ashtxsniper
Member
Without a doubt shot placement, energy of the fired round, and bullet design are the three most important factor.
What in your opinion is the greatest factor in stopping power?
- Thread starter MikePGS
- Start date
- Status
In all firearms, it is in having perfect shot placement.
In handguns though . . . a close second would be to have a big bullet that makes the biggest wound channel for, all things else equal . . . the big wound channel has a greater chance of hitting a vital spot that will end the fight instantly.
In handguns though . . . a close second would be to have a big bullet that makes the biggest wound channel for, all things else equal . . . the big wound channel has a greater chance of hitting a vital spot that will end the fight instantly.
DMK
Member
I don't pay attention to energy.
#1 is penetration. The round needs to penetrate deeply enough to strike vital organs. Even at an angle. The 12-14" rule of thumb sounds pretty good, with a bit of a margin in most cases.
#2 is expansion. If the round penetrates enough AND expands reliably, it will increase damage.
If you have both these factors, you have the energy needed.
Some folks say velocity is key,some folks say bullet weight is the key. I don't know, but 45cal 230gr at 900fps, and 165gr 40cal at 1000fps and 125gr 357 at 1200fps all seem to have about the same success rate.
#1 is penetration. The round needs to penetrate deeply enough to strike vital organs. Even at an angle. The 12-14" rule of thumb sounds pretty good, with a bit of a margin in most cases.
#2 is expansion. If the round penetrates enough AND expands reliably, it will increase damage.
If you have both these factors, you have the energy needed.
Some folks say velocity is key,some folks say bullet weight is the key. I don't know, but 45cal 230gr at 900fps, and 165gr 40cal at 1000fps and 125gr 357 at 1200fps all seem to have about the same success rate.
There is no one single greatest factor. Without penetration the size of the hole makes little difference. Without a decent hole size penetration doesn't make that much difference either. Bullet placement is fine, but your enemy isn't always going to stand and let you place the bullet where you want to and with an insufficent caliber even if you shoot perfectly if you've got to go through his arm and 8 layers of heavy clothing you're not going to reach a vital organ.
It takes placement, penetration, plus expansion to cause the kind of permanent wound cavity that goes into and through vital organs that will stop someone quickly even if you have to shoot through their arm first and a dozen layers of clothing to get there.
It takes placement, penetration, plus expansion to cause the kind of permanent wound cavity that goes into and through vital organs that will stop someone quickly even if you have to shoot through their arm first and a dozen layers of clothing to get there.
mljdeckard
Member
I agree that bleed time is the ultimate factor. Which means the bullet that causes the most cm3 of tissue damage will most likely cause the most bleeding. Multiple hits, even better.
I flat refuse to believe that stopping power doesn't exist. You're talking about hundreds of ft-lbs of energy, impacting on a target. This force will break ribs under a vest. One cannot say that under no circumstances will this energy knock someone over. Think about it like getting punched. If you are prepared, with your weight forward, a punch will not likely knock you down. If you are standing straight up, and you get blindsided, it is much more likely that you will.
Again, multiple hits, from the biggest, heaviest bullet you can control.
I flat refuse to believe that stopping power doesn't exist. You're talking about hundreds of ft-lbs of energy, impacting on a target. This force will break ribs under a vest. One cannot say that under no circumstances will this energy knock someone over. Think about it like getting punched. If you are prepared, with your weight forward, a punch will not likely knock you down. If you are standing straight up, and you get blindsided, it is much more likely that you will.
Again, multiple hits, from the biggest, heaviest bullet you can control.
Yes, I can. Under no circumstances will the physical impact of a bullet ever ever ever "knock someone over". Period. If the impact of the bullet knocks someone over, then it will also knock down the shooter!
The momentum of a punch is orders of magnitude greater than the momentum of a bullet, therefore a punch can knock you down whereas a bullet will not.
Momentum is different than energy!
p=mv
For a .44Mag:
240gr@1760fps
0.0342 pounds x 1200mph = 170 pounds x M miles an hour.
Therefore, a .44Mag hitting a 170 lb person will impart a velocity of 0.25mph to them. That's one quarter of a mile an hour!
