.45 auto not penetrating winter clothes?

[R.W.Dale]

I once read an account about the .45 not having enough penetration for the winter clothing worn by North Korean Army. I once shot up my bil's 65 Chevy truck. The .45 would not penetrate thru and thru the bed, stopping fully on the opposite side, but I had no trouble with my 9mm Browning. The .38 super was brought out as a direct result of the .45 not having enough penetration.



I have never shot my .45 into clothing, but at normal handgun distances I'm not worried about penetration. I guess the North Koreans had some really heavy clothing. I also recall some GI's ditching their .45's in favor of carbines.



I would like to see someone do a test against different barriers. My money is on the 9mm.

A lot if these tales seem to originate form Korea. I suspect that there may be a grain of truth behind then but not because of the immediately obvious reason.


Lack of penetration through heavy clothing is what is cited. But why were soldiers wearing that much winter gear? BECAUSE IT WAS COLD...really really really cold as low as -30

I'm thinking that it was cold enough that the propellants of the day were not performing at 100% resulting in low velocity and under penetrating

 

[MCgunner]

You don't think ballistic coefficient has anything to do with how well a bullet retains velocity and how the velocity of a bullet is also a factor in penetration?

At self defense ranges....no. At 400 yards across a New Mexico canyon, sure. I have lots of exterior ballistics print outs of handloads I've tested over the years with drop tables and retained velocities/energies, time to distance, other calculations. I wrote the program back in the early 80s in BASIC for an old Tandy computer. I know the math. It's pretty complicated, but it's filed around here somewhere. The computer is long gone.

 

[Nom de Forum]

A lot if these tales seem to originate form Korea. I suspect that there may be a grain of truth behind then but not because of the immediately obvious reason.


Lack of penetration through heavy clothing is what is cited. But why were soldiers wearing that much winter gear? BECAUSE IT WAS COLD...really really really cold as low as -30

I'm thinking that it was cold enough that the propellants of the day were not performing at 100% resulting in low velocity and under penetrating

You may be on to something there about propellant performance, but I suspect it is more about soldiers thinking they made good hits but really did not. That is still happening in today's conflicts. It is also interesting that depending on the soldier you hear either the M-whatever is a death ray or worthless. I agree these stories often involve the Korean War but they are usually about the .30 carbine not the .45ACP.

 

[rcmodel]

I don't recall of ever hearing of a GI in Korea trading. A .45 ACP grease-gun for a .30 carbine either.

Unless they just got tired of carrying it due to the extra weight of the guns & the ammo.

I have heard of a lot of them discarding .30 Carbines in favor of M-1 Garands though.
And that was all about the lack of power of the .30 carbine.

Never heard of anyone saying the same about a .45.

rc

 

[Nom de Forum]

At self defense ranges....no. At 400 yards across a New Mexico canyon, sure. I have lots of exterior ballistics print outs of handloads I've tested over the years with drop tables and retained velocities/energies, time to distance, other calculations. I wrote the program back in the early 80s in BASIC for an old Tandy computer. I know the math. It's pretty complicated, but it's filed around here somewhere. The computer is long gone.

Agreed.

 

[Tony k]

aren't there three types of ballistics relevant to firearms? internal, external, and terminal?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but terminal ballistics is what the bullet does once it hits its target. It's more complicated than just simply sectional density versus energy.

I think I've seen some gelatin tests on youtube by hickock and others that compare what happens when you fire a given bullet at different velocities. In many cases, lower velocity results in deeper penetration with hollowpoints because they don't expand as much. The same bullet expands quickly when fired at a higher velocity, which causes it to penetrate less in some instances.

If those youtube tests have any real world relevance, and under penetration is a concern, then use a decent SD round at standard velocities and you should get a good balance of expansion and penetration. If anything, the heavy winter clothing will clog the hollow point, which would cause less expansion and more penetration. The end result would be a less devastating wound channel with excessive penetration. As others have said, it would act like an FMJ. If I'm gonna be stuck with a bullet that doesn't expand, then I rather have it be .45" than .35"

 

[Nom de Forum]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but terminal ballistics is what the bullet does once it hits its target. It's more complicated than just simply sectional density versus energy.

Yes it is. Sectional density is just one factor that affects terminal ballistics.

I think I've seen some gelatin tests on youtube by hickock and others that compare what happens when you fire a given bullet at different velocities. In many cases, lower velocity results in deeper penetration with hollowpoints because they don't expand as much. The same bullet expands quickly when fired at a higher velocity, which causes it to penetrate less in some instances.

