Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

"Stopping Power" Study

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by wally, May 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wally

    wally Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    12,748
    Location:
    Houston, Tx
    I think most here will find these conclusions heresy, Let the nit picking begin!

    http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7866

    I am not really surprised by this data, I've always believed bullet placement trumps all other factors.
     
  2. JellyJar

    JellyJar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,278
    Location:
    Alabama
    Thank you very much for your long hard work.

    I think you have pretty much nailed it!
     
  3. Weevil

    Weevil Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    690
    Location:
    Colorado
    Interesting.

    It's also interesting that although the differences are small the .357 seems to live up to it's reputation as the best of the best for "stopping power".
     
  4. Owen Sparks

    Owen Sparks member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Messages:
    4,524
    And the mind set of the person being shot is second.
     
  5. Robert

    Robert Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    10,419
    Location:
    Texan by birth, in Colorado cause I hate humidity
    Stopping power has been long held as a "myth" by a good many shooter. I see far more people talking about shot placment than stopping power- whatever that is.
     
  6. Dr. Detroit

    Dr. Detroit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2012
    Messages:
    11
    The article is written by the same author who believes that students should be taught to disobey (at least sometimes) school lockdown protocols. (See that article here.)

    I'm not saying he's necessarily wrong, only that his opinions (on both ammo stopping power and school lockdowns) are peculiar and deserve particularly careful evaluation.

    Cheers,
    Dr. Detroit
     
  7. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,171
    Location:
    Illinois
    Aside from being regurgitated Marshall & Sanow material, - redigested and re-regurgitated, Greg Ellifritz doesn't make sense.

    The stuff he writes just doesn't makes sense.

    I hope no one ever makes purchasing decisions based on his math.
     
  8. Old judge creek

    Old judge creek Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    160
    Location:
    1881 Ranch, Nevada & California
    Well done, IMO.
     
  9. 9mmepiphany

    9mmepiphany Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    18,986
    Location:
    northern california
    Maybe I missed it.

    Where is the heresy?
    What is there to nit pick?
    Why didn't I do my research paper on something this interesting?

    I think this is pretty mainstream thinking among folks who actually pay attention to this kind of stuff
     
  10. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,171
    Location:
    Illinois
    Why would you do that and call it "fatalities" ? There are documented shootings where a person was shot in the leg and even though they received medical attention relatively quickly, and yet they died, even though they were still alive when they arrived at the ER.

    This is another problem I have with Greg Ellifritz - his word bending definitions. If you are looking for some specific meaning from torso and head shots - then call it "Head or Torso hit fatalities".


    OK here is the big problem here, One shot stop means - One. It is a discrete event. You have to define the event and count how many times it occurs. You cannot have a "One shot stop percentage" that is the result of a number divided by another number.
     
  11. jmr40

    jmr40 Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    10,441
    Location:
    Georgia
    People have used dozens of different strategies to document or predict how effective different handguns will be for over 100 years. If you look at any of them, whether they be 1 shot stop percentages, ballistic gell, shooting live farm animals, or autopsie reports they all pretty much show the same results. Always have, even going back 100 years or more. Some would rather make their decisions based on urban myth than on facts.
     
  12. bikerdoc

    bikerdoc Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    Messages:
    17,287
    Location:
    Southern Virginia
    Stopping power is just that .You shoot until the threat has stopped. Not until you think it has stopped, but until it is stopped!
     
  13. jimbo555

    jimbo555 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,146
    Location:
    Statesboro,Georgia
    I just have to figure out how to conceal my m-1 garand!:D
     
  14. Strange Bob

    Strange Bob Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    119
    Location:
    East Texas
    You can conceal that M1 Garand if you have long hollow legs.:D

    I was most impressed by the .22 numbers. Guess I need to consider getting rid of my 629's and getting a couple of Buckmarks and k-22's.

    Very interesting read and study of data to say the least.
     
  15. Loosedhorse

    Loosedhorse member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    3,454
    Location:
    eastern Massachusetts
    Okay.

    I note the high number of shots on target/persons shot for 9mm. This is interpreted by the label "Average number of rounds until incapacitation" but that might not be so. It might be that 9mm shooters were putting follow-up shots on target fast enough that two or more shots would land before it became clear that the attack was over.

    In other words, if you can rapidly put many shots on target, and have been trained to do that in an LE or SD scenario, then we should expect very few fights that end with one shot.

