 180 grain .308 does more damage than a 180 grain 10mm. Same weight bullet, the 10mm is even larger in diameter, but the .308 wins because it has a higher velocity. If all we are doing is punching lead through tissue it seems that the two rounds would perform the same. I guess the fact that .308 beats 10mm with the same weight bullet has something to do with a pressure shock. I dunno, not tying to start a fight, but I want to point out how silly it gets on here when we debate BPW and people say it doesn't exist. If it didn't exist 10mm 180 grain loads would equal 180 grain .308 loads every time, but they don't.

Because you are talking apples & oranges. The faster handgun loads can make about 1500fps. The 308 about 2700fps. The increase in tissue damage is not linear w/ vel. but expontial. So yo ucan not compare handgun rounds to rifle rounds. Maybe when you get into some of the magnums, 41mag & 44mag or heavy 45colts, but service rounds are just not making enough vel. w/ a heavy enough bullet to give reliable penetration. I'm sure someone can get a light wt solid copper HP to get good vel & still give adequate penetration.
BTW, not all rifle rounds are selected for high vel. Even in the age of super magnums, DG hunters in Africa still choose heavy & slow for whacking the largest DG. You can have too much vel which reduces penetration & when DG is the target, penetration is king, even to the point of using solids. Not completely diff form SD rounds against humans but then we aren't talking 400gr bullets @ 2200fps.

thegriz18
01-19-2010, 12:14
Because you are talking apples & oranges. The faster handgun loads can make about 1500fps. The 308 about 2700fps. The increase in tissue damage is not linear w/ vel. but expontial. So yo ucan not compare handgun rounds to rifle rounds. Maybe when you get into some of the magnums, 41mag & 44mag or heavy 45colts, but service rounds are just not making enough vel. w/ a heavy enough bullet to give reliable penetration. I'm sure someone can get a light wt solid copper HP to get good vel & still give adequate penetration.
BTW, not all rifle rounds are selected for high vel. Even in the age of super magnums, DG hunters in Africa still choose heavy & slow for whacking the largest DG. You can have too much vel which reduces penetration & when DG is the target, penetration is king, even to the point of using solids. Not completely diff form SD rounds against humans but then we aren't talking 400gr bullets @ 2200fps.
I don't think that they are apples and oranges. They both operate off the same basic principle. Also, I don't consider a 400 grain bullet at 2200 fps slow in the whole scheme of launched projectiles. Let's not forget that some service caliber rounds achieve 1100+ fps. The 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 9mm and 10mm are all capable of achieving 1100-1400 fps within their respective caliber range. High velocity handgun rounds, say, 1100 fps+, should create more BPW than rounds in the 950-fps range. I think that we give weight too much consideration and not enough consideration to speed. We have the technology now to create bullets that are light and can with stand higher velocity and still hold together and penetrate. Handgun rounds may create a BPW that the body can handle, but it will cause a disruption to the system non-the-less.

mteagle1
01-19-2010, 13:22
Most handgun calibers cannot create more BPW than a body can handle...most bottle-neck rifle calibers create a lot more BPW than a body can handle. This is why BPW is considered irrelevant when discussing handgun caliber, because the BPW they are able to create is within the levels that a body can reasonably absorb and is thus irrelevant. And most people will not say that slower is better, but rather that slower is acceptable in exchange for bigger/heavier. Larger bullets make larger holes. The larger & longer a hollow point bullet is, the larger a size it can expand to. The heavier a bullet is, the more inertia it has and thus will typically penetrate deeper. It takes all three...size, weight, and velocity...there is no "one" that trumps all. Since handguns typically do not have the velocity to deliver damaging BPW, one is left with the initial bullet size, it's maximum expanded size, and it's penetration capacity for creating adequate damage. Most of the 45 crowd are not advocates of "big and slow"...most 45acp defencive ammo is loaded hot (+P). I think the 45 crowd is really more of a "biggest, heaviest, fastest" crowd...use the biggest, heaviest bullet and push it as fast as possible.

:popcorn:
High school dropout does not understand what BPW means. What I do understand is that if I have to shoot someone it will be at a close range and I don't want the bullet to exit the body and hit someone else. I shoot a .45ACP (a lot) and I don't want the recoil of a +P spoiling my chance for a followup shot so I am not in your "biggest, heaviest, fastest" crowd. My .45 carry ammo is a 165gr HP Winchester Silvertip which is not +P or in 9mm it is a 115gr HP Hornady Critical Defense. The perfect self defense or military ammo would be one that penetrated about 6" with a permanent 6" wound channel.

dosei
01-19-2010, 13:39
I don't think that they are apples and oranges. They both operate off the same basic principle. Also, I don't consider a 400 grain bullet at 2200 fps slow in the whole scheme of launched projectiles. Let's not forget that some service caliber rounds achieve 1100+ fps. The 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 9mm and 10mm are all capable of achieving 1100-1400 fps within their respective caliber range. High velocity handgun rounds, say, 1100 fps+, should create more BPW than rounds in the 950-fps range. I think that we give weight too much consideration and not enough consideration to speed. We have the technology now to create bullets that are light and can with stand higher velocity and still hold together and penetrate. Handgun rounds may create a BPW that the body can handle, but it will cause a disruption to the system non-the-less.

Velocity needs to be around Mach 2 or better (2250 fps) to begin to see levels of BPW that are significantly in excess of what a body can handle and, thus, cause damage/disruption. Most SD handgun calibers fall way short of that mark. And even in rifle calibers, it's still about weight and speed. The 180 grain loads for the 308 are very popular among those that hunt with the 308...and that is one of the heaviest bullets for the 308. The 168 grain is one of the second heaviest for the 308, and it is the standard weight bullet for match ammo. When hunting dangerous game...what do hunters look for...they look for the biggest, heaviest bullets being pushed as fast as possible in a gun they can carry and shoot accurately.

DocKWL
01-19-2010, 13:42
I don't think that they are apples and oranges. They both operate off the same basic principle. Also, I don't consider a 400 grain bullet at 2200 fps slow in the whole scheme of launched projectiles. Let's not forget that some service caliber rounds achieve 1100+ fps. The 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 9mm and 10mm are all capable of achieving 1100-1400 fps within their respective caliber range. High velocity handgun rounds, say, 1100 fps+, should create more BPW than rounds in the 950-fps range. I think that we give weight too much consideration and not enough consideration to speed. We have the technology now to create bullets that are light and can with stand higher velocity and still hold together and penetrate. Handgun rounds may create a BPW that the body can handle, but it will cause a disruption to the system non-the-less.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

There is no BPW.

Read THIS (http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=34714) and THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm) and buy THIS (http://pw2.netcom.com/~dmacp/index.html)

dosei
01-19-2010, 13:45
High school dropout does not understand what BPW means.

Ballistic
Pressure
Wave

fredj338
01-19-2010, 13:51
High school dropout does not understand what BPW means. What I do understand is that if I have to shoot someone it will be at a close range and I don't want the bullet to exit the body and hit someone else. I shoot a .45ACP (a lot) and I don't want the recoil of a +P spoiling my chance for a followup shot so I am not in your "biggest, heaviest, fastest" crowd. My .45 carry ammo is a 165gr HP Winchester Silvertip which is not +P or in 9mm it is a 115gr HP Hornady Critical Defense. The perfect self defense or military ammo would be one that penetrated about 6" with a permanent 6" wound channel.
Well, yes & no. You are using a 185grWSTHP & the perfect round would NOT make 6" deep wound. A large man's forearm can be almost 4-5" across. hit that in front of his chest & you will disable the arm but not get near vitals. A large, heavy man will have 3-4" of fat & muscle on his chest, hit that & you will not hit vitals, we won't even discuss oblique or 90deg angle shots into the torso. It's why the FBI came up w/ the 12" min. penetration. It allows you to get to vitals from any reasonable angle.
So the perfect round would penetrate 100% from any angle then drop to the ground. Those do not exist.
High velocity handgun rounds, say, 1100 fps+, should create more BPW than rounds in the 950-fps range. I think that we give weight too much consideration and not enough consideration
There isn't much diff in temp cav form 950fps-1100fps. You have to get the vel. up, well over 1200fps to see significant diff. Again, bullet design has a lot to do with that. So in the end, I don't think rifle shooters look for anything really diff. It's just as vel goes up, bullet design is even more important to sustain vel. Vel. alone will not kill. Roy Weatherby tried selling that in the 1950s. It helps a properly designed bullet do more work, but there is no magic to HV impacts at what we would term normal vel. of 1200fps-3000fps. The bullet still has to do the work.

dosei
01-19-2010, 14:31
Using the OP's "logic" and giving it a twist.

