Pistol Smith Forum banner
21 - 40 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
If a RN bullet passes through tissue at 700+ fps, it has to tear; there are no free channels it could use. I don't think organs could really move out of the way at that speed.

But I think we are really saying the same thing here; the RN profile is a gentler way to make a the wound channel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Actually Dane, if you want to go back to the very beginning, it was nitrocellulose powders and the velocity they were capable of that brought us the full metal jacketed bullet. Lead, paper patched or other bullets don't hack it at the then amazing speeds of 2200-2400fps. The Brits used the infamous Dum-Dum bullet(made in Dum Dum Arsenal, India, which were softpoints IIRC) against their not completely willing subjects and attracted all sorts of ill will from the rest of the world IIRC. I imagine that it was just an excuse to attack the Brits politically, but the pols will take whatever scraps you throw them when it gives them a shot at the hated foe(the more thing's change...)

FMJ's in pistols were about reliability, due to better feeding, less distortion of the bullet etc etc(you know this better than me). But even if lead bullets would have functioned fine(I know they do, I shoot lots of them) we would have had FMJ's due to international law. The 45 Colt loads were lead(and black powder) and the 38 Long Colt loads were also. The 38 Special and 38S&W(.380 to the Brits)loads were FMJ. Lead bullets would not have had any bearing on functionality in a revolver, they did it because of international law(and custom, in the case of the US, which was not a signator of the Geneva convention or Hague Accords) Semper Fidelis...Ken M
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Hmmm-tough topic here.

I have seen some of Dr. Facklers findings on the .45acp ball. And found them to be unremarkable lots of penetration and a big hole is about it-but hey it is a handgun so whaddaya expect-I cannot place my faith in the statistics of %OSS. What seems to matter more than anything is shot placement. Be it a .25 auto or a 44 mag. if you cannot hit good what difference does it make? There are some documented accounts of people being shot 4-6 times w/a .45 Auto (most likely FMJ) and not being hampered by it.
If I knew I was going to shoot somebody in the head from the front I would use a 9mm over a .45
If I were going to shoot somebody in a bone I would use a 7.62x25.
But for all others (at least in the event of being stuck with the FMJ Option Considering also that a rifle or shotgun is unavailable) I would still use a .45.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,831 Posts
Discussion Starter · #24 ·
There are many accounts of people being shot with up to 8 rounds of current high grade HPs and walking away...Golden Saber being the last, just a mounth ago, that I heard about.

Like the man said, "it's only a handgun for crimney sake, what do you expect!"
 
G

·
Well where to start:
The 1911,
John Browning's first autoloader was originally developed in 1889 for the Winchester Repeating Arms Co. and tested as a gas bleed system based on the Maxim of 1883.
Browning was commissioned by Colt to develop an autoloader for the US Army.
The Army had determined they required a .45 caliber lead bullet based on the recommendations of Colonel John T. Thompson and Colonel Louis A La Garde.

