A hard look at handgun stopping power [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : A hard look at handgun stopping power


Iceman cHucK
01-25-2010, 08:53
If you are interested in this subject a must read is the referenced article below by Chuck Taylor. If you don't know who he is, you need to find out. He heads up American Small Arms Acadamy.
Real world experience spoken in easy to understand terms. Needless to say I agree with everything he says. 45hardball gets the job done and has for almost 100 years!

www.chucktaylorasaa.com/stoppingpower.html (http://www.chucktaylorasaa.com/stoppingpower.html)

Merkavaboy
01-25-2010, 09:39
Well, I guess all those guys out there who have been shot with .45 hardball, some of them multiple times, and didn't immediately fall over dead weren't familiar with Taylor's writings from 2003.

TwinFourFives
01-25-2010, 11:50
I have a major problem with this article. To quote the very first paragraph, "
"The controversy continues: Which is the better manstopper? -- big, slow bullets or those which are small, and fast? Upon which are you willing to bet your life? -- documented history, computer simulations or limited case-study review?"



Not to sound cliche, but assuming your life will be saved by which cartridge you carry is delusional. This kind of thinking can get people unnecessarily hurt or killed. 45's are not a joke. 9mm's are not a joke. 22s are not a joke (just cheap enough to have lots of fun with).


Lets say, hypothetically that i am in a gunfight. My weapon of choice is a 1911, but my adversary has a 32 pocket pistol. Caliber won't save me from dying. If i take a round to the heart because i'm not moving and seeking cover, i'll be dead. If i stand still in the open and shots ring out, we both get hit, the fact that i have a 45 and he has a 32 doesn't magically get rid of the bullet hole in my heart. Unless i make a CNS hit, or blow his shooting hand off he'll still be able to shoot me.

People that survive gunfights are the ones who avoid getting shot. Even if you have a big caliber and make the first shot, don't count on it to stop the fight right when it impacts. This is delusional on all accounts, even with a rifle.

481
01-25-2010, 14:05
Well, I guess all those guys out there who have been shot with .45 hardball, some of them multiple times, and didn't immediately fall over dead weren't familiar with Taylor's writings from 2003.

Ahh....Chuck Taylor and his "They all fall to forty-five ball" mentality.

He's missed the boat for years by remaining stuck in the past. History can be a good teacher, but it is a lousy master as it lacks foresight. There are examples of every handgun caliber failing in some way, at some point, utilizing every bullet design.

When folks start talking in "absolutes", they are destined for a fall.

Still, I enjoy his writings and observations on his torture test of the Glock pistol design. After that, it's all noise.

He'd do well to read MacPherson.

ithaca_deerslayer
01-25-2010, 14:24
Ahh....Chuck Taylor and his "They all fall to forty-five ball" mentality.

He's missed the boat for years by remaining stuck in the past. History can be a good teacher, but it is a lousy master as it lacks foresight. There are examples of every handgun caliber failing in some way, at some point, utilizing every bullet design.

When folks start talking in "absolutes", they are destined for a fall.

Still, I enjoy his writings and observations on his torture test of the Glock pistol design. After that, it's all noise.

He'd do well to read MacPherson.

I've got one of his books. Both good and funny at the same time.

I wonder what he would have done if his 1911 failed the torture test. Would he have told us it failed?

He really, really, hates double-action pistols, 9mm, and exotic bullets :rofl:

Dexters
01-25-2010, 14:57
First indication that this isn't a good article is that he doesn't define terms such as "Man Stopper" and "effective". Nothing new in the article.

Hitting someone in the thorax or cranial cavity is better than other parts of the body. Great! I hope the BG stays still long enough for me to hit either of those targets. If not I'll be aiming at the center of mass.

"So, look at the overview before you decide what you are going to bet your life on. And remember too that regardless of your choice of weapon, caliber or bullet style, you must still get solid hits in the thorax or cranial cavity to stop your assailant with a minimum of shots fired. There is simply no substitute for marksmanship, a point that, all too often seems to be overlooked."

481
01-25-2010, 15:20
I've got one of his books. Both good and funny at the same time.

I wonder what he would have done if his 1911 failed the torture test. Would he have told us it failed?

He really, really, hates double-action pistols, 9mm, and exotic bullets :rofl:

Yeah, his perspective and stories, some a bit dated, are still good reading, so I can't totally dismiss Taylor.

If a 1911 failed his torture test, I am sure he'd manage to blame it on ol' Gaston hisself. :rofl:

Taylor started out hatin' on the Glock in 1992, but his test seems to have instilled in him a real respect for the design after all that he's put it through.

Last number I saw was the 270,000+ round mark.

While 1911s are fine guns, I doubt that they'd go as far without barrel and major parts replacement. 270,000 rounds is alot of shootin!

tjpet
01-25-2010, 15:56
Handguns are ineffective when a human body is really adrenalized.

In my own military experience the only hand-held weapon generally available to civilians that will stop a man in his tracks with one well-placed round is a shotgun with 00 buck.

A .45 will stop'em dead but only with a headshot in most cases.

82ndVet
01-25-2010, 17:08
:yawn:.....There really is no science here to discuss, or no legitimate arguments to debate here. With a properly placed shot, all calibers can kill....including a .22 in the eyeball, or a BB up a nostril. :deadhorse:

481
01-25-2010, 17:30
....or a BB up a nostril.


I am not sure that I wanna know how you came up with that one. :outtahere:



:animlol:

82ndVet
01-25-2010, 17:39
I am not sure that I wanna know how you came up with that one. :outtahere:



:animlol:
Well, as a kid, I preferred to shoot from the hip, and got lucky once or twice...just like Chuck Taylor...:laughing:

:uglylol:

thegriz18
01-25-2010, 20:40
I respect Taylor for his knowledge of how to fight. I've read one of his books and it seems that he does know how to fight with a pistol. His theory on stopping power and types of bullets, based on his personal opinion, is just that, opinion. I imagine that a great deal of those one shot stops he had with a 45 was due to good shot placement.

Jeepnik
01-25-2010, 21:33
Agree with him or not, Chuck has seen the elephant. Of the above posters I wonder how many have.

481
01-25-2010, 21:49
Agree with him or not, Chuck has seen the elephant. Of the above posters I wonder how many have.

Taylor's experience is not being questioned here. There is no doubt that Taylor has had combat experience.

His "opinion" regarding wound trauma and the advice he dispenses and how it holds up when it's exposed to light of reality is what is being discussed.

Just because he's seen combat and even shot few (or even several) folks does not make him an expert ballistician or even qualified to comment on wound trauma and incapacitation mechanisms.

kgpcr
01-25-2010, 22:22
Agree with him or not, Chuck has seen the elephant. Of the above posters I wonder how many have.

So very true. I used to get people tell me all about the M16 and how it was or was not a good weapon. Most of them never held one much less saw what they did in combat.

glock20c10mm
01-25-2010, 22:53
So very true. I used to get people tell me all about the M16 and how it was or was not a good weapon. Most of them never held one much less saw what they did in combat.
Nothing to mention on Chuck, as I agree with what all others have said in reguard to him and his "work".

As to the post above, the M16 is fine as a general firearm. It did start out life with MAJOR problems, but was fixed over time. It's the round it launches that isn't up to the task. As Dr. Fackler (trauma surgeon from the Veitnam era) will tell you, it has proved to have just as many spectacular stops as it has dismal failures to stop. Dr. Fackler also said that some 45 Auto rounds do more damage and stop more effectively on average.

glock20c10mm
01-25-2010, 22:57
He's missed the boat for years by remaining stuck in the past. History can be a good teacher, but it is a lousy master as it lacks foresight.
You think that has any bearing on how you preach against Dr. Courtney's work on Ballistic Pressure Wave? :whistling:

481
01-25-2010, 23:34
You think that has any bearing on how you preach against Dr. Courtney's work on Ballistic Pressure Wave? :whistling:

Your comment is off topic since this thread has absolutely nothing to do with BPW.

By stalking me like this and attempting to bait me into an argument with an unrelated question, it is clear that you need to re-familiarize yourself with the GT CoC and seek help.

9mm +p+
01-26-2010, 01:24
Taylor can't be taken seriously, 45 ball is not the almighty hammer of thor like he makes it out to be. It's just his misguided opinion, his just happens to get published somehow. Personally i couldn't care less what he thinks, not matter how many critters he's supposedly seen...

coal
01-26-2010, 02:40
Taylor can't be taken seriously, 45 ball is not the almighty hammer of thor like he makes it out to be. It's just his misguided opinion, his just happens to get published somehow. Personally i couldn't care less what he thinks, not matter how many critters he's supposedly seen...

Agreed. Getting press/pushished does not itself make an opinion fact. There's far more involved than the bullet.

Me, I think what matters is in this order:
1) Archer
2) Bow
3) Arrow

9mm aides the Archer in follow-up shots and gun control. 9mm fits more Arrows in a smaller Bow. Many praise the .45acp consider only the Arrow. That's short-sighted IMO.

I own 9mm and .45acp. Overall and most days, I'll take 9mm: Citizen: Caliber Acedemic? (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=934135). I like having both though.

ricklee4570
01-26-2010, 08:15
Nothing to mention on Chuck, as I agree with what all others have said in reguard to him and his "work".

As to the post above, the M16 is fine as a general firearm. It did start out life with MAJOR problems, but was fixed over time. It's the round it launches that isn't up to the task. As Dr. Fackler (trauma surgeon from the Veitnam era) will tell you, it has proved to have just as many spectacular stops as it has dismal failures to stop. Dr. Fackler also said that some 45 Auto rounds do more damage and stop more effectively on average.

I am not so sure I take everything that Fackler says as pure gospel. There are many others just as qualified who disagree with him. Many Vietnam Vets I have talked to reported excellent results with the 5.56

I think that only when you combine the thinking of all the "experts" and study all the different view-points can you come up with any kind of reasonable data. Then you end up even more confused than when you started!

automan
01-26-2010, 08:57
Last time I read anything about Chuck Taylor he was carrying a G30 as his side arm.

CanyonMan
01-26-2010, 09:55
Man I can see right now I best stay out of this one and go on outside and get to work... ;)




CanyonMan
:patriot:

Dreamaster
01-26-2010, 11:28
You guys are over-simplifying what he said about .45 ball at best, completely distorting the article at worst.

He does seem to be a "penetration" guy though... clearly he has a distaste for using frangible rounds, but I've never seen anyone on this site recommend them either.

Next to last phrase in his article:
"There is simply no substitute for marksmanship, a point that, all too often seems to be overlooked."

ithaca_deerslayer
01-26-2010, 11:46
He puts a lot of emphasis on 1 shot stops.

His criticism of 9mm is because he has data that he says shows the .45 is much better at 1 shot stops.

Yet in his own shooting with the 9mm, he got a 2nd 9mm shot off that stopped things. What if his 1st shot was a .45 and it didn't make the stop, and what if he was slower to get the 2nd shot off and things ended badly?

I have yet to see where he looks at the totality of the 9mm platform. More shots could mean more opportunities. He has sort of disregarded that possibility in the book I have from him, where he makes a big deal out of how few shots the average handgun fight lasts, thus implying that it doesn't make sense to factor in multiple shots. The problem with that is historical data is more filled with low round count platforms, from the older guns.

I don't know any of the answers. I'm just pointing out that he doesn't seem to look at the issue of the 9mm having higher capacity and lower recoil, when compared to the .45 ACP.

It's almost as if EVERYTHING I've ever read from him, reads as if he is still out to prove that the army was wrong to switch from a single action .45 to a double action 9mm.

Maybe he truly believe that was such a big errror that he doesn't want anyone to make that mistake. So he harps on it about the army, about police, and about civilians. Over and over and over again.

As if he'll never get any rest until the army adopts a single-action .45 again, and if the police follow suit, and if all civilians do the same.

BleedNOrange
01-26-2010, 14:10
Nothing to mention on Chuck, as I agree with what all others have said in reguard to him and his "work".

As to the post above, the M16 is fine as a general firearm. It did start out life with MAJOR problems, but was fixed over time. It's the round it launches that isn't up to the task. As Dr. Fackler (trauma surgeon from the Veitnam era) will tell you, it has proved to have just as many spectacular stops as it has dismal failures to stop. Dr. Fackler also said that some 45 Auto rounds do more damage and stop more effectively on average.
You talk about how weak the 5.56x45mm is but yet you preach that shock wave crap where a pistol round can cause brain damage with a COM hit. Man, youre killing me here.:rofl:

BleedNOrange
01-26-2010, 14:12
Your comment is off topic since this thread has absolutely nothing to do with BPW.

By stalking me like this and attempting to bait me into an argument with an unrelated question, it is clear that you need to re-familiarize yourself with the GT CoC and seek help.
Glock 2010mm can't resist spouting off that garbage any chance he gets.

Glolt20-91
01-26-2010, 15:45
Nothing to mention on Chuck, as I agree with what all others have said in reguard to him and his "work".

As to the post above, the M16 is fine as a general firearm. It did start out life with MAJOR problems, but was fixed over time. It's the round it launches that isn't up to the task. As Dr. Fackler (trauma surgeon from the Veitnam era) will tell you, it has proved to have just as many spectacular stops as it has dismal failures to stop. Dr. Fackler also said that some 45 Auto rounds do more damage and stop more effectively on average.

Stoner's design was okay, it was Department of Defense secretary McNamara with his no experience bean counters who decided not to chrome line the bore, nor issue cleaning kits in order to save a couple of bucks. As far as the 5.56 round not being up to the task, that's simply BS. Fully automatic three shot bursts and move on to the next target, just like WWII vets did with the Thompson sub-machine gun.

Bob :cowboy:

Glolt20-91
01-26-2010, 15:49
You think that has any bearing on how you preach against Dr. Courtney's work on Ballistic Pressure Wave? :whistling:

How on earth does this statement relate to this discussion? :upeyes:

Bob :cowboy:

bfg1971
01-26-2010, 17:47
About 20 yrs ago I took Taylor as gospel today I realize that he has an agenda much like everyone else. As to which side of the debate I fall on heavy and slow or light and fast see my sig line.

Zombie Steve
01-26-2010, 18:06
I'm not commenting on this one other than to say I found this odd:

I've examined the same data as Cooper and been in eight handgun fights myself

And because in five of the seven pistol fights in which I have been a participant, I used a .45 with ball ammo -- and it worked.



:dunno:

internal
01-26-2010, 18:26
I think I feel dumber after reading that.

uz2bUSMC
01-26-2010, 20:12
Ahh....Chuck Taylor and his "They all fall to forty-five ball" mentality.

He's missed the boat for years by remaining stuck in the past. History can be a good teacher, but it is a lousy master as it lacks foresight. There are examples of every handgun caliber failing in some way, at some point, utilizing every bullet design.