The OP's example is two bullets of the same weight traveling at different velocities...and from that he concludes that speed is everything...

...so let's flip that on it's head...

5.56 NATO - A 55 grain bullet traveling at 3240 fps
vs.
50 BMG - A 700 grain bullet traveling at 2978 fps

Per to OP's assumption, the 5.56 should be a much more devastating choice given it's blistering 262 fps advantage over the 50 BMG...

Ah heck, let's throw one other in the mix...
7.62 NATO - A 168 grain bullet traveling at 2650 fps
(now this just has to be a poor performer when compared to the faster 5.56)

:rofl:

thegriz18
01-19-2010, 15:00
Using the OP's "logic" and giving it a twist.

The OP's example is two bullets of the same weight traveling at different velocities...and from that he concludes that speed is everything...

...so let's flip that on it's head...

5.56 NATO - A 55 grain bullet traveling at 3240 fps
vs.
50 BMG - A 700 grain bullet traveling at 2978 fps

Per to OP's assumption, the 5.56 should be a much more devastating choice given it's blistering 262 fps advantage over the 50 BMG...

Ah heck, let's throw one other in the mix...
7.62 NATO - A 168 grain bullet traveling at 2650 fps
(now this just has to be a poor performer when compared to the faster 5.56)

:rofl:

You're totally wrong. That wasn't my logic. I required the bullets to be the same weight. I said speed was very important, not everything.

ithaca_deerslayer
01-19-2010, 15:21
I required the bullets to be the same weight.

Here's as much as I can figure.

If the bullets are the same weight, then the one going faster is better. If the bullet is hard, it will mean more penetration. If the bullet is soft, it will mean more expansion. Either way, at the end of things where the bullet is hitting, faster is better, just choose the type of bullet you want.

But faster will cost you in increased recoil, increased cartridge and gun size, and increased gun weight. You want your handgun to weigh little, and have little recoil.

dosei
01-19-2010, 15:35
You're totally wrong. That wasn't my logic. I required the bullets to be the same weight. I said speed was very important, not everything.

So...have you ever given this a read:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

Speed can be important...if in excess of 2000 fps. For typical SD handgun calibers, speed only equates to better penetration and better expansion of soft-point/hollow-point projectiles.

BPW trauma is a lot like a sonic boom...it doesn't exist until something is going fast enough.

thegriz18
01-19-2010, 15:43
Here's as much as I can figure.

If the bullets are the same weight, then the one going faster is better. If the bullet is hard, it will mean more penetration. If the bullet is soft, it will mean more expansion. Either way, at the end of things where the bullet is hitting, faster is better, just choose the type of bullet you want.

But faster will cost you in increased recoil, increased cartridge and gun size, and increased gun weight. You want your handgun to weigh little, and have little recoil.

This pretty much sums up my point. Thanks deerslayer.

Jeepnik
01-19-2010, 15:52
Popcorn anyone?

No, but a beer would be nice.

thegriz18
01-19-2010, 16:00
No, but a beer would be nice.

:cheers:

Gunnut 45/454
01-19-2010, 17:10
If I had a choice of the two weapons for a BG take down I'd choose the rifle every time!
Pistols are great for most SD situations! But if you want complete take down damage any high powered soft nosed bullet will decapitate at close range/ blow big nasty holes!
Now if you want rifle performance with out the High powered rifle round go with a pistol carbine/levergun! Same damage as a rifle with out the recoil! :supergrin:

Don't believe me talk to a Vet of WWII/Korea and ask them what a rifle round will do at close range! Ask them how good they were when they did CCQB! And that was with Ball ammo! Try soft nosed bullets!
Of course where talking about "Real Rifle" rounds of .30 Caliber!
:supergrin:

fredj338
01-19-2010, 17:35
You're totally wrong. That wasn't my logic. I required the bullets to be the same weight. I said speed was very important, not everything.
Unless the bullet is designed to perform well in that vel envelope, vel. means little. Shape & composition matter more than the vel. on impact. Stable solids hitting @ say 2200fps don't do the same damage as heavy siofts @ the same vel. Increasing the vel of the solid at that point doesn't destroy more tissue. If it hits bone, that again changes the result. It's not just as simple as more vel is better.

glock20c10mm
01-19-2010, 22:47
So...have you ever given this a read:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm

Speed can be important...if in excess of 2000 fps. For typical SD handgun calibers, speed only equates to better penetration and better expansion of soft-point/hollow-point projectiles.
I don't know what you think you read in that link, but I for one would like to know in the context you're claiming.

The ONLY place in the link you posted where 2000 fps is brought up is in direct relation to fragments of a bullet at that velocity actually penetrating tissue far enough outside the direct path of the main projectile to inflict enough damage to be worthwhile. And the speed and amount at which the permanent wound cavity expands outward. Nothing is brought up in terms of a ballistic pressure wave or any other terms many wrongly associate with BPW (hydrostatic shock...).

BPW trauma is a lot like a sonic boom...it doesn't exist until something is going fast enough.
This clearly shows you're not up to speed with Dr. Courtney's theory of BPW. BPW trauma is NOTHING like a sonic boom. BPW is pressure in psi measured at a location well beyond the temporary wound cavity produced by the projectile as it penetrates producing a pressure wave that continues traveling outside the temporary cavity.

So...have you ever given this a read:
http://arxiv1.library.cornell.edu/vc/physics/papers/0702/0702107v1.pdf

glock20c10mm
01-19-2010, 22:49
You're totally wrong. That wasn't my logic. I required the bullets to be the same weight. I said speed was very important, not everything.
I was wondering where dosei got that from too, because it certainly wasn't from your post.

Good Shooting,
Craig

unit1069
01-19-2010, 22:51
I suspect this thread will soon be closed, looking at recent Glock Talk history.

A declaration that the possibility of BPW effect in handgun calibers is a myth has been made.

So we'll have no further discussion, debate, or introduction of scientific studies, pro or con, which only serve to confuse the unwashed masses.

glock20c10mm
01-19-2010, 22:55
When hunting dangerous game...what do hunters look for...they look for the biggest, heaviest bullets being pushed as fast as possible in a gun they can carry and shoot accurately.
How does what dangerous game hunters choose for a round have anything to do what we choose for SD against BGs??? :headscratch:

Doesn't recoil of the 460 Wby Mag automatically rub you the wrong way against BGs because of over penetration and recoil hindering follow up shots? Or no? :shocked:

glock20c10mm
01-19-2010, 23:00
You are comparing apples to oranges.
That's not true in the full context of what he was asking.

There is no BPW.
You yourself have agreed more than once within your posts on GT that BPW does exist. And since we can measure it with a high speed transducer, it clearly exists!

Read THIS (http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=34714) and THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm) and buy THIS (http://pw2.netcom.com/~dmacp/index.html)
I have. What don't you get? Maybe you have unknown misconceptions within your own mind some of the rest of us can help you clear up as I'm sure you don't want to go away not knowing the truth.

