Stopping power of BP vs. Modern Cartridges

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, it's not wave particle momentum density I'm referring to.
The concept of momentum density as applied to terminal ballistics is discussed on this page:

http://www.grosswildjagd.de/momentum.htm

And here:

http://shootersnotes.com/battle-rifle-cartridge/ii-terminal-effects/

Also here:

http://ammoguide.com/myag/articles/hunt/penetration0802.pdf

Since the momentum is also force x time, the momentum density could be described as lbs (force) / area x time-unit. In short, a unit of pressure times a time unit.
 
Penetration in any given medium will of course depend on the Bullet section or Meplat and, the Bullet's composition.


One could of course, load a WALKER ( well, you might have to load the Cylinder off of the Revolver, but ) with a .454 Jacketed Hollowpoint of say 230 Grains, with 60 Grains of 3f Swiss behind it, and, at a likely 1,250 or so FPS, it will do whatever it will do, just as nicely as if it came from a Metallic Cartridge Revolver.


Nor is it that a .41 Magnum Loading was or remains always a Jacketed Hollowpoint, since as one example, the several boxes of 'early' Remington Ammunition I have right in front of me here, in .41 Remington Magnum, are, 210 Grain Semi Wadcutter 'Soft Point' of Lead, simply, and, this was a popular Load at the time those Revolvers came out.


Any of these Revolvers of course can have widely varying Loadings and Bullet Types, depending on application.


Generalities then become liable to omit the viable options, which I think should be borne in mind.



200-odd Grain HardBall, out of a WALKER, of course would offer a great deal of Penetration.


A pure Lead hollow front Wadcutter of same weight and FPS, out of a .41 Magnum, would likely become a small 'Saucer' after merely couple inches of penetration in Game or Man or similar.


We all know this of course, but, jus' sayin'...



What is the anticipated application? Is also the election of projectile kind and loading details.
 
Mike Venturino did a test a few years back where he lined up 12in square white pine 1X12 boards with a one inch space in between each board and shot with various calibers.
I can't quote any results other than a .45Colt loaded with Swiss penetrated all 12 boards.
But the results did show that cap and ball revolvers are not something you'd want to play catch the bullet with.
 
Though I'm sure my tests aren't precisely scientific, I thought I'd try my own quick test while plinking. I stuck a phone book on a board and fired my lil' Kel Tec .380 at it. Then I fired my Remington .44 at it. Only 25 grains of powder behind the ball. The only difference between the two is I can't hit a phone book until I'm 5 yards away. I can hit up to 25 yards away with my Remmie. So I did my test at 5 yards. They were pretty close to penetration distance, of course the .44 was slightly larger of a hole. Bottom line I trust my .44 over the .380.
 
Penetration in any given medium will of course depend on the Bullet section or Meplat and, the Bullet's composition.

I agree. But speaking of meplats, I've found that the momentum density formula that I showed works best when it comes to flat-nosed bullets. For the sectional density, you use the meplat diameter squared as opposed to the caliber squared. This gives an effective sectional density which is much higher than the "classic" formula. A group of us who've been studying terminal ballistics in depth have found that penetration is almost always straight line with flat nosed bullets. However, this tendency drops when the meplat is either greater than or less than 65 percent of caliber. Round nose bullets (other than round balls) tend to veer badly and don't achieve their penetration potential in the medium that our group has been using (water-soaked newspapers.) If anyone is interested, this study can be found in Accurate Reloading Big Bore forum:

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4711043/m/2861098911

The main tester and the one who started the thread is Michael458. He doesn't claim to be an expert, just a student like me. He's a heck of nice guy who is generous with his time. We've learned a lot from his tests.

He hasn't yet tested cap and ball projectiles, I don't think, but I'll suggest it. I'm sure the results would be interesting.
 
Last edited:
The percentage one shot stops for modern ammunition done by Marshall and Sanow were suposedly based on actual police reports. Even so there were discreprencies and there were questions about the accuracy of reporting.

I assisted Dr Martin Fackler in one of his arguements against the methods of Marshal and Sanow.

These comparisons are all somewhat speculative.

On the .41 Magnum question......The inteneded police load or service load for the .41 Magnum when it came out was a 210 grain Round nose lead bullet at about 950 fps from a 4 inch service revolver. The semi jacketed hollow points at "magnum" velocities were for four legged critters.

Shoot even with the .44 Magnum old Dirty Harry used loads that were actually .44 Specail loadings.

News bulletin.....a big old hunk of lead at a given velocity does not care what it is launched from.

