[registrar]

Assuming that both projectiles have adequate penetration, would you regard a round that throws 2 bullets to be more effective than the same diameter bullet as a single projectile. Assume that the single projectile load really does expand in the chest as claimed, and assume that the 2 projectile load just bores 2 caliber-sized holes.

Specifically, if you could have a pair of 60 gr 9mm's, stacked one bullet in front of the other, at 1200 fps, and those bullets were swc or full wc in configuration, would you prefer such a load to a single 120 gr jhp, at 1200 fps? I sure would, because the 2 projectiles double my chances of hitting something vital, or in a rough and tumble scenario, in the dark, dodging blows or bullets, it offers me 2x the odds of hitting my attacker at all.

[General Geoff]

You're contradicting yourself here. You said one bullet stacked in front of the other. This does not increase your hit probability or chance of hitting something vital at all. Furthermore, the heavier single bullet will by definition penetrate more, so your "assume both projectiles have adequate penetration" precludes the main advantage of using a heavier bullet.

[registrar]

the rifling spin will cause the 2 projectiles to spread apart in flight, friend. the issue is how far apart, at what range?

[General Geoff]

the rifling spin will cause the 2 projectiles to spread apart in flight, friend.

I don't think rifling does what you think it does.


Rifling is designed to impart spin on a bore-sized projectile, so as to minimize trajectory variation from one bullet to the next. If you were to have two identical bullets stacked on top of each other in a single cartridge, both bullets would presumably be very close to each other in flight. That is not to say, they wouldn't deviate slightly given enough distance. But rifling isn't what causes that.


In any case, presuming both lighter projectiles have adequate penetration removes the primary reason for wanting a heavier projectile.

[registrar]

Then you think incorrectly, sir. The sort of thing I speak of has already been tried, in an inferior fashion to my proposal, by stacking several very short, full WC shape bullets in a 357 case. they do spread apart in flight.

[wheelgunslinger]

So, how many times have you tested this and what is your data for the spread at various meters?

[registrar]

so far, just a few rds, 5" at 5m seems to be the average. Perfect, in my book, since nearly all justifiable civilian defensive shooting occurs at closer ranges. I do have a way to ensure adequate penetration, btw.

[General Geoff]

I do have a way to ensure adequate penetration, btw.

The entire small arms industry is listening.

[registrar]

I know, that is why it will be kept secret until the patent application is submitted. Right now I am seeking marketing information.

[General Geoff]

Let's put this in perspective. If whatever you're touting really ensures adequate penetration from lighter, shorter projectiles, everyone would stop making any handgun below .50 caliber, and all new handgun ammunition would be comprised of multiple thin discs stacked on top of each other, similar to a short roll of dimes. These would subsequently spread out and completely annihilate the target, since every one of these discs would have 'adequate penetration."

There would be zero reason to use anything else.

[Loosedhorse]

u believe that somehow the laws of physics are undone?That was not suggested.Then you think incorrectly, sirThen he's got a lot of company.Right now I am seeking marketing information.Good luck. I give you free advice: don't talk down to your target audience, sir. And get your patent quick.

http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tri_plex-tfb.jpg

[Sam1911]

Given the offered information, there's not enough reason for me to answer "yes," and
almost everything else I know about shooting and the behavior of bullets upon striking living tissue tells me "no."

A lot has been tried before, and many millions of rounds have been sent downrange to bring us to the understanding we currently have about bullet performance as it is affected by sectional density, bullet construction, velocity, jacket design, etc. A great many versions of stacked, duplex, frangible, pre-fragmented, and other (please forgive the term, but) "gimmick" rounds have been offered to the shooting public. And they all seem to become footnotes in the history of bullet development as they prove themselves to be less effective than the known standards.

Now, perhaps you have developed something that no one has tried before, and that really works. Great! Can't wait to see it. Maybe it will change all we know about wounding and the terminal effects of firearms rounds.

But remember: today, with the rise of the shooting community on the internet, including not just millions of shooting enthusiasts, but regular input from professional in various parts of the firearms industry, law enforcement, the military, and even such amateur testing entities like the "Box O' Truth," the process of vetting new technologies and adopting or abandoning them is faster and more subject to the harsh light of fact than ever before. In other words, "bring your "A" game." ;)

If you aren't providing something truly groundbreaking, you'll end up another "Extreme Shock (http://www.extremeshockusa.com/)" (AKA, The Ninja Masters of the Temple of the Exploding Pants) with nothing but cheesy advertising to your credit.

[General Geoff]

(AKA, The Ninja Masters of the Temple of the Exploding Pants)

I thought their preferred nomenclature was "Ninja Assassin Clans From the Dark Future," as that preserves their true identity. :D

[Haxby]

I read something years ago about loading two round balls in a revolver case.
There was a western where somebody loaded dimes in his shotgun. I always expected that to catch on in the vampire movies.

