An End To The Caliber Wars . . .?

[Aqeous]

If I may . . . I might make an anal retentive scientific observation

Hunters have known for years that the disposition of there pray played an important role in how they responded to taking a hit (adrenaline and all that)
One might think that an enraged charging coon (like a human) may be only that much tougher when the adrenaline is pumping and it/he has to save its own life.

The importance of exit wounds in the hunt are well known. After giving it some consideration, I might think that if a JHP does not have enough energy to expand and push its way through a modest size coon, maybe its not the best of loads. The 40 S&W comparison that I gave in Pt 2 for instance was a clean exit through a deer. The wound was surprising for a handgun . . . but in order to get the a real feel for it you'd have to read the whole PDF file.


You are the first person I have ever talked to who hunted a deer with a 9mm How did that go? I would imagine it is possible, I heard that it was possible, but I'd think it would have to be a pretty good shot.

[Aqeous]

Your quote:

"Whenever I read these discussions where someone with a personal opinion tries to support it with 'evidence' from one or anothet so called 'expert' I am reminded that ...:

They can not ALL be right;

They can ALL be wrong;

If the explanation is not obvious to even educated people the preponderance of the evidence must be rather slight.

If for example the results show an advantage either way of say 10% but with an extreme variability of 50% the issue becomes irrelevant.

It reminds me of people with chronographs comaprinf different loads. One says his load produces 20 fps greater velocity. The other says yes but it produces 40 fps greater variation which off sets the average velocity advantage. Meanwhile both are ignoring that there can be more difference than that in the ballistics when fired from different guns.

All the while they ignore that the perceived advantage that exists when measured at a certain distance could vanish at a different distances.

It seems to me that the entire exercise is ego driven. It seems more important that one or the other be justified than whether the differences have any practical significance.

"Mirror, mirror on the wall who is the fairest one of all".


Let me share with you a little about myself:http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...=1#post2630260

This was my very first post on the Firingline. At the time I was a die hard 9mm man. My load of choice was speer gold dot 147 gr JHP. At the time I was convinced do to the information that I had studied in length, that the differences in caliber/velocities in handguns were only marginal in the "effectiveness department". Since then, as I have delved into one of my passions, I have come to find that I may have been sorrly mistaken.

Big bullets and big egos do more often go hand and hand. And many people have a personal agenda. Not to insult the 9mm crowd that I was once part of but it has been equally said that people with tiny hands who can't handle recoil will prefer 9mm's. Is that true . . . maybe, maybe not, all I know is that I was once a 9mm person and through no benefit to myself (being that I must admit that my own hands are of the smaller variety) and through no profitable gain, my exploration into ballistics have brought me to this line of thinking. ANd I wish to share it with the good people of the Firingline (whether they want to read the PDF's and Links or not) Knowledge is why we are here is it not.

So if you were to ask the mirror, mirror on the wall, would it tell you that you are apart of the tiny hand crowd?? Well if the answer is yes, then join the club . . . but as for I myself I would like to possess real knowledge if it exists. And I would like to debate it with those who are knowledgeable and those who have life experience . . .

I would love it if the magic bullet was a 0 recoil .22 that worked like a .44 magnum JHP. When they invent it I will let you know. Until then I do not believe that they are all wrong, nor do I believe that they are all right . . . I believe that the truth most likely lies somewhere in between, or it will be some combination of the two. Dr's and professors that delicate their lives to their study are not simply idiots because some people don't understand what they are taking about. However Dr and Professors can at times be short sighted and bound by their own preconceived ideas, that is why it is WISE to STUDY EVERYONES opinion and take them into account if you are really seeking knowledge.


Now back to ballistics . . .

[Dave85]

In reference the conclusions of Dr.s Courtney:

B. Implications for Bullet Design
The trend in bullet design over the last decade has drifted toward bullets with little fragmentation and a higher percentage of retained mass. Bullets that both fragment and meet minimum penetration requirements create larger pressure wave magnitudes and offer improved incapacitation potential.

