Can 0.0929 inches really make a difference?
- Thread starter Einar84
- Start date
orionengnr
New member
Yes.
It's not the diameter (okay, it is to some extent)...it is the weight.
To provide an analogy, would you rather be hit with a Wiffle Ball bat or a Louisville Slugger?
Yes, it is a bit of an exageration, but the theory holds.
It's not the diameter (okay, it is to some extent)...it is the weight.
To provide an analogy, would you rather be hit with a Wiffle Ball bat or a Louisville Slugger?
Yes, it is a bit of an exageration, but the theory holds.
One thing people fail to touch on when discussing diameter differences in these rounds is the amount of time it will take to incapacitate someone from blood loss/secondary tissue damage, barring shot placement (since the bullet itself means nothing when compared to the skill/luck of the shooter in that case) or psychological factors (since that depends on the person). Realistically, it is far too long to matter, unless you are in some hours-long standoff with a BG you shot, and have to wait for him to bleed out. I personally don't care what will stop/kill in hours or days, but what stops in seconds, when my life is on the line. If you made a good shot, you would not need to rely on wound cavity volume or any other secondary effect to stop someone faster. I make better shots with lower-recoiling rounds, which is why the 9x19 is my favorite SD round. It's assumed you will not do your best shooting under stress, so take all the advantages you can to achieve a good shot (light recoil, more capacity).
Shot placement, which is independent of bullet diameter, is what stops someone immediately. You have to produce enough trauma to interrupt the function of vital-to-life processes that are going on in the body. This is very unlikely to be affected by the ever-so-slight added diameter to the primary wound channel, but a result of a solid hit or hits to a major blood vessel or immediately vital-to-life organ. Even if we are considering the volume of damage to surrounding non-vital tissue, the secondary wound channels are very similar between common SD rounds...to the point that it is irrelevant. You can look to the jell-o blocks for this.
Bone deflection? That is more an issue of the angle it strikes the bone than with the bullet itself. I can assure you that a .38 cal. bullet moving at standard velocity is more than enough to pass through any bone in the body and keep trucking as well as any .45 round. Anything can be deflected. I've seen rounds of all kinds deflected by thin bones, thick bones, vertebrae, etc.
There are always rarities and exceptions, and there are infinitely more variables that also determine the effects of any gunshot, but shot placement is the general rule, even among communities of true experts on ballistics (no, M&S are not experts by any standard I've ever seen). True, more tissue damage is worse for the body, as is more of any trauma; this does not aid in timely incapacitation all the time.
If you don't understand how the body works, how it reacts to trauma, or how psychology plays into life an death situations, you might find this hard to believe, because the avg. person wants to simplify things by saying more always = better. Sorry, it's not true...there are processes that go on in your body that try to mitigate the damage done to it, effectively "cheating" the physics involved; you just cannot simplify this stuff in any way.
...and the wiffle ball bat vs. Louisville Slugger is not a valid comparison at all. That's like a .177 cal BB pistol vs. a .300 Win Mag, or getting hit by a RC car vs. a real one. The big difference is that the .38/9mm rounds perform almost identically to the .45 ACP/Colt defense rounds against most objects. A more fair comparison would be a light aluminum bat vs. a heavier one. Does it sound like it matters as much this way?
Shot placement, which is independent of bullet diameter, is what stops someone immediately. You have to produce enough trauma to interrupt the function of vital-to-life processes that are going on in the body. This is very unlikely to be affected by the ever-so-slight added diameter to the primary wound channel, but a result of a solid hit or hits to a major blood vessel or immediately vital-to-life organ. Even if we are considering the volume of damage to surrounding non-vital tissue, the secondary wound channels are very similar between common SD rounds...to the point that it is irrelevant. You can look to the jell-o blocks for this.
Bone deflection? That is more an issue of the angle it strikes the bone than with the bullet itself. I can assure you that a .38 cal. bullet moving at standard velocity is more than enough to pass through any bone in the body and keep trucking as well as any .45 round. Anything can be deflected. I've seen rounds of all kinds deflected by thin bones, thick bones, vertebrae, etc.
There are always rarities and exceptions, and there are infinitely more variables that also determine the effects of any gunshot, but shot placement is the general rule, even among communities of true experts on ballistics (no, M&S are not experts by any standard I've ever seen). True, more tissue damage is worse for the body, as is more of any trauma; this does not aid in timely incapacitation all the time.
If you don't understand how the body works, how it reacts to trauma, or how psychology plays into life an death situations, you might find this hard to believe, because the avg. person wants to simplify things by saying more always = better. Sorry, it's not true...there are processes that go on in your body that try to mitigate the damage done to it, effectively "cheating" the physics involved; you just cannot simplify this stuff in any way.
...and the wiffle ball bat vs. Louisville Slugger is not a valid comparison at all. That's like a .177 cal BB pistol vs. a .300 Win Mag, or getting hit by a RC car vs. a real one. The big difference is that the .38/9mm rounds perform almost identically to the .45 ACP/Colt defense rounds against most objects. A more fair comparison would be a light aluminum bat vs. a heavier one. Does it sound like it matters as much this way?
jason_iowa
New member
I have never seen recoil to be an issue that could not be solved with some nice grips. I have shot a 357 out of a 2in barrel and the thing rolled back in my hand and it was just awful to shoot. I have shot a 357 out of a 2 in barrel that I could shoot all day and not bother me at all. I have shot a 454 cas out of a 2 in barrel and it was not to bad.
If its all I had I would carry a 38 with out hesitation but personally I carry a 45 big and slow wins the race...
If its all I had I would carry a 38 with out hesitation but personally I carry a 45 big and slow wins the race...
.357, you have made some excellent points.
I have also read that the average reaction to being shot is ...... no reaction at all. It ain't TV, people do not get thrown through windows by a single hit. In many cases, people who did not expect to get shot have simply continued on (in one case, walking up the steps of the NYC Library), until told they had been shot.
That is just one reason why 'one shot stop' data is, well, irrelevant.
I have also read that the average reaction to being shot is ...... no reaction at all. It ain't TV, people do not get thrown through windows by a single hit. In many cases, people who did not expect to get shot have simply continued on (in one case, walking up the steps of the NYC Library), until told they had been shot.
That is just one reason why 'one shot stop' data is, well, irrelevant.