Bullet Frontal Area Misconception
- Thread starter CSI
- Start date
- Status
30-30remchester
New member
Shawn Dodson is on the right track from my personal observations. An experement I have used many times with novice shooters, to demonstrate that bullet shape does in fact make a great deal of difference, goes this way. I take an old peice of denim cloth from blue jeans, I have a very sharp pencil and have the novice stab the cloth with it, very fast and with great athourity. Then I cut the point off and sand it flat and have him repeat the test. The pencil is same diameter on both strikes, however the pointed stab can hardly be detected ,while the flattened tip rips big holes, again same pencil, same diameter, same force. So bullet shape has a definate place in this debate.
FrankenMauser
New member
Except when 9mms are loaded with 147gr projectiles, and the .45 Auto with 185s (or lighter). How many .45 Auto SD rounds actually make it into the, "TWICE the mass as a 9mm" (230gr) bracket?
Many 9x19mm SD loads are not 115gr loads. Logic fails to agree with your conclusion.
The argument really doesn't stay on topic, either.
Carry what you want. Shoot what you want.
I choose 9mm and .380 Auto, because I'm too damn skinny to hide a .45 Auto. I don't care about frontal area. I care about the fact that "Concealed" means you have to conceal the damn thing.
For those not concealing... round count, recoil, ergonomics, and other factors come into play. This 9mm vs .45 argument is equal to a prehistoric battle over a thoroughly-beaten, decomposing horse.
Last edited:
freedom475
New member
A wound hole is caused by tissue spray away from the bullets nose....
Tissue spray is created by the frontal impact portion of the bullet.
The hole size is directly determined by the striking surface of the nose (meplat), and the speed and direction that the tissue is forced away from the melplat. A flat nose will give much more tissue spray than a round one based on tissue spray direction alone.
Veral Smith said it best... "The shoulders of a SWC do not even get wet as the bullet passes through tissue"
A hole larger than 1 1/4" will excede the bodies pulmanary systems ability to fill it with blood so the energy is wasted and is better spent making the hole deeper..so this limits the HP's usefulness.
The 45 to 9MM caliber debate was settle way back in 1858.. The 45 Won
The following story is from THE PRAIRIE TRAVELER, by Capt Randolph
B. Marcy, published in 1859, pages 165 & 166. It's a fascinating,
and eye-opening book, written by Capt Marcy in the late 1850's for
Americans headed west. Reprints are available through Amazon.com.
When reading this excerpt, remember that in 1858, the only revolvers
readily available were Colt's, and the only "Army" revolver
available at that time was the Colt Dragoon. It is not stated
whether round balls or conical bullets were fired, ("ball" being a
generic term in 1858 for any projectile, round or conical) but my
feeling is that the Navy Colts were usually fired with round balls,
at least until combustible cartridges became readily available
around 1860. The Dragoon, on the other hand, had been customarily
fired with the 219 grain conical bullet, using 28, 36, or 41 grains
of powder, the charges listed in Colt literature of that era. Both
the Walker Colt and the early Dragoons were sold with a single-
cavity conical bullet mould, which is why the conical became the
customary Dragoon projectile.
Enjoy a look back at 1858.
Greg Nelson
"Notwithstanding Colt's Army and Navy sized revolvers have been
in use for a long time by our army, officers are by no means of one
mind as to their relative merits for frontier service. The navy
pistol, being more light and portable, is more convenient for the
belt, but it is very questionable in my mind whether these qualities
counterbalance the advantages derived from the greater weight of
powder and lead that can be fired from the larger pistol, and the
consequent increased projectile force.
This point is illustrated by an incident which fell under my
own observation. In passing near the "Medicine-Bow Butte" during
the spring of 1858, I most unexpectedly encountered and fired at a
full grown grizzly bear; but, as my horse had become somewhat blown
by a previous gallop, his breathing so much disturbed my aim that I
missed the animal at the short distance of about fifty yards.
