Hollowpoint expansion?

[C-grunt]

Does anyone know or know of a study about which hollowpoints expand reliably. Im pretty sure all good SD hollowpoints will do the job but Id like to know which ones are the most reliable at expanding.

[Lennyjoe]

check out www.ammolab.com for more info.

BTW, keep your head down and make it back safe will ya.

[armoredman]

User fee $100 for one year.

[pioneer]

the only thing i can say is dont base all of the decisions on jello testing. in his book by evan marshal on hadgun stopping power the human body is not consistant but jello is. for example the 200gr speer hollow point ( flying ashtray ) the bullet will expand reliably but when a swat team entered a home and shots were fired,it failed to expand although the person did go down because of surgical shot placement NOT of bullet performance.soo jello testing the bullet expanded but not in a person. thats some food for thought. :scrutiny:

[pioneer]

http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp here is the one that i trust because its actual street results and NOT jello testing.im not against jello testing but im not going to stake my life on it though. ;)

[Elmer]

Oh no, not again..... :banghead:

Ignore the Marshal-Sanow book, which was discredited as fiction by the wound ballistics community years ago.

Member here Shawn Dodson has a nice site WWW.firearmstactical.com (http://WWW.firearmstactical.com), which will steer you in the right directions.

There are some disagreements in the WB community, but at least most of those who do it for a living base their opinions on facts and science.

And properly calibrated gelatin has been shown to be an extremely accurate predictor of a bullets performance in human tissue. The kind of anecdotal information you'll find in the gunzines is pretty much worthless.

Gunwriters are usually the worst source of information.

[Elmer]

Here's a link to a review of the Marshal-Sanow book. Pretty much proves the book is BS. It's co-written by someone who Marshal said he obtained data on some of the shootings in the book from. He never gave it to him.




Stopping Power book review (http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm)

[pioneer]

well,im sorry that you think that evan marshals a fraud but theres a lot of police officers on his site that disagrees with ya.and yes ive read his books.however like he states at his website,if anyone out there can PROVE his literature to be false then WHY dont others out there come up with their own shooting data :confused: ,i think that there must be alot of professional jealousy against him.he just happen to be smart enough to figure out on how to come up with the info. ;)

[pioneer]

and theres one more thing that i will add here. everyone out there wants to know the sources for the info thats inside of his books,however knowing the sensitive nature of the info inside his books i can understand as to why he wont release the info.he could get his rear end sued off because the info was collected from various police depts out there,plus ammo makers could get involved in the lawsuites with them.yes,ive been to the links that you provided before,all it is is pure charactor assasination pure and simple.his data is very sound,and it ruined alot of preconceived ideas of what WILL work and what WONT work. :scrutiny:

[Elmer]

yes,ive been to the links that you provided before,all it is is pure charactor assasination pure and simple.

I find it odd that you read the link and got that out of it. The review was co-written by two well respected members of the International Wound Ballistics Association. One of them, Gene Wolberg, authored many papers on wound ballistics, some of which are still used as standards today. He was the chief ballistics expert for the San Diego Police Department, and testified as a court expert all over the country.

Marshal claimed to have received shooting data from Wolberg, which Wolberg publicly stated he never gave to Marshal. Since Marshal claimed in his book to have data to support all the shootings used for his "study", and Wolberg challenged him to provide it, because he never sent it to him, it puts in question all the conclusions in his book.

Most cops know almost nothing of wound ballistics, so the fact that many read his articles doesn't lend any credibility to Marshal.



i can understand as to why he wont release the info

his data is very sound


Not sure how you came to that opinion, but you're certainly entitled to it.

[pioneer]

well your entitled to your opinion,but im not going to go with the jello tests myself because the human body isnt made with jello. :rolleyes:

[Lennyjoe]

User fee $100 for one year.
:what:

I remember when you could drop into ammolab and see all the test results for free.

[Elmer]

the human body isnt made with jello.



Speak for yourself. At my age, many parts are quite Jello-like....... ;)

[mspears]

We need to keep this in perspective. Evan Marshall is a highly respected individual that has provided us with some very interesting and valuable real world shooting data to mull over. The International Wound Ballistics Association also provides some interesting statistics to throw in the equation, but should not discredit anyone elses study to make theirs look 'correct' and right. Personally, I'll read, study and contemplate anyones honest effort to provide us with stopping power performance data so we may use our powers of self discernment in choosing the carry load that we may have to defend our life with.

