Misconceptions, ammo effectiveness...

[Palladin]

Over the past month or so I've seen several of you guys express opinions on selection of ammo (caliber, grain weight, bullet construction and profile, etc.) for personal defense. I hesitated on offering my $.02, because I just don't have that much experience. I have noted a few things though, and they seem to line up with the conclusions presented in this article I stumbled across. http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
I haven't read everything in the host site, but it seems to present a wealth of information.

Thoughts?

[zephyp]

Its interesting that the article places penetration and permanent cavity as critical wounding components and leaves out temporary cavity (top of page 11). I would have guessed temporary cavity would be important due to the shock propagated to surrounding organs and tissue. Yes, its critical to penetrate for max damage and blood loss and permanent cavity adds to that, but to knock someone down immediately requires maximum shock...at least those were my thoughts.

Good stuff Glen.

[WRW]

Its interesting that the article places penetration and permanent cavity as critical wounding components and leaves out temporary cavity (top of page 11). I would have guessed temporary cavity would be important due to the shock propagated to surrounding organs and tissue. Yes, its critical to penetrate for max damage and blood loss and permanent cavity adds to that, but to knock someone down immediately requires maximum shock...at least those were my thoughts.

Good stuff Glen.

The shock of which you speak is not sufficient, in most cases, to cause the type of shock that physiologically drops an organism. I don't mean to be short, here, but I'm still not up to snuff following some dental extractions.

[wally626]

The FBI report and several other point out that the temporary cavity is just tissue moving out of the way and does not hurt the person once it goes back. This is the reason they do not rate effectiveness on temporary cavities just permanent cavities and penetration. Very high speed and mass rounds can cause shock waves that permanently destroy tissue, but those are not fired from typical handguns.

[gunderwood]

That is indeed a good site. Read through most of their material a few years ago.

Its interesting that the article places penetration and permanent cavity as critical wounding components and leaves out temporary cavity (top of page 11). I would have guessed temporary cavity would be important due to the shock propagated to surrounding organs and tissue. Yes, its critical to penetrate for max damage and blood loss and permanent cavity adds to that, but to knock someone down immediately requires maximum shock...at least those were my thoughts.

Good stuff Glen.

The problem for ammo effectiveness is that humans are not gel blocks. I.e. constantly constructed. What is an effective round for a 300lbs sumo attacker, problem isn't optimal for a 90lbs female ninja assassin.

In all seriousness, temporal shock may cause a stopping affect, but isn't reliable. There is some debate as to if handguns are even capable of causing temporal cavities. Sure, the shock of the bullet moving through does cause flesh to expand outwards, but the speed at which it expands is too slow to cause anything more than a bruise. There tends to be less debate with rifles, but it also depends on cartridge, bullet, and range. Even with rifles, ignoring fragmentation or expanding bullets, less aerodynamic rounds tend to be better at generating temporal cavities. I.e. big blunt nose vice long and sleek.

A counter argument, is that some handguns may be traveling sufficiently fast to cause similar affects as rifles (the flesh can't move quickly enough and tears). Seem to recall a gel block tester claiming .357SIG/.357Mag seemed to do so, but who knows. The street stats for those two calibers are impressive and possibly back up that claim.

[Palladin]

I got to thinking after shooting various brands of hollowpoints through different mediums and at different angles, hmmm... uniform expansion is anything but reliable. The more I read, the more it looks like the best one can hope for at velocities <1200fps is a long hole through the BG about the size of the bullet... It all boils down to shot placement.




Note to self, practice double-taps and cranio-ocs...
Pant, pant... gotta fight my way back to my rifle, pant ,pant.

[MountainCat]

I haven't read that article yet but here's one that was interesting to me.


Terminal Ballistics as Viewed in a Morgue:
http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal%20Ball ... morgue.htm

[zephyp]

Ok, I understand temporary cavity but tell me this. When I hit a deer in the vitals and he falls like a sack of taters - why? It takes 7-12 seconds for the oxygen to get cut off from the brain enough to cause them to pass out. Other times I've hit them in the vitals (once a heart shot dead through) and they ran 50 or 60 yards bleeding all the way. Actually there was a big spurt about every 5 feet. The last one I know - adrenalin. But what about the first? I always attributed the initial drop as a result of the shock from the temporary cavity followed shortly by death from a fatal wound.

[gunderwood]

I haven't read that article yet but here's one that was interesting to me.


