FMJ effectiveness

[trackskippy]

What???

What hell. Pay attention. You obviously havent been. Unless of course, youre just trying to pick through "anything" Ive said and try and spin it off into something I didnt. Its starting to feel like Ive got a stalker.

This is a discussion about the terminal effectiveness of FMJ's. Shot placement is a given. Those who enter a discussion like this and only talk about shot placement, do so because they know little of the subject at hand. That said, shot placement does not make up for poor bullet selection, any more than good bullet selection makes up for poor shot placement.

If shot placement is a given, then whats the problem? Will a properly placed FMJ kill just the same? Answer that question. Seems to have worked that way for me. Seems to have worked in millions of cases around the world for centuries too. I dont think their terminal effectiveness is in question.

Whether we signed The Hague Convention or not, we still abide by it. The militaries of the world do no use FMJ because it's the most effective. In fact, I feel that much dumber for having to even say this. What the hell does it matter anyway? Am I supposed to ignore 35yrs of actual field experience in light of such a sophomoric point?

So the fact that they use it, for whatever reason, and it obviously works, is supposed to be negated because you have a different experience hunting? And Ive got a bit more experience than you, by a decade or two, and seem to have had a totally different experience with full patch bullets. Ive seen deer shot with a single .22lr that dropped in their tracks, and Ive seen deer hit with a 30-06 with soft points, run off. Ive seen deer shot with GI ball out of an M1 and they dropped pretty much where they stood. None of those knew what they were shot with, and they are all still dead.

I'm responding to your rhetoric that basically implies that bullet selection does not matter, all that matters is shot placement. Those wer e your words.

I said good placement or poor placement will likely bring the same result, regardless the bullet. Thats all. As I said above, you seem to want to constantly twist what I say into something else. Show me where Im wrong.

Nice try at the passive-aggressive insult. Before I take to the field with a handgun, I do this until it's second nature.

Nice shooting. Was that done from a rest? Or from a field position, under stress, and on demand? There is a difference you know, and especially with things that might be hunting you back.

Everybody seems to have a pic like that, and wants you to think they shoot like that, all the time. Lets see the targets where youre drawing, moving, and shooting as you go and see what they look like.

So when it comes time to "poke a hole" in something living, it is also second nature.

LOL. So what? You think youre the only one?

We also know from experience that while hardball will poke a smaller than bullet diameter hole in everything, a large diameter WFN will remove a quadrant of the heart.

No doubt, and Ive never said any different. What I have constantly stated is, would a FMJ that made that same exact hit have killed whatever it was any less dead?

Pay attention now, Ill say it one more time, since you seem to have some reading comprehension problems. I normally use quality SD type ammo in my carry guns, and the appropriate ammo for what it is Im hunting in the guns I hunt with. "Normally". If all I have in the gun is FMJ, I dont/wouldnt have a problem using it, if I needed to. Im not telling anyone to make a choice based on that, Im simply saying Im comfortable with my skills and using FMJ if I had to.

Is that really so hard to understand? Or is this something else with you?

 

[CDW4ME]

We were trained three rounds center mass and all we carried was FMJ.

I was a cop 92-94 - department issued 357 mag revolvers, but approved personally owned pistols in 9mm or 45 acp were allowed.
I initially carried a Glock 17 then a 21.
Anyway, issued ammo was Remington 115 +P in 9mm or 185 +P in 45 acp and we were taught to double tap.
Close to 30 years later, much of my practice is focused on quick & accurate double taps (1/3 second) at 6-7 yards. (Goal of both hits in a 6 inch circle, not just inside a silhouette)

 

[Corpral_Agarn]

looks like this thread took a turn.

I never understand all this stuff.

Can't we at least agree that with all things being equal (shot placement, velocity, bullet weight, etc)

A bullet well designed to expand performs better?

 

[C-grunt]

Ive seen a lot of people shot with FMJ and shot with various hollow points. Any sort of number or percentage assigned to a type of bullet is pure BS. There are far too many factors involved in "stopping an attacker" to say that one bullet type is such and such percentage better than the other.

