Tumbling Bullets

Durango_Dave

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
148
Location
Durango CO
Terminal Ballistics: There are many technologies to make a bullet more effective for self defense or hunting. By far the most common is expansion.
main-qimg-398316aa42b6ac8c8515062b83015215-lq.jpg
Hollowpoints are made for maximum expansion. Some rifle bullets have a soft rubbery tip in the hollowpoint to make the bullet streamlined until it hits the target and then the tip disintegrates and the bullet expands. (i.e. Nosler Ballistic Tip)

There are other types of bullets such as those that are meant to fragment.
2.jpg Ruger-PolyCase-ARX-Lead.jpg
I often hear the anti-gun media say that the AR-15 bullet causes much more damage because it tumbles. Is there any truth to that? I never hear that from the bullet or cartridge manufacturers.

Of course the AR-15 uses the same bullets that are used in other calibers.

Here's one such article that says AR-15 bullets tumble.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/interactive/2023/ar-15-damage-to-human-body/
 
The WaPo article is full of errors.

The major wounding mechanism of the M193 and M855 FMJ bullet is fragmentation, which happens when the bullet yaws. (The term "tumble" is inaccurate because it implies the bullet continuously flips end over end in the body, which it doesn't do.)

M193 and M855 FMJ are the most used cartridges in mass shootings because they're less expensive.

When the M193/M855 bullet (hereafter referred to as "M193" because both bullets behave the same way) impacts and penetrates soft tissues, the spin stabilization imparted to the bullet by the rifling in the barrel is insufficient to keep it traveling point forward. Soft tissues are 400 times more dense than air. As it penetrates it seeks to achieve a state of stability. It does this by yawing 180 degrees to travel base first through tissue because the bullet's center of gravity is located nearer to the base than the tip. This is true for all pointed non-expanding FMJ bullets.

As the bullet yaws, it presents more surface area to the soft tissues it's penetrating. This creates a greater disturbance in the tissues. What the WaPo article calls "The Blast Effect" is actually a "splash" effect.

Soft tissues are mostly water.

When you throw a rock into a pool of water it creates a splash.

Likewise, when a bullet strikes water-filled soft tissues it creates a splash in those tissues. The splash is called a "temporary cavity", because the splash is a transient event. Soft tissues are propelled away from the bullet then rebound back to where they were.

As the M193 bullet yaws through 90 degrees (sideways) the stresses on the bullet caused by soft tissue resistance to penetration can affect the physical integrity of the bullet, depending on the bullet's velocity.

The M193 bullet has a knurled groove, called a "cannelure", around the circumfrence of the bullet shank, at about the lower 1/3 of the bullet. The purpose of the cannelure is to allow the cartridge case mouth to be firmly crimped into the bullet to hold the bullet in place.

153-2267B250_4.jpg

The cannelure also weakens the physical integrity of the bullet's copper jacket.

As the M193 bullet yaws through 90 degrees the stresses on the bullet causes the leading edge of the bullet side to flatten, curls the tip, and then break in two at the cannelure. The tip forward of the cannelure usually remains intact, whereas the base aft of the cannelure disintegrates into many small fragments of lead and copper. The fragments pepper surrounding soft tissues with tiny holes and weakens them, allowing the subsequent temporary cavity (the "splash") to stretch these tissues and cause the tiny fragment holes to be torn open, substantially increasing wounding effects.

ammo_project_ammoOraclePics_wund5.jpg

If the bullet didn't have the cannelure it would remain intact and simply yaw 180 degrees to travel backwards as dictated by physics. Therefore the cannelure causes the bullet to fragment (when penetration velocity is high enough - usually 2500 fps and higher) and increase wounding effects.

Without the cannelure the bullet would simply create a splash about 6" in diameter as it yawed through 90 degrees, and the wounding effects wouldn't be as severe.

This is a slomo video of the M855 bullet's wounding mechanisms depicted in properly prepared and calibrated Type 250A ordnance gelatin (a realistic soft tissue simulant). Observe how the bullet yaws, increasing the size of the "splash", then breaks in two and fragments, with the tip exiting the block:
 
Last edited:
Well, first of all, the Washington Post article and other similar pieces I've seen, is dumb for one main reason. Ok, it's dumb for a lot of reasons, but the following is all you need.

1. Bolt actions and single shots are chambered in .223 and/or 5.56 NATO as well. I guess they should be banned too because they wound the same.

