9mm fmj for HD

[sargents1]

I'm with Evil Monkey except on one point. I dont think that over penetration is overstated. There are some good videos at Boxoftruth.com where they setup some layers of sheet-rock and fired different rounds thru them to see how many layers of Sheet-rock construction it takes to stop various rounds. Bottom line is that even a "wimpy 9mm" will cut thru typical home walls like they are paper (unless it hits a wall stud, which will slow it down quite a bit).
(http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot1.htm)

I think 9mm FMJ for self defense is fine...I would normally pick hollowpoints, but I would not hesitate to use FMJ's if that what was available.

I remember hearing a Navy Seal say it best "Sure, 9mm is kind of weak, but it wont make a damn bit of difference after I put two thru your heart and one thru your brain." THe point being that shot placement is key. (dont ask me where I saw the video, I honestly dont remember where I saw it, but the point is still valid)

 

[mljdeckard]

I agree with evil monkey completely. I want all the penetration I can get. There is no guarantee that any round will do anything, but under stress, you can't assume you are going to make them all hit what and where you planned on. You can increase the odds, try to arrange your house so that the things you don't want to hit aren't in likely lanes of fire, train to maximize the odds that you will hit and not miss, but there is no such thing as a magical round that will hit a bad guy and wound him badly enough to stop him, not go any further than that, and not go through walls. They are bullets. They aren't magical. The smash through things. Rule number four ALWAYS applies.

 

[David E]

One post says "most shots miss," while the next post says something like "they all drop dead with two in the head," another "I want all the penetration I can get."

With all due respect to those views, they all miss part of the point.

Thinking that bullet choice doesn't matter because "most shots miss anyway" betrays a lack of competence in gunhandling skills.

Conversely, thinking you'll be able to coolly place two in the head in a dynamic life or death defensive situation betrays an attitude of arrogance.

Any over penetration results in wasted bullet energy that did not get imparted to the hostile target, but may be imparted to an innocent target.

In most plausible defensive situations, one should be able to quickly place all their shots into the torso of a man at 10 feet. Choosing a bullet that imparts all of its minuscule energy into the target is desired. This puts FMJ at the bottom of the list.

Of course, IMHO, YMMV, GMTA, and TGIF

 

[mljdeckard]

No. Energy dump does not stop the bad guy from doing what he was doing. I could absolutely not care less how much energy a pistol bullet leaves in the target, because a pistol bullet does not deposit enough energy to stop someone. All, none, whatever. I care about how big of a hole it makes, and I want it to go all the way through the target. If it doesn't, that means there is tissue that didn't get damaged between the bullet and the outside of the target. When I shoot someone, I want to cause as much cm3 of tissue damage as possible. The more damage I cause, the higher the likelihood I hit something that the bad guy can't continue attacking without. Arteries, heart, spine, lungs, etc are all desirable.

I work to ensure that the backstop is clear BEFORE I shoot. I don't shoot and then hope that junior isn't sleeping behind it.

I'll say it one more time. Rule #4 ALWAYS applies. You don't ever plan on a bullet NOT hitting whatever is behind the target.

 

[Evil Monkey]

In most plausible defensive situations, one should be able to quickly place all their shots into the torso of a man at 10 feet. Choosing a bullet that imparts all of its minuscule energy into the target is desired. This puts FMJ at the bottom of the list.

If I can put all rounds into an enemy at 10 feet, I'm trying to drop him by a spinal cord injury. I am not relying on blood loss to kick in. That puts the FMJ at the top of the list.

 

[crazysccrmd]

FMJ is just not as effective as a good JHP. A FMJ round will penetrate, maybe tumble and most likely exit without creating a large wound cavity or transferring all the energy it carries. A good JHP will create the same entry wound but will have far greater effect internally. Expansion and jacket separation create a much larger wound cavity, perforate a higher area of flesh/organs/vessels and have a lower likelihood of exiting the body, therefore transferring more energy and creating a shock wave effective (cavitation).

This isn't saying FMJ won't kill and only JHP will, but that JHP are simply more effective. Neither will one shot stop someone on the spot without hitting the CNS.

 

[PabloJ]

It will punch nice holes in walls of newer American houses.

 

[David E]

. I care about how big of a hole it makes, .

Then FMJ is, again, not the best choice.

 

[David E]

If I can put all rounds into an enemy at 10 feet, I'm trying to drop him by a spinal cord injury. I am not relying on blood loss to kick in. That puts the FMJ at the top of the list.

I did not realize we had a celebrity posting on THR!

Mr. Seagal, I really enjoyed your movie "Exit Wounds". Now I know why that was called that!