If those youtube tests have any real world relevance, and under penetration is a concern, then use a decent SD round at standard velocities and you should get a good balance of expansion and penetration. If anything, the heavy winter clothing will clog the hollow point, which would cause less expansion and more penetration. The end result would be a less devastating wound channel with excessive penetration. As others have said, it would act like an FMJ. If I'm gonna be stuck with a bullet that doesn't expand, then I rather have it be .45" than .35"

Fortunately today we have HP and other expanding bullet types that clogging does not present a problem with expansion. By the way, in my opinion under-penetration is far more worrisome than over-penetration. Anyone remember the video of the state trooper who shot a really big fat guy multiple times with 125gr .357 HPs that did not stop the guy? I wonder what would have happened if the trooper was using 158gr RN?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

A lot if these tales seem to originate form Korea. I suspect that there may be a grain of truth behind then but not because of the immediately obvious reason.


Lack of penetration through heavy clothing is what is cited. But why were soldiers wearing that much winter gear? BECAUSE IT WAS COLD...really really really cold as low as -30

I'm thinking that it was cold enough that the propellants of the day were not performing at 100% resulting in low velocity and under penetrating

Read up on the Battle of Chosin Reservoir and you will find the only gun that was still able to shoot in the extreme cold was the GI 1911.

 

[1911Tuner]

Whew!

Let's take a fresh look at it.

Simplify...

First...when it comes to penetration...nothing is everything, but everything is something.

Sectional density...velocity...momentum...frontal area...energy. All these things play a role.

Let's look at the length/sectional density assertion with something that we can use as a real-world comparison. The 150 grain .30 caliber vs the 150-grain .270/7mm.

Loaded to identical velocities, the 7mm will shoot a little flatter over distance. A little. Assuming identical impact velocities, it will penetrate a little deeper into a given medium. A little.

A "little" meaning: "Not enough to make any significant difference in the real world." The flatter trajectory might be meaningful for those who take the shot at a Pronghorn across 600 yards of prairie...but those shots are in a class to themselves.

As far as the "short stubby" .45 vs the "long streamlined" 9mm assertion...I'd suggest that jmr40 stand a 124-grain 9mm ball next to a .45 230 ball and see how the lengths compare.

Nothing means everything. Everything means something.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Unless your winter attacker is a yeti wearing pykrete underoos I doubt penetration will be a problem.

There is an old manual that suggests military handgun rounds specifically fmj are designed to shoot through heavy woolen uniforms, metal buttons, leather belts and other such equipment as well as through doors or planks or brush which might conceal an enemy. The manual was an English translation for Lugers in .30 and 9mm during WW1.

I fired a box of 45 acp that wasn't 'properly' stored from the Korean war. That steel cased ball ammo wasn't lukewarm at all, in fact it was a little hot.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Read up on the Battle of Chosin Reservoir and you will find the only gun that was still able to shoot in the extreme cold was the GI 1911.

That doesn't mean it was performing at 100%

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Since a lot of this is "Iheard..." working from memory, I'll go off on a limb here.

The stories of .30 carbine bullets not stopping North Korean soldiers in winter clothing stories are also matched by stories of .30 carbine bullets not stopping German soldiers in the Dec 1944 Battle of the Bulge, countered by stories that in the Pacific (tropics) the .30 carbine was effective. People in winter have constricted blood circulation especially in the extremities and are numb to pain: the person shot bleeding out and feeling pain are also part of the stopping effect regardless of caliber

Another source claimed that intelligence parties who searched North Korean dead for papers (details of personal or unit history, orders, etc) found that the winter coats and bodies were penetrated by .30 carbine and .45 ACP; they were not finding holes in winter coats not matched by holes in bodies. One could argue the dead had defective coats or something and a lot of NK soldiers with the good winter coats were hit and walked away, but I suspect those were cases of NK soldiers shot at and missed (easy to do with the M2 .30 carbine on full auto).

Surely someone can find a link to a Box'O'Truth test demonstrating .45 ACP penetration on various comibinations of clothes.

 

[busdriver72]

Ok, let's say for a moment by some freak factor it doesn't penetrate...but the 45ACP would still leave you on the ground in need of medical help writhing in pain with a busted sternum. I have a feeling it would still take the fight out of a person.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Sectional density...velocity...momentum...frontal area...energy. All these things play a role.

Add to that list bullet construction. The biggest example of extremes in construction I can think of off the top of my head is the 12ga Brenneke Slug compared to a 12ga Breaching Slug. Both are similar in weight and velocity but not construction which make all the difference in their penetration performance.

As far as the "short stubby" .45 vs the "long streamlined" 9mm assertion...I'd suggest that jmr40 stand a 124-grain 9mm ball next to a .45 230 ball and see how the lengths compare.