Sooo... we're done. End of thread, and you're welcome. :D
 
Bolt actions and single shots are chambered in .223 and/or 5.56 NATO as well. I guess they should be banned too because they wound the same.

223 (556) is an intermediate cartridge. It's not as powerful as rifle cartridges but the mainstream media portrays it as much more deadly and destructive. How do they do it? They always compare the AR-15 to 9 mm handguns. Google it and you'll see they do it all the time. Yes a 223 is much more destructive than a 9 mm but not as destructive as a 30-06, .308 or most other rifle cartridges.
 
There is a lot of sensationalism right now meant to confuse people who don't understand how guns and projectiles work. Thereby changing attitudes toward banning guns. Yes, a 223/5.56 bullet could produce more damage than a typical 9mm bullet. But the end results would be the same if used in the types of mass shootings we are seeing. Could say the same if a shooter were using my dad's 100-year-old shotgun loaded with buckshot.

Concerning tumbling bullets. The original M16 used a slow 1:14 twist barrel firing lightweight 55 gr bullets from 20" barrels that got 3100+ fps. Those light bullets impacting at those speeds at close range did tumble and do a lot of damage.

But the military found that they did a poor job of penetrating barriers, and they didn't perform well at longer range. Current military AR's now use much shorter barrels firing 60-70 gr bullets at much slower speeds from 1:7 twist barrels. They do better at long range, and penetrate barriers better, but they don't tumble and do as much damage.

Who knows what these nuts are using. MOST AR's now are sold with 16" barrels and 3100 fps isn't happening even with 55 gr bullets. I'd assume that most of them are using the cheapest FMJ they can buy which would be 55 gr FMJ. But there are 223/5.56 bullets ranging from 40-90 gr available. And many use expanding soft points.

Unfortunately, most people get their information from an internet meme. Which may be partly true, but without a lot more information can also be misleading. No one wants to take the time to fully understand any complex issue anymore. If it can't be explained in 30 seconds they don't want to hear it.
 
i have experience killing wild hogs using the M193 round fired from bolt action rifles with 20-24" barrels. Most of my hogs are killed at short range from blinds/stands overlooking ponds, feeders, game plots and trails. When the M193 bullet strikes the heart/lung area of a 200 pound hog it usually penetrates 4-6", yaws and fragments; lacerating the heart, lungs, diaphragm and sometimes the liver.

US Army doctor (Colonel) Martin Fackler conducted the wound ballistic studies of various military small arms rounds.

i own AR-15 rifles, they quickly generate once fired cases for my bolt action rifles. :D
 
I once saw a breakdown of the range at which a bullet may be expected to break up, tabulated by barrel length and bullet type.
I think an M855 from M4 was breaking in half at the lead-steel seam out to maybe 125 yards.

The German 7.62 NATO bullet had a very heavy cannelure for good feeding in machine guns, no doubt. Just a coincidence that it increased the tendency to break up.
 
223 (556) is an intermediate cartridge. It's not as powerful as rifle cartridges but the mainstream media portrays it as much more deadly and destructive. How do they do it? They always compare the AR-15 to 9 mm handguns. Google it and you'll see they do it all the time. Yes a 223 is much more destructive than a 9 mm but not as destructive as a 30-06, .308 or most other rifle cartridges.


The point I was making is I've seen anti-gun articles like the Washington Post piece you linked to before. A couple years ago or so I also saw the same propaganda in a TV news segment. Can't remember the network, but I believe it was ABC or NBC nightly news.

Their argument is fundamentally flawed. It doesn't matter that there are more powerful rounds or not.

The fallacy of the article and others like it is that they're focusing on the .223/5.56 cartridge, not the semi-auto "weapon of war" nature of the AR in this particular case.

Anti-gun people assure us they don't want to take "Traditional" firearms away from us, but just those evil semi-autos.

But if they can persuade the unwashed gun-ignorant masses that the round itself is particularly wicked, then it's just as wicked in any firearm chambered for it, including countless bolt-actions, and single shots... Ruger No. 1, H&R handi rifle, TC Contender, etc, etc, etc. Too many non semi-auto firearms chambered in .223 to list.

The big take away here is that the authors (maybe unbeknownst to them) are demonizing the .223/5.56 round, not the AR-15 per se.

^^^ see what I mean?

Maybe I should have just said, "Don't trust the Washington Post." That would have been an easier answer.
 