We're here to help,
Craig

coal
01-20-2010, 01:46
I don't think that they are apples and oranges. They both operate off the same basic principle. Also, I don't consider a 400 grain bullet at 2200 fps slow in the whole scheme of launched projectiles. Let's not forget that some service caliber rounds achieve 1100+ fps. The 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 9mm and 10mm are all capable of achieving 1100-1400 fps within their respective caliber range. High velocity handgun rounds, say, 1100 fps+, should create more BPW than rounds in the 950-fps range. I think that we give weight too much consideration and not enough consideration to speed. We have the technology now to create bullets that are light and can with stand higher velocity and still hold together and penetrate. Handgun rounds may create a BPW that the body can handle, but it will cause a disruption to the system non-the-less.

IMO, you are asking a, "Does BPW exist in service calibers?" question, then subsequenly answering yes. You either think it does or you don't. You appear to think it does. That's opinion.

I don't think that they are apples and oranges. They both operate off the same basic principle. ....

The real question is whether BPW exists in service calibers. That remains a matter of (heated) debate. The "principle" then is in fact not definatively the same comparing rifle to service pistol if the "BPW" velocity window is not reached. That's why some folks have stated yours is an "apples to oranges" comparison. I agree because comparing 2500+fps (rifle) to 1000-1300fps (service pistol), in terms of BPW, is not "comparable" IMO.


Ultimately, folks base selection off what they:
1) know
2) believe
Always will. Both have varying levels of subjectivity.

TwinFourFives
01-20-2010, 19:53
Most pistol rounds dont cause enough damage. a .45 that passes completely through someone won't do as much damage as a 30-06, even though the 45 is larger.

If you read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout#Weaponry_and_injuries

You'll see Platt and Matix were both shot multiple times in the head and neck with 38 specials, none of those hits stopped the incident. Meanwhile Platt was using a .223 and fbi were getting hit in the arms and such and still suffering fight stopping wounds. One of them got hit in the neck, no fragmenting or yawing the bullet didnt touch the spine or arteries, but the shot still paralyzed him for the duration of the fight.

glock20c10mm
01-20-2010, 22:23
IMO, you are asking a, "Does BPW exist in service calibers?" question, then subsequenly answering yes. You either think it does or you don't. You appear to think it does. That's opinion.
It's not opinion. It has been measured with a high speed pressure transducer from distant locations from the impact area of the subject.

The real question is whether BPW exists in service calibers.
No, again, it's been measured and will always be able to be measured.

fredj338
01-20-2010, 22:23
You'll see Platt and Matix were both shot multiple times in the head and neck with 38 specials, none of those hits stopped the incident
Actually not true. They were hit multiple times in the body, mostly 9mm & 38sp. The headshots by Morales w/ his 38sp finished the fight. Research it further.

glock20c10mm
01-20-2010, 22:28
If you read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout#Weaponry_and_injuries

You'll see Platt and Matix were both shot multiple times in the head and neck with 38 specials, none of those hits stopped the incident. Meanwhile Platt was using a .223 and fbi were getting hit in the arms and such and still suffering fight stopping wounds. One of them got hit in the neck, no fragmenting or yawing the bullet didnt touch the spine or arteries, but the shot still paralyzed him for the duration of the fight.
Did you know some 10mm loads can produce just as much BPW as some 223 FMJ loads (not downloaded 223s either)?

As for the officers that got hit in the arms and such, if they quit fighting immediately they chose to quit.

thegriz18
01-21-2010, 00:27
If our bodies are mostly (~97%) water (tissue), then I don't see how BPW couldn't exist. When you throw a rock in a pond it makes ripples. I don't see how body tissue could be any different.

dosei
01-21-2010, 08:27
I never said BPW did not exist, it does. But the simple fact that a pressure wave is induced does not equate out to any level of trauma unless the pressure wave is sufficiently intense. Typical SD handgun calibers cannot induce a sufficiently intense pressure waves in a full grown human to impart trauma. Is velocity important? Yes, because higher velocities translate to more penetration and more reliable expansion of expanding bullets.

The existence of a BPW does not mean there is any BPW trauma.

Pressure waves are constantly traveling thru our bodies.

Angry Fist
01-21-2010, 13:02
Speed Kills, at least for handguns, anyway. What is the difference between hydrostatic shock and BPW? How about small caliber 9mm x 25mm Dillon? It can push a 90 grain bullet upwards of 2000 FPS, but I choose to stay with 10mm caliber instead. Still get great speed (~1300 FPS) and with double the bullet weight and slightly larger diameters. Who wants to carry a rifle for SD anyway if you are not being paid or ordered to do so? My $.02 ain't worth it, so I'm gunna have to charge ya'll a quarter!

dosei
01-21-2010, 13:36
Speed Kills, at least for handguns, anyway.

:rofl:

Here you go then...
http://www.rbcd.net/Personal%20Defense-%20Ammo.htm

:animlol:

Angry Fist
01-21-2010, 14:24
:rofl:

Here you go then...
http://www.rbcd.net/Personal%20Defense-%20Ammo.htm

:animlol:

DAMN!!! Now that's FAST!! Who shoots that stuff? What about penetration and fragmentation?

Angry Fist
01-21-2010, 14:25
Could I make Major shooting this through a .25?:rofl:

dosei
01-21-2010, 15:29
Could I make Major shooting this through a .25?:rofl:

Not a chance...actually it gets lower power factor scores.

Example:
RBCD 45acp
90 grain bullet at 2036 fps Muzzle Velocity = 183240 Power Factor
(90 x 2036 = 183240)

American Eagle 45acp
230 grain bullet at 890 fps Muzzle Velocity = 204700 Power Factor
(230 x 890 = 204700)

Angry Fist
01-21-2010, 16:25
I always wondered what the power factor equation was...thanks. BTW, would you carry ammo that light of weight? I bought DT 135gr 10mm, but I think I'm gunna move up to the 165+ DT, cuz with the data on that ultra-lightweight stuff, and seeing how bad DT 135 frags out, I think im gunna pass, but thanx anyway:cheers:

dosei
01-21-2010, 16:43
I always wondered what the power factor equation was...thanks. BTW, would you carry ammo that light of weight? I bought DT 135gr 10mm, but I think I'm gunna move up to the 165+ DT, cuz with the data on that ultra-lightweight stuff, and seeing how bad DT 135 frags out, I think im gunna pass, but thanx anyway:cheers:

No I do NOT and would NOT!!!

I am absolutely not someone that agrees with the "speed is everything and most important factor even at the expense of size and/or weight" camp. I'm a supporter of the "Big & Heavy & Fast (in that order)" camp. I carry 45acp, 185 grain DPX bullet loaded to +P from CorBon...which is the heaviest DPX bullet for 45acp. I like the DPX because it has performed exceptionally well in tests, combining deep penetration with excellent expansion. It is specifically design to not fragment at all. And it is lead-free.

TwinFourFives
01-21-2010, 17:25
Actually not true. They were hit multiple times in the body, mostly 9mm & 38sp. The headshots by Morales w/ his 38sp finished the fight. Research it further.
The stuff in italics is pasted from the wiki page:

Platt then fired at agents McNeill and Edmundo Mireles across the street. Mireles was hit in the left forearm, creating a severe wound.<sup id="cite_ref-EFOIA_1-2" class="reference">[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-EFOIA-1)</sup> Platt then pulled back from the window, giving Matix opportunity to fire. Due to collision damage, Matix could only open his door partially, and fired one shotgun round at Grogan and Dove, striking their vehicle. Matix was then shot in the right forearm, probably by Grogan.<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference">[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-3)</sup> McNeill returned fire with six shots from his revolver, hitting Matix with two rounds in the head and neck. Matix was apparently knocked unconscious by the hits and fired no more rounds.<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference">[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-4)</sup> McNeill was then shot in the hand, and due to his wound and blood in his revolver's chambers, could not reload.<sup id="cite_ref-EFOIA_1-3" class="reference">[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-EFOIA-1)</sup>

Matix was Knocked unconcious, but that did not stop the fight because platt was still shooting. Matix got back up later and made his way back to the car.

