Stopping power of BP vs. Modern Cartridges

[Packman]

I'm curious as to how a percussion revolver stacks up against modern cartridges. I'm sure this has already been covered somewhere, but I'm curious nonetheless.

Say you have a .44 caliber 1858 NMA. (Since I do!). If you loaded the cylinders to full, with a standard, .454 roundball on top, what kind of power equivalent would you have? I'm guessing somewhere in the neighborhood of a .38 Special, yes?

Where do reduced powder loads stand? Say you used only 30, 35, or maybe 40 grains? (I don't actually know the max possible charge on this gun- never tried it.) I'm guessing these would be down around the .32 ACP level?

Thanks guys.

 

[ofitg]

Got an old Handguns magazine, Feb '98, with an article written by Ed Sanow. He chronographed the round ball from an 1860 Colt at 935 fps with 35 gr FFFg - penetrated 19.8 inches of gelatin, recovered diameter 0.48 inches, stretch cavity 38.8 cubic inches.

Those numbers are comparable to some 9mm and .357 hollowpoints.

When he tried .44 conicals, he got lower muzzle velocities and deeper penetration... in his words, "the round ball turned this energy into tissue damage and massive disruption. The conical bullets turned the same energy into extremely deep penetration".

He did not run gelatin tests for reduced powder charges - no numbers available.

 

[Packman]

Huh. More oomph that I'd figured. I didn't think that they'd be on par with 9mm, but that's cool!

 

[martysport]

A Dragoon would have some good stopping power

Link to video

 

[TheBigAR2003]

i always thought that the lead expanded some and so when it hit it hit with a larger ball to do more damage

 

[Jim K]

Powder never stopped anything. Killing power (there is no such thing as "stopping power" in a handgun) comes from bullet mass and velocity. It doesn't matter if a bullet of x mass and y velocity gets those from black powder, smokeless powder, a blowgun, or magic, it will do z damage.

Jim

 

[Packman]

Jim, I have to respectfully disagree. I see your point, but I contend that there is a "stopping power" capability out of handguns. It comes in the form of the bullet being capable of producing such overwhelming neurological and physical trauma that body parts simply cease responding to inputs, rendering a threat null.

Killing power, in my personal opinion, is incidental to stopping power. The fact that the same damage that creates disruption (stopping power) is what kills you is tangential to my purposes. At the risk of invoking a cliche, a .22 will kill you just as dead, but it lacks the capability* of producing rapid, systemic trauma such that a person can not continue, regardless of their wishes.



*Central Nervous System hits are being discounted here-any caliber that severs that system renders the desired effect.

 

[Oyeboten]

Well too, you can Load shorter full Wadcutters of say, 230 Grains, into most of the old Cap & Ball .44s, and, with a full charge of Powder under it, have another option then for Target or SD.


They were no slouch, either way.



If you can propell a 230 Grain flat front Wadcutter at 950 or 1050 FPS...you gotta figure, it's going to have that much more energy to deliver, than a 160 Grain Ball going the same speed.

 

[Packman]

If you can propell a 230 Grain flat front Wadcutter at 950 or 1050 FPS...you gotta figure, it's going to have that much more energy to deliver, than a 160 Grain Ball going the same speed.

Yowch! That'll leave a mark....

 

[Foto Joe]

Keep in mind that the Round Ball is typically soft lead. Bullets tend to be alloyed and harder, much harder depending on FMJ or HP etc.

A 140gr RB fired at 800-900 fps is a devasting center mass round.

 

[Pyro]

Has there been any ballistic gel tests with black powder revolvers?
I'd love to see ball sizes from .31 (in those pocket revolvers) to .44 (dragoons/walker) in a gel test.

 

[arcticap]

kologha prevoiusly posted Ed Sanow's cap & ball wound ballistics that includes some comparisons with modern cartridges in a thread titled:

Stopping power of a New Army vs modern revolver?

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=255957&highlight=sanow

Hi
Ed Sanow published a list of cap & ball .31, .36 & .44 round ball versus modern calibre one shot stops in the Feb 1998 copy of Handguns. I have pasted it but it's a bit messed up.

