[Jeff82]

I am not sure I buy this: "When you shoot an attacker in the torso, the goal is to produce fatal hemorrhage by rupturing the heart or a major blood vessel so he will quickly collapse." The goal is to stop the attack. They give instance where the person becomes unconsious with a shot to the shoulder as a mind game. Maybe, but I think it is more complex than what you want is heart shot. About 80% of handgun wounds are survived.

As far as the fat guy and the 357 mag., you can find individual shooting where just about anything can happen. Almost seemed to be indicating the .22 would be better than the 357. The effect bullet transferred energy has in regard to stopping is not well defined. Notice, I said stopping an agression. That is the goal.

The best way to stop the attack is to get either a CNS hit or cause unconsciousness via blood loss from injured organs. We can't rely on the "psychological stop" as we have no control as to when it will or will not appear. Any round used must penetrate far enough to get to the vitals and at that point bigger is better as there is more wounding surface to the bullet.

So the two factors you are looking for are penetration and permanent wound tract size. Temporary stretch is not a factor at handgun velocities. These two factors are unimportant if shot placement isn't good. Nothing else really matters.

 

[481]

The best way to stop the attack is to get either a CNS hit or cause unconsciousness via blood loss from injured organs. We can't rely on the "psychological stop" as we have no control as to when it will or will not appear. Any round used must penetrate far enough to get to the vitals and at that point bigger is better as there is more wounding surface to the bullet.

So the two factors you are looking for are penetration and permanent wound tract size. Temporary stretch is not a factor at handgun velocities. These two factors are unimportant if shot placement isn't good. Nothing else really matters.

Quoted because everyone should be required to read Jeff's post at least twice before posting anything in "Caliber Corner". :winkie:

 

[Glolt20-91]

The best way to stop the attack is to get either a CNS hit or cause unconsciousness via blood loss from injured organs. We can't rely on the "psychological stop" as we have no control as to when it will or will not appear. Any round used must penetrate far enough to get to the vitals and at that point bigger is better as there is more wounding surface to the bullet.

So the two factors you are looking for are penetration and permanent wound tract size. Temporary stretch is not a factor at handgun velocities. These two factors are unimportant if shot placement isn't good. Nothing else really matters.

+1 :cheers:

Time to kick back, crank up the volume on some Mo-town tunes, get a cold one out of the fridge and read your post again! :bluesbrothers:

Bob :cowboy:

 

[PghJim]

The best way to stop the attack is to get either a CNS hit or cause unconsciousness via blood loss from injured organs. We can't rely on the "psychological stop" as we have no control as to when it will or will not appear. Any round used must penetrate far enough to get to the vitals and at that point bigger is better as there is more wounding surface to the bullet.

So the two factors you are looking for are penetration and permanent wound tract size. Temporary stretch is not a factor at handgun velocities. These two factors are unimportant if shot placement isn't good. Nothing else really matters.

I do not think anyone doubts that. However, if your chances of a CNS hit or blood loss are the same with either bullet, I would take the one with the higher energy. I do not think I mentioned Temporary Stretch. In my hunting experience, I see more damage with a high energy load. I have shot rabbits with a 357 hard cast bullets moving at 38 special speed and the same bullet moving at 357 magnum speed. Both completely penetrate the animal but the faster bullet does more damage. I only use this as one example.

Why is it that when one advocates a higher energy bullet, people think they are making up for shot placement? I also believe there are other shots that would stop an attack such as a broken pelvic bone, hip, sturctural leg bone, collapsed lungs, etc. The link goes into great length to tell where the 22 bullet went, but does not give a good description as to the paths of the 357 bullets on the fat man. I would not really consider those Silver Tip bullets to be high energy, though much higher than the 22. If the man was shot four times in the center on the chest with the 357 then I would really listen.

 

[DocKWL]

I do not think anyone doubts that. However, if your chances of a CNS hit or blood loss are the same with either bullet, I would take the one with the higher energy. I do not think I mentioned Temporary Stretch. In my hunting experience, I see more damage with a high energy load. I have shot rabbits with a 357 hard cast bullets moving at 38 special speed and the same bullet moving at 357 magnum speed. Both completely penetrate the animal but the faster bullet does more damage. I only use this as one example.

Why is it that when one advocates a higher energy bullet, people think they are making up for shot placement? I also believe there are other shots that would stop an attack such as a broken pelvic bone, hip, sturctural leg bone, collapsed lungs, etc. The link goes into great length to tell where the 22 bullet went, but does not give a good description as to the paths of the 357 bullets on the fat man. I would not really consider those Silver Tip bullets to be high energy, though much higher than the 22. If the man was shot four times in the center on the chest with the 357 then I would really listen.

