Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Semi-Auto Handguns > which is more important........

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-27-2012, 08:35 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: I see you, and you will not know when I will strike
Posts: 24,301
Liked 3478 Times on 1609 Posts
Likes Given: 3590

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunRunner View Post
I understand shot placement is key, but that taken out of the equation, which is more important to have, a fast and light or slower and heavier? If both round were to strike similar target at the same area which round would do more damage?
You have to think about it like C3 was talking about. How much of a wound channel is the round itself creating?

The 5.7mm is a really popular round right now. I honestly don't know why, but it is.

This thing launches with a speed of something like 2,300 feet per second for their 31 grain (heavy) round.

The problem is the thing is moving so fast it doesn't have time to expand as it zips right through the target, thus the wound channel is small, just slightly bigger than the round itself.

This was a problem that the Rangers and DELTA had in Mogadishu. Their small, fast moving 5.56mm rounds were going all the through the non armored population that was high on khat, thus when they were hit, they just kept on running and were not "put down".

He's a question for yah. Would you rather be hit with a fast moving piece of bamboo? Or a slower baseball bat?


__________________
Dillinger is offline  
USEBOTHHANDS Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 08:50 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: West, by God, Funroe,Louisiana
Posts: 18,707
Liked 9203 Times on 5058 Posts
Likes Given: 74

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GunRunner

I understand shot placement is key, but that taken out of the equation, which is more important to have, a fast and light or slower and heavier? If both round were to strike similar target at the same area which round would do more damage?
Ya know, I don't have the answer for that. But, there is a great picture floating around the interwebz. I'll see if I can find it for ya. It can help you decide for yourself, in some way.


__________________
trip286 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 08:54 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DoyleTheDog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 301
Liked 30 Times on 23 Posts
Likes Given: 14

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dillinger View Post
The 5.7mm is a really popular round right now. I honestly don't know why, but it is.

This thing launches with a speed of something like 2,300 feet per second for their 31 grain (heavy) round.

The problem is the thing is moving so fast it doesn't have time to expand as it zips right through the target, thus the wound channel is small, just slightly bigger than the round itself.
I read that the 5.7mm starts to "tumble" after it enters the target. To me that sounds like a pretty vicious round...
__________________
"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams
DoyleTheDog is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 08:58 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: West, by God, Funroe,Louisiana
Posts: 18,707
Liked 9203 Times on 5058 Posts
Likes Given: 74

Default

Here you go. Notice the wound channels. Expect the temporary wound channel to be around 1/8-1/4 larger than the permanent wound channels. 12" is a standard placed needed depth of penetration to hit vital organs. As you can see, they are all quite impressive except the heavier 9mm, and even then, I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of it.

Notice the 9mm is smaller and faster than the others. Does that help?

__________________
trip286 is offline  
USEBOTHHANDS Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 08:59 PM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: West, by God, Funroe,Louisiana
Posts: 18,707
Liked 9203 Times on 5058 Posts
Likes Given: 74

Default

Sorry, forgot the pic.

handgungelcomparison.jpg

__________________
trip286 is offline  
USEBOTHHANDS Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 09:07 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: I see you, and you will not know when I will strike
Posts: 24,301
Liked 3478 Times on 1609 Posts
Likes Given: 3590

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoyleTheDog View Post
I read that the 5.7mm starts to "tumble" after it enters the target. To me that sounds like a pretty vicious round...
Okay, assuming that is true. And I haven't seen this proven, so we are just going on the assumption that it does tumble.

It's moving at over 2000 feet per second when it hits you. How wide is the average human chest? 12"? 18"

Say 2 feet wide, and the 5.7mm round hits at 2000 feet per second, but instantly reduces speed because of resistance and "tumbling".

That means it takes .0005 of a second to travel the first 12 inches, and assuming it's velocity is cut in half to 1,000 feet per second, it takes another .001 of a second to get to the other side of the 24 inch fleshy thing.