Regards,
kologha


Cap and Ball Ballistics



By Ed Sanow

Handguns February 1998



Cap and Ball Wound Ballistics



Calibre
Firearm
Bullet
FFFg
Velocity
Energy
1 Shot Stop

.31 Pocket
Baby Dragoon
46gr RB
11gr
821 fps
69 ft lb
30%

.36 Navy
Colt 1851 Navy
70gr RB
22gr
1038 fps
189 ft lb
59%

.44 Army
1861 New Army
141gr RB
35gr
935 fps
274 ft lb
75%

.44 Walker
1847 Walker
141gr RB
60gr
1287 fps
519 ft lb
87%


.44 Calibre RB Ballistics



0.44
1860 Sheriff
141gr RB
30gr
756 fps
179 ft lb
59%

0.44
1861 New Army
141gr RB
35gr
935 fps
274 ft lb
75%

0.44
Ruger Old Army
141gr RB
40gr
1031 fps
333 ft lb
79%

0.44
1848 Dragoon
141gr RB
50gr
1181 fps
437 ft lb
85%

0.44
1847 Walker
141gr RB
60gr
1287 fps
519 ft lb
87%



Cap and Ball versus Modern Cartridges



.31 Pocket
Baby Dragoon
46gr RB
11gr
821 fps
69 ft lb
30%

.22LR
Revolver
37gr LHP
FL
975 fps
78 ft lb
29%

.36 Navy
Colt 1851 Navy
70gr RB
22gr
1038 fps
189 ft lb
59%

9mm S
Semi Auto Pistol
88gr JHP
FL
1000 fps
189 ft lb
59%

.44 Army
New Army
141gr RB
35gr
935 fps
274 ft lb
75%

.44 Spl
Revolver
200gr LHP
FL
810 fps
292 ft lb
73%

.44 Walker
Walker 1847
141gr RB
60gr
1287 fps
519 ft lb
87%

.41 Mag
Revolver
175gr JHP
FL
1250 fps
608 ft lb
89%

kologha

 

[McCall911]

.44 Walker
Walker 1847
141gr RB
60gr
1287 fps
519 ft lb
87%

.41 Mag
Revolver
175gr JHP
FL
1250 fps
608 ft lb
89%

A .44 C&B having as much "one shot stop" potential as a .41 Magnum????
Where does Sanow et. al. come up with all this horse puckey?

 

[Robert Wilson]

You got anything better?

For my money, the round ball's performance is all out of proportion to its size. I would rather hit a game animal with a round ball than any other projectile. If only its exterior ballistics matched its terminal ballistics...

 

[junkman_01]

Remember that round balls have been killing for MUCH longer than any conical bullet. That's a good enough endorsement for me.

 

[trickshot]

On page 15 of Sixguns Elmer Keith tells how some very experienced civil war veterans, said the Colt Navy is a great man stopper. Keith said it was a lot more lethal than a 38 Special. One guy who claimed to have shot many men during the war, liked the Colt Navy so much that he carried a pair of them for self defense (and shot people with them in self defense) well into the 20th century.

 

[Billy Shears]

Jim, I have to respectfully disagree. I see your point, but I contend that there is a "stopping power" capability out of handguns. It comes in the form of the bullet being capable of producing such overwhelming neurological and physical trauma that body parts simply cease responding to inputs, rendering a threat null.

Apart from a hit to the central nervous system's "control center" (i.e. the base of the brain or the upper spinal cord), handgun bullets simply don't have enough power to accomplish that, at least not instantaneously.

After a hit to the central nervous system, the next quickest route to physiological incapacitation is circulatory collapse. To achieve this, you need to hit the heart, a major blood vessel, or a major blood bearing organ (e.g. the liver). Unlike a hit to the central nervous system, this is not instantaneous. It can take from seconds to hours, depending on what the bullet hits. There is sufficient oxygenated blood in the brain and the muscles to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed. This is an eternity in a fight.

