Idea for combat handgun round

[Nightcrawler]

I've been thinking. If I were going to use a handgun in a combat situation, i.e., a gunfight (as opposed to home defense), I'd want a different kind of ammunition. Given the thin walls of my house, I'd prefer a hollow point pistol round, one designed to not exit a human target. Last thing one wants in a defensive shooting is to have the bullet go through the badguy and into something else.

But in a gunfight, putting two holes in the badguy is GOOD, as is being able to penetrate light cover.

So, what I think would be a a better choice than JHP ammo would be jacketed soft point ammunition, loaded to high velocities. Now, the bigger your bullet is to begin with, the bigger hole you're going to make. So, for .45ACP, I'd want a maybe 200 grain JSP bullet, pushed to 1100 fps. The bullet would be designed to expand in such a way as to make the exit hole a lot bigger than the entry hole, and to not be defeated by light cover (ala car door, garbage cans, thin walls). In a firefight, you WANT to be able to shoot the guy hiding behind the wall.

Is such a round doable? That is, would it perform as I hope? Or would plain old FMJ be the best choice for this scenario?

 

[stans]

Any bullet that is designed to rapidly expand, be it a hollow point or soft point, is likely to deform when it meets any resistance, whether it is muscle, plywood, or glass. Any bullet that is designed to penetrate plywood, glass, car doors, etc. is going to be resistant to expanding. The magic bullet does not yet exist.

 

[WebHobbit]

Too me you would NEVER want BG perforation. If anything liability concerns would be WORSE out in public as compared to in your own home. Think about it.

This is a world ran by lawyers!

 

[Nightcrawler]

Why would, for instance, an end-user of the ammunition of discussion, in battling pseudo-marxist terrorists in South America, worry about lawyers or being sued? Dead terrorists in other countries don't sue.

When I said combat, I meant combat. Not self defense. Not SHTF. Not you or I sitting here at home protecting ourselves. In personal/civil defensive situations, the objective is to end the threat and protect your life and the lives of others.

In combat, the objective is to kill the enemy and/or destroy his assets. obviously, this is not something most of us are going to encounter, outside of military service.

So, we're still far enough into the realm of the hypothetical that we needn't fear litigation or accidentally popping the neighbors' dog.

 

[Jim Watson]

I think you are getting into the realm of the programmable bullet.

Probably the best real world projectile for all seasons would be a hard semiwadcutter or LBT WFN. It would chop through light cover better than an expanding bullet and still transmit energy and momentum to the opponent better than roundnose. Carroll M. Peters did a technical paper that to that effect a number of years ago. Some old guy name of Keith had come to that conclusion on the basis of killing large wild animals, too. And gunsmith John Lawson throated a PD's .45 autos for SWCs back when it was very daring for a LEO to carry any sort of autoloader, and the light, fast .38-.357 JHPs copied after Super Vel were the darlings of the industry.

Maybe high-tech can do better now. The Federal EFMJ is very photogenic after passing through a hard barrier. The "BAT" bullet and competing Euro designs were intended to have some "tactical penetration" and still hit harder than ball.

But you have to bear in mind that a handgun bullet only has so much power to begin with. It is asking a lot for it to penetrate even light hard cover and deliver a nasty exit wound to the threat. Sometimes you just need a rifle.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

If we can get programmable bullets, do you think we could get them to hit what we intended for them to hit even if that location wasn't where we were aiming?

 

[blades67]

Sounds like you should check out Federals EFMJ ammunition.

 

[mrmeangenes]

Wonder how Remington's " Leadless" ammo would work ?

I ran across it on the Remington site - believe available rounds were .357 and .38. Bullet shape appeared to be solid, truncated round nose ( flat point) at fairly respectable velocity/energy.
It looked - from what little infor was available- as a "possible" for lever actions in areas where expanding ammo is a big No-No.

Has anyone here tried it ?
Comments?

 

[TheMariner]

If you're talking about combat, screw all that hollow point stuff... or flat nose rounds... You want hardball... especially if a .45 is in the mix. Just be able to hit the target and hit repeatedly. In combat, it may take awhile for your target to realize he/she has been hit... Best remind them with another shot...

Plus, the possibility of encountering body armor makes using JHP or soft nose/flat nose a bad idea.

Remember, its combat... best to be able to hit and hit smaller, than not at all...

 

[Lone_Gunman]

The overpenetration issue is frequently cited as a reason not to use FMJs. The thought is that there will be a liability risk if over penetration occurs.

The only problem with this idea is it is stupid.

You are much more likely to have a problem with a "miss" striking a bystander, than with a bullet that over penetrates.

If a "miss" hits a bystander, it does so with full energy, as opposed to a bullet that already passed through someone else.

JHP's might or might not over penetrate, so don't think you are off the hook if you use them.

If you think your bullet is going to overpenetrate and hit a bystander, then you better not take the shot, whether you are using FMJs or JHPs.

On an entirely different issue, I would also mention that an exit wound is not necessary. Exit wounds are nice in hunting because it makes another external hole for a blood trail. But a person who is shot will bleed internally and die as fast as from an exit wound. Most people shot in the chest or abdomen will die from bleeding out into the chest or abdominal cavities.

 

[George Hill]

Is such a round doable? That is, would it perform as I hope?



Sure, it's called .454.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

George, I think 44 mag would do it also, but with less obscurity.

 

[sm]

45 ACP , seems to have worked for a while...
granted JHP bullets, heavy weights with some velocity makes sense.

However, for combat I want reliable, in all firearms. Mine may be feeding JHP's...but what about that gun I pick up to use in the field? Dunno.

So I'll stick with FMJ with 45 ACP. In a revolver, give me a Hard cast LSWC HP standard or preferable +P. Make it a heavy weight, (like 158 gr for a .357) and run it at a fast clip.

Reliability in the firearm's issued everytime that is accurate for quick effective hits. I ain't into style points, or getting attacked by gelatin...I do want the threat stopped DRT.

 

[355sigfan]

Liability aside putting two holes in a bad guy is not a good thing. Bullets that tend to stay inside the target tend to stop better. They use their energy to do more damage to the target. I feel that we have good loads for gun fights already in most major caliber. I prefer the Ranger series. In 45 acp I like te +p 230 grain Ranger load, In 9mm I like the +p+ 127 grain load in 357 sig I like the 125 grain load in 40sw I like the 165 grain ranger load.
PAT

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Ok , I expect the sky to fall today... 355sigfan has actually said something I agree with.