Platt took up position by the passenger side front fender of the Cutlass. He fired a .357 Magnum revolver at agents Ronald Risner and Gilbert Orrantia, and received another wound when turning to fire at Hanlon, Dove and Grogan. The bullet, fired by Risner or Orrantia, penetrated Platt's right forearm, fractured the radius bone and exited the forearm. This wound caused Platt to drop his revolver.<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference">[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-7)</sup> It is estimated that Platt was shot again shortly afterwards, this time by Risner. The bullet penetrated Platt's right upper arm, exited below the armpit and entered his torso, stopping below his shoulder blade. The wound was not serious.<sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference">[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-8)</sup>



Platt fired one round at Risner and Orrantia's position, wounding Orrantia with shrapnel created by the bullet's passage, and two rounds at McNeill. One round hit McNeill in the neck, causing him to collapse and leaving him paralyzed for several hours.<sup id="cite_ref-9" class="reference">[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-9)</sup>


Platt attempted to start the car. Mireles drew his .357 Magnum revolver, moved parallel to the street and then directly toward Platt and Matix. Mireles fired six rounds at the suspects. The first round missed, hitting the back of the front seat. The second hit the driver's side window post and fragmented, with one small piece hitting Platt in the scalp. The third hit Matix in the face, and fragmented in two, with neither piece causing a serious wound. The fourth hit Matix in the face next to his right eye socket, travelled downward through the facial bones, into the neck, where it entered the spinal column and severed the spinal cord (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinal_cord). The fifth hit Matix in the face, penetrated the jaw bone and neck and came to rest by the spinal column.<sup id="cite_ref-16" class="reference">[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-16)</sup> Mireles reached the driver's side door, extended his revolver through the window, and fired his sixth shot at Platt. The bullet penetrated Platt's chest and bruised the spinal cord, ending the gunfight.<sup id="cite_ref-17" class="reference">[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-17)</sup>


also: Toxicology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicology) tests showed that the abilities of Platt and Matix to fight through multiple traumatic gun shot wounds and continue to battle and attempt to escape were not achieved through any chemical means. Both of their bodies were completely drug-free at the time of their deaths.<sup id="cite_ref-19" class="reference">[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fbi_miami_shootout#cite_note-19)</sup>

coal
01-21-2010, 17:34
It's not opinion. It has been measured with a high speed pressure transducer from distant locations from the impact area of the subject.

No, again, it's been measured and will always be able to be measured.
:upeyes: Come on now... I think the context is very clear in this thread, and I think you are clear as well: Does BPW have a reliable effect in service calibers?

The thread context is pretty clear to me, and was clear IMO in my full reply, of which some you omited in my quote. So, I added a bit of emphasis below to what I said above to be sure you'd not miss it the second time around:
... The "principle" then is in fact not definatively the same comparing rifle to service pistol if the "BPW" velocity window is not reached. ...

The fundamental question is not whether BPW exists at all. The real question, of which I think we're all clear, is: Do service calibers travel fast enough for BPW to have a reliable effect? The answer to that question is certainly not definative, and it appears unlikely. Me personally, I think BPW is not a proven reliable mechanism in service calibers and it's apples-to-oranges comparing to rifles.

adv
01-21-2010, 17:35
:suntan:

TwinFourFives
01-21-2010, 17:38
I think any shockwave, or temporary cavity will have some effect from the carry cartridges, 9mm, 38, 45, 40 357. I've never been shot by one, though.

Even if the temporary cavitation doesn't destroy organs like from a high powered rifle, i'm sure it would have a painfull effect. If ones lungs or what not get moved out of place very quickly and settle back down, it will probably hurt like heck.

DocKWL
01-21-2010, 18:53
The term "ballistic pressure wave" was coined by a self-admitted amatuer/crackpot and has no place in a serious discussion of wound ballistics. Handgun bullets that generate approximately less than 1000 ft-lbs of KE only wound via the direct crush of the passage of the bullet. Barring a psychological response, this is fairly conclusive.

Velocity is a <VERY>good thing. Unfortunately, enough velocity can not be generated from any of the "service calibers" that will allow for relaible wounding via the TC created by a projectile's passage alone and certainly will not create magical, mythical "ballistic pressure waves".

Ljay
01-21-2010, 19:14
About the time when most police were carrying a 38S&W or 38 Special
Henry Ford said You can have a model T in any color you want as long as its Black,,,, OH how times have changed,,




Please carry on,:popcorn:

thegriz18
01-21-2010, 21:10
The term "ballistic pressure wave" was coined by a self-admitted amatuer/crackpot and has no place in a serious discussion of wound ballistics. Handgun bullets that generate approximately less than 1000 ft-lbs of KE only wound via the direct crush of the passage of the bullet. Barring a psychological response, this is fairly conclusive.

Velocity is a <VERY>good thing. Unfortunately, enough velocity can not be generated from any of the "service calibers" that will allow for relaible wounding via the TC created by a projectile's passage alone and certainly will not create magical, mythical "ballistic pressure waves".

OK, I'm not picking on this one post, but in general the conclusion I can draw from the crowd that either says BPW does not exist, or thinks that handgun velocities aren't high enough to cause BPW, and bullets only wound from direct crush, is that we should all use FMJ bullets for SD. If a bullet's only wounding mechanism is direct crush, then why fol around with an extra .1-.15 inches of diameter, sacrificing greatly needed penetration, because we want to crush as much as possible. Seems to me that if BPW has no effect at all in handguns we should all replace our JHP ammo with FMJ because penetration is the number one most important factor to direct crush, or any wounding in general. If the bullet doesn't reach vitals it probably won't make a stopping wound. So let's not mess around with shooting through doors or glass, or arms with JHP's, cut the crap, and carry FMJ. As to over penetration, well, I think it's paranoia. Let's worry about hitting our target first, then worry about over penetration. Besides, a service caliber handgun bullet traveling through a human body will probably loose so much velocity that it isn't lethal for very long after it exits, if it exits.
I guess all this crap about HST's and Ranger T's and DPX is just that, crap. :whistling:

coal
01-21-2010, 22:07
OK, I'm not picking on this one post, but in general the conclusion I can draw from the crowd that either says BPW does not exist, or thinks that handgun velocities aren't high enough to cause BPW, and bullets only wound from direct crush, is that we should all use FMJ bullets for SD. If a bullet's only wounding mechanism is direct crush, then why fol around with an extra .1-.15 inches of diameter, sacrificing greatly needed penetration, because we want to crush as much as possible. Seems to me that if BPW has no effect at all in handguns we should all replace our JHP ammo with FMJ because penetration is the number one most important factor to direct crush, or any wounding in general. If the bullet doesn't reach vitals it probably won't make a stopping wound. So let's not mess around with shooting through doors or glass, or arms with JHP's, cut the crap, and carry FMJ. As to over penetration, well, I think it's paranoia. Let's worry about hitting our target first, then worry about over penetration. Besides, a service caliber handgun bullet traveling through a human body will probably loose so much velocity that it isn't lethal for very long after it exits, if it exits.
I guess all this crap about HST's and Ranger T's and DPX is just that, crap. :whistling:

:dunno:I assume some things are obvious, but obviosuly not.

The answer to your question above (i.e. why HP ammo) is that:
- Critical tissues lies within a "window" in the human body. Call it ~12", ~13", <14", <16" ... whatever, it's a limited "window": Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo (http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm). Pentration beyond that "window", or that exist the body, both FAR more common with FMJ, is meaningless.

