Velocity and Muzzle Energy vs Incapacitation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Styx

Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
3,806
When it comes to defensive carry against humans, does velocity and muzzle energy really matter? If a human is hit with a, just for sake of argument:

9mm 124 gr; 1200-1300 fps; 400+ fps
357 Sig 125/124 gr; 1400+ fps; 600 +/- ft-lb
357 mag 125 gr; 1600+ fps; 700 +/- ft-lb

If each round expands and penetrates to similar dimensions, is there any real world advantage to incapacitating and doing damage to a threat?

There seems to be this obsession and correlation with velocity and muzzle energy when it comes to what caliber and ammo people in the gun community choose to carry. What does higher velocity and muzzle energy of 9mm +p/+p+, 40s&w, 357 Sig, 10mm, 357 mag, 44 mag, etc. materialize itself when it comes to real world hits on target.
 
When cops carried revolvers, the 357 Mag had a better reputation for ASAP incapacitation than 38 special.
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/revolver-ballistics-test/
357 Mag 4'' Remington 125 SJHP - 13.6'' / .54
38 special 4'' Remington 158 LSWCHP +P - 13.4'' / .56
Near identical penetration & expansion in gel.
Few would say the 38 load has the same ASAP potential (same shot placement) as the 357 Mag.
Why would one think the 357 to have better ASAP potential? KE.
 
Terminal ballistics are more important than MV or ME when the target is live and dangerous.
You want certainty? Nuke 'em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Humans react myrad different ways for myrad reasons to being shot, to the point that there is no one 'one shot stop' certainty.
 Where you place your shots matters, as well as the terminal ballistics, (what happens after the bullet enters the body) a  lot more than the ME or MV. A slow moving large bullet placed right is stll as deadly as it was on the streets of Tombstone in the 1880's. So is a .22 placed right.
 
I think it's a pointless discussion because no human is the same. Some will be very easy to stop and others will take massive damage and keep coming.

Weight, body composition, clothing, influence of substances, mental state, and level of commitment all play a role. A 22 short might stop one person in their tracks while another will soak up some 45s and keep on coming at you.

Pick what you can shoot the best and train often so you can put them where they need to go.
 
I think it's a pointless discussion because no human is the same. Some will be very easy to stop and others will take massive damage and keep coming.

Weight, body composition, clothing, influence of substances, mental state, and level of commitment all play a role. A 22 short might stop one person in their tracks while another will soak up some 45s and keep on coming at you.

Pick what you can shoot the best and train often so you can put them where they need to go.
In this scenario, bullet size and penetration are virtually identical. The only difference is the speed at which the handgun bullet leaves the barrel and hits the target.
 
Last edited:
I think mavracer nailed it.

Could it matter if a higher velocity slug passed close to an aneurism in a significant vessel, or a less elastic liver due to cirrhosis, or could the higher energy affect a health-compromised heart? Maybe?

Bullets that expand tend to be more effective than those that don't. But it's not like the effect is quantified by a minimum size. Will a .30 super carry that expands to .452 be more effective than a wadcutter in .45 ACP? Maybe?

Potentially, energy could make a difference, potentially a bullet that expands to a larger diameter could make a difference, potentially a bullet that penetrates further than the FBI protocol could be more effective. Good luck finding a standard that qualifies the elements that determine a bullet's effectiveness.
 
Styx - in the .357 Magnum, do you have any info about 158 gr. loads? I reload but don't have a chrono so I can't say how fast my loads are running BUT I'm using just under a MAX load of W296. Not having the MV, I haven't been able find any KE results online.
Do you have any ideas or suggestions?
 
I've seen some studies of measuring "hydrostatic" effects with a piezometer measuring amplitude of pressure waves in a material. Below is a similar chart to what I'm talking about. But this doesn't quite get to the point of the OP I don't think. In the information below, the Double Tap 40S&W 135 JHP only taking into account the pressure waves does show a good amount of difference over the other two loads. But that will only make a difference if that pressure wave is heading by internal parts of the recipient that causes a bursting/tearing/etc.

If all three of the examples below hit their mark on the CNS in the same optimal position, I don't think there will really be much difference, but I would say on a CNS hit the one with the most amplitude provides the greatest assurance of damage to the surrounding area.

Hydrostatic Shock Pressure Wave Measurement.JPG
 
I don't think we will ever come up with a way to rank the service pistol cartridges so that the rankings accurately reflect the outcomes of real-world shootings. People and organizations have been trying for a very long time and no one has succeeded. People have been able to very accurately characterize the differences in terminal performance of the service pistol cartridges by using controlled conditions and gel shooting, but no one has been able to take the next step and prove that the differences between the service pistol cartridges that show up in gel shooting actually provide a practical/significant benefit to a defender in the real world.