Read all the reports you can get your hands on and make your own decision based on what you believe is the truth, but remember that shot placement is the number one criteria for stopping power performance, not the newest, greatest hollowpoint bullet. Beside, the 'bullet' is just a small part of the total self defense issue anyway. There are many other factors that contribute to ones' survival in a self defense situation.

[Elmer]

The International Wound Ballistics Association also provides some interesting statistics to throw in the equation, but should not discredit anyone elses study to make theirs look 'correct' and right.


real world shooting data


Can we get this straight?

Evan Marshal wrote a book, where he purported to have studied "street shootings," and gave numerical values to various caliber's and rounds rating their "one shot stop" probabilities. One extremely well respected member of the IWBA, a full time ballistics expert from a major police department, who was listed as a source for some of the data, publicly stated he never gave it to Marshal. Wolberg had no competitive book, no axe to grind, he was just stating facts. Since Marshal claimed to have exaustive reports to back up all the shooting data in the book, and Wolberg never sent any to him, this placed the veracity of the book in question.

The public loves the idea of a 96% one shot stop bullet. Since the scientific community can't give them these kind of numbers, there's room for other folks to do it. And facts and data don't seem to be necessary.

So enjoy reading whatever you choose, and pick your ammo on whatever data, or lack of data you wish. But there are folks studying this subject everyday, doing it for a living, that you'll have to seek out their information. Their information is dry, and hard to read, but it's based on science, and is subject to the review of the rest of the wound ballistics community.

[armoredman]

I will keep shooting until the BG ceases his felonious assault. I like a high "one shot stop" percentage, but I am not betting on one shot!

[jc2]

Actually, the aforementioned Gene Wolberg did complete a peer reviewed study of the shhoting in which the San Diego PD was involved. He documented that there is very good correlation between the results obtain in properly mixed and calibrated ballistic gelatin and what actually happened when a bullet a human body.

A current generation premium 147-grain .36 calibre JHP will reliably deliver good penetration and expansion with a MV as low ~950-1000 fps. A current generation premium 230-grain .45 calibre JHP will reliabily penetrate and expand with a MV as low ~850-900 fps.

[pioneer]

people must not forget one important detail.ballistic gelatin simulates muscle tissue,the upper torso in the chest cavity is soft lung tissue,NOT muscle tissue.just like mas ayoob said before,ignore the information at your own peril. :rolleyes:

[ShelbyV8]

For you young guys that haven't been around as long as I have, Evan Marshall was a homiside detective in Detroit. His job was attending autopsies. His personal carry weapon was a S&W 25 45 long colt. His information was the only information in the 80's and early 90's. Since has data didn't support the 9mm most people try to discredit his data. I have not read any of his later data.

[Elmer]

Actually, the aforementioned Gene Wolberg did complete a peer reviewed study of the shhoting in which the San Diego PD was involved. He documented that there is very good correlation between the results obtain in properly mixed and calibrated ballistic gelatin and what actually happened when a bullet a human body.

Indeed. That was one of the definitive pieces of Gene's work I alluded to in my earlier post. I helped Gene make the gelatin for some of that study. Gene's work continued until his untimely death in 2000.

Looking at dead bodies as a homicide investigator is interesting, but usually the information gleaned becomes anecdotal. The Gunwriters with an ax to grind, and sometimes financial interests in ammunition companies, have tried to discredit the work that Gene, Fackler and other's have done. But thankfully, many large departments, and some small ones, have forensic firearms personnel, who can sift through the BS and get to the science.

So like I said, enjoy your reading, and select whichever triple whizzbang, dollar-a-shot round the latest gunzine tells you has an 111% "one shot stop" percentage. Most likely, you'll never have to find out if you were being shucked.

[jc2]

The Gunwriters with an ax to grind, and sometimes financial interests in ammunition companies, have tried to discredit the work that Gene, Fackler and other's have done.
I got a big kick out of Mas Ayoob pretending to be objective while he was the NE distributor for CorBon. I've read articles by Ed Sanow that should have been labeled an "infomercial" instead of an article. They're good for selling snake oil but nothing much else.

