Status
Not open for further replies.
To me the real discussion is about what we're going to put our time into.

Are we going to agonize over a 1 mm greater wound channel and spend years on that subject discussing it in minute detail?

Or are we going to put our time into making sure that our weapon functions reliably and accurately with the ammunition chosen, with it being some pistol that we'll carry every day and making sure that the projectile won't go through our intended target and kill/injure someone else?

Just buy some ammo that's reliable and accurate, something that reliably opens up and just occasionally scan new advances as they're reported.

Training trumps hardware.
Unfortunately they frown on bringing guns to the plant and shooting at break time is against company policy, but they do have free WiFi. And momma will let me go to work about everyday, she gets pissy if I go to the range 40 hours a week.
 
Chalk drawings to show what you "think" is happening doesn't answer the question at all, I asked HOW DO YOU MEASURE PRECICLY IN "SOFT" TISSUE.

Shawn is correct in what he thinks.

This—

9mm%20US%20M882.jpg

seems to look very much like this—

9-MM-115-FMJ-9-25-2012.jpg

Dr. Fackler's illustration matches reality.

Of course, you can discount it, but there it is.
 
So bottom line is you guys just can't really answer my question.
Other than " looks like they're about the same" not real "quantifiable" evidence as one poster suggested it was.
I mean we measure bullets to the thousandth and velocity to the tenth of a fps then claim oh look that holes about the same as this one everything works the same.
 
Unfortunately they frown on bringing guns to the plant and shooting at break time is against company policy, but they do have free WiFi. And momma will let me go to work about everyday, she gets pissy if I go to the range 40 hours a week.
You get days off right? Do you go to the range or have a piece of land to shoot on? Do you actually shoot the guns you talk about online there?

Then?
 
So bottom line is you guys just can't really answer my question.
Other than " looks like they're about the same" not real "quantifiable" evidence as one poster suggested it was.
I mean we measure bullets to the thousandth and velocity to the tenth of a fps then claim oh look that holes about the same as this one everything works the same.

If you have a scientifically valid and repeatable method for assessing 'stopping power' (which will also require that you develop an equally valid/correct unitary definition for that inadequately defined term) that'll pass peer-review, I am sure that we would all enjoy seeing it. Purely a rhetorical statement...I really don't expect that you or anyone else possesses such a thing.

What bullets do in human bodies can never be accurately predicted due to the tremendous number of (primarily, but not limited to, anatomical) variables involved and anyone demanding so will always be disappointed by that reality; those variables introduce plenty of room for error/uncertainty. IOW, some things are simply not possible. However, physical test mediums (10% and 20% ordnance gelatin, water) and/or mathematical models (modified Poncelet equations) can, at the very least, provide an idea as to how much tissue a bullet is capable of damaging and how far it might penetrate.
 
Placement plus penetration are the keys to your elusive "stopping power".

A bullet must damage tissues critical to immediate survival to reliably produce rapid physiological incapacitation. The bullet must be placed so that its wound track will pass thru vital tissues. Likewise the bullet must penetrate deeply enough to reach and damage these tissues.

So if two rounds of different calibers are placed similarly on similar targets, which one has the most chance of doing the deed ?
 
Ya gotta love all this Techno ballistico Babble. Reminds of the Turbo Encabanator. I have often wondered if a bullet traveling on a humid day suffers any Sinusoidal Depleneration on the way to the target. It has keep me awake many a night.

 
Vasily Blokhin killed 7000 men over the space of 28 days using a briefcase full of Walther pistols, all chambered in 25ACP.

I guess shot placement really does matter.
 
I think increased velocity / KE matters and I have pics
10mm 155 XTP bullet impacted deer 18 yards away with just over calculated 600# KE
Handload 155 gr. XTP @ 1,366 / 642# KE (5 shot chrono average)
The bullet expands to about .65 - so holes made in tissue should be .65 but they were bigger.
Delta Deer pic1.jpg
Delta Deer pic6.jpg
Delta Deer pic2.jpg
Some factor allowed a handgun bullet to make bigger holes than diameter of expanded bullet.
Quarter is .95
 
You get days off right? Do you go to the range or have a piece of land to shoot on? Do you actually shoot the guns you talk about online there?

Then?
Oh yeah I shoot about 5000 rounds a year that's down from my hay day in the early to mid 90s when I shot about 20k a year.
Just pointing out I have a lot more time to argue online with random people
 
If you have a scientifically valid and repeatable method for assessing 'stopping power' (which will also require that you develop an equally valid/correct unitary definition for that inadequately defined term) that'll pass peer-review, I am sure that we would all enjoy seeing it. Purely a rhetorical statement...I really don't expect that you or anyone else possesses such a thing.
Sure I do bigger bullets make bigger holes, faster bullets make bigger holes. Faster and bigger bullet make even bigger holes.
 
