Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness

FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit ^ | July 14, 1989 | Urey W. Patrick

[TheThirdRuffian]

A study on the most effective and useful handgun ammunition for self-defense and law enforcement purposes.

[edpc]

Interesting work. I enjoyed the read. However, I did take issue with one sentence.....

The impact of the bullet upon the body is no more than the recoil of the weapon.

That would have to mean a heavy gas operated rifle, like a WWII M1 would have less impact with its 30.06 projectile than a light, bolt action rifle of the same caliber and barrel length at the same distance. I find that hard to believe.

[edpc]

Perhaps a better example (since the article was about handguns) would be a gas operated Desert Eagle, with a 6in barrel in .44 mag compared to a 6in S&W Model 29 firing the same load.

[umgud]

Gotta have a gun
Gotta have shot placement
Gotta have penetration/expansion is a bonus
Gotta be able to have quick followup shots

[umgud]

The impact of the bullet upon the body is no more than the recoil of the weapon.

Recoil on what, from what? A .30 to .45 diameter case against the entire surface of the handhold? Thru a 14 ounce or 52 ounce handgun?

[I see my hands]

The energy of a .22 mag, 30 grain, 2,200 fps, is similar to that of a .38 special.

[NerdDad]

I’d like to see something a little more up to date than 1989. Something that will address some of the newer types of ammunition. Tell me something about the effect of “hydroshocks” in my .45. Compare that to some of the +P type ammo now available for .38 and 9mm. If penetration is so important, address the over-penetration issues seen in the hyper-velocity ammo like my FN 5.7 mm. As I understand it, a lot of the people shot at Ft Hood were only wounded because the 5.7 mm round went through them too fast to create an “incapacitating” event.

It was a good study and covered the subject well — as far as it took it and as old as it is. I would have liked to have seen more specifics. But I guess that is what is encompassed in the oh-so-standard call for more study at the end of every study I’ve read. I’d certainly love to see a new version of the same study that takes into account the new stuff out there.

[45Auto]

Probably not great for police work, but a solid hit with the S and W 629 with the right ammo might be the ticket.

[ASA Vet]

After reading that, I guess I'll be carrying my .300 Win Mag.

Anyone know where I can get a shoulder holster for it?

[mapmaker77]

I’ll take my Python loaded up with hp’s.

[marktwain]

Goddard amply proves the fallacy of "knock-down power" by calculating the heights (and resultant velocities) from which a one pound weight and a ten pound weight must be dropped to equal the momentum of 9mm and .45ACP projectiles at muzzle velocities, respectively.

A silly argument. Momentum is equal and opposite, energy is not. So? Defining "knock down" power as equal to momentum makes this a straw man argument, imho.

Much of "stopping power" is psycological.

[FromTheSidelines]

Well put. Which is why I go by the rule of the biggest caliber I can conveniently carry with the highest capacity. If at first you don’t succeed, try, try (and in the case of some pistols, try * 15) again!

FMJ, liberally applied with some decent firearm control, will give you the greatest chance of a CNS hit.

[Atlas Sneezed]

An important factor is the design of the bullet and cartridge. If you carry a short-barreled 9mm, then you want to have the right bullet weight and expansion characteristics, which will be quite different from a 9mm from a full sized pistol.

Freepers not wishing to look any further may trust me in that I trust my life to Hornady “Critical Defense” ammo, the right round for what I carry. I personally know the geniuses who designed this stuff, and assure you that you can do no better.

That said, the critical factor is practice, not ammo.

[FromTheSidelines]

As I understand it, a lot of the people shot at Ft Hood were only wounded because the 5.7 mm round went through them too fast to create an “incapacitating” event.

Those shot were, in fact, incapacitated; they were not killed. The two are not the same thing. Most military-based weapons are designed for maximum chance of incapacitation, not just lethality.

[Ellendra]

The impact of the bullet upon the body is no more than the recoil of the weapon.

That's just basic laws of physics, phrased to sound misleading. Yes, the force exerted on the bullet is the same as the force exerted on the gun. There is some friction loss by the time said bullet reaches the body, so it's technically accurate to say that the impact on the body will never be more than the force exerted on the weapon. But in a bullet all that force is concentrated, while in the gun the force is spread out. The design and weight of the gun makes a huge difference in how that force feels by the time it reaches the shooter's arm(s). The author seems to have substituted "force" for "recoil" and made their statement misleading.

Yes, I overanalyze things.

[FromTheSidelines]

I once worked out the energies of a 45 ACP @ 1000 FPS with a 230 grain bullet, and a typical semi-pro middleweight fighter. Turns out the energy delivered by the boxer's fist was a bit higher than the 45 ACP. And someone like Mike Tyson in his heyday was around 2.5 times as strong as the 45 ACP.

The difference, however, is that the energy from the fist is spread out over 10 square inches and doesn't penetrate.

But the point is: if a punch won't knock you over, a shot from a pistol probably won't either - at least not from the energy transfer.

NOTE: oddball pistols like the 460, S&W500, AE50 and others are excluded as they're more of a hand cannon and really not suitable for concealed carry

[Sea Parrot]

Defensive handgun rounds are all subjective. All I know is the wife with her Judge using the Federal 3” shells can put 25 .36 caliber lead balls (five with each shot) into a 12” circle at 15 feet faster than I can read this missive.

She can also put 14 .380 rounds from her Bersa Model 85 (13+1) into the a 12” circle at same range even faster.

She is also 70 years old, nuff said.

[familyop]

Back to the future. And don’t forget about those armored gangs likely in the near future.

Shooting Holes in Wounding Theories:
The Mechanics of Terminal Ballistics
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html

[Yo-Yo]

But the point is: if a punch won't knock you over, a shot from a pistol probably won't either - at least not from the energy transfer.

The same amount of energy put into the bullet as it exits the muzzle is also put into the pistol and by extension the shooter as recoil.

If the bullet has enough energy to physically knock down a 200 lb man, the pistol has enough energy to physically knock down the 200 lb shooter.

NOTE: oddball pistols like the 460, S&W500, AE50 and others are excluded as they're more of a hand cannon and really not suitable for concealed carry

All of those are included, because they don't physically knock the shooter on his wallet. So they don't impart enough energy to knock a bullet-stopping zombie off if his feet, either.

[FromTheSidelines]

I’ve heard that in a typical police firefight, something like 80% of all shots miss their target; out of that 17 rounds from your service pistol, you might get 3 on target.

I believe there’s even some Youtube videos of an officer and a suspect trading 30 rounds at a distance of 10 feet - and neither was hit.

High capacity firearms aren’t needed because a 9mm isn’t a sufficient caliber, it’s because most of your shots will completely miss - so you need a much higher capacity to begin with.

[Vinnie]

Ping