The fallacy of the article and others like it is that they're focusing on the .223/5.56 cartridge, not the semi-auto "weapon of war" nature of the AR in this particular case.
They focus on any trait of those scary black guns. The ammo makes them more dangerous than other guns. Also the pistol grip, and that barrel shroud surely makes them more deadly.
 
Well, first of all, the Washington Post article and other similar pieces I've seen, is dumb for one main reason. Ok, it's dumb for a lot of reasons, but the following is all you need.

1. Bolt actions and single shots are chambered in .223 and/or 5.56 NATO as well. I guess they should be banned too because they wound the same.

You better believe it! Once they get the "assault weapons" banned they can go after the sniper rifles, AKA bolt action rifles that will accept a scope.
 
The WaPo article is full of errors.

The major wounding mechanism of the M193 and M855 FMJ bullet is fragmentation, which happens when the bullet yaws. (The term "tumble" is inaccurate because it implies the bullet continuously flips end over end in the body, which it doesn't do.)

M193 and M855 FMJ are the most used cartridges in mass shootings because they're less expensive.

When the M193/M855 bullet (hereafter referred to as "M193" because both bullets behave the same way) impacts and penetrates soft tissues, the spin stabilization imparted to the bullet by the rifling in the barrel is insufficient to keep it traveling point forward. Soft tissues are 400 times more dense than air. As it penetrates it seeks to achieve a state of stability. It does this by yawing 180 degrees to travel base first through tissue because the bullet's center of gravity is located nearer to the base than the tip. This is true for all pointed non-expanding FMJ bullets.

As the bullet yaws, it presents more surface area to the soft tissues it's penetrating. This creates a greater disturbance in the tissues. What the WaPo article calls "The Blast Effect" is actually a "splash" effect.

Soft tissues are mostly water.

When you throw a rock into a pool of water it creates a splash.

Likewise, when a bullet strikes water-filled soft tissues it creates a splash in those tissues. The splash is called a "temporary cavity", because the splash is a transient event. Soft tissues are propelled away from the bullet then rebound back to where they were.

As the M193 bullet yaws through 90 degrees (sideways) the stresses on the bullet caused by soft tissue resistance to penetration can affect the physical integrity of the bullet, depending on the bullet's velocity.

The M193 bullet has a knurled groove, called a "cannelure", around the circumfrence of the bullet shank, at about the lower 1/3 of the bullet. The purpose of the cannelure is to allow the cartridge case mouth to be firmly crimped into the bullet to hold the bullet in place.

View attachment 1147400

The cannelure also weakens the physical integrity of the bullet's copper jacket.

As the M193 bullet yaws through 90 degrees the stresses on the bullet causes the leading edge of the bullet side to flatten, curls the tip, and then break in two at the cannelure. The tip forward of the cannelure usually remains intact, whereas the base aft of the cannelure disintegrates into many small fragments of lead and copper. The fragments pepper surrounding soft tissues with tiny holes and weakens them, allowing the subsequent temporary cavity (the "splash") to stretch these tissues and cause the tiny fragment holes to be torn open, substantially increasing wounding effects.

View attachment 1147439

If the bullet didn't have the cannelure it would remain intact and simply yaw 180 degrees to travel backwards as dictated by physics. Therefore the cannelure causes the bullet to fragment (when penetration velocity is high enough - usually 2500 fps and higher) and increase wounding effects.

Without the cannelure the bullet would simply create a splash about 6" in diameter as it yawed through 90 degrees, and the wounding effects wouldn't be as severe.

This is a slomo video of the M855 bullet's wounding mechanisms depicted in properly prepared and calibrated Type 250A ordnance gelatin (a realistic soft tissue simulant). Observe how the bullet yaws, increasing the size of the "splash", then breaks in two and fragments, with the tip exiting the block:



Is the 5.7 more like a rifle round that will yaw? It seems like it should, being longer than it is wide by a good bit.
 
Self defense and hunting bullets are usually made to expand. This seems to be the most effective method.

Would it be accurate to say the 5.56 bullets are made to tumble because that would not violate the Hague treaty forbidding expanding projectiles? (maybe discouraging is a better word than forbidding since it is my understanding we and most countries voluntarily agreed)

Modern bullet technology has better methods for self defense or hunting than tumbling.
 
Self defense and hunting bullets are usually made to expand. This seems to be the most effective method.

Would it be accurate to say the 5.56 bullets are made to tumble because that would not violate the Hague treaty forbidding expanding projectiles? (maybe discouraging is a better word than forbidding since it is my understanding we and most countries voluntarily agreed)

Modern bullet technology has better methods for self defense or hunting than tumbling.