Hardly "knocking someone over".
For a punch:
50lbs@60mph:
50*60=170*M miles an hour.
Therefore, someone with a good punch with a good portion of bodyweight behind it will impart a velocity of 17.6mph to a person and knock them over.
Under no circumstances will the physical impact of a bullet fired from any man-portable firearm ever knock someone down.
Period.
mpmarty
Member
funny about those "dangerous game" scenarios from Africa. Most hunters over there take shoulder shots on Rhino and Cape Buff to take out one of their front legs and then go for a killing shot as they are more concerned with stopping the charge than they are about killing the beast.
Looks like momentum * energy has the best correlation with wound volume.
Going by theoretical, calculated data (though my equations have proven extremely accurate when compared to gelatin and hunting data)...
Energy vs. wound volume
Two distinct curves. Ironically, it's the heavy and slow bullets that ended up in the upper curve, meaning that heavy and slow makes a more efficient use of a given amount of energy. Those two way above the curve are .45-70 rounds.
Momentum vs. wound volume
Two distinct lines again. This time the dividing factor was energy. High-energy bullets make a much more efficient use of momentum than low-energy ones. Odd, eh?
Energy * momentum vs. wound volume
Holy crap, it's practically a straight line! We have a winner!
Calibers ranged from .25 ACP to .375 H&H. All wound volumes were calculated based on typical bullet weights and muzzle velocities. Penetrations were held to 12" for all rounds, and 0% fragmentation. Naturally, most of the rifle cartridges would penetrate much further than that.
Increased penetration depth tended to decrease total wound volume, roughly proportional to penetration depth, but heavy and slow bullets tended to suffer less. And obviously, you need a certain minimum penetration depht to reliably reach vital organs from likely shooting angles. So you want enough penetration to hole something vital, but not so much that the wound dwindles away to nothing (like with FMJ ammo).
Energy * momentum / penetration vs. wound volume
Going by theoretical, calculated data (though my equations have proven extremely accurate when compared to gelatin and hunting data)...
Energy vs. wound volume
Two distinct curves. Ironically, it's the heavy and slow bullets that ended up in the upper curve, meaning that heavy and slow makes a more efficient use of a given amount of energy. Those two way above the curve are .45-70 rounds.
Momentum vs. wound volume
Two distinct lines again. This time the dividing factor was energy. High-energy bullets make a much more efficient use of momentum than low-energy ones. Odd, eh?
Energy * momentum vs. wound volume
Holy crap, it's practically a straight line! We have a winner!
Calibers ranged from .25 ACP to .375 H&H. All wound volumes were calculated based on typical bullet weights and muzzle velocities. Penetrations were held to 12" for all rounds, and 0% fragmentation. Naturally, most of the rifle cartridges would penetrate much further than that.
Increased penetration depth tended to decrease total wound volume, roughly proportional to penetration depth, but heavy and slow bullets tended to suffer less. And obviously, you need a certain minimum penetration depht to reliably reach vital organs from likely shooting angles. So you want enough penetration to hole something vital, but not so much that the wound dwindles away to nothing (like with FMJ ammo).
Energy * momentum / penetration vs. wound volume
Attachments
mljdeckard
Member
So, an object hitting with enough force to break ribs cannot physically knock someone over?
As I showed above, it depends on the object's MOMENTUM. Both a .44Mag into a vest and an uppercut will break ribs, but the latter is the only one that will physically knock you to the ground. You might fall out of surprise or shock when the .44Mag hits, but that's not being knocked down by the bullet, that's being knocked down by the mental and psychological reaction to the bullet.
ETA:
For the record, a 25mm cannon with a 185 gram HEAT projectile moving at 1100m/s will impart a velocity of only about 5.5mph to a 170lb person when it hits. That might knock the... remains... of you over.
kyrifleman0714
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2007
- Messages
- 22
IMO, the biggest factor besides the obvious of shot placement, is bullet weight, this is why you hear reports of troops complaining about the 5.56 lack of stopping power, because they are using 55-77 grain bullets that are going really fast, so they basically whiz right through. AK47 fires 122-154 grain bullets that move slower, so more energy transfer.
inherentical
Member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2007
- Messages
- 753
Marketing?