[Elmer]

The first time I met Sanow, he was behind the booth for Glaser at the SHOT show. He's another guy who never lets facts get in the way of his articles......

[RyanM]

Back on topic, you should look for gelatin tests where the bullets were fired through 4 layers of denim. The denim test is much harsher than most obstacles a bullet is likely to face "on the street," and studies have shown that bullets which perform consistently through denim also work consistently against humans.

[Elmer]

Back on topic, you should look for gelatin tests where the bullets were fired through 4 layers of denim. The denim test is much harsher than most obstacles a bullet is likely to face "on the street," and studies have shown that bullets which perform consistently through denim also work consistently against humans.



Well, there is some controversy on the 4 layer denim test. Some feel it was written to favor one particular bullet, that seems to work well in it, even though that bullet doesn't perform as well though some of the other protocols. Myself, I'm not sure how realistic 4 layers of denim is, compared to the traditional heavy clothing test. In cold climates you may have several layers of clothing, but probably not four layers of denim.

[armoredman]

OK, where are those test results? I am always willing to look. BTW, Even tested some 9mm rounds that came up fine. Anyone who used to go to his stoppingpower website would know he did not restrict himself to morgue studies, but also did extensive jello testing as well. That's why I carry what I have, and don't worry extremely much about it. Perhaps when big $ come back in to my life, I'll start buying the high end stuff again, but for now, I will concentrate on putting my 115gr high speed pill where it needs to go.


BTW, for those who love the 45/9mm debate, the big/small or light/heavy, here is a fact in easy to understand units of measurement.The actual difference in diameter is 95/100ths of an inch, or .095 inch. Just thought I'd add that.... :p

[RyanM]

Well, there is some controversy on the 4 layer denim test. Some feel it was written to favor one particular bullet, that seems to work well in it, even though that bullet doesn't perform as well though some of the other protocols. Myself, I'm not sure how realistic 4 layers of denim is, compared to the traditional heavy clothing test. In cold climates you may have several layers of clothing, but probably not four layers of denim.

The denim test really isn't meant to simulate any one type of clothing, though, it's simply meant to be a barrier which is harder to defeat (and expand on the other side) than the majority of cold-weather wear; thus, if a bullet works well through the denim, it will also do well through 99% of heavy clothing. It's like the +50% overpressure proof test for firearms. Guns are unlikely to ever have to undergo more then +10% pressure (+P), but a certain amount of over-engineering is desirable.

One thing I'd like to see, though, is a test which involves hard-ish barriers that would normally be found on or about one's person, like pencils, pens, cell phones, zippers, buttons, etc., to see if those have any effect.

And something to simulate ribs and other bones would be very practical as well, especially for law enforcement testing in jurisdictions that advocate the "2 to the chest, 2 to the pelvis" variation of the Mozambique drill.

[pauli]

The actual difference in diameter is 95/100ths of an inch, or .095 inch.

if the difference were 95/100ths of an inch, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

we'd be trying to figure out how in the heck you conceal something firing rounds in the 1.3" range ;)

[Elmer]

thus, if a bullet works well through the denim, it will also do well through 99% of heavy clothing.


Barriers have unique effects on a bullet's performance. Denim has it's own characteristics, and you can't extrapolate performance with other fabrics.

Again, I've seen some ammunition that would perform quite well through the traditional FBI heavy clothing protocol, but not as well on the 4 layer denim. Similarly, I've seen rounds do well on the 4 layer denim, but poorly on the other protocols.

It just seems strange to pick four layers of denim. I spent quite a few years as a cop, and never encountered anyone wearing four pairs of Levi's, or four denim jackets.

I would be suspect of anyone who pushed the 4 layer denim to the exclusion of the other protocols.

[RyanM]

What's the FBI heavy clothing test use? I forget; I think it's something like 2 layers of heavy fabric, 1 layer cotton T-shirt, and 1 layer cotton undershirt?

As to why 4 layers of denim, all I know is what I've read in mainly IWBA literature, which is that denim makes for a very difficult test, and isn't meant to simulate anything in particular.

My best guess is that there are too many different types of outerwear to be able to simulate every conceivable clothing combination someone could wear, and denim makes for an acceptable generic "tough cloth."