To reasonably discuss stopping power you must first define what you mean by stopping power. Too many variables to have a reasonable discussion. Is the person facing you or standing sideways? Is the person wearing a t-shirt or a leather coat? Is the person setting in a car or kicking in your door?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 481
If you're being grappled by a bigger stronger opponent who's trying to rip your head off, and all you can guarantee is one shot (because the gun my not cycle correctly in the grapple) from waist level somewhere into their torso,...... shot placement isn't going to be a very controllable factor. But more damage is going to be a big deal. Sure, not all self defense scenarios are this way, but close up and dirty is still entirely possible.

There's a balance for everyone based on their skills, physical stature, frequency of practice, etc. But I like the philosophy of carrying the most powerful caliber you can shoot well.
 
If really, all calibers were only about 20% more effective than a .32 acp, we would all choose that caliber. possibly in bigger guns/different bullets but case closed. Cheaper ammo, lower recoil, more rounds on target, we're done.

I understand your point, but disagree with this. There is always going to be those people that believe bigger is better, regardless of what is being discussed.

I think there is some merit to a larger bullet having more "stopping power." I bigger piece of lead will have a more dramatic effect on whatever it collides with, and a larger hole will allow blood to empty out quicker.

That said, I still feel shot placement is king. I'd rather get hit in the arm or leg with a 44 magnum than in the heart or head with a 22. I'd rather not get hit with either, but if I had a choice...

I also believe that if some thug breaks into your house because he wants your TV, if you start unloading your 22 on him, he's likely going to change his mind pretty quickly about how bad he wants that TV. Same with any other caliber, but you understand my point.
 
I understand about shot placement but what this thread was objecting to is that all handgun calibers are similarly effective.

It's like I'm asking which model of car is faster and the answer is none are faster if they take a wrong turn. It's undeniably true but beside the point.

I've never had to defend myself against a bear thank goodness but I have against several large wild dogs. I'm glad I had a .44 magnum and not a .32 acp.

Just sayin'
 
To me one or two posts on a discussion forum doesn't exactly equate to 'agonizing'. If it does to you feel free to disagree :shrug.

Yeah, but a substantial portion of all the gun forum threads I've ever read end up being merry-go-rounds regarding caliber wars or platform wars. If we didn't have that kind of stuff to argue about, I'm not sure what we'd talk about.
 
I understand about shot placement but what this thread was objecting to is that all handgun calibers are similarly effective.

It's like I'm asking which model of car is faster and the answer is none are faster if they take a wrong turn. It's undeniably true but beside the point.

I've never had to defend myself against a bear thank goodness but I have against several large wild dogs. I'm glad I had a .44 magnum and not a .32 acp.

Just sayin'


I guess my answer would be yes and no. Yes, they are all similarly effective in that you can make anything take its last breath with any caliber. No because a larger caliber gives you more margin for error when doing so.

Have we gotten anywhere? :)
 
I guess my answer would be yes and no. Yes, they are all similarly effective in that you can make anything take its last breath with any caliber. No because a larger caliber gives you more margin for error when doing so.

Have we gotten anywhere? :)

Sure, it's the second word of the thread title. I'm just venting because I don't want to trade in all my .44 magnums (which were lost in that terrible boating accident) for .32 acp bear guns ;)
 
Sure I do bigger bullets make bigger holes, faster bullets make bigger holes. Faster and bigger bullet make even bigger holes.

Size is not ''stopping power'', unless that is the definition of ''stopping power'' that you wish to go with...it ignores all other elements involved in incapacitation. By that logic, you could carry around a 13-pound shot put and consider yourself to be ''well-armed''.
 
Last edited:
Sure, it's the second word of the thread title. I'm just venting because I don't want to trade in all my .44 magnums (which were lost in that terrible boating accident) for .32 acp bear guns ;)

A man should have at least 1 handgun that lets him know when he’s pulled the trigger, whether he needs it or not.
 
Yeah, but a substantial portion of all the gun forum threads I've ever read end up being merry-go-rounds regarding caliber wars or platform wars. If we didn't have that kind of stuff to argue about, I'm not sure what we'd talk about.
Stuff that mattered?
 
If Pelosi managed to ram through a bill requiring all handguns to be single shot, what caliber would you choose?

Conversely, if the law required at least three warning shots what caliber would you choose?

“Stopping power” (whatever it may be) is only part of the equation of choosing a handgun. How much it factors into your personal decision is something only you can decide.
 
Since experenting with tissue damage on humans is prohibited by law the only way to really prove tissue damage is on huntable animals or cuts of meat picked up at your local supermarket, but even so there will be anomolies like if bones were hit... Op if you want definitive answers go hunt as many pigs as you can with as many gun and cartridge combinations as you can. It may take years but you'll have your answers.
As far as handgun and caliber effectiveness I have a limited sample of one. My first wife "hated kids and never wanted them" hired a guy to kill me and my 1 yr old, at the time, daughter. Long story short he watched me load my 6 inch gp 100 357 mag and entered my home anyway. The shot hit torso through rib cage under right arm and logded in his spine. Load was 158 gr hornandy xtp jhp @1335 mv. At 15 feet it was effective enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top