Is 9mm FMJ really that ineffective against bad guys?

[481]

Yes, I believe MacPherson is wrong. As far as I know, he's never examined the insides of a gunshot victim, whereas Di Maio has examined I want to say thousands. So yea, if it comes down to those two, then the correct answer is obvious. When I said that Di Maio was THE definitive authority on gunshot wounds I wasn't kidding. He is to gunshot pathology what Michio Kaku is to physics.

Not only that, but Di Maio's findings have been out there for a long time now, and many surgeons and medical examiners have weighed in to support his conclusions. What I'm trying to explain to you here is that this is a long established medical fact.

It's not like in the movies. You cannot determine caliber or bullet type from merely examining a wound channel. That is a myth created by Hollywood.

OK, since you explained it like that, I get it. I don't agree with all of it, but I do get what you are saying. Kudos for answering what I asked of you.

 

[grampajack]

A 22 is going to make a different wound channel than a 50S&W, but between a 9mm and 45? Not so easy. Velocity too, will play a role as well, further mucking up findings in a semi-fluid and elastic medium.

I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that it is possible to distinguish the difference between something like .22 and 9mm in an entrance wound, all things being equal, but I wouldn't assume that the wound channel would be obviously different between the two. I would lean towards assuming that there would be a noticeable difference, but I wouldn't put money on it.

One thing people like Di Maio never address is muzzle energy. They attribute everything to velocity, but I've seen some pretty messed up game animals that were shot with big, slow bullets. Additionally, the major studies on hydrostatic shock found that the effect was equal to kinetic energy, regardless of whether it was a small fast bullet or a heavy slow one. I think the reason Di Maio and others don't talk about muzzle energy is that it's pretty rare to see gunshot victims who've been shot with 300 grain plus bullets traveling at 1000 fps. I'm sure it happens, but for everyone shot with a 500 S&W or similar you undoubtedly get thousands of people shot with .22, .25, .380, 9mm, .223, etc. Probably the closest thing Di Maio sees on a regular basis is shotgun wounds, and that's going to be really skewed unless it happens to be a slug.

 

[481]

I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that it is possible to distinguish the difference between something like .22 and 9mm in an entrance wound, all things being equal, but I wouldn't assume that the wound channel would be obviously different between the two. I would lean towards assuming that there would be a noticeable difference, but I wouldn't put money on it.

One thing people like Di Maio never address is muzzle energy. They attribute everything to velocity, but I've seen some pretty messed up game animals that were shot with big, slow bullets. Additionally, the major studies on hydrostatic shock found that the effect was equal to kinetic energy, regardless of whether it was a small fast bullet or a heavy slow one. I think the reason Di Maio and others don't talk about muzzle energy is that it's pretty rare to see gunshot victims who've been shot with 300 grain plus bullets traveling at 1000 fps. I'm sure it happens, but for everyone shot with a 500 S&W or similar you undoubtedly get thousands of people shot with .22, .25, .380, 9mm, .223, etc. Probably the closest thing Di Maio sees on a regular basis is shotgun wounds, and that's going to be really skewed unless it happens to be a slug.

When it comes to lethality and its relationship to KE, you might want to check out the work of A.J. Dziemain of the US ARMY BRL. I can find you the link to the PDF if you are so inclined. His work involves correlating lethality to the amount of KE expended from a depth of 1-15 centimeters depth in the human body.

 

[grampajack]

When it comes to lethality and its relationship to KE, you might want to check out the work of A.J. Dziemain of the US ARMY BRL. I can find you the link to the PDF if you are so inclined. His work involves correlating lethality to the amount of KE expended from a depth of 1-15 centimeters depth in the human body.

I just have a serious problem with trying to quantify "lethality." There are too many variables, plus it's kind of a moot point because there are limitations to what is possible in terms of small arms. I would happily take any of the common calibers, whether it be .45, 9mm, .40, .357 sig, etc., and I would feel very confident with any of them. Of course I prefer 9mm because it gets the job done and has advantages in capacity and recoil, but if I were issued a .45 then I certainly wouldn't feel like I was at some kind of disadvantage. They're all good, and at the same time they all suck, depending on your perspective. But they all suck equally in my opinion.