The single biggest factor in determining the power to incapacitate is the damage dealt to the BG per second. This has two major considerations; controllability and depth/diameter of holes produced.
Any bullet - ANY bullet - in the right place will instantly incapacitate. A .22 in the eye socket will penetrate the brain and short circuit a few vital neurons. However, a .22 in the wrong place is practically useless; lodged in the arm, you'd be lucky to break bone. You therefore need a LOT of .22 bullets in the wrong places to make a guy bleed to death, even though each one if it only contacts soft tissue would probably go right through. Therefore, the issue is having a bullet big enough that you can just slightly miss and still contact vital tissue like heart muscle, blood vessels or nerve trunks, which cause rapid incapacitation. The bullet must also penetrate deeply enough to get to said tissue.
By that consideration alone, a .50AE +P+ HydraShok is the cartridge of choice. It makes a big hole (it would probably expand to 3/4" or more) and penetrates deep, so you're virtually guaranteed to damage something important and do a lot of damage per shot. However, .50AE is a VERY powerful round needing a VERY big gun and producing a LOT of recoil. All references to the Matrix aside, it is not a practical cartridge based on the availability of weapons to fire that round that are of a practical size for concealed carry.
By contrast, a smaller-diameter round may not make as big a hole, but it also requires less energy to propel through a BG (thereby doing maximum damage), resulting in less recoil. You can then have a smaller, easier-to-manipulate, easier-to-control weapon, allowing you to fire faster. Say you can fire a 9mm accurately twice as fast as a .50AE. The .50AE doesn't do twice as much damage; therefore even though the Desert Eagle wins shot-for-shot, a 9mm does more damage over the same time spent shooting.
Therefore, the final answer to the $1,000,000 question is that the best cartridge is the biggest and highest-power load that you can fire accurately at a good rate of speed. "Good" is subjective, but if you can rapidly unload at 5 yards and achieve a 6" grouping I think you can handle your average BG. It doesn't matter what that caliber is; if 9mm is your most comfortable caliber, go for it. If you can shoot a .40S&W at least as fast, that's an advantage. If you can fire a .45ACP cartridge that fast as well, more power to ya. And yes, if you can shoot a Desert Eagle rapidly and accurately, and it's practical for daily life
then by all means carry one.
Any bullet - ANY bullet - in the right place will instantly incapacitate. A .22 in the eye socket will penetrate the brain and short circuit a few vital neurons. However, a .22 in the wrong place is practically useless; lodged in the arm, you'd be lucky to break bone. You therefore need a LOT of .22 bullets in the wrong places to make a guy bleed to death, even though each one if it only contacts soft tissue would probably go right through. Therefore, the issue is having a bullet big enough that you can just slightly miss and still contact vital tissue like heart muscle, blood vessels or nerve trunks, which cause rapid incapacitation. The bullet must also penetrate deeply enough to get to said tissue.
By that consideration alone, a .50AE +P+ HydraShok is the cartridge of choice. It makes a big hole (it would probably expand to 3/4" or more) and penetrates deep, so you're virtually guaranteed to damage something important and do a lot of damage per shot. However, .50AE is a VERY powerful round needing a VERY big gun and producing a LOT of recoil. All references to the Matrix aside, it is not a practical cartridge based on the availability of weapons to fire that round that are of a practical size for concealed carry.
By contrast, a smaller-diameter round may not make as big a hole, but it also requires less energy to propel through a BG (thereby doing maximum damage), resulting in less recoil. You can then have a smaller, easier-to-manipulate, easier-to-control weapon, allowing you to fire faster. Say you can fire a 9mm accurately twice as fast as a .50AE. The .50AE doesn't do twice as much damage; therefore even though the Desert Eagle wins shot-for-shot, a 9mm does more damage over the same time spent shooting.
