I want YOUR opinion.

Do you think PETA would have our hides if we set up an experiment... say shooting fish in a barrel? Lets say we purposely avoid hitting the fish and put the fish in a container that will withstand the force of a bullet without rupturing. I wonder at what point would the shock wave be enough to kill the fish? If Box o' Truth would do it, i'd put up the money for the fish... Some how... I don't think he'd bite.
 
Do you think PETA would have our hides if we set up an experiment... say shooting fish in a barrel? Lets say we purposely avoid hitting the fish and put the fish in a container that will withstand the force of a bullet without rupturing.
Click to expand...


That sounds like fun, no matter what the results.:D
 
There is scientific research on this very subject.

Fish surveys in ponds will use a series of small, spaced explosive charges to stun the fish without hurting them (at least too badly) and allow them to be counted.
 
First, who said they "don't have anything to do with it..." Power and velocity are agents of penetration. Placement is king, penetration is queen, "stopping power" is the court jester.
Click to expand...


Could we take shot placement out of the equation for the moment? Lets say that shot placement is equal for all calibers mentioned. Lets also say that the shot is placed center of mass (not heart shot) rather than a brain shot. That way we can come up with some meaningful comparison.

Okay... what if there is adequate penetration to reach the vitals or to even create a through and through wound? Is there no benefit for using a higher powered round of the same caliber? I'm sure the arguement holds true for fmj and hollow points (probably even more so for hollow points since more energy is transferred through the expanding face (and deformation) of the bullet.

For arguement's sake... what if the bullet is retained in the body? All of the force of the bullet is transferred into the target. Is the greater damage simply caused by greater penetration (more tissue displaced from the path of the bullet)?

Human tissue is elastic but has a tearing point (as mentioned by Mike Irwin). Is there solid proof that that tearing point can only be reached at velocities above 2000 fps?

My main point is that the increase in damage is gradual rather than simply "on or off" above or below the 2000 fps threshold.
 
Mike Irwin said:
There is scientific research on this very subject.

Fish surveys in ponds will use a series of small, spaced explosive charges to stun the fish without hurting them (at least too badly) and allow them to be counted.
Click to expand...

What I'd like to know is WHERE THE HELL DO I APPLY??? :eek::p:D peetzakilla and I just found our calling in life. (Poor Nemo) :(

peetzakilla,
Regarding Marshall and Sanow, there are many variables that decrease the value of the data. For example, shot placement is not consistent from shot to shot. Heck the people shot are different from shot to shot. There is a huge psychological factor involved. Some people will drop dead from a flesh wound while others fight on with fatal wounds (where they die shortly after). The effects of drugs and adrenaline are also not constant in the Marshall and Sanow report. In fact, the highest percentage of one stop shots was from the .357 magnum 125 grain.

I'm not arguing shot placement is not important. I'm just saying it needs to be kept as a constant in order to make any meaningful comparisons.
 
Human tissue is elastic but has a tearing point (as mentioned by Mike Irwin). Is there solid proof that that tearing point can only be reached at velocities above 2000 fps?

My main point is that the increase in damage is gradual rather than simply "on or off" above or below the 2000 fps threshold.
Click to expand...

Some body else with have to provide the data for that number. I remember it from another thread but I don't know the link. The link provided in that thread suggested that 2000fps was the approximate number. There is no "magic number" but there really is a threshold, "on"/"off" that must be crossed. As you stated tissue is elastic. In order for the shock to have an effect, the elasticity of the tissue must be exceeded. A round traveling at 1900fps may not cross that threshold, one 50fps faster might or it might take 2050, or 1850 might do it. It will depend on the type of tissue (heart, lung, liver )among other things.

Okay... what if there is adequate penetration to reach the vitals or to even create a through and through wound? Is there no benefit for using a higher powered round of the same caliber?
Click to expand...

Sure, there are advantages. It takes a certain speed (don't remember it) to make a JHP expand. Expansion obviously makes the hole bigger, that's a good thing. You can make a .65(or more) hole with a .357 bullet if you have the power to expand it.

All of the force of the bullet is transferred into the target.
Click to expand...

All the force of the bullet is retained by the shooter also. Well, except the amount required to cycle the gun, eject the shell... etc.
It just gets spread out better. ;)

In fact, the highest percentage of one stop shots was from the .357 magnum 125 grain.
Click to expand...

Yepper, that's partly why my carry gun is (sort of "is", will be) a .357sig. Closest equivalent in semi platform.


peetzakilla and I just found our calling in life. (Poor Nemo)
Click to expand...

Salt water fish are way too expensive. Goldfish are cheap, Guppies breed like rabbits!

BTW, I think we "mostly" agree on "mostly" everything. It's just fun to flap the fingers on the keyboard.;):D
 
Last edited:
"Is there solid proof that that tearing point can only be reached at velocities above 2000 fps?"

I believe that Dr. Martin Fackler has talked about it.

Regardless, there is a body of material (don't know if anyone has compiled or not) on wound mechanics that indicates that right around 2,000 fps is the barrier point between tissue expansion and tissue disruption.