And it actually would be possible, albeit very unlikely, for a bullet to encounter 4 layers of denim. A bullet that hits the lower part of the watch pocket would have to go through at least 3 layers of denim, plus underpants and any cover garment that's in the way. One that hits a belt loop would have 4 or 6 layers plus belt and underoos. The fly area has 3 layers plus zipper. Above the fly is 4 layers, unless it hits right at the seam, which can be up to 10 layers (by my count) depending on exact location.

And a bullet that strikes in one of those areas could very well be the one that stops the fight, if it hits a femoral artery.

[boing]

"Recomended Duty/Self-Defense Service Pistol Loads"

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000964

Take note of the advice at the bottom of that post, too.

[axmurderer]

I've read some things (box o truth) that make me wonder about hollowpoint expansion when clothing is involved. Seems that if the "hollow" of a hollow point bullet is filled with cloth from passing through clothing, it may not expand reliably. Since most BGs wear clothing, it made me wonder.

I'd like to get more clarification on this, if I can. If anyone can add anything or know of gelatin tests that include a layer of clothing over the gelatin, I'd love to hear it.

[Elmer]

Ax,

Thats the purpose of the FBI protocol tests. The rounds are fired through various mediums put up in front of the gelatin blocks, including light and heavy clothing. And you are correct, some rounds will fill the nose cavity and not expand at all.

Most of the major companies ammunition, designed in the last 15 years or so, usually do fairly well, with the exception of some of the lightweight hyper velocity stuff, produced to satisfy the demand caused by gunwriters fictional articles.

[jc2]

The plugging of HPs with less clothing is less common than it once was thanks to better designed bullets. Most ballistics testing is done with bare and with clothed (usually four-layers of denim). The FBI protocols call for four layers of heavy cloth--one layer of cotton T-Shirt material (48 threads per inch); one layer of cotton shirt material (80 threads per inch); a I0 ounce down comforter in cambric shell cover (232 threads per inch); and one layer of 13 ounce cotton denim (50 threads per inch)

The FBI four layers of heavy cloth is meant to simulate winter clothing.

For my money, the bare gelatin results are pretty useless. Probably the best indicator of overall performance is the four-layers of denim test.

The four-layers of denim is often misunderstood in that many people assume (dangerous word, that) it is meant to simulate something. It is not. It is just a very tough barrier for HPs to defeat. Generally speaking, a round that does well against four-layers of denim does well in actual use. (Actually, the skin in many cases may prove a tougher barrier than clothing--the four-layer denim test seems to best reflect what really happens).

[axmurderer]

Elmer, and jc2... thanks for the additional info. I like to stay informed.

[shield20]

ahhh - hollowpoints that don't expand - makes you wish you shoot the bigger wider .451s instead of the smaller thinner .355 doesn't it?

[Elmer]

Actually my solution is to carry the .451 that expands to .90 or better.....

[c_yeager]

We have had a couple of threads in which Physicians and Medical Examiners have observed that expansion of hollowpoints is a rarity regardless of design. Really, if you take a look at the inside of a human body you will see that there isnt anything even resembling a good medium for expansion. We have very little "meat" on our bones and our organs are pretty soft and rubbery, really there isnt much inside us that even resembles jello in any way.

I would suggest choosing ammunition with the assumption that whatever your shooting *wont* expand, if it does then great, but you want something thats reasonably effective even if it doesnt.

[Elmer]

We have had a couple of threads in which Physicians and Medical Examiners have observed that expansion of hollowpoints is a rarity regardless of design.

Any Physician or Medical Examiner that would say today's good hollow point designs "rarely expand" would be incredibly dishonest, or insane.

Check with any major police department. It's rare for them not to expand. Go back to the 70's, and that statement would be a little more factual.

[jc2]

I think he went back to the 70s to find it.

[RyanM]

Remember, the physicians were looking at the people that survived long enough to make it to the ER. Also, since lawful self-defense shootings are quite a bit rarer than assaults in which both the perp and the victim are career criminals, the majority of the hollowpoints they saw were most likely WWB or other cheap-o boollits. I believe they also mentioned that the majority of gunshot wounds they treated were caused by .22s, .25s, .32s, .380s, and .38 SPLs (especially the latter three), with 9mm and up being much rarer.

[earthworm]

Hollow points MIGHT expand;solids WON'T.
Bullet placement is the key:use the most accurate & reliable load you & the gun will shoot.