When folks start talking in "absolutes", they are destined for a fall.

Still, I enjoy his writings and observations on his torture test of the Glock pistol design. After that, it's all noise.

He'd do well to read MacPherson.

I actually agree with you here, for the most part... hurts to the core. Fackler and MacPherson are outdated too. IWBA=old and defunct.

uz2bUSMC
01-26-2010, 20:25
You talk about how weak the 5.56x45mm is but yet you preach that shock wave crap where a pistol round can cause brain damage with a COM hit. Man, youre killing me here.:rofl:



You probably can't put this into perspective can you? What does "weak" mean? Pistols and rifles alike can cause TBI, but I guess you don't have an idea of how this happens...do you? I'd like to hear you explain, if you would.

uz2bUSMC
01-26-2010, 20:29
How on earth does this statement relate to this discussion? :upeyes:

Bob :cowboy:

By him refferring to the old (Chuck) publishings as outdated but new publihings are discounted, somehow(Dr. C) ...

MTS532
01-26-2010, 21:26
If you are interested in this subject a must read is the referenced article below by Chuck Taylor. If you don't know who he is, you need to find out. He heads up American Small Arms Acadamy.
Real world experience spoken in easy to understand terms. Needless to say I agree with everything he says. 45hardball gets the job done and has for almost 100 years!

It's hard to argue with a man's own personal experiences. Naturally, he will likely stick to what has worked for him in the past.

But as vaunted as the .45 ball is, not everybody has been stopped as quickly as were Chuck's adversaries. They don't always fall to hardball. The .45 hasn't always "gotten the job done for the last 100 years." Sometimes these assumptions are built on nothing but hyperbole and anecdotal evidence.

When subjected to objective testing, sometimes the .45 works as advertised, sometimes it fails, just like the rest of the common service calibers (9mm; .357 Sig; .40 S&W; 10mm or .45 ACP/GAP). If .45 hardball was as efficient as it is sometimes built up to be, there would be no point in continuing the quest for a better manstopper.

The .45 has a great legacy behind it, but I would not put any more faith in it than a solid hit in the same place with one of the other calibers mentioned.

481
01-26-2010, 21:28
I actually agree with you here, for the most part... hurts to the core. Fackler and MacPherson are outdated too. IWBA=old and defunct.

U-

Honestly, man, when you do things like this...

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1175104

...it is hard to take you seriously.

My guess is that you are probably a nice guy who enjoys a good debate about things that you are really passionate about (like discussions about what constitutes the best in terminal ballistic performance), but you take dissenting opinions a little too personally.

It's just a discussion, man. Why waste perfectly good hate on something so inconsequential as the "caliber wars" and Fackler vs. whomever? :supergrin:

Nothing personal here. :dunno:

uz2bUSMC
01-26-2010, 21:47
U-

Honestly, man, when you do things like this...

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1175104

...it is hard to take you seriously.

My guess is that you are probably a nice guy who enjoys a good debate about things that you are really passionate about (like discussions about what constitutes the best in terminal ballistic performance), but you take dissenting opinions a little too personally.

It's just a discussion, man. Why waste perfectly good hate on something so inconsequential as the "caliber wars" and Fackler vs. whomever? :supergrin:

Nothing personal here. :dunno:

Cause it's entertaining and I don't care who takes me seriously, or who likes me (use ignore feature). And no I don't take them personally... most who make them I actually take as a joke. There's people on here who are on the other side of the fence but I have respect for... most I don't. And stop talkin' nice, it's weird.

We spend time on these calibers wars for the same reasons, no other reason to freakin' be in CC.

481
01-26-2010, 21:53
...And stop talkin' nice, it's weird...



OK. Drop dead.

Better? :supergrin:

uz2bUSMC
01-26-2010, 21:54
OK. Drop dead.

Better? :supergrin:

Everything is now as it should be.

481
01-26-2010, 21:56
Now I can die a happy man.

uz2bUSMC
01-26-2010, 22:02
Now I can die a happy man.

Your welcome. Get back on topic. I wish you early happiness.

481
01-26-2010, 22:20
Your welcome. Get back on topic. I wish you early happiness.

:animlol:

AWESOMO 4000
01-26-2010, 22:45
How could Chuck Taylor possibly be wrong?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_NliQl_vuj1Q/R11TvVIYF3I/AAAAAAAAAGg/5DT6Gs62ZOw/s200/Chappelle+as+Chuck+Taylor+1a.JPG


Do Tyrone Biggums or Tron have any thoughts on handgun performance? :rofl:

army.matt
01-27-2010, 13:33
Its all about shot placement and what you feel most comfortable with. He said he shot someone with a 357 and a 9mm and then 5 others with a 45, the 45 put them down once so thats what HE feels comfortable with. There are plenty of people who have shot a guy with a 9mm and they droped on that shot and they will only feel comfortable with the 9mm. I can only research and try to get the best out of what I use cause I havent shot anybody. I only know not to carry anything with a saftey cause on a incident where I pulled a m9 and was about to have to use it and with all the stress and suprise I forgot the saftey on the slide. I could have died if the guy had been anything more than just pissed off. So I feel COMFORTABLE with a glock that doesnt have a saftey. ITS ALL ABOUT WHAT YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE USEING TO SAVE YOUR OWN SKIN!!!

army.matt
01-27-2010, 13:40
ALSO check out a forum on glocktalk called JUST MY OBSERVATION. This guy has done alot of shooting investigations and talks about the issue of using hollow points versus hardball and while some may dissagree with some of his OBSERVATIONS he does bring some valuable info to the table.

and if someone were to disagree with anything Ive said please be polite we are all good guys just trying to talk about our hobbies and personal interests in self defense.

BleedNOrange
01-27-2010, 13:43
You probably can't put this into perspective can you? What does "weak" mean? Pistols and rifles alike can cause TBI, but I guess you don't have an idea of how this happens...do you? I'd like to hear you explain, if you would.
Better yet explain to me how a pistol round center of chest is going to cause traumatic brain injury(maybe after you fall and hit your head). This theory is laughable. Let me guess that 10mm a.k.a battlefield nuke can do it...right?

BleedNOrange
01-27-2010, 13:58
Before you respond, yes, I've read the theory by Courtney on how allegedly pigs and dogs and goats had "damage" to the brain from body shots. I also read those "cited" human studies. Personally I think its a bunch of garbage. You think whatever you want. I have personally seen more than my fair share of humans shot by various pistol and rifle rounds. Of the ones that survived(which is a surprisingly large majority) I have NEVER seen any of them that were brain dead and had to ride the short bus because of some magic wave.

481
01-27-2010, 14:35
BPW (n) The misconception that, if you hit your assailant in the guts with a service caliber handgun round, his skull will explode, ripping free just above his eyes, raining brain matter down from above. (see: pseudo-science, fraud, fallacy, and "junk-science") -syn. Courtney, Michael, self-admitted amateur, self-described prophet

BleedNOrange
01-27-2010, 14:46
BPW (n) The misconception that, if you hit your assailant in the guts with a service caliber handgun round, his skull will explode, ripping free just above his eyes, raining brain matter down from above. (see: pseudo-science, fraud, fallacy, and "junk-science") -syn. Courtney, Michael, self-admitted amateur, self-described prophet
:rofl:pretty much sums it up.

RhinoR
01-27-2010, 15:03
sniff on boys

uz2bUSMC
01-27-2010, 15:25
Better yet explain to me how a pistol round center of chest is going to cause traumatic brain injury(maybe after you fall and hit your head). This theory is laughable. Let me guess that 10mm a.k.a battlefield nuke can do it...right?

Well if you've read it and can't figure it (it's a very simple concept), there probably no one who could speak down to your level and explain it here, they probably would not be able to read at that age, much less type. Is that chuck in your avatar? Perfect.

uz2bUSMC
01-27-2010, 15:27
BPW (n) The misconception that, if you hit your assailant in the guts with a service caliber handgun round, his skull will explode, ripping free just above his eyes, raining brain matter down from above. (see: pseudo-science, fraud, fallacy, and "junk-science") -syn. Courtney, Michael, self-admitted amateur, self-described prophet

Ah, yes. This is a comment that would make everyone take you serious.

481
01-27-2010, 15:34
Ah, yes. This is a comment that would make everyone take you serious.

Aw...c'mon, no sense of humor today? :dunno:

I wasn't trying for that. Just lookin' to lighten the mood.

uz2bUSMC
01-27-2010, 15:41
Aw...c'mon, no sense of humor today? :dunno:

I wasn't trying for that. Just lookin' to lighten the mood.

The mood would be ok if people would actually be able to discuss stuff.

481
01-27-2010, 15:55
The mood would be ok if people would actually be able to discuss stuff.

Oh, OK. So, who you for in the SuperBowl? Saints or Colts?

uz2bUSMC
01-27-2010, 16:23
Oh, OK. So, who you for in the SuperBowl? Saints or Colts?

Ha, dude that's like askin' me " Fackler or Roberts"... can't they both loose!

CanyonMan
01-27-2010, 17:11
Oh, OK. So, who you for in the SuperBowl? Saints or Colts?



Colts! :supergrin:




Good luck here ! ;)




CanyonMan

uz2bUSMC
01-27-2010, 17:53
So, FOUR-EIGHT-with the ONE attached,

What's your view on "stoppung power"? Your obviously Dr. Fackler camp, but why?

Glolt20-91
01-27-2010, 19:10
Colts! :supergrin:


Man.... Whew!



Back to the corral. Snow storm comin...


Good luck here ! ;)




CanyonMan

+1 Colts

Raining, again, here, lotsa rain and mud

Bob :cowboy:

481
01-27-2010, 19:16
So, FOUR-EIGHT-with the ONE attached,

What's your view on "stoppung power"? Your obviously Dr. Fackler camp, but why?

uz2busmc,

As concisely as I can put it, I do not subscribe to the notion of "stopping power". There is no measurable, unitary description of the concept as there is for momentum (pound-foot/second), kinetic energy (foot-pounds) or velocity (feet per second) and as such it is simply not a valid (in terms of physics) conceptual mechanism.

While I prefer the "scientific method" as a result of the education that I have received, I do not blindly accept something as factual simply because a reasearch authority says it is so. Rather, I prefer to see proof (ideally "peer reviewed" proof) of concept and actual research results whenever and wherever possible.

I do not catagorize myself as being strictly in any one "camp" when it comes to the topic of what constitutes optimal and effective terminal ballistic performance, but my views do trend towards those of researchers who utilize laboratory controlled variable testing procedures.

Ideally, I prefer in a service handgun caliber (9x19, .40S&W, .357SIG, 10mm, .45ACP, what have you) loaded with an appropriate self defense bullet design:

- in the heaviest practical weight (or the greatest sectional density) for the caliber (e.g.: 147 gr. in 9x19/.357SIG, 180 gr. in .40S&W/10mm and 230 gr. in .45ACP)

- with a velocity between 800 fps and 1,000 fps

- that offers no less than 14 inches and no more than 18 inches of penetration against a lethal threat/assailant

I am not "tied" to, nor do I have an "exclusive preference" for, any one caliber. I find the parameters set forth above to be satisfied by any of the combinations listed above. I carry both 9mm and .45ACP pistols and while I do not own one in 10mm, .40 S&W or .357SIG yet, I wouldn't hesitate to carry one in any of those calibers for the purpose of defending myself or my loved ones.

Used correctly, calibrated ordnance gelatin offers excellent comparative data, but I believe that it is in error to equate that data as being exactly equivalent to what happens in the human body since ordnance gelatin is homogenous and the human body is heterogenous in its construction.

Put flatly, gelatin is not people and people are not gelatin.



Now, I'll turn the question back to you: What's your view on optimal/effective terminal ballistic performance and why?

glock20c10mm
01-27-2010, 20:39
How on earth does this statement relate to this discussion? :upeyes:

Bob :cowboy:
You mean like where you mentioned nothing other than favoring the Colts winning the SuperBowl in a thread that had nothing to do with football? So are you a pot and me a kettle and you're calling me black?

glock20c10mm
01-27-2010, 21:00
Your comment is off topic since this thread has absolutely nothing to do with BPW.

By stalking me like this and attempting to bait me into an argument with an unrelated question, it is clear that you need to re-familiarize yourself with the GT CoC and seek help.
Stalking? :rofl:

Hang on, I have to wipe the tears from my eyes... :rofl:

Ok, carry on... :rofl:

eh hem, bait you into an argument?.... :rofl: ....I had no intention of an arguement. How strange you'ld choose to see it that way.

If that's how you are, I'm not so sure caliber corner is your best bet in reguard to places to hang out.


Good Shooting,
Craig


PS - seriously, can't we all just get along??? :grouphug:

PSS- show me more than one thread over 40 posts long that has stayed "on track". Good Luck with that!

kgpcr
01-27-2010, 21:26
Taylor can't be taken seriously, 45 ball is not the almighty hammer of thor like he makes it out to be. It's just his misguided opinion, his just happens to get published somehow. Personally i couldn't care less what he thinks, not matter how many critters he's supposedly seen...

His "misguided opinion" Is based on real life shootings. How many were you involved in? Just saying he has seen the elephant. I have seen the elephant so to speak as well. I would not suggest you agree with everything he says but he has been places and done things you have not. I would at least respect that. You cannot acuse him of been a keyboard commando like so many are. When you have had to depend on your weapon to keep you alive and staked your life on it then we have something to talk about.

481
01-27-2010, 22:03
Stalking? :rofl:

Hang on, I have to wipe the tears from my eyes... :rofl:

Ok, carry on... :rofl:

eh hem, bait you into an argument?.... :rofl: ....I had no intention of an arguement.


Your apparent obsession with what I think clearly implies otherwise.


You think that has any bearing on how you preach against Dr. Courtney's work on Ballistic Pressure Wave? :whistling:

Anglowulf
01-27-2010, 22:30
My handgun instructor told me years ago that knock-down power in a pistol is only viable when pain is present. In his simpler words, people get knocked down when something hurts them.

I think there are limits to this philosophy, as one of you mentioned a shotgun will put you on your can with or without your permission. Swing a ball-peen hammer into someone's chest while they are running at you may not immediately stop them due to mass and velocity.
But a sledgehammer, simple physics takes over. But a 250 grain ball is not a sledgehammer.

After shooting deer and pig, .308 bullets travelling 2800 fps or a 50 Beowulf bullet doing 2 grand did not always stop them immediately (Their nervous systems are not as "advanced" as ours I hear)

People hopped up on drugs/adrenalin may just be able to shake off a .45 round with ease. But nothing runs very long without blood.

I don't want any part of a 9mm bullet that expands to 18mm.

I think big slow bullets are good for blood loss, but there are other ways of getting that to happen. Knockdown power is a case-by-case issue with too many variables.

