Training Idea

[strong]

I was thinking about center mass shot placement and had an idea.

I went to the local big and tall store and bought a 6XL T-shirt and a pair of cheap very large baggy jeans. I put the clothing on a cardboard silhouette with the pants very low. The clothing made the figure difficult to make out.

I took some center mass shots and then removed the clothing to see where they ended up. Needless to say they were lower than usual.

The question is how to take shots when a BG is so clothed that it is hard to tell where the body is?

[Alex45ACP]

Just shoot him in the head.

[teriyakisaki]

aim for the middle-most portion. an inch or two off true center of center mass is still a killshot if not incapacitation.

[threegun]

Strong, You have completed half the battle already. Just by acknowledging this problem and thinking about solutions you have an advantage. Take it one step furthur and think about how angles play into your bullets path. Say for instance a bad guy is bladed almost but not completely sidways. You fire for the center mass of what is presented to you............problem is center mass at certain angles would completely miss vitals. At some angles it might only create a nasty flesh. Understanding this as you do and being able to hit were you aim at and you are a ok.

This is one reason why it is so important to get multiple hits on the bad guy ASAP.

[JoeBlackSpade]

When you hear trainers telling to strike your targets at "Center Mass", this does not mean heart, lungs, kidneys, etc.

It means exactly that: Center Of Mass.



Stopping power of a firearm doesn't come simply because you struck the heart. It comes from the transference of energy from the round into the torso, and the shock waves that come from the release of that energy. Remember that the body is mostly water. Just as you can imagine a pebble fired at high velocity into the water, you can get an idea of what the human body tends to do when it is struck by a round. It wants to ripple outward from the impact point, particularly deep into the torso, in the direction of travel.

Ball ammunition tends to have modest amounts of energy transference, and may go right through the target. If the round exits the body, it will take with it some of the kinetic energy that it had when it was originally fired. While certainly possessing lethal potential, ball ammunition may not stop an attacker reliably, as simply piercing holes in someone's gut may not create an immediately incapacitating wound, and much of the energy that was sent downrange escapes the target's body. Taken in real world terms, a gun-weilding attacker can still fire off a few rounds at you, even though you've shot him in the gut 3 or 4 times with ball ammo. The tendency of ball ammo to bounce off of bones and back out of the skin means even chest shots may not stop your attacker.

Using hollow point ammunition, the round flattens upon impact like a tin can, and the energy is transferred more readily into the target, hence more stopping power. In many cases, the round won't pass all the way through the target, but get lodged below the surface, doing extraordinary damage to the tissue. Since the round does not escape the target, its energy does not escape either and 100% of the energy is transferred into the target. The result is a much greater traumatic "shockwave" into the torso. There are limitations to hollow point ammo, however, namely velocity. At velocities of less than 1,000 fps, it may behave just like ball ammo.

Then you have special ammunition like Hydra Shock, which expand at an even greater rate, simply because their "hollow point" is filled with a very soft substance, usually lead. That soft metal (located at the tip of the round, and surrounded by a "jacket" of harder metal) expands dramatically upon impact with the target, forcing the jacket around it to expand into a flower shape, even at slower velocities (less than 1,000 fps). This is great for your heavier ammunition of .380 or larger. A few rounds of Hydra Shock .45 will knock down a Sumo wrestler in mid-step. It may also be more effective at longer ranges, since its stopping power does not rely solely on velocity.

The other advantage to specialized rounds like Hydra Shock is its tendency NOT to penetrate walls. Taking an attacker down in your home, or in a building, and you are less likely to punch holes through the attacker and into innocent bystanders behind them, or obscured by dry wall, etc.

Follow the experts, and don't try to gauge where the heart is. In a gunfight, Center Of Mass describes finding the very middle of that fuzzy blob (your attacker) floating in front of your FRONT SIGHT POST.

Get some good ammo, and rest easy. In a gunfight, concentrate on sight alignment, sight picture and smoothly squeezing off your rounds in rapid succession, and let the ammunition do the rest.

[David Armstrong]

The question is how to take shots when a BG is so clothed that it is hard to tell where the body is?

Without comment on the rest of it, what joe said regarding center mass is the key. Just find the middle of your target and shoot it. Don't worry about getting things real precise, just try to get rounds on the target. If you are a little off, so what? Think the BG is really going to notice that you shot him 3 inches lower than you wanted too?

[Tim Burke]

I do not think the true center of mass represents a good target. On frontal targets, I like the high chest, i.e. the triangle formed by the nipples and the notch at the top of the sternum. If you know your landmarks, this can usually be identified even with clothed targets.

[JoeBlackSpade]

Head shots, heart shots, etc....

We aren't talking sniping, right guys? We're talking about a blazing fast gunfight, where you see a charging psycho lunatic with a gleaming 12-inch Rambo knife coming at you from across the parking lot after a nice dinner by the wharf. You've got 2 seconds to draw and stop him before he impales you, or your wife/girlfriend. In that amount of time, going for anything other than TRUE center of mass will likely result in a miss- or substantially increase the chances of one anyway.

Sure, if you have time, pick off your shots as you like, but I'd define that as sniping targets of opportunity, not defensive gunfighting.

Just my opinion, and certainly if your eye is quick enough and you practice plinking from the holster on 3" X 3" targets on a weekly basis, then by all means, go for it.

Military and select law enforcement people use 3 X 5 cards to shoot on, using MP-5's - and 9mm subsonic loads- under low light conditions while wearing gas masks, so it can be done! Of course, they aren't drawing from the hip- they're at the ready when they come through the door.

[Double Naught Spy]

Strong,
Good for you! If you are wanting a center of chest shot (what folks often incorrectly refer to as center of mass) then just figure that location is 6-10" below the head. Of course, that only works for an upright person.

JoeBlackSpade said

Sure, if you have time, pick off your shots as you like, but I'd define that as sniping targets of opportunity, not defensive gunfighting.

First, that would be defensive shooting. Gunfighting is when the bad guys are shooting back as well. It isn't a gunfight if only one guy has a gun.

Second, if the person is a threat and subject to lethal force being used against him/her, then it does not matter where that person is shot or whether you think it is "defensive gunfighting" or not. That is just silly. Just because you have the time and or skills to make a precision shoot does not negate that shot as being defensive.

FYI, a few dozen LAPD officers attempted head shots on the North Hollywood bank robbers, most all from ranges at 50-100 yards. They did not succeed, but if they had, would you have claimed that they were not shooting defensively?

[JoeBlackSpade]

Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy

First, that would be defensive shooting. Gunfighting is when the bad guys are shooting back as well. It isn't a gunfight if only one guy has a gun.

Okeedokie. I stand corrected.

Second, if the person is a threat and subject to lethal force being used against him/her, then it does not matter where that person is shot or whether you think it is "defensive gunfighting" or not. That is just silly. Just because you have the time and or skills to make a precision shoot does not negate that shot as being defensive.

I probably could have worded my post a little better. I agree 100% with what you are saying- that IF you can make a head or chest shot in a defensive situation, its still defense. My point was- and still is- that when you are drawing and firing on a target, what you see (if you are looking at your front sight post) is a dark blurry mass. Your focus is on your front sight post, not the target. As I understand it, the "mass" that you are trying to fire in the "center" of is that mass that your attacker becomes when you are no longer focusing on them, and rather are focused on your front sight post, as it hovers in front of them. Hence the term "shoot center of mass". The principles of marksmanship do not change, whether you are shooting under stress or sprawled out under a date palm with a Barrett .50 cal, taking out a napping sentry at 2500 meters.

If you sharply distinguish the features and shapes of your target, you are shifting your focus off of your front sight post, and back onto the target- which will result in a miss.

FYI, a few dozen LAPD officers attempted head shots on the North Hollywood bank robbers, most all from ranges at 50-100 yards. They did not succeed, but if they had, would you have claimed that they were not shooting defensively?