That being said from what Ive seen the hollow points do more damage to tissue than FMJ. The FMJ ammo usually cuts a hole slightly smaller than the diameter of the bullet. The expanded hollow points usually cut a whole the full diameter of the expansion.

With duty caliber handguns I see no downside to carrying hollow points. They give you expansion and enough penetration.

I would feel fine if I was forced to carry FMJ in my guns. But Im not and I'll take every advantage I can when using an already fairly weak platform, especially since there is no downside to using it.

 

[CraigC]

What hell. Pay attention. You obviously havent been. Unless of course, youre just trying to pick through "anything" Ive said and try and spin it off into something I didnt. Its starting to feel like Ive got a stalker.

What??? Because the sentence quoted was incoherent. It's comical to accuse people of reading comprehension issues when they can't interpret your gibberish. I'm not "spinning" anything. I'm responding to your words.

If shot placement is a given, then whats the problem? Will a properly placed FMJ kill just the same? Answer that question. Seems to have worked that way for me. Seems to have worked in millions of cases around the world for centuries too. I dont think their terminal effectiveness is in question.

No, it won't "kill just the same". Is that a serious question? By your logic it doesn't matter what bullet is used at any time, in any context. How anyone can look at 100yrs of military use and say unequivocally that "it works" is baffling.

I said good placement or poor placement will likely bring the same result, regardless the bullet. Thats all. As I said above, you seem to want to constantly twist what I say into something else. Show me where Im wrong.

So why doesn't everybody use hardball for every purpose? Sorry but your comment is dead wrong and all it does is illustrate how much you do not know. It's not that I 'think' you're wrong based on something I read or heard in a gun sop. I know you're wrong. Shoot a whitetail with hardball through the lungs and you'll never see it again.

Nice shooting. Was that done from a rest? Or from a field position, under stress, and on demand? There is a difference you know, and especially with things that might be hunting you back.

I've been hunting with handguns for 35yrs. You presume to school me like i just fell off the turnip truck. My marksmanship under pressure is not in question so you can stop trying to make it personal.

LOL. So what? You think youre the only one?

You questioned my "fundamentals" with a passive-aggressive insult. The pictures prove you wrong. Do you even realize what you're doing? You take a discussion about terminal ballistics and try to make it about shot placement and shooting ability, then chastise someone for defending themselves on your tangential point?

No doubt, and Ive never said any different. What I have constantly stated is, would a FMJ that made that same exact hit have killed whatever it was any less dead?

The answer is not degrees of dead but a matter of when. Dead in 50yds and a matter of seconds or dead 2 miles away the next day? Not exactly the same thing.

Pay attention now, Ill say it one more time, since you seem to have some reading comprehension problems. I normally use quality SD type ammo in my carry guns, and the appropriate ammo for what it is Im hunting in the guns I hunt with. "Normally". If all I have in the gun is FMJ, I dont/wouldnt have a problem using it, if I needed to. Im not telling anyone to make a choice based on that, Im simply saying Im comfortable with my skills and using FMJ if I had to.

I don't care what you carry. I'm responding to your post #40 and the blanket statement that bullet selection doesn't matter. I think my reading comprehension is just fine, thank you.

 

[Odd Job]

Heat needs to be dialled down in this thread, or it will be closed.

 

[trackskippy]

I don't care what you carry. I'm responding to your post #40 and the blanket statement that bullet selection doesn't matter.

How is anything I said in #40 not the truth?

Id love to hear an explanation of how bullet differences will make up for the lack of accuracy on your part. If you dont hit what needs to be hit, the bullet doesnt matter. If you do make good hits, the results will likely be the same. Thats all Ive been saying. JHC, is this really that hard to understand?

This whole topic is about FMJ and its use vs SD type ammo against people, is it not?

Heres a snippet from Gabe Suarez on 9mm and discussing FMJ ammo for this use...

