why handgun bullet is round nosed?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ns66

Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
290
instead of pointed like a rifle round? wouldn't pointed nose make it more areodynamic and easier to tumble inside target?
 
I'm sure a pointed bullet that would have to retain the weight of say a 115g 9mm bullet, would have to be longer and therefore the grip and magazines would be bigger.

Smaller diameter rounds such as 5.7 are using the spitzer type bullets.
 
Feed geometry in most semi autos, coupled with weight for cartridge length as already noted. The polymer spitzer point Hornady LeverEvolution cartridges work just fine in revolvers where feed geometry isn't an issue.
 
As far as aerodynamics go, at the speeds most handgun bullets go, and the ranges, drag just isn't that big of a deal. The drag force increases exponentially with velocity, so for an identical round going 3x as fast it will have 9x the drag, slow down that much faster, and be much less useful at longer ranges.
 
Pointed spitzer bullets for rifles are intended to increase effective range beyond a couple hundred yards.

There is no reason for that in a handgun, and the blunter bullet offers more frontal area for increased expansion on close range targets at low velocity.

A pointy handgun bullet in most common calibers would not be going fast enough to expand at all.

"Tumbling" is not desirable when you barely have enough velocity to get desirable penetration in the first place.

For that matter, tumbling is not desirable in a rifle bullet either.
Unless you have to abide by the Humane Rules of Land Warfare, as outlined by the Hague Convention of 1899!!

Most hunting bullets used in rifles are pointy to extend range, and expand rather then tumble to provide the best deep penetration and killing performance on big game.

rc
 
Last edited:
Also, a round nosed bullet will expend more energy than a pointed bullet in the medium it encounters. In a close encounter of the handgun kind full penetration (thru the body) is not wanted.

The next best thing after a round nosed handgun bullet would be a hollow point. Both in most cases (or less cases) will not exit the subject causing collateral damage.
 
the FN 5.7mm round that's designed to replace 9mm uses pointed bullet, and so much better it almost became the standard NATO round, so i doubt round nose for handgun is the best way to go...
 
It's also a .224 caliber, so it's skinny enough that you can reasonably chamber a spitzer bullet without needing an excessively deep grip.

9mm is never going to leave general global service. It will very likely remain the standard until the self-contained metallic cartridge firearm becomes obsolete for service use.
 
the FN 5.7mm round that's designed to replace 9mm uses pointed bullet, and so much better it almost became the standard NATO round, so i doubt round nose for handgun is the best way to go...
The 5.7x28 round was designed for a PDW (Personal Defense Weapon), the FN P90. FN designed the FiveSeven pistol after the P90 was already on the market. PDWs are the concept of a SMG sized weapon with rifle like penetration of body armor at short range. They're intended to replace handguns for drivers and other troops in similar roles who don't need the range of a rifle, and for whom the size of a rifle interferes with carrying out their duties. Unless you need increased armor penetration capabilities at the cost of reduced wounding capability the 5.7x28 round, in either pistol or PDW, isn't really practical.
 
Handgun rounds don't need to tumble, nor do rifle rounds, in order to be effective. There are small-caliber rifle rounds, e.g., .223, that attain some effectiveness from tumbling and having the bullet break at the cannelure.

Round-nose handgun bullets work better for feeding purposes, and for serving the purposes for which handguns are designed. We aren't too worried about how a handgun bullet performs 300 yds + downrange.
 
Last edited:
the FN 5.7mm round that's designed to replace 9mm uses pointed bullet, and so much better it almost became the standard NATO round, so i doubt round nose for handgun is the best way to go...
If I'm remembering correctly... There was talk of making it NATOs standard PDW caliber, which meants it would replace 9mm SMGs and some pistols. The only reason they even considered this was to defeat body armor, NOT because 5.7mm beats 9mm.

A lot of people in NATO would probably have kept on using their 9mm pistols as usual.

But the Germans (HK with their 4.6mm) whined, so nothing happened.

5.7mm isn't "better" than 9mm. It justs beats body armor.
 