[c_yeager]

I think he went back to the 70s to find it.

15 days to be exact.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=144893&highlight=expansion

Read the whole thread, pay particular note to posts by LoneGunman.

Explain to me how a modern police department has such great insight into the terminal effectiveness of their ammo. They dont get the bodies afterwards, and after having gun-related conversations with multiple police officers i wouldnt go to them for anything even approaching accurate firearms information.

Since most of that thread is off-point for us here i will quite the relevant passages:

Lone Gunman
I do general and vascular surgery, and this means I am also on call for trauma.
...
I cannot tell much (if any?) difference between a FMJ and JHP wound channel.

I have seen many 9mm, 380, 38 spec, 32, 25, and 22 wounds. The majority of these were FMJ's. Of the JHP's, I would guess that less than half expanded. Most were just deformed a little bit.

Cookekjdr
Lonegunman's experience mirrors mine as a homicide prosecutor. Just yesterday I met with an ME and we went over the slides from a homicide victim's autopsy. I told her I had never seen a hp bullet that expanded when it only contacted human tissue. She said she had seen a perfect mushroom before, but most hp bullets merely deform a little bit. Most, in her experience, do not expand, although they may separate from their jacket the same way fmj's bullets often do.

I'll take actual first hand experience over whatever dubious "research" gets itself published by people trying to sell books.

[jc2]

I'll take actual first hand experience over whatever dubious "research" gets itself published by people trying to sell books.
I think you should have paid a lot more attention to their qualifying statements and disclaimers. You assume way too much on far too little information.

[Elmer]

Explain to me how a modern police department has such great insight into the terminal effectiveness of their ammo. They dont get the bodies afterwards, and after having gun-related conversations with multiple police officers i wouldnt go to them for anything even approaching accurate firearms information.

Actually, I agree with you about most police officers, not knowing much about the performance of their service ammunition, including homicide investigators. However, many larger departments have firearms forensic personnel, who do collect the data from their officer involved shootings. They will specifically request information from the ME including penetration depths, etc. The bullets are retained for evidence in any of the cases, so it's quite easy to judge the performance. They frequently share this data with other agencies, removing names from the reports. I have seen literally hundreds of them.

And as I said, it's rare for modern, hollow point, police service ammunition not to expand. This is why, despite it's poor reputation in gun magazines and chat rooms, the 9mm does quite well in police shootings.

[Elmer]

Read the whole thread, pay particular note to posts by LoneGunman.



I did. This is what he said....



as I am only operating on people who live long enough to make it to the hospital, so my statistics may be biased in favor of FMJ's. If they were shot with hollowpoints, and if they died at the scene, obviously the coroner handles that.

[BluesBear]

Elmer, just remember that you can't teach anything to a person who already knows everything.

pioneer now holds the record for earning a place on my ignore list in the shortest amount of time.

[Elmer]

I should take a lesson from you Blues.....

Instead I usually :banghead:

It's funny, I got a PM from one of the IWBA guys telling me that he's given up trying to post the truth on these boards.

[Jamie C.]

The only thing I'm really sure of, concerning handgun calibers, is that both 9mm and .45 auto have been effectively killing people for almost a century now, if either one is applied properly.

And also that I doubt either one is suddenly gonna quit on me. :D



J.C.

[JERRY]

handgun hunting is a good way to measure bullet performance............

it allows LIVE TISSUE resistance, the shots are placed as they would be for a man, in the chest, hitting the heart and or lungs along with ribs, muscles and thin skin like a pig or deer. (this is matching size for size mind you).

but the best thing is that the animals havent been "programed" to stop fighting or running after being shot like most people have.

unlike hunting, self defense against troglodites........killing is a non issue, STOPPING is.

[Pietro Beretta]

Has anyone tried Federal EFMJ ammunition? Anyone know if its "good" or not

If it is, we should put hollow points in the drawer and start using these (http://www.ammoman.com/40_EP_DESC.htm)

[Elmer]

Gene Wolberg said it best, pick a gun/ammo combination that you can shoot well, because bullet placement is far more important than bullet design, as long as, that bullet will penetrate deep enough to reach the vitals, as in 11"-14". The hyper velocity, fragmenting or pre-fragmented bullets can fail to stop someone, even with a good hit.