Creating a Round for Reduced Over Penetration in Urban Setting .223/9mm/.40/.45acp

S

stonewall50

New member
I figured I would ask the ammo experts here this question. If you were making a round for an urban setting, and you wanted to reduce the over penetration factor...what caliber would you use? The reason I dropped the .223 rifle round in is because handgun calibers can be seen in SMGs and mini carbines.

So if over penetration is a concern, what would you consider as a caliber and load of choice?

If you are wondering what spawned the thought, it was, is the mp5 still a valid weapon for law enforcement/self defense area with the abilities of the M4/Ar15?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Been done with light loads using cast bullets and some HP's. Either one will break up upon impact. Might not on just dry wall though. More about range than just penetration though. A .22 LR will penetrate about 15ish(guessing it's been a while) inches of tightly packed newspapers in a 24" box at 10ish feet. Disintegrates, but still penetrates. CF cartridges will go farther.
Mind you, light loads out of a semi'd SMG can cause 'em to rock and roll. Know a guy who has an Uzi that'd do that.
 
Well...

For a rifle or carbine, 223 with frangible bullets.

https://frangiblebullets.com/223/

For a pistol, whatever frangible bullet you feel like reloading.

All bullets are still deadly, but bullets that break apart on impact do reduce the risks associated with over penetration somewhat.

Jimro
 
For starters, I use factory ammo for self-defense.

Second, I'm a fan of heavy bullets - I am a member of the "you must first make a hole" thinkers.

Third, I plan to hit what I aim at. I'm not going to select a bullet based on over-penetration concerns.

Just one guy's opinion. And worth every penny you paid for it. :p

P.S. My firearm of choice for home protection is a Springfield 1911 45 ACP. My ammunition choice is Hornady's 230gn +P XTP.
 
Last edited:
Plenty of .223 rounds will tear themselves apart on building materials, specifcally varmint rounds that are meant to self destruct.

Pistol rounds? Generally speaking, light weight, low sectional density, High velocity, fragile structure. A .45 ball round won't stop for anything. a 9mm +P round will shed a lot of it's energy in each piece of material it hits.

It's comparing kinetic energy to momentum. High kinetic energy rounds, or high velocity, tend to expend more energy destroying the target, instead of just punching through. So, offhand, the best choices might be to use a .223 varmint round, a +P 9mm 115 grain round, Number 2 buckshot, maybe even one of those stupid .410 revolvers with buckshot because of the pathetic sectional density.

In my own testing, one of the best penetrators was a plain lead wadcutter in my .38 special. No expansion, no deformation, no damage to the target, and high sectional density.
 
Thin jacketed ballistic tipped varmint rounds in an AR may work okay, but you do want SOME penetrating power, otherwise some dude all hopped up on PCP takes a couple shots to the ribs and keeps coming. Personally I use a Remmington 870 police magnum with a 9 round tube for home defense but if I was going with a carbine type, I would use a UMP type gun (45 ACP) with high velocity, low mass hollow points.
 
A .223 with a 35 grain Vmax, would greatly reduce penetration.

Even under 3000 fps they disintegrate in a beer can. You can see the entrance at the top and bottom left and where different parts of the bullet went through the back.

IMG_20160914_160632_993_zpscc7goglx.jpg


Not a bullet I would use for SD on anything bigger than coyote size though.
 
jmorris said:
A .223 with a 35 grain Vmax, would greatly reduce penetration.



Even under 3000 fps they disintegrate in a beer can. You can see the entrance at the top and bottom left and where different parts of the bullet went through the back.



IMG_20160914_160632_993_zpscc7goglx.jpg




Not a bullet I would use for SD on anything bigger than coyote size though.
Click to expand...



And that is the crux of the question. What kind of penetration is too much, but how much is enough and what calibers produce the right loads?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
No experience with pistol rounds but I hear they are more apt to penetrate walls than the .223, despite the rifles much greater power. As has been said, any varmint bullet would do what you want. The most fangible bullets out there that a handloader could readily acquire would probably be Barnes varmint grenades. If you're wanting just a little more penetration but still with a frangible bullet perhaps the hornady 53, 55, or 60 grain vmax would be for you.
 