I suspect they missed because basic marksmanship wasn't being applied properly. Having said that, of course they were under fire, and under extreme stress. My point is not concerning the issue of whether or not a head shot is defensive or not. My view is that making head shots (or precision heart shots) in a high stress situation is difficult to make, even by very well trained individuals. Your comment about the LAPD illustrates that quite well.

My mistake for not explaining myself properly. A justified defensive situation is defensive regardless of where your rounds impact. My point concerns whether or not it is prudent to use a handgun the way a designated marksman uses a rifle. IMO, its a misapplication of the tool, and likely to get someone killed- besides the perpetrator.

[NukemJim]

Stopping power of a firearm doesn't come simply because you struck the heart. It comes from the transference of energy from the round into the torso, and the shock waves that come from the release of that energy

And then to see that the images are from Dr Fackler

Now that is dicotomy

NukemJim

[JoeBlackSpade]

And then to see that the images are from Dr Fackler

Dr. Fackler- a respected, often quoted source on wound ballistics- has said that the only reliable way to stop a person is with a disabling impact on the CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM. All other stops are from the result of blood loss, and the associated loss of oxygen, i.e. bleeding out.

On first glance, that seems to contradict (or provide a dichotomy as you put it) what I posted above.

However, in my view, Dr. Fackler is a wound ballistics expert, whose focus is on the autopsy table, or perhaps at the ballistic gelatin lab. Essentially, we are comparing two different things: First, The overwhelming majority of anecdotal and scenario based consensus provided to us by Law Enforcement officers that have survived gunfights (or defensive shooting scenarios), including Mas Ayoob, is that center of mass shooting is the key to accuracy under stress. Second, there are many other experts that have dissected the actual processes involved in induced cardiac arrest as a result of ballistic trauma. In other words, center of mass shots to the torso can- and often does- induce an instant heart attack on the attacker. The sudden shock wave to the torso forces blood to travel away from the impact- blowing out what are normally one-way valves around the heart by forcing blood in the opposite direction of its natural flow. This results in an instant loss of blood pressure, instant loss of blood flow, and moments later, the loss of consciousness of the attacker.

This type of stoppage, while not as fast as a Central Nervous System impact, is much faster than the "bleeding out" described by Dr. Fackler, in the case of a carotid artery, or femoral artery puncture/laceration (for example) or damage to an extremity.

[Double Naught Spy]

My mistake for not explaining myself properly. A justified defensive situation is defensive regardless of where your rounds impact. My point concerns whether or not it is prudent to use a handgun the way a designated marksman uses a rifle. IMO, its a misapplication of the tool, and likely to get someone killed- besides the perpetrator.

I have not known many designated marksmen use rifles for headshots inside of 7 yards, but that is where most self defense shootings take place.

Okay, once again, it isn't a matter of what somebody else does or what you think their job is. Your repeated comparisons with the point of impact being related to that of a job done by a sniper or designated marksman doesn't make sense. There is no relevance as to what other people do. The question at hand is whether or not the shot can or needs to be made.

From your statements, my guess is that you don't practice head shots, because everything is going to be blurry for you? Yet, many folks here, various instructors, all speak of the virtues of failure to stop drills that specifically involve making head shots. I will say this, in the case of Mark Wilson in Tyler not making a head shot, he did get killed by the guy he was shooting. Problem was that the guy was wearing armor.

I suspect they missed because basic marksmanship wasn't being applied properly. Having said that, of course they were under fire, and under extreme stress. My point is not concerning the issue of whether or not a head shot is defensive or not. My view is that making head shots (or precision heart shots) in a high stress situation is difficult to make, even by very well trained individuals. Your comment about the LAPD illustrates that quite well.

No, they all took basic marksmanship and requalified yearly. The problem was not that they had no training, but that they qualified out to 25 yards and LAPD specifically did not stress head shots for the street personnel. So they were shooting minimally from double the distance to four times the distance at which they qualified and trying to hit a target much smaller than required for qualifications. Most probably had no idea where their rounds were impacting given distance and drop. My point does illustrate head shots are difficult to make at 50-100 yards by folks not trained to shoot past 25, no doubt about it, but that does not make all head shots so difficult given that the most common self defense shootings are no more than a few feet.