The comparison of the sectional density of a .45 230gr with a 9mm 147gr is very illuminating.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

You don't think ballistic coefficient has anything to do with how well a bullet retains velocity and how the velocity of a bullet is also a factor in penetration?

We're talking about handguns in defensive situations, where the range can vary from bad-breath distance to a half dozen paces.

 

[1911Tuner]

The comparison of the sectional density of a .45 230gr with a 9mm 147gr is very illuminating.

Yes, it'tis. Indeed.

 

[Nom de Forum]

We're talking about handguns in defensive situations, where the range can vary from bad-breath distance to a half dozen paces.

That started the conversation. Why not expand the topic to all the aspects of bullet penetration since it will only serve to give an even better understanding of handgun bullet penetration? Perhaps we should begin discussing the differences in bullet jacket material and design, core material, and how lower and higher velocity can dramatically increase penetration depending on bullet construction. What about rotational speed, center of gravity, etc. The limited scope of the original topic has been fairly well addressed. Why not increase the knowledge value of the thread for shooters that are unaware of the complexity of what influences penetration?

 

[W.E.G.]

Some heads are harder than others.

I met a fella who was greeted by his drug-dealer's collection agent at his front door.

One shot 9mm to the forehead.

Entry wound: patched with Band-Aid
Exit wound on back of head: same

Bullet ran right under the skin for several inches.

Another incident, pimp shot john in left side of neck with .25 pistol. Again, without penetrating deeper than skin, bullet entered neck, traversed half circumference of neck, across shoulder, and down upper right arm before lodging beneath skin at right elbow.

I suspect .45 ball might have similar ineffective performance in occasional circumstances.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Bullets can do strange things -- but if I had to bet, I'd bet on the .45 ACP to perform as designed.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

That started the conversation. Why not expand the topic to all the aspects of bullet penetration since it will only serve to give an even better understanding of handgun bullet penetration?

It will also wander so far from the original thread as to be incomprehensible.

 

[fastbolt]

I was attending an armorer class taught by a working cop from back East several years ago. At one point during the class the inevitable subject of caliber reared its head.

While avoiding (properly) any appearance of recommending some specific caliber, as I recall he did mention that his agency had switched issued calibers after reviewing some shooting incidents over the years.

They'd apparently determined that they experienced better consistency of penetration and expansion, when heavy winter clothing was involved, using .40 S&W compared to their experience with .45 ACP. No, specific brands of ammo weren't mentioned, nor did any of the roomful of armorers seem particularly interested in asking for such details. (That's seemingly a subject of more interest to internet gun forum enthusiasts. )

On this subject, I seem to remember reading some historical article involving combat vet experiences in the Korean War, where there was a brief mention that in some of the coldest conditions it had been reported that military .45 ball had been observed to produce unpredictable and sometimes unsatisfactory results. The gist of it was that the .45 ball was said to sometimes insufficiently penetrate multiple layers of heavy, near frozen, clothing worn by enemy combatants. Maybe so. Freezing temps can certainly have an effect on ammo performance, let alone the density of multiple heavy layers of clothing which might have retained moisture and frozen.

There are enough countries around the world where their military and police have gained experience working in such conditions, so this isn't exactly some mysterious subject where experience and knowledge doesn't exist.

None of it holds any particular interest for me when it comes to the selection of my defensive pistol ammo.

It's either something that's been available to me (since I still work as a firearms instructor & armorer, even though retired), or I've been required to use it, or it's something made by one of the major American ammo companies as defensive hollowpoint ammo which I've been authorized to buy and use (and I own, shoot & carry 9, .40 & .45 ACP).

I'm much more interested in mindset, weapon maintenance and proper training/practice.

 

[jimbo555]

So if it gets real cold down here in Georgia I should switch to the m-1 Garand when confronted with heavily coated bad dudes. Does that sum it up?

 

[Nom de Forum]

It will also wander so far from the original thread as to be incomprehensible.

Not if we do it right. We could start with something simple like how a hard cast bullet non-jacketed bullet can penetrate better than a Full Metal Jacketed bullet using exactly the same case, power, and primer. The original thread topic has been fairly well asked and answered.

 

[1911Tuner]

C'mon guys. The OP's concerns have been addressed and explanations given. We can expound on the question...but to what end?

A cast 230 RN may penetrate a little deeper in a given medium than a jacketed 230 of identical shape and at equal impact velocity.
The question is: How much deeper? Enough to be a game changer? I seriously doubt it.

Everything means something. Anything that covers the target will affect penetration...even a cotton T-shirt. Enough to mean anything? Nope.

We can nit pick the issue to death.

But, let's not.

 

[Nom de Forum]

O.K., I was just trying to add a little spice to a simple meal that has become boringly bland.