Given the weight of the bullets I always thought of a .36 navy RB as a .380 RN FMJ and a .36 conical as a .38 S&W.

Think about it.

-kBob
 
From what I understand, the NYPD stopped using .38 Special FMJ in the 1990's because the bullets were passing completely through people.
Then when they switch to 9mm FMJ the same thing happened so they decided to only use hollow points.
They didn't want over penetration due to the liability of a bullet passing through and hitting a bystander, and there had been too many lawsuits as a result.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
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?
__________________

Marshall & Sanow's first book, Handgun Stopping Power (1992), was controversial. It included "One Shot Stop" results for various handgun loads, calculated from thousands of police shooting reports.... it seems that those police shooting reports were obtained through unofficial channels. Marshall & Sanow refused to let outsiders view those shooting reports, stating that they had to protect their sources. Additional controversy centered around Marshall/Sanow's definition of a "One Shot Stop".

Marshall/Sanow's second book, Street Stoppers (1996), introduced a mathematical prediction method called the Fuller Index. Using data from gelatin tests, the Fuller Index supposedly provided good correlation to the Marshall/Sanow "street results".

In the Feb'98 Handguns article, Sanow presented gelatin test results for several C&B revolver loads, and he used the Fuller Index to calculate the OSS percentages listed in the article.
Yes, those OSS percentages are contrived, and I would take them with a grain of salt.

I still like the Handguns article because of the gelatin test data - I think it is useful to compare that data (penetration, recovered bullet diameter, etc) against gelatin test data for modern handgun loads. I wish that I could post Sanow's gelatin test data here, but I'm afraid it would violate copyright law and THR policy.
 
There are so many factors which configure into a 'One Shot Stop'.

No modern policeman would likely fire one shot anyway, they tend to fire all the arm holds or a lot more than 'one' anyway.


I do not think it is meaninghful to try and co-relate one-shot-stops to any specific Cartridge/Calibre.

What the Bullet hits, is far more the matter, where, anything hitting the Spine or Brain fairly hard, will make for a one shot stop, and, anything not doing so, likely will not, or, not instantly anyway.

Some people wil drop instantly even if receiving a very superficial wound, and, others will continue to aggress even if parts of their skull are blown off and their heart perforated, for however long it is untill their Blood Pressure drops past where the Motor Cortex can still still manage, and, this can be a few minutes even.

If the recipient of a Bullet manages to muddle on well for four minutes after being shot through the Heart, to then collapse, is that a 'One Shot Stop'?

Maybe it is...

There was a guy in the news also a while back, who died of complications incidental to a Bullet wound received in the Texas Tower Sniper incident, which wound had not dropped him at the time, but did cause him decades of problems.

Granted, this would represent an instance of some considerable delay, but, it that a 'One Shot Stop'?

Maybe it is...


There was that story in the news awhile back, of a woman, whom the Police found sitting on a couch, looking a little woosey, who had a small hole in her forehead, and, she had been shot from very close range with a .44 Magnum, and, the Bullet passed through her entire head, between the Cerebral Hemispheres, and went through the wall behind her, and, did not even knock her out, let alone kill her.


What the Handgun Bullet of any Calibre actually perforates or impacts in the recipient, in my imagining on these things, is the central and salient factor as for the probable effects it would have upon the recipient, with Cartridge type or Calibre, secondary.
 
Last edited:
I laugh my fool butt off everytime I read one of these threads.Cap and ball sixguns have probably killed more folks than all the other handguns made throughout history combined.And we're still wondering how effective they are. Hilarious.
 
I am sure that if .36 Calibre and .44 Calibre Cap & Ball revolvers were used 50/50 with all the foremost present day Cartridge Handguns which get carried by LEO or anyone else for SD, we would find no difference in the attributed stopping power between the two Camps.
 
funny.gif
 
Well, I don't know how to explain it and I have no proof or any documents that I can refer to, but I have shot all of my life and not at paper targets, and I DO KNOW that there is STOPPING POWER, KNOCKDOWN POWER, and KILLING POWER. I also know that a swaged round lead ball ie .451 and .457 deliver a TREMENDOUS amount of energy to the target. (everything else [powder, caps, etc] being equal)..Now, By God I KNOW that....
 
Last edited:
I have his book, that's why I too find it hilarious that some folks think that the C&B guns aren't good stoppers.
 
If any of you have doubt about the stopping power of a cap and ball, rush me someday when I'm carrying my remmie and see what happens when your on the business end of a lead ball...
 
No one can get hurt by black powder guns. That's why no one died in the American Civil War. 600,000 not dead guys compared to 300,000 in the WW2.

