Well, everyone does know, deep down, bigger bullets are better. The question is only how much better and at what cost?
I do not believe, deep down, bigger slow bullets are better or worse. I simply do not have any religious beliefs involved in this specific argument.
IF bigger bullets are always better, the 45acp 230gr would be a better “stopper” than a 5.56NATO 55gr. It isn’t.
Folks keep forgetting that little velocity thing that keeps getting in the way. It creates a bunch of things, amongst them is energy, or the ability to do work.
When does “enough” velocity, for a given caliber, make up for bigger rocks is the question as related to “stopping”.
True todays technology has brought about some great bullets. Funny thing though the bullets that are doing the job very well are the bigger harder ones that don't expand, similar to solids. Years ago the semi wad cutter design was used very effectivly, as I remember.
The top of the line 38spl load, at various times called the St. Louis/Chicago/FBI load was the 158gr Lead HPSWC +P. Also known as the load that ended the Miami Massacre, when fired out of a 357Mag S&W.
It is a shame that those same revolvers were not loaded with a LIGHTER FASTER and possibly the “best” stopping round ever fired out of a fighting handgun. The 125gr Semi Jacketed Federal 357Magnum or the full house Remington version. (they made a mild load too). No agency ever dropped the 125Mag loads mentioned because of the lack of stopping power. None!
By the way, they are known for expanding “explosively”. And according to the Jello murderers a poor selection. Work on that for a while.
Back to the 38spl.
Why was it the best load? Because it expanded reliably and went deep. Remember bullets behave differently upon impact with a human if they are going supersonic (approx 1100fps).
The Secret Service, on the other hand, found much success with the very light hi speed 38 loads. 110gr at +P+ velocities and later continued along those lines with the +P+ 115 gr 9mm's and today with the 357SIG 125gr hypervelocity round.
They have to get in to do the job, so no expansion is used. On human targets and soft skinned animals they have come up with some real changes for sure.
In areas where not much clothing is worn or where it is worn with heavy coats and multiple layers, I would think those departments (LEO) would not be carrying the same bullet design.
Please read the immediate prior answer.
Criticism of Marshall and Sanow's methods and presentations are valid. These guys are not scientists skilled in the use of the Scientific Method. They are cops presenting the results of the data (however flawed) that they have gathered. I tend to rely on more scientific presentations like those presented by Flackler and others more thoroughly steeped in presenting scientifically valid data. That being said, it looks to me like real-world results agree rather closely with some of Marshall and Sanow's conclusions. If you have ever visited Marshall's web site you will see that he is quite close-minded and tolerates no opposition or disagreement with his views. You will be banned if you step out of line. That is a huge red flag to me regarding his methods, motives (selling books), and skill in evaluating scientific data.
Interesting, I agree about the scientific Criticism of M&S. But from the beginning they never claimed any “scientific methods”. Their data and info were what they were, a collection of anecdotal data that they collected while protecting their sources. They made their own observations and conclusions from the collection of that data. It is what it is.
As to Marshall’s site, and his sensitivity to being attacked, I understand perfectly why.
Flacklers scientific attacks on M&S frankly go over the top. All Flackler proved was which bullet killed, to Flackler’s satisfaction, a given dimensional size of Jello. As our argument is about stopping, not killing human beings, his data and information are interesting, and may even be useful, but definitive, not by a long shot.
Remember Flacklers herd originally chose 10-12 inches as the “needed” depth. Then later changed to 12-14inches. What changed? Human beings? Jello? The cartridges?
I think both Flackler and Marshall bring important data to the table. The difference is, in my opinion, Flackler got famous by and for attacking Marshall.
Marshall, when ever in the public domain, now wears, asbestos. He needs to after what Flackler and his gang did to him.
i agree that the criticism of M&S is valid. i dont however, agree with that criticism in that M&S conclusions are discredited. again, i find value in both viewpoints. M&S deals with probabilities of expectation. so long as you dont try to make it anymore than that, its very valid.
BINGO!
I have equal confidence in my 9mm or my 45’s. Frankly, I carry both. Based on which platform I am using. Either a 1911 or Hi power. If I put either's bullets where they belong, the BG will stop or not based on the BG, not the caliber or bullets. IF I miss, well I hope Darwin has a nice room for me, and caliber ain't the issue.
If I am not ready to fight, and to carry that fight, to my enemy, it doesn’t matter what is in my holster that day.
Go figure.
Fred
