stopping power statistics
- Thread starter SPUSCG
- Start date
As has been stated many, many times, shot placement #1 Do this and from 22
to 45acp
will do the job.
1) Every gunshot wound is a unique occurrence.
2) Every gunfight is a unique occurrence.
Anybody who tells you that they have a magical formula that will quantify the effectiveness between different calibers or different loadings in the same caliber is trying to sell you something.
One thing matters with handgun bullets: The ability to put holes in stuff that the bad guy needs to keep un-holed. Carry a load that will do that, and practice to hit the stuff in question, and hope you're having a lucky day when the balloon goes up.
2) Every gunfight is a unique occurrence.
Anybody who tells you that they have a magical formula that will quantify the effectiveness between different calibers or different loadings in the same caliber is trying to sell you something.
One thing matters with handgun bullets: The ability to put holes in stuff that the bad guy needs to keep un-holed. Carry a load that will do that, and practice to hit the stuff in question, and hope you're having a lucky day when the balloon goes up.
There is an interesting thread on this site about Trooper Coates who shot someone 6 times with a 357 Magnum full house rounds and then Trooper Coates was shot with a .22 pistol. The trooper was killed instantly although he was wearing bodyarmor while the guy he shot seemingly walked away.
There are also many stories about Medal of Honor winners who took multiple rifle shots and still having the ability to kill others and ultimately survive.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=43454
I dont believe its caliber that will win the battle and shot placement is difficult when placed in a stressful position. I believe that volume of fire is the key.
If Trooper Coates had a 12-16 shot Glock would he have been able to put the man down? Im certain he would have probably shot the whole clip and I think getting hit by 10 .40s is probably more effective then 6 .357s.
Just my opinion....
There are also many stories about Medal of Honor winners who took multiple rifle shots and still having the ability to kill others and ultimately survive.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=43454
I dont believe its caliber that will win the battle and shot placement is difficult when placed in a stressful position. I believe that volume of fire is the key.
If Trooper Coates had a 12-16 shot Glock would he have been able to put the man down? Im certain he would have probably shot the whole clip and I think getting hit by 10 .40s is probably more effective then 6 .357s.
Just my opinion....
Double Naught Spy
New member
You have mischaracterized this event significantly.
Last edited:
Didnt Trooper Coates shoot the man with all six shots from his 357 Magnum revolver? Didnt the man return fire with a .22 and kill Trooper Coates? I believe that is enough detail to get the point across about heavier calibers not being effective in all scenarios and lighter calibers being very effective in certain scenarios.
A lot of talking around a subject that really is impossible to quantify!
Might as well talk about it as not, even though the one most important truth in a gun fight, have one?
The gun play by many people are non starters, the gun does not go bang! Good guys, BGs, Police. The change to hi-cap modern pistols has seen a lessoning of the failure to fire situations, most likely because of the flood of more modern firearms (New ones)
One of my Client Company's, a Bank said no to the firearms carried by employees coming to the range, new boss, said of course.
One Bank Guard, ex of the Indian Army, carved his own stocks on his model 10 S&W, it was spotless, up to aim, fire twice, click twice!
Firing pin missing!!! He had carried that gun for 10 years.
Might as well talk about it as not, even though the one most important truth in a gun fight, have one?
The gun play by many people are non starters, the gun does not go bang! Good guys, BGs, Police. The change to hi-cap modern pistols has seen a lessoning of the failure to fire situations, most likely because of the flood of more modern firearms (New ones)
One of my Client Company's, a Bank said no to the firearms carried by employees coming to the range, new boss, said of course.
One Bank Guard, ex of the Indian Army, carved his own stocks on his model 10 S&W, it was spotless, up to aim, fire twice, click twice!
Firing pin missing!!! He had carried that gun for 10 years.
The longer I've been involved in the field the more I've shifted my primary focus to awareness, mindset, skills development/maintenance, training, frequent practice, weapon maintenance & maintaining physical fitness.