[JTQ]

Penetration is the key. If you can get good penetration you may have a winner.

The reason you don't see those "SuperVel" 90gr 9MM rounds anymore is because they didn't penetrate deep enough. Rightly or wrongly, the reason the 115gr 9MM has fallen out of favor (and the .40 S&W came about) for police and self defense use is the shallow penetration of the light projectile in the Miami shootout in 1986.

I doubt a 9MM 60gr projectile will penetrate very deep.

[Jed Carter]

Whether it is a better mouse trap, I doubt it enough to say, I would not buy it, or use it. I will just shoot the threat 3 times and move on to the next threat, if there is another. Now a Sodium bullet would be nice, shoot em full of holes and they catch on fire too!

[Loosedhorse]

More patent problems. Belgian 7.92 Glock (http://www.fsdip.com/website/VBRBelgiumHome/English/Glock792VBRBCompact/TheGlock17VBRBelgium792with3Pcartridge/tabid/440/Default.aspx).

http://www.fsdip.com/website/Portals/0/Glock%207.92/Glock792S3Pb.JPG

[CraigC]

I'm sorry but a 60gr 9mm isn't gonna penetrate worth a hill of beans. So more holes won't do you any good if they're only an inch deep.

[StrawHat]

I believe the Springfield Arsenal loaded three round balls in the 45-70 for a time. It did not work out for them as well as it looked on paper. Granted, it was not for a handgun but it did not work as it was intended.

Sorry, when it is my life on the line, I will stay with a single projectile and depend on my training and experience to get me home.

[Odd Job]

Well, in the light 9mm projectile arena, there is the NGA Eliminator/Sentry which is a nickel-plated solid copper projectile. You can Google those, they are quite light. I have seen one real life shooting with that and I've shot cellulose sheets (reject X-ray films) with that ammunition also. Penetration was okay, but it would be good to see some standardised test results from those, compared to the current range of hollow-points such as the DPX round.

[psyshack]

There is a very good and in depth article in the Gun Digest 1978 Deluxe Edition, 32nd Anniversary. Called Double Bullets! By V.R. Gaertner. It is written for the advanced hand loader. With how to's, loads, patterns and cavity molds taken with Duxseal.

They were loading hot .38 .357 mag and .44 mag. Using Sierra and Hornady 150/158gn bullets cut in half. As expected they had shallow penetration with good expansion. Billed as a want to be man stopper and safer in HD work.

In the end the author calls on the the loading community and ammunition manufactures to look into and possible speed up development in this design. It appears the author has or had some faith in this type of ammunition.

That was 1978, so where is the idea now? :)

[BullfrogKen]

A 60 grain 9mm at 1,200 fps isn't going to penetrate anything like a single projectile of twice the weight. I don't believe it would penetrate well at all. I wouldn't use it.

Two projectiles of 120 grains, each going 1,200 fps might spark my interest. But that's not possible in any of the service-caliber sized handguns available.

[SoulLessGinger]

You're contradicting yourself here. You said one bullet stacked in front of the other. This does not increase your hit probability or chance of hitting something vital at all. Furthermore, the heavier single bullet will by definition penetrate more, so your "assume both projectiles have adequate penetration" precludes the main advantage of using a heavier bullet.
Not contradicting you here, just thinking out loud:
I would imagine the reason for the spread has little to do with the rifling itself, but rather the thin, low ballistic coefficient bullets exiting the muzzle in each other's wake.

[Vern Humphrey]

This is an old idea -- the Army tested in rifles about 50 years ago and abandoned it.

[rcmodel]

Your idea is not new, and it is not going to reinvent the SD ammo market.

Winchester tried selling nested light wadcutter ammo in .38 Spl & .357 Mag back in the 1970's or 80's. Remington had similiar loads using stacked round balls.

It only stayed on the market for a very few years, as it was soon proven to be ineffective in a gun fight compaired to full weight JHP ammo.

As for your "spread" increasing your hit probablity?
Not gonna happen.

There was so little spread at typical SD range a miss is still a miss.
If only one of the three bullet "pattern" hit at all, it will only a glancing flesh wound of no consiquence.

rc

[Tinman357]

How about we all give the guy a little encouragement? Let him bring it to market and that will tell the tale.

In other words,, Let's all take the high road. Just because it's improbable doesn't make it impossible. I myself have a device that will completely eliminate the need for petroleum fuels. Been threatened over it as well. Don't cast dispersion on what you don't know the whole story of.

Like that ignorant idiot a while back. Tried to replace the best gun ever built with some darned new fangled semi auto thinga ma jig. They shoulda' hung that John M Browning character for trying to foist off that new styled junk on us experienced shooters. We know what works and ain't no way a short, fat, slow moving bullet, shot from a 7 round semi-automatic ever gonna change the way people defend themselves.:banghead:

[Vern Humphrey]

The man requested "informed discussion."