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 08:12
Well if you've read it and can't figure it (it's a very simple concept), there probably no one who could speak down to your level and explain it here, they probably would not be able to read at that age, much less type. Is that chuck in your avatar? Perfect.
:rofl:I've read it and I understand the "concept" perfectly. I however, think it's a load of crap. Yes, that is Chuck Norris in my avatar and your point is?

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 08:47
Now, I'll turn the question back to you: What's your view on optimal/effective terminal ballistic performance and why?


First, I must say you articulated your viewpoint nicely, sir. I actually agree with ...eh... I'll give it, 96.2% of what you said.

I'll answer the question above directly, then I'll explain below.

-The optimum/most effective terminal performance is choosing the cartridge and loading that will give it's all to a lethal threat based upon your individual risk assessment for all settings. Meaning, I believe the loading used for home defense should be different than what you use on the street and consequently, what is used on the street should be as specific to your environment as possible.

-Now, I am obviously a fervent defender of (2) things... the 10mm and Dr.Courtneys work. But there is a constant misunderstanding in CC, and it's done for argument's sake against my camp in the struggle to "WIN" a debate by the "nine is fine" crowd. I do not recommend either the 10mm or loadings that produce pretty BPW numbers to ANYONE in place of their individual risk assessment.

If an individual has small hands, they should choose a platform to fit them first and foremost...then worry about what loadings are offered. If they shoot a particular loading really well and it's reliable... carry that one. Carry what you can shoot the best and have the most confidence in (confidence is a piece of mindset). Now if you can handle a more "potent" caliber with a "potent" loading, you should train to master that weapon, not vice versa, choosing a weapon that is easy to master so you have to train less.

-More onto my idea of specific termainal performe. I don't care for the golden 12" rule, and this is were we differ in opinion the most. I certainly do look for loadings that 14" deep. But I still cater to my individual risk assessment to my specific settings.

My home defense round is the 135grn Nosler from DT out of my G20 ". Running at those speeds, it's explosive but may only penetrate 8-10". I'm comfortable with this and during my own testing, I'm more than impressed with it's capabilities. It'll tear a BG apart... or should I miss, It'll tear itself apart on the structure of my home. The high side of this loading will run 955ft.lbs which is better than 5.56 from those uber cool short barrel M4's. And for the BPW crowwd, it boasts around 2000psi. BOOM! But! This loading cannot compete, realistically, with the dangers of the street in my area.

This is where I say again, choose a loading specific to your environment. If I lived in a city area, used the transit systems and encountered few people in cars and rarely got inot any my self, this probably is what I would use. My current location would require something along the lines of DT's 155grn GD's or perhaps the 165grn'ers. I want to have the ADDED BENEFIT of high BPW numbers but I can't sacrifice barrier penetration since I may have to fire through my own car door or winshield. Home defense isn't as big of a deal since thugs rarely invade a dwelling carring a car door as a shild like a modern day Ghetto Gladiaor . 'Least not in my area, YMMV.:dunno:

-Now for the science of it. Here is my science, I try to rely on common sense. Everytime I've punched someone, the hard hits tend to force upon my oponent a greater affect. A motorcycle is a flee on the roadway... but a crotch rocket @150mph is a serious threat and can absolutely devestate a full size car... and unfortunately, everyone inside. So across a wide spectrum, speed and power "stop". Yet somehow, handgun bullets are magical, in that, they are somehow all the same and are all inemic. The universe has not provided a linear spectrum for these poor little fellas. So in the mean time, Dr. Facler is all we got. Bahh...BS. I would spell that out but I recently got in trouble... so I can't. So just make a mental note, that BS right ther is a passionate one! K, movin' on.

- There has been recently, a lot of refferences towards Duncam Macpherson. Thing is, he's say things that jive with Dr. C. Who woulda thunk it.:dunno: For instance, everybody tries to bust Dr.C's balls 'bout shootin' deer. "Ah, well, deer ain't people". No kidding?! There just aren't allotta homosapiens volunteers for static testing! So Dr.C used deer. Funny thing is, Macpherson himself has written that deer are an acceptable model.

Another common thing that people spout off "handguns are handguns and rifles are rifles" hmmmm, Duncan, yet again, has written against this saying he would expect a .45 built for people to be more reliable stopper than 5.56...

-So in summary... I want a handgun loading that will meet my requiresments based on my individual risk assessment and utterly and visciously attempt to destroy as much of my opponent as possible everytime it hits.

Note, im not checking this for spelling and grammar, it is what it is!

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 08:48
:rofl:I've read it and I understand the "concept" perfectly. I however, think it's a load of crap. Yes, that is Chuck Norris in my avatar and your point is?

It fits you.

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 11:23
It fits you.
Chuck is a fine American a good christian and a fellow conservative. Also a big supporter of the Constitution. So, I will take that as a compliment. Thank you

fastbolt
01-28-2010, 12:12
Well, some of the usual crowd have stopped by to visit. Nothing wrong with that, but it does make for a rather predictable ebb & flow to the thread.

Maybe if the thread title were more along the lines of, "A Hard Look at Handgun Marksmanship" there would be more agreement (and room for agreement) among the participants.

Sometimes I wonder if some folks assume that one good trip to the range, or even a couple of good trips to the range (where they shoot a few good groups on targets) leads them to think that the marksmanship issue has been satisfied. Dunno.

Me? I think the marksmanship issue needs some continual attention. Maybe a bit less investment in time may be needed for some folks who have spent a lot of years practicing and honing their skills, but shooting is still considered a perishable physical skill and the edge can become dull from inattention, I'd think.

Personally, I still like to place more emphasis on striving to make consistently accurate hits on intended targets as rapidly as possible, in as many difficult circumstances as possible to arrange on a training range (moving, off-side, reduced light, bad weather, etc), instead of thinking that any one caliber or load will somehow offset any occasional lapse in practice or minor degradation of my skills, tactics and mindset.

Also, I don't want to make the potential mistake of convincing myself that I'm 'better off', or 'more likely to prevail/survive' when carrying a particular caliber/load than any other. I decided long ago that I didn't want my attitude and mental 'faith' in some caliber/load combination to create the potential for me suddenly losing confidence in my ability to survive an armed encounter just because I wasn't armed with a particular caliber/load combination on any given day.

After all, as a working cop I wasn't always given the opportunity to carry whatever I wanted in the way of weapon and ammunition when on-duty. That being the case, I didn't want to unintentionally brainwash myself into a potential mental disadvantage or loss in confidence in my duty weapon and ammunition. (Think 9mm and the late 80's version of the Winchester 147gr OSM load, which I was given to use for a few years.)

Instead, I decided to focus on those things over which I had continuous control, such as my training and the ability to maintain my skills regardless of whatever handgun/caliber/ammunition combination I might find myself 'stuck' with carrying. I decided I wanted to keep my emphasis more on skills and mindset than on specific calibers & loads even once I was able to have a direct influence on the selection of duty ammunition, or could choose my own ammunition for off-duty weapons.

I simply felt my time and energies were better applied to maintaining my skills and mindset instead of tying them to some "magical" caliber/load.

I didn't carry a rabbit's foot on duty, either. ;)

Sudden, unexpected, physically taxing, dynamic and chaotic shooting situations don't generally seem to happen as some folks may expect.

I was recently updating some training hours by attending a series of lectures. One of them (Dr Blum's "I'm Shot!" lecture, which I've previously attended) had 3 guest speakers who were cops and who had survived rather horrific shooting situations where they were gravely injured during the course of the encounter. Two of the speakers were different from the last time I heard the lecture.

The point I wish to make of listening to those cops is that all 3 of them discussed their ability to continue engaging an armed criminal attacker after they had been seriously injured, and all 3 of them mentioned being able to make aimed accurate hits on their attackers as being an important factor to their survival. One of the speakers mentioned that having rapidly fired upwards of 20-odd rounds without effect at his attacker, using 'natural instinctive' shooting at various distances, it wasn't until he realized that he was well into his last magazine and almost out of ammunition that he remembered to settle down and aim, at which time he made the necessary hits to cause his attacker to stop continuing the attack.

All 3 of them made reference to their issued weapon/caliber at one point or another, if only when someone asked about it, but that's not where they placed their own emphasis when discussing their encounters.

Mindset and marksmanship folks.

Be wary of accepting some caliber/load substitute.

Stay safe.

481
01-28-2010, 12:14
First, I must say you articulated your viewpoint nicely, sir. I actually agree with ...eh... I'll give it, 96.2% of what you said.

Thanks. Unfortunately, this leaves us little to debate. 3.8% ain't much, y'know? :winkie:

I'll respond in-line (red) to the rest of your post and I promise to keep it as brief as possible.

-The optimum/most effective terminal performance is choosing the cartridge and loading that will give it's all to a lethal threat based upon your individual risk assessment for all settings. Meaning, I believe the loading used for home defense should be different than what you use on the street and consequently, what is used on the street should be as specific to your environment as possible.

For those who've only one CCW, the constant exchange of ammunition/magazines required as one moves from one environ to another could be a little time-consuming, perhaps annoying, but your point is valid and very well reasoned.

-Now, I am obviously a fervent defender of (2) things... the 10mm and Dr.Courtneys work. But there is a constant misunderstanding in CC, and it's done for argument's sake against my camp in the struggle to "WIN" a debate by the "nine is fine" crowd. I do not recommend either the 10mm or loadings that produce pretty BPW numbers to ANYONE in place of their individual risk assessment.

As I said above, I have no problem with any acceptable service caliber and am not tied to any one in particular. The "10" is fine with me as are the 9mm, .40S&W, .357SIG and the .45ACP, but I digress, we are in agreement again. I find Courtney's theory acceptable in some regards, problematic in others.

If an individual has small hands, they should choose a platform to fit them first and foremost...then worry about what loadings are offered. If they shoot a particular loading really well and it's reliable... carry that one. Carry what you can shoot the best and have the most confidence in (confidence is a piece of mindset). Now if you can handle a more "potent" caliber with a "potent" loading, you should train to master that weapon, not vice versa, choosing a weapon that is easy to master so you have to train less.

We are in agreement above.

-More onto my idea of specific termainal performe. I don't care for the golden 12" rule, and this is were we differ in opinion the most. I certainly do look for loadings that 14" deep. But I still cater to my individual risk assessment to my specific settings.

We are largely in agreement here also. While I believe that establishing a "hard" algorithm for penetration is a mistake, much as you do; I consider an acceptable range of penetration as being a more realistic approach to defining an optimal level of terminal performance. More specifically than I stated above in my prior post, I prefer a "hard" minimum of at least 14 inches of penetration and "soft" maximum of 18 inches. In other words, my SD ammunition must penetrate no less than 14 inches (in all possible conditions) yet it may penetrate more than 18 inches (under the same conditions) although a large departure from that "soft" limit (like more than 20 inches of penetration) causes the selection to become "suspect" in my eyes.

My preference for greater penetration is tempered by the fact that I am not nearly as concerned about over-penetration as I am about misses. Once a bullet over-penetrates an object, it usually emerges in a ballistically unstable state. While there is some threat posed by over-penetration, I am of the mind that "clean" misses which have greater stability by virtue of the fact that they remain undisturbed by passage through an intervening object and have an equally greater threat range are much more a concern that over-penetrative partially "spent" projectiles.

My home defense round is the 135grn Nosler from DT out of my G20 ". Running at those speeds, it's explosive but may only penetrate 8-10". I'm comfortable with this and during my own testing, I'm more than impressed with it's capabilities. It'll tear a BG apart... or should I miss, It'll tear itself apart on the structure of my home. The high side of this loading will run 955ft.lbs which is better than 5.56 from those uber cool short barrel M4's. And for the BPW crowwd, it boasts around 2000psi. BOOM! But! This loading cannot compete, realistically, with the dangers of the street in my area.


This is where I say again, choose a loading specific to your environment. If I lived in a city area, used the transit systems and encountered few people in cars and rarely got inot any my self, this probably is what I would use. My current location would require something along the lines of DT's 155grn GD's or perhaps the 165grn'ers. I want to have the ADDED BENEFIT of high BPW numbers but I can't sacrifice barrier penetration since I may have to fire through my own car door or winshield. Home defense isn't as big of a deal since thugs rarely invade a dwelling carring a car door as a shild like a modern day Ghetto Gladiaor . 'Least not in my area, YMMV.

No problem with what you say here. You've considered both of your immediate environments and needs and selected a round that "fits" them. Sounds like you are near a large urban area that has more than its "fair share" of "occurences". I've seen enough of that in my prior career in LE to last me several lifetimes. Stay clear of it as much as you can and expect that they'll be looking for trouble if you've gotta pass through the area. "Paranoia" is a valid tactical principle. :supergrin:

-Now for the science of it. Here is my science, I try to rely on common sense. Everytime I've punched someone, the hard hits tend to force upon my oponent a greater affect. A motorcycle is a flee on the roadway... but a crotch rocket @150mph is a serious threat and can absolutely devestate a full size car... and unfortunately, everyone inside. So across a wide spectrum, speed and power "stop". Yet somehow, handgun bullets are magical, in that, they are somehow all the same and are all inemic. The universe has not provided a linear spectrum for these poor little fellas. So in the mean time, Dr. Facler is all we got. Bahh...BS. I would spell that out but I recently got in trouble... so I can't. So just make a mental note, that BS right ther is a passionate one! K, movin' on.

What?!? You??? In trouble??? For inappropriate language??? No, I refuse to believe it!!! :upeyes:

:animlol:

- There has been recently, a lot of refferences towards Duncam Macpherson. Thing is, he's say things that jive with Dr. C. Who woulda thunk it. For instance, everybody tries to bust Dr.C's balls 'bout shootin' deer. "Ah, well, deer ain't people". No kidding?! There just aren't allotta homosapiens volunteers for static testing! So Dr.C used deer. Funny thing is, Macpherson himself has written that deer are an acceptable model.

This is not unacceptable to me. The use of biological analogues is of value though one must be careful about what conclusions one draws from the data obtained through their use. Just as deer ain't people, neither is gelatin, yet I believe that both can yield valuable information about a bullet's or a design's potential terminal performance.

Another common thing that people spout off "handguns are handguns and rifles are rifles" hmmmm, Duncan, yet again, has written against this saying he would expect a .45 built for people to be more reliable stopper than 5.56...

I've never seen this comment or its context attributed to MacPherson so I cannot comment. Can you aim me at a link or source for this?

The biggest problem that I have with BPW is its attempt to associate BPW generated in COM hits to neuro-vascular ("brain damage") trauma. We see no veterans that have taken COM hits (from either rifle or pistol rounds) and survived, that demonstrate any evidence of such trauma and because pressure waves ("energy") diminish rapidly in intensity as they traverse outwardly in any media (imagine an ever expanding sphere) and that intensity diminishes as a function of the inverse square of the distance from the point of origin, I find the theory of COM hit induced "brain damage" (neuro-vascular trauma) to a "problematic" one at best.