Of course, that doesn't mean that everyone who gets shot will keep fighting as long as he is physically capable of doing so. Actual gunfights show that physiological factors may actually play a relatively minor role in achieving rapid incapacitation. Usually, psychological factors cause incapacitation first. In other words: the assailant basically gives up, even when his body is actually capable of carrying on. Unfortunately, there is no way to predict whether the guy you shoot is going to be a coward who gives up upon being wounded, or a mad dog killer type (like the two bad guys in the Miami Dade shootout) who will fight until the last second when his body fails. Nevertheless... Barring a central nervous system hit, there is no physiological reason for an individual to be instantly incapacitated by even a fatal wound. If he's one of the mad killer types, he can keep going until blood loss is sufficient to drop blood pressure and/or the brain is deprived of oxygen. Trauma alone won't make much difference. In a fight pain is commonly suppressed in the aftermath of serious injury such as a gunshot wound. And even if it isn't, it has to cause an emotional response. Actual incidents show that in many cases, pain is either ignored or else motivates the subject to anger and increased resistance, not surrender.

In short: handguns have little to no "stopping power," speaking purely of physiological effects.

 

[Oyeboten]

Bear in mind, one can Cast one's own 230-0dd Grain .454 flat front Wadcutters, provided one has a Mold to do so with.

In the WALKER, with it's Barrel Length, and, Black Powder, this would equal or exceed the usual off the shelf terminal whallop, of a .41 Remington Magnum from a typically shorter Barrel Revolver.

FPS would be about the same, while the Wadcutter would be heavier than the usual 210 Grain .41 Magnum Loading, so, if anything, the WALKER with BP, and a 230 Grain Wadcutter, would in fact exceed meaningfully, the terminal Ballistics figures of the standard Loadings of the .41 Remington Magnum Cartridge.


It is not far behind it, using Round Ball.

Too, using a .457 Round Ball, which one has sized to .454 in a Lube-Sizer, gives a l-i-t-t-l-e more weight to the Ball...if one wants.

 

[Oyeboten]

Hi Billy Shears,



Those are good mentions and good reminders.


To my mind or imagination, there is FPS, Bullet Weight, Bullet composition, and bullet Shape or Meplat also...and, Shot placement, to some degree, as far as my interest in some imprecise yet meaningful anticipations, of what it might be expected to do, depending on what it hits, and, how far away the target is.


Those variables are the 'Constellation' so to speak, to my mind...in whose mean, some order of appreciaiton can occur.


As many know, there is in every Human Being, a small area in the actual center of the Chest, close to the Heart, where, a Bullet can pass entirely through, and, cause no serious injury.

However certain one may be of their Cartridge or Arm, the potential Target, when Human or other large Animal, remains intrinsically uncertain in practice, as for how it shall react to the Shot or Shots it might receive.

So indeed, even as some can attest to for having lived through disappointment with it, there is really little benifit in trying to think of 'Stopping Power', even if it is an appealing or catchy phrase one might wish could offer more than it does.

 

[andrewstorm]

shoot fer the head

any projectile including a small stone,can kill almost any animal or other giant goliath,@300 fps out of Davids sling according to the bible he also killed lions,surely modern ammo is only marginally more powerful in some instances,the only true advantage of modern ammo is reliability,(non hygroscopic),and no smoke in your way for follow up shots,my R O A can get 1200 fps and 555 fpe with 40 gr 777 3f compressed and a 190 gr bullet i can take any critter here in Michigan,or north America including grizzly bear, after all they claim the 357 mag did it.(Vasillies aim for the eye)

 

[McCall911]

You got anything better?

Who me? When I made this comment?

A .44 C&B having as much "one shot stop" potential as a .41 Magnum????
Where does Sanow et. al. come up with all this horse puckey?

About this notion?

.44 Walker
Walker 1847
141gr RB
60gr
1287 fps
519 ft lb
87%

.41 Mag
Revolver
175gr JHP
FL
1250 fps
608 ft lb
89%

It's not for me to prove anything or show anything! For my money, it's the proponents of this idea who need to present some evidence as to why these "percentages" might be valid. Where are the tests/evidence? What are the tests/evidence? Let them show us.

Otherwise, I'll have to remain with the conclusion that it's not just horse puckey, but pseudo-scientific drivel in addition to horse puckey.