In addition to moving toward designs which both penetrate and fragment reliably, the incapacitation potential of a bullet can be further improved by delaying expansion and fragmentation to a penetration depth of at least 4”. This would place the peak pressure magnitude closer to vital organs.

Optimal use of a bullet’s kinetic energy to produce pressure wave incapacitation suggests a bullet design that penetrates the first 4” or so prior to significant expansion or energy loss, and then rapidly expands and transfers a large percentage of its energy and 40% of its mass at penetration depths between 4-8” before continuing to penetrate to the depth desired for the application.

From Ballistic pressure wave contributions to rapid incapacitation in the Strasbourg goat tests by Michael Courtney, PhD and Amy Courtney, PhD

If further research bears that out, so be it. I'm not going to fight scientifically illuminated truth. However, as a practical matter, does the technology exist to produce ammo that economically and reliably performs as suggested? The frangibles they use in their tests are prohibitively expensive; too expensive to allow familiarity and the resultant confidence. Also, their performance in the real world remains controversial to say the least. This report calls for projectiles that penetrate 4" (we are talking about the thoracic cavity here) and then fragment. Can a projectile be developed that will do this reliably, without any regard to how many layers of clothing, or at what angle we are shooting? And at any reasonable range? Remember:

The BG is not just going to stop and stand in the anatomical possition (sic) so you can place your shots perfectly.

I would again reference the same paper as above:

A. Cautions and Limits of Interpretation
Goats are not people, and the shot angle used in the
Strasbourg tests was particularly favorable to loads with
shallow penetration. It would be an error to infer that the
loads that worked well in the goat tests would
necessarily work well in self-defense applications with a
variety of shot angles and different penetration
requirements.

Do not be overly impressed by the propensity for shallow
penetrating loads to produce larger pressure waves.
Bullet selection criteria should first determine the
required penetration depth for the given risk assessment
and application, and only use pressure wave magnitude
as a selection criterion for bullets which meet a minimum
penetration requirement.

Reliable expansion, penetration, feeding, and functioning
are all important aspects of load testing and selection. It
would be unwise to abandon long-held criteria of the
load testing and selection process, but it seems prudent
to consider the pressure wave magnitude along with
other factors.

(emphasis added)

As to this statement:

Ballistics Pressure waves could effectively prove the notion---NOT THAT bigger is better---but that BIGGER, FASTER AND HEAVIER is better.

I don't think we need evidence for or against a ballistics pressure wave to tell us that. A couple hundred years of experience already has. It is always interesting, though, and useful, to understand the mechanism that brings about any reality.

Personally, I think at this point most reasonable people agree that the bigger the hole the better. Most people agree that the more energy you can dump into the target, and keep in the target (for a number of reasons) the better. The caliber war traditionally begins when you start talking about "light and fast" vs. "heavy and slow" methods to achieve this largely agreed upon result. It's the classic 9mm vs. .45 yawner.

The more real-world evidence that is compiled, the more we see that, when the technology maximizes performance on either side of this dichotomy (which is largely established by practical matters of gun design), both will have very similar results in frontal COM shots. Hit him in the the os nasale, and the BG won't know the difference. If this new information is verified, and can be expressed in technology that translates into handguns, it represents a serious shift at least equal to the introduction of expanding ammunition. IMHO, that's the truth of the matter. But truth doesn't end a religious war.

I, for one, greatly appreciate the research you have done on this subject. We see a lot of rehashing of old arguments in this forum, and new, thoughtful ideas are a rare and special treat. Thank you.

[Boris Bush]

It was more like I have a tag, and I have my 9mm with me. All shots were CLOSE and the deer were somewhat relaxed. They were 110 pounds or smaller and shot in the shoulder. Every round penetrated fully and rested under the skin on the far side. Broken shoulders meant they dropped on the spot and a few got finishers to the head..... and my freezer had meat in it. At the range I did it I could have done it with a .22 rimfire and head shots, but that aint leagal nor would I consider it.