-So in summary... I want a handgun loading that will meet my requiresments based on my individual risk assessment and utterly and visciously attempt to destroy as much of my opponent as possible everytime it hits.

Don't we all? :dunno:



.

automan
01-28-2010, 12:22
Its all about shot placement and what you feel most comfortable with. He said he shot someone with a 357 and a 9mm and then 5 others with a 45, the 45 put them down once so thats what HE feels comfortable with. There are plenty of people who have shot a guy with a 9mm and they droped on that shot and they will only feel comfortable with the 9mm. I can only research and try to get the best out of what I use cause I havent shot anybody. I only know not to carry anything with a saftey cause on a incident where I pulled a m9 and was about to have to use it and with all the stress and suprise I forgot the saftey on the slide. I could have died if the guy had been anything more than just pissed off. So I feel COMFORTABLE with a glock that doesnt have a saftey. ITS ALL ABOUT WHAT YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE USEING TO SAVE YOUR OWN SKIN!!!

Interesting information in that I see your Army. I was reading Defensive Handgunning by John Farnam and in it he mentions the operation of various mechanical types of handguns. He explains the operating system on the 92 and says that once your loaded and ready to holster the last thing you should do is place the decocker lever in the up position. I mention Army as I know soldiers are trained to carry their M9 with no round chambered and the decocked down. Air Force carries as described by Farnam.

I imagine if you'd been an airman, you may not have forgotten to wipe off the safety as it would have already been off.

But, worrying about swiping off the safety on any weapon in a high stakes encounter, even if you shoot regularly with say a 1911, is something to consider with a CC weapon. You make a good point.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 12:37
481,

I'm goin to hit on a few points, but not all because we actually agree on alot.

I've never seen this comment or its context attributed to MacPherson so I cannot comment. Can you aim me at a link or source for this?

When it comes to BPW, the biggest problem that I have with it is its attempt to associate the BPW generated in COM hits to neuro-vascular ("brain damage") trauma. We see no veterans that have taken COM hits (from either rifle or pistol rounds) and survived, that demonstrate any evidence of such trauma and because pressure waves (energy) diminish rapidly in intensity as they traverse outwardly in any media (imagine an ever expanding sphere) and that intensity diminishes as the inverse square of the distance from the pioint of orgin, I find the theory of COM hit induced "brain damage" (neuro-vascular trauma) to a "problematic" one at best.


This is where a majority of the problem lies. For one, a complete picture of thiese types of examples must be compiled, much like a puzzle, to discern the truth. A person is shot and survives- Well, for each example... what were they shot with? What was the path of the bullet? What specific bullet hit them? And what was the reaction? Did thy drop on the spot, yet live in the end. Did they drop and then bounce back up and keep fighting. Were they just simply unaffected? Also, TBI does not have to be permanent. Like a knock out punch or a concussion, they damage may not be seen later in life or even looked for. All BPW needs to accomplish is that knock-out punch. It's not a killing mechanism, specifically. Subject is put down, let's say instantly, and then bleeds out from the permant crush cavity. BPW, has done it's job. Same scenario, the subject does not go down but is mortally wounded in the same manner. He's up and has precious few seconds... but those few seconds could be used to kill you back! Besides, checking for TBI is kinda hard in a live specimen.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 12:40
-So in summary... I want a handgun loading that will meet my requiresments based on my individual risk assessment and utterly and visciously attempt to destroy as much of my opponent as possible everytime it hits.


Don't we all?

No, some of us are content with 9mm hole punchers. That's not viscious in my book.

481
01-28-2010, 12:46
481,

I'm goin to hit on a few points, but not all because we actually agree on alot.

Yes, we do. Looks like that 3.8% has taken another hit.

This is where a majority of the problem lies. For one, a complete picture of thiese types of examples must be compiled, much like a puzzle, to discern the truth. A person is shot and survives- Well, for each example... what were they shot with? What was the path of the bullet? What specific bullet hit them? And what was the reaction? Did thy drop on the spot, yet live in the end. Did they drop and then bounce back up and keep fighting. Were they just simply unaffected? Also, TBI does not have to be permanent. Like a knock out punch or a concussion, they damage may not be seen later in life or even looked for. All BPW needs to accomplish is that knock-out punch. It's not a killing mechanism, specifically. Subject is put down, let's say instantly, and then bleeds out from the permant crush cavity. BPW, has done it's job. Same scenario, the subject does not go down but is mortally wounded in the same manner. He's up and has precious few seconds... but those few seconds could be used to kill you back!

Besides, checking for TBI is kinda hard in a live specimen.

MRI, CAT, PET scans are all possible options, but for their expense and practicality. Nothing conclusive about this topic, anything is possible and nothing can be ruled out.

481
01-28-2010, 12:52
No, some of us are content with 9mm hole punchers. That's not viscious in my book.

:)

Depends on the beholder, I s'pose. Remember, "vicious" can also relate to the manner in which you employ the "tool". :supergrin:

Some call it "mindset".

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 13:11
:)

Depends on the beholder, I s'pose. Remember, "vicious" can also relate to the manner in which you employ the "tool". :supergrin:

Some call it "mindset".

Mindset's a given. And I don't believe CAT scans can reveal some of the minute trauma, not sur bout the others.

481
01-28-2010, 13:30
Mindset's a given. And I don't believe CAT scans can reveal some of the minute trauma, not sur bout the others.

Depending upon the specific technology employed, it is my "lay" understanding that resoultion in the 1mm/0.04inch range can be achieved.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 13:33
Depending upon the specific technology employed, it is my "lay" understanding that resoultion in the 1mm/0.04inch range can be achieved.

Verywell, I wasn't sure.

But you still have to have a reason to look. Same goes for autopsies. Cause of stop is not investigated, only COD.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 14:07
I've never seen this comment or its context attributed to MacPherson so I cannot comment. Can you aim me at a link or source for this?


From IWBA journals
189881

189882

189883

189884

189885

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 14:16
Last few.
189893

189894

189895

189896

you'll have to copy and paste the pic, then zoom... sorry 'bout crude format.

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 14:37
"The high side of this loading will run 955ft.lbs which is better than 5.56 from those uber cool short barrel M4's. "

Hey us2BUSMC, exactly where did you get those numbers? DT has the 135gr nosler at 1600fps and 767ft.lbs from a Glock 20. You have a link or something verifying that 955ft lbs you claim?

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 14:40
Magic ft lbs of energy and magic pressure waves.....I think I'm seeing a pattern here.

481
01-28-2010, 14:48
From IWBA journals
189881

189882

189883

189884

189885

Uz-

Thanks for the jpgs. :)

After reading pages 3 and 4, it would appear that MacPherson's position is that, fired from a short barrel and exhibiting a proportionate reduction in velocity, that a "non-CNS" .223 "hit" would require a longer time to incapacitation than a "non-CNS" .45 "hit".

I agree with this position generally, but only so long as the .223 bullet's velocity is reduced (via the "short" barrel) to the point at which it would preclude the radical expansion (fragmentation) and cavitation of the .223 round thus in effect, rendering the .223 a "handgun bullet" by sole virtue of its much diminished velocity and making the comparison closer to an "apples-to-apples" one; one that is dependent solely upon the factors of sectional density and velocity of each of the bullets by removing the effectiveness of fragmentation and hypercavitation that so clearly benefits the usually much higher velocity .223 projectile.

His position is not a "blanket statement" ("the .223 will produce longer time to incapacitation than the .45") because it is predicated upon a set of conditions that makes the comparison a valid one only under those conditions should they exist.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 14:55
Uz-

Thanks for the jpgs. :)

After reading pages 3 and 4, it would appear that MacPherson's position is that fired from a short barrel and exhibiting a proportionate reduction in velocity, that a non-CNS .223 "hit" would require a longer time to incapacitation that a .45 "hit".

I agree with this position generally, but only so long as the .223 bullet's velocity is reduced (via the "short" barrel) to the point at which it would preclude the radical expansion (fragmentation) and cavitation of the .223 round thus in effect, rendering the .223 a "handgun bullet" by sole virtue of its much diminished velocity and making the comparison closer to an "apples-to-apples" one; one that is dependent solely upon the factors of sectional density and velocity of each of the bullets by removing the effectiveness of fragmentation and hypercavitation that so clearly benefit the usually much higher velocity .223 projectile.

His position is not a "blanket statement" ("the .223 will produce longer time to incapacitation than the .45") because it is predicated upon a set of conditions that makes the comparison a valid one only under those conditions should they exist.

Yes, that is correct, I did not mean it to be a blanket statement. This should be apparent since I sent my source. But non-the less, a rifle is not automatically superior because it is a rifle, nor is it superior because it achieves 2000 fps plus. Regardless, I actually like Duncan because he seems to be realistic, not political like Fackler (IMHO) and some of his chronies.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 14:59
Oh, forgot to add... in accordance with the topic. Energy from the low side 5.56, still enabling frag compared to the energy on the high side of the 10mm = apples to apples.

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 14:59
Yes, that is correct, I did not mean it to be a blanket statement. This should be apparent since I sent my source. But non-the less, a rifle is not automatically superior because it is a rifle, nor is it superior because it achieves 2000 fps plus. Regardless, I actually like Duncan because he seems to be realistic, not political like Fackler (IMHO) and some of his chronies.
I'm still waiting on the link to that "high end" load you stated producing 955 ftlbs from your G20 using that 135gr Nosler...anyone....anyone....Bueller...Bueller...

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 15:05
Can't find one can ya? Well you and Courtney have one thing in common. You both like talking out the side of your arse.

481
01-28-2010, 15:15
Yes, that is correct, I did not mean it to be a blanket statement. This should be apparent since I sent my source. But non-the less, a rifle is not automatically superior because it is a rifle, nor is it superior because it achieves 2000 fps plus. Regardless, I actually like Duncan because he seems to be realistic, not political like Fackler (IMHO) and some of his chronies.

You've clarified it quite well. I initially took it to be a "blanket statement" when you posted this...

...Another common thing that people spout off "handguns are handguns and rifles are rifles" hmmmm, Duncan, yet again, has written against this saying he would expect a .45 built for people to be more reliable stopper than 5.56...

...in an earlier post (see page 3, post #68) but the context is apparent after reading the jpgs you provided above. That's why I wanted a link. Wanted to see the context that the comment was made in. We're good. :cool:

While I like both Fackler and MacPherson, I don't give a hoot about the political crap and pay it little mind. Only interested in the facts, the rest is noise.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 15:16
Can't find one can ya? Well you and Courtney have one thing in common. You both like talking out the side of your arse.

Sorry Chuck, calm down. I didn't even see your post cause I was diggin' around my computer for the IWBA journals for 481. I don't have a link 'cause it was data on GT, you'll just have to search. And remember, I said from a 6'' bbl in my post. I know what DT website says and that's from 4.6 inches. So muster up some "Zen" like focus, sprinkle a little "chi" on it and get that search done.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 15:18
You've clarified it quite well. I initially took it to be a "blanket statement" when you posted this...



...in an earlier post (see page 3, post #68) but the context is apparent after reading the jpgs you provided above. That's why I wanted a link. Wanted to see the context that the comment was made in. We're good. :cool:

While I like both Fackler and MacPherson, I don't give a hoot about the political crap and pay it little mind. Only interested in the facts, the rest is noise.

It's a terrible day today... I actually had a great discussion in CC. And I think I like 481 now, for the moment...

481
01-28-2010, 15:25
It's a terrible day today... I actually had a great discussion in CC. And I think I like 481 now, for the moment...

Ask and ye shall receive....

Drop Dead!


Better? :supergrin:

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 15:49
Yea , I appreciate the "discussion" it has been productive and entertaining.

Drop Dead!


*sigh* everything is as it should be...

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 15:50
Sorry Chuck, calm down. I didn't even see your post cause I was diggin' around my computer for the IWBA journals for 481. I don't have a link 'cause it was data on GT, you'll just have to search. And remember, I said from a 6'' bbl in my post. I know what DT website says and that's from 4.6 inches. So muster up some "Zen" like focus, sprinkle a little "chi" on it and get that search done.
You and me both can search 24/7 for a month and won't find a 135gr Nosler load that will produce 955 ft. lbs. Just had to call you on that mis-information you put out there. 1.4 in of extra barrel isn't going to create almost an extra 200 ft lbs of energy. However if you believe in magic and you seem to, anything is possible.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 15:56
You and me both can search 24/7 for a month and won't find a 135gr Nosler load that will produce 955 ft. lbs. Just had to call you on that mis-information you put out there. 1.4 in of extra barrel isn't going to create almost an extra 200 ft lbs of energy. However if you believe in magic and you seem to, anything is possible.

Sorry bro, it's true. Just because I didn't spoon feed you the info doesn't mean it's not so. Hell, Mcnett has gotten 750ft.lbs outta a G29 with 800x. You can find that in the reloading forum. Or do you need me to take you by the hand and carry you down there to find it? Do a little work homie.

481
01-28-2010, 16:00
Yea , I appreciate the "discussion" it has been productive and entertaining.


You and I are in 100% agreement on that, friend. 100%!

:)

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 16:02
Sorry bro, it's true. Just because I didn't spoon feed you the info doesn't mean it's not so. Hell, Mcnett has gotten 750ft.lbs outta a G29 with 800x. You can find that in the reloading forum. Or do you need me to take you by the hand and carry you down there to find it? Do a little work homie.
Yes please do...lead me to that magic 955 ft lb 10mm round out of a G20. You tell me to do some work?, :rofl:you're the one that made up that outrageous comment to try to prove some invalid point. Your comment so there YOU do the work to back it up....homie.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 16:08
Yes please do...lead me to that magic 955 ft lb 10mm round out of a G20. You tell me to do some work?, :rofl:you're the one that made up that outrageous comment to try to prove some invalid point. Your comment so there YOU do the work to back it up....homie.

Holy Cow, bro. You need to pull out your Pez dispenser and munch an another ridalin.... Ima call you "hyperorange" from now on. Look man, don't be sad if the numbers scare you, the 135grn'er can hit that hard from a 6'', it goes down as the bullet weight goes up because of case capacity. I'm sorry that this is something extraordinary to you... one day hopefully, you too, will be in the know.

