Does Energy Count In Handgun Calibers?

[1911Tuner]

And while it may be a crapshoot it's far more telling than energy numbers.
Energy is a poor way to compare rounds as it really doesn't corralate to permanent wound channel size.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. Far too much credence is given to energy figures.

it's momentum, not energy, that allows the projectile to penetrate. This is because energy is conserved only in plastic collisions, and not in elastic collisions.

A point that I've tried to get across for years...with very little success. Good luck.

 

[2zulu1]

The original .357 Magnum cartridge was loaded with a 158-grain LSWC. If there was ever a 158 LRN commercially loaded in the caliber, I'm not aware of it.



I think that pretty well sums it up for most people. I hear far more arguments for the "best" based on velocity/energy figures than anything else.

To me, it's a little like using the top speed as a basis for the selection of a new pickup truck

Now you have me thinking about the old lead158gr bullets. I knew Keith and Sharpe were involved with the original 357/LSWC design, but I wasn't aware that it was the only design.

When I began in LE, some of the gray hairs had served in WWII and/or Korea, and others had been in LE during those wars. Early on I met an "old" officer who must have gone back about 30 years, what I remember most was that his duty belt rig had the old individual cartridge loop style. He was in a 357mag department and he carried a large frame Smith, the ammunition in those loops was LRN. Since then, I've had the belief that the "old timers" carried 158gr LRNs until the semi jacketed ammunition went into service.

Thoughts?

 

[MCMXI]

This is because energy is conserved only in plastic collisions, and not in elastic collisions.

I was under the impression that kinetic energy is conserved in elastic collisions. What is a plastic collision? Do you mean an inelastic collision in which energy is not conserved?

 

[jimbo555]

It is simple for me.For 2 legged threats,357 in revolver.45 in auto.

 

[2zulu1]

In the case you cite, the 124 gr. Gold Dot +P has both higher energy and momentum compared to the 147 gr. HST.

When you say the M&S data is flawed you should consider the source of it's biggest detractors. Most of 'em have an axe to grind because M&S data showed that sometimes a faster lighter bullet is more effective. In Fackler's case, his early models that the FBI used resulted in three ammo failures where they had to go to something else at taxpayer expense. After the Miami Shootout fiasco the FBI selected the poor expanding and overpenetrating 147 gr. JHP in 9mm. At the same time there were two very effective loads used by the Illinois State Police and the Secret Service as well as some other LE agencies. The loads were 115 gr. JHPs loaded to +P+ velocity with conventional JHPs and had stopping records above 90% effective. The FBI ignored them. The testing they use today is not that relevant for civilian shooters unless you really think you'll be involved in a gun battle where you'll need to shoot through sheetmetal or autoglass. 4 layers of denim is the necessary standard most shooters are likely to encounter. The 180 gr. .40 S&W load they use today may be more effective after penetrating barriers than say the 165 gr. "Medium Velocity"they were using, but in both cases the loads are subsonic and there are better loads out there for civilian use. Particularly the 165 gr. Golden Saber at around 1150 FPS.

I'm starting to think that some of you guys haven't been at this very long or haven't developed the skills to accurately shoot the higher energy loads, and in the case of the 165 gr. Golden Saber, it has considerably higher momentum to that of a subsonic 180. I enjoy good mathematical data as much as anyone else and can perform all of it. I just don't awe at it. In my work, I consult to engineers, so let's not go there. I'll suffice it to say that good engineers are not manufactured in our universities. The best of them and particularly design engineers have God given aptitude for their profession. Frankly I find it hard to understand how an engineer at the top of his craft would have the time to devote to writing up his opinions on wound ballsitics.

As far as Roberts and MacPherson, most of their opinions and theories are based on ballistic gel testing. When they have used actual shooting cases the perps were shot multiple times.



As I said, the Texas DPS has been using the .357 Magnum nearly as long as it's been around. The DPS started using 125 gr. JHP loads about as soon as they were developed. No other state in the US has more highways to patrol than Texas. No other state comes close to the gunfighting experience of the DPS. There are more LE personnel and agencies in some counties of Texas than there are the entire state of Arizona. Harris, Dallas and Tarrant county for example. And as I've stated, the load they used for around 25 years was the 125 gr. JHP in .357 Magnum. Now they use the.357 SIG. You really think they haven't done their homework? Combined, the DPS Troopers and Rangers already have more actual experience than the FBI is ever likely to have. They don't find a need to consult Fackler, Roberts or MacPherson either.

