"One Shot Stop" chart...?

T

Tactical Jackalope

New member
I don't have an opinion on this chart. I'm just confused...How did this chart even come about? Based on what?

What do you guys think about this?




http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

They recommend .45's down here in law enforcement. Many different branches issue Glock 22's and/or your choice from a list. Which is a lot. North Miami Beach gives Hk USP .45's. Miami Gardens gets Glock 22's..etc... the whole "Anything starting with a number 4" is the way it is over here.


But this chart shows 9mm doing just as well if not better in some.


I'm not going to say my handgun caliber of choice.


What's your take on this chart?



I'm just going to add....we're taught "shot placement is king" everything else is just marginal. This one shot stop thing is a step under shot placement IMO.
 
Constantine: said:
How did this chart even come about?
Click to expand...

Looks like Hawks just cobbled together a few sources of data and published it.


Constantine: said:
What's your take on this chart?
Click to expand...

It is of little value since much of it depends upon the debunked M&S study for the One Shot Stop %s. It is pretty typical fare for Hawk's website- no surprise there- and I wouldn't put much stock in it. Seems like Hawks' 'site continues to remain frozen in the early 1990s.

There is also considerable debate regarding the existence of the Strasburg Goat Tests- the column labeled "AIT" is apparently meant to reflect data that source- despite its mention in a few gun magazines, no proof (documentation, photos, peer reviewed articles, etc.) of its existence...er...um...exists. :p

I am not sure where they got the gelatin penetration results- unsourced/generic "data" like that is hard to take seriously.
 
Last edited:
Agreed..doesn't seem like 1 man could conjure up all those percentages unless he was a hitman in his 70's blogging all of a sudden. Hell..departments don't even have that.

I just want to find someone with a strong opinion on the chart being "accurate" I want to see why they believe so.



Excuse me good sir, did you say "goats"?
 
Constantine: said:
Excuse me good sir, did you say "goats"?
Click to expand...

Yep. Goats. :D

A search on google for

Strasburg Tests French Alpine Goats

should give you all sorts of information- but I have yet to see anything in the way of actual documentary proof that it ever occurred. One of those weird phenomena like Big Foot- everyone's heard of it, but no one can prove its existence.

:o
 
That son of a biscuit eating bulldog shot goats with handguns to prove a point? Guess that makes sense...Sick sadistic cactus..


So wow...


IMO 9mm, .40 , & .45ACP are HANDGUN cartridges..not saying they're 100% inadequate in "one shot stops" again, shot placement is king. Though a rifle is where "stopping power" really comes into effect. Handgun cartridges among those standard LE ones I just mentioned (along with some who use .357SIG and .45GAP) they're equally matched in this day and age with modern hollow point technology. +p's and +p+'s...etc.



Goats? lol...
 
If you want to read something that's relevant, look up this article from 2004 online:
One-Shot Drops
Surviving the Myth
by Anthony J. Pinizzotto Ph.D., Harry A. Kern, M.Ed., Edward F. Davis, M.S.

FWIW, even rifles and shotguns can't be relied upon to produce "one-shot stops", let alone handguns ...
 
As time goes on, I believe more and more that until you get above common defensive caliber handguns, caliber is a ways down the list of importance when it comes to 1 shot stops. Most handguns just aren't that effective. I assume the primary factor in most 1 shot stops is fear. "Stuff" gets real when bullets start tearing through you. After that, I would assume are pain and, of course, shot placement. Obviously, a cns hit should result in an immediate stop.
 
That looks like the data from the now infamous Strasbourg Goat Test, in the early 90's, they took a bunch basically human sized goats and shot them at close range with near perfect shot placement and recorded the listed data.

OOPS I guess I should have read the whole thread.
 
First of all I love the 357 magnum. It is my favorite round ever created.

That said I dont buy in to those numbers. I love the 357 magnum but I would not feel out gunned with a 10mm or a 45 acp or a357 sig or any other common hand gun.

shot placement is infinantly more important than caliber or energy.

Energy, Taylor TKO, Momentum and 1 shot stops are all just myths and numbers. Shot placement is where its at. As my Signature says "Id rather be shot with a 50BMG to the foot than a 22 short to the base of the skull.
 
Lions and tigers and Marshall and Sanow, oh no!

That's from a study older than some members here. As others have pointed out, the data was questionable then. Even if the data were credible at the time, technology has come a long way.