The selection of specific weapons and ammunition are a bit farther down on my list of things-to-do than they seem to be for some other folks ...
I'm certainly not saying, or even meaning to imply, that the review of historical "Stopping Power" data is not worthwhile. Nor that considering some of the growing wealth of data in the field is a waste of time. Understanding how we got to where we are today can often be helpful in learning to look beyond the subjective to the objective, and assess the available data from the perspective of an individual's specific anticipated needs or desires.
Experience can be very useful, but often doesn't come easily or cheaply.
It's just that such online 'research' almost invariably leads one into either strident arguments masquerading as informed debates, personal attacks upon folks who have contributed to the wealth of data available ... (sometimes ignoring their evolving thoughts on how such data might be viewed and interpreted) ... or emotional diatribes & shouting matches over how data developed by one person has value, but data from another person is worthless, etc., etc.
It's just a defensive handgun.
Does anyone really think that experience, skills, knowledge, training, awareness, mindset, tactics and judgment are any less important depending on the caliber/bullet design chosen by personal preference or used because of policy requirement/restriction?
Now, if you want to find some quantitative data about "Stopping Power" that's less contentious, look for stuff regarding disc brakes.
The selection of specific weapons and ammunition are a bit farther down on my list of things-to-do than they seem to be for some other folks ...
I'm certainly not saying, or even meaning to imply, that the review of historical "Stopping Power" data is not worthwhile. Nor that considering some of the growing wealth of data in the field is a waste of time. Understanding how we got to where we are today can often be helpful in learning to look beyond the subjective to the objective, and assess the available data from the perspective of an individual's specific anticipated needs or desires.
Experience can be very useful, but often doesn't come easily or cheaply.
It's just that such online 'research' almost invariably leads one into either strident arguments masquerading as informed debates, personal attacks upon folks who have contributed to the wealth of data available ... (sometimes ignoring their evolving thoughts on how such data might be viewed and interpreted) ... or emotional diatribes & shouting matches over how data developed by one person has value, but data from another person is worthless, etc., etc.
It's just a defensive handgun.
Does anyone really think that experience, skills, knowledge, training, awareness, mindset, tactics and judgment are any less important depending on the caliber/bullet design chosen by personal preference or used because of policy requirement/restriction?
Now, if you want to find some quantitative data about "Stopping Power" that's less contentious, look for stuff regarding disc brakes.
IIRC the guy that Trooper Coates shot was a significantly obese individual. The bad guy got a lucky shot off which went in Trooper Coates's armpit and travelled into his thorax, puncturing his aorta.
That is a really unlucky set of circumstances and doesn't mean that .22 should be selected for defense instead of .357
What Tamara said should be a sticky.
That is a really unlucky set of circumstances and doesn't mean that .22 should be selected for defense instead of .357
What Tamara said should be a sticky.
If that were true, then two hits to the chest with a .32ACP would be as effective as with the .45.
Sometimes we're too quick to discount factors we don't understand because we don't know how to measure them.
Can't measure those factors that cause instant incapacitation without hitting CNS or major vessels? Well, let's just deny they exist. Attribute it to psychological surrender or whimp factor rather than consider there might be things we don't know.
"He don't need no freekin' statistics"
I have no real-life experience myself. (Hope I never do.)
However, I have a buddy. We all have “buddies”, right?
Anyway this guy is a do-what-ever-it-takes kind of guy. He is the kind of man that feels data is over-rated and depends more on his instincts.
He’s worked under-cover narcotics. He has rank in a local police department. He ruffles the feathers of those around him, but his results give him job security.
His experience and theory follows.
He says that he has shot BGs with 9mm and watched them run away.
His take is that the fire-flash and concussive “BOOM” from a .45 makes people drop even in less-than lethal hits.
I have never tried to debate his line of reasoning with stats.
I have no real-life experience myself. (Hope I never do.)
However, I have a buddy. We all have “buddies”, right?
Anyway this guy is a do-what-ever-it-takes kind of guy. He is the kind of man that feels data is over-rated and depends more on his instincts.