[Aqeous]

Thank you very much for your post, this is the kind of input and feed back that I was looking for when I posted.

Got to sit for dinner . . . I'll post back in maybe a half an hour.

[BillCA]

Originally Posted by Nate45

Aqeous look at this test of the .44 Mag 240 gr Gold Dot nothing of lesser caliber and weight performs like that.

Originally Posted by Nate45

Show me a handgun round that fires a projectile of lesser caliber, weight and velocity that is the equal of the one I posted a link to.

It's not identical, but very close to the .44 mag link you posted. And keep in mind that the .44 Mag Gold Dot is a recent design while the .41 Mag load is a 40 year old JSP design. (.19 smaller, 30gr lighter and about 72 fps slower).
http://www.brassfetcher.com/41Mag210grSWC.html
I'd be highly interested in seeing the 210 gr Speer Gold Dot compared to the .44 Mag 240 GDHP. I suspect you couldn't really tell the difference.

Aqeous
The pressure wave theory does make some sense and could explain some variances is bullet performance. For instance, a 124gr .355" (9mm) JHP vs. a 125gr .357" JHP perform differently against live targets with similar hits. Up to now, the current wisdom says that it's a psycho- or physiological difference (adrenaline, drugs, anger, determination, etc.) or slightly different points of impact. This is especially unsatisfactory when gelatin tests show very similar results for similar loads.

For years I have believed if you had a bullet moving at sufficient speed that utilized a blunt nose (LSWC, flat point, etc.) it would perform better than RNL, FMJ or pointy JHP designs (like the notoriously bad Rem. 115gr 9mm JHP). I had theorized that the application of force over a larger area would direct the "bow wave" of force at a larger outward angle - i.e. 50 degrees vs 30 degrees) resulting in (a)compression and/or tearing of nearby structures instead of pushing them aside and (b)higher pressure against nearby blood vessels resulting in a surge of blood pressure. If this occurs near or in vessels leading to an organ damaged by the P-wave it can result in considerable hemorraging.

This seems to be borne out by handgun hunting experiences I've had and from others in discussions.

The question becomes what is the optimal performance envelope for a given caliber? Is a 255-gr .45 caliber LSWC at 850fps as effective as a 180-gr .40 caliber flat point at 1150 fps? I dunno.

I suspect we won't know until someone versed in fluid dynamics does a Vulcan mind-meld with someone with forensic medical knowledge.

[nate45]

I'd be highly interested in seeing the 210 gr Speer Gold Dot compared to the .44 Mag 240 GDHP. I suspect you couldn't really tell the difference.

I suspect it would be very close, it is in other loadings.

Were looking at a 210gr .410 caliber vs a 240gr .429, 30grs and .029" the .41 is .44's little brother.

My Model 57 with 230gr Keith Types and a 210gr Gold Dot.

[tipoc]

Interesting reading. Thanks for posting.

tipoc

[TNFrank]

The problem with an exit wound in a self defence situation is that you can't control where the bullet will go once it exits the perp. I'd hate to hit an inocent by-standard with an exiting bullet. I'd much rather have the bullet open up and dump all of it's energy into the perp. even if it ment shooting him a couple more times to get the job done.

[Aqeous]

"can a projectile be developed that will do this reliably, without any regard to how many layers of clothing, or at what angle we are shooting? And at any reasonable range?"

It is interesting to consider that with all of the modern day advancements we have made in bullet technology, that we still may have another giant step to make. Its kind of exciting.


"I don't think we need evidence for or against a ballistics pressure wave to tell us that. A couple hundred years of experience already has. It is always interesting, though, and useful, to understand the mechanism that brings about any reality."


I have found that the generally accepted consensus, that our handguns are entirely inadequate, leads to beliefs similar to the ones that I myself had only a short time ago. It goes like this: If all handguns are so inadequate, and bigger faster calibers will only marginally effect what I am shooting at with what can only hope to be a barely noticeable, heightened level of lethality (if any difference at all) then ALL I am accomplishing when I trade in my 9mm for a .40 or .45 is added recoil. Added recoil will trump my follow up shots, 9mm ammo is cheaper, I get more shots in my clip (to make up for how utterly inadequate my handgun is) ex.) you get the idea . . .