The "goat tests" may or may not have actually taken place.
 
As far as "Stopping Power" goes, Marshal and Sanow provide some useful information. It is anecdotal, but they covered a whole lot of actual shooting "victims." Confirms common sense propositions. One I never could get my head around was the .32 ACP Silvertip coming in at around 62% "One Shot Stops."
 
Seen a fair number of gsw's(retired grouchy old nurse). Except for CNS or disabling skeletal hits IMHO the will to live was the most important factor. This is a good news, bad news, situation. While single hits from a pistol are a very iffy proposition to stop a bad guy, normally that's what they are armed with as well. Even if they get off an accurate shot and hit you first, if you're determined enough, you are probably still going to be able to defend yourself or your family. In other words his pistol isn't a magic death ray either and in all likelihood he doesn't have the experience and accuracy with his weapon most of us on the firing line do. Advantage, us.
 
Man has the unfortunate attitude that he can put the whole world into neat simple numbers and formulas. :rolleyes:

Things like shooting are far too complex for that.The 'energy' formulas count velocity too much [V squared]. A momentum formula is much better to me. I searched every bit of info for the last 40 years and before .Today we have some fine expanding bullets and in my experience bullet construction is a major aspect of performance .I carry and hunt with premium bullets.

Against that we now have more and more use of drugs which can greatly alter the nervous system. The nervous system is what is involved with 'stopping power'.
So 9mm or better with premium bullets is the way to go.
So give up the idea that there is a formula that works and never assume that you'll get your shots where you want .The rule is to shoot and continue to shoot until the perp is no longer a threat !
 
If you search you will find articles debunking the statistics of "Handgun Stopping Power" by Marshall and Sanow. Based on statistical tests of Marshall and Sanow data, it is apparent they made their data up.

I remember reading about the "Strasbourg" Goat tests, and that may have been also a fraud.

Fackler sort of dismisses the concept of "one shot stopping power", unless the bullet hits the nervous system, the subject will still be around till he bleeds out. Fackler points out that blood loss is 100% fatal.

As for shooting goats, I know the Army shot Goats, and ballistic gelatin in the report "Wound Ballistics Assessment of the .30 Cal Ball, Carbine, M1, and an experimental .22 cal ball, carbine", Dec 1954.

Pigs have also been used as test subjects in wound testing. I also read that the Army took human heads and shot them with .223’s to evaluate the lethality of the .223 Remington, this was back in the 60’s. These things, and animal experiments, are not discussed as it upsets people. The tests that La Garde ran, shooting cattle with handguns till they dropped, would not be allowed in today’s society.
 
Not relational.

How far a round penetrates a block of gelatin obviously has no relation to how long it takes a goat to die, which has no relation to one shot stops, which has no relation to anything else except shot placement.

Bottom line, if you hit what you aim at and use any caliber between .38spl and .45lc, you shouldn't have any problems stopping a threat.



*edit: word
 
M&S were two former LEO's that tried to quantify something that many talked about but had never bothered to actually study.

The M&S works are valuable in the sense that many can along to decry them but few would bother to try to come up with better information. They tried to compile the available information from actual documented shootings and make something useful out of it.

The noisiest critic was Maarten van Maanen of the now defunct International Wound Ballistics Association. See Section 71

Strangely, members of the IWBA were generally from the camp knows as Jello Junkies.
 
SRH970: said:
M&S were two former LEO's that tried to quantify something that many talked about but had never bothered to actually study.

The M&S works are valuable in the sense that many can along to decry them but few would bother to try to come up with better information. They tried to compile the available information from actual documented shootings and make something useful out of it.

The noisiest critic was Maarten van Maanen of the now defunct International Wound Ballistics Association. See Section 71

Strangely, members of the IWBA were generally from the camp knows as Jello Junkies.
Click to expand...

van Maanen's was a very thorough statistical analysis of M&S's "study".

There are others, I've posted them elsewhere on this 'site, but they seem to be a good fit here:

Too Good to be True, Wishful Thinking?, The Best Defense by M. Fackler and C.E. Peters

Discrepancies in the Marshall & Sanow "Data Base": An Evaluation Over Time by M. van Maanan

Sanow Strikes (Out) Again by D. MacPherson


There used to be a time when I thought that M&S's "study" should be struck from the 'net for all of its falsity, but now I'd just as soon see it remain as an example for all of exactly what a fraudulent statistical model looks like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top