Same with rifle calibers. .223, 5.45, 7.62, 6.8, whatever, they all do the job. Some are a little faster, some are a little heavier, but in the end they all do the same thing because they're all constrained by the same limitations. It's kind of like comparing a civic to a jetta to a camry. Someone might have a reason to prefer one over another, but at the end of the day you'd be happy with any of them. I would gladly take any of them. My money goes to .223 and 5.45, but if Uncle Sam were footing the bill for my habit then I would gladly take a 6.8. Ball, soft point, hollow point, ballistic tip, machined solid, whatever. I don't care.

We need to spend less time debating calibers and bullets and more time learning how bullets actually incapacitate people in real life.

 

[481]

I just have a serious problem with trying to quantify "lethality." There are too many variables, plus it's kind of a moot point because there are limitations to what is possible in terms of small arms. I would happily take any of the common calibers, whether it be .45, 9mm, .40, .357 sig, etc., and I would feel very confident with any of them. Of course I prefer 9mm because it gets the job done and has advantages in capacity and recoil, but if I were issued a .45 then I certainly wouldn't feel like I was at some kind of disadvantage. They're all good, and at the same time they all suck, depending on your perspective. But they all suck equally in my opinion.

Same with rifle calibers. .223, 5.45, 7.62, 6.8, whatever, they all do the job. Some are a little faster, some are a little heavier, but in the end they all do the same thing because they're all constrained by the same limitations. It's kind of like comparing a civic to a jetta to a camry. Someone might have a reason to prefer one over another, but at the end of the day you'd be happy with any of them. I would gladly take any of them. My money goes to .223 and 5.45, but if Uncle Sam were footing the bill for my habit then I would gladly take a 6.8. Ball, soft point, hollow point, ballistic tip, machined solid, whatever. I don't care.

We need to spend less time debating calibers and bullets and more time learning how bullets actually incapacitate people in real life.

I agree, in part, which is why I pointed out the work of Dziemian in developing the BRL incapacitation model to you for your review. In his work, Dr. Dziemian took the WDMET (Wound Data and Munitions Effectiveness Team) data compiled over the course of the Vietnam war and, correlated his predictive model against the tens of thousands of wound data evaluated against 16 Gould's Functional Groups (this is in real human bodies, mind you) to obtain the correct coefficients for his P[I/H] equation. Kokanakis & Sperrazza did much the same thing, naming the causal value 'ballistic dose', and did so for various projectiles including flechettes, resulting in their equation for incapacitation equation that predicted the Ph/k of a missile.

Some of the works to which I refer are:

Minisi-

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2016/armament/Minisi.pdf

Dziemian-

http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=AD0365619

Beverly-

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a058947.pdf

Kokanakis & Sperrazza-

http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=AD0359774

I have obtained the coefficients for a couple of these models (Dziemian, Kokanakis) and their results are very interesting to say the least.

 

[grampajack]

I agree, in part, which is why I pointed out the work of Dziemian in developing the BRL incapacitation model to you for your review. In his work, Dr. Dziemian took the WDMET (Wound Data and Munitions Effectiveness Team) data compiled over the course of the Vietnam war and, correlated his predictive model against the tens of thousands of wound data evaluated against 16 Gould's Functional Groups (this is in real human bodies, mind you) to obtain the correct coefficients for his P[I/H] equation. Kokanakis & Sperrazza did much the same thing, naming the causal value 'ballistic dose', and did so for various projectiles including flechettes, resulting in their equation for incapacitation equation that predicted the Ph/k of a missile.

Some of the works to which I refer are:

Minisi-

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2016/armament/Minisi.pdf

Dziemian-

http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=AD0365619

Beverly-

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a058947.pdf

Kokanakis & Sperrazza-

http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=AD0359774

I have obtained the coefficients for a couple of these models (Dziemian, Kokanakis) and their results are very interesting to say the least.