Terminal Ballistics as Viewed in a Morgue:
http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal%20Ball ... morgue.htm

Interesting. Don't think I've seen that before, but I've read so much who knows. I am always very interested when people deride the 9mm so much though. Couple of comments.

"The .357 is gloriously effective. It's just that semi-autos are much more common than they used to be, so we see far more 9mm and .380 rounds on the autopsy table than we do the .38 and .357. Particularly among the gangbangers, the 9mm and .380 are the weapons of choice. The .357 is a wonderfully effective round for self-defense from what I've seen, but it's rare that we get them in anymore."

I want to walk through a comparison. The original .357mag load was 158gr, but most people carried the 125gr because 158gr in a short barrel is harsh. Speer's GD webpage lists the 125@1450 and the 158@1235 with 4" barrels. I would contend that 4" is on the large size of what people actually carry. Also, note that revolver barrels are truly all barrel vice semi-auto's which include the chamber. The difference in bullet diameter between 9mm and .357Mag is 0.002" (.355 vice .357) or for practical purposes (except reloading!), nothing.

The 9mm 124gr +P out of a 4" barrel is 1220fps. 230fps difference and less if we normalize the barrels; probably more like 1300-1350fps out of the shorter revolvers usually carried and similar in size. So, according to the author, the difference between awful round (9mm) and a glorious one (.357Mag) is practically 100-200fps. Non-+p rounds in 9mm would widen this gap by approx. 70fps. So there seems to be something to shooting a similar bullet faster that makes all the difference. My .357SIG is usually around 1350-1375fps with factory GDHP, right in-line with what is a glorious round.

So, 9mm is a little weak, especially non-+P, but I think there is more to the story.

Most of 9mm's bad reputation comes from an era when manufacturers were copying bullets designs and simply scaling them up and down. E.g. design a 90gr bullet, scale it to 115gr, 124gr, and 147gr. Experience showed that regardless of caliber this was less than optimal. Today they specifically design bullets for operating velocities. The craze was for fast and light or slow and heavy. As Ayoob says here (http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/ayoob93.html) those departments that stuck with the original 124gr often still use it today and are quite happy. Additionally, 9mm was really pushed in the new, hi-cap guns. This made them cool (movies used them) and lots of people used them, including gangbangers and such. Quantity rather than quality was pushed and no wonder that 37 rounds of 9mm to the toe didn't stop the threat. I exaggerate, but you get the point.

I don't view 9mm as a poor choice, but do prefer .357SIG and .45ACP.

[gunderwood]

Ok, I understand temporary cavity but tell me this. When I hit a deer in the vitals and he falls like a sack of taters - why? It takes 7-12 seconds for the oxygen to get cut off from the brain enough to cause them to pass out. Other times I've hit them in the vitals (once a heart shot dead through) and they ran 50 or 60 yards bleeding all the way. Actually there was a big spurt about every 5 feet. The last one I know - adrenalin. But what about the first? I always attributed the initial drop as a result of the shock from the temporary cavity followed shortly by death from a fatal wound.

Yes, shock may stop an attack right now or in your example, a deer, but as you also noted it doesn't always work. The problem with self-defence is that the attacker planned to attack you and is pumped up. If they just shoot you with no warning you are likely to go into shock.

[Palladin]

Ok, I understand temporary cavity but tell me this. When I hit a deer in the vitals and he falls like a sack of taters - why? It takes 7-12 seconds for the oxygen to get cut off from the brain enough to cause them to pass out. Other times I've hit them in the vitals (once a heart shot dead through) and they ran 50 or 60 yards bleeding all the way. Actually there was a big spurt about every 5 feet. The last one I know - adrenalin. But what about the first? I always attributed the initial drop as a result of the shock from the temporary cavity followed shortly by death from a fatal wound.

My point exactly - and this was at rifle velocities, right? I've seen the same thing through the years, and would have to say the instant drops from shots to the body were ones that were close to (or through) the spinal cord.

[WRW]

In the deer example I suspect that the hearts SA or AV node was affected by the energy imparted by the round. If that is the case, one shot may do the job, but it would be something of a crap shoot depending on accuracy and individual susceptibility. Not something I would depend on without followup shots in a self defense situation.

[zephyp]

Yes there is a big difference in the shock caused by the temp cavity from a rifle bullet as opposed to a pistol bullet. So I wonder if a body shot will drop someone the same way as a rifle shot to a deer? Gunderwood brings up the .357 mag, which IMO is the best practical self defense round. Knowing it has significantly more energy than a 9mm or .45 is the shock from the temp cavity a factor with its effectiveness?