I can tell you that I would not stand willingly in front of my ROA. Even if I was shooting it.
 
Some of the C&B gelatin tests are impressive!

Regarding the question of a .44 Walker round ball vs. the modern .41 Magnum (175gr JHP), here are Sanow's gelatin results -

.44 Walker RB - 17.8 inches penetration, recovered diameter 0.53, stretch cavity 79.6 cubic inches

.41 Mag 175 JHP - 14 inches penetration, recovered diameter 0.64, stretch cavity 83.2 cubic inches

The only thing I would caution against, is accepting Sanow's OSS values as "gospel". I don't accept Fackler's WTI numbers as "gospel" either. If I wanted to choose a load based upon gelatin tests and mathematical calculations, I would try to choose a load which is ranked highly by both Sanow and Fackler.

The .44 Walker RB is such a load. It's devastating.
 
.44 Walker RB - 17.8 inches penetration, recovered diameter 0.53, stretch cavity 79.6 cubic inches

.41 Mag 175 JHP - 14 inches penetration, recovered diameter 0.64, stretch cavity 83.2 cubic inches

Now that's what I call proper info. Thanks for sharing, ofitg.
So I suppose it's time I re-evaluated my position on the efficacy of BP revolvers! :D
 
Last edited:
Well, to be fair, they should tell us what Barrel Length and what Loading the .41 Magnum Revolver was.


And, done further tests, where, the '41 Magnum gets to try a Round Ball over some sensible Smokeless Loading, and, the Walker, gets to have say, a 230 Grain 'Beer Can' shaped Wadcutter over 58 Grains or so of 3f Swiss Powder.


All in all, they are about on par in my mind, either way.

But, or and, Loadings can and will vary!
 
Tech talk aside, Game shots tell me what I know

One can talk about meplats, terminal balistics, muzzle energy, and such 'til the cows come home. I have been shooting BP weapons since 1963. In that time from my early days to the present, I can tell you this.

I have killed deer with a 2nd Mod Dragoon with RB's and not just once, but 4 times. Downed hogs with the same weapon and with a '58 Remington more than I can remember. Armidillos, rabbits, wild dogs, skunks (always up wind then) and God know what else. All with C&B revolvers.

Dropped a coyote a couple weeks ago in my back pasture/woods behind the house with my cut down '51 Navy slipgun loaded with 20 gr. of 777 and a 130 Lee conicial. It was a surprise to both of us, but I was laughing as I saw him stagger and go down in a ten foot sprint pumping blood like mad. It was a fluke I hit him as he was on me before I knew it. Just point and thumb the hammer. The coyote was just as dead if I had hit him with a .357 mag. Nice wound channel.

In closing, study on paper and in computers, and shooting gel helps in finding the technical "how much" thing from your weapons. But.....Get yourself out in the field and shoot flesh and blood and bone. There you'll see just what is really "how much" and such. paper is fine, but shoot something that is on the move in the wild and see what you get. I know what I can get. Dead critters.:D Never sell the well stoked BP revolver short. It will kill with great effect........


Off the soapbox, Wade
 
About the one shot stop thing....I think that’s a load. Too many variables to calculate including an individuals will to fight, which can't be calculated.

Sure, a gun that makes a bigger deeper hole is going to be more likely to stop a person quicker, but there is a lot more to it than that.

Cap and ball are of course effective weapons or people would have gone back to the bow and arrow. Cap and ball can kill just fine.... has it killed more people than modern arms?? NO I really don't think so. Modern guns are just better at killing due to the vast increase of lead on target.

One shot stop percentage? Every shooting is a unique event it’s pretty ridiculous to try to assign a percentage to that.
 
Well, to be fair, they should tell us what Barrel Length and what Loading the .41 Magnum Revolver was.

Yeah, and the 175 grain factory loadings are usually pretty light IIRC. The heavier 210+ grain bullets would probably tell a different story, even in factory loading.

One can talk about meplats, terminal balistics, muzzle energy, and such 'til the cows come home.

Anybody who hunts cares about terminal ballistics. If they don't, they have no business hunting.
Terminal ballistics is basically how effective ammunition is against a living target. In the past, we simply relied on trial and error. Either it worked or it didn't. Now we have ballistics testing. Is it perfect? No. But it's humane, for one. And it does serve to show what to expect from your ammunition--whether it will expand, hold together, etc.

Sure, we can talk about shot placement all we want. There's no denying that's important. But there is still the fact that some ammo just isn't suitable for a particular task.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top