Browning’s first design began in 1905 using lead round nose bullets in a diameter and size of .367 to .398. The Army required a diameter .45, Browning noted in his journals the serious functional design limitations that his pistol designs demonstrated. He was plagued by both poor functioning and decreased accuracy over the testing period. The functional problems were diagnosed from deposits of small lead fragments on the feed and action areas. The accuracy issue was one that plagued him until he began measuring the diameter of fired bullets, the diameter was found to be bore diameter not groove diameter this showed that lead was being stripped away from the bullet as it traveled through the barrel. In late 1905 the decision was made to apply an outer coating of cupro-nickel in a thickness of 0.0165 as a jacketing material. In 1906 Browning submitted his own design round nose .45 caliber fully jacketed cartridge weighing 200 grains at a velocity of 800 fps (often reported in error as 900 fps). Colonel Thompson (Often referred to as General in error - he became a General in 1914) strongly recommended that the Army reject Browning’s cartridge design due to a "lack" of penetration. Browning redesigned his cartridge to a limited OAL of 1.265" and 230 grains with a velocity of 850 fps.
In 1907 the Army determined that Browning’s design for Colt (Colt also submitted a competing design) and Savage’s design warranted further testing. Luger, White-Merrill, Smith & Wesson, Knoble, and Bergmann’s designs were rejected.
Browning continued to promote his design to the Army and began to personally oversee the production of test models in Hartford.
Plagued with durability failures as his design could not withstand 1,000 rounds of continuous function testing, Browning began working with a young Colt employee named Fred Moore. Moore and Browning were able to redesign the locking lugs and the front bushing angle, and after adding a revised heat treatment process the pistols were able to exceed the functional test requirements. The test pistols were able to meet the endurance requirement of 600 rounds fired per hour for 10 hours allowing each pistol to be cleaned after 1,000 rounds of fire. During the development and preparation for the official endurance testing Browning added the swinging link, manual grip safety, and extended grip angle, the inclusion of the swinging link required a new locking pin and Browning devised the slide stop with a new 7 round magazine.
On March 1st 1911 the official test pistols were submitted to the Army selection board. On March 3rd 1911 the endurance test began, on March 4, 1911 the Colt prototype was the deemed to have passed the endurance test and the Savage was rejected. The Browning/Colt set an Army service record as the only firearm to successfully fire 6,000 rounds without failure. (This record stood until 1917 when Browning broke it using his new design machine gun).
On March 29, 1911 the Browning/Colt pistol was selected as the official sidearm of the US armed forces and designated the model 1911.
The use of FMJ,
Neither the Geneva Convention nor the Hague Accord caused the US to issue FMJ ammo.
The only treaty ever entered into by the US Govt. that prohibits the use of expanding ammunition by Military personnel against foreign nationals outside the confines of the USA and its territories is the North American Treaty.
I will explain the process that led to the prohibition of expanding bullets for the European nations and the Warsaw Pact starting with Captain Charles Minnie the inventor of the first expanding bullet (no the dum, dum was not the first design) in a second article.
Wounding by Bullets,
Neither expanding JHP nor FMJ bullets use cutting as a primary wounding mechanism. (It has been attempted and the Winchester Talon is successful).
First energy loss along a wound track is not uniform, the bullets wounding ability is demonstrated in two manners.
The first is the ability to exert energy, kinetic energy to be exact; this energy can be doubled by doubling the weight of the projectile. If you increase the velocity to double its original speed you quadruple the kinetic energy so you can see that weight has a factor of x2 but velocity equals x4. This factor is important as it directly equates into the size of the temporary wound cavity, the temporary wound cavity is caused by the bullet’s shock wave in fluid materials like muscle and tissue, this wave pulses and flings the surrounding tissues away in a radial manner for 5 to 10 milliseconds as the bullet travels through the body. This cavity will then experience a series of smaller pulses similar in nature to waves or ripples on a water surface until it dissipates.
The resulting bullet track is called the permanent wound cavity. In this case we are discussing pistol calibers so it is important to note that the size of the permanent wound cavity is often insignificant within a permanent wound or path of destruction that does not extend into other areas or surrounding tissues. This is why so many companies have attempted to increase the wound size using everything from pre-stressed JHP bullets of relatively poor/thin quality (fragmenting on impact in 3’ to 4”), bird and buckshot, marine epoxy, plastics to pre-fragmented bullet designs. The only conventional handgun bullet to impart a larger permanent wound track at a velocity of 1,900 fps or less is the Winchester Talon/Ranger this design imparts a radial cutting motion that is discernable on autopsy, the Remington Golden Saber imparts a substantially lesser wound but it is still discernable under microscope. (It is important that we do not assume that a smaller caliber bullet of better design will cause a larger permanent wound cavity than a larger bullet of unequal design.) It is worth mentioning that at velocities above 2,600 fps the wound cavity can be as large as 30 times the initial diameter of the bullet.
From a purely physiological standpoint a handgun bullet must strike the intended organ to damage it. Please remember that 80% of all gunshot wound victims live if surgery can be performed within 60 minutes.
I’m going to end this post for now under this thread and begin it again under “Stopping Power” in the “Pass the Ammunition” thread this week.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Interesting reply there about the history of the .45 and ammo. Also according to LaGarde that .45 cal was the Minimum cal. necessary. Mind you I am not an expert on this matter, some of the people I work with would strongly disagree though on the Temporary cavity theory though. They have found that Permanant cavity is what kills you-From the time the bullet leaves the body the elastic tissue begins to close in on itself (unless of course it hits a non-elastic organ liver etc.)and if the hit is not a good one they may live to shoot you back. In Somalia there were many instances of somalis being hit multiple times w/M-16s and being able to shoot back (and the range was under 200M which is the supposed best area for temporary cavity damage of the 5.56mm M855 round). And some people were showing up in hospitals 4-5 days later w/multiple gunshot wounds under their own power. If you rely solely on kinetic energy damage I think you may be disapointed in the terminal dept. It does help though but I think it is overrated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
418 Posts
This subject will be endlessly debated. One side has medicos who say temporary wound cavities are useless. I've got a pathologist/medical examiner friend who believes whole heartedly in the "speed stops" philosophy of light and fast based on his experience.