Much of modern day thinking is focusing so much on removing our minds from the idiocies of "caliber wars" so we can focus more on what really matters (bullet placement) but it has become to such a degree that we can no longer question whether or not more powerful loads offer any added benefits over the lesser loads. Much of the science of wound ballistics is very clearly saying "big...small... it doesn't matter much."

The research I have done was to illuminate whether or not an equally viable study has been done to explain what so many people are saying about their "bigger more powerful guns". People (not scientists and Dr.) will openly state : "you need to shoot well, but bigger bullets tend to work better"

"TEND TO WORK BETTER"--is a very powerful statement when we are talking about something that will be defending your life.


Low and behold, I have indeed found something that may actually be supporting the "big fast bullet hypothesis". Shootings are random, we now this . . . and there are far to many variable to account for to make a definitive easy "scientific assessment". But if there is any truth to the idea that big fast bullets tend to work better there must be some scientific evidence SOMEWHERE supporting it. I believe that I have found some of that evidents. . . and it is my pleasure to share it with the Firingline.

Once again thank you for your well thought out reply . . .

[The Tourist]

I also believe that incremental improvements make cartridges better over time. That's an odd statement to make if you love 1911s as I do.

If you'll remember history, our .45 ACP came out based on the developement of new firearms for the army.

However, the army wanted the .476 Eley.

[Aqeous]

"For years I have believed if you had a bullet moving at sufficient speed that utilized a blunt nose (LSWC, flat point, etc.) it would perform better than RNL, FMJ or pointy JHP designs (like the notoriously bad Rem. 115gr 9mm JHP). I had theorized that the application of force over a larger area would direct the "bow wave" of force at a larger outward angle - i.e. 50 degrees vs 30 degrees) resulting in (a)compression and/or tearing of nearby structures instead of pushing them aside and (b)higher pressure against nearby blood vessels resulting in a surge of blood pressure. If this occurs near or in vessels leading to an organ damaged by the P-wave it can result in considerable hemorraging."


I had a similar theory. Originally I was thinking about the temporary cavity. I understood that (with regards to handgun bullets) the expansion was not great enough to damage living tissue. But what vexed my mind was that kind of "Shock" has to go somewhere. The body is mostly fluid, and so that kind of displacement had to propagate and disperse somewhere--- I thought a "wave" of some kind must exits that will permeate the body.

Long story short, I talked to a physicists or two (no help what so ever ) luckily I started to find already published works on a concept that I had never heard of before---The BALLISTICS PRESSURE WAVE.

The idea that A bullet ripping through tissue could effect the nervous system is not a new Idea. I have heard people here on the firingline state such beliefs but had no "evidents" that might back up there theory. I believe this could stand as evidence supporting such theories.


When you add it up the idea of nerve damage (blunt force trauma) coupled with a sudden "blood pressure" increase that can propagate through arteries to the heart and brain ,. . . has at least a random CHANCE (mind you a CHANCE) of adding to the perceived "stopping potential" of a bullet impact. The fact that it is so random may be why it is difficult to prove . . . but that is the nature of the beast. ALL SHOOTINGS are random events. EVERY BEING ON THIS EARTH has slight differences in there anatomy that can account for "Statistical" variations in even the most perfect of tests. IN SPITE of this, we still can observed real repeatable results throughout these studies in question . . .

[Socrates]

AQUEOUS:
Do a search for Dr. Courtney here. He posts here, or did.
I don't need to discuss, or read his work in progress. Our discussion last time didn't explain a couple things very well.

The big advantage of a big, heavy bullet, that expands, is, if it has either sufficient weight, or velocity, it will maintain it's velocity through the target essentially creating a 'temporary'
wound channel all the way through the target.

