5.56 Wall penetration.

[benEzra]

5.56 frangible or varmint rounds did the best at two wall sections. 5.56 ball or soft point went through all three walls if it was stable enough to hit the third wall. Most times it yawed one way or another and missed number three.

The point is, .223 JHP and SP that didn't hit the third wall started to fragment in the first wall, and the fragments were either stopped by the second wall, or exited the second wall insufficient velocity to penetrate the third.

Hollow, fragile, 55-grain pieces of copper-wrapped lead spinning at a quarter-million rpm, when whacked by multiple sheets of drywall at Mach 3 and destabilized, don't hold together very well.

So here's my question, which is safer a small chunk or two of fast moving unstable bullet going who knows were, or a slow stable bullet following the path you sent it on?

When a bullet fragments, the individual fragments have a lot less ability to penetrate than an intact projectile would...and as a result, they have a lot less ability to penetrate additional walls, they slow down more quickly from air resistance, and they have less ability to critically wound a bystander should they hit someone.

 

[meanmrmustard]

buckshot is round

To temporarily deviate from a straight course is yawing.

Round or not, its yawing.

Semantics aside, I've heard buckshot isn't ideal for HD in that those large pellets carry energy, don't deform much if at all, and "yaw", stray, or whatever.

 

[Warp]

To temporarily deviate from a straight course is yawing.

Round or not, its yawing.

Semantics aside, I've heard buckshot isn't ideal for HD in that those large pellets carry energy, don't deform much if at all, and "yaw", stray, or whatever.

In this context the definition that applies is "To turn about the vertical axis." Though pitch, turning about the horizontal axis, would also apply. Point is, that as we use it to apply to projectiles, yawing is tumbling...not just being redirected to a different direction.

 

[Jim K]

Don't be misled about shotguns, either. There are two common myths: one is that there is no need to aim as a shotgun will "fill a room with a cloud of shot and nail anyone inside." Not true.

The other is that with a shotgun there is no need to worry about overpenetration, since a shot charge will not penetrate dry wall or a door. Not true, either.

Jim

 

[meanmrmustard]

In this context the definition that applies is "To turn about the vertical axis." Though pitch, turning about the horizontal axis, would also apply. Point is, that as we use it to apply to projectiles, yawing is tumbling...not just being redirected to a different direction.

Then we can assume that the term yawing when used in context to projectiles still means a change in direction.

In which case, "deformation" is a catalyst. I've not recovered a deformed or partially fragmented bullet that continued on an even remotely straight path, or when of semblance.

My point is, something can tumble and still travel its course. That's not yawing. Its just tumbling. Had it deviated from its path while tumbling, by definition, you'd have a yawing effect.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Don't be misled about shotguns, either. There are two common myths: one is that there is no need to aim as a shotgun will "fill a room with a cloud of shot and nail anyone inside." Not true.

The other is that with a shotgun there is no need to worry about overpenetration, since a shot charge will not penetrate dry wall or a door. Not true, either.

Jim

This second section in your statement is more what I was referring to as well.
I am in the camp of using a small to intermediate rifle cartridge for HD.

 

[JohnBT]

"Then we can assume that the term yawing when used in context to projectiles still means a change in direction."

I disagree. Yawing is associated with movement about the direction of flight or travel. Think wobbly football pass - the ball goes in one direction, but it's not a tight spiral.

The line in the drawing is the tip of the yawing .223.

www.tuffsteel.com/Ballistics/bullfly/fig17.htm


John

P.S. - I'm glad I have plaster and lath interior walls and 14-inch solid brick exterior walls with an inch of plaster laid directly on them. I do have to worry about getting hit by ricochets though.

 

[meanmrmustard]

"Then we can assume that the term yawing when used in context to projectiles still means a change in direction."

I disagree. Yawing is associated with movement about the direction of flight or travel. Think wobbly football pass - the ball goes in one direction, but it's not a tight spiral.

The line in the drawing is the tip of the yawing .223.

www.tuffsteel.com/Ballistics/bullfly/fig17.htm


John

P.S. - I'm glad I have plaster and lath interior walls and 14-inch solid brick exterior walls with an inch of plaster laid directly on them. I do have to worry about getting hit by ricochets though.

Yaw, verb: To turn by angular motion about the vertical axis.
As given to me by an ex-Naval officer with whom I work with, who agrees that an object travelling outside its intended axis is yawing. I'd say he knows what he's talking about.
We can agree to disagree, as I assume we shall do.