Testimony from trauma surgeons does seem to indicate that there's a direct relationship between KE and the likelihood a person is to walk away from it. If someone shows up to the ER with a significant handgun wound, their chances of walking away from it are pretty good, whereas someone coming into the ER with a rifle injury is likely to die on the operating table.

However, we as civilians couldn't possibly care less whether someone dies on an operating table. All we care about is if they're rendered incapable of pulling a trigger in the moment that we shoot them, and that seems to be 100% dependent on shot placement.

 

[481]

You might also look at this as it gives the equations for the P[I/H] models by Dziemian, Sturdivan, Kokinakis (see pages 6 & 7):

http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA240295

Unfortunately, this paper does not provide the coefficients for those equations however.

 

[kBob]

I should like to point out that when a thread gets down to two guys arguing with one another rather than an open discussion by all that it is time for those two to use the Messaging function and have their own private wrestling match.

-kBob

 

[Jim Watson]

I dunno, some of the Morgue Monster vs Jello Junkie debates are interesting when it doesn't decline to neener neener neener your momma wears combat boots.

Say, did V. Di Maio get over the "energy dump" theory he wrote up in the old Police Marksman a few decades ago? Seems like he would have to if he is now a major big expert.

 

[481]

I should like to point out that when a thread gets down to two guys arguing with one another rather than an open discussion by all that it is time for those two to use the Messaging function and have their own private wrestling match.

-kBob

Coming along and offering a scolding after the issue has been resolved only threatens to derail the thread again.

While I regret what occurred between grampajack and I, we've obviously moved forward.

Perhaps you could find someone else in need of your ''help'' as we are just fine here.

 

[grampajack]

Coming along and offering a scolding after the issue has been resolved only threatens to derail the thread again.

While I regret what occurred between grampajack and I, we've obviously moved forward.

Perhaps you could find someone else in need of your ''help'' as we are just fine here.

Agreed.

 

[481]

I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that it is possible to distinguish the difference between something like .22 and 9mm in an entrance wound, all things being equal, but I wouldn't assume that the wound channel would be obviously different between the two. I would lean towards assuming that there would be a noticeable difference, but I wouldn't put money on it.

One thing people like Di Maio never address is muzzle energy. They attribute everything to velocity, but I've seen some pretty messed up game animals that were shot with big, slow bullets. Additionally, the major studies on hydrostatic shock found that the effect was equal to kinetic energy, regardless of whether it was a small fast bullet or a heavy slow one. I think the reason Di Maio and others don't talk about muzzle energy is that it's pretty rare to see gunshot victims who've been shot with 300 grain plus bullets traveling at 1000 fps. I'm sure it happens, but for everyone shot with a 500 S&W or similar you undoubtedly get thousands of people shot with .22, .25, .380, 9mm, .223, etc. Probably the closest thing Di Maio sees on a regular basis is shotgun wounds, and that's going to be really skewed unless it happens to be a slug.

It seems that you and I agree on more aspects than we disagree.

I think ''that energy thing'' is an interesting angle, especially in light of the work done by the folks in the sources which I provided to you earlier in those posts. Energy, also known is work, is what the bullet does on tissue when it damages/crushes it. I think that looking at the problem from the perspective of an expanded bullet's greater frontal area producing greater stresses which result in greater strain energy storage within the surrounding tissues which in turn increases the likelihood of tissue damage is the way to go.

Don't know your math background, but I can hit you with a link that'll give you a PDF with the coefficients to Dr. Dziemian's equations if you wanna have ago at it.

ETA: It is here if you wish to look into it:

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=AD0357721

 

[grampajack]

It seems that you and I agree on more aspects than we disagree.

I think ''that energy thing'' is an interesting angle, especially in light of the work done by the folks in the sources which I provided to you earlier in those posts. Energy, also known is work, is what the bullet does on tissue when it damages/crushes it. I think that looking at the problem from the perspective of an expanded bullet's greater frontal area producing greater stresses which result in greater strain energy storage within the surrounding tissues which in turn increases the likelihood of tissue damage is the way to go.