I think this explains part of why a 440 grain bullet at 950 fps creates such trauma, or, for that matter, the large increase in damage when you move a 400 grain .475 hollow point through a target at full speed.

I also think BillCa is on to something, since since Elmer Keith, or before, flat point bullets have worked better then their round nosed counterparts. Also, the flat point tends to go through it's target in a straighter line, as well.

Jack Huntington maintains that at low speed, the actual area of the bullet effects the target somehow, the total surface area. This is not new. The bullets designed by GS custom are monometal bullets, as are another South Africian firm, that are light, yet large.

The result is a relatively large flat point, or spire point with a cutting edge, that are devastating on game. Why? the bullet allows extra velocity for the bullet size, and, this extra velocity is transfered to the target. How? IIRC, Courtney said the bullet creates a pressure wave nearly every 6 inches. If the bullet is still at near the same velocity it hit the target with, the pressure wave(s) are repeated through the target. This sort of makes sense, since otherwise, it's very difficult to explain the 'stopping power' on large game of heavy bullets, at relative to light fast rifle bullets, slow velocity, i.e. 500 grains, 2150 fps.

[freakshow10mm]

Dr. Courtney posts a lot on Glocktalk's Caliber Corner. They treat him like a god over there.

My opinion: Ballistic pressure wave might exist, but it isn't a significant factor.

Shot placement. Penetration. Expansion.

[Aqeous]

I would be curious to here what you last conversation with him did not explain very well? What did it entail and why?



EDIT: Just ran a search, I had no idea he posted here. Thanks for the heads up. Is there anyone else of significance who is apart of this forum that I should know about??

[Socrates]

BB posted:

FWIW I have used 40s and 45s on 'coons and there is no noticable difference in how they die when shot with ANY of the big three. Subsonic, standard, hyper velocity, you name it I have tried it on the critters all seem to be very inconsistant unless I got an exit, nothing scientific about my "tests" (not realy a test, I just wanted the never ending plague of 'coons gone from the farm).

If the bullet doesn't exit, it has to seriously slow down, in the animal. Contrary to popular,

"If it exits, it loose energy"

If it doesn't exit, it has a large area that it could have proceeded through at near entrance velocity. In other words, the potential damage it could have done is missed.

The going logic is off side skin, in humans, is equal to about 5-6" of penetration in ballistic gello.
So, if you hit a person 12" thick, and the bullet stays in the target, there is a considerable distance where the bullet is not creating a pressure wave, since it's moving much slower then the entrance velocity, that may create a pressure wave(Dr. Courtney has a rather cool graph that indicates the velocity neccessary to consistently create a ballistic pressure wave). In fact, you could have used a bullet with MUCH more energy, that penetrates 17-18", and still not had an exit wound, or barely had one.
If you look at it that way, all of a sudden the 18" penetration doesn't look so dreadful, and, may in fact be
one of the reasons handgun bullets are considered relatively ineffective.

For perspective, look at these gello results from Double Tap:

DoubleTap .40 S&W Penetration / expansion
155gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1275fps - 13.00" / .76"
165gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1200fps - 14.0" / .70"
180gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1100fps - 14.75" / .68"

DoubleTap 10mm
155gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1475fps - 13.5" / .88"
165gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1400fps - 14.25" / 1.02"
180gr Gold Dot JHP @ 1300fps - 15.25" / .96"

The above three examples really give a vivid illustration of what I'm getting at. The energy difference are real big, about 500 fpe for the 40, and over 700 for the 10mm.

Yet all that happens is the bullets open up faster, put more energy into the target, and penetrate about the same. One might conclude that the difference in expansion,
.7" vs. nearly 1", requires nearly an additional 40% of foot pounds of energy to move the projectile through the same medium, the same distance.