By the way, I like your blurry target and gun sights graphic. It makes it look like a defensive head shot would be pretty darned hard because the head is so small. Cute, but misleading for normal defensive shooting.

Those look to be Glock sights. Either your eyeball is waaaaay too close to the sights, or if the gun is held at arms' length for a proper sighted shot, that sight picture is for a target some 30+ yards distant. It is probably closer to 50 yards. That target is so far away that the front sight appears wider than head of the target and is more than half the width of the body. Nice graphic, but it is not the sight picture most defensive shooters see where their attacker is 7 yards or less distant.

[JoeBlackSpade]

Spy, tell me, have you ever heard of any headshot drill that didn't first start with "two to the chest" or "two to the hip"?

If so, I'd love to know who's teaching to put two rounds center head, right from the holster. That's the school I'd stay away from.

I'm pretty sure every elite group, unit, and agency on the planet teaches two rounds center mass, followed by two to the head, or two to the hip, etc.

I don't think its prudent to wager, in the middle of a gunfight (or defensive shooting scenario) that you're going to draw and squeeze off on a target that's between 25% and 33% the size of a torso, while said target is moving either laterally or otherwise- and under the pressure of impending bodily harm.

Nobody that I've ever heard of is teaching the application of using a handgun for taking headshots, except as follow up to center mass, or in cases of body armor (as you pointed out, i.e., failure to stop). Failure to stop drills doesn't seem to be what the thread was about, though. And, in defense of my DM comment, it is quite the norm to train to make head shots, if you are the team sniper.



As for the graphic, it's not necessarily good for depicting actual distances, as eye-relief would affect the entire ratio. In other words, if you have really short arms, that's what the sight picture's gonna look like. The illustration is just good for showing what you should see when acquiring sight picture.

I included it for two reasons:

1.) an attacker's going to instinctively lower his head in a conflict involving violence.

2.) the human body instinctively hunches forward in a conflict involving violence.

the entire center of mass is therefore inclined to you. Viewing from dead on, the entire silhouette is smaller, and the acceptable impact area necessary for a stop is smaller of necessity. This is the best reason to fire center mass, IMHO.

[threegun]

Spy, I can on demand hit a head size target out to ranges of 25-35 yards with great consistency out of a weapon not meant for such distances (handgun). Still if the SHTF I'm going to fire for center mass. Why, because as Joe nicely posted, in a real shoot out the bad guy isn't stapled to a target frame and will most likely be moving. Add that I'm under the pressure of eminent death should I fail to stop the bad guy and marksmanship skills erode for most people (I must assume that mine will also).

What I can do is put hits on the biggest part of the bad guy that will incapacitate him. If that fails (and I'm still able to fight) keep the mental clarity to understand that body armor, missing vitals due to angles, or missing the vitals due to bad guys luck might force alternative shots to the pelvic girdle or head.

I'd love to know who's teaching to put two rounds center head, right from the holster. That's the school I'd stay away from

I agree with Joe that if someone is teaching you draw and go for the head, get rid of them. Your odds of survival are better going to the largest target availible, that can incapacitate, given realistic shoot out expectations. Firing at center mass of that target of course.

[Double Naught Spy]

Sorry Strong that your thread has been hijacked.

Joe, I see you have changed tactics again. You have taken my comment about instructors who do teach failure to stop drills (involving head shots) and then saying,

Spy, tell me, have you ever heard of any headshot drill that didn't first start with "two to the chest" or "two to the hip"?

If so, I'd love to know who's teaching to put two rounds center head, right from the holster. That's the school I'd stay away from.

Well Joe, I said nothing about any schools with drills with head shots from the holster drills. I specifically did say "failure to stop drills." Do you know what those are? Those are where you transition to the head after COM shots have failed to produce a stop. This was something Mark Wilson did not do.