He’s worked under-cover narcotics. He has rank in a local police department. He ruffles the feathers of those around him, but his results give him job security.
His experience and theory follows.
He says that he has shot BGs with 9mm and watched them run away.
His take is that the fire-flash and concussive “BOOM” from a .45 makes people drop even in less-than lethal hits.
I have never tried to debate his line of reasoning with stats.
One of the reasons the stopping power numbers are controversial is that using the term 'statistics' and stating the findings in terms of 'percentages' invites conclusions that can't really be drawn from this kind of data.
When we say 'percentage,' we are implying a series of like events. The events that are documented for stopping power numbers are too dissimilar to be lumped together and all considered as equivalent instances of the same event.
When we say 'statistics,' we are implying that numerical data has been collected and organized in a way that allows one to draw conclusions. Again, the numbers presented as stopping power statistics don't meet this standard.
It is a classic dilemma in science: the need to choose between in vivo (real life) and in vitro (controlled experimental) data. In vitro data allows you to be confident that your conclusions are accurate and reliable, but you don't know whether they will hold up in real life. In vivo data comes from real life, but the data quality is often so messy you can't be confident that your conclusions are reliable.
People get into long arguments on these boards about what kind of data is "best." It's a foolish argument: both kinds of data are inherently flawed. Unfortunately, we live in a random, messy world and we have to make decisions based on imperfect information.
When we say 'percentage,' we are implying a series of like events. The events that are documented for stopping power numbers are too dissimilar to be lumped together and all considered as equivalent instances of the same event.
When we say 'statistics,' we are implying that numerical data has been collected and organized in a way that allows one to draw conclusions. Again, the numbers presented as stopping power statistics don't meet this standard.
It is a classic dilemma in science: the need to choose between in vivo (real life) and in vitro (controlled experimental) data. In vitro data allows you to be confident that your conclusions are accurate and reliable, but you don't know whether they will hold up in real life. In vivo data comes from real life, but the data quality is often so messy you can't be confident that your conclusions are reliable.
People get into long arguments on these boards about what kind of data is "best." It's a foolish argument: both kinds of data are inherently flawed. Unfortunately, we live in a random, messy world and we have to make decisions based on imperfect information.
Wow, we really have learned to discuss this nicely !
Not real good memory so help me out.....
Back in the 80's didn't some guys in europe shoot 200 or so mountain goats with various rifile and pistol calibers ?
I remember it REALLY ticked off PETA and the study got burried. That said, it was controlled, repeatable and involved real world targets not a block of jello.
Anyone else remember this and have a weblink or was this a hallucination?????
Not real good memory so help me out.....
Back in the 80's didn't some guys in europe shoot 200 or so mountain goats with various rifile and pistol calibers ?
I remember it REALLY ticked off PETA and the study got burried. That said, it was controlled, repeatable and involved real world targets not a block of jello.
Anyone else remember this and have a weblink or was this a hallucination?????
Sounds like you're referring to the Strasbourg Goat Tests. These were supposedly done in secret so as not to draw the wrath of PETA and the like and the results later "leaked." The debate over their validity or existance range from outright denial to somebody who knew a guy who knew a guy who shot a goat there.
When I mean volume of fire, I mean with the main calibers. However, there have been many people killed each year with the .32 and the .22 (and with just one shot).
Quite honestly, if I was defending my house then I would rather have the .45. I thought about a few scenarios and 15 feet is about all I will get which is enough time to place 2-3 bullets into the intruder. In that case, I will take the .45. The .45 was specifically designed for close quarters combat and there is some evidence to suggest it is slightly more effective then the other rounds. So if I have even a slight advantage then I'll take the .45.
However, against a large group of people out in the open then I would prefer a 9 mm because of the volume of rounds that can be carried and cooked off. Most modern 9mm weapons usually have the option of a much larger magazine such as the Sig's 20 rounder or the Glocks 19 rounder or 33 rounder.