BleedNOrange
01-28-2010, 16:16
Holy Cow, bro. You need to pull out your Pez dispenser and munch an another ridalin.... Ima call you "hyperorange" from now on. Look man, don't be sad if the numbers scare you, the 135grn'er can hit that hard from a 6'', it goes down as the bullet weight goes up because of case capacity. I'm sorry that this is something extraordinary to you... one day hopefully, you too, will be in the know.
Typical behavior from one that can't back up a statement or face facts. The name calling and mud slinging comes out then. I agree the 10mm can hit hard but you got caught in some BS and can't own up to it. Either prove me wrong or stfu.

uz2bUSMC
01-28-2010, 16:24
Typical behavior from one that can't back up a statement or face facts. The name calling and mud slinging comes out then. I agree the 10mm can hit hard but you got caught in some BS and can't own up to it. Either prove me wrong or stfu.

Honestly I'm LMAO! Look man I apologize for the rudeness. I don't have the data, once again, it was on here. I could search it, but I'm just not gonna. You can do it. I don't really BS at all, pretty much straight up. Hell, it get's me in trouble. If you think I'm full of it, so be it. There are people on here that know what I'm about and others don't. You are in the latter category, sorry. I'm not losin' any sleep, though.

glock20c10mm
01-28-2010, 21:44
I'm still waiting on the link to that "high end" load you stated producing 955 ftlbs from your G20 using that 135gr Nosler...anyone....anyone....Bueller...Bueller...
This post isn't meant to rub you the wrong way. That said, what uz2bUSMC says doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

10mm 135gr round hitting 955 ft-lbs from a 6" barrel.

That only requires 1785fps.

The difference in OVERALL barrel length between 4.6" and 6.0" is 1.4".

The difference in meaningful barrel length (length of barrel the bullet actually travels down) dropping a minimum of 1" off each for case length brings us down to a comparison of 3.6" and 5.0" barrels, and still a difference of 1.4". So the 6.0" barrel has practically 30% more barrel length to burn powder in.

For the 10mm, with the sheer volume of powder it contains to launch a 135gr bullet (double the powder volume of a standard pressure 9mm 124gr load with the 135gr 40cal bullet having even less bearing surphase on the barrel) at max velocity within safe pressure limits, I don't think another 185fps is all that unreasonable from a 6" barrel.

Part of the reason the 10mm produces more muzzle flash from standard length barrels over rounds like 9mm and 45 is because there is a fair amount more powder to still burn which a 6" barrel can make much better use of and still produce more velocity from added barrel length than 9mm or 45 can on a percentage basis.

Anyway, what uz2bUSMC says about the 955 ft-lbs doesn't seem to out of the ball park to me. Again, not making an attempt to rub you the wrong way, just saying. YMMV.


Good Shooting,
Craig

ssilvestro
01-29-2010, 02:56
This post isn't meant to rub you the wrong way. That said, what uz2bUSMC says doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

10mm 135gr round hitting 955 ft-lbs from a 6" barrel.

That only requires 1785fps.

The difference in OVERALL barrel length between 4.6" and 6.0" is 1.4".

The difference in meaningful barrel length (length of barrel the bullet actually travels down) dropping a minimum of 1" off each for case length brings us down to a comparison of 3.6" and 5.0" barrels, and still a difference of 1.4". So the 6.0" barrel has practically 30% more barrel length to burn powder in.

For the 10mm, with the sheer volume of powder it contains to launch a 135gr bullet (double the powder volume of a standard pressure 9mm 124gr load with the 135gr 40cal bullet having even less bearing surphase on the barrel) at max velocity within safe pressure limits, I don't think another 185fps is all that unreasonable from a 6" barrel.

Part of the reason the 10mm produces more muzzle flash from standard length barrels over rounds like 9mm and 45 is because there is a fair amount more powder to still burn which a 6" barrel can make much better use of and still produce more velocity from added barrel length than 9mm or 45 can on a percentage basis.

Anyway, what uz2bUSMC says about the 955 ft-lbs doesn't seem to out of the ball park to me. Again, not making an attempt to rub you the wrong way, just saying. YMMV.


Good Shooting,
Craig

Definitely-- but, just as an outside observer to this debate, it would be nice if those who actually MADE the claims are the ones who backed them up, rather than sending others on a wild goose chase to "do their homework." I don't think that's too unreasonable to ask, especially from a poster who is so "straight up" about everything, apparently. :upeyes:

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 03:31
Definitely-- but, just as an outside observer to this debate, it would be nice if those who actually MADE the claims are the ones who backed them up, rather than sending others on a wild goose chase to "do their homework." I don't think that's too unreasonable to ask, especially from a poster who is so "straight up" about everything, apparently. :upeyes:

Really? I spent more time posting more important things in this thread than I probably should but if you think that I'm worried about wasting my time with someone like hyperorange, who contributes nothing, you're mistaken.

mossy500camo
01-29-2010, 08:38
[QUOTE=481;14618288]Ahh....Chuck Taylor and his "They all fall to forty-five ball" mentality.QUOTE]

There is a guy in my area that was shot 7 times with the great .45 acp and is still alive and breathing today. And out and about walking the streets too! =-O

TwinFourFives
01-29-2010, 08:52
Is anyone else disturbed by the caliber emphasis on one shot stops?
You won't get a one shot incapacitation with a .45 unless you hit certain parts of the body. The exact same shot placement and effects apply to 9 millimeters. It's not a video game where it takes two 45s, or four 9mms to drop someone.

In real life, any drop/kill shot you make with a 45 can be duplicated with a 9mm.

481
01-29-2010, 11:46
There is a guy in my area that was shot 7 times with the great .45 acp and is still alive and breathing today. And out and about walking the streets too! =-O

He's lucky to be alive. Seems that angels watch over fools, children and drunks.

Any caliber can (and has) fail.

When it comes to anything "handheld", I am always in doubt.

"Stopping power"? I don't believe in the concept except where large Naval guns (8" and above) are involved. :winkie:

TwinFourFives
01-29-2010, 12:31
Pfft, we all know the a-10 thunderbolts are the best stoppers. Slow heavy planes that deliver enough depleted uranium to stop any tank with a half second burst :D

BleedNOrange
01-29-2010, 14:06
This post isn't meant to rub you the wrong way. That said, what uz2bUSMC says doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

10mm 135gr round hitting 955 ft-lbs from a 6" barrel.

That only requires 1785fps.

The difference in OVERALL barrel length between 4.6" and 6.0" is 1.4".

The difference in meaningful barrel length (length of barrel the bullet actually travels down) dropping a minimum of 1" off each for case length brings us down to a comparison of 3.6" and 5.0" barrels, and still a difference of 1.4". So the 6.0" barrel has practically 30% more barrel length to burn powder in.

For the 10mm, with the sheer volume of powder it contains to launch a 135gr bullet (double the powder volume of a standard pressure 9mm 124gr load with the 135gr 40cal bullet having even less bearing surphase on the barrel) at max velocity within safe pressure limits, I don't think another 185fps is all that unreasonable from a 6" barrel.

Part of the reason the 10mm produces more muzzle flash from standard length barrels over rounds like 9mm and 45 is because there is a fair amount more powder to still burn which a 6" barrel can make much better use of and still produce more velocity from added barrel length than 9mm or 45 can on a percentage basis.

Anyway, what uz2bUSMC says about the 955 ft-lbs doesn't seem to out of the ball park to me. Again, not making an attempt to rub you the wrong way, just saying. YMMV.


Good Shooting,
Craig
Personally I think it is way out of line, unless of course you wanted to blow up your gun. Again, all I ask is some proof or a link...anything. Prove me wrong and I will man up and admit I was wrong.

BleedNOrange
01-29-2010, 14:16
Oh, one more thing Glock20, uz2bUSMC said he carried a G20 and that is what I am saying is impossible. With proper barrels and chamber support etc I'm sure amazing velocities and ft lbs can be reached with ANY load. I just called BS on the 4.6 inch G20 producing that, afterall thats what he said he carries.

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 18:09
Oh, one more thing Glock20, uz2bUSMC said he carried a G20 and that is what I am saying is impossible. With proper barrels and chamber support etc I'm sure amazing velocities and ft lbs can be reached with ANY load. I just called BS on the 4.6 inch G20 producing that, afterall thats what he said he carries.

From a 6'' bbl. This was what was 'sposed to be be in my first post but all I see is the little quotation hanging in the air after I wrote G20 ". I clarified this to you in another post.

Holy Cow, bro. You need to pull out your Pez dispenser and munch an another ridalin.... Ima call you "hyperorange" from now on. Look man, don't be sad if the numbers scare you, the 135grn'er can hit that hard from a 6'', it goes down as the bullet weight goes up because of case capacity. I'm sorry that this is something extraordinary to you... one day hopefully, you too, will be in the know.

Either way, I'll carify again... from a 6"bbl

955ft.lbs from a 6"bbl. Got it?

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 18:13
Is anyone else disturbed by the caliber emphasis on one shot stops?
You won't get a one shot incapacitation with a .45 unless you hit certain parts of the body. The exact same shot placement and effects apply to 9 millimeters. It's not a video game where it takes two 45s, or four 9mms to drop someone.

In real life, any drop/kill shot you make with a 45 can be duplicated with a 9mm.

Just curious, bro... where do you get your info from?

BleedNOrange
01-29-2010, 19:45
From a 6'' bbl. This was what was 'sposed to be be in my first post but all I see is the little quotation hanging in the air after I wrote G20 ". I clarified this to you in another post.



Either way, I'll carify again... from a 6"bbl

955ft.lbs from a 6"bbl. Got it?
No I haven't got anything. I still think it's a pipe dream and you have shown absolutely NOTHING to prove me wrong....Got it??

BleedNOrange
01-29-2010, 19:47
Just curious, bro... where do you get your info from?
His info sounds alot more credible than yours does. At least there is actual shooting data that shows success and failure for pretty much all handgun rounds. Now where was your data again?

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 20:03
His info sounds alot more credible than yours does. At least there is actual shooting data that shows success and failure for pretty much all handgun rounds. Now where was your data again?

I never said I was going to give you the data, matter of fact I said I wasn't going to do the leg work, you can do the search. I mean, somehow you apparently think I care about proving anything to you? Like...to you? Are you 15? Come on, you can tell me, bro.

Any how, I don't care about helpin you out is better way to say it, nobody else even cares 'bout this particular point. Just you... and I don't like you , so yea, I'm not lookin' up the info for you. Got that? Ninja along now and believe what you want.

BleedNOrange
01-29-2010, 20:22
I never said I was going to give you the data, matter of fact I said I wasn't going to do the leg work, you can do the search. I mean, somehow you apparently think I care about proving anything to you? Like...to you? Are you 15? Come on, you can tell me, bro.

Any how, I don't care about helpin you out is better way to say it, nobody else even cares 'bout this particular point. Just you... and I don't like you , so yea, I'm not lookin' up the info for you. Got that? Ninja along now and believe what you want.
:rofl:You just proved my point.

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 20:26
:rofl:You just proved my point.

Truly genious. Com'on now, fes up... who let you outta General Glocking? Com'on boy... gonna' speak?, gonna' speak? Com'on... who let you out?

MTS532
01-29-2010, 20:32
Is anyone else disturbed by the caliber emphasis on one shot stops?
You won't get a one shot incapacitation with a .45 unless you hit certain parts of the body. The exact same shot placement and effects apply to 9 millimeters. It's not a video game where it takes two 45s, or four 9mms to drop someone.

In real life, any drop/kill shot you make with a 45 can be duplicated with a 9mm.

Possibly. I think the "one shot stop" idea is much more a function of the subject's own psychological state of mind at the time he realizes he has been shot rather than some external ballistic function of the projectile. I don't think such things can be predicted beforehand. A non-lethal shot anywhere on the body may instantly drop one bad guy, while it may take a whole magazine (or more) of lethal hits to stop someone else.

But as long as the bullet goes far enough into the bad guy to disrupt vital organs, even after penetrating intervening barriers, who cares what caliber it is? Conversely, if it doesn't penetrate far enough, who cares what caliber it is?

We all know the story of the inability of the old .38 Long Colt to stop fanatical Moros in the Philippine Insurrection. This round fired a 150 gr. lead bullet at about 770 fps and was considered a failure. Old .45 Colt revolvers were dragged out of government warehouses and sent to the troops, who generally reported better success.

Yet in World War II, the British began using a .38 S&W with a slow, heavy 200 grain bullet at about 630 fps. which showed to have the same 'shocking' effect as a .455 Webley, which fired a 265 gr. bullet at about 600 fps. (Cartridges of the World; 11th edition., p. 301, 310.)

Why was our own experience in combat so much different than that of the British? Nevertheless, it does indicate that caliber itself cannot be a reliable indicator of stopping power.

Again, as far as velocity is concerned, the standard .45ACP was considered a better 'stopper' than the old .45 Remington-Thompson. This fired a 250 gr. bullet at about 1450 fps!

The 230 gr. .45 has been noted for decades for its decisive 'fight stopping' ability, but with some modern loads, light, fast stepping rounds from the 9mm and the .357 Sig have also gained an enviable reputation, according to anecdotal sources. If this proves correct, caliber, velocity and bullet weight do not seem to be reliable indicators of stopping power.

If incapacitation isn't so much about caliber, velocity or bullet weight what else is there that the shooter can control?

And if 'stopping power' is a function of effective bullet design, how was it achieved in the days before modern hollow-points?

The only thing I can see as a reliable factor of incapacitation is shot placement and adequate penetration.

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 20:32
Watch now, someone with intelligence is going to post soon...

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 20:37
The only thing I can see as a reliable factor of incapacitation is shot placement and adequate penetration.

Now move past this and you have caliber comparisons. There are many rounds that penetrate just fine... some seemingly inneffective. Why not just carry an old boring .38 spl semmi wadcutter?

uz2bUSMC
01-29-2010, 20:42
And a note to all. Why consider one shot stop ability? It's not like you guys would have it, placing words in the mouths of others, that is....

It's not that one expects one shot to accomplish all:upeyes:. If you know which round performs the best, keep shooting with that round and your odds are even better. Extremely simple, really.

glock20c10mm
01-29-2010, 22:27
This is where a majority of the problem lies. For one, a complete picture of thiese types of examples must be compiled, much like a puzzle, to discern the truth. A person is shot and survives- Well, for each example... what were they shot with? What was the path of the bullet? What specific bullet hit them? And what was the reaction? Did thy drop on the spot, yet live in the end. Did they drop and then bounce back up and keep fighting. Were they just simply unaffected? Also, TBI does not have to be permanent. Like a knock out punch or a concussion, they damage may not be seen later in life or even looked for. All BPW needs to accomplish is that knock-out punch. It's not a killing mechanism, specifically. Subject is put down, let's say instantly, and then bleeds out from the permant crush cavity. BPW, has done it's job. Same scenario, the subject does not go down but is mortally wounded in the same manner. He's up and has precious few seconds... but those few seconds could be used to kill you back!

Besides, checking for TBI is kinda hard in a live specimen.