Don't know your math background, but I can hit you with a link that'll give you a PDF with the coefficients to Dr. Dziemian's equations if you wanna have ago at it.

ETA: It is here if you wish to look into it:

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=AD0357721

Math was never my thing, except for geometry. The things is, handgun calibers just don't have enough energy to cause remote wounds, regardless of the diameter or shape of the bullet. Even the studies that believe in such a thing admit that it doesn't even start to become measurable until you're at 500 ft-lbs. Simply causing the bullet to deform isn't going to change that. Even if you can get the bullet to open up into a broadhead, it's still only going to damage tissue that it contacts directly, and if you compromise its structure that much you'll destroy its sectional density and probably cause it to fragment as well. That RIP stuff is about the closest we could get to what I'm talking about, and it's crap because it doesn't penetrate far enough. Another thing no one addresses with hollow points is how much energy is spent deforming the bullet, as opposed to being "dumped" into the target. Basically I think hollow points are a braking system and nothing more.

 

[otasan56]

It has been killing since it was introduced
WW1. WW2. Etc. Not the best but will do it’s job
From what I understand most of the street killing are done with 9mm and 380 FMJ ammo. Getting the job done in Chicago

Its killing reputation was achieved via the WWII 9mm submachine guns of Great Britain and Germany. Getting hit in the torso by five or six 9mm FMJ bullets would be conclusive.

 

[kBob]

I always liked McBrides story from "A Rifleman Went to War" about the best knock down he ever saw with a 9mm. A friend had just taken a luger in a holster and on a belt as a war trophy when a German suddenly appeared and his friend swung the holstered 9mm on the belt as morning star or weighted flail and instantly stopped the attacker.

-kBob

 

[Jim K]

Hmmm. So guns have been around since roughly AD 1300, and we are still arguing about why they kill and how to make them do it better. And how to find/make a gun or bullet that will kill in spite of the shooter's incompetence.

Jim

 

[kBob]

Jim K,

Visit the knife guys in the non firearms weapons section. They are still arguing whether a stab or slash is better for fight stopping.

-kBob

 

[Balrog]

This thread has really gone on too long and for no reason.

 

[If1HitU]

I sure hope i'm not the one to take one to find out.

 

[Stargater53]

Coming in in the middle of the discussion, what really soured the pot in handgun stopping power, in my view, was the 158-200 gr. loads of the .38 Special from the 1920s to the 1940s. Most of us have heard of the case of the New York Police Sergeant who emptied his service revolver into a man who then stabbed him to death as his partner delivered the killing shot.

The 9mm is a deceptively powerful round, but power adds an unpredictable element to its use. The round shoots flat and far, and a solid blow to the chest will pack a deadly punch. But unless it hits bone in the extemities, it can pass through without stopping the fight. That also can be said about JHPs, so that's not an issue.

I've heard Cooper sycophants say going from the .45 to the 9mm would be one of the worst decisions this country could make and that it would result in many deaths in close combat situations, but that never happened. Military personnel I've talked to have nothing bad to say about the caliber, but they have been critical of some of the Berettas. Having owned a number of these guns (and their Taurus clones, which I actually like better), I have a hard time understanding that. Many are critical of the magazines, but for the most part, pistols are very much improved over the older Colts.

The 9mm is powerful enough to penetrate heavy ammunition packs worn by enemy combatants. Another fact that's often overlooked by many of the .45 advocates is that the stopping power of .45 ball ammo wasn't all that great. In fact, it's debatable whether the .45 ball ammo has any more stopping power than 9mm ball ammo. In close quarter fighting, knives play a greater role in stopping people than small arms, especially in small dark rooms. I'm a big advocate of JHP ammo in 9mm and have heard that the .40-cal has been a bit of a disappointment. Police Magazine reports (1/2016): "At the end of October, the FBI announced that it was planning to swap out the .40 S&W pistols and ammunition now used by its agents and replace them with 9mm pistols and ammo. This was a widely discussed decision, given that the Bureau once partially blamed the performance of 9mm cartridges for the deaths of two agents in the 1986 Miami shootout and subsequently transitioned to 10mm and then to .40 caliber sidearms. This is also a widely followed decision because the FBI's choice of duty pistol and ammo will likely influence many other law enforcement agencies to give the 9mm jacketed hollow-point another look." Check out the article for a greater discussion of why. It is interesting.