Last edited:
At handgun velocities, the wounding mechanism is crushing and tearing of tissue from direct contact by the bullet; If you use a bullet with a long, gentle ogive, it will push aside tissue just as it pushes aside air, rather than ripping through it. You don't want that.
 
instead of pointed like a rifle round? wouldn't pointed nose make it more areodynamic and easier to tumble inside target?
Most handgun bullets in conventional cartridges don't have high enough velocity, nor are shot at great enough distances, to make any difference. To get this "tumbling" effect you need rifle velocities. With less velocity, more of a flat nose or hollowpoint shape is needed to cause maximum damage to live tissue. Round nose bullets, however, are needed to function through an autoloading action.
 
well, FN FiveSeven pistol proved you don't need round nose to feed well, pointed feeds just fine

the reason i am curious about this is, everyone knows rifle is much better than handgun, besides the sight radius difference, the main difference is the ammo, is it possible to make a handgun round close to a rifle round so it's more potent? i think it's possible, i think FN 5.7mm is a good example in that direction, with better powder faster speed pointed nose, handgun ammo can do better, with technology advances so fast everyday, there's no reason handgun round designed a hundred years ago can't be improved
 
Last edited:
Yes, there is a very good reason.

Most modern handguns & the calibers they are chambered for are limited by how much pressure they can withstand.

Even with all the modern proplllent improvements.
There is still no way to hot load one to get rifle velocity, which is necessary to get rifle performance out of a spitzer bullet.

And even if you could, recoil & muzzle blast would be so bad you couldn't use it for the intended purpose it was designed for.

rc
 
Yes, there is a very good reason.

Most modern handguns & the calibers they are chambered for are limited by how much pressure they can withstand.

Even with all the modern proplllent improvements.
There is still no way to hot load one to get rifle velocity, which is necessary to get rifle performance out of a spitzer bullet.

And even if you could, recoil & muzzle blast would be so bad you couldn't use it for the intended purpose it was designed for.

rc
5.7mm from fiveseven can reach 2000f/s+

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Five-seven

that's not as fast as rifle, but way faster (close to double) 9mm and cause considerable hydrostatic shock:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
 
You said
there's no reason handgun round designed a hundred years ago can't be improved
The FN 5.7 guns or cartridge were not designed 100 years ago.

Most all popular handgun calibers still in use were.
And so were most of the basic operating principals of the modern guns chambered for them.

rc
 
5.7mm from fiveseven can reach 2000f/s+

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Five-seven

that's not as fast as rifle, but way faster (close to double) 9mm and cause considerable hydrostatic shock:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
Note, it's also spitting a 30ish grain bullet. No wonder it's fast, it doesn't weigh anything!

It's fast, but it's not even close to rifle level performance. If you wanted to shoot a bigger/heavier round at the same speed and approach rifle power levels, it would probably hurt to shoot... There's a reason pistols are pistols and rifles are rifles.

I've never heard that 5.7mm causes "considerable hydrostatic shock". I doubt there's enough energy there. 5.7mm is cool, but it really isn't "better" than any other mainstream pistol caliber with the exception that it can beat armor.
 
I've never heard that 5.7mm causes "considerable hydrostatic shock". I doubt there's enough energy there. 5.7mm is cool, but it really isn't "better" than any other mainstream pistol caliber with the exception that it can beat armor.
i already provided the link, under "Ammunition selection for self-defense, military, and law enforcement", quote:

"A number of law enforcement and military agencies have adopted the 5.7x28mm cartridge, which is reputed to cause considerable hydrostatic shock.[62][74] These agencies include the Navy SEALs[75] and the Federal Protective Service branch of the ICE.[76][77]"
 
Why not just use a .22 magnum? You get the same bullet diameter, muzzle velocity, energy, it's a lot cheaper, and you can buy it at any Wal-Mart. I believe a Kel-Tec PMR-30 magazine also holds 30 rounds as compared to 20 for a five-seven.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm

This leaves us with the obvious conclusion that the 5.7x28mm cartridge has little advantage over the .22 WMR in terms of killing power and serious disadvantages in terms of the price and availability of both firearms and ammunition. Without doubt, being shot with either can have deadly results, but there are much greater threats and more important things with which to be concerned.
 
Last edited:
A number of law enforcement and military agencies have adopted the 5.7x28mm cartridge
Yes, they have.

For use in the P90 PDW.

In short, a sub-machine gun.

When you hose somebody down with enough of them on full-auto fire, they probably do work.

Out of a handgun, they give slightly more velocity the the .22 WMR rimfire cartridge out of a rifle.

rc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top