MRI, CAT, PET scans are all possible options, but for their expense and practicality. Nothing conclusive about this topic, anything is possible and nothing can be ruled out.
In the sense of objectivity and comprehensive thought (whether one chooses to consider it or not), I think the following is important to keep in mind toward Dr. Courtney's scientific study of BPW and it's possible attributes of quicker incapacitation some percentage of the time (not to mention among quite a bit of other supporting scientific study), in reguard to actually finding symptoms.

With reguard to brain trauma, how can those that treat gunshot wound victims know if there was remote brain damage or not? MRIs and CT scans don't usually even tell doctors if someone has a concussion.

Much of mild traumatic brain injury is far from being understood, let alone they don't know how to diagnose much of it. Yet mild to moderate TBI still clearly exists even though they have trouble with the explanation part.

The defense dept has been throwing out grant money to study all kinds of forms of brain injury for years now.

The same mild TBI that they don't fully know how to diagnose or treat yet, sometimes the symptoms go away by themselves. So far as they know right now, the effects of mild TBI can disappear in seconds to years, after whatever happened to happen to cause it to happen.

All the doctors can do is see if the patient has symptoms of being mentally screwed up in any way, physical or mental. Brain injury does not necessarily mean brain damage.

Grade 1 concussion is defined as mild, very brief, neurological disturbance such as confusion, without loss of consciousness. And therefore anyone treating a gunshot wound victim may very well NOT know the person had a grade 1 concussion, as the symptoms for it may very well have subsided by the time the vitim was seen by anyone with a medical background.

A concussion is a traumatically induced transient loss of normal brain function. Who knows if they (doctors and such) can even explain a fraction of what diagnosing the brain all actually entails?

So what about the shootees on the good side paying attention to what happens to the BGs after they are shot by whatever round? Much of the time they can't remember what they did themselves.

They (doctors and such) already know that anatomical imaging such as computerized tomography (CT scans) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) don't always tell them much of anything in relation to obvious signs of mild TBI. Contrast-enhanced CT scans help a little, but still leave some to be desired.

So now a days studies and testing are being done with functional imaging like: Functional MRI (fMRI), Positron emission tomography (PET scanning), Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT scan), and ELECTRO-PHYSIOLOGICAL STUDIES (EEG, evoked potentials, and 'brain mapping'). And thats besides Neuro-psychological (NP) testing.

Brain injury can simply be trivial, and completely reversible by natural healing processes, again, taking anywhere from seconds to years. The symptoms of concussion alone, limited to what they know so far are varying degrees of impairment of limb movement, vision, speech, and cognitive function, not to mention coma.

Another thing to keep in mind is if there isn't a symptom, they don't look for a cause or vis versa. Especially symtoms that may subside before the GSW victim gets to the folks meant to treat the GSW.

In a way, this leaves believers and nonbelievers in a predicament as to who's right or wrong. All I know is we have a more than fair amount of supporting evidence (IMO), with zero evidence going against it. Problem at this point and time is, both sides still need "proof" which will require further scientific analysis/study which neither has, and doesn't seem to be available to us either way if any does exist somewhere.


Good Shooting,
Craig

glock20c10mm
01-29-2010, 23:23
Personally I think it is way out of line, unless of course you wanted to blow up your gun. Again, all I ask is some proof or a link...anything. Prove me wrong and I will man up and admit I was wrong.

Here's what I found in the 10mm reloading forum after about 2 minutes of searching. There's more, but this should suffice -

I finally had a day off that was perfect. 70 degrees, and sunny, no clouds. My wife bought me a Beta Master for Christmas, and it's been sitting undre my reloading bench since then. I was shooting some 10mm with longshot. I'm shooting a G20 with a 6" KKM barrel and 22lbs Wolff spring. The loads were 135Gr Nosler HP 13.2Gr of Longshot at 1.260. The 135' were as follows:

1. 1829 = 1003 ft-lbs
2. 1830 = 1004 ft-lbs
3. 1800 = 971 ft-lbs
4. 1746 = 914 ft-lbs
5. 1813 = 985 ft-lbs
6. 1812 = 984 ft-lbs
7. 1815 = 987 ft-lbs
8. 1781 = 951 ft-lbs
9. 1817 = 990 ft-lbs
10. 1836 = 1010 ft-lbs


So we have an average of 980 ft-lbs.

Does that work for ya?


Good Shooting,
Craig

uz2bUSMC
01-30-2010, 03:58
Here's what I found in the 10mm reloading forum after about 2 minutes of searching. There's more, but this should suffice -



So we have an average of 980 ft-lbs.

Does that work for ya?


Good Shooting,
Craig

Probably not, that's too high, your gonna have to spend another two minutes ( sorry ) and find exactly 955ft.lbs. to make him happy.:upeyes: I appreciate your sacrifice of those gruely two minutes of research, though!

481
01-30-2010, 14:47
glock20c10mm,

I never said this:

This is where a majority of the problem lies. For one, a complete picture of thiese types of examples must be compiled, much like a puzzle, to discern the truth. A person is shot and survives- Well, for each example... what were they shot with? What was the path of the bullet? What specific bullet hit them? And what was the reaction? Did thy drop on the spot, yet live in the end. Did they drop and then bounce back up and keep fighting. Were they just simply unaffected? Also, TBI does not have to be permanent. Like a knock out punch or a concussion, they damage may not be seen later in life or even looked for. All BPW needs to accomplish is that knock-out punch. It's not a killing mechanism, specifically. Subject is put down, let's say instantly, and then bleeds out from the permant crush cavity. BPW, has done it's job. Same scenario, the subject does not go down but is mortally wounded in the same manner. He's up and has precious few seconds... but those few seconds could be used to kill you back! Besides, checking for TBI is kinda hard in a live specimen.

The quoted material attributed to me (post #122) is not something that I said. Please correct your post (#122) so that the commentary above is attributed to the proper member. If you are going to attempt to "quote" someone, it'd be best if you'd take the time to do so correctly instead of just haphazardly assigning material to someone who did not post it.

I have no desire to debate anything, of any sort, at any time with you, much less address your addled speculations about what consititutes reality.

uz2bUSMC
01-30-2010, 18:21
I think he did that on purpose. Answering what I said but directing it towards you, 481.

glock20c10mm
01-30-2010, 18:37
glock20c10mm,

I never said this:

This is where a majority of the problem lies. For one, a complete picture of thiese types of examples must be compiled, much like a puzzle, to discern the truth. A person is shot and survives- Well, for each example... what were they shot with? What was the path of the bullet? What specific bullet hit them? And what was the reaction? Did thy drop on the spot, yet live in the end. Did they drop and then bounce back up and keep fighting. Were they just simply unaffected? Also, TBI does not have to be permanent. Like a knock out punch or a concussion, they damage may not be seen later in life or even looked for. All BPW needs to accomplish is that knock-out punch. It's not a killing mechanism, specifically. Subject is put down, let's say instantly, and then bleeds out from the permant crush cavity. BPW, has done it's job. Same scenario, the subject does not go down but is mortally wounded in the same manner. He's up and has precious few seconds... but those few seconds could be used to kill you back! Besides, checking for TBI is kinda hard in a live specimen.

The quoted material attributed to me (post #122) is not something that I said. Please correct your post (#122) so that the commentary above is attributed to the proper member. If you are going to attempt to "quote" someone, it'd be best if you'd take the time to do so correctly instead of just haphazardly assigning material to someone who did not post it.

I have no desire to debate anything, of any sort, at any time with you, much less address your addled speculations about what consititutes reality.
No kidding. :upeyes: I simply kept things in context. First what uz2bUSMC said, then what you said (in red), the same way you had quoted uz2bUSMC and then answered him in red.

I don't remember asking for you to debate me. I simply posted some relevant facts. It's your choice to answer back, not mine for you.

Clearly you had no idea brain injury does not necessarily mean brain damage, which is the reason you wrongly assumed to some extent that a CAT scan could aid in seeing brain injury without damage, produced by BPW.


Have a Nice Day,
Craig

481
01-30-2010, 21:39
No kidding. :upeyes: I simply kept things in context. First what uz2bUSMC said, then what you said (in red), the same way you had quoted uz2bUSMC and then answered him in red.

I don't remember asking for you to debate me. I simply posted some relevant facts. It's your choice to answer back, not mine for you.

Clearly you had no idea brain injury does not necessarily mean brain damage, which is the reason you wrongly assumed to some extent that a CAT scan could aid in seeing brain injury without damage, produced by BPW.


Have a Nice Day,
Craig


Yours is hardly qualified commentary when it comes to the field neuro-trauma. Find someone else to yammer at.

481
01-30-2010, 21:43
I think he did that on purpose. Answering what I said but directing it towards you, 481.



Thanks.

I get it. :winkie:

Still, I have no desire to waste my time with him. :dunno:

Tilley
01-30-2010, 23:55
Is anyone else disturbed by the caliber emphasis on one shot stops?
You won't get a one shot incapacitation with a .45 unless you hit certain parts of the body. The exact same shot placement and effects apply to 9 millimeters. It's not a video game where it takes two 45s, or four 9mms to drop someone.

In real life, any drop/kill shot you make with a 45 can be duplicated with a 9mm.
I agree with you 100%

texas 48
01-31-2010, 00:45
I have a major problem with this article. To quote the very first paragraph, "
"The controversy continues: Which is the better manstopper? -- big, slow bullets or those which are small, and fast? Upon which are you willing to bet your life? -- documented history, computer simulations or limited case-study review?"



Not to sound cliche, but assuming your life will be saved by which cartridge you carry is delusional. This kind of thinking can get people unnecessarily hurt or killed. 45's are not a joke. 9mm's are not a joke. 22s are not a joke (just cheap enough to have lots of fun with).


Lets say, hypothetically that i am in a gunfight. My weapon of choice is a 1911, but my adversary has a 32 pocket pistol. Caliber won't save me from dying. If i take a round to the heart because i'm not moving and seeking cover, i'll be dead. If i stand still in the open and shots ring out, we both get hit, the fact that i have a 45 and he has a 32 doesn't magically get rid of the bullet hole in my heart. Unless i make a CNS hit, or blow his shooting hand off he'll still be able to shoot me.

People that survive gunfights are the ones who avoid getting shot. Even if you have a big caliber and make the first shot, don't count on it to stop the fight right when it impacts. This is delusional on all accounts, even with a rifle.
You are correct in your statement all those calibers kill but if you hit with a less than lethal 1st shot damage inflicted by more powerful and larger projectile ammo does count,. If Not why do they use rifles in close quarter battle and not just duke it out with hand guns.
I like big fast bullets .44 mag .41 mag and the one I carry 10MM. Power size and expansion. Not many .45 can take down large game Deer, Bear, and 2 legged vermin like the 10mm also ballistically superior in flight. I have shot from .22 to .44 mag and .45 long colt. Nothing in a carry weapon is better than the 10mm for destructive 1 shot power. why do you need 17 rounds to stop a threat when one or 2 from a cartridge with the ballistics of the 10. Energy does matte

glock20c10mm
01-31-2010, 00:48
Yours is hardly qualified commentary when it comes to the field neuro-trauma.
Anyone who is qualified to read and write is capable of researching the data on neuro-trauma I posted. Quite simple really.


Good Shooting,
Craig

texas 48
01-31-2010, 00:57
I think he did that on purpose. Answering what I said but directing it towards you, 481.

There you go again uz2bUSMC handing out facts and not just opinions. You should know by now that some people can't handle the truth nor the facts. The Kool aide is still be served I see.

82ndVet
01-31-2010, 10:18
Watch now, someone with intelligence is going to post soon...
Well....Let me dig through my overflowing filing cabinet of intelligence and see what I can find....

OHHH...here's a piece that says " I hope you guys get all this stuff figured out before Tyrone decides to crash the party at O dark thirty".

>>>digging and searching...

OHHH...Well, the only other intelligent item I could find lists a hypothetical situation. It reads:

Tyrone and Two-Two have broken into your house. Your wifey has peed the bed, teeth chattering so loud that you'd hear it in the next room...because you are under your blanky with a red lense pin light, calculator, and a notebook full of ballistic data, trying to decide which gun to grab and what grain load to use, before you step out into the hallway to start clearing your house.

Is this an example of intelligence?? Unlikely.

But I thought that I'd give you guys an intelligent piece of logic to think about about.

No charge...:supergrin:

sigcalcatrant
01-31-2010, 10:36
You guys are over-simplifying what he said about .45 ball at best, completely distorting the article at worst.

He does seem to be a "penetration" guy though... clearly he has a distaste for using frangible rounds, but I've never seen anyone on this site recommend them either.

His definition of 'frangible' rounds includes plain ol' JHP, though. He gets upset if you challenge him on this.

481
01-31-2010, 10:49
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Blah, blah, blah.

Blah Blah,
Craig

Uh-huh. Sure. Yeah.

texas 48
01-31-2010, 11:04
Well....Let me dig through my overflowing filing cabinet of intelligence and see what I can find....

OHHH...here's a piece that says " I hope you guys get all this stuff figured out before Tyrone decides to crash the party at O dark thirty".

>>>digging and searching...

OHHH...Well, the only other intelligent item I could find lists a hypothetical situation. It reads:

Tyrone and Two-Two have broken into your house. Your wifey has peed the bed, teeth chattering so loud that you'd hear it in the next room...because you are under your blanky with a red lense pin light, calculator, and a notebook full of ballistic data, trying to decide which gun to grab and what grain load to use, before you step out into the hallway to start clearing your house.

Is this an example of intelligence?? Unlikely.

But I thought that I'd give you guys an intelligent piece of logic to think about about.

No charge...:supergrin:

I take it that by your avatar you have served or are serving with the 82nd Airborne for that I extend my gratitude and thanks.

People discus these issues about caliber and bullet choice before Tyrone and Two-Two pop into your home here on this forum. Many of us have made advanced planning on reaction and choices and have trained for this possibility. Because of our planning my wife knows what to do if there is an invasion and where to go and what weapon she will use. She goes to the range and we actually practice the drills. Will we follow the plan is another matter in the heat of the moment is another question but as you know training can kick in when the SHTF. I hope we never to have to face this situation.

I have made my choices long ago as to caliber to use in such a situation as a result of reading , experimenting and the exchange of ideas on this and other forums and 40 years of experience with firearms both in the military and personal use.

For home defense My selections are 18.5 inch 12 gauge with 00 buck and LE Slug as a followup and will use one of my 10mm if the fight needs to continue if all else fails I have a seasoned White Ash club. The installation of a good alarm system hopefully will give us the time to put plan into action.

Thank you for your contributions

82ndVet
01-31-2010, 11:40
I take it that by your avatar you have served or are serving with the 82nd Airborne for that I extend my gratitude and thanks.