 

[NG VI]

I hate to sound like I'm supporting the idea of energy as a useful measure of service pistol effectiveness, but if a bullet leaves a target with ~40%, or even ~30% of it's original energy, that's a bullet that had too much penetration capability for the target it was fired into, when it could have been designed to penetrate that amount of tissue while delivering a wider wound.

If you fire an FMJ round through someone's torso from side to side, and it leaves with 30% of it's starting velocity, the shooter missed an opportunity to deliver a wider wound with a bullet that could penetrate that same amount of torso while expanding. It wouldn't be able to penetrate the same total amount of tissue, but you select your bullets for the target you expect to encounter.

That's why a dramatically expanding bullet that can penetrate 13-14" of tissue is generally the best choice for defensive use against people, because an extremely small number of people are 400-pound body builders with torsos two feet deep and four feet wide. The ability to punch a tiny (remember, FMJ rounds at pistol velocities usually act almost self-sealing, they don't punch a hole the same width as the bullet due to the elastic nature of living bodies) hole through two and a half feet of human isn't beneficial, because people aren't built that way for the most part. Most people have decided that the ability to punch a wider-than-subcaliber hole is better than the ability to punch a hole all the way through the assailant from any angle, provided that the wound tract is still deep enough to reliably get all the way through whichever organs it hits first and second.

Why do I post right before three?

 

[Evil Monkey]

I did not realize we had a celebrity posting on THR!

Mr. Seagal, I really enjoyed your movie "Exit Wounds". Now I know why that was called that!

Do you agree or disagree that at scary close ranges, a spinal cord injury is more beneficial than blood loss?

 

[mljdeckard]

I agree with you, except that I think CNS hits are so hard to get in real life, I don't put the emphasis on them. Shoot for the center. Get as many hits as you can, and if you get really lucky, one of them will sever the spine between the sternum and the nose, but I think it's much more likely that they will stop from other wounds.

 

[Evil Monkey]

When I say spinal column, I mean the most obvious part, the thoracic and lumbar.

The great thing about strikes to the spinal column is you don't even need a direct hit. You just need to clip it and cause the vertebrae to put pressure on the nerve to get an effect.

 

[mljdeckard]

Even still. It MAY have an incapacitating effect. It might not. I think that a CNS hit that stops all motor activity in a fight is a very lucky hit. I'm going to train to hit center of mass. A spine hit would just be a bonus.

 

[Bovice]

I would not use FMJ for the reason that some have claimed it to be superior in this thread. Overpenetration means that even a well-placed shot is heading someplace I didn't want it to.

 

[David E]

Do you agree or disagree that at scary close ranges, a spinal cord injury is more beneficial than blood loss?

Steven (or may I call you Steve?) it might be more beneficial than blood loss, but I'm going for maximum trauma.

In your other post you say bullet choice doesn't matter because "most bullets miss," but here you are apparently claiming that fmj is best because it may have the best chance of reaching the spinal cord (not "column," you specified "cord.") because you are coolly able to surgically place your shot under life or death pressure. This assumes, of course, that the bullet travels in a straight path after you placed it so precisely.

Choose fmj if you want, but no LE agency currently issues fmj for valid reasons.

 

[Skribs]

NG VI, there are a lot of other factors to consider. Not necessarily body armor, but heavy clothing (which is easily possible this time of year where I live). There's also whatever the person has in their clothing - i.e. will I hit something they have in their jacket pocket? I'm not saying a wallet will magically stop a bullet, but it would slow it down. The bullet needs to be travelling fast enough to still crush the tissue underneath it instead of simply pushing it aside.

Evil Monkey, based on what I've seen at brassfetcher, a JHP will travel through bone just as well as an FMJ.

 

[KodiakBeer]

Even if taken at face value, it doesn't include all the failures of multiple hits. IE, if a guy takes 15 rds of 9mm ball and keeps coming, that incident is NOT used in their "study."

Sure it is. It would be in the negative side of the figure. If 115 grain 9mm ball stops 70 percent with one torso shot, then the guy that didn't get stopped would be in the 30% left over.

 

[David E]

Sure it is. It would be in the negative side of the figure. If 115 grain 9mm ball stops 70 percent with one torso shot, then the guy that didn't get stopped would be in the 30% left over.

Thank you for posting that! You make the mistake a LOT of people make when citing M/S

100% of their "one shot stop" (OSS) stats involve a person getting hit with ONE shot.

That means that 30% of the people in this example got hit once and did not stop.

The people that absorbed 2-17 or more hits ARE NOT INCLUDED AT ALL.