Very likely the majority of this information has been developed by the military over the years, as they were the ones most likely to routinely see projectile wounds in a wide range of velocities.
 
Very likely the majority of this information has been developed by the military over the years, as they were the ones most likely to routinely see projectile wounds in a wide range of velocities.
Click to expand...

The problem with military research is most of their shooting is done with rifles that easily exceed the 2000 fps mark and their limited use of ammo (FMJ due to the Geneva Convention). Besides, we all know that "military intelligence" is an oxymoron! :eek::p (Just kidding)

I may be dead wrong on this guys, but logically, it doesn't make sense. The higher powered rounds should transfer more energy to a target, even if it fails to hit the 2000 fps mark. You mention tissue expansion vs. tissue disruption. While rounds under 2000 fps may not tear the tissue, the surrounding tissue should still be affected to a greater extent (more hemoraging) when a higher velocity round passes through it.

One very interesting episode of Mythbusters was the firing of different rounds into a swimming pool. The high velocity rounds pretty much all broke up and fragmented when they hit the water while the slower rounds ended up having greater penetration. This is probably due to some complex fluid dynamics (of which I know NOTHING about)!

I will look up the info on Fackler (I think I have before). Thanks for the civil debate!
 
"The problem with military research is most of their shooting is done with rifles that easily exceed the 2000 fps mark and their limited use of ammo (FMJ due to the Geneva Convention). Besides, we all know that "military intelligence" is an oxymoron! (Just kidding)"

The military, especially in this day and age, also deals with many wounds caused by projectiles fired at ranges that causes their velocity to drop BELOW 2,000 fps.


"I may be dead wrong on this guys, but logically, it doesn't make sense. The higher powered rounds should transfer more energy to a target, even if it fails to hit the 2000 fps mark."

Unfortunately, in this case, your logic is flawed.

No one ever said that the increased velocity wouldn't transfer more energy to the target.

That's a matter of simple physics. Newton tells us that that is true.

However, as has been explained numerous times, certain thresholds of energy transfer have to be met, and in small arms all evidence points to that level being roughly 2,000 fps.

Might it be different for different projectiles?

Yes.

Is it STRICTLY 2,000 fps? IOW, at 1,999 fps you don't get the effect?

No. Of course not. The 2,000 fps mark appears to be fairly valid, though.

All people are saying is that the general level for hydrostatic shock that causes increased tissue disruption beyond what is caused by the path of the bullet is about 2,000 fps.
 
I read the debate about the 40 S&W and read about the recoil 'issue' so when I bought a 40 S&W I bought one of the biggest semi auto pistols you could buy to shoot it out of,the Taurus PT101.

That's Taurus's copy of the Beretta 92 in 40 S&W.

Yea,there was a little more recoil.

Not enough to be really objectionable but the recoil was real sudden.

I also have a Ruger 9mm that I shoot often now.

And I can attest to those that talk about a quick follow up shot with the 9 vs.the 40.

That Ruger resets right on the sights perfectly and I can almost machine gun that P95.:D-accurately-

I could'nt do that with the 40 but then again,I did'nt have it long enough to train myself on it.

9mm is much cheaper to buy and shoot and that's what I wanted.

A gun I could shoot enough that if time ever came to use it,it was second nature and I could trust it completely.

Plus,it can hold 15 rounds plus one in the pipe so capacity is a great friend here too.

But if that Taurus was 9mm,I'd still own it.
 
Okay... So the experts say I'm wrong. Not the first time. Still doesn't make sense but I'll eat crow... Anyone have some good recipes for crow? Pass the salt please! :barf: :p
 
Okay... So the experts say I'm wrong. Not the first time. Still doesn't make sense but I'll eat crow... Anyone have some good recipes for crow? Pass the salt please!
Click to expand...


Dude! You don't have to admit! I made the same arguments as you a few months ago. All you gotta do is wait a few months and act like you believed the experts all along. No body will be the wiser.;)

Ah crap, did I type that out loud? Frigg!


BTW, I completely agree that it makes no sense. That's one of several reasons why I went with .357sig instead of something like 9mm. My brain still says harder hits are better hits. It can't hurt, right?
 
Dude! You don't have to admit! I made the same arguments as you a few months ago. All you gotta do is wait a few months and act like you believed the experts all along. No body will be the wiser.

Ah crap, did I type that out loud? Frigg!


BTW, I completely agree that it makes no sense. That's one of several reasons why I went with .357sig instead of something like 9mm. My brain still says harder hits are better hits. It can't hurt, right?
Click to expand...

Do you think its too late to go back and delete or edit my posts? :p:D

Frankly, I think getting shot with a .357 Sig would hurt A LOT! Heck, I'm sure even a 9mm would hurt (though the experts say they should hurt about the same :p). If you believe the arguements, don't get the .357 Sig. You carry less rounds and pay more for ammo for nothing. Between you and me, I say go with the .357 Sig just in case the experts are wrong!

Thanks for a friendly debate!
 
From one of the last threads along these lines I participated in:

The .40 S&W, one of the better options currently available.

1870s - Catridges looking a lot like the .40 and 10mm began to be worked on. The .38/40, as an example, pushed a 180 grain bullet at approx 950 feet per second. Not bad for black powder.