People discus these issues about caliber and bullet choice before Tyrone and Two-Two pop into your home here on this forum. Many of us have made advanced planning on reaction and choices and have trained for this possibility. Because of our planning my wife knows what to do if there is an invasion and where to go and what weapon she will use. She goes to the range and we actually practice the drills. Will we follow the plan is another matter in the heat of the moment is another question but as you know training can kick in when the SHTF. I hope we never to have to face this situation.

I have made my choices long ago as to caliber to use in such a situation as a result of reading , experimenting and the exchange of ideas on this and other forums and 40 years of experience with firearms both in the military and personal use.

For home defense My selections are 18.5 inch 12 gauge with 00 buck and LE Slug as a followup and will use one of my 10mm if the fight needs to continue if all else fails I have a seasoned White Ash club. The installation of a good alarm system hopefully will give us the time to put plan into action.

Thank you for your contributions
Thanks for the kind words.:patriot:

Intelligent decisions are doing what you (and I) do, as you have stated above, training and experimenting. But the bickering that goes back and forth in a thread pertaining to the subject at hand here, is no more intelligent than trying to incapacitate a mouse by flicking a paper football at it. A shorter version of my last post mindset can be seen in post# 9. :supergrin:

glock20c10mm
01-31-2010, 13:52
Well....Let me dig through my overflowing filing cabinet of intelligence and see what I can find....

OHHH...here's a piece that says " I hope you guys get all this stuff figured out before Tyrone decides to crash the party at O dark thirty".

>>>digging and searching...

OHHH...Well, the only other intelligent item I could find lists a hypothetical situation. It reads:

Tyrone and Two-Two have broken into your house. Your wifey has peed the bed, teeth chattering so loud that you'd hear it in the next room...because you are under your blanky with a red lense pin light, calculator, and a notebook full of ballistic data, trying to decide which gun to grab and what grain load to use, before you step out into the hallway to start clearing your house.

Is this an example of intelligence?? Unlikely.

But I thought that I'd give you guys an intelligent piece of logic to think about about.

No charge...:supergrin:
Well said! +1 :thumbsup:

Glad I carry 10mm with 155gr Gold Dots at 1400fps. No need for the notebook here. :supergrin: Hope I never have to find out just how well they do or don't work! :scared:

Have a great day, and thanks for your service!


Craig

texas 48
01-31-2010, 14:24
[QUOTE=ithaca_deerslayer;14624389]

I have yet to see where he looks at the totality of the 9mm platform. More shots could mean more opportunities. He has sort of disregarded that possibility in the book I have from him, where he makes a big deal out of how few shots the average handgun fight lasts, thus implying that it doesn't make sense to factor in multiple shots. The problem with that is historical data is more filled with low round count platforms, from the older guns.

/QUOTE]
He may not have looked at the 9 in those terms but your above statement forces the question.

Does this mean that a .22 is more effective than a nine because it has less recoil and you can fire it faster giving you more opportunities to make an effective shot and additional possibility of a bolo and wounding an IBS? The answer may be yes or no depending on your perspective.

Each person should use the weapon and caliber they are most confident and can be the most effective with.

Ballistic data is quantifiable. Speed, energy, size of projectile do make a difference in effectiveness ,as well as, accuracy of the shooter and the placement of the shot.

The First shot in my opinion is the most important in combat. I want my 1st shot to be devastating no matter what the caliber. I will place my money on the caliber for my 1st shot to have the best opportunity to end the conflict.

That is a personal decision.

That is why I place my faith in my ability, in size and weight of projectile and energy delivered to the target ,not how many rounds I can fire in 5 seconds. If you practice enough you can get back on target fast enough to finish the job but IMHO I want high energy, large wound channel and deep penetration.

You may have a different perspective and I respect that.

Have a nice day and good shooting

Bones13
01-31-2010, 15:19
Texas 48, quick question. You sure you're gonna hit him with that first shot?

I get what you're saying about wanting the most oomph since you might only hit the BG once. If you take that to an extreme though, then we should all be carrying desert eagles in 50 cal.

Since nobody does, it's clear compromises have to be made somewhere along the line. One thing I worry about is missing and missing a lot. If the BG is moving and I'm shaking like a leaf from fear, I'd like to have a decent sized mag to make up for the fact that my marksmanship will likely suck. Seems to me that the ability to get on target fast and get quick follow up shots is at least as important as how big a bang you make. Carrying what you can shoot well easily seems like a big deal to me.

82ndVet
01-31-2010, 16:26
If the BG is moving and I'm shaking like a leaf from fear, I'd like to have a decent sized mag to make up for the fact that my marksmanship will likely suck.
Fear is something that varies from person to person, as well as adrenaline. It can consist of shakiness, hyperventilating, or even so much as you running and hiding...even with a gun! That person has to come to terms with his/her ability to handle it under stress...one of the first things they try to carve in your brain when training in a combat MOS.

An enemy may have the drop on you, and if he lucks out with a one shot kill, you're not going to know it anyways...so what is there left to fear? Keep your letter to momma in your front pocket, and move on.

A decent capacity is always preferred, and if you have it, learn the skills and techniques necessary to employ it in a productive and efficient manner. But if fear is so much of an issue, then your only option would be to find some cover, and employ birdshot from a distance at anything that moves. However, not exactly the most intelligent decision here is it. Bottom line...a little marksmanship fundamentals, and a little bit of soul searching, and you'll sleep easier at night. And if Tyrone comes lurking at O dark thirty....no fear, no hiding, no calculators, only pissed off as hell because he woke you up when you have to get up at 4AM to go to work. Tyrone is deader than that squirrel I ran over last week, and I'll sit there and still curse him til the garbage men arrive. :rant:

glock20c10mm
01-31-2010, 16:40
.....I get what you're saying about wanting the most oomph since you might only hit the BG once. If you take that to an extreme though, then we should all be carrying desert eagles in 50 cal.

Since nobody does, it's clear compromises have to be made somewhere along the line.....
Which is exactly why we don't carry 50AE. The 10mm Auto is far from an extreme. Remember, the 9mm is an extreme, the extreme low end of the spectrum still rated as "good" in the world of best SD cartridges. 10mm puts us in a nice middle ground where recoil is still tolerable, you don't need a Desert Eagle to lauch it, and the destruction it's capable of makes most 9mm loads seem appear less than par.

It will be interesting to see what texas 48 has to say.


Good Shooting,
Craig :cheers:

texas 48
01-31-2010, 16:40
Texas 48, quick question. You sure you're gonna hit him with that first shot?

I get what you're saying about wanting the most oomph since you might only hit the BG once. If you take that to an extreme though, then we should all be carrying desert eagles in 50 cal.

Since nobody does, it's clear compromises have to be made somewhere along the line. One thing I worry about is missing and missing a lot. If the BG is moving and I'm shaking like a leaf from fear, I'd like to have a decent sized mag to make up for the fact that my marksmanship will likely suck. Seems to me that the ability to get on target fast and get quick follow up shots is at least as important as how big a bang you make. Carrying what you can shoot well easily seems like a big deal to me.

That is what I said in my post. Each person should use the caliber they can shoot most effectively. No where did I subscibe that everyone should do what I do nor did I mention any caliber.

You have chosen to intimate that I said something I did not and exaggerate.

I submit that I don't fire my weapon without target aquisition .

The ability to aquire target and squeeze off the 2nd round depends on the shooter not the caliber.


I still maintain that the 1st shot is the most important and I prefer a the highest velocity most powerful cartridge I handle effectively. In a gunfight I would prefer my 12 ga with 6 rounds of 00 buck.
The ability of shooter ultimately determines how effective he/she will be with the 1st shot and followup shots .

There is no disagreement here.

uz2bUSMC
01-31-2010, 19:35
There you go again uz2bUSMC handing out facts and not just opinions. You should know by now that some people can't handle the truth nor the facts. The Kool aide is still be served I see.

Yes, my friend, CC is the koolaid 'Starbucks' of the internet! Glad to see you 'round here:wavey:

uz2bUSMC
01-31-2010, 19:38
Well....Let me dig through my overflowing filing cabinet of intelligence and see what I can find....

OHHH...here's a piece that says " I hope you guys get all this stuff figured out before Tyrone decides to crash the party at O dark thirty".

>>>digging and searching...

OHHH...Well, the only other intelligent item I could find lists a hypothetical situation. It reads:

Tyrone and Two-Two have broken into your house. Your wifey has peed the bed, teeth chattering so loud that you'd hear it in the next room...because you are under your blanky with a red lense pin light, calculator, and a notebook full of ballistic data, trying to decide which gun to grab and what grain load to use, before you step out into the hallway to start clearing your house.

Is this an example of intelligence?? Unlikely.

But I thought that I'd give you guys an intelligent piece of logic to think about about.

No charge...:supergrin:

The decision for the correct loading has already been made, and the platform. And there's no rush in my house, I'll probably have ample time to pickup my G20 when the BG enters since my dog chews loudly... and I'm a light sleeper.

uz2bUSMC
01-31-2010, 19:39
Thanks.

I get it. :winkie:

Still, I have no desire to waste my time with him. :dunno:

Well maybe one day you guys will get along.:dunno:

82ndVet
01-31-2010, 19:53
The decision for the correct loading has already been made, and the platform. And there's no rush in my house, I'll probably have ample time to pickup my G20 when the BG enters since my dog chews loudly... and I'm a light sleeper.
Great!! :thumbsup:

No Tyrones are safe tonight! :devildance:

Bones13
01-31-2010, 20:24
There is no disagreement here.

Quite right. Becoming a competent shooter means training and practice. It takes time, effort and many repetitions to ingrain muscle memory to the point where your hands know what to do well enough that your brain can focus on solving the problem.

Your post just made me think about the many unpredictable ways a confrontation can unfold. There are many different solutions to the problem. Clearly you've made your choices and are very comfortable with them. I appreciate your comments.

glock20c10mm: Wouldn't it be more accurate to say 10mm is at the upper end of good SD cartridges, particularly if you characterize 9mm at being at the extreme lower end? Does anyone seriously considers 50AE as an SD cartridge? FWIW I'd take 10mm over it any day, too.

82ndVet: No doubt you've had a lot more experience dealing with that kind of stress than I. The few times I've had to deal with emergencies showed me just how hard it can be to raise your awareness from "OH *****!" to "How will I handle this?". Adrenalin tends to hit me pretty hard, but at least I'm aware that it does. For me it's a better bet to prepare for worst than hope for the best.

uz2bUSMC
01-31-2010, 21:02
Quite right. Becoming a competent shooter means training and practice. It takes time, effort and many repetitions to ingrain muscle memory to the point where your hands know what to do well enough that your brain can focus on solving the problem.

See, this paragraph is a chunk of commentary that always falls outta order. What you said here is the baseline, the begginning, this is a given, move past this and begiin ballistic discussions. What you wrote above does not replace cartridge selection and cartridge selection certainly does not replace training or having a plan. They compliment each other, they have to... but we're past your paragraph in this discussion. It has been terminal ballistic from the begining.... you have trained... the bullet has left your tool of survival, and it has introduced itself to the BG, now what? The eternal struggle continues to be "What components blend together for the top dawg man stopper?"

Bones13
02-01-2010, 07:33
See, this paragraph is a chunk of commentary that always falls outta order. What you said here is the baseline, the begginning, this is a given, move past this and begiin ballistic discussions. What you wrote above does not replace cartridge selection and cartridge selection certainly does not replace training or having a plan. They compliment each other, they have to... but we're past your paragraph in this discussion. It has been terminal ballistic from the begining.... you have trained... the bullet has left your tool of survival, and it has introduced itself to the BG, now what? The eternal struggle continues to be "What components blend together for the top dawg man stopper?"

Yes, that's the baseline, but the next paragraph (which you did not quote) is about the uncertainties that may render training and caliber choice irrelevant.

uz2bUSMC
02-01-2010, 07:36
Yes, that's the baseline, but the next paragraph (which you did not quote) is about the uncertainties that may render training and caliber choice irrelevant.

I know I didn't, cause we're discussing terminal ballistics. I didn't have a need to quote that paragraph. Sorry if I came across rudely, BTW.

Bones13
02-01-2010, 08:52
I know I didn't, cause we're discussing terminal ballistics. I didn't have a need to quote that paragraph. Sorry if I came across rudely, BTW.

No offense taken. If you frame the discussion purely in terms of terminal ballistics, isn't the answer is always going to be "bigger, heavier, faster"?

uz2bUSMC
02-01-2010, 09:01
No offense taken. If you frame the discussion purely in terms of terminal ballistics, isn't the answer is always going to be "bigger, heavier, faster"?

No. Bullet construction is to big of a deal to overlook. A slow moving .45 doesn't cut a .45 cal hole... many tissues in the body are extremely elastic. A semi-wadcutter or wadcutter to leave a more discernable ".45" hole. Same with expanding projectiles, smooth mushroon vs jagged petals. One possesses an inate ability to "cut". Also, energy can't play as much of a factor if the bullet is not designed to impart that enegy.

glock20c10mm
02-01-2010, 10:24
glock20c10mm: Wouldn't it be more accurate to say 10mm is at the upper end of good SD cartridges, particularly if you characterize 9mm at being at the extreme lower end? Does anyone seriously considers 50AE as an SD cartridge? FWIW I'd take 10mm over it any day, too.
Yes, but staying with the context I quoted you on earlier, I'm don't think "more accurate" is accurate, because based on your earlier context I still would have said it the same. Aside from that, what you say above, on it's own merit, I agree with.

That virtually no one carries Desert Eagles in 50AE was part of my point.


Good Shooting,
Craig

glock20c10mm
02-01-2010, 10:28
CC is the koolaid 'Starbucks' of the internet!
And close to the only large forum site left where you don't get kicked off for bringing up any newer studies in the way of quicker incapacitation than about 20 years old in the way of terminal ballistics.

Bones13
02-01-2010, 10:45
No. Bullet construction is to big of a deal to overlook. A slow moving .45 doesn't cut a .45 cal hole... many tissues in the body are extremely elastic. A semi-wadcutter or wadcutter to leave a more discernable ".45" hole. Same with expanding projectiles, smooth mushroon vs jagged petals. One possesses an inate ability to "cut". Also, energy can't play as much of a factor if the bullet is not designed to impart that enegy.

Ok, makes sense; I'd lump bullet design in with "terminal ballistics" but however you want to look it is fine by me. By "bigger" I meant to imply expanded projectiles.

uz2bUSMC
02-01-2010, 10:52
Ok, makes sense; I'd lump bullet design in with "terminal ballistics" but however you want to look it is fine by me. By "bigger" I meant to imply expanded projectiles.

Oh! I thought you meant bigger as in the .45 big and slow vs 9mm light a fast type of thing... my bad.:whistling:

Bones13
02-01-2010, 18:03
Oh! I thought you meant bigger as in the .45 big and slow vs 9mm light a fast type of thing... my bad.:whistling:

Oh dear, please not that again...

