Anyone carry FMJ's

[jon_in_wv]

I don't know why anyone would carry a ccw that only reliably fed FMJ. HPs are pretty widely accepted as being better. Get a better weapon and carry better ammo. Those people who buy into the idea the human body is so tough that 32s and 38s just bounce off the skin and 9mms and 40 FMJs are more likely to UNDER penetrate likely have little experience shooting things with these calibers or have been misinformed by the internet ninjas. NYPD is a very good example of what happens when you use FMJs. They even used very mildly loaded ones form my understanding. +p or hot loaded FMJs will go through a human body pretty reliably. I agree with FMJs in small calibers like 22 or 32 that don't deliver enough velocity and energy to push a HP with enough penetration but in good 380/9mm/40/45 I think anyone is better served with JHPs.

 

[Kentucky]

I alternate FMJ and JHP in every mag for every handgun I own.

The first round out is a FMJ and the second is a JHP and so on.

This way I don't have to worry about penetration vs expansion. It's the best of both worlds as they say.

What kind of POI difference do you see between the two different kinds of ammo?

Also, I am curious about something. Most of the people in this thread who are advocating HP keep talking about doing it to minimize overpenetration and the risk of hurting bystanders. Do you not feel that the HP give you more of a chance of stopping the BG faster, or do you only do it for liability purposes? I thought it was pretty well universally conceded that in smaller calibers like 9MM it took a HP type projectile (like a Hydrashock) to bring the calibers effectiveness up to "adequate."

 

[jon_in_wv]

Not to mention JHP technology and construction have come a long way in 20 years. I wouldn't campare the performance of the older JHPs to modern ones.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Which renders then equal to FMJs - no?

No, it makes them worse than FMJ's because you get the feeding liability of JHPs but do not get the benefit of expansion. A hollowpoint that fails to expand gives you the drawbacks of the FMJ (ie, no expansion) with the drawbacks of a JHP (possible feeding issues).

I doubt there has ever been a situation where someone has said "gee, I am glad I have JHPs in my gun, or else I would not be able to safely take this shot". If it is not safe to take a shot with FMJ, its not safe to take it with JHP.

 

[Kurt S.]

I commonly carry a mousegun- .32 NAA or .380 Keltec P3AT. The .32 has S&B 73 grain FMJ, which run a little hotter than US loads and the Keltect has WWB 95 grain, which has a relatively large and flat meplat.

 

[youngda9]

.40 S&W Golden Sabre 165 grain bonded JHP

No reason for anyone to carry FMJ. Find ones that work reliably for you and carry them.

Carry the most effective threat stopper...and that is an HP.

 

[Ed Ames]

As I read the numbers it isn't a big issue.

Most defensive handgun effect comes from displaying the weapon.
The second biggest effect comes from conditioned shock responses ("I've been shot!" Faint.).
The third biggest effect comes from CNS damage.
The fourth biggest effect comes from blood loss.
The sixth biggest comes from muscular/skeletal injury (broken bones, severed muscles).

And so on.

HP ammo only starts improving the effectiveness at 3rd or 4th on that list.

That said, if given a choice HP is good.

 

[geronimo509]

Carry the most effective threat stopper...and that is an HP.

+1... and I see no reason why this should continue

Plus I think that someone tried to start another caliber war too:bangheadHowever, I might be mistaken).

 

[Guy de Loimbard]

Sometimes I carry FMJ, it depends on the pistol. In my 9x18's I use FMJ. All my other pistols are larger calibers so I use HP's with those.

 

[Gun Slinger]

Anyone carry FMJ's?

Yep. At the range.

As for CCW/SD, I follow expert advice from the likes Dr. Martin Fackler, Duncan MacPherson and Dr. Gary Roberts and carry well designed, premium JHPs intended for the applications of CCW/SD/HD.

I leave the FMJs for "paper-punching" and for "fun" shooting like knocking over tin cans at the range.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Fackler will tell you that he cannot tell the difference between FMJ wounds and JHP wounds.

 

[Gun Slinger]

Fackler will tell you that he cannot tell the difference between FMJ wounds and JHP wounds.

Since I am certain that you do not speak for Dr. Fackler, I'd like to see verifiable proof of this "assertion".

Quote? Source? Proof? Document? Link?

 

[Pork Fat]

I know this would not apply to anyone here, but in the event of a missed shot does the FMJ not tend to ricochet a bit more/further?

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I carry 9mm and would not use FMJs due to lack of "stopping power" and greater risk of overpenetration. In the .45 caliber, these problems are less pronounced due to the larger, blunter, slower bullet.

 

[Deanimator]

Clint Smith carries FMJ's, but what does he know?

He knows he's willing to take the additional chance of a through and through.

I know I'm not.

Massad Ayoob carries JHPs, but what does he know?

 

[The Wiry Irishman]

I carry FMJ in my PPK/s because I haven't found a hollowpoint that both gets acceptable penetration and feeds reliably.

 

[Deanimator]

I would also think that what experts carry is in fact part of your defense if you are sued after a shooting.

Massad Ayoob carries JHPs.

There's NO defense to shooting a bystander with a through and through of your target. Either you did it or you didn't. There's no way to justify it. You might not be prosecuted, but I guarantee that if you shoot somebody and hit me with an FMJ, I'm going to sue you. I'm going to win too.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Quote? Source? Proof? Document? Link?