I'm pretty sure every elite group, unit, and agency on the planet teaches two rounds center mass, followed by two to the head, or two to the hip, etc.

I don't think its prudent to wager, in the middle of a gunfight (or defensive shooting scenario) that you're going to draw and squeeze off on a target that's between 25% and 33% the size of a torso, while said target is moving either laterally or otherwise- and under the pressure of impending bodily harm.

Well Joe, that is where you would be in error. Most elite groups, units, agencies on the planet teaches to shoot the best target available given the circumstances. So do most standard groups, units, agencies. That target won't always be a nice big COM torso.

Joe and threegun, y'all will want to avoid classes from Thunder Ranch and from Ken Hackathorn, and probably from many other schools as well. They do teach head shots from holster draws. Why? Because that may be the only shot you have available and one of the mantras repeated is that if you don't practice it, then you probably aren't going to do it under stress. I am not big into mantras, but people really do tend to fight like they train.

For example, if a guy is engaging you from over the top of a car, what target is available for you to hit? Is it going to be a great big ole COM body shot or is it going to be a head shot? This is the connection threegun failed to make. Because of cover, armor, use of a hostage, etc., the largest COM shot available may be just the head.

Spy, I can on demand hit a head size target out to ranges of 25-35 yards with great consistency out of a weapon not meant for such distances (handgun).

You are going to have to help me here. Just what gun maker stipulates that their handguns were not designed for shooting out to 35 yards? What patents have this information? And I will say it again, most gunfights are not at the distances stated. Most are within 7-10 yards. Can you draw and fire at a target head and hit it consistently at those ranges? How about at 5 yards. 3?

The bottom line here is that COM is ideally for the torso if the bad guy is out in the open. However and as noted, there is the issue of available COM or available incapacitating COM (threegun's concept). You don't always have a torso available, but since the bad guy's primary fighting senses are on his head, it will be what he uses for gathering data and so it is likely what will become available to hit even if no other target is available. Of course, that is a two way street as it is where most of your fighting senses will be too.

I don't see why y'all are so quick to completely disregard an option that may be necessary to exploit. It is strange to dismiss hitting a particular target as too hard, as being somebody else's job, or only taught at schools you would avoid when it may be your only viable target, that somebody else whose job it is may not be there to aid you, and when it is actually taught by reputable schools and instructors.

[JoeBlackSpade]

Sorry Strong that your thread has been hijacked.

Isn't this exactly the content of the OP: He was thinking about Center Mass, and wanted to know the opinion of others, with regards to best shot placement options, when the torso was covered in large clothes. We're right where we should be, no?

Joe, I see you have changed tactics again.

Spy, I've been saying the same thing from the first post, which I'm starting to wonder if you read, no offense.

I specifically did say "failure to stop drills." Do you know what those are?

Eh... I'm wondering if you read my post. I've said many times that it is wise to immediately follow up with head shots (or other targets of opportunity) AFTER making shots to center of mass. In fact, the last post I made on THIS thread (the one you replied to, and then QUOTED) says the same thing, which is to follow up center mass with head or hip.

Well Joe, that is where you would be in error. Most elite groups, units, agencies on the planet teaches to shoot the best target available given the circumstances.

Hmm. You sure about that?

For example, if a guy is engaging you from over the top of a car, what target is available for you to hit?

Obviously if the only thing showing is the guy's head, (or if as I've said before, the guy is draped in BA) then you'd need to take a head shot. Statistically, however, the vast majority of law enforcement stop the perpetrator with Center of Mass shots. Which is why you train that way. Go with statistics.

Just what gun maker stipulates that their handguns were not designed for shooting out to 35 yards?

The M1911A1, the model sidearm of choice for law enforcement, military and security forces, has a max effective range of 82 feet. That's 27 yards.

Granted, newer smaller caliber weapons such as the Glock .40, and the Beretta M-9 have max effective ranges of as much as 163 feet- 53 to 54 yards, but that's a far cry from making head shots at such ranges.