 

[crazysccrmd]

If I can put all rounds into an enemy at 10 feet, I'm trying to drop him by a spinal cord injury. I am not relying on blood loss to kick in. That puts the FMJ at the top of the list.

The great thing about strikes to the spinal column is you don't even need a direct hit. You just need to clip it and cause the vertebrae to put pressure on the nerve to get an effect.

With FMJ you with a typical straight through penetration shot you would get a primary wound channel ~.35" wide. Using a JHP the average expansion I've seen is around .60", meaning a primary wound channel almost twice the size. Given that you are putting 10 shots into the center of the torso you would have a higher chance of hitting the spinal column with the bullet that carves a larger channel.

 

[Miked7762]

The great thing about strikes to the spinal column is you don't even need a direct hit. You just need to clip it and cause the vertebrae to put pressure on the nerve to get an effect.

Interesting theory, but it doesn't make sense. I'm willing to bet there are hundreds here who have constant pressure on the spinal cord from vertebrae, much more than if a bullet were to 'clip' a vertebrae or two, and are still up and about.

 

[KodiakBeer]

That means that 30% of the people in this example got hit once and did not stop.

The people that absorbed 2-17 or more hits ARE NOT INCLUDED AT ALL.

I'll take your word on that, but the data is only meant to rate the rounds against each other, not to suggest that such-and-such a load will kill 92% of the people that get hit in the torso with it. A certain percentage of people are going to "stop" even if you miss them. Other torso hits are nearly meaningless in terms of incapacitation. Yet, if you get enough data on particular rounds, you eventually get a statistical pattern that has some meaning.

 

[David E]

So what does it mean when 70% of people shot one time with bullet "X" stop, but that 71% of the people shot multiple times with the same bullet do not stop?

 

[Evil Monkey]

In your other post you say bullet choice doesn't matter because "most bullets miss," but here you are apparently claiming that fmj is best because it may have the best chance of reaching the spinal cord (not "column," you specified "cord.") because you are coolly able to surgically place your shot under life or death pressure

nobody can surgically put rounds where they want them in a real shooting incident. But in self defense, I am relying on taking away the threats mobility rather than wait for lethal blood loss to kick in.

 

[NG VI]

NG VI, there are a lot of other factors to consider. Not necessarily body armor, but heavy clothing (which is easily possible this time of year where I live). There's also whatever the person has in their clothing - i.e. will I hit something they have in their jacket pocket? I'm not saying a wallet will magically stop a bullet, but it would slow it down. The bullet needs to be travelling fast enough to still crush the tissue underneath it instead of simply pushing it aside.

Heavy clothing doesn't reduce a JHP bullet's penetration though, it will increase penetration in almost every instance. A bullet that can be measured to penetrate 12" consistently in gel may penetrate an extra three or four inches after punching through a down coat and a sweater.

Clothing defeating a JHP just means the JHP expands less than desired and penetrates more than expected. The more the clothing affects it, the less it will expand and the more it will penetrate, until the point where it doesn't expand at all and acts exactly the same as an FMJ.

Most modern bullets are designed with the ability to perform like a JHP should regardless of heavy clothing, so it's rare that you would use a current duty JHP bullet and get zero expansion after any amount of clothing.

A wallet would be one of very few things found in ordinary pockets that would slow down a bullet significantly. If you're shooting repeatedly, you probably won't hit the same obstacle twice. I don't know of anyone who recommends shooting once and waiting to see what happens next.

With FMJ you with a typical straight through penetration shot you would get a primary wound channel ~.35" wide. Using a JHP the average expansion I've seen is around .60", meaning a primary wound channel almost twice the size. Given that you are putting 10 shots into the center of the torso you would have a higher chance of hitting the spinal column with the bullet that carves a larger channel.

Non-rifle FMJ bullets don't leave a wound channel as wide as the bullet is, because tissue is highly elastic and tends to stretch around the bullet as it passes through, sometimes the wounds will close almost all the way after the bullet has gone on it's way. The only real exceptions to that are strikes on bone, which is rigid and will break or shatter, and the liver, which is apparently a fairly hard organ.

JHP expanded diameters vary greatly depending on what generation of bullet you are examining and how you measure expansion.

If you go with the average recovered diameter model, there appears to be little difference between older and newer JHP styles, because it can't account for the very large span of bullets like the HST and Ranger-T, which can surpass three quarters of an inch wide in three separate areas. It seems to me that the space between the petals of bullets that expand into that sort of profile would allow the tips of the bullets to deliver some cutting trauma.


For today's duty JHP, .66-78" is the typical range of diameters. That's a hell of a lot better than a sub-.35" FMJ tract, even if they don't leave a full .70" circular hole all the way through the attacker.