For example, lets say I am in an area that was swept by a natural disaster. I have decided to hike to safety and then come upon a gang of 5-10 people armed with different weapons. In that situation, I would want to lay down as much fire as possible while I perform a hasty retreat (assuming the group is coming at me with hostile intentions). The Glocks 33 round magazine would be very nice to keep heads down while I am performing such a retreat. 2 19 or 2 33 round magazines could be easily stowed in a fanny pack or back pack.
Indeed, there was some data from Somalia where the Beretta's larger capacity proved useful in beating back rampaging crowds. I can see where that 33-round magazine would have some purpose.
There are many scenarios that are admittingly not all that possible. There have not been many break ins around here in a while and there hasnt been an occasion in my lifetime where there is civil anarchy in my area.
However, if you ask me then I would use the .45 for my home and work. A 9mm overloaded with the largest capacity magazines for carry.
Quite honestly, if I was defending my house then I would rather have the .45. I thought about a few scenarios and 15 feet is about all I will get which is enough time to place 2-3 bullets into the intruder. In that case, I will take the .45. The .45 was specifically designed for close quarters combat and there is some evidence to suggest it is slightly more effective then the other rounds. So if I have even a slight advantage then I'll take the .45.
However, against a large group of people out in the open then I would prefer a 9 mm because of the volume of rounds that can be carried and cooked off. Most modern 9mm weapons usually have the option of a much larger magazine such as the Sig's 20 rounder or the Glocks 19 rounder or 33 rounder.
For example, lets say I am in an area that was swept by a natural disaster. I have decided to hike to safety and then come upon a gang of 5-10 people armed with different weapons. In that situation, I would want to lay down as much fire as possible while I perform a hasty retreat (assuming the group is coming at me with hostile intentions). The Glocks 33 round magazine would be very nice to keep heads down while I am performing such a retreat. 2 19 or 2 33 round magazines could be easily stowed in a fanny pack or back pack.
Indeed, there was some data from Somalia where the Beretta's larger capacity proved useful in beating back rampaging crowds. I can see where that 33-round magazine would have some purpose.
There are many scenarios that are admittingly not all that possible. There have not been many break ins around here in a while and there hasnt been an occasion in my lifetime where there is civil anarchy in my area.
However, if you ask me then I would use the .45 for my home and work. A 9mm overloaded with the largest capacity magazines for carry.
Last edited:
Ah jeez, my ribs were just starting to heal up after laughing so hard on another thread after a poster criticized the new SureFire's LED bulp because it doesn't get as hot as the old Incandescant bulb---which he used to melt the ice as he scraped it off his winshield with the strike bezel.
After thinking how hard it'd be to top that for laughs, now there's this:
I have to admit that I'd never considered the superiority of the .45 over the 9mm being attributed to the "fire flash/concusive boom factor...LOL, here I go again.
After thinking how hard it'd be to top that for laughs, now there's this:
I have to admit that I'd never considered the superiority of the .45 over the 9mm being attributed to the "fire flash/concusive boom factor...LOL, here I go again.
Last edited:
I've always found these discussions strange. In my early days, the only really different then normal stopping handguns were 45 Colt, with heavy loads, and 44 magnum.
One common thread is that 260 grain 44 or 45 Colt bullets, with thin jacketed hollow points, or soft lead, at anywhere from 900-1200 fps, or faster, seem to work VERY well, and, have done so for nearly 150 years.
Oddly enough, this seems lost on the handgun community.
The 45 ACP has worked fairly well, but, I think it's stopping power could be increased considerably by 260 grain bullets, and, 45 Detonics allows these to move in the 1000 fps range, out of a semi-auto pistol.
I've also had great comments from Detonics with 200 grain bullets at 1200 fps, in 45 Detonics.
I believe that due to the 'over-penetration' boogie man, a threat created by the FBI and many LEO agencies to validate moving to high capacity semiauto pistols, the rest of the industry has taken a large drink from the same cup.