Fearful, that if I stopped to reload my rifle, the bear would make
his escape, I resolved to drive him back to the advanced guard of
our escort, which I could see approaching in the distance; this I
succeeded in doing, when several mounted men, armed with navy
revolvers, set off in pursuit. They approached within a few paces,
and discharged ten or twelve shots, the most of which entered the
animal, but he still kept on, and his progress did not seem
materially impeded by the wounds. After these men exhausted their
charges, another man rode up armed with the army revolver, and fired
two shots, which brought the stalwart beast ot the ground. Upon
skinning him and making an examination of the wounds, it was
discovered that none of the balls from the smaller pistols, after
passing through his thick and tough hide, penetrated deeper than
about an inch into the flesh, but that the two balls from the large
pistol had gone into the vitals and killed him. This test was to my
mind a decisive one as to the relative merits of the two arms for
frontier service, and I resolved thenceforth to carry the larger
one."
Tissue spray is created by the frontal impact portion of the bullet.
The hole size is directly determined by the striking surface of the nose (meplat), and the speed and direction that the tissue is forced away from the melplat. A flat nose will give much more tissue spray than a round one based on tissue spray direction alone.
Veral Smith said it best... "The shoulders of a SWC do not even get wet as the bullet passes through tissue"
A hole larger than 1 1/4" will excede the bodies pulmanary systems ability to fill it with blood so the energy is wasted and is better spent making the hole deeper..so this limits the HP's usefulness.
The 45 to 9MM caliber debate was settle way back in 1858.. The 45 Won
The following story is from THE PRAIRIE TRAVELER, by Capt Randolph
B. Marcy, published in 1859, pages 165 & 166. It's a fascinating,
and eye-opening book, written by Capt Marcy in the late 1850's for
Americans headed west. Reprints are available through Amazon.com.
When reading this excerpt, remember that in 1858, the only revolvers
readily available were Colt's, and the only "Army" revolver
available at that time was the Colt Dragoon. It is not stated
whether round balls or conical bullets were fired, ("ball" being a
generic term in 1858 for any projectile, round or conical) but my
feeling is that the Navy Colts were usually fired with round balls,
at least until combustible cartridges became readily available
around 1860. The Dragoon, on the other hand, had been customarily
fired with the 219 grain conical bullet, using 28, 36, or 41 grains
of powder, the charges listed in Colt literature of that era. Both
the Walker Colt and the early Dragoons were sold with a single-
cavity conical bullet mould, which is why the conical became the
customary Dragoon projectile.
Enjoy a look back at 1858.
Greg Nelson
"Notwithstanding Colt's Army and Navy sized revolvers have been
in use for a long time by our army, officers are by no means of one
mind as to their relative merits for frontier service. The navy
pistol, being more light and portable, is more convenient for the
belt, but it is very questionable in my mind whether these qualities
counterbalance the advantages derived from the greater weight of
powder and lead that can be fired from the larger pistol, and the
consequent increased projectile force.
This point is illustrated by an incident which fell under my
own observation. In passing near the "Medicine-Bow Butte" during
the spring of 1858, I most unexpectedly encountered and fired at a
full grown grizzly bear; but, as my horse had become somewhat blown
by a previous gallop, his breathing so much disturbed my aim that I
missed the animal at the short distance of about fifty yards.
Fearful, that if I stopped to reload my rifle, the bear would make
his escape, I resolved to drive him back to the advanced guard of
our escort, which I could see approaching in the distance; this I
succeeded in doing, when several mounted men, armed with navy
revolvers, set off in pursuit. They approached within a few paces,
and discharged ten or twelve shots, the most of which entered the
animal, but he still kept on, and his progress did not seem
materially impeded by the wounds. After these men exhausted their
charges, another man rode up armed with the army revolver, and fired
two shots, which brought the stalwart beast ot the ground. Upon
skinning him and making an examination of the wounds, it was
discovered that none of the balls from the smaller pistols, after
passing through his thick and tough hide, penetrated deeper than
about an inch into the flesh, but that the two balls from the large
pistol had gone into the vitals and killed him. This test was to my
mind a decisive one as to the relative merits of the two arms for
frontier service, and I resolved thenceforth to carry the larger
one."
Last edited:
Double Naught Spy
New member
Even more simple this way...
Area of a Circle (A) = πr2 (pi times radius squared)
As the OP stated, or rather hoped, "This will not be a caliber wars thread." And what did it turn into? - Yep, a caliber war, namely the age old 9 vs 45 war.
Add to that a new one to us - arguing about how to calculate the area of a circle! Well, it's not really an argument, but there is too much useful storage space being wasted talking about it.
Clank!
Add to that a new one to us - arguing about how to calculate the area of a circle! Well, it's not really an argument, but there is too much useful storage space being wasted talking about it.
Clank!
- Status