The bottom line here is that COM is ideally for the torso

Agreed from Day 1.

I don't see why y'all are so quick to completely disregard an option

I never said disregard options.

What I said (and what I will stick to) is that a systematic approach to defensive shooting is necessary and that in training (drilling) one should practice by taking shots to the center of mass, and follow up by taking head shots or hip shots, EXCEPT where the situation obviously restricts this. As you've restated, you will react as you train, and this is how I believe a defender should react, if he wants to survive. I also said this is what the overwhelming majority of instructors teach. Last of all, this pattern, i.e., two center mass, followed up by two to the head/hip, is statistically supported as the pattern that has saved the lives of law enforcement.

The information you are putting out seems to suggest that Bob Citizen should go home, and start training to draw from the holster, and squeeze off head shots, just in case. While I think that there's nothing wrong with incorporating head shots into a balanced self defense training regimen, the average shooter has a hard time even drawing and making tight groups CENTER MASS, let alone head shots.

I've trained with some VERY good shooters (PM me and I'll tell you who), and we fired head shots with 3X5 cards, constantly. That, however, was when I was part of a unit that had an unlimited budget for ammunition, and I spent many months of training between 20 and 40 hours a week shooting (depending on the training evolution). And even then, these were open carry holsters on a range at 3 and 7 meters.

While I respect your views, I can't quite understand what you are getting at.

[BluesBear]

Oh my. Where to start.

There is so much urine flying back and forth it's hard to see the facts.

Joe, while I respect your opinions 95% of the time. You really need to do a little more study on bullet design and terminal ballistics.
There just aren't any major "shock waves" from typical defense handgun ammunition. You might get that kind of performance from a Thompson Center Contender in .30-30 but you'd better connect with that first round because you reloads are gonna be a real witch. You really need high powered rifle velocities to get shock waves. And with your average J-Frame or Kel-Tec pocket rocket it just ain't gonna happen.

Federal Hyrda-Shok bullets will sail right through drywall and other common home construction materials as will most other good hollow point designs.

I was a distributor for the original Scorpion ammunition from the old Hydra-Shok sompany (actually DP&E Ammo Company). The later designs as marketed by Federal after they purchased all of the production rights are very good bullets. I've carried them. Hell's Bells™ I've even "used" them.
So lemme tell you from experience, they ain't the end all be all those slick ads in the magazines say they are. While they offer marvelous expansion in human flesh they all too often suffer from a stopped up nose. That nifty little post in the middle that makes it "blosson" (with some assistance from fluid dynamics) has been down-sized so much that it's now unable to keep debris out of the cavity. The fact is that it can often act just like those old "memo spikes" you used to see on office desks.
(You know the kind where you just keep stacking the memos one on top of another and the spike holds them like a nice tower.)
So Hydra-Shok has a nasty habit of getting clogged and reverting to ball ammunition with all of the characteristics of over-penetration and riccochets. While denim is often the culprit it seems that the real krypton for Hydra-Shok is fleece and the insulation found in most starter type jackets. "Hoodies" and similar garments just love to clog small hollow points.
Now don't get me wrong Hydra-Shok is still great ammo. But it's not always the best. It has steadily lost it's once formidable share of the LE market to newer better designs such as Gold Dot and Golden Sabre. Even Federal has developed what they consider a superior design.


Fackler is a very learned man. You can learn a lot from his research. However those who blindly idolize him and regard his words as gospel... well... those threads usually get locked real quick.

[BluesBear]

SO...
With regards to the original question posed in this thread, let's discuss tactics.

Strong had a very good idea by clothing his targets.
That's a very good way to get some real world feedback and that's how you learn the best.

Its always easier to aim for "the big part" in a draw and fire situation.

Some of the best instructors out there use the prescription, "Present, Front sight, Press!... Repeat As Needed".
And there's a good reason for this.