I didn't need to read what others wrote to realize that M&S's data was seriously flawed. First and foremost is the fact that there isn't, nor was there ever, an OIS national database.

Using your own statement that Texas DPS carried the mag from the beginning (1935) to the 125gr JHP era (circa 1975) means they carried 158s for approximately 40 years and the 125s from ~1975 to 2000.

Do we agree with this?

 

[2zulu1]

It is simple for me.For 2 legged threats,357 in revolver.45 in auto.

I agree, but every once in awhile I get in a M29 mood here at Make My Day Ranch.

 

[CZ57]

Yeah, 2zulu1, we are in agreement but like 1911 Tuner said it started with the SWC in .357 Magnum. It was used for 40 years but where the DPS and Rangers found the Holy Grail was with the 125 gr. JHP.

Quote:
Once expanded, a bullet relies on bullet weight and remaining velocity (energy) to continue penetrating.


This is a great example of folks not understanding the physics. First, velocity does not equal energy. Second, once a barrier - like a large mammal for example - is encountered it's momentum, not energy, that allows the projectile to penetrate. This is because energy is conserved only in plastic collisions, and not in elastic collisions. That's why momentum is far more important than energy when discussing the terminal ballistics of projectiles in a self defense context.

I don't think you are actually grasping the physics. Velocity is a major player in both energy and momentum. For energy, velocity is the major player because velocity is squared: Vsquared X BW / 450240 = KE, and in momentum velocity is half the equation: BW / 7000 X V = Momentum. The real difference between energy and momentum is that with energy, velocity is squared and in momentum, bullet weight is equal to velocity in its calculation. It takes either energy or momentum to make a bullet perform as it was designed to. Heavier bullets perform because of momentum but a lighter bullet in some cases can perform as well but it has to have higher KE in order to equal the momentum of the heavier bullet. This is why I took exception to your example of the standard pressure 147 gr. HST @ 1000 FPS and the +P 124 gr. Gold Dot @ 1220 FPS. The 124 gr. +P Gold Dot has both higher energy and higher momentum.

My whole point about the 400 - 600 Ft/Lbs of KE window was to illustrate that a lighter bullet has to have higher KE to match the momentum of a heavier bullet. It's also why I brought up loads in .40 S&W like what the FBI uses in 180 grs, although probably a subsonic load. The best load I'm aware of for that particular loading is the Winchester PDX1. It may be what the FBI is using, I don't know to be honest, but lets look at the numbers. At 1076 FPS the PDX1 is achieving 463 Ft/Lbs of KE, pretty respectable, with a momentum of 28. The Remington 165 gr. Golden Saber @ 1150 FPS develops 485 Ft/Lbs of KE with a momentum of 27. Nearly identical momentum with a slight edge going to the 165 gr. Golden Saber in KE. Personally, I'd feel well armed with either load. The PDX1 180 gr. JHP, IMO, is the best offering in its weight class and is nearly supersonic in velocity. Go ahead and gel test with either and you'll find that performance is very similar.

The moral of this story is that you have to have either enough KE or enough momentum to get the job done. They do actually agree with each other in some case as presented by the 180 gr. PDX1 with a momentum advantage of 1 while the 165 gr. Golden Saber that has the advantage in KE at 22 FT/Lbs. Nether offers a clear advantage. Energy and momentum is what causes JHPs to work in the first place. The problem I have with these new idea experts is that they think that's where it ends without consideration of what KE or momentum of a bullet does to the human body. I firmly believe that it is translated by the temporary stretch cavity where they say it isn't a worthwhile consideration. The M&S data shows that these are clear factors in wounding. Try looking at a gel test pic and trying to discern where there is only a permanent crush cavity. You can't find one until the near end of the temporary stretch cavity.

I believe that Fackler, Roberts and MacPherson make some solid points. I also believe that M&S make valid points. The problem I have is that Fackler, Roberts and MacPherson have spent far too much time bemoaning the results found in the M&S data, although the last time I saw Fackler it was in a special episode on Nat Geo channel where it appeared he was singing a much different tune from his early beliefs in that expansion is an equal part of the wounding equation to penetration. That's why I say it takes both. I believe that the data from both sides is somewhat skewed, but to claim M&S data is a fraud is libelous.