Here's where it starts getting REAL intresting:
http://www.brassfetcher.com/180grHorn44mag.html

Single shot impacted at 1571 ± 0.500 ft/sec and penetrated to 12.6 ± 0.031". Average recovered diameter was 0.743 ± 0.0005"

We now add another 271 fps to the bullet speed, use a bullet that actually expands less then the Gold Dot, and, we get LESS penetration, with the same weight bullet, going WAY faster. It appears that the increase from .40 to .429" REALLY decreases the bullets penetration. So, to get back to the 10mm 15" penetration, we could probably add another 300 fps, and maybe get there. That's the HUGE
advantage the larger calibers have. If I use the same Gold Dot, I might be able to push it 2000 fps, have little recoil, and, on top of getting barely 15" penetration, I'll likely get a fragmented bullet, that will further increase the ballistic pressure wave.

[Aqeous]

Awesome . . .

[Socrates]

Thanks

Anyway, Dr. Courtney had a hard time explaining the rather large wound channel the big bullets, at very low velocities create. I'm talking about the 440 grain LFN .500JRH bullets, that we have a lot of experience with. The guys have taken a LOT of heavy game, 1200 pounds plus with the .500JRH, and, the consensus is it kills about like a 375 H&H rifle, with 300 grain soft points. The 375 is very popular with american bison
hunters, so they have an excellent comparision round.

Since Courtney's little chart was based on ft lbs of energy, IIRC, it doesn't make any sense, when you have a handgun round around 1200 fpe, and a rifle round thats around 5000 fpe, yet from observations, they kill about the same.

[Socrates]

Mas Ayoob also posts here, and, if you start talking about handloads for CCW, he may jump in.

Also the owner posts here, but last time I saw a post it was in the rifle forum.

[freakshow10mm]

Mas Ayoob also posts here, and, if you start talking about handloads for CCW, he may jump in.

He does too over on GT. That's cool. I'm an 06 FFL so I am factory ammo.

[Aqeous]

Once again I am reminded of how much I still have to learn . . . but at least now I feel like I am on the right track and I am beginning to really put my finger on it.

I am amazed that these basic facts are not more common knowledge . . . I had to dig pretty good to find this stuff out. Its not exactly main stream stuff?? I wonder why?

[Socrates]

Dr. Courtney's stuff is a work in progress, a new comer on the block, trying to explain stuff.

check his website, it's also a work in progress...

[Boris Bush]

http://us.share.geocities.com/alanco...hester_9mm.pdf

Socrates

I posted that link for another member on a question he had about the ammo that I just happen to use most. It is a report on 27 actual shootings into humans. Most get full penetration with the bullet just under the far side skin. My EXACT experience when shooting deer. Penetration depended on the angle of the shot and ranged from 10-17". On smaller critters like 'coons I would get consistant exits and consistant kills.

I have had a chance to test alot of loads and have seen real differences in what works best through observation. Light fast energy dumping bullets for pistol calibers dont cut it, penetration and accuracy is what worked for me. handguns do not posess enough "power" to create large waves of pressure. Full penetration and multiple accurate shots are what I have observed to work best on critters from 15-35 pounds up to smaller deer up to 110 pounds or so.

[Socrates]

Boris:

My point above is there is a TON, literally, for energy, in rounds that will penetrate the same as the heavy 9mm round.

Excellent article, by the way. Thank you

PS my favorite 475 load has this exact specs:
400 gr. J.H.P. (1350 fps / M.E. 1618 ft.lbs.)


A load I want to meet, or exceed, in either the 475 or the .500 Linebaugh Max is:
350 gr. J.H.P (1500 fps / M.E. 1748 ft. lbs.)

If it over penetrates, I can kick the bullet weight down to 275-325 grain Gold Dots, and move the speed up, which will make it even higher on Dr. Courtney's ballistic pressure wave scale...

By the way, I have a bunch of 525 grain bullets, at 1350 fps(2125 fpe), and, out of my gun, can be pushed up to 1550(2801 ft lbs energy), but, I can't handle 82 ft lbs of recoil, even for about 2800 ft lbs of energy...

[sks]

EDIT: Just ran a search, I had no idea he posted here. Thanks for the heads up. Is there anyone else of significance who is apart of this forum that I should know about??

I'm here.