    If, on the other hand, you use a round that prevents a quick follow-up shot, we should expect more one-shot stops (as you'll have more time between shots to notice that the fight is over). And indeed, we find that the .44 Mag (with which I'd expect the slowest follow-up shots) shows the most one shot stops, edging out even the shotgun.

    Anyone want to guess how many one shot stops you get with a submachinegun? ;)
     
  16. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    18,719
    Location:
    Deep in the Ozarks
    Interesting.

    I've said this about Marshall and Sanow's study for years.

    A much better standard would be Stops/Encounters. In other words, what percentage of fights did the good guys win with each cartridge studied?
     
  17. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,558
    Location:
    Georgia
    There is way too much about Marshall/Sanow that I just don't like. I never use their numbers.
     
  18. valnar

    valnar Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Messages:
    1,409
    Location:
    Ohio
    The best data from that study is to shoot and hit twice.
     
  19. philoe

    philoe Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    This study makes me carryin my. 32 look like a genius!! In all seriousness it would take a fool to look at any of these studies and take their conclusions over known ballistics on the calibers.
     
  20. Skribs

    Skribs Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    5,807
    Location:
    Lakewood, Washington
    I trust that his data is accurate, but I think there's more going on than just a change of caliber. .38 special had more than the 9mm, but the .38 has less power with the same diameter. What I think the difference here is with the .38 people are firing one or two shots, whereas with the 9mm they're firing three or four shots (or more) and thus skewing the data higher. You don't know if shot #1 or 2 would have stopped him because shot #3 was only a quarter second later.

    Another interesting thing is the .22, average number of rounds before incap is really low (1.38, second only to shotguns), whereas the percentage of folks who were not incapacitated was higher than everything but .25 ACP and .32.

    I'd also like to point out that the definition of "stop" includes both voluntary and involuntary stops, and voluntary stops are entirely random.

    I guess a lot of this is shown in the discussion after the numbers, but it still does highlight the issues. I still believe, as I've posted in other threads, that due to the random nature of shootings, the only way to definitively lable the "stopping power" of different calibers and bullets is via high-end computer simulation, involving accurate ballistics, physics, and anatonmy.
     
  21. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    10,717
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    I think this is the most significant data from the study:

    Ellifritz_Failure_to_Incap.jpg

    The assailants not incapacitated are the ones who can still hurt you.

    And as Ellifritz says (emphasis added):

    Not really. See above. The .32 failed to incapacitate more assailants than any other cartridge.
     
  22. Swing

    Swing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,550
    LOL!

    "'scuse me while I whip dis out."
     
  23. C0untZer0

    C0untZer0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,171
    Location:
    Illinois
    It's not nit picking - there are serious flaws in what Greg Ellifritz is presenting here.

    How many people fight off an assailant the way you try to figure out how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll lolipop?

    Shoot once, see if the attacker is still coming... shoot twice, see if the attacker is still coming, shoot a third time and see if the attacker is still coming.

    Greg Ellifritz also doesn't elaborae in this article on how he treats a shooting where 3 officers engage a single perpatrator.

    I wonder if he's taken into account last weeks shooting in NYC where police officers fired 84 rounds at a suspect and hit him in non-vital places 7 or so times. Technically a few of those were torso hits, although the bullets didn't strike any vital organs.

    I don't think anything usefull can be learned from his treatment of the data.
     
  24. JEB

    JEB Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,088
    Location:
    Douds, IA
    IMO, you did a great job compiling all that data. thank you

    very good point. i had never looked at it that way.
     
  25. GunnerShotz

    GunnerShotz Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    112
    Location:
    Ohio
    "Anyone want to guess how many one shot stops you get with a submachinegun?"
    Nice one LoosedHorse! ;)

    It's an incredibly valuable compilation of data worth consideration! What Anyone needs to remember IMHO is that the variables of actual case studies like these (and then the definitions used to define them) will inevitably skew any conclusive results for Anyone to make Any conclusively accurate and broad statement like "caliber A is going to Stop a perp better than caliber B". So, personally, I would never draw such a broad conclusion from such a study.

    If there are 456 9mm hits on (the defined) target vs 25 .32, how am I really supposed to conclude (based on numbers) which one is 'better' for the defined objective.... which I'm reading to be "immediate incapacitation" in this study. It just means that many more people used 9mm :)

    Ellifritz did a nice job, and I'll be keeping it in mind, don't get me wrong...

    There are just too many possible scenarios and variables (and definitions of said variables) to conclusively define "stopping power"..... unless of course I can get volunteers to attack me in the same way, every time, while I shoot them with progressively bigger calibers....
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page