Therefore, the final answer to the $1,000,000 question is that the best cartridge is the biggest and highest-power load that you can fire accurately at a good rate of speed. "Good" is subjective, but if you can rapidly unload at 5 yards and achieve a 6" grouping I think you can handle your average BG. It doesn't matter what that caliber is; if 9mm is your most comfortable caliber, go for it. If you can shoot a .40S&W at least as fast, that's an advantage. If you can fire a .45ACP cartridge that fast as well, more power to ya. And yes, if you can shoot a Desert Eagle rapidly and accurately, and it's practical for daily life
then by all means carry one.Shawnee
member
shot placement.
BobbyQuickdraw
Member
Hey, ammo is relatively cheap. So if you're facing what looks to be 1 Bad Guy, might as well give him at least half of your magazine (or cylinder). No matter what you're shooting, more equals more! If you're prepared and have another mag on hand, hell, give him 80% or more.
The only reason I don't explicitly say "empty the mag" is because there could be another. If your reloads are fast, then give him the full basket. After about the 6th round maybe he'll realize he's been shot and then you can sink that headshot.
The only reason I don't explicitly say "empty the mag" is because there could be another. If your reloads are fast, then give him the full basket. After about the 6th round maybe he'll realize he's been shot and then you can sink that headshot.
usp9
Member
I'm not sure what "stopping power" means, but hitting a vital organ that causes instant or near instant death seems to work. What else matters?
FWIW: Bobby Kennedy claims the best round is the .22lr. He has reason to recommend it.
FranklyTodd
Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 517
Dumb comment
Wow, this is a dumb comment. If we alter this to say that PLANNING to knock someone over would be stupid, I'd be on board.
A friend of the family is a cop (a BIG freakin cop - probably 6'3", 240), chasing bad guy, who wheels around and shoots him in the chest with something small, I think he said it was a 22 (this happened in the mid 80s). He's on a dead run, takes one through the badge (he has it encased in plastic - eerie). It hits a rib and goes sideways, making more like a 6" cut on his chest. He said it was like getting hit with a sledgehammer, knocked him flat on his butt.
He then proceeded to empty his gun into the BG (from the seated position) as he tried to flee. Didn't kill him, but he didn't get very far.
Again, I wouldn't recommend using a 22lr planning to knock a guy off his feet, but if the BG in this case was bent on murder rather than escape, he certainly bought himself time for follow up shots! For "knockdown" power, probably hitting bone is preferable to ripping into soft tissue - that's where bleed-out timing comes in to play. [edit: I hope nobody thinks I mean you should AIM for bone rather than soft tissue, I just mean the luck of the shot]
This also illustrates why I carry a baton/flashlight instead of a knife for SD if without a gun. A knife is a weapon that will eventually do massive long-term damage (read: kill), but a blunt force weapon is often much more effective as a fight STOPPER. There are good arguments to the contrary in certain situations, but this post is too long already....
Wow, this is a dumb comment. If we alter this to say that PLANNING to knock someone over would be stupid, I'd be on board.
A friend of the family is a cop (a BIG freakin cop - probably 6'3", 240), chasing bad guy, who wheels around and shoots him in the chest with something small, I think he said it was a 22 (this happened in the mid 80s). He's on a dead run, takes one through the badge (he has it encased in plastic - eerie). It hits a rib and goes sideways, making more like a 6" cut on his chest. He said it was like getting hit with a sledgehammer, knocked him flat on his butt.
He then proceeded to empty his gun into the BG (from the seated position
) as he tried to flee. Didn't kill him, but he didn't get very far.Again, I wouldn't recommend using a 22lr planning to knock a guy off his feet, but if the BG in this case was bent on murder rather than escape, he certainly bought himself time for follow up shots! For "knockdown" power, probably hitting bone is preferable to ripping into soft tissue - that's where bleed-out timing comes in to play. [edit: I hope nobody thinks I mean you should AIM for bone rather than soft tissue, I just mean the luck of the shot]
This also illustrates why I carry a baton/flashlight instead of a knife for SD if without a gun. A knife is a weapon that will eventually do massive long-term damage (read: kill), but a blunt force weapon is often much more effective as a fight STOPPER. There are good arguments to the contrary in certain situations, but this post is too long already....
crankshop1000
Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2007
- Messages
- 372
Where you are hit...DUH!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