Also:
- The difference in expanded diameter with modern HP is typically 0.3+", and even greater when you consider expanded surface area: Load Data (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=868400) and Caliber Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11129015). And, surface area is what really matters relative to expansion.

Penetration beyond that "window", or that exits the body, is not "crushing" critical tissue. For service calibers, all that matters is what's crushed/destroyed within that critical tissue "window", and how critcal that tissue is.

Modern HP offers reliable expansion and reliable penetration. A .355" object that expands to 0.65+" and passes through 12" of tissue will be more likely to effect reliable incapacitation than an identical 12" path of a .355" object. There are no guarantees, but that concept is pretty simple.

thegriz18
01-21-2010, 22:10
I was being sarcastic. But still, SHTF, like Katrina, I'm loading up with FMJ.

thegriz18
01-21-2010, 23:54
Hey, is .357 Sig more effective than 9mm?

dosei
01-22-2010, 06:34
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i170/dosei/NEW_BUTTON.jpg

glock20c10mm
01-22-2010, 11:05
I never said BPW did not exist, it does.
:thumbsup:
Typical SD handgun calibers cannot induce a sufficiently intense pressure waves in a full grown human to impart trauma.
What fact/theory are you basing this on?
The existence of a BPW does not mean there is any BPW trauma.
Who said it does? Are you not aware of the probabilities that have been worked up thus far toward the level of BPW aiding in incapacitation in under 5 seconds???

500psi = 15%
700psi = 50%
1000psi = 75%
1300psi = 90%

These probabilities are based on an unobstructed hit to the center of the chest that penetrate 10" or more for given pressure wave magnitudes. The accuracy of the predictions are estimated to be roughly 10%.

Examples of rounds that produce varying levels of the above probabilities:

9mm 124gr standard pressure HST = 501psi
9mm 127gr +P+ Winchester Ranger = 691psi
9mm 115gr +P+ Winchester Ranger = 1023psi
10mm 135gr Double Tap Ammo = 1332psi


Pressure waves are constantly traveling thru our bodies.
At +500psi??? :shocked: I don't know what you do in daily life, but in mine, no pressure wave has ever reached my brain at a magnatude of 400psi or higher. You statement is true, but holds no water in the context you tried to use it.


Good Shooting,
Craig

dosei
01-22-2010, 11:10
Are you not aware of the probabilities that have been worked up thus far toward the level of BPW aiding in incapacitation in under 5 seconds???

:rofl::animlol:

Oh...that's good...I almost wet my pants from laughing so hard...

You should do stand-up comedy at gun shows...

glock20c10mm
01-22-2010, 11:16
:Do service calibers travel fast enough for BPW to have a reliable effect? The answer to that question is certainly not definative, and it appears unlikely.
A good amount of scientific study including and beyond Dr. Courtney's work show the "unlikely" would definately be a poor choice of wording in general on your part.

glock20c10mm
01-22-2010, 11:19
:rofl::animlol:

Oh...that's good...I almost wet my pants from laughing so hard...

You should do stand-up comedy at gun shows...
Somehow I'm not surprised you have no answer back to my post. I guess you'ld have to have knowledge on the subject to speak intelligently about it. That's ok, you're learning. Anything else you need me to clear up for you?

I'm here to help,
Craig :wavey:

dosei
01-22-2010, 11:49
Somehow I'm not surprised you have no answer back to my post. I guess you'ld have to have knowledge on the subject to speak intelligently about it. That's ok, you're learning. Anything else you need me to clear up for you?

I'm here to help,
Craig :wavey:

Boxers have been tested, pro's can deliver punches in the 900 psi range. So for 12 rounds, two men deliver/receive hits to the body that...per your claims...should have them dropping in 5 seconds or less.

glock20c10mm
01-22-2010, 14:45
Boxers have been tested, pro's can deliver punches in the 900 psi range. So for 12 rounds, two men deliver/receive hits to the body that...per your claims...should have them dropping in 5 seconds or less.
I guess you missed the following in post #52 where I said; These probabilities are based on an unobstructed hit to the center of the chest that penetrate 10" or more for given pressure wave magnitudes. The accuracy of the predictions are estimated to be roughly 10%.

Non penetrating blunt force hits to the outside of the human body wouldn't be expected to have them dropping in 5 seconds or less, and if it's happened, it's probably an extremely small percentage of the time (like less than 1%).

Anything else?


Craig

glock20c10mm
01-22-2010, 14:54
The term "ballistic pressure wave" was coined by a self-admitted amatuer/crackpot and has no place in a serious discussion of wound ballistics.
:upeyes:

Handgun bullets that generate approximately less than 1000 ft-lbs of KE only wound via the direct crush of the passage of the bullet. Barring a psychological response, this is fairly conclusive.
Where are you getting the 1000 ft-lbs number from?

Velocity is a <VERY>good thing. Unfortunately, enough velocity can not be generated from any of the "service calibers" that will allow for relaible wounding via the TC created by a projectile's passage alone and certainly will not create magical, mythical "ballistic pressure waves".
TCs are only indirectly related to peak ballistic pressure wave. You can't have one without the other, but that's about the closest they relate.

Besides that velocity is only part of the tail that can lead to a higher peak ballistic pressure wave. There are rounds at lower velocities than others that produce a higher PBPW than some of the faster ones.

dosei
01-22-2010, 15:30
I guess you missed the following in post #52 where I said; These probabilities are based on an unobstructed hit to the center of the chest that penetrate 10" or more for given pressure wave magnitudes. The accuracy of the predictions are estimated to be roughly 10%.

Non penetrating blunt force hits to the outside of the human body wouldn't be expected to have them dropping in 5 seconds or less, and if it's happened, it's probably an extremely small percentage of the time (like less than 1%).

Anything else?


Craig

No, I did not miss the part where you conceded to the fact that penetration is key (and still you try to dodge that fact that it is the damage caused by said penetration that drops a person, not the "pressure wave trauma"). But from the stand point of "Pressure Wave Trauma", that number is completely irrelevant. I'm 6' tall & weigh 200 lbs...and I'm 10", front to back (grin...that's right, I'm a full 10" thick...☺). So the emanation point of the "pressure wave" per your data would be the front or back of a person...much like the boxing example. The surface of the body is also the part most susceptible to such trauma, since it is covered with sensitive nerve endings that would carry the "traumatic pulse" of the impact to the brain and shut it down (like stun grenades...although, IMHO, it is the "pressure wave" damaging the ear drum and disrupting the fluid in the inner ear that is the primary incapacitator). The body is not designed to notice or react to internal pressure waves. Not to mention the fact that 5 seconds is an unacceptably slow incapacitation time for SD purposes. I've dumped a full magazine into their chest cavity by then and their heart now resembles road kill...that "incapacitating pressure wave" is about as useful as teets on a boar.

glock20c10mm
01-23-2010, 02:51
No, I did not miss the part where you conceded to the fact that penetration is key (and still you try to dodge that fact that it is the damage caused by said penetration that drops a person, not the "pressure wave trauma").
Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I don't know if we're all the way there yet in terms of understanding where the other is coming from but we're definately getting close.

I'm not positive, but I think you're misunderstanding what I meant by penetration depth being an important factor directly in terms of the peak ballistic pressure wave magnatude.

If I'm understanding you correctly (correct me if I'm wrong) you're refering to penetration depth (permanent crush cavity) and PBPW (psi of PBPW) as two separate entities toward incapacitation (reguardless if you believe a BPW can incapacitate at all), and they are.

The point I was trying to make is that the PBPW must occure as close to the center of the thoratic cavity as possible to expect the probabilities I listed in an above post. If a bullet only penetrates, lets say 7", the PBPW may happen too early in the wound track to expect the effect of PBPW to work in incapacitating a BG in less than 5 seconds (whether you believe it's possible or not is beside the point here).