1960s - Folks started looking for what they considered "the ideal" revolver cartridge, a .40 cartridge which could push 200 grain bullets between 900 and 1000 feet per second. Folks like Jordan, Keith, and Skelton, mind you. (They didn't get it, instead getting the more powerful .41 Magnum; a great cartridge relegated mostly to field use having been deemed too powerful by most for every day carry and defensive use.)

1970s - Col. Jeff Cooper, Mr. .45acp, called for "the ideal" semi automatic cartridge, one delivering a .40 caliber 200 grain bullet at 1000 feet per second. The 10mm began to take hold. (He didn't get it, instead getting a more powerful 10mm; a great cartridge... deja vu... deemed too powerful by most for every day carry and defensive use.)

The 10mm began to be loaded in two varieties; the magnum variety which has proven popular with 10mm advocates, and the variety often referred to as the "down loaded" and "lite" 10mm. (The weaker cartridges look an awful lot like what the greats had called for, but what did they know?)

1980s - the FBI adopted the 10mm in the form of a 180 grain JHP at approx 950 feet per second. There never was a stronger one or a weaker one. That was it, and the agents apparently liked it.

Meanwhile, folks began experimenting with cartridges duplicating the 10mm. And someone asked, can we produce a 9mm sized semi-automatic with a 10mm performance? Yes, was the answer, so long as you are talking about the "lite" loads, the self defense loads, the loads closely mirroring what the greats had called for. The .40 S&W, bout a 0.140 inch shorter than the 10mm Auto but otherwise nearly identical, was introduced in 1989 with a 180 grain loaded to identical specs as the FBI spec'd 10mm.

The .40S&W currently dominates the US law enforcement market, having captured between approx 70-75% of the market.

It is very popular with the self defense and gaming crowds, too.

Why?

LEO wise: Many law enforcement agencies took note of the FBI's delaration that a 10mm 180 grain JHP at approx 950 was "best" for LEO/SD purposes. And some of those folks were gunnies who rememered what hte greats had called for.... They also took note to the .40 S&W pistols duplicating that is 9mm sized pistols, with nearly splitting the differnce in capacity between the 9mm and the .45acp. The combo of of good performance, with smaller pistols, and increased capacity was all that it took.

Gamer wise: 180 grain bullets at 1000 feet per second make major. Making major while affording more capacity? That's all that it took.

Non-LEO/SD wise: These folks, many of them at least, pay a lot of attention to the afore mentioned folks; greats, LEOs, and gamers. They began to see more and more pistols chambered for .40 S&W, and that's all that it took.

Now a days, there are a variety of choices, with the 155, 165, and 180 grain varieties being the most popular. Gaming and bipedal fighting wise, you could do worse.

The two law enforcement entities who spend the most time and money testing such things, both primarily issue .40S&W offerings, the 155 grain JHP and the 180 JHP respectively. That doesn't mean there aren't other worthy options, or that they are the only ways to go. But its indicative that perhaps you could sleep well at night with a gun loaded with one of them in your night stand.

(Update: Both will be exclusively issuing .40 S&W 180 grain JHP in the near future.)

So for my money I'd advise ignoring the nay sayers, or at least understanding where they are coming from - allegiance mainly to the 9mm, 10mm, and .45acp crowd. They're good crowds to be in, for sure, along with the .40S&W crowd. They're just a bit resentful at times at the upstart eating into their pie. Oh, and you should hear them infight among themselves. ;)

---

Oh, a con. The .40 S&W can't push bullets as fast or heavy as some, and will never start out as big as others. Note the history on some of those as far as popularity in SD/LEO/gamer circles.
 
Last edited:
"Still doesn't make sense"

It makes perfect sense, when you think of it in terms of something that happens every time we go shooting.

Breaking the sound barrier with a bullet.

In order to break the sound barrier, you have to have a bullet that is going fast enough to actually rip through the air that builds up in front of the bullet.

At sea level on a 70 degree day with moderate ambient humidity that bullet has to be going about 1,100 feet per second to go supersonic.

If you don't get it above that velocity, you don't break the sound barrier.

Granted, most of the time you can't actually hear the sound barrier being broken because the muzzle report is as loud, if not louder, than the sonic boom that is created, but that doesn't negate the fact that in order to break the sound barrier you need a velocity of approximately 1,100 fps.
 
Have tried all the calibers and just find the 45ACP a great effective HD round with less recoil than a 40SW. I still have one semi in 40, but its a Walther P99, and actually bought it for the model, not the caliber, so it stays. I've found 1911's easy and accurate to shoot. Still have a .357mag SP101, tuned and trigger smoothed, and it still accompanies me on many a hike/outing. Would say that before going to a .40, I'd go with a .357mag or even a .357Sig, if 45 wasn't an option. But that's just me.
 
Last edited:
If it's big enough to stop a bad guy, then just practice with it. What does it matter if it is not the ultimate round? If you pulled a .40 on me, I'd back-pedal like you never saw. When you can afford more guns, then you can decide for yourself which fits you best. Whatever YOU shoot the best, is the best caliber for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top