I don't agree that if you shoot a BG , he's doing to get side-tracked looking for wounds. A lot of people never realize they've been shot at first. I think the assumption there is a bad one. Many never realize it until the shooting is over, remembering adrenaline is flowing and blocks pain.
penetration or expansion?
- Thread starter troy_mclure
- Start date
Walt Sherrill
New member
I don't think there's any clear-cut answer to the question.
I think PLACEMENT is the critical issue not addressed in this discussion -- which is why some .22 and .32s rounds are very effective, in some situations, and almost useless in others.
Seems as though the more tissue, organs, and bone structure disrupted, the greater will be the likelihood of blood loss, crippling damage, or shock -- all of which can be dibilitating.
Penetration alone is damaging -- but only if it hits or goes through something vital. A shot through just muscle alone may be more painful than anything -- and against an experienced opponent, or someone on drugs, it may not have much effect.
Expansion alone is damaging -- if it's someplace that matters. A big hole (larger caliber or bullet that has expanded) is more likely to be harmful than a small one, but again, if it's thorugh the thigh without hitting bone, it may not matter that much..
It those penetrating, large or expanding rounds end up in a leg, or in the person's stomach, without hitting a liver or kidney or the spine, he or she is likely to still be a danger to you long enough to do you harm.
I think PLACEMENT is the critical issue not addressed in this discussion -- which is why some .22 and .32s rounds are very effective, in some situations, and almost useless in others.
Seems as though the more tissue, organs, and bone structure disrupted, the greater will be the likelihood of blood loss, crippling damage, or shock -- all of which can be dibilitating.
Penetration alone is damaging -- but only if it hits or goes through something vital. A shot through just muscle alone may be more painful than anything -- and against an experienced opponent, or someone on drugs, it may not have much effect.
Expansion alone is damaging -- if it's someplace that matters. A big hole (larger caliber or bullet that has expanded) is more likely to be harmful than a small one, but again, if it's thorugh the thigh without hitting bone, it may not matter that much..
It those penetrating, large or expanding rounds end up in a leg, or in the person's stomach, without hitting a liver or kidney or the spine, he or she is likely to still be a danger to you long enough to do you harm.
I'll take both. And since most premium type ammo designed for the purpose seem to do both and make it past the 12"+ mark/requirements, I'll take the one that allows the most ammo in the mag in a 9mm sized gun. That way, if for some reason, one or the other, or both together arent getting it done, I can just keep shooting til it does. 
That's already agreed on. There's no controversy or anything really to discuss. Not to say it shouldn't be pointed out when folks get carried away aguing about bullet performance and design.
I'm for bullets that have good street records. Some of those bullets work very well without meeting some LE agencies', or other shooters' penetration standards.
Not as big an issue these days when you have ammo like DPX or HST that tend to satisfy both penetration and expansion requirements in different bbl. lengths.
cougar gt-e
New member
Expansion is ok, penetration is better, but EXPLODING -- now you're talk'n!
Uh, if you don't have any exploding rounds, then you have to settle for penetration over expansion.
Uh, if you don't have any exploding rounds, then you have to settle for penetration over expansion.
1911_Hardball
New member
I carry hardball in all auto calibers. I don't like surprises.
Kreyzhorse
New member
Penetration.
Penetration with good shot placement is paramount. Expansion is just the frosting. Expansion is usless it it can't hit anything that's deep inside. Many years ago a trooper shot a very large fat suspect with a light weight 357 Mag bullet. Nothing penetrated in and the tropper was killed. Now you can decide which is more important.
The OP asked about .380. I'm certainly in agreement that FMJ is preferred in sub 9mmP ammo.
IF a .380 JHP does expand, it will take energy to do so. Energy that will take away from penetration.
I think the JHP ammo in .32 and .380 is just a marketing gimmick. It's a black magic wand that they hope to sell. How could they claim their ammo was better if it was FMJ?
I've read the FBI study and it certainly is convincing that deep penetration is the key.
IF a .380 JHP does expand, it will take energy to do so. Energy that will take away from penetration.
I think the JHP ammo in .32 and .380 is just a marketing gimmick. It's a black magic wand that they hope to sell. How could they claim their ammo was better if it was FMJ?
I've read the FBI study and it certainly is convincing that deep penetration is the key.
orionengnr
New member
No, not really.
This is exactly why many prefer something larger than a .380. Everything is a compromise.
Some will compromise penetration vice expansion.
Others will compromise comfort/concealability and carry something that that does not compromise penetration or expansion.
oldman1946
New member
One of those I frequently deal with in LE has his Glock loaded with two different types of bullets. One is a solid jacketed and one is Winchester Silver tips. Every other bullet is a WST. It has worked for him twice in 18 yrs to stop the aggression.
N.H. Yankee
New member
Penetration and multiple hits.