Shot placement is paramount and we should all know that you don't stop shooting until the fight is over. M&S have never disagreed with this and state that their data is not science, just a reporting of the facts. They go on to say that the one shot stop is NOT a tactical philosophy, just reporting the facts where it had occurred. You guys should lighten up, these guys claim nothing more than being laymen. They don't boast credentials because none were required to get the numbers from various LE agencies that provided information to them other than their LE credentials.

That's why I go back to the simple argument of the 125 gr. JHP in .357 Magnum. No matter what the testing media, nor how many corpses you examine with multiple gunshot wounds. The fact that the 125 gr. JHP in .357 Magnum's 96 -97 % effectiveness can not be explained by Fackler, Roberts or MacPherson. They don't even try. Typically they bombard you with an unnecessary amount of mathematical formula's or they attack M&S as being fraudulent. The reason? The 125 gr. .357 Magnum created extremely large temporary stretch cavities that their data can not account for because they say it's inconsequential.

 

[AKMtnRunner]

I mean no offense, but this is a silly question. Energy, inertia, momentum . . . c'mon guys, you're splitting hairs. It's plain DAMAGE that counts.

 

[1911Tuner]

I mean no offense, but this is a silly question. Energy, inertia, momentum . . . c'mon guys, you're splitting hairs. It's plain DAMAGE that counts.

The voice of reason emerges once in a while.

Again...far too often, energy figures are used for a determining factor while ignoring all else.

An example:

Many years ago, when I was an avid deer hunter, a huntin' buddy loaded up a few 158-grain Speer JHPs in .35 Remington cases to some frantic velocities. In spite of the .357/.358 diameter discrepancies, the rifle shot well enough to take to the field. We generally didn't get shots at much over about 50 yards where we usually hunted, and it was entirely adequate.

He reckoned that the energy and explosive expansion would be heap big Whitetail medicine.

His opportunity came at about 25 yards by his own estimation. The buck was hit well and solidly behind the shoulder at a slight angle...dropped like a train hit it...got up and proceeded to head for the next county at warp speed. Another hunter in the party dropped it with a .30-30 in the lungs. A cursory examination determined that the extreme energy pistol bullet blew up on a rib and never even got close to the vitals.

Beyond a certain level, velocity and energy can and sometimes does work against you. That pesky 3rd Law. The harder the bullet hits the target, the harder the target hits the bullet.

Energy alone doesn't kill the deer. The bullet kills the deer, and in order for the bullet to kill the deer, it has to hit something important.

 

[2zulu1]

The voice of reason emerges once in a while.

Again...far too often, energy figures are used for a determining factor while ignoring all else.

An example:

Many years ago, when I was an avid deer hunter, a huntin' buddy loaded up a few 158-grain Speer JHPs in .35 Remington cases to some frantic velocities. In spite of the .357/.358 diameter discrepancies, the rifle shot well enough to take to the field. We generally didn't get shots at much over about 50 yards where we usually hunted, and it was entirely adequate.

He reckoned that the energy and explosive expansion would be heap big Whitetail medicine.

His opportunity came at about 25 yards by his own estimation. The buck was hit well and solidly behind the shoulder at a slight angle...dropped like a train hit it...got up and proceeded to head for the next county at warp speed. Another hunter in the party dropped it with a .30-30 in the lungs. A cursory examination determined that the extreme energy pistol bullet blew up on a rib and never even got close to the vitals.

Beyond a certain level, velocity and energy can and sometimes does work against you. That pesky 3rd Law. The harder the bullet hits the target, the harder the target hits the bullet.

Energy alone doesn't kill the deer. The bullet kills the deer, and in order for the bullet to kill the deer, it has to hit something important.

Excellent points about bullet construction and their velocity designs. Speer #14 sets their hollow point bullets to a velocity max of 1300fps, this probably why a number of 40 cal Gold Dots blow up when pushed to 10mm velocities.

The shallow cavity Gold Dots can be pushed faster, but they can over expand as your friend learned.

To illustrate the point of your post, a few years ago I tested the 210gr Gold Dot in 44mag,



M629/6.5" 1570fps impact velocity, 1.014" expansion resulted in a calculated (MacPherson) penetration of ~9.1";



Knocking on 1200 ft/lbs of energy and 9" of penetration.

Changed to a M29 Mountain (4") and reduced the load to 1390fps, bullet expanded to 0.75" and penetration increased to 14", crush cavity size calculated (MacPherson) at 2.6oz; a 0.2oz reduction from the 1570fps test.