 

[kBob]

I have to report a 9x19mm 115 grain FMJ STOP that occurred about 20 minutes ago. The guy hit immediately stopped what he was doing and assumed a sitting position and made no attempt to get up or move until helped.

For real!!!

OK, I was looking for stuff in the lockable closet with a gun safe in it and there was an unlabled box on the top self....about 7 feet off the ground. Something was sticking the box up there so I pulled it out a little ways and tipped it. One of those 100 round value packs of FMJ "target" ammo had been wedged in the very back against the ceiling. When I tipped the box forward that box reacted to local gravity from about two feet over my head it hit me in the left temple and I was finished in the closet right then and there.

Yep on shot 9x19mm STOP.....a 100 round single shot.....and not fired from a gun. But dang!

My wife, once she figured out why I was barking then moaning in the back hall checked me out then insisted I share this 9x19mm FMJ one shot stop with you guys.

-kBob

 

[mnrivrat]

"The U.S signed both Conventions after W.W. II. Anyway, using HP's by any military would result in War Crimes charges"

And yet it is my understanding that the government in recent times has bought millions of rounds of hollow point ammo . If that is true I wonder why ?

 

[Berger.Fan222]

"The U.S signed both Conventions after W.W. II. Anyway, using HP's by any military would result in War Crimes charges"

And yet the Canadian military uses the tipped Hornady A-MAX round and has a number of notable kills with it. Maybe more consideration needs to be given to tipped rounds instead of hollow points as a potentially more effective option to FMJ.

 

[Jim Watson]

The US JAG has written convoluted logic legal opinions that it is OK to shoot foreigners with "open tip" bullets because the intent is to hit them farther away, not hurt them worse.
The large purchases of hollowpoint pistol ammunition by the government are apparently to be used to keep taxpayers in line, not engage in foreign adventures.

 

[Kano383]

Between the FMJ round nose, high penetration with little “collateral” damage, and the expanding JHP - impressive wound channel, unreliable penetration, unreliable performance with barriers, there should be something that has the advantages of both, without the inconvenients...

This has been the holy grail of big game hunters, because they usually have one round to get the job done.
What is of interest to the handgun community are the bullets designed to stop large dangerous animals, because they need penetration, and quick lethality.

In recent years, a number of bullet makers and experimenters have come up with designs that actually work on living things in ways that were not well understood as recently as twenty years ago.

The most comprehensive study on the effects of bullet shape on terminal ballistics has been done by Michael McCourry of B & M Rifles. He spent years experimenting and accumulating data, and his results show that a big flat meplat creates a much larger wound channel than a round nose, while insuring straight penetration. Elmer Keith said so, Mike put the tape to it...

There is a veeeeery long thread on this topic here: http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/2861098911

It contains an invaluable trove of experiments, reports, datas, and field tests. These are not handgun bullets, but the principles apply.

Having personally tested several wide meplat designs, I can attest that they create wound channels far larger than round nosed bullets, while having much better and deeper penetration than expanding bullets, especially if there is bone in the way.

The picture below is the ENTRY wound, in the shoulder muscles, from a solid bullet. The bullet was a Woodleigh Hydro, not the one pictured with the wound (put there for scale). Yes, that hole was made by a bullet of same caliber as the one pictured, a non-expanding bullet.



Again, these are rifle bullets, but the principles apply.

Therefore, I’d be extremely interested in testing solid bullets like those from Lehigh Defense, and I expect that they would out-perform both round nose FMJ and expanding JHP in real life situation, i.e. they’ll provide deep penetration, large wound channels, good performance with barriers, and good performance when hitting bone.