I dont have time to find a quote on that, but he has said that for a given diameter permanent wound channel, there is no difference in the severity of a wound caused by a JHP versus a FMJ. The permanent channel diameter is, of course, important, but the wound itself will be no different. There is nothing inherently more deadly about a JHP wound channel. Diameter is all that matters. I will try to find the source I am referencing and send it when I get the time.

You might not be prosecuted, but I guarantee that if you shoot somebody and hit me with an FMJ, I'm going to sue you. I'm going to win too.

I have no doubt you would win, regardless of whether I was using a FMJ or JHP. If I shoot a bad guy and it hits a bystander, I am liable no matter what

 

[MHBushmaster]

First off, read up on modern HP designs. They don' just clog up and perform worse than FMJ bullets.

Let us talk .45acp, as you would probably say its the best FMJ performer.

Here is Corbon's .45acp load using the Barnes Expander HP bullets

Notice the lack of the HP bullet getting "plugged up" in denim. 3rd and 4th Generation Hollow Point bullets have resolved that plug up issue that was problematic with Gen 1 Silver Tips and Federals much touted 1st Gen Hydra-Shock HP bullet designs.

More new HP bullets and how they perform:
Federal HST (this is what I carry in my 1911, they feed 100% reliably just like ball ammo does).



Finally, take 230gr .45acp Ball ammo.
This is what you get:

"A picture is worth a thousand words..."

 

[c5_nc]

I wouldn't want to get shot with either. Anyone see the snipershide test where the .22lr hollow point pentrated through (3 of 5 shots) a partially frozen turkey wraped in 3 layers of clothes at 250 yds. On the flip side I had a relative that had to put a second 45 in the chest of a attacker b/c the first round went through and did not stop him. I carry JHP in all calibers except 380 if it works good with the gun. I have a pocket carry that is not fully broken in yet (or bugs worked out) that I carry a single JHP round followed by FMJs. I know its is questionable/debatable, but in the mouse calibers some feel .32 is fine in JHP but you need 380 in FMJ to get pentration.

 

[MHBushmaster]

Lone Gunman,

You wrote, "The permanent channel diameter is, of course, important, but the wound itself will be no different. "

Yes, the permanent wound cavity is the main source of wounding/trauma. The wound will be different when the bullet has expanded to a larger diameter than its normal diameter. The temporary cavitation wound most likely will not result any form of acceleated compliance from the bad guy, but is can reach and effect organs like the lungs where they can be effected by the temp wound cavitation.

The diameter of these HP wounds are significantly larger than their un-expanded FMJ bullets. Bigger wound channel = bigger wound = faster compliance or exanguation from the bad guy (which is your goal)

 

[Gun Slinger]

I dont have time to find a quote on that, but he has said that for a given diameter permanent wound channel, there is no difference in the severity of a wound caused by a JHP versus a FMJ. The permanent channel diameter is, of course, important, but the wound itself will be no different. There is nothing inherently more deadly about a JHP wound channel. Diameter is all that matters. I will try to find the source I am referencing and send it when I get the time.

Not calling you a liar, but I'll have to see it before I'll believe it.

 

[Gun Slinger]

MHBushmaster-

Nice posts and well documented. This is the kind of informed perspective that I am always looking for.

I am in complete agreement with what you posted above.

Nice job!

 

[axeman_g]

I appreciate this debate, I do and I have learned many things. I will go look at Federal HST rounds. I appreciate all the information I garnered.

Can I say one thing though. If I must use my weapon, and I shoot and stop a BG and the round overpentrates and goes on to hit someone else... I will gladly spend the rest of my life paying the lawsuits and suffering the consequencese because the BG isn't living anymore. I am still here, he is isn't.

I cant live my life worrying about collateral effects. It would be a tragedy to have an innocent hurt, but between my family and consequences... I will take my family.

 

[rmuzz]

@ Gunslinger

Frequently, forensic pathologists cannot distinguish the wound track caused by a hollow point bullet (large temporary cavity) from that caused by a solid bullet (very small temporary cavity.) There may be no physical difference in the wounds. If there is no fragmentation, remote damage due to temporary cavitation may be minor even with high velocity rifle projectiles.(19) Even those who have espoused the significance of temporary cavity agree that it is not a factor in handgun wounds:
"In the case of low-velocity missles, e.g., pistol bullets, the bullet produces a direct path of destruction with very littleral lateral extension within the surrounding tissues. Only a small temporary cavity is produced. To cause significant injuries to a structure, a pistol bullet must strike that structure directly. The amount of kinetic energy lost in tissue by a pistol bullet is insufficient to cause remote injuries produced by a high velocity rifle bullet.(20)

19) Fackler, M.L., Surinchak, J.S., Malinowski, J.A.; et.al.: "Bullet Fragmentation: A Major Cause of Tissue Disruption', Journal of Trauma 24:35-39, 1984.
20)DiMaio, V.J.M.: Gunshot Wounds,Elsevier Science Publishing Company New York, NY 1987, page 42.

Before you disect this apart and say "of course it doesn't do what a rifle will do" it basically says in the rest of the article that is 1) penetration 2) permanent wound cavity 3) temporary wound cavity and 4) fragmentation. Fragmentation does not happen in handgun ammo that also effectively penetrates and temporary wound cavity is less effective due to lack of fragmentation and the fact that most of the tissue within a human body can take a significant amount of internal "stretch" without hemorrhaging (an exception being the liver.)

Edit - Bushmaster: How long can you survive with one lung? I know the sources in the article I am citing are somewhat dated maybe concerning modern HP design, I'm just participating in friendly debate and regurgitating some info that I've come across. =)