Then, on top of that, yes, whatever the penetration depth was, is a permanent crush cavity that does incapacitate at some point, but not forcingly till after a minimum of ~ 15 seconds, and more likely ~ 30 seconds to a minute or more when oxygen loss through blood loss occures to enough of an extent to render the BG harmless.

With that said, is it now obvious to you I wasn't dodging anything, but that we didn't fully understand where the other was coming from in what we were thinking we needed to get across? I certainly am well aware the permanent crush cavity, left untreated through simple blood loss or vital organ impairment, will usually at some point incapacitate a BG.

Again, the idea behind BPW is to incapacitate in under 5 seconds. Permanent crush cavities by themselves, except when disrupting the CNS, will never incapacitate in less than 5 seconds no matter how many holes you shoot into the BG.

NOW, the BG may choose by his own free will to stop fighting, BUT until oxygen loss drops enough through blood loss, he doesn't have to, no matter if you've completely shredded his heart or lungs or whatever, as it takes 15 seconds or more (the vast majority of the time, more) for the brain to use up the oxygen it already had from the time you put the first hole in him.

I personally choose to choose an SD round that has a fair capability of incapacitating the BG in less than 5 seconds with the first shot, assuming good shot placement (thoratic cavity), with the chances going up as I put more rounds into the BG IF POSSIBLE.

Do you realize how many BGs have been shot in the chest with neither the lungs or heart being hit, sometimes even after multiple shots? You can practice for excellent shot placement all day long, but at the end of the day there is no guarantee a COM hit will result in either the heart or lungs being taken out.
But from the stand point of "Pressure Wave Trauma", that number is completely irrelevant. I'm 6' tall & weigh 200 lbs...and I'm 10", front to back (grin...that's right, I'm a full 10" thick...☺). So the emanation point of the "pressure wave" per your data would be the front or back of a person...much like the boxing example.
No. With JHP handgun bullets, the PEAK ballistic pressure wave will never happen at the front or back, it will happen somewhere in the middle when retarding forces of the body on the bullet are greatest, which is after the JHP bullet expands (after entry) but before it comes to a stop if it does come to a stop, where most energy will already have been lost in relation to psi of the ballistic pressure wave.
The surface of the body is also the part most susceptible to such trauma, since it is covered with sensitive nerve endings that would carry the "traumatic pulse" of the impact to the brain and shut it down (like stun grenades...although, IMHO, it is the "pressure wave" damaging the ear drum and disrupting the fluid in the inner ear that is the primary incapacitator).
No. We're not refering to a "traumatic pulse". We are refering to a pressure wave based on a ballistic source occuring within a human body. I question where you got the term "traumatic pulse" from? Did you make it up, or was it used in some literature you read or were told about? The stun grenades I have no comment on.
The body is not designed to notice or react to internal pressure waves.
Really??? Well I guess concussions aren't possible then.
Not to mention the fact that 5 seconds is an unacceptably slow incapacitation time for SD purposes.
Really??? I hope for your sake you either take out the BGs CNS, or, he chooses to quit fighting, because if not, you're in for a big surprise!!! Is less than 5 seconds not a whole lot better than 15 seconds up to minutes?
I've dumped a full magazine into their chest cavity by then and their heart now resembles road kill...
I'll take that as sarcasm for now.
that "incapacitating pressure wave" is about as useful as teets on a boar.
If I wasn't aware of what you aren't in relation to Dr. Courtney's theory of BPW, I would think the same thing!!!


Good Shooting,
Craig :grouphug:

TwinFourFives
01-23-2010, 12:51
OK, I'm not picking on this one post, but in general the conclusion I can draw from the crowd that either says BPW does not exist, or thinks that handgun velocities aren't high enough to cause BPW, and bullets only wound from direct crush, is that we should all use FMJ bullets for SD. If a bullet's only wounding mechanism is direct crush, then why fol around with an extra .1-.15 inches of diameter, sacrificing greatly needed penetration, because we want to crush as much as possible. Seems to me that if BPW has no effect at all in handguns we should all replace our JHP ammo with FMJ because penetration is the number one most important factor to direct crush, or any wounding in general. If the bullet doesn't reach vitals it probably won't make a stopping wound. So let's not mess around with shooting through doors or glass, or arms with JHP's, cut the crap, and carry FMJ. As to over penetration, well, I think it's paranoia. Let's worry about hitting our target first, then worry about over penetration. Besides, a service caliber handgun bullet traveling through a human body will probably loose so much velocity that it isn't lethal for very long after it exits, if it exits.
I guess all this crap about HST's and Ranger T's and DPX is just that, crap. :whistling:



The way i see it, fmj would be the superior choice for stopping the fight instantly. They have a better chance of hitting the central nervous system because they penetrate farther. However, with the hollow points, the organs are more likely to be damaged or destroyed because of the depression in the bullet nose. If you have a fmj bullet it might push stuff out of the way as it travels, but the little indention on HPs can cut a good path, especially if they expand some. That would give the round more resistance on its way to a CNS hit though, if it expanded.

I do think over penetration is hyped. If there's someone you dont want to shoot standing right behind the target, using a jhp isn't a smart way to justify the shot. It is irresponsible to assume the jhp wont go through the person and hit someone standing right behind them.

glock20c10mm
01-23-2010, 17:37
The way i see it, fmj would be the superior choice for stopping the fight instantly. They have a better chance of hitting the central nervous system because they penetrate farther. However, with the hollow points, the organs are more likely to be damaged or destroyed because of the depression in the bullet nose. If you have a fmj bullet it might push stuff out of the way as it travels, but the little indention on HPs can cut a good path, especially if they expand some. That would give the round more resistance on its way to a CNS hit though, if it expanded.

I do think over penetration is hyped. If there's someone you dont want to shoot standing right behind the target, using a jhp isn't a smart way to justify the shot. It is irresponsible to assume the jhp wont go through the person and hit someone standing right behind them.
:agree:

Other inherent problems with FMJ is that they commonly don't penetrate in a straight line through an actual human body. They like to veer off course and follow the path of least resistance, and more easily ricochet off bone. So even if you shot is dead center on a straight on hit at the BG perfectly lined up for the spine, doesn't mean you'll hit it anyway. Now you add a moving target to the equation, and hoping to hit that 1.5" or so wide spine starts looking really bleak unless you simply get lucky. :shocked:

Yeah, think I'll stick with JHP too! :thumbsup:

P99ikp5
01-23-2010, 18:51
Speed matters! everybody agrees a .357 magnum 125 gr JHP GD @ 1335 fps is an excellent defensive load!
Then when they are going to choose between two 9mm loads: a 147 gr jhp GD @ 982 fps and a 127 gr +p+ Win Ranger @ 1230 fps, they say they prefer the 147 gr load... The 127 gr load is only 100 fps shy of the magnum load but the 147 gr load is 350 fps away from the magnun load... and all of them are exactly the same caliber (diameter)...

thegriz18
01-24-2010, 16:19
Speed matters! everybody agrees a .357 magnum 125 gr JHP GD @ 1335 fps is an excellent defensive load!
Then when they are going to choose between two 9mm loads: a 147 gr jhp GD @ 982 fps and a 127 gr +p+ Win Ranger @ 1230 fps, they say they prefer the 147 gr load... The 127 gr load is only 100 fps shy of the magnum load but the 147 gr load is 350 fps away from the magnun load... and all of them are exactly the same caliber (diameter)...

Shhh, that makes sense......:rofl:

DocKWL
01-24-2010, 16:29
Shhh, that makes sense......:rofl:

What makes sense? If the .357 Magnum is that good, why isn't everyone using it? If the 357 SIG was designed to mimic the Magnum's performance, why is the .40 S&W the runaway favorite?