The Hague Convention is also pushing 130 years old and only addresses states in war or similar conflict. Self defense bullets are designed differently and for a different purpose. The USA is not a signatory of the 1899 Hague Convention and could arguably load whatever the heck it wants in its military rifles. 5.56 ammo (M193) was not made to tumble. It is a FMJ projectile as required by the convention. That it happens to hit and fragment in tissue because of its velocity and cause nasty wounds is just a happy little accident. Wink Wink. Later on, the US Military has abandoned some of its focus on fragmentation with the M855A1 and its steel penetrator. The goal here is seemingly to improve barrier penetration. Interestingly enough, the bullet doesn't seem to fragment as easily as its older cousins, but does tend to yaw more. Not really surprising though as the Soviets played with yawing bullets with the 5.45x39 and were seemingly pretty successful in that regard. The 5.45x39 7N6 did a number on people in Afghanistan; gnarly wounds.
I don't know how well current Russian ammo penetrates as there are quite a few variants, some with steel penetrators and others with Tungsten. The Russian 7N10 cartridge adopted in the 1990s uses a similar design but has a small soft lead plug at the tip which deforms and causes the jacket to split, freeing the penetrator and presumably causing some fragmentation of its own.
But since its a FMJ bullet it's still legal under the Hague convention. It's a bit like Formula 1 racing in that the sanctioning body sets down rules to improve the race and improve driver safety, and then the teams employ former aerospace engineers to figure out how to get around the limits of the rules without actually breaking them.
 
England argued at The Hague Convention meetings that it was ok for them to load expansive bullets for fighting savage tribesmen - starting with the real dum dum bullets from Dum Dum Arsenal in India, designed by Captain Bertie Clay - but that they would maintain an inventory of full patch ammunition for "civilized" conflict. That did not fly with the Continental delegations, but England had the last laugh with the Mk VII spitzer, a substantial "tumbler."
 
The tumbling bullet . . . .

Cartridge, Small Arms, Ball, .303 inch, Cordite, Mk IV was approved as standard .303 ammunition in February 1898. The bullet weight 215 grains with a cupro-nickel jacket and differed from the Mk II bullet* in that the round nose of the bullet was pierced to form a hollow point. This method of manufacture left a small disc of jacket material in the base of the hollow and the lead core exposed at the base of the projectile. The muzzle velocity from 31 grains of cordite was 2,000 fps.

Cartridge, Small Arms, Ball, .303 inch, Cordite, Mk V was approved in October 1899. This bullet corrected an major problem with the Mk IV in which the soft pure lead core would blow through the jacket. The major difference was a switch from pure lead to a 98/2% lead/antimony alloy, necessitating a increase in length to maintain the 215 grain weight.

Concerns with hollow cavities in the nose of the bullet and international conventions lead to Cartridge, Small Arms, Ball, .303 inch, Cordite, Mk VI being adopted in January 1904. which was basically the same as the MK II round nosed bullet, but the jacket was made thinner to increase the likelihood of bullet break-up after impact.

In keeping with other nations adopting "spitzer" nosed bullets, in March 1910 Cartridge, Small Arms, Ball, .303 inch, Cordite, Mk VII was introduced. Initially, the bullet was 160 grains with a cupro-nickel jacket and a composite core with the rear two-thirds a lead-antimony alloy and the front third aluminum (or aluminium, if you prefer). The first batch no cannelure; these failed accuracy tests and were replaced by a 174 grain design with a cannelure for crimping. The 174 grain version retained the lead/aluminum core layout. During wartime production, compressed paper, fiber, or ceramic tips were used as replacement for aluminum. The light-weight tip, like the void in early 5.45mm bullets and the steel penetrators of M855 and 7N6 moves the CG aft so that on entering dense material, the bullet will rotate to a base-to-the-front orientation.

There is a big "however," most bullets need at least 4-6 inches travel in dense material to go broadside, so in humans, there are a limited number of angles to make full use of this property. And, for those bullets that fragment, it usually takes 4-6 inches to fragment, as it is the sideways loading of the jacket that causes fragmentation.

__________________
* The Mk III was an experimental hollow point 215 grain bullet, less than 200,000 round were ever issued.
 
As I recall, the English tested the soft point and hollow point hunting bullets of the day and found them to deliver tremendous wounds, but were not as accurate at long range as the full patch service bullet and its expansive derivatives.
 
Back
Top