As a rule, us civilians don't present our weapons until the threat is already appeared. Once action has been decided we need to get moving. Most of the time you'll barely have the time to get your muzzle on target much less acquire a good sight picture.
So you shoot for the big part. In practice I work on the ribcage theory.
It's actually quite simple, the parts I need to damage to stop the action are protected by the rib bones. If I aim for the lower sternum and work my way up. If the target doesn't disengage with he first shot (or shots if I double tap) I just unbutton this chest one round at a time. Recoil moves my muzzle up so I just stitch my way up untill he or she crumples.

No matter what the angle, I go for the center. Visualize a vertical rod running up and down through the body. That's my target. No matter which way they turn, bend, lean, of fall, that central "pole" is my target.
There will always be a body part along that pole that is not bullet friendly.
There will always be an organ that doesn't respond well to perforations.
If I even remotely suspect there is body armor or extra heavy clothing dimishing the effectiveness of my ammunition I immediately go for the snot locker. The center of the triangle formed by the eyes and nose become my point of aim. One of my .41/.44/.45 projectiles there will probably cause them extreme discomfort.
Unless you hit the spine or pelvic bone there's not much below the ribcage you can perforate with reliable results. Gut shots, even with Hydra-Shoks, are highly unlikely to be a "one shot stop". Even if they expire before EMS gets there there is the danger of them still harming you or someone else.

My primary shooting range has a target we call "Organ Man". It's a life sized male target and in low contrast printing there are outlines of the major organs.
You can't see them from firing distance but you can when scoring.
They can really help you get a handle on the best places to park your gold dots.

[JoeBlackSpade]

Bear,

Thanks for putting a little perspective in here. This certainly isn't a two-sided discussion. It's got about as many facets as a diamond, I suspect.

BTW, I'm aware that HS will penetrate drywall, and have done my fair share of hole-punching. My statement was regarding the fact that it is LESS LIKELY- statistically- to do so after exiting a target, since so much of its energy has been spent, provided you get the hoped-for expansion. I certainly wouldn't advise anyone to stand behind a target while I light it up with HS!

Great to know we have a knowledgeable ammunition guy swooping in and keeping our facts straight.

I was completely unaware the role of certain fabrics regarding EXPANSION, although I knew it would play a role in penetration. Interesting.


Maybe you can point us to another thread concerning commercially available specialty loads, and how they compare with classic HS? I say that so as not to derail this one.

[BluesBear]

That's why I advocate the rid-cage theory. There are plenty of nice blood filled, squishy bits inside there to active a good hollow point.

There's no such thing as magic bullets. If there were then every police department in the country would be using them.
Choose a quality load from from of the major players and run with it.
As Charlie Petty says, "Devote less time to worrying about your ammo and more time learning to shoot better."
Unless you get a good hit the boiler room or the snot locker/brainbox you're just poling holes.

Now having said that (and here's where I will catch a whole lot of hell),
in warmer weather, I often carry Glaser Safety Slugs as my first two rounds. When they work they work unbelievably well! But they're just not all that good against really heavy clothing so I don't load them exclsively.

In cold weather I often carry a hardcast Keith style lead semi-wadcutter as the last round or two in case I need the increaded penetration.
I use a load that will hit as close to the point of impact as its preceeding hollow pointed brethren.
A sharp shouldered SWC will cut a nice hole. And getting the blood out and letting the air in is very important.

And in some of the smaller calibers a deep penetrating SWC can work better than a hollow point.

[FM12]

JoeBlackSpade: Where can I get me a set of sights the size of those in your previous post. I think at my age even I could see those!

[JoeBlackSpade]

Originally Posted by FM12

JoeBlackSpade: Where can I get me a set of sights the size of those in your previous post. I think at my age even I could see those!

That about made me spit out my coffee! Tell you what, that's our little 10 million dollar invention. P.M. me later and we'll talk about getting a patent on it. Gotta think of a name for them...

How about:

Cannon Ball Optics (?)
Castle Moat Sights
USS Kitty Hawk Sight System
CS4S (Can't See 4 S***) Sights





Bear: So you take the same approach with your handgun that I take with my Mossberg 500- sequence your rounds in a custom order. I load 2 buck, 2 slugs, 2 buck.