That said, the laws of physics seem to apply, at least in trying to slow down a heavier moving object, and, the result aid the ability to incapacitate. TO make it very simple, the higher the bullet weight, the harder it is to slow the bullet down, and, when a large caliber, heavy bullet opens up like a parachute, and, thanks to it's heavy weight, creates a large, deep hole THROUGH the target, rather then stopping 12-15" in, it tends to inhibit the targets ability to continue.
We do have some handgun rounds now that are seriously in another category as far as stopping power. The 460 S&@, with a 200 grain 45 caliber bullet, at 2300 fps is a handgun with rifle statistics. I see no reason that a 475 Linebaugh, .500 S&@, .500 Maximum, etc. that all come into the 3000ft-lbs of energy range, 6 times that of the average service caliber, aren't considered REAL stopping rounds, and guns. Yes Martha, you can tune some of these guns and calibers into deer, SD rounds, with 200-265 grain fast expanding, thin jacketed bullets, and, yes, they will work 4-6 times better then ANY of the service rounds.
The real stopping rounds read:
30-06, .308, 7.62 x 54R, 8mm, and up. Also, a very strong case can be made for the 7.62 x 39 as being an effective SD round...
Finally, long for caliber bullets have an advantage: they wobble, and, geometrically increase the wound channel due to instability.
You want my worst nightmare? Getting shot by a 733 grain, cup point .510" caliber bullet, out of a gun incapable of stabilizing the bullet, at near point blank range. The thought of an over an inch long, BMG bullet tumbling through my body, at nearly 1200 fps, is truly my worst nightmare. My gunsmith has shot a LOT of deer, buffalo, etc. with heavy caliber handguns, and, he assures me for not quantifiable reason that there is something about getting hit with a .510" 525 grain bullet at 1350 fps that tends to totally get the attention of deer to car sized animals...
Bullet instability, and the chaos that comes with a tumbling, or unstable bullet, read british .303, they didn't make those bullet with wood cores to be nice to the Germans, is an often neglected part of the 'stopping power equation'/.
One common thread is that 260 grain 44 or 45 Colt bullets, with thin jacketed hollow points, or soft lead, at anywhere from 900-1200 fps, or faster, seem to work VERY well, and, have done so for nearly 150 years.
Oddly enough, this seems lost on the handgun community.
The 45 ACP has worked fairly well, but, I think it's stopping power could be increased considerably by 260 grain bullets, and, 45 Detonics allows these to move in the 1000 fps range, out of a semi-auto pistol.
I've also had great comments from Detonics with 200 grain bullets at 1200 fps, in 45 Detonics.
I believe that due to the 'over-penetration' boogie man, a threat created by the FBI and many LEO agencies to validate moving to high capacity semiauto pistols, the rest of the industry has taken a large drink from the same cup.
That said, the laws of physics seem to apply, at least in trying to slow down a heavier moving object, and, the result aid the ability to incapacitate. TO make it very simple, the higher the bullet weight, the harder it is to slow the bullet down, and, when a large caliber, heavy bullet opens up like a parachute, and, thanks to it's heavy weight, creates a large, deep hole THROUGH the target, rather then stopping 12-15" in, it tends to inhibit the targets ability to continue.
We do have some handgun rounds now that are seriously in another category as far as stopping power. The 460 S&@, with a 200 grain 45 caliber bullet, at 2300 fps is a handgun with rifle statistics. I see no reason that a 475 Linebaugh, .500 S&@, .500 Maximum, etc. that all come into the 3000ft-lbs of energy range, 6 times that of the average service caliber, aren't considered REAL stopping rounds, and guns. Yes Martha, you can tune some of these guns and calibers into deer, SD rounds, with 200-265 grain fast expanding, thin jacketed bullets, and, yes, they will work 4-6 times better then ANY of the service rounds.
The real stopping rounds read:
30-06, .308, 7.62 x 54R, 8mm, and up. Also, a very strong case can be made for the 7.62 x 39 as being an effective SD round...