 

[Oyeboten]

I don't know how the 'percentages' are calculated.


And...other than I take it that they are a sort of calculated as an idea for an average...I do not know the conditions in which the average is determined, so...dunno...


But, we all know of course, that whatever the Caliber or Ballistics, shot placement tends to end up being fairly significant, if not more significant in practice, than Calliber and Bullet Weight and FPS are...or, for conventional Hand Gun anyway.

At five feet...grazing a Rib or Ear or Bicept, with a shot fired from a .44 Magnum, verses, one right betwen the Eyes with a .22 LR out of a 1890s Iver Johnson 'Bicycle Gun'...well, who wins that one?

The .22 LR does, of course!


What is the percentage there, with that?


100 percent of nothing, for the miss.

100 percent instant drop, with the operatively correct placement.

 

[arcticap]

Sanow's figures are from an article that he wrote and authors will often reveal & explain the formula that they used in the written article.
Since that's not possible here it should suffice to say that the percentages are at least relative since some guns, loads and cartridges are more powerful and lethal than others.
What we do know is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Colt

...The Walker Colt was quite powerful, with modern replicas firing modern FFFg black powder producing energy levels in excess of 500 foot pounds with both picket bullets and 0.454-inch-diameter (11.5 mm), 141-grain (9.1 g) round ball bullets. The black powder Walker Colt is regarded as the most powerful commercially manufactured repeating handgun from 1847 until the introduction of the .357 Magnum in 1935, and has a muzzle energy nearly exactly the same as a 4-inch-barreled handgun firing a .357 Magnum....

Who really thinks that they would survive after stepping in front of a Walker being fired at less than 3'? That would be an awfully bloody mess....

 

[McCall911]

And...other than I take it that they are a sort of calculated as an idea for an average...I do not know the conditions in which the average is determined, so...dunno...

I don't know this, but it seems to me that the OSS percents are calculated. However, the authors didn't seem forthcoming with their calculations, so I must assume that they wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.

...The Walker Colt was quite powerful, with modern replicas firing modern FFFg black powder producing energy levels in excess of 500 foot pounds with both picket bullets and 0.454-inch-diameter (11.5 mm), 141-grain (9.1 g) round ball bullets. The black powder Walker Colt is regarded as the most powerful commercially manufactured repeating handgun from 1847 until the introduction of the .357 Magnum in 1935, and has a muzzle energy nearly exactly the same as a 4-inch-barreled handgun firing a .357 Magnum....

OK, now this makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. 500+ fpe is clearly a rather stout handgun bullet.
My problem has always been with the OSS percentage idea. My comment was mainly a kneejerk reaction to this, rather than questioning the efficacy of BP.
Short of ballistic testing and actual field experience, the only thing I can rely on are formulas. There is one that I use to give myself a rough idea of the penetration potential of a projectile. It's called the momentum density. This is nothing more than the velocity multiplied by the sectional density. The sectional density of the .44 Walker is about 0.1. So the momentum density is 0.1x1287, or about 128.
For the .41 Magnum, the SD is about 0.149, so the momentum density would be about 186. However, we have to remember that the .41 Magnum is a JHP which likely will expand to quite a bit more than .41 caliber, so the effective momentum density will be less. Therefore it's possible that the penetration of the .454" ball would exceed that of the .41 Magnum.
This may be horse puckey to some of you, but at least I showed you how I arrived at my horse puckey.

 

[mykeal]

It's not for me to prove anything or show anything!

That's quite true, but you did.

You provided numbers, devoid of any units, and a concept unfamiliar to many (in fact the vast majority of shooters) called 'momentum density'; you defined the concept but provided no data whatsoever in support of it's alleged superiority in determining the efficacy of a given charge and projectile.

The application of a concept from electromagnetic wave particle physics to low speed mechanical objects is yet to be demonstrated as a viable extrapolation, and it's use in providing a meaningful comparison of wound potential is an even bigger stretch. I grant that it may be a very useful tool, but there's no data here, and Wakeman and Hawks have quite a bit more work to do before they become recognized authorities in this area.