"One of my contacts in South America has a score of 47...many of those with a Glock 17 with Military FMJ. He prevailed by being generous with his trigger and accurate in his shooting. Good enough for me. For me, its a 9mm Glock 17 with a lot of Corbon DPX rounds."

Some of us are stuck using what youre issued, some arent and have a choice. Either way, you have to learn to make it work. I expect any handgun ammo to suck as a people round, and train/practice to shoot to account for it. Its not going to matter whats in the gun, Im still going to shoot the same way. How can you not? If someone is getting shot, they are quickly getting shot multiple times, and will likely take multiple hits before there is even a response. And they will continue to be shot until they are down and out, or I have to reload. How else are you going to do it?

Will the high dollar SD ammo work better than FMJ? Who knows? Its an absolute maybe at best, and regardless of what it is, its still up to you to make it work.

 

[kBob]

Getting “low road-ish” so before they shut this one down to I just wanted to add a bit.

I like history. Supposedly some of the earliest 9x19 FMJ in Imperial German service was Truncated cone FMJ.

Fast forward and USAF was looking at the 9x19 late 1970’s and still issuing .38 Special with FMJ/RN for most folks and some AP were armed with 1911A1 .45 ACP with FMJ/RN

one of their first AP armed with a Beretta that would become the M9 had a close range failure to stop with multiple rounds at close range in San Antonio. She was saved (of corse) by a single shot from a 1911a1.

There was much ya-yaing and no one seemed to care that Model 15 loaded with .38 Special would have done a darn lucky better and no one cared that the single shot stop with the .45 was after multiple 9x19 hits.

Meanwhile USAF OSI ( doesn’t OSI sound way cooler than CID?) in San Antonio was ignoring the rest of the American Military and slowly cranking out what would become the Officers ACP based on the General Officers pistol.

someone, I understand in the OSI, remembered there history and suggested that USAF look into TC ammo if they were going to be restricted to FMJ.

Supposedly this was why Hornady offered a TC FMJ and supposedly the USAF tested it and found it superior to RN FMJ in wounding capability and not loosing ground in penitration or accuracy.

Hornady went on to offer bullets for 9x19mm and .45 ACP on the open market. They cycled in a1960’s P35, a P1 (P38), and a Taurus 91 just fine.

I got some of the .45 acp and they cycled in my series 70 ( but it had been cleaned up to feed 200 grain Speer Flying Ashtrays so no big deal) but impressively in a Star PD which basically only reliably handled 230 grain GI profile ammo. While I could get it the .45 acp TC FMJ was my preferred carry in the Star PD magazines (carried a Flying ashtray up the spout)

I have not seen any in a while but some folks offer a hard cast TC if folks are curious to see what the shape can do.

Dr. Fackler said he thought the TC would leave a larger permanent crush channel and that the angles MIGHT make a larger temporary expansion channel.


One of my funny moments with him occurred when he wished someone would offer a 230 grain .45 acp HP in that shape and I smiled in those early 1990’s when he said that as no one had such.

when next we met I dropped a 230 grain TC profile format with a large HP where the Metplat should have been in The Good Doctor’s palm. Norma had made a bunch in the 1970’s and being Norma no one had them. My Father-in-law had gifted me a few boxes only a year earlier on retiring and reducing his household clutter.

loaded to around 850 FPS they failed to expand in water, in fact penetrated 30 inches of water and the base of my heavy plastic trash can I was shooting down into ( hey, almost 30 years ago and you use the equipment at hand even if it consist of a step ladder and garbage can)

I believe Winchester pretty much makes that bullet in loaded ammo now….

I believe NATO cross certification requires a specific round nose configuration in the belief that assures across the board feeding and that killed the USAF desire for TC FMJ or at least killed the option.

I am done.

-kBob

 

[CraigC]

Id love to hear an explanation of how bullet differences will make up for the lack of accuracy on your part.

I don't debate straw men.

 

[trackskippy]

Thats OK. I got the answer.