[SgtBill]

All of the above leave out one thing that I had seen happen over many year's (not to include the deer shot's) not all people will react the same to a gunshot wound no matter what calibre or velocity it is traveling at weither it be a hollow point or a ball round. Their mind set can range from shock to anger to rage and the only thing that will drop them right now is to take out the spinal column the brain stem or deplet the
blood flow to all the maine body part's the Brain , Liver,Lung's etc. very prapidly by severing the Aorta and such other important thing's that are conected to the heart.
I have seen old men run several block's with death wounds and then drop dead and I have seen young kid's drop where shot with the same type's of wounds. I have seen lung's that had trauna and that were black and blue from being shot through with .38 spl. 125 grain silvertip hollow point's from a 4 " revolver.

To sum it up it is a crap shoot (no pun intended) almost everyone will act diffrently when hit with a projectile.
Just my 2 cent's worth.
Bill

[WRW]

the only thing that will drop them right now is to take out the spinal column the brain stem or deplet the
blood flow to all the maine body part's the Brain , Liver,Lung's etc. very prapidly by severing the Aorta and such other important thing's that are conected to the heart.

Bill

I agree 100%. I've read of one youth dropping when shot AT...no wounds found. He just fainted. LOL.

[WRW]

Yes there is a big difference in the shock caused by the temp cavity from a rifle bullet as opposed to a pistol bullet. So I wonder if a body shot will drop someone the same way as a rifle shot to a deer? Gunderwood brings up the .357 mag, which IMO is the best practical self defense round. Knowing it has significantly more energy than a 9mm or .45 is the shock from the temp cavity a factor with its effectiveness?

I am not an expert. Period.
That out of the way, I think the value of the .357 rounds (mag and Sig) lies in their ability to penetrate obstacles like outerwear, bone, muscle mass, car doors, glass, etc. and still reach vital organs. Higher energy and lesser surface area work together to accomplish this.

[communicator7]

I can also recommend some good books that address this as well as many other topics needed to make wise handgun and ammo choices.
"Tactical Pistol Shooting" By Erik Lawrence
"The Concealed Handgun Manual" By Chris Bird
"Essential Guide to Handguns" By Stephen R. Rementer and Bruce N. Eimer

[brokengun]

I recall reading recently that Col. Colt designed the '51 Navy .36 in response to complaints about weight and balance of the .44 Dragoon pistols. Then later, when several British officers reported from the Crimea that the .36 was failing to penetrate the Russian's winter clothing, Colt designed the 1860 Army to blend the handiness of the Navy with the projectile mass of the Dragoons.
Very similar to the Philipine situation which resulted in the US Army re-adopting a .45 caliber handgun.

[gunderwood]

Yes there is a big difference in the shock caused by the temp cavity from a rifle bullet as opposed to a pistol bullet. So I wonder if a body shot will drop someone the same way as a rifle shot to a deer? Gunderwood brings up the .357 mag, which IMO is the best practical self defense round. Knowing it has significantly more energy than a 9mm or .45 is the shock from the temp cavity a factor with its effectiveness?

I am not an expert. Period.
That out of the way, I think the value of the .357 rounds (mag and Sig) lies in their ability to penetrate obstacles like outerwear, bone, muscle mass, car doors, glass, etc. and still reach vital organs. Higher energy and lesser surface area work together to accomplish this.

It is a matter of sectional density. http://www.chuckhawks.com/sd.htm
"In other words, a skinny bullet of a given weight tends to penetrate better than a fat bullet of the same weight, because it concentrates the same force on a smaller area of the target."

It is no mistake that the SD and BC are related or that 5.7x28mm was designed to penetrate armor.

[gunderwood]

I think the 9mm/.357Mag question summed up is:

Why does approx. 150-250fps velocity difference cause such dramatic differences (according the morgue link, no first hand experience), all else being practically equal? Why does the 75fps difference between regular 9mm and 9mm+P (124gr range) make such a difference (Ayoob link)?

"The 9mm round now acknowledged to work the best is a 124-grain to 127-grain high tech hollow point at a velocity of 1250 feet per second. NYPD, with some 30,000 officers carrying this type of ammo, the Speer Gold Dot +P 124-grain, is happy with the performance of its 9mm service pistols. Ditto the Orlando, Florida, Police Department, which uses the Winchester Ranger 127-grain +P+ in their standard issue 9mm SIGs."