Curious, but how many guys do you think are packing their mags with several different types of ammunition? I'd wager the man who does is few and far between, but it really makes sense, although I was hoping you'd expound on the hot weather/cold weather aspect, when it comes to the Glaser. Is the coating/filling subject to substantial changes in its break-up properties in extreme temperatures? You said you want them in hot weather, so I assume that means they're softer in such conditions.

Also, what about a Magnum Glaser? Can custom loads like that be made, to get the penetration of a magnum with the expansion of a Glaser?

[Night Watch]

Mostly in the wintertime I alternate JHP and FMJ in my magazines.

Sometimes I've been criticized for doing this; but, my year's of shooting at all different sorts of targets have convinced me that JHP's and, either, winter clothing or barricades can be a problem. If you're worried about what's behind your target, either kneel before firing or move to a different position and engage the target from another angle.

Don't forget any bullet that misses can be a huge potential problem; and, I'll just bet that bystanders are in far greater danger from the multitude of rounds that frequently miss than from the comparatively few hits that will overpenetrate.

I don't see anything wrong with hitting low, either; after all, that's where Ayoob's, 'pelvic girdle' is located. By the way, from everything I've read Fackler has always hated the Glaser, 'Safety Slug'.

[BluesBear]

The Glaser is considered to be a "pre-fragmented" round. Instead of expanding it releases a large amount of very little birdshot (#12 in the blue & #6 in the silver) almost like a miniature fragmentation grenade.
It's designed to break up whenever it encounters a hard surface hence the "Safety" part of its name.

The same ball (except for colour) is used in the nose of both the Glaser Safety Slug and the Glaser Pow'R'ball bullets. It's planty tough.
Temperature has nothing to do with the ammuniton. It just alters the target.
So it's possible that if a GSS were to engountere a buckle or a heavy zipper pull or anything hard in the pocket of a jacket it could break up prematurely.
I have heard claims of it breaking up merely on heavy clothing but I've never been able to duplicate that in testing.
So that's the reason I usually don't use them in heavy coat weather.


Glasers are already loaded to a very high velocity. That's a must have with light shot since it tends to lose momentum very fast.


I strongly advise the same precautions if you're using Mag-Safe ammunition. Since the ultra light SWAT loadings by Mag-Safe have the scalloped edges of the jacket exposed it IS possible to make it fragment through heavy clothing.


Also the reason I don't load more than two* is that they might be semi-hard cover involved after the first few shots. By there very nature Glasers and Mag-Safes do not defeat hard cover. I figure my first two shots will be out in the open. I know I will be rapidly moving to a position of better safety so I must presume my opponent will do so likewise. If there is still a threat I don't want my fire thwarted by an overturned Starbuck's table.


Now to put this back in perspective with the thread topic...
And once again I appologize for contributing to thread drift.
This is another good reason to NOT use pre-fragmented ammo exclusively.
As fellow member Strong observed in his original post, IF your target(s) is covered with oversized baggy clothing as an attempt to disquise their body shape, it's sometimes easy to miss the vitals. And pre-fragmented ammunition just doesn't work well on the peripheral locations.
It will create a very nasty flesh wound but unless an artery is hit it's usually not fatal if promptly treated.
Glasers and Mag-Safes have their place in the toolbox. But they're not for everybody.
One huge drawback is you need a home equity loan to afford very many.
They can be extremely effective°, however, shot placement becomes even more critical.

The bottom line is, no matter what ammunition you use, there is no substitute for accuracy.
Accuracy is a skill, not a gift.
Practice Safe!
Practice Hard!
Practice OFTEN!




*In a magazine holding eight or more rounds I've been known to load two GSS in the mag and another in the chamber for a total of three out of nine+. However I'm a true dinosaur so I'm usually carrying a large bore revolver.


°(read Ayoob's book with the story of the restaraunt shooting where the good guy had a snub .44 loaded with six Glasers)