Of course, he solved the issue by carrying a Glock 20 with Silvertips. The best of both worlds, at least in terms of caliber.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
About 10 years ago, I was instrumental in developing the marketing and distribution for COR-BON ammunition. During my rounds to the gunshops, one fella came up to me and personally thanked me for getting COR-BON in his favorite gunshop.

The turned out to be an emergency room doctor, who carried a 9mm.

For every doctor or researcher who says bigger/slower, the other side can find one who says lighter/faster. I know what side I am on, (squarely in the middle with a .40).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Concerning the use of M855 ammo in Somalia...You must also consider the fact that a lot of the 16's used over there, if not all, were A2's with the 1/7inch twist which was adapted for use with the SS109 62grain steel core ammo. That ammo as far as I know still is not used on a wide scale basis due to it's cost. Even with the new ammo you would have the same effect...bullets zipping through and not imparting the maximum potential of their kinetic energy.

Eugene Stoner originally designed his AR15 with a 1/14inch twist, the Army had it changed to 1/12 supposedly to attain the proper level of accuracy in cold weather. With less twist(hence, less stability), when the round hits a medium denser than air, there is much greater upset which causes the bullet to impart more of it's energy in a shorter depth. Now we have M16's designed for penetration at longer ranges(In my opinion the military was attempting to make a 5.56 into a 7.62NATO, especially since they were going to the M249 as a squad automatic weapon)....Enough of my rambling.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Being in the Army Ammunition Field I can tell you that the SS109/M855 ctg. (62gn green tipped penetrator)are pretty much the same and general issue and issued in bulk Army wide there is no problem with cost. An ammo site I used to work in had about 4 40'w x60'l x20'h bunkers loaded top to bottom with pallets of the stuff, each pallet containing about 48 cases (1440 rnds per case or something to that effect)-and that was a very small ammo facility), they are about 19 cents if not less (been awhile since I checked the Docs.) where as the old M193 (55gn bullet) was about 12 cents. so no probs about cost. Never once since I have been in a unit with M16A2s have I ever seen the old M193 load issued or carried with it. And terminally the M855 is almost the same as the M193 (especially out to 200M is where the bullet "works its' magic" after that then it less effective). Sorry for the digression from pistols.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Devilman55 on 2001-05-08 22:34 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
I have seen the way that .45 ball will sometimes overpenetrate, but since I work more in rural environs these days, I carry FMJ in my .45s. On the rare occasion that I work close protection in an urban area, I will use Federal HS, because they do what they were designed to do. My preferred FMJ is Proload, but the nice thing about that basic round,(FMJ), is it's availability.
 
G

·
If I may, the issue at hand may not be the rate of twist/cost/M93 versus the M855 bullet weight versus overall effectiveness.
The M193 and M855 5.56mm projectile was never designed for and is not intended to be a personal defense or game cartridge. It was not designed from day one to exhibit the necessary factors like rapid energy transfer to target that directly relate to terminal effectiveness. It was and is designed for reduced recoil, a reduction in per soldier carried weight, increased stabilization, accuracy, decreased recoil, a reduction in training requirements, extended range of effectiveness and soft armor penetration.
The armed forces using the 5.56mm rounds have never demonstrated single shot effectiveness in combat and do not make such claims. True to form a soldier armed with an M4 carbine or M16 rifle should remain sighted on and firing into the target until the target ceases all further hostile action.
I would also like to comment that recent innovations in bullet design and custom rifle accuracy have led to the adoption of the .223 as a tactical rifle (not patrol rifle)by some ill advised Police Agencies in the US and abroad. This trend is ill advised and is due to the strong influx of former military personnel into American law enforcement postions. IMO, this trend will taper and trail off as the real world shooting results/failures circulate among Law Enforcement trainers over the next decade. Additionally, Police agencies under public scrutiny will not be able to justify the use of multiple shoots per target/suspect in the real world. The civil liabilities will outweigh the influence of the former millitary trainers.
Lest you say that I dislike the 5.56 totally, I must interject that I still remain very fond of the SAW and felt quite comfortable when armed with one and I am a fan of the M4 Offensive Weapon System.

_________________
Thanks,
David

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David DiFabio on 2001-05-09 20:12 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
Using FMJ for personal protection is a bad idea unless you have no other choice.