The nice part about the M29 Mountain with this load is very controllable during double action shooting.

 

[Ala Tom]

Based on many years of experience in engineering involving impact phenomenon (admittedly not bullet impacts) I think energy is the most important in addition to bullet type. I pick the best weight to give the best energy for a given caliber and then a hollow point bullet to break up in the target's body. The best energy means you get the max penetration potential (depending on how much and what type of bone is struck) and the energy also adds to the explosive destruction in soft tissue. It makes a bigger and a deeper hole in general. Of course there are so many other variables that it is difficult to assess "stopping power" or "killing power." But of all basic parameters that have influence in the severity of a wound (from a properly aimed gun), energy is the most significant of all the "specs" normally available to the person shopping for an effective cartridge. Where momentum is simply the product of mass and momentum, energy is the product of mass and velocity squared so it is strongly related to velocity.

It is interesting to consider that Energy affects both ends of a shot. in the chamber, energy determines the speed of a given bullet mass, depending on the type of powder used. On the impact end it determines the severity of the damage done to the target.

On long distance shots (over 100 yards), bullet aerodynamics plays a part in the final velocity. This also relates to energy. The bullet starts with a given amount of energy, and loses it due to drag along its path.

I normlly shoot 40 S&W with 180 grain JHP for defense, FMJ for the range. If I need more energy or better penetration, I use 125 grain JHP or FMJ in my 357 Sig for about 140 more foot pounds of energy.

 

[NG VI]

What could you possibly be shooting that would make you 'need' a difference in penetration of an inch either way or a hundred foot pounds more energy?

Don't you think that maybe the differences are maybe not terribly significant?

 

[2zulu1]

Based on many years of experience in engineering involving impact phenomenon (admittedly not bullet impacts) I think energy is the most important in addition to bullet type. I pick the best weight to give the best energy for a given caliber and then a hollow point bullet to break up in the target's body. The best energy means you get the max penetration potential (depending on how much and what type of bone is struck) and the energy also adds to the explosive destruction in soft tissue. It makes a bigger and a deeper hole in general. Of course there are so many other variables that it is difficult to assess "stopping power" or "killing power." But of all basic parameters that have influence in the severity of a wound (from a properly aimed gun), energy is the most significant of all the "specs" normally available to the person shopping for an effective cartridge. Where momentum is simply the product of mass and momentum, energy is the product of mass and velocity squared so it is strongly related to velocity.

It is interesting to consider that Energy affects both ends of a shot. in the chamber, energy determines the speed of a given bullet mass, depending on the type of powder used. On the impact end it determines the severity of the damage done to the target.

On long distance shots (over 100 yards), bullet aerodynamics plays a part in the final velocity. This also relates to energy. The bullet starts with a given amount of energy, and loses it due to drag along its path.

I normlly shoot 40 S&W with 180 grain JHP for defense, FMJ for the range. If I need more energy or better penetration, I use 125 grain JHP or FMJ in my 357 Sig for about 140 more foot pounds of energy.

Let's take a look at the data and see if it supports your energy theory, not only between the 357SIG/40 S&W, but also the 9mm.

Winchester LE, heavy clothing gel penetration/expansion data:

9mm
RA9TA-127grs-1250fps, 14.4"x0.703"
RA9T-147grs-990fps, 14.0"x0.66"
RA9B-147grs-995fps, 15.8"x0.58"

357SIG
RA357SB-125grs-1350fps, 12.0"x0.684"
RA357SIGT-125grs-1350fps, 14.0"x0.680"

40S&W
RA40B-180grs-1025fps, 13.9"x0.689"
RA40TA-165grs-1140fps, 14.2"x0.828"
RA40BA-165grs-1140fps, 14.0"x0.688"

The published Winchester data does not support your assumption that the 357SIG's higher energy Ranger T is a "better" performer than the 40, let alone the time tested 9mm 127gr +P+.

Predicting bullet incapacitation based upon KE is not advised.

 

[ugaarguy]

M&S have never disagreed with this and state that their data is not science, just a reporting of the facts.

Yet you continue to assert it as science. If it doesn't hold up under scientific scrutiny it's not a fact. It's a theory, and a poor one at that. OIS National Database? They claim to gave gotten information from a non-existent database, and you still believe it's reporting of facts?

