Why even make the bullet FMJ?

OOPS- caught pontificating again. Nasty habit, but it often moves people to educate me.:rolleyes:

Point i was trying to make is that, at rifle velocities, bullet type has little to do with penetration.

That would have been a good place to shut up.

So...Edward- what sort of bullets in .45 ACP?

RED-i can't substantiate the 44/wadcutter test, something i read somewhere, and the velocities cited are really... my own distilled assumptions. Thanks for the slap in the face-I needed that.:o
 
FMJ

>> Everybody says that the old 8mm ammo isn't good for knocking down living creatures quickly and efficently because its all FMJ and doesn't expand upon impact. Why produce a round that won't expand when it hits a target (like a human)?

Because humans being hunted by other humans have the annoying habit of digging holes in the ground and wearing all sorts of gear. And because the ballistics of a "full" bullet are better, allowing a flatter trajectory or longer effective range, or both, in addition to the treaty conventions.

The M16 and AK74 rounds were designed to be unstable when they hit something, so that they tumble. The Army had discovered that a wounded soldier removes more soldiers from the battlefield than a dead one.

Don't forget that 70% of all battlefield casulties are caused by artillery. And machine guns cause most of the remaining casulties. The whole idea is to make sure you aren't in a fair fight.
 
"Don't forget that 70% of all battlefield casulties are caused by artillery..."

True, but I think the stats are shifting back the other way now that so many conflicts are urban combat and "low intensity" conflicts where arty and CAS are less predominant. For example, in Somalia, there were more small arms casualties than indirect fire casualties.

Bruegger
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top