That does not leave a lot of time to develop a gaping wound channel. Almost none actually. You only hope is it hits bone and breaks into a million shards.

I wish Sebbie was here. That gal's mind is out of this world brilliant and I know she would have a formula that would show all the possibilities. Maybe I'll PM her.
__________________
Dillinger is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 09:10 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
mdauben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 441
Liked 97 Times on 68 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by USEBOTHHANDS

F = m x a
If it was that simple we would not have a dozen different SD cartridges and hundreds of different loadings. Unfortunately:

F =/= combat effectiveness

So your equation, while true, is irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by c3shooter
It is actually a phenomenon called a temporary wound channel-
can you point to any research that supports this? Everything I have read indicates that the temporary wound channel only becomes a significant mechanism when bullet velocities reach 2000-3000FPS which is much greater than most handguns are capable off. It's more a rifle wounding mechanism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunback
A well placed 22 shot can do just as much if not more damage then larger calibers
Unfortunately "surgical precision" and "life or death" situations are mutually incomparable. A shot to the heart, spine or brain with any round might be equally effective. However a general COM hit with a .45ACP is much more likely to stop a fight than general COM hit with a .22 is.
__________________
mdauben is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 09:46 PM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 742
Liked 48 Times on 38 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoyleTheDog

I read that the 5.7mm starts to "tumble" after it enters the target. To me that sounds like a pretty vicious round...
Thats what the 5.56 was designed to do, a wounded enemy that will or may eventually die that needs to be carried off as he screams in agony is more detrimental to the enemy than a quickly killed one.
__________________
GunRunner is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 09:59 PM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
USEBOTHHANDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ferriday,LA
Posts: 1,332
Liked 650 Times on 368 Posts
Likes Given: 5125

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdauben View Post
If it was that simple we would not have a dozen different SD cartridges and hundreds of different loadings. Unfortunately:

F =/= combat effectiveness

So your equation, while true, is irrelevant.

it is THAT simple!

BUT, with that said, there ARE varyin factors that play a role in the projectiles' "kill" efficiency.........
1. clothing (bein the more important)
2. placement - soft tissue vs bone, or a combination
3. distance to target
4. barrel length
5. etc
6. etc

so it IS relevant in many aspects. the equation ONLY imparts the knowledge of HOW and WHY. it does not take into account all the outside factors, 4 of which i listed above. take your pick on many others that can affect projectile performance. HELL, i didn't even mention FMJ vs HP vs SP. EVERYONE of these projectiles will REVELANTLY use the equation, BUT due to their make-up and INTENDED PURPOSE OF DESIGN, they WILL NOT give the same results on impact (as compared to one another).
__________________

"they may get me in a rush, but not before i turn your head into a canoe....." -Kurt Russell (Wyatt Earp) in Tombstone

"if it was up to me, i'd like to see, this country run,
the way it used to be, the way it oughta be, just like it's done, OUT HERE.........WAY OUT HERE." -Josh Thompson, country music singer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0sYnro_3Rc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3R00rlA0S0&NR=1

PEOPLE TEND TO ACT LIKE SHEEP, BOY I LOVE MUTTON! -Me

USEBOTHHANDS is offline  
Dillinger Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2012, 10:05 PM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,512
Liked 2447 Times on 1393 Posts
Likes Given: 1911

Default

My read is the .45ACP is going @850 FPS, in a larger round.

About half the "speed" of other rounds, yes, still pretty fast,

but larger, and with almost twice the time in the target during

impact. The larger size causes it to begin to twist, yaw, and in the case of

HPs, open up, and cause more damage.



__________________
therewolf is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
FPS important or not JMAtactical Semi-Auto Handguns 13 08-16-2012 04:51 PM
Probably Not Important, but............. avordman General Rifle Discussion 29 02-20-2011 06:00 PM
Important keys NGIB The Club House 31 01-25-2011 11:16 PM
Grammar is important jpattersonnh The Club House 10 10-16-2010 11:17 AM