The last SWAT team I was on retired the sub guns and replaced them with the M4. When using them for entry, we used frangible ammo supplied by whoever won the state contract for that year.
 
And that is the crux of the question. What kind of penetration is too much, but how much is enough and what calibers produce the right loads?
Click to expand...

That's a simple one to answer.

If your little girl is on the other side of a sheet rock wall you want a bullet that won't pass through the second layer of sheet rock.

If it's the bad guy you want it to pass through both sides and still have enough energy to effectively eliminate the threat.

I would lean towards "more than enough" then again I have also never fired a shot in SD against a human inside my house.
 
OVERpenetration

A subject discussed a lot on the boards, (and in print before the web era) one that will probably be argued back and forth until/unless someone comes up with a magic smart bullet that doesn't miss, AND knows when it exits the intended target, and then instantly turns to mist.

I don't see that happening in the real world anytime soon, though. So lets talk about the real world pros & cons.

essentially, what it boils down to is risk assessment. What is the greater risk, to you, the defender, and to others in your home, and the public at large?

And, bear in mind the difference in risk assessment between you and I as individuals, and police officers, and their departments.

You and I need only concern ourselves with the bullet we fire. A police agency is concerned with ALL the bullets fired by ALL their officers. What is a once in a lifetime thing (hopefully) for us, is a COMMON thing for a police dept. Especially the larger ones, who might have hundreds of rounds fired every year.

Frangible bullets do reduce the risk of overpenetration, because they reduce the "risk" of ALL penetration. The only way to have a bullet that doesn't bore a hole through whatever is on the other side of the person you meant to shoot is to use a bullet that does not go all the way through the intended target.

There are two ways to do this, both have disadvantages. One way is to use a low powered round, something that lack the energy to go all the way through. The obvious risk to this is that it may not have the energy to reach a vital spot.

Another way is frangible bullets. Varmint bullets, essentially. The down side to this is the risk that the bullet may break up BEFORE reaching a vital spot, not stopping the attack.

The point of a defensive shooting is to STOP an attack. Any and everything that does that is a good thing. I look more favorably on a round that has more than enough penetration than one that has "just enough", because that just enough might not be enough, with a tiny change in conditions.

Note how the "recommended" amount of penetration (by some official agencies) has been changed, again. Look at the 86 Miami shootout to see a round that met the official requirements at the time, failed in a real world situation. Also take into account what you don't see in the reports of that shootout, the hundreds, maybe thousands of times that same round didn't fail in real world situations.

There is no free lunch. For me, I accept the tiny risk that sufficient penetration (meaning an exit wound) carries to those beyond the intended target. I value my own life rather highly, it seems.:rolleyes:

Those who have to decide the value of other's lives, both employees (police officers) AND the general public, especially in crowded urban settings might have a different opinion of what is the "best" round to use, counting ALL the costs together...
 
Not to put too fine a point on things here,
'Over Penetration' is relative to 'APPLICATION'...

A big heavy round that passes THROUGH a gam animal only expends its energy on the other side of that animal...
Fragmenting rounds do great for blowing up 'Varments', but aren't a good idea for something you want to eat,
Too much damage to the game meats, and no one likes picking fragments out of 'Dinner'!

When a weed stem will blow apart a light weight 'Varmint' round on the way to the varmint, drywall or 2x4 will do the same...

I have to think about a raid on a house I saw the aftermath of first hand,
The (Inexperenced) police used 12 Ga slugs & 40 cal bullets, shot through the walls, and through the next TWO house trailers, missing a 4 year old girl in her bed by less than 4"...
Nothing like seeing a 12 ga slug hole in a child's headboard to make you think...

We don't have a lot of shoot outs around here, so our local law Enforcment hadn't addressed the issue before that.

Frangables, light varmint rounds, ect. are the current 'Go To', but the problem still exists...
One of the elite anti-terrorist units I once saw practicing was using full auto .22LR sub guns, but that was many years ago.
Don't know why, but they specialized in aircraft hijackings.

*IF* I had kids in the house, and my walls weren't poured concrete, I would rethink slinging around 230 grain ball ammunition with only drywall between me and loved ones/neighbors...
 