If the man was shot four times in the center on the chest with the 357 then I would really listen.

Why? The topic of discussion is high energy impacts. All else equal, chest or belly, the energy absorbed would be the same. The only difference being that the same shots to the chest would have a greater percentage of hitting the vitals. This brings us back to placement and penetration. Trooper Coates was killed due to proper placement and penetration (however lucky/unlucky the shot was), not energy.

 

[cowboy1964]

BTW, WTH is "Vcav"? I was assuming it was cavity volume but why is the units "fps"? Cavity velocity??? Huh?

10mm 180 gr. Remington Golden Sabre JHP
Impact velocity: 1243 fps/618fpe
Average recovered diameter: 0.698"

Vcav = 389.302 fps
Mw = 58.906 grams (2.078 ounces)
Xcm = 33.361 cm (13.134 inches)

.45ACP Winchester Bonded PDX1 230 gr. JHP
Impact velocity: 889 fps (404fpe)
Average recovered diameter: 0.680"

Vcav = 392.366 fps
Mw = 62.603 grams (2.208 ounces)
Xcm = 36.748 cm (14.468 inches)

 

[481]

BTW, WTH is "Vcav"? I was assuming it was cavity volume but why is the units "fps"? Cavity velocity??? Huh?

Vcav is the threshold velocity of a specific medium's (in this case it is calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin or soft tissue assumed to have a density of ~1.03 grams/cc +/- 0.03 grams/cc) cavitation regime expressed in feet per second.

Projectiles having a velocity greater than Vcav will produce (temporary) cavitation in calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin (or soft tissue) while projectiles with a velocity lower than Vcav will not produce cavitation along the penetration path.

Mw is the total mass of the permanent wound cavity expressed in grams and Xcm is the projectile's final penetration depth expressed in centimeters.

If you are interested in this sort of thing, I'd encourage you to check out Glolt20-91's "Furniture Murder" thread here in CC for examples of the application of Duncan MacPherson's penetration model.

 

[glock20c10mm]

Maybe I should rephrase. Going off the data, the 357. is the winner based off of velocity and FPE. But, .40 and .45 seem to be regarded as the more favorable calibers when it comes to energy transfer or "stopping power".

...Im looking for the deciding factor in energy transfer whether it be bullet weight, velocity, FPE.

The way I see it, energy transfer is one piece of a larger puzzle leading to a determination of "stopping power". You are using the two interchangeably, it appears, for the sake of simplicity toward how each individual interpets the two terms themselves.

Going by "how I see it", 9mm-357SIG-40S&W-45Auto CAN NOT be compared in any way overall. Even you yourself in your first post ended up comparing loads at specific velocities with specific bullet weights. Not to mention how velocity of even that minute sample changes between being fired from a full sized platform to a subcompact platform.

IMO, some 9mm loads are better manstoppers than some 40S&W loads and some 45Auto loads, and visa versa in every way you can spin it. Untimately there may be more better loads in one of the three over the others, or even one best load. In the end though, the point is individual loads within each must be used for comparison to gather any meaningful results.

There reason there is never an overall agreement as to which is best is because they can't be compared overall. Pretty simple. Yet this seems to be how ~99% of the population that supposedly cares, looks at it.

Same with throwing 357SIG loads into the mix. All 357SIG loads available are NOT created equal in terms of energy transfer. Therefore they must be looked at on an indivdual basis also.

Beyond that there are people who are more than happy with a load good for 10" penetration depth, while others want a pass-through wound everytime, not to mention those that want something inbetween. And when you deal with both those groups in the same discussion on energy transfer in reguard to incapacitating effect(s) you're going to get greatly varied conclusions on an individual basis to say the least.

You already know that even within a group that simply chooses EITHER the 9mm OR 357SIG OR 40S&W or 45Auto, that they greatly vary on what round they think is best for incapacitating effects on live subjects, man or beast. They even vary between using FMJ or JHP. Some don't consider there to be enough difference between any individual load and simply use what they can buy cheapest.

Ultimately, within each "School of Thought" on what's required for quickest incapacitating effects, the best load from each of: 9mm, 357SIG, 40S&W, and 45Auto, would have to be decided upon, and the discussion continued from there for any resonable conclusion to be reached.

I on the other hand choose specific loads in 10mm Auto which no load in 9mm, 357SIG, 40S&W, or 45Auto, compares to anyway. Takes a lot of guess work out of the equation right off the bat, wouldn't you say? The only arguement beyond that is wanting or not wanting to carry the specific platforms available for the 10mm Auto.