 

[Warp]

Yaw, verb: To turn by angular motion about the vertical axis.
As given to me by an ex-Naval officer with whom I work with, who agrees that an object travelling outside its intended axis is yawing. I'd say he knows what he's talking about.
We can agree to disagree, as I assume we shall do.

Your claim seems to be that turning about the axis = changing direction.

I find this interesting.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Your claim seems to be that turning about the axis = changing direction.

I find this interesting.

Not a claim. That's a definition over 400 years old.
Your claim is that an object moving about its axis WITHOUT changing direction is yawing.
This is flawed. There are numerous axis, and without getting to deep into a tangent debate, if the projectile deviates from one or more, its direction can indeed change, I.e: yaw.

As stated, we can agree to disagree.

 

[Warp]

In the context of this thread and this topic, buckshot is round, and as such cannot yaw/tumble in the manner/with the result being discussed for rifle rounds in this thread.

 

[Sam1911]

Sheesh, you guys are talking right past each other.

Yaw = to change the direction the projectile (or airplane, or whatever) IS POINTING as it travels.

Not necessarily to change the direction it IS TRAVELING.

Usually a bullet (and most other things) do start to change the direction OF TRAVEL once they've yawed because of changes in drag/friction/lift/etc. as they present a different face to the media they're traveling through.

If a bullet starts to move so that it's base is no longer directly behind the point -- along the axis of the direction of travel -- then it is yawing.

Soon it is quite likely to ALSO change the direction of travel. And to change velocity and to break up/fragment.

So yaw can be a cause of a change of direction of travel, but is not itself a change in direction of travel.

...

Now to argue about whether buckshot yaws is a bit pointless. (See the useful pun there?) Yes, it can yaw and probably is generally yawing as it flies because the portion of it that was oriented to the rear (along the direction of travel) does not stay in that position but moves around. However, this is of little practical consequence as the shot is generally a sphere so all points of the surface present roughly the same surface to the media it is traveling through.

 

[funnelcake]

If you have time to deploy a shoulder fired carbine or shotgun - maybe they do make better choices. That said I agree most ardently with the post about all encounters being situational.

We have a decent size house and the speed at which I was able to "kick" the back door open and make it upstairs (where the bedrooms are located) scared the crap out of my wife. Good - I was trying to make a point. You're asleep - hear (hopefully) a loud bang. You have to wake up and be conscious enough to perform several coordinated physical actions. I think a ready-to-fire handgun (DA revolver, no safety's engaged pistol etc.) is probably the most safe, rapidly deployed weapon in that situation.

Also, for those of us with small kiddos that need to keep weapons secured at all times, there's that latency added to being ready to shoot if needed. Most pistol vaults can be accessed more quickly than wall mount jobs for shotguns or carbines.

As an aside, I took a class where the instructor recommended using a vault or lock that could be accessed while laying down (attacker in the room). Theoretically good advice, but the likelihood of being able to access and PUT INTO ACTION about any weapon by the time someone crosses the room is not good.

The example was really bad too. This scumbag had a knife and the female victim lost the use of several fingers when she grabbed the knife with the perp on top of her. Intimating that if she had a GunVault-type safe reachable while laying down may have allowed her to deploy her pistol is IMO foolish in the extreme.

Ranting a bit but a I don't think a perfect set of options exist and the best course is to look at all the odds for your circumstances, possible situations, and go for the solution(s) that competently address as many as possible.

Funnel

 

[Warp]

If you have time to deploy a shoulder fired carbine or shotgun - maybe they do make better choices. That said I agree most ardently with the post about all encounters being situational.

We have a decent size house and the speed at which I was able to "kick" the back door open and make it upstairs (where the bedrooms are located) scared the crap out of my wife. Good - I was trying to make a point. You're asleep - hear (hopefully) a loud bang. You have to wake up and be conscious enough to perform several coordinated physical actions. I think a ready-to-fire handgun (DA revolver, no safety's engaged pistol etc.) is probably the most safe, rapidly deployed weapon in that situation.

Also, for those of us with small kiddos that need to keep weapons secured at all times, there's that latency added to being ready to shoot if needed. Most pistol vaults can be accessed more quickly than wall mount jobs for shotguns or carbines.

As an aside, I took a class where the instructor recommended using a vault or lock that could be accessed while laying down (attacker in the room). Theoretically good advice, but the likelihood of being able to access and PUT INTO ACTION about any weapon by the time someone crosses the room is not good.