Finally, long for caliber bullets have an advantage: they wobble, and, geometrically increase the wound channel due to instability.
You want my worst nightmare? Getting shot by a 733 grain, cup point .510" caliber bullet, out of a gun incapable of stabilizing the bullet, at near point blank range. The thought of an over an inch long, BMG bullet tumbling through my body, at nearly 1200 fps, is truly my worst nightmare. My gunsmith has shot a LOT of deer, buffalo, etc. with heavy caliber handguns, and, he assures me for not quantifiable reason that there is something about getting hit with a .510" 525 grain bullet at 1350 fps that tends to totally get the attention of deer to car sized animals...
Bullet instability, and the chaos that comes with a tumbling, or unstable bullet, read british .303, they didn't make those bullet with wood cores to be nice to the Germans, is an often neglected part of the 'stopping power equation'/.
Socrates said:
Heavy-for-caliber bullets are very stable in flight, provided they are spun adequately and the center-of-mass is not too far aft. On hitting the target, a long-for-caliber bullet will exhibit a rapid yaw cycle only if it is of a spitzer shape, but it's not a "wobble" so much as a simple swapping of base for apex. (Much like a hammer does not tumble if you throw it handle first, it merely swaps ends.) If the heavy-for-caliber bullet is of a more balanced shape (such as a Keith SWC from a handgun or a Woodleigh Solid from a DGR) then it will exhibit a very slow yaw cycle and hardly yaw at all in the target, which is why these shapes are favored for big game that requires deep penetration.
Socrates said:
It'd better be point-blank range. Extensive personal experimentation has shown that handgun bullets that are keyholing at 3 yards are lucky to land on a B-27 much past 15.
Doesn't matter what kind of superload you've fallen in love with if it won't hit the target except by sheerest good luck, nicht wahr?
Ruthless4christ
New member
is there any website that posts how many foot pounds of energy per squarefoot for differant loads and calibers of ammo?
Nnobby45 said:
If you were around the guy I’m talking about, you would understand where he’s coming from. His experiences are from undercover work with highly paranoid and motivated drug dealers. Right or wrong he has the convictions and confidence in himself that brings to mind Dirty Harry or Det. Jimmy 'Popeye' Doyle.
He doesn’t care about gel blocks, goat studies or crowd control.
His conclusions, laughable or not, come from close quarters, real life situations where there’s a real nasty human animal out to do him harm. In his opinion, when he has shot scumbags at close range, their reactions to a 9mm vs. a .45 seem to be different.
This would be hard to put to a scientific test. Maybe he’s just superstitious. Just like gamblers and baseball players, he seems to base his actions and beliefs on past scenarios. The opinions may not be statistically sound, but don't try to prove them wrong to his face.
I think his comments also reflect the fervent loyalty many LEO’s have for their 1911. The LEO’s I talk to aren’t being funny when they argue the merits of their favorite firearm vs. a 9mm.
I have to admit that I'd never considered the superiority of the .45 over the 9mm being attributed to the "fire flash/concusive boom factor...LOL, here I go again
If you were around the guy I’m talking about, you would understand where he’s coming from. His experiences are from undercover work with highly paranoid and motivated drug dealers. Right or wrong he has the convictions and confidence in himself that brings to mind Dirty Harry or Det. Jimmy 'Popeye' Doyle.
He doesn’t care about gel blocks, goat studies or crowd control.
His conclusions, laughable or not, come from close quarters, real life situations where there’s a real nasty human animal out to do him harm. In his opinion, when he has shot scumbags at close range, their reactions to a 9mm vs. a .45 seem to be different.
This would be hard to put to a scientific test. Maybe he’s just superstitious. Just like gamblers and baseball players, he seems to base his actions and beliefs on past scenarios. The opinions may not be statistically sound, but don't try to prove them wrong to his face.
I think his comments also reflect the fervent loyalty many LEO’s have for their 1911. The LEO’s I talk to aren’t being funny when they argue the merits of their favorite firearm vs. a 9mm.