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 15:00
Here's what I found in the 10mm reloading forum after about 2 minutes of searching. There's more, but this should suffice -



So we have an average of 980 ft-lbs.

Does that work for ya?


Good Shooting,
Craig
Thanks for doing his homework for him since he cant do it on his own. Oh and I said WITHOUT blowing up the gun. 13.2 of longshot is at the edge at best and some would think it crazy to use that much. In the context of the original argument uz2bUSMC likes to cherry pick data to fit his needs. I prefer to stick with common loads and normal results. Comparing a super hopped up 10mm(and maybe dangerous) load to another from a short barrel(5.56) is comparing apples to oranges.

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 18:07
Thanks for doing his homework for him since he cant do it on his own. Oh and I said WITHOUT blowing up the gun. 13.2 of longshot is at the edge at best and some would think it crazy to use that much. In the context of the original argument uz2bUSMC likes to cherry pick data to fit his needs. I prefer to stick with common loads and normal results. Comparing a super hopped up 10mm(and maybe dangerous) load to another from a short barrel(5.56) is comparing apples to oranges.

You misunderstand, I just didn't care enough about you wanting the data to even bother with it. Your level of importance is minimal here, why would I waste time with you when you can do a simple search? You actually should be spending more time in "General Glocking"... that's where the newbs are.

It's not comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing the 10mm to short barrled 5.56. That's it, that's what I stated for the comparison. There's no comparison "rules", it is what it is. Don't whine because those numbers are possible from a 10mm WITHOUT blowing it up, because those numbers are common. Just because you don't have the feintist idea about any of this does not make it abnormal. It's only strange to you because of your very limited knowledge.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:35
You misunderstand, I just didn't care enough about you wanting the data to even bother with it. Your level of importance is minimal here, why would I waste time with you when you can do a simple search? You actually should be spending more time in "General Glocking"... that's where the newbs are.

It's not comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing the 10mm to short barrled 5.56. That's it, that's what I stated for the comparison. There's no comparison "rules", it is what it is. Don't whine because those numbers are possible from a 10mm WITHOUT blowing it up, because those numbers are common. Just because you don't have the feintist idea about any of this does not make it abnormal. It's only strange to you because of your very limited knowledge.
OK I'm gonna cherry pick like you. Velocities of certain handloaded 5.56 rounds can reach over 3000 fps in a 14.5 in m4 thus producing MORE energy that your 10mm AND have a way more effective range. I swear you 10mm guys are nuts. Devoted but nuts.

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 19:41
OK I'm gonna cherry pick like you. Velocities of certain handloaded 5.56 rounds can reach over 3000 fps in a 14.5 in m4 thus producing MORE energy that your 10mm AND have a way more effective range. I swear you 10mm guys are nuts. Devoted but nuts.

Umm... ok:dunno: Did you do that handload? Is their a factory loading that can come close. Is that over pressure? The DT 135grn, as said before, has been weighed in at 955ft.lbs... that's a factory loading through a 6"bbl.

Do you have anything worth anyone reading? Do you need a link to general glocking?

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:41
A 62 gr at 3000fps is around 1238 ft lbs...since we are cherry picking and all

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:43
Umm... ok:dunno: Did you do that handload? Is their a factory loading that can come close. Is that over pressure? The DT 135grn, as said before, has been weighed in at 955ft.lbs... that's a factory loading through a 6"bbl.

Do you have anything worth anyone reading? Do you need a link to general glocking?
Show me ONE FACTORY round that ha 955 FT LBS ....show me...all I saw was some reloaders data that couldnt be verified and most reloaders said that was crazy

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:44
Double tap is about as hot as it gets for "factory" and doesnt even come close! You are delutional.

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 19:45
Oh, and I didn't cherry pick, btw. I simply listed a direct comparison. A 200grn beartooth from a 10mm wouldn't work out the same, but I wasn't comparing that round, you see? How many times do I have to explain this? Is there a more simple format that you prefer to be given explainations? Should I draw pictures or something? Help me help you.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:46
My lil bro is a company commander USMC. Now I know what he means when he tells me most of em are great guys but some are REALLY dumb. You, (if you were a marine) would fall in the latter.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:48
Oh, and I didn't cherry pick, btw. I simply listed a direct comparison. A 200grn beartooth from a 10mm wouldn't work out the same, but I wasn't comparing that round, you see? How many times do I have to explain this? Is there a more simple format that you prefer to be given explainations? Should I draw pictures or something? Help me help you.
Yes very simple...show me that FACTORY round producing 955 ft lbs. You can even have your buddy Glock 2010mm help you since you seem incapable.

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 19:48
Told you all ready, do the search. I'm not doin the work for you. And you don't believe the load data posted for you, but we sgould believe your 62grn'er for 1200+ft.lbs right? Umm, k

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 19:50
My lil bro is a company commander USMC. Now I know what he means when he tells me most of em are great guys but some are REALLY dumb. You, (if you were a marine) would fall in the latter.

Nah, you wouldn't know nothin bout that cause your just a civilian. Lemme guess, you're bro got a degree in basket weavin and became an officer... so how does he like being a company commander for admin.?

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:51
Told you all ready, do the search. I'm not doin the work for you. And you don't believe the load data posted for you, but we sgould believe your 62grn'er for 1200+ft.lbs right? Umm, k
Like I said Einstein that was handloads and thats what your buddy Glock 20 posted...Show me that ever elusive "factory" round you speak of champ.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:53
Nah, you wouldn't know nothin bout that cause your just a civilian. Lemme guess, you're bro got a degree in basket weavin and became an officer... so how does he like being a company commander for admin.?
LOL. He lives in Jack probably not far fron your sorry A** so exactly how far up the chain did you get rambo...Not far I'm assuming

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 19:54
Like I said Einstein that was handloads and thats what your buddy Glock 20 posted...Show me that ever elusive "factory" round you speak of champ.

So you didn't even post a quote or a link to your data, you just merely "said" that was a handload but you want me to post a link? Put Chuck back in your avatar, it's fits you better. General Glocking man, you're not ready for this yet.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 19:56
So you didn't even post a quote or a link to your data, you just merely "said" that was a handload but you want me to post a link? Put Chuck back in your avatar, it's fits you better. General Glocking man, you're not ready for this yet.
Once again SHOW me the factory round or stfu like I said before....You cant shgow me that factory round because it doesnt exist

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 19:58
LOL. He lives in Jack probably not far fron your sorry A** so exactly how far up the chain did you get rambo...Not far I'm assuming

Far enough to know "Marine" is capitalized. Shame you don't, having a little bro in the Marine Corps. Guess the Corps was to scarry for you, your little bro did alright though... somebody had to make your family proud... even if it could'nt be you.

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 20:00
Once again SHOW me the factory round or stfu like I said before....You cant shgow me that factory round because it doesnt exist

Your a funny guy, ChucK...funny guy. If general glocking doesn't work there's always the "women's issues" sub forum.

82ndVet
02-03-2010, 20:00
WhhhhhaaaaaaattttttttttttttttZZZZZZZZZZZZ UUUUUUUPPPPPPPPP!!!!!!!! :tongueout:

What'd I miss...? :af:

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 20:01
WhhhhhaaaaaaattttttttttttttttZZZZZZZZZZZZ UUUUUUUPPPPPPPPP!!!!!!!! :tongueout:

What'd I miss...? :af:

Nothin much.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 20:03
Your a funny guy, ChucK...funny guy. If general glocking doesn't work there's always the "women's issues" sub forum.
Where is that factory round again??

82ndVet
02-03-2010, 20:04
Nothin much.
Bullets, clips, and BB's...? :af:

:rofl:

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 20:05
<CENTER>M4 Assault Carbine http://www.specwarnet.net/kit/bigm4.gif</CENTER><TABLE width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>The M-4 (Colt model 727) is the US armed force's latest assault rifle. It is tailored for use where light weight and quick action are required. The stock is colapsible for compact storage and operations and the M203 grenade launcher can also be fitted for increased firepower. A revised rear sight allows for better control of the weapon out to the maximum range of the ammunition. </TD><TD vAlign=top><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 *********#215e21><TBODY><TR><TH colSpan=2>Data
Data is for M4</TH></TR><TR><TD>Round</TD><TD>5.56 x 45mm NATO</TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>Weight
(Empty)</TD><TD>2.54Kg
5.6 lb</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Length</TD><TD>840mm
33.07"</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Firing Rate</TD><TD>700-1,000 rds/min</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Muzzle Velocity</TD><TD>921 m/sec
3,020 ft/sec</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Magazine capacity</TD><TD>20 or 30 shot magazines</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Varients</TD><TD>

M4A1
M4A2
M4A3 - Removable Carry Handle
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Hows that?

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 20:11
<CENTER>M4 Assault Carbine http://www.specwarnet.net/kit/bigm4.gif</CENTER><TABLE width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>The M-4 (Colt model 727) is the US armed force's latest assault rifle. It is tailored for use where light weight and quick action are required. The stock is colapsible for compact storage and operations and the M203 grenade launcher can also be fitted for increased firepower. A revised rear sight allows for better control of the weapon out to the maximum range of the ammunition. </TD><TD vAlign=top><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 *********#215e21><TBODY><TR><TH colSpan=2>Data
Data is for M4</TH></TR><TR><TD>Round</TD><TD>5.56 x 45mm NATO</TD></TR><TR><TD><TD>Weight
(Empty)</TD><TD>2.54Kg
5.6 lb</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Length</TD><TD>840mm
33.07"</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Firing Rate</TD><TD>700-1,000 rds/min</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Muzzle Velocity</TD><TD>921 m/sec
3,020 ft/sec</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Magazine capacity</TD><TD>20 or 30 shot magazines</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Varients</TD><TD>

M4A1
M4A2
M4A3 - Removable Carry Handle
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Hows that?

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

That's what you give? Never mind bro, Gt doesn't have a forum for you yet. The short bus section is on another site, why don't you try to find it... I hear your baseball might be there too!

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 20:13
Bullets, clips, and BB's...? :af:

:rofl:

No, we're sittin at about cap guns and super soakers right about now.

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 20:15
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

That's what you give? Never mind bro, Gt doesn't have a forum for you yet. The short bus section is on another site, why don't you try to find it... I hear your baseball might be there too!
Its as good as some "reloaders" post Glock 20 put up give me time and I will post the reloaders info on the 5.56. Kinda busy with more important things..Once again you avoid my question WHERE is the FACTORY load that you speak of that produces 955 ft lbs????

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 20:20
where oh where is it? im out till tomorrow. Maybe you can come up with that magic factory round by then.

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 20:23
where oh where is it? im out till tomorrow. Maybe you can come up with that magic factory round by then.

I'm not avoiding it, I already told you I don't care to find it, pretty simple. Or were you asking where your baseball was?

BleedNOrange
02-03-2010, 20:27
I'm not avoiding it, I already told you I don't care to find it, pretty simple. Or were you asking where your baseball was?
You dont care beacause it isnt there moron. Oh and to address the jab you took at my lil bro he is a 26 yr old Captain and the last time I checked Annapolis didnt have basket weaving degrees. NO FACTORY LOAD EXISTS for your 955 ft lbs...PERIOD!!!!

uz2bUSMC
02-03-2010, 21:08
You dont care beacause it isnt there moron. Oh and to address the jab you took at my lil bro he is a 26 yr old Captain and the last time I checked Annapolis didnt have basket weaving degrees. NO FACTORY LOAD EXISTS for your 955 ft lbs...PERIOD!!!!

The factory load is the 135grn DT at 767ft.lbs but from a 6"bbl. Read that slow so you understand.

And as far as your little bro is concerned, I don't really want to keep bringin that up cause I'm probably more proud of him than you are. So we should just drop that portion cause I'm not gonna continue to disrespect him, cause he couldn't possibly be anything like you. He's a Marine after all.

BleedNOrange
02-04-2010, 07:14
The factory load is the 135grn DT at 767ft.lbs but from a 6"bbl. Read that slow so you understand.

And as far as your little bro is concerned, I don't really want to keep bringin that up cause I'm probably more proud of him than you are. So we should just drop that portion cause I'm not gonna continue to disrespect him, cause he couldn't possibly be anything like you. He's a Marine after all.

Umm... ok:dunno: Did you do that handload? Is their a factory loading that can come close. Is that over pressure? The DT 135grn, as said before, has been weighed in at 955ft.lbs... that's a factory loading through a 6"bbl.

Do you have anything worth anyone reading? Do you need a link to general glocking?
Ok first you say the factory DT is 767 ft lbs then you say that the same factory DT load is 955 ft lbs. Which is it? You can continue the personal attacks now since you can't factually back up anything you say.

uz2bUSMC
02-04-2010, 07:42
Ok first you say the factory DT is 767 ft lbs then you say that the same factory DT load is 955 ft lbs. Which is it? You can continue the personal attacks now since you can't factually back up anything you say.

Thought I told you to read slowly?

I'll break this down Barny style again and maybe, just maybe you'll be able to grasp it.

DT 135grn is listed as 767ft.lbs. from a 4.6" bbl... stay with me here...

That same load out of a 6"bbl can produce 955ft.lbs

I've identified the key things you need to understand, they are bigger, bolded, and underlined. Additionally, I typed this post extra slowly to assist you further. If you are still in bewilderment, please consult your nearest 3rd grade teacher for assisitance. They can be found at any of your local big brick buildings and will be marked as a "school". You will know when you have found the right place as there will be a large number of little people all over the place who are all smarter than you.

Iceman cHucK
02-04-2010, 09:07
I started this thread with an article by Chuck Taylor, it has degenerated into mindless bickering. Can we get it back on tract? Thanks

BleedNOrange
02-04-2010, 10:59
Thought I told you to read slowly?

I'll break this down Barny style again and maybe, just maybe you'll be able to grasp it.

DT 135grn is listed as 767ft.lbs. from a 4.6" bbl... stay with me here...

That same load out of a 6"bbl can produce 955ft.lbs

I've identified the key things you need to understand, they are bigger, bolded, and underlined. Additionally, I typed this post extra slowly to assist you further. If you are still in bewilderment, please consult your nearest 3rd grade teacher for assisitance. They can be found at any of your local big brick buildings and will be marked as a "school". You will know when you have found the right place as there will be a large number of little people all over the place who are all smarter than you.
The same factory load is NOT gonna provide almost 200 extra ft lbs with just a 1.4 in increase in barrel length. Obviously you should take your own advice and visit that building you were mentioning. Oh and earlier you mentioned you didnt like me. Wow, I'm kinda hurt. To think this whole time I thought we were gonna take long walks on the beach and swap spit in the shower...:crying: Your fanatical devotion to this dying round has blinded you from reality. To iceman, yes get back to the topic at hand I am outta here.