The example was really bad too. This scumbag had a knife and the female victim lost the use of several fingers when she grabbed the knife with the perp on top of her. Intimating that if she had a GunVault-type safe reachable while laying down may have allowed her to deploy her pistol is IMO foolish in the extreme.

Ranting a bit but a I don't think a perfect set of options exist and the best course is to look at all the odds for your circumstances, possible situations, and go for the solution(s) that competently address as many as possible.

Funnel

This is why I have access to both.

There's a long gun in the bedroom (loaded mag inserted, safety on, empty chamber, it's in the corner now but will soon be in a quick access safe) and there is also a loaded handgun on the nightstand (within arms reach of where I sleep, condition 1, holstered...it will be in a quick access pistol safe soon). Then there is a loaded, condition 1, handgun in a quick access safe in the living room, next to my spot on the couch. There are also beefed up doors, always locked doors/windows, a monitored alarm, and two dogs, one of which is a little over 100 pounds and has a bit of a problem with strange adult males (or teens) who come to close to his house...let alone in it.

So, for MY situation, I'm likely going to have time to get a long gun out.

But if not, or if I really want the one hand operation, there's a handgun.

Choices. Choices are good.

Realizing that an armed homeowner is to the theabsolute last line of defense is also a good thing.

 

[kimberkid]

Not to trample your thread, but ... a buddy and I did some testing with handgun ammo on computer monitors (we had a couple dead ones from work)

All pistol ammo was stopped by a flat-screen monitor. A 45acp/185 nearly made it through when hit the bottom edge of the screen ... however a 55grain fmj 5.56 went right through, and we didn't bother testing any other rifle bullets as everything else was bigger.

Don't know if that helps or not, but for your viewing pleasure ...

 

[ugaarguy]

Not to trample your thread, but ... a buddy and I did some testing with handgun ammo on computer monitors (we had a couple dead ones from work)

All pistol ammo was stopped by a flat-screen monitor. A 45acp/185 nearly made it through when hit the bottom edge of the screen ... however a 55grain fmj 5.56 went right through, and we didn't bother testing any other rifle bullets as everything else was bigger.

That's actually good info. 5.56 fmj tends to penetrate hard barriers well, but tumble in soft barriers.

Even Federal's own testing reflects this: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=146306

 

[C-grunt]

A friend and I did some "ballistic testing" out in the desert a while back. Just an FYI there is something in a VCR that will stop M855. We didn't tear it apart to see what I was though.

That same friend'a father in law ND'd his AR in his bedroom once. That M855 went through a wall, a granite lined shower (two sides), an oak entertainment center and then out the exterior wall. There was no visible mark on the cinderblock wall outside though. They never found the bullet.

Also in Iraq we used to "prep" buildings by firing a couple bursts into them with the SAW or M240. The M855 didn't penetrate as well as the M80 but it still made it through the smaller buildings sometimes.

High velocity rounds behave too erratic to give a definite. I love M855 but I don't load it up for home defense.

 

[ugaarguy]

I love M855 but I don't load it up for home defense.

Of course, it has a steel penetrator. M193 is a completely different animal. The ballistic and JSP ammo typically recommended for HD use are even more different.

High velocity rounds behave too erratic to give a definite.

Nothing is definite with any cartridge. However, modern ammo is actually very consistent in behavior.

 

[C-grunt]

Of course, it has a steel penetrator. M193 is a completely different animal. The ballistic and JSP ammo typically recommended for HD use are even more different.

Nothing is definite with any cartridge. However, modern ammo is actually very consistent in behavior.

I should have clarified ball ammo.

I too am a believer of 193 as an effective all around round. Good terminal performance and decent light barrier penetration. I however have seen 55 grn ball penetrate to many walls for my liking as a HD round. Not that it wouldn't be effective, but I believe a good hollow point to be better.

 

[powder]

Objective #1: Stop the threat.

Obj. #2: Do so "safely".

If you are concerned about the bedrooms of your children, you are better to study the re-building of those rooms to repel rounds of any sort, and here's why:

You are concerned about a gunfight, per a home invasion scenario, correct? The bad guys are going to use whatever is at their disposal, and have ZERO concern per over-penetration and which rooms are holding precious family. They will probably be shooting too, right?

Exterior security measures: dead bolts on doors, windows' security, eliminate landscape that can be used as concealment, motion lights, and noise distractors such as wind chimes and running a cheap radio in your garage 24/7.
Interior: how far you want to go is up to you-add material to inner walls to protect children?