Don't mean to be rude, but this "all fall before hardball" stuff is nonsense. For most personal defense purposes, it is inferior to a decent JHP. My *suspicion* is that virtually every LEO agency, HRT, SWAT unit, and counter-terrorism unit under the sun didn't change to JHP from a sudden desire to use a LESS effective cartridge. :roll:

Does this mean that .45 ACP FMJ sucks? No, but why not use something better? I'm not a believer in "going cheap" on something that is supposed to save my life... and not spending an extra $10 to get some Hydra-Shoks is pretty damn cheap.

All these anecdotes that get tossed around are just that, anecdotes. They don't have any validity aside from what people WANT them to have. And just because someone who is old and deeply wise intones the virtues of FMJ does not mean that, in this respect, they couldn't be utterly full of crap. That people would drop $2K+ on a pistol and then go cheap on their self-defense ammo is mind-boggling to me. JHPs are proven technology that is widely used in other fields, like hunting thin-skinned game (these being critters that are generally tougher than people, BTW) with considerable success.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
I wish I could express myself in words and paint as good a picture as you people do.
I keep harping on experiences I've had in shooting critters. Hardball is very unimpressive!!!
I must agree with castlebravo, use a good hollow point.
There is all the difference in the world in observed energy transfer between a good hollow point and lowly ball.
Placement is the KEY!!! and if all I could get was hardball, or if the gun I had at the time was only reliable with hardball I would use it and make the best of it.
But its a poor poor choice when you have all the good hp ammo that we have today. Just my 0.02: JS

_________________
That's a dumb question,45 of course,why?
cause they don't make no 50 on a 1911

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: J Sanders on 2001-05-10 08:37 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
While HP`s are certainly usefull in .357 Revolvers and indeed should be used in 9mm I have serious doubts about them in .45 APC.

The only problems I have ever encountered as far as FTF`s and stovepipes in otherwise well set up and reliable, not tight tolerances, defensive 1911`s are with HPs. I consider _1_ malfunction as too many.

That experience is based on shooting 3-4 times a week running about 500 rounds of factory ammo a week through 1911`s only, and I don`t consider that alot.

The idea that you can get a brand or type of HP to work 100% of the time seems, IMHO, to overlook the fact that the quality of the ammo supplied, both in the powder used and the specs on the case & bullet, as well as the way they are assembled is subject to wild swings in any brand and even lot #.

The minor ( too me ) advantages that HP`s offer in a large, slow, heavy round round like the .45, which for a very long time has been regarded as a one round fight stopper ( and still is by me FWIW ) do not outway the utter relibility of the FMJ in the 1911 launching platform of choice.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Blackjack on 2001-05-10 09:36 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
On 2001-05-10 09:31, Blackjack wrote:
the .45, which for a very long time has been regarded as a one round fight stopper ( and still is by me FWIW ) do not outway the utter relibility of the FMJ in the 1911 launching platform of choice.

<
Without trying to start another long-winded debate, what will it take to show people that NO handgun round is a one-round fight stopper? Statistics and dead cops scream at you to give up this notion. If you trust your 1911 with FMJ that much, send your magazines to me. Sounds like you are quite happy with a single-shot .45 .

Yes, it is a good platform. Yes, it was designed for FMJ. Yes, I am serious about taking your magazines off your hands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
On 2001-05-10 10:25, Shane Kropf wrote:
[quote:ntfyumxg]
On 2001-05-10 09:31, Blackjack wrote:
the .45, which for a very long time has been regarded as a one round fight stopper ( and still is by me FWIW ) do not outway the utter relibility of the FMJ in the 1911 launching platform of choice.

<
[/quote:ntfyumxg]

Without trying to start another long-winded debate, what will it take to show people that NO handgun round is a one-round fight stopper? Statistics and dead cops scream at you to give up this notion. If you trust your 1911 with FMJ that much, send your magazines to me. Sounds like you are quite happy with a single-shot .45 .

Yes, it is a good platform. Yes, it was designed for FMJ. Yes, I am serious about taking your magazines off your hands.

Shane

I consider that an insulting, silly, and uncalled for response to a IMHO post that you have taken out of context.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Blackjack on 2001-05-10 10:42 ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
On 2001-05-10 10:38, Blackjack wrote:
Shane

I consider that an insulting, silly, and uncalled for response to a IMHO post that you have taken out of context.
How was this insulting ? You are entitled to your beliefs and opinions, just as we all are. People also believed the world was flat for a very long time too. I am just trying to possibly open your eyes to the FACT that a lot of people have died because they though one round was enough, and that FMJ is the be-all end-all.

If that is your belief, I pray to God that you don't have to test out your theory and/or die trying.

Best regards,
Shane.
 
21 - 40 of 53 Posts
Top