The only reasonable conclusion we can come to is that it's very hard to tie differences in terminal performance in the service pistol performance class to differences in real-world shooting outcomes. It doesn't take much reasoning ability to understand that if there was a practical/significant benefit, we should be able to see it--it should show up when people look at the outcomes of real-world shootings. I mean, if we can't see it, what practical/significant benefit is it providing? The fact that no one has been able to make the connection suggests very strongly that if someone ever does pull it off, the benefit isn't going to be significant. If the benefit were significant, how could it be so hard to detect it?

If you want to improve your chances on the street, spend your money and time on practice and training--that will pay dividends. If you're using something in the service pistol performance class, the numbers stamped on the side of the gun or printed on the ammo boxes you buy aren't going to be what makes the difference.
 
In what way though if hand rounds do not result in hydrostatic stock because they aren't moving fast enough?
Even if one doesn't believe in Hydrostatic Shock, pistol rounds are going plenty fast enough for hydrodynamics to be involved.
While some downplay temporary wound channel and tout permanent wound channel, in the real world the line these folks try to draw between the two is about as clear as mud.
 
Even if one doesn't believe in Hydrostatic Shock, pistol rounds are going plenty fast enough for hydrodynamics to be involved.
While some downplay temporary wound channel and tout permanent wound channel, in the real world the line these folks try to draw between the two is about as clear as mud.
"Hydrostatic shock" is nothing more than the temporary cavity.

It's simply the splash created in water-filled soft tissues, exactly like a rock tossed into a pool of water creates a splash.

A handgun bullet penetrating the torso must pass through vitals (heart, aorta, vena cava) or disrupt the upper spinal cord to be quickly effective.

If the bullet doesn't pass though vitals, then they'll simply stretch and rebound from the temporary cavity while incurring very little damage.
 
If the bullet doesn't pass though vitals, then they'll simply stretch and rebound from the temporary cavity while incurring very little damage.
True of elastic tissues. Veins, arteries and muscles tend to be quite elastic. Organs like the liver, spleen, kidney are significantly less elastic and can tear from temporary cavity in a way that resembles the "tearing" noted in ballistic gelatin.

 
I tend to be the only one who believes this but higher energy numbers would indicate a higher likelihood of having a shot stop a target more quickly if no vitals or CNS is hit such as breaking a structural bone.

To me, this correlates to the mythic “stopping power”. Having a gun and cartridge that is able to decisively break bones can increase stopping power even if nobody believes in stopping power. Most handguns and cartridges will do nearly equal damage to soft tissue and organs but a more powerful cartridge can help in a few more ways that seem to be overlooked.
 
"Hydrostatic shock" is nothing more than the temporary cavity.
That's incorrect hydrostatic would be a pressure wave thru a stationary liquid, the temporary cavity is fluid in motion and that would be hydrodynamics.
If the bullet doesn't pass though vitals, then they'll simply stretch and rebound from the temporary cavity while incurring very little damage.
How much is very little and how do you measure this in flesh?
If your theory would hold true a round nose at 800 fps would have the same wounding effect as a SWC or WFN at 1200. This just isn't the case.
 
Terminal ballistics are more important than MV or ME when the target is live and dangerous.
You want certainty? Nuke 'em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Humans react myrad different ways for myrad reasons to being shot, to the point that there is no one 'one shot stop' certainty.
 Where you place your shots matters, as well as the terminal ballistics, (what happens after the bullet enters the body) a  lot more than the ME or MV. A slow moving large bullet placed right is stll as deadly as it was on the streets of Tombstone in the 1880's. So is a .22 placed right.
Oh, if we could only carry shotguns….
 
True of elastic tissues. Veins, arteries and muscles tend to be quite elastic. Organs like the liver, spleen, kidney are significantly less elastic and can tear from temporary cavity in a way that resembles the "tearing" noted in ballistic gelatin.

Temporary cavity displacement has the potential to damage non-elastic soft tissues. Except for the brain, non-elastic soft tissues (kidney, liver, pancreas, and spleen) are located in the abdomen. These tissues aren't blood distribution organs, like the heart and major vessels, and during sympathetic nervous system activation ("flight or flight" response), the blood supply to these organs is reduced. They'll bleed, but they don't bleed in rate and quantity to produce rapid incapacitation like a hole in the heart or a major vessel bleeds.
 
Last edited:
That's incorrect hydrostatic would be a pressure wave thru a stationary liquid, the temporary cavity is fluid in motion and that would be hydrodynamics.
You have two pressure waves:

1) Sonic pressure wave - which is nothing more than the sound wave of bullet impact traveling at ~4000 fps through water-filled soft tissues. It is benign and doesn't damage soft tissues.

2) Temporary cavity - measured at about 60 psi for centerfire rifle bullets that produce a volleyball-sized temporary cavity.

How much is very little and how do you measure this in flesh?
If your theory would hold true a round nose at 800 fps would have the same wounding effect as a SWC or WFN at 1200. This just isn't the case.
Bruising.

The temporary cavity produces blunt trauma-type tissue injury.

What you hit is more important than what you hit with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top