Some would argue cost being too expensive for the 10mm Auto, but if you can afford to shoot 357SIG and/or 45Auto, then you too can afford to shoot 10mm Auto, reguardless if you're interested or not interested in getting your ammo from online sources. Some will argue follow-up shots are too slow with full-power 10mm Auto loads. To that, I call blasphemy.

If a BG gets the jump on me because the triple-tap I'm capable of with the 10mm from a G29 isn't "good enough" compared to 9mm and the others, then in my opinion a 9mm or any of the others wouldn't have helped either. Not to mention I'm already doing more damage per round in 10mm than the next guy choosing to shoot 9mm or any of the others previously mentioned.

Bottom line, it's not about any of the individual aspects of what equate to the "best" terminal performance. It's about all the individual aspects considered as a whole for every specific load available between all the cartridges you're comparing. Anything else is giving you false information anyway +99% of the time given all available choices.


Good Shooting,
Craighew:

 

[PghJim]

Why? The topic of discussion is high energy impacts. All else equal, chest or belly, the energy absorbed would be the same. The only difference being that the same shots to the chest would have a greater percentage of hitting the vitals. This brings us back to placement and penetration. Trooper Coates was killed due to proper placement and penetration (however lucky/unlucky the shot was), not energy.

I think if the 22 were shot in the same locations as the 357 there would be no incapacitation either. Nothing makes up for shot placement. However, higher energy rounds of the same caliber are more effective. In .40 S&W, I would choose the 155gr over the 180gr, I would choose the 10mm 155gr over the S&W.

I know there has been some controvery over this data, but it is all that we have.

http://www.handloads.org/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=11&Weight=All

The Silver Tip is concidered a penetration round not high energy, If the example had been with Fed or Rem 125gr SJHP, then maybe the story would work.

 

[Glolt20-91]

Let's compare some high energy for caliber results.

10mm 155gr Gold Dot,

Impact Velocity: 1420 fps/694fpe
Retained Weight: 132.9 grains (85.74%)

For those who believe in energy transfer, all of this bullet's energy was transferred in about 8.5" of penetration

By comparison, the lowly .40 S&W 165gr Gold Dot;

Impact velocity: 1011fps/374fpe
Retained weight: 164.4 grains

This bullet was good for about 14.6" of penetration.

For those who think they can push their .357SIG/124gr XTPs into the 1600s, this 124gr XTP came apart at 'only' 1436fps/568fpe. Using real world experiences from those who have used this bullet during culling duties, the 124gr XTP comes apart in the high 1300s to low 1400s.

Same 124gr XTP bullet, factory 9mm Hornady TAP CQ at:

1150fps/364fpe
Full recovered weight

It's only good for about 14.9" of penetration

Given the choice between the 124gr XTP at uber fast .357SIG velocities or the factory 9mm Hornady 124gr TAP CQ, which ammo would you choose to reach the vitals of a 3XL or 4XL sized felon?

A high energy bullet that comes apart (fragments) drastically loses mass, loses momentum and to complicate matters even worse, typically over expands inducing an even higher drag coefficient; this all results in poor penetration that does not reach vital organs.

YMMV :supergrin:

Bob :cowboy:

 

[PghJim]

Pretty pictures. Expansion and penetration into what, and yes you can push some bullets too fast.

I shoot 150gr Noslers 10mm at 1,500fps and get .70 expansion and great penetration. But that is through fabric into water jugs. I will bother to post a picture if you wish. What was the penetration on the 357sig XTP?

I am guessing that is not through fabric. I might take the 8.5". You also do not mention the expansion difference in the GD.

 

[janice6]

Momentum means little if the bullet does not come to a complete stop within the body.

 

[DocKWL]

Momentum means little if the bullet does not come to a complete stop within the body.

Can you qualify this statement? For example, why must a bullet come to rest in a body?

 

[481]

Pretty pictures. Expansion and penetration into what, and yes you can push some bullets too fast.

I shoot 150gr Noslers 10mm at 1,500fps and get .70 expansion and great penetration. But that is through fabric into water jugs. I will bother to post a picture if you wish. What was the penetration on the 357sig XTP?

I am guessing that is not through fabric. I might take the 8.5". You also do not mention the expansion difference in the GD.

Jim,

All of the test bullets photographed and presented by Glolt20-91 like the ones above were evaluated using the procedure described by Duncan MacPherson on page 251 of his book, "Bullet Penetration" (they were fired into water; in this case using a Fackler Box and a intermediate barrier consisting of four layers of denim much like the FBI test protocols specify), after which the test data is gathered (recovered projectile mass, average diameter, impact velocity) by Bob. (These tests can be found in the "Furniture Bullet Penetration test" thread here in CC.)

After Bob (Glolt20-91) shoots each test round, I then complete the analysis using the test data gathered employing MacPherson's equations (presented earlier in MacPherson's book) to calculate the cavitation regime threshold velocity, the penetration depth and permanent wound cavity mass instead of employing the graphs (provided on pages 246-253) which are presented as an easier option for those individuals who are less than mathematically inclined and do not wish to go through the laborious process of running the calculations. :winkie:

 

[PghJim]

Thanks. Do you have the permanent wound cavity for both GD bullets mention, by chance.

 

[MinervaDoe]

Momentum means little if the bullet does not come to a complete stop within the body.

Which is why a .30 caliber Full Metal Jacket 168 grain boat tail bullet going 2,800 fps will incapacitate nearly any human target it strikes center of mass.

I think your statement needs some qualifiers to limit the discussion to handguns. Even then, it is likely that I disagree. High velocity full metal jacketed bullets have been used in combat for over a century and I believe that even in a handgun, you can find examples of a FMJ bullet in one cartridge being more effective than a hollowpoint in another cartridge which comes "to a complete stop within the body."

In handgun cartridges, coming "to a complete stop within the body" is the current holy grail of stopping power discussions, but I think the importance of temporary cavitation and neural shock is completely ignored by this line of thinking.

 

[481]

Thanks. Do you have the permanent wound cavity for both GD bullets mention, by chance.

No, not immediately available...I'll have to sift through Bob's thread to find them since I don't keep that data for myself. Bob may have it though as I know that he does retain some of the data.

Bob?

 

[481]

OK, Jim...found 'em.

Speer 10mm 155 gr. "Gold Dot" JHP v. four layers of denim
Vi: 1420 feet per second
Mr: 132.9 grains

Vcav: 371.823 feet per second
Mw: 45.820 grams (1.616 ounce)
Xcm: 21.761 centimeters (8.567 inches)

Speer .40S&W 165 gr. "Gold Dot" JHP v. four layers of denim
Vi: 1011 feet per second
Dr: 0.648 inch
Mr: 164.4 grains

Vcav: 396.394 feet per second
Mw: 47.916 grams (1.690 ounce)
Xcm: 37.139 centimeters (14.622 inches)

Were these what you were looking for? :dunno:

 

[PghJim]

OK, Jim...found 'em.

Speer 10mm 155 gr. "Gold Dot" JHP v. four layers of denim
Vi: 1420 feet per second
Mr: 132.9 grains

Vcav: 371.823 feet per second
Mw: 45.820 grams (1.616 ounce)
Xcm: 21.761 centimeters (8.567 inches)

Speer .40S&W 165 gr. "Gold Dot" JHP v. four layers of denim
Vi: 1011 feet per second
Dr: 0.648 inch
Mr: 164.4 grains

Vcav: 396.394 feet per second
Mw: 47.916 grams (1.690 ounce)
Xcm: 37.139 centimeters (14.622 inches)

Were these what you were looking for? :dunno:

Yes thanks. I still do not know the diameter, or how you calculate Permanent Cavity. Please do not look it up. I just thought by the two diameter that 8.5" of the large diameter, would be closer to the further distance of the smaller diameter.

 

[Glolt20-91]

Which is why a .30 caliber Full Metal Jacket 168 grain boat tail bullet going 2,800 fps will incapacitate nearly any human target it strikes center of mass.

I think your statement needs some qualifiers to limit the discussion to handguns. Even then, it is likely that I disagree. High velocity full metal jacketed bullets have been used in combat for over a century and I believe that even in a handgun, you can find examples of a FMJ bullet in one cartridge being more effective than a hollowpoint in another cartridge which comes "to a complete stop within the body."

In handgun cartridges, coming "to a complete stop within the body" is the current holy grail of stopping power discussions, but I think the importance of temporary cavitation and neural shock is completely ignored by this line of thinking.

Let's not forget the very effective, relatively slow velocity, high sectional density military rounds in 6.5x55mm and 7x57mm. Finn Aagard and others wrote, what the 6.5 Swede lost in energy, it made up for in sectional density.

As far as the holy grail of a self defense bullet coming to rest w/i the body, that would not include the .357mag/158gr JHPs that typically left felons dead on scene.

Bob :cowboy: