Quote:
|
But, I'm pretty confident the higher momentum provided by the larger calibers permits them to penetrate barriers with minimal deflection compared to smaller calibers.
|
Like I said, I think there is a tendency to overgeneralize based on some finite testing. What you are saying may be true based on certain tests in a lab. But actual conditions offer such a variety of conditions that the generalization doesn't help understand anything.
Decades back, around WWII, the Canadian military did a variety of tests using 9mm and 45acp ball ammo involving penetration of the steel battle helmets used at the time. At 50 yards and beyond the 45 dented the helmets while the 9mm penetrated. This remained true to beyond 100 yards.
Here you can read through a variety of tests done through barriers with a variety of bullets over time. The heavier and larger caliber bullets do not always penetrate barriers any more effectively than the smaller.
http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Sel...ps/federal.htm
If you go here you can also see real world tests on barriers and materials. Again the generalization that increased weight and caliber means less deflection in barrier penetration does not hold up in any meaningful way. The best you can say it that it has a tendency to if all goes well.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/theboxotruth.htm
You also have to decide if the amount of deflection is meaningful. As with auto glass. Usually it isn't.
You chose the most powerful round you can shoot well. Given what what's-his'-name above bromided about, shot placement is always critical. In a gun that suits the task.
tipoc