TwinFourFives
01-24-2010, 17:44
40 smith and wesson is a versatile caliber, for the platform it can be used in. Common loads can be light and fast in the 9mm realm, or slower and heavier such in the 45 acp realm, but you can still hold 15 rounds of 180 grain .4 slugs in the common platforms. There are some dandy solid lead 200+ grain loads for .40 that will hit fast and be effective against four legged predators and hogs. I do not think all the guns are made to handle these loads reliably.

unit1069
01-24-2010, 17:52
What makes sense? If the .357 Magnum is that good, why isn't everyone using it? If the 357 SIG was designed to mimic the Magnum's performance, why is the .40 S&W the runaway favorite?

Just a guess here, but maybe the FBI got carried away with the downloaded 10mm and jumped at the .40S&W before the .357sig was created.

I think the .357sig is on a positive uptrend with both LEO and the civilian population since the caliber's favorable comparison to the legendary 125-grain .357 Magnum round is proving out.

Now the LEO/civilian population have the .357sig and the .40S&W plus the 10mm the FBI originally wanted. Choice is good.

unit1069
01-24-2010, 17:54
40 smith and wesson is a versatile caliber, for the platform it can be used in. Common loads can be light and fast in the 9mm realm, or slower and heavier such in the 45 acp realm, but you can still hold 15 rounds of 180 grain .4 slugs in the common platforms. There are some dandy solid lead 200+ grain loads for .40 that will hit fast and be effective against four legged predators and hogs. I do not think all the guns are made to handle these loads reliably.

Right, and a lot of .40S&W pistols can easily convert to .357sig, which provides comparable ballistics to the legendary .357 Magnum round but with double capacity.

Like I say, choice is good.

DocKWL
01-24-2010, 18:01
Just a guess here, but maybe the FBI got carried away with the downloaded 10mm and jumped at the .40S&W before the .357sig was created.

I think the .357sig is on a positive uptrend with both LEO and the civilian population since the caliber's favorable comparison to the legendary 125-grain .357 Magnum round is proving out.

Now the LEO/civilian population have the .357sig and the .40S&W plus the 10mm the FBI originally wanted. Choice is good.

All you need now are the facts to support your statement.

The FBI didn't "jump" into anything. They got the performance they were seeking with the .40 S&W. Why would they choose the high velocity SIG round when velocity is what they were trending away from?

481
01-24-2010, 18:07
All you need now are the facts to support your statement.


:animlol:

This has gotta be one of the greatest one liners that I've ever read. What makes it even funnier is that it is true.

thegriz18
01-24-2010, 18:12
All you need now are the facts to support your statement.

The FBI didn't "jump" into anything. They got the performance they were seeking with the .40 S&W. Why would they choose the high velocity SIG round when velocity is what they were trending away from?

Because the Sig round didn't exist yet! Besides, the above post is correct. People rave about 125 grain .357 Magnum, and then choose 147 grain 9mm, which makes zero sense. and the FBI wasn't trending away from velocity. They wanted heavy and fast. The reason we have the 40 S&W is due to the fact that not many agents could control full power 10mm loads in rapid fire. From full power 10mm we got 10mm lite, then S&W figured out they could take the 10mm lite load, shorten the case, make it fit in 9mm sized weapons and wham, we now have the 40 S&W. So the FBI really didn't get the performance they wanted. They wanted full power 10mm. They didn't get it due to human ability factors. Full power 10mm loads do more damage in target than the same exact bullet weight and design in 40 S&W.

thegriz18
01-24-2010, 18:13
All you need now are the facts to support your statement.

The FBI didn't "jump" into anything. They got the performance they were seeking with the .40 S&W. Why would they choose the high velocity SIG round when velocity is what they were trending away from?

If I am not mistaken, a number of LEA's have gone to .357 Sig. I believe TX DPS, NJSP, NMSP, Dallas Police just to name a few. I'm sure there are others.

DocKWL
01-24-2010, 19:23
Because the Sig round didn't exist yet! Besides, the above post is correct. People rave about 125 grain .357 Magnum, and then choose 147 grain 9mm, which makes zero sense. and the FBI wasn't trending away from velocity. They wanted heavy and fast. The reason we have the 40 S&W is due to the fact that not many agents could control full power 10mm loads in rapid fire. From full power 10mm we got 10mm lite, then S&W figured out they could take the 10mm lite load, shorten the case, make it fit in 9mm sized weapons and wham, we now have the 40 S&W. So the FBI really didn't get the performance they wanted. They wanted full power 10mm. They didn't get it due to human ability factors. Full power 10mm loads to more damage in target than the same exact bullet weight and design in 40 S&W.

Your facts are skewed and charged by emotion. Read the link provided objectively.

READ THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf) (PDF file)

It will also serve you well to read and understand THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm).

DocKWL
01-24-2010, 19:26
If I am not mistaken, a number of LEA's have gone to .357 Sig. I believe TX DPS, NJSP, NMSP, Dallas Police just to name a few. I'm sure there are others.

Yesterday's news. Please cite new police organizations (say within the last two years), procurements, and sales figures.

The LEA's you cite adopted the caliber years ago.

thegriz18
01-24-2010, 19:39
That link you posted to Firearms Tactical is the test results, not the history of the 10mm. The link says nothing about the evolution of the 10mm, which is what I am talking about. Do some research and look it up. Read this link,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10mm_Auto which has all the cites in it. The 10mm lite load, which was "best" was only issued because the FBI Firearms Training Unit deemed it uncontrollable for average agents. The 10mm Lite, was NOT what the FBI wanted.

And that second link is from 1989. Dude, its the year 2010 a lot of things have changed since then.

unit1069
01-24-2010, 21:31
All you need now are the facts to support your statement.

The FBI didn't "jump" into anything. They got the performance they were seeking with the .40 S&W. Why would they choose the high velocity SIG round when velocity is what they were trending away from?

Well, Doc,

You're great at telling people to read dead-end links. However, the fact is (thanks for providing at least one easily established fact in your non-sequitur link) that the .40S&W was first issued in July 1990.

Now will you please tell everyone when the .357sig was first developed or do you want me to tell them? The facts are exactly as I presented them, and now we'll probably see another thread close because you've run up against a question you won't answer.

unit1069
01-24-2010, 21:38
Your facts are skewed and charged by emotion. Read the link provided objectively.

READ THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf) (PDF file)

It will also serve you well to read and understand THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm).

Doc,

It's become all too obvious that when you can't rely on facts you resort to asking people to read non-sequitur links that do nothing to support your unsubstantiated claims.

When are you ever going to actually back up your statements without reaching for deflection tactics?

conpro
01-24-2010, 22:17
Sometimes people like to down play the 9mm round. I subscribed to this thinking for a long time. While a .45 is indeed a great personal defense round, I think the 9mm is a great round. The last thing that convinced me of this is the fact that Heaven forbid, we get into a self defense situation that requires the use of a handgun, you are going to put 2 rounds in your target regardless of caliber. Now, that just took you down to 6 or 7 rounds left in the .45 and the G19 still has 14.
I think alot of it boils down to training. Find a gun that fits your hand and shoot the snot out of it 45,9mm,40

thegriz18
01-24-2010, 23:01
Doc,

It's become all too obvious that when you can't rely on facts you resort to asking people to read non-sequitur links that do nothing to support your unsubstantiated claims.

When are you ever going to actually back up your statements without reaching for deflection tactics?

+1000 :goodpost:

thegriz18
01-24-2010, 23:09
10mm evolution:
Full power 10mm > 10mm Lite > 40 S&W > 357 SIG, and so goes the list of rounds that are variations of the original 10mm cartridge in some war. And if I am not mistaken, the US Secret Service and US Air Marshals use .357 SIG. Hmm those agencies normally need to put people down/stop them in a hurry.