Those who have to decide the value of other's lives, both employees (police officers) AND the general public, especially in crowded urban settings might have a different opinion of what is the "best" round to use, counting ALL the costs together...
Click to expand...

And keep in mind that when the police use such rounds, they do so with the benefit of being wearers of body armor and having radio access to call in backup if they haven't already done so and to expect a much faster response than what us 911 callers will get. "Officer needs help" carries a lot of weight to rally the troops. Point? They may be able to get by with less performance than your average Joe Blow citizen when it comes to threats.
 
Unless there's time enough to asses the situation and choose from a large choice of appropriate ammo, it's going to be mighty hard to get it right with over penetration.
Way too many variables in targets and environments.
Fat targets, thin targets, hard thick walls, soft thin walls, upstairs rooms, downstairs rooms, the distance to neighbors, on and on.
Maybe technique choices to match the situation would be better than trying to figure out what equipment might be the most useful for every possible encounter.
 
I would rethink slinging around 230 grain ball ammunition
Click to expand...

I realize it is probably just a turn of a phrase, but if you are actually "slinging around" ANYTHING, you aren't hitting your opponent.

Since we are talking about the risks of slugs AFTER they exit an attacker, you must recognize that the risks of misses (or peripheral hits) are WORSE.

Forget the Hollywood/TV fantasy of a gunfight, that is THEATER, NOT REALITY. (and their version of sword fighting is even worse!:eek:)

"slinging lead" around sounds like "spray and pray" which is a bad thing for you, I, and anyone else in the area. Defensive firearms use is NOT the same as infantry combat, nor should it be.

They do have SOME things in common, but the differences are huge, and not something to take lightly.
 
I found 44 AMP's remarks one of the best summations of defensive ammunition selection criteria, that I've ever read. For that reason, I've re-posted them in their entirety, for further consideration. Well done 44, Rod

A subject discussed a lot on the boards, (and in print before the web era) one that will probably be argued back and forth until/unless someone comes up with a magic smart bullet that doesn't miss, AND knows when it exits the intended target, and then instantly turns to mist.

I don't see that happening in the real world anytime soon, though. So lets talk about the real world pros & cons.

essentially, what it boils down to is risk assessment. What is the greater risk, to you, the defender, and to others in your home, and the public at large?

And, bear in mind the difference in risk assessment between you and I as individuals, and police officers, and their departments.

You and I need only concern ourselves with the bullet we fire. A police agency is concerned with ALL the bullets fired by ALL their officers. What is a once in a lifetime thing (hopefully) for us, is a COMMON thing for a police dept. Especially the larger ones, who might have hundreds of rounds fired every year.

Frangible bullets do reduce the risk of overpenetration, because they reduce the "risk" of ALL penetration. The only way to have a bullet that doesn't bore a hole through whatever is on the other side of the person you meant to shoot is to use a bullet that does not go all the way through the intended target.

There are two ways to do this, both have disadvantages. One way is to use a low powered round, something that lack the energy to go all the way through. The obvious risk to this is that it may not have the energy to reach a vital spot.

Another way is frangible bullets. Varmint bullets, essentially. The down side to this is the risk that the bullet may break up BEFORE reaching a vital spot, not stopping the attack.

The point of a defensive shooting is to STOP an attack. Any and everything that does that is a good thing. I look more favorably on a round that has more than enough penetration than one that has "just enough", because that just enough might not be enough, with a tiny change in conditions.

Note how the "recommended" amount of penetration (by some official agencies) has been changed, again. Look at the 86 Miami shootout to see a round that met the official requirements at the time, failed in a real world situation. Also take into account what you don't see in the reports of that shootout, the hundreds, maybe thousands of times that same round didn't fail in real world situations.

There is no free lunch. For me, I accept the tiny risk that sufficient penetration (meaning an exit wound) carries to those beyond the intended target. I value my own life rather highly, it seems.

Those who have to decide the value of other's lives, both employees (police officers) AND the general public, especially in crowded urban settings might have a different opinion of what is the "best" round to use, counting ALL the costs together...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top