Stopping Power Measurement - Page 2


Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > General Handgun Discussion > Stopping Power Measurement

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-10-2012, 03:37 AM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Incline Village,NV
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
That was when the Soviet Union switched from the large, heavy 7.62X39 in the AK-47 to the light, fast 5.45X39 in the AK74. The increase in lethality of the smaller, higher velocity round was very dramatic.

In reality, momentum is a meaningless figure, since it gives equal weighting to mass and velocity, rather than factoring in the square of the velocity. (energy). Even energy has little effect compared to velocity.
It's not that the 5.45x39s were more lethal than the 7.2x39, it's that the foot soldiers can carry far more rounds and the guns can put more bullets in the air. Same logic why the US switched away from the 30-06 in WWII to the .223 -- no one can reasonably argue that a .223 is more lethal than a 30-06, but the combined ammo carrying capacity and rounds-in-the-air seem to be.

As to the physics, momentum is imperfect but it's certainly not meaningless. And "even energy has little effect compared to velocity" ignores the math. Energy is just velocity squared x mass, so for any given bullet energy and mass are interchangeable. As are momentum and velocity. Velocity is no more inherently useful than energy or momentum; all are just mathematical representations of the physics. If a bullet has sufficient velocity for penetration and expansion, then its not at all clear that more velocity is of any benefit. The same cannot be argued bout increasing weight (momentum and energy) and diameter (TKO).

If you take the velocity argument to it's logical extreme, a 1 gr .17 bullet going 10,000 fps would be the ultimate round. Unfortunately that would produce a trivial wound channel, delivering only 0.2 ft-lbs of energy, and would be easily stopped by even light clothing.


__________________

Last edited by mes227; 02-10-2012 at 03:41 AM.
mes227 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2012, 06:42 PM   #12
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,617
Liked 5954 Times on 3371 Posts
Likes Given: 5523

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeepergeo View Post
Are you suggesting that Newton's Laws are all wrong?
Newton wasn't wrong, but attempting to apply his laws thandguns is.

According to newton's third, if the hanfgun has adequate momentun to "knock a man down", it would also knock the shooter down.


__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2012, 06:48 PM   #13
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,617
Liked 5954 Times on 3371 Posts
Likes Given: 5523

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mes227 View Post
It's not that the 5.45x39s were more lethal than the 7.2x39, it's that the foot soldiers can carry far more rounds and the guns can put more bullets in the air. Same logic why the US switched away from the 30-06 in WWII to the .223 -- no one can reasonably argue that a .223 is more lethal than a 30-06, but the combined ammo carrying capacity and rounds-in-the-air seem to be.

As to the physics, momentum is imperfect but it's certainly not meaningless. And "even energy has little effect compared to velocity" ignores the math. Energy is just velocity squared x mass, so for any given bullet energy and mass are interchangeable. As are momentum and velocity. Velocity is no more inherently useful than energy or momentum; all are just mathematical representations of the physics. If a bullet has sufficient velocity for penetration and expansion, then its not at all clear that more velocity is of any benefit. The same cannot be argued bout increasing weight (momentum and energy) and diameter (TKO).

If you take the velocity argument to it's logical extreme, a 1 gr .17 bullet going 10,000 fps would be the ultimate round. Unfortunately that would produce a trivial wound channel, delivering only 0.2 ft-lbs of energy, and would be easily stopped by even light clothing.

Look up Roy Weatherby's tests. (You know- Weatherby rifles??)

Increasing momentum has no effect. Increasing frontal area will have a very small effect. Increasing velocity has an enormous effect if that velocity is beyoong 2650 FPS.

And the 5.45X39 is enormously more efective, bullet for bullet than the 7.62X39. It's not putting more bullets in the air, it's increasing the velocity that makes the difference.

Google "Hydrostatic shock" sometime.
__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill

Last edited by locutus; 02-10-2012 at 06:54 PM.
locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2012, 01:22 AM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
roscoguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Roscommon,Michigan
Posts: 178
Liked 7 Times on 6 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
And the 5.45X39 is enormously more efective, bullet for bullet than the 7.62X39. It's not putting more bullets in the air, it's increasing the velocity that makes the difference.
And if you get both (more bullets AND more velocity), I'd say you have a winning combination!
__________________
roscoguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
stopping power. 10mm vs .40 vs .357 Sig vs .45acp Broke124 Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection 21 12-27-2011 02:33 AM
Best caliber for stopping power 97cobra Semi-Auto Handguns 88 10-02-2011 01:12 AM
STOPPING POWER of a .380 ..... LONGHAIR Semi-Auto Handguns 20 07-07-2011 04:34 AM
I Need a CC - But I NEED MORE STOPPING POWER!! Dillinger 1911 Forum 27 05-24-2010 11:28 AM