I think that these agencies are on to something. Light, fast bullets that penetrate and expand. That is why I carry fast 165 grain loads in my G23. Not to mention in my own rudimentary testing it kicked 180 grain's butt. However, I would like to test some of the newer Ranger 180's that are now loaded to 1025fps. Now if someone would make a 135 or 140 grain bonded round that isn't as long as an XPB so it can move at 1350fps... That would be interesting to try out.

DocKWL
01-25-2010, 05:13
Well, Doc,

You're great at telling people to read dead-end links. However, the fact is (thanks for providing at least one easily established fact in your non-sequitur link) that the .40S&W was first issued in July 1990.

Now will you please tell everyone when the .357sig was first developed or do you want me to tell them? The facts are exactly as I presented them, and now we'll probably see another thread close because you've run up against a question you won't answer.

I apologize if you mistakenly accepted my initial response as malicious, I assure you that was not my intent. You now say:

The facts are exactly as I presented them

But in the post I responded to, you said:

Just a guess here, but maybe the FBI got carried away with the downloaded 10mm and jumped at the .40S&W before the .357sig was created.

I think the .357sig is on a positive uptrend with both LEO and the civilian population since the caliber's favorable comparison to the legendary 125-grain .357 Magnum round is proving out.

Starting off two paragraphs with, "Just a guess here" and "I think..." are hardly supporting factual information. Where are your sales figures supporting your argument that, "the .357sig is on a positive uptrend with both LEO and the civilian population..."?

It does not matter when the SIG was developed (1994). Your underlying argument was that if the SIG was available, the FBI may have selected that caliber over the .40 S&W which is simply not true.

DocKWL
01-25-2010, 05:19
Doc,

It's become all too obvious that when you can't rely on facts you resort to asking people to read non-sequitur links that do nothing to support your unsubstantiated claims.

When are you ever going to actually back up your statements without reaching for deflection tactics?

The links are PDF files written by the man directly involved explaining who, what, where, when, why and how. Unlike other people, I did not say "I think" and "just a guess here..."

DocKWL
01-25-2010, 05:25
+1000 :goodpost:

You did not read the links objectively. I doubt you read them at all.

TwinFourFives
01-25-2010, 11:18
Right, and a lot of .40S&W pistols can easily convert to .357sig, which provides comparable ballistics to the legendary .357 Magnum round but with double capacity.

Like I say, choice is good.

:D especially with glocks

thegriz18
01-25-2010, 11:38
You did not read the links objectively. I doubt you read them at all.

I read enough.

unit1069
01-25-2010, 22:09
Starting off two paragraphs with, "Just a guess here" and "I think..." are hardly supporting factual information. Where are your sales figures supporting your argument that, "the .357sig is on a positive uptrend with both LEO and the civilian population..."?

Well of course I was guessing! My response was to your post on page 3, "If the .357 Magnum was so good ... " Is it your guess that .357 Magnum was the king of manstopping handgun rounds or do you know it is? My response can only be conjecture on anyone's part because the FBI didn't have .357sig to evaluate in the late 1980s. So that part of my response is factual and will always be factual. As for issue LEO handgun calibers I recently read that .357sig now has taken overall third slot.

It does not matter when the SIG was developed (1994). Your underlying argument was that if the SIG was available, the FBI may have selected that caliber over the .40 S&W which is simply not true.

"It does not matter ... ?" Now who's the one guessing? Do you have FBI evaluations of the two calibers that show the FBI would have initially picked .40S&W over .357sig if the two had been simultaneously available for testing? Why do the US Secret Service and federal Air Marshals choose .357sig when .40S&W has been available longer than .357sig?

unit1069
01-25-2010, 22:55
Here's at least one article where a competent researcher tested .357sig and .40S&W side-by-side. The FBI rendered assistance although not their imprimatur. No doubt they believe in the author's professionalism or else they'd not have given their assistance, right, Doc?


The author said that out of the 8 testing categories of the 40 round evaluation, tests 6 and 8 are the acid tests. These two tests involve shooting at lightly clothed gelatin through automobile glass.

"With respect to performance in gelatin, all rounds from both test loads shed their jackets after penetrating the glass in tests 6 and 8. However, the .357SIG showed better penetration, going an average of 13 inches into the gelatin in test 6 as opposed to 10 inches for the .40. The Federal .357SIG also out-penetrated the Hornady .40 by one to four inches in tests 2, 4, 5 and 7.
"The maximum pressure of the .40 load was 37,400 psi, so one can expect that the .40 will be just about as hard on a gun of similar construction as the .357SIG."
http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IIIC2q8.html

It's anyone's guess which caliber the FBI would have selected had both calibers been available for testing. If anyone has something definitive that proves otherwise I look forward to reading it.

glock20c10mm
01-25-2010, 23:09
Your facts are skewed and charged by emotion. Read the link provided objectively.

READ THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf) (PDF file)

It will also serve you well to read and understand THIS (http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm).
I understand you posting the first link, as he was misinformed on why the FBI went with and later dumped the 10mm.

It's the second link I don't get? Besides that it's all good info, what specifically is it suppose to help him understand in the context of what's been discussed? Or did you simply post it out of the kindness of your heart towards further learning in general outside the scope of this thread?

Molon
01-30-2010, 21:01
Originally Posted by DocKWL http://glocktalk.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14593251#post14593251)

The term "ballistic pressure wave" was coined by a self-admitted amatuer . . .



:upeyes:




What's the matter? Does the truth hurt?

Darkangel1846
01-31-2010, 13:25
Remember you only have a handgun to give you time to get to your rifle.

glock20c10mm
01-31-2010, 14:03
What's the matter? Does the truth hurt?
Well first it would have to be true.

glock20c10mm
01-31-2010, 14:05
Remember you only have a handgun to give you time to get to your rifle.
Or in my case, the Benelli semi-auto 12ga. :supergrin:

sigcalcatrant
01-31-2010, 14:43
I always wondered what the power factor equation was...Don't forget to divide by 1000.

sigcalcatrant
01-31-2010, 14:46
[B][U] And it is lead-free.Oh, My, God! Not another "green" obama supporter? When will they learn, when the ecomy completely collapses? :supergrin:

sigcalcatrant
01-31-2010, 15:29
The reason we have the 40 S&W is due to the fact that not many agents could control full power 10mm loads in rapid fire. From full power 10mm we got 10mm lite, then S&W figured out they could take the 10mm lite load, shorten the case, make it fit in 9mm sized weapons and wham, we now have the 40 S&W. So the FBI really didn't get the performance they wanted. They wanted full power 10mm. They didn't get it due to human ability factors. Full power 10mm loads do more damage in target than the same exact bullet weight and design in 40 S&W.That's incorrect.The FBI started out with the 10mm light. They never even considered the full-power 10mm. The reason they gave up on the 10mm was because of the size of the handguns necessary to reliably feed the 10mm cartridge, not the power of the round.

Molon
01-31-2010, 15:31
The term "ballistic pressure wave" was coined by a self-admitted amatuer . . .





:upeyes:




What's the matter? Does the truth hurt?



Well first it would have to be true.





“In the field of wound ballistics, I am an enthusiastic amateur . . .”<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Michael Courtney AKA “Pasteur”<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
www.m4carbine.net (http://www.m4carbine.net/)<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
04-20-2009<o:p></o:p>

glock20c10mm
01-31-2010, 16:20
“In the field of wound ballistics, I am an enthusiastic amateur . . .”<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Michael Courtney AKA “Pasteur”<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
www.m4carbine.net (http://www.m4carbine.net/)<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
04-20-2009<o:p></o:p>
And that proves what?

Why the link and date that don't show the context?