What are we supposed to do, lie and tell him it's never been tried and he should sink his life savings in it?

[Sam1911]

Don't cast dispersion... I think that's "dont' cast aspersions (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aspersion)," but anyway I, for one, did not. I've offered all the encouragement that would be reasonable (perhaps more) but like Vern, I think it only fair to offer a word of caution that this is going to be a knotty physics problem to actually overcome, it will be a tough sell at best, and the commercial company into which a product would be immediately cast is not the best and would be a burden to overcome, itself.

But, the best of luck to him!

[Tinman357]

Sam. Vern... Points well taken. I'm possibly a bit bristly from my own trials of inventing. It's easy to see all the problems that would stop progress, after all, it's all we hear.

Solving those issues is the cause of a lot of lost sleep.


Tired of paying high electric bills? Tired of putting gas in your car? Yep, Me too. So I don't. Can you do the same thing? Nope. Not until the powers that be figure some way to make a profit on it.

To keep it on topic... I have my doubts as well. I've played with the idea of multiple projectiles, attempting to double the terminal effectiveness without drastically increasing the gun size or the recoil. I couldn't do it and don't see how it could be done but I'm open to the idea that it can be done.


And I apologize for coming across so.... abrupt. Didn't mean it that way.:D

[Loosedhorse]

And I apologize for coming across so.... abrupt
FWIW, I don't think you did. The OP, on the other hand, came asking a favor, explained everything's tested but too secret to reveal...and then implied that the first replier didn't understand physics or rifling. Kinda off-putting.
in a rough and tumble scenario, in the dark, dodging blows or bullets, it offers me 2x the odds of hitting my attacker at all.
Does this remind anyone else of the "you don't have to aim a shotgun" idea? If the projectiles have that much spread...how do you know that either round is going where it was aimed?

If I am discouraging, so be it. But the odor I'm getting is not pleasant.

[Shadow 7D]

Can I point out that the 'tactical ninja exploding pants clan' still manages to sell ammo
even if it is named rather silly things and well, is VERY use specific.

[Sam1911]

Can I point out that the 'tactical ninja exploding pants clan' still manages to sell ammoOh absolutely! And we may offer the OP encouragement, with this practical example, that there may be a fortune to be made on such a product even if the results of his development aren't as positive as he would hope.

What things make for a successful business plan? Technological or ballistic superiority over the old, known, standards isn't even near the top of that list.

[jgiehl]

I'd say it's like buckshot vs. slug for a shotgun.
It depends on the application needed.
Either way, to see a million little holes on target when shooting a pistol would be kind of neat. I'll bet money it would have a lot of room for growth in the pest control department. Those CCI loads in .44 won't hit a bird at 5 yards for anything.
You have my vote of support.

[DWFan]

Been there, done that. The .357 round was called the QuadraMax and used 4 H&G wadcutters in a .357 Maximum case for a thru bored cylinder. My revolver was a rechambered M14 Dan Wesson. The bottom bullet seated so deeply that it bulged the brass. Accuracy was out the window; meaning that it seldom shot to the same POA with successive shots. I was told that a Tayllor forcing cone would help as it would align the wadcutters before they engaged the rifling, but I didn't try it. I gave up and replaced the cylinder.

[Mot45acp]

Wouldnt this constitute a machine gun? The whole more than one projectile with a single activation of the trigger thing?

[LightningMan]

FYI, I haven't read all the replys other than a couple, but I did a little experament a several years ago using 2 bullets in one cartridge case. I took a .45 Colt case and loaded it with two 141gr. .452 round balls (typically used for ball&cap revolvers) and I actually used black powder for a propellent. (as much as I could get in the case) Then I went out to have a fun day of shooting, I will tell you that those twin lead balls would not shoot in the same spot, as one would usually go high and the other go low. They both didn't shoot to bad as far as left to right goes, but that was it, and it seemed that the further away you were from your target the larger the top to bottom spread was. IMO, if I wanted a SD round in a .45 Colt it would be a single projectial of 225 grs. or heavier. LM

[orionengnr]

Google "Triton Quik-Shok" ammo. Same basic idea.

Cliff's Notes:
Flash in the pan. Came and went. Now a footnote.

Bottom line: read up on "sectional density". Your proposal is antithetical to the concept.

[Sam1911]

Wouldnt this constitute a machine gun? The whole more than one projectile with a single activation of the trigger thing?
No, unless you'd consider firing a 12 ga. load of no 8 shot to be the equivalent of a "400-round burst!" :)

[thezoltar]

http://i1021.photobucket.com/albums/af334/thezoltar/doublebullit.jpg
http://i1021.photobucket.com/albums/af334/thezoltar/doubleb.jpg