 

[italy4nra]

I have the very good fortune to not have the experience to know.
But experts seem divided, and each camp supported by good science and ample case study.
I say keep firin'. Now pass me the rifle.

 

[Certaindeaf]

What could you possibly be shooting that would make you 'need' a difference in penetration of an inch either way or a hundred foot pounds more energy?

Don't you think that maybe the differences are maybe not terribly significant?

100 fpe is about equal to a .22lr at the muzzle from a pistol.

 

[mavracer]

What could you possibly be shooting that would make you 'need' a difference in penetration of an inch either way or a hundred foot pounds more energy?

Don't you think that maybe the differences are maybe not terribly significant?

It's in fact likely that an extra inch of penatration won't make a signifigant difference. But you really need to look at the stakes here not the odds.
In the 1986 FBI shootout in Miami 1" more penatration could have likely left two FBI agents very much alive.

 

[NG VI]

So there is a self-defense scenario a person could plan for where one well-designed service-caliber pistol JHP is preferable to another well-designed service-caliber JHP out of a similar or even identical weapon, seeing as it's .40 and .357 we're talking about, but that is reversed in other scenarios that could be planned for?

I understand that a deeper wound in certain shootings could have changed the outcome of the incident, what I don't get is how you could say or think that there is any set of situations in which a .357 Sig load is significantly better or worse than an equivalent quality .40 load.

 

[481]

Yet you continue to assert it as science. If it doesn't hold up under scientific scrutiny it's not a fact. It's a theory, and a poor one at that. OIS National Database? They claim to gave gotten information from a non-existent database, and you still believe it's reporting of facts?

Besides the evident manipulation of the "data" demonstrated by the analysis that I linked to earlier, this (the data obtained from a nonexistent data base) is the biggest problem that I have with M&S.

I have read those books (borrowed, never paid for 'em -*phew*) and they absolutely full of errors and flimsy analysis.

 

[Certaindeaf]

When in doubt, use a semi-wadcutter.

 

[Jaymo]

The biggest problem with the M&S book is the fact that CNS shots were included for calibers .40 and smaller (or smaller than .40, I forget), and were EXCLUDED for rounds larger than that. They lost ALL credibility with that.
A CNS shot with a .22 will give you a one shot stop, every time, whereas a heart shot with any round may or may not give a one shot stop.
The fact is, M&S LIED and FAKED their research, and tried to pass it off as gospel.
They have no credibility. Their work is worse than flawed, it's fraudulent.

I called BS, when I first read it, many years ago. Everyone told me I was full of BS.
After all, the 9mm was the hot ticket for cops and military. It was the best thing since sliced bread. Everybody was using it. The military unceremoniously dumped that old, outdated, slow .45 for it. It HAD to be better. After all, Evan Marshall said so.

Then, the truth came out. It turns out, you can't change the laws of physics because you don't like them.

I believe energy is important, but only if it's transferred to the target. Energy that is not transferred to the target is wasted.
I don't think energy is the be all, end all of handgun stopping power. I think it's a factor in handgun stopping power.

 

[Warp]

I answered the poll as it was phrased.

This is NOT the same as answering the question you put in the actual post.

I think it matters. I don't think it is an "important" factor. Shot placement, penetration, that's what really matters. After that more expansion/greater permanent crush cavity is better

 

[mavracer]

So there is a self-defense scenario a person could plan for where one well-designed service-caliber pistol JHP is preferable to another well-designed service-caliber JHP out of a similar or even identical weapon, seeing as it's .40 and .357 we're talking about, but that is reversed in other scenarios that could be planned for?

Yes, you can watch the weather if it's going to be 20 degrees out it might be a good idea to lean toward a better penatrating load.

 

[Warp]

Yes, you can watch the weather if it's going to be 20 degrees out it might be a good idea to lean toward a better penatrating load.

Can you provide an example of the kind of ammunition switch you would make for cold weather?

Are you aware that states where it gets plenty cold there are large police agencies that have had VERY good results with rounds that tend more towards expansion than penetration?

Examples: Illinois using 9mm 115 grain +P+, or Kentucky using 125gr .357 magnum.

 

[mljdeckard]

I will also roll my eyes at people thinking that they can so surely predict the results of different rounds based on weather conditions. Just carry one that works in ALL weather. (I doubt there is as much difference as you think there is anyway.) They will ALL likely completely traverse a human target under most circumstances.