Underpenetrator vs Overpenetraror

[marb4]

Question,

Given the FBI/IWBA recommendation for self defense rounds being 12 to 18 inches penetration of 10% ballistic gel, which of the two following rounds would you choose to carry (assuming reliability, shootability, ect are the same)?

"The Undrepenetrator" -large expansion with consistent 10-12 inches gel penetration.

"The Overpenetrator" -mild expansion with consistent penetration to 20-22 inches gel.

For the sake of this exercise, lets keep it to these two choices. I know the proper answer is "neither". We would like moderate expansion with penetration of 15-16 inches. Please post the reasoning behind your choice.

 

[bullseye308]

Underpenetrater for me. You just might have to shoot more than once, but I'd rather have the bullet stay in and not go through than worry about hitting an innocent.

 

[Fla_dogman]

IMHO it is relevant to the time of year, summer with lighter clothes the less penetrating, winter with heavy clothes more penetrating, of course shooting through objects between you and the peep negates all this LOL

 

[DeepSouth]

For self defense ammo I feel much better about erroring on the side of under penetrating. I'd also say I believe it's much less likely to happen, or matter, than is commonly believed.

 

[huntsman]

It's all about penetration baby.

 

[Captain O]

I would rather penetrate too much than not enough. You can't always "shoot them again". If the projectile comes out the back, it isn't likely to have the power to do much damage.

My axiom is as follows:

Shot placement is king, penetration is queen. Everything else is "angels dancing on the heads of pins".

 

[FL-NC]

The cheaper one. Seriously- practice lots and often, select a HP round from an American manufacturer, and move on.

 

[REB]

I would rather penetrate too much than not enough. You can't always "shoot them again". If the projectile comes out the back, it isn't likely to have the power to do much damage.

My axiom is as follows:

Shot placement is king, penetration is queen. Everything else is "angels dancing on the heads of pins".

I agree completely.
Considering the fact that in a close range shootout the odds are most rounds are going to miss the intended target any idea that less penetration is somehow safer to bystanders is a topic for gun writers with nothing better to write about.

 

[Black Knight]

I don't want over penetration for obvious reasons. I don't want under penetration for similar reasons. I want effective ammo that will penetrate enough to dump all its destructive energy into a bad guy and still hit vital organs.

 

[psyopspec]

Over penetration. It would be horrifying to land shots that would have stopped an attack but for insufficient penetration.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Penetration has precedence...the more the merrier. I need to be assured that when I hit my target, I'm going to be able to penetrate deeply enough to hit a vital organ.

The worry about "over penetration" with respect to "innocents" is silly, in my opinion. I seriously doubt that the majority of any of our self-defense rounds, on average, are actually going to hit the perp, and those are the ones I'd be more worried about.

 

[Deaf Smith]

For self defense... where 75 percent of the shots miss the target... who cares.

Deaf

 

[Panzerschwein]

10-12" with large expansion is about ideal methinks.

 

[JTQ]

No question, I'd prefer over penetration.

Edit to add: The under penetration, energy dump stuff, was very popular in the 1960's - 1970's. It was a bad idea then, it's a bad idea now.

 

[ROAshooter]

its more shot "placement" than over or under pentration

 

[ACP]

I voted overpenetration. The human body is tough, clothes are thick, arms and such get in the way of vitals, and then there is the possibility of barriers like auto sheet metal, auto glass, wall board, plywood, pane glass, etc.

Underpenetration is one of the reasons why I stopped carrying Glaser Safety slugs and such over 20 years ago,

 

[Iggy]

Two holes leak more blood than one. I'll take over penetration every time.

 

[MICHAEL T]

I wonder if Wild Bill , Billy the Kid, John Wesley Hardin and other gunfighters. Sat around in the saloons and worried about under or over penetration.
Never even heard of this .Till I came on the internet. I didn't know my fathers 38spl Colt was useless unless had +P ammo But a 357 was even better.

 

[C0untZer0]

"The Overpenetrator" -mild expansion with consistent penetration to 20-22 inches gel.

If only this were the case. Even .380 rounds end up going 24" inches. Nine millimeter rounds that are going to over penetrate can easily zip through 26" of gel.

 

[COLOSHOOTR]

Voted the lower end but i prefer 12-15 inches with consistent expansion and weight retention. Anything less than 12 inches is a no go in my book. Penetration is important for sure but there can also be too much. You need enough to to get to something vital but you also want as much energy transfered into the target as possible. The 12-15 range seems to work pretty well and that's the range my carry ammo, the 124gr Gold Dot +P falls under.

 

[Plan2Live]

In class I teach nothing under a .38 (revolver) or .380 (semi-auto) and nothing larger than a .357 (revolver) or .45acp (semi-auto) for self defense so I went with the lesser penetration option. Plus I live in a hot, sticky climate so punching through multiple layers of clothing isn't normally a concern.

Too bad the poll didn't have a 2 to 3 inch category for the "only head shots" crowd.

 

[Plan2Live]

I wonder if Wild Bill , Billy the Kid, John Wesley Hardin and other gunfighters. Sat around in the saloons and worried about under or over penetration.
Never even heard of this .Till I came on the internet.

I'm guessing you have never taken a concealed carry class or attended one of Massad Ayoob's (among others) classes.

 

[bannockburn]

Given the choices I went with under penetration with large expansion. Certainly not my ideal preference of sufficient depth penetration but to my way of thinking better than too much penetration and only a little bullet expansion.

 

[PiratePenguin]

Of those two, the underpenetrator.

The FBI guidelines are based on "worst case" scenario, so I'll take the larger expansion at an inch or two less.

If there were any more lost penetration, though, I'd go the other direction.

 

[REB]

Under Penetration can be an issue, just ask the FBI what they learned after the Miami shootout.

In my opinion there is no such thing as over penetration with a handgun round. At one point in time I have probably read every report and wound ballistics workshop the FBI published after this event and I don't remember over penetration ever being mentioned. This was made up by certain gun writers later for whatever reason. In a high adrenaline situation even at close range history has shown us that even highly trained individuals are likely to miss the intended target. This idea that a round that doesn't penetrate as much is somehow safer to bystanders just doesn't hold up in a real life situation. You have to be aware of what it beyond your target.

Another myth that will never die is that some how dumping energy or hydrostatic shock is a factor in the effectiveness of a handgun round, a high velocity rifle round maybe but not a handgun round. The FBI and others have stated over and over that in a handgun round there are only two factors in effectiveness other than the obvious shot placement, penetration and permanent cavity (Diameter). I have shot a number of white tail deer in my life with a handgun you just don't see the internal damage that you get with a high velocity rifle round.

To quote the FBIs Handgun Wounding factors and effectiveness.
"Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding. Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, "too little penetration will get you killed. Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet"