Stopping Power? - Page 2

Heist · July 5, 2005, 09:18 PM

I tend to ignore words like "shock" and figure that gun wounds work by the fact that they punch painful holes in people, and occasionally those holes hit places that are immediately fatal. Bigger bullets make bigger holes. Faster bullets (rifles) can make bigger holes too.

Simplistic but it fits.

xXStarScreamXx · July 5, 2005, 09:30 PM

Quote:

if you had a choice and had two pick one ,which would you pick ,being hit in the head by a pebble at 1000 fps or hit in the head with a boulder at a 1000 fps , there's your difference 22 or 45.

You've got to be kidding me. Comparing a pebble to boulder and a .22 to a .45 is dumb. A pebble and a slightly bigger pebble, maybe a small rock is better. Assuming a 30 Gr .22 round the .45 is usually about 230 grains. So the difference is 200/7000's of a pound or 2/70's of a pound. Not a whole lot. Then you have to consider speed, sectional density, and target placement. Not to mention it's easy as hell to put a whole lot of .22s on target faster than full defensive loads in a .45. Also there is an issue of quantity of bullets.

Then again a slightly bigger pebble the .223 must also be useless compared to the monolith that is the .45 ACP round. You're forgettng about a very very important variable. Speed. What about the 5.7x28 round, its a little pebble that will slam through vests,through people and through walls. Why cant the .45 do that? With a nice vest I could probably take a few 45's maybe a whole clip with a couple shots in me. I dont know if I could take a clip of 5.7's to the chest, I would probably die.

Just shoot the guy a few times.

stephen426 · July 7, 2005, 05:03 PM

We already know about shot placement. Now lets say all shots will be center of mass for arguement's sake since few of us here will be able to consistently make head shots on a moving target. For all you who claim shot placement is the absolute most important thing, can you put one between the BG's eyes everytime (especially if he is moving and shooting back at you)?

With COM shots, firepower DOES matter. Assuming you hit a person in the same spot with different rounds, the more powerful round will do far greater damage and incapacitate that person much more quickly. That is one reason why we use better ammo such as high-tech hollowpoints. More tissue is destroyed. There are going to be exceptions such as people getting 6 rounds of .380 acp pumped into their COM and living long enough to kill the person who shot them or a police officer who shot a perp with a few rounds of .357 mag and the perp surviving. There are going to quirks and few handgun rounds are going to drop a person instantaneously. Bigger and more powerful rounds DO make adifference assuming good shot placement.

So to end this arguement, practice, practice, practice, to be able to put a bullet where it will count and make sure you carry enough gun to ensure that bullet will do its job. Enough gun is usually defined as 9mm and above and good ammo must be used for any caliber. The flip side is carry a gun which you can control well enough to shoot accurately. If you miss with a .500 S&W, your follow up shot is going to be a hell of a lot slower than with a 9mm.

**JohnKSa** · July 7, 2005, 07:58 PM

Quote:

the more powerful round will do far greater damage and incapacitate that person much more quickly

Nope, leave out the "far" and the "much" and you're getting closer to the truth. Add "possibly" and "may" before the "do" and the "incapacitate" and now you've got it.

Unless you're talking about comparing two different classes of cartridge. Like comparing a typical service pistol caliber to a hot-loaded magnum revolver, or comparing a pistol to a rifle.

stephen426 · July 7, 2005, 08:19 PM

Okay John,

I agree. If we are talking about .22 LR to .45 ACP, then there is a much greater effect. If we are talking 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP, the difference is not as pronounced.

Even with rifles, I was just reading an article about how under powered the .223 is. In the Gun&Ammo Combat Tactics magazine, there was an article about a special forces soldier's experience with the .223's less than desirable performance in Afganistan. Basically, he double tapped the guy using green tipped (steel core?) rounds. The guy dropped and was thought dead. The guy got back up and continued to attack him. I was under the impression that .223 was pretty effective against people. They were pushing for the 6.8 SPC round which could be adapted to the AR-15 platform.

I guess that is why they say shoot until there is no longer a threat. That means the guy is down and no longer capable of attacking, not putting one between his eyes at point blank range after he is down. That kind of stuff usually isn't looked upon too favorably by a jury.

**JohnKSa** · July 7, 2005, 09:33 PM

.223 in its original incarnation and shot out of an M16 is a pretty good anti-personnel round.

After being modified to include light armor piercing capability, having had the bullet weight upped to stretch the range a bit and then being shot out of a shorter barrel with a faster twist, it's anti-personnel performance has begun to suffer.

However, I'm extremely leery of anecdotes being used as "evidence" that a particular round is or isn't good at "stopping." There are just too many variables in these stories to be able to draw any useful conclusions from them. I can assure you that if the guy had been hit in the spine or the head he would have gone down and stayed down regardless of the caliber. And that if he wasn't, he might have stayed in the fight--again regardless of caliber.

steve154 · July 7, 2005, 10:47 PM

"You've got to be kidding me. Comparing a pebble to boulder and a .22 to a .45 is dumb. A pebble and a slightly bigger pebble, maybe a small rock is better. Assuming a 30 Gr .22 round the .45 is usually about 230 grains. So the difference is 200/7000's of a pound or 2/70's of a pound. Not a whole lot. Then you have to consider speed, sectional density, and target placement. Not to mention it's easy as hell to put a whole lot of .22s on target faster than full defensive loads in a .45. Also there is an issue of quantity of bullets"

With all the JEDI and .45 is great flamming aside, what is REALLY dumb is you attempting to say that there is "not a whole lot" of difference between a 30 grain .22LR and a 230 grain .45ACP. When comparing 30 grains, 230 grains and a bowling ball and all are sitting on a table, there is not much difference between 30 and 230 grains. In the realm of objects striking human beings at close to 700mph, the difference between 30 grains and 230 grains is absolutely gigantic. (toss the bowling ball in at the same speed and it would be ridiculous)

By the way, a sharply pointed knife will also pass through soft body armor, walls and people. Also, I never said the .223 was useless. I said that with ball ammo and at PISTOL ranges I felt that a .45 with hollow points might be a better stopper. I figure that a .45 expanding to .70" and dumping all of it's energy in a target just might be better than a .223 ball round making a significantly smaller hole and expending only a portion of it's energy in the target as it passes completely through while barely slowing down. All of that is of course assuming that the .223 does not strike heavy bone. I realize that if it did, you would have major issues probably greatly exceeding what a .45 would do in the same spot. Strictly thinking of COM shots and soft tissue. I also said that I was not a ballistics expert, so I wasn't sure.

Steve

**JohnKSa** · July 8, 2005, 07:17 PM

pebble vs boulder is not 22 vs 45.

A pebble is going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of the same weight as a typical pistol bullet. Probably around 200 grains max. A boulder, by any definition I can imagine is going to weigh upwards of 10lbs. That makes a boulder at least 350 times heavier than a pebble.

A 45 bullet is about 8 times heavier than a 22cal bullet.

A pebble is gonna be about an inch in diameter, max. A boulder, being conservative, would have to be at least a foot across or so. That makes a boulder about 12 times larger than a pebble.

A 45 bullet is about 2 times larger than a .22 cal bullet.

Weight or size--whichever measure you pick, it's a very poor analogy at best.

FLA2760 · July 9, 2005, 03:14 PM

Hi
I know what you mean about stopping power being a perplexing subject.
If you ever have to use your gun in a defensive situation the goal is to have the attacker STOP their aggressive behavior IMMEDIATELY! The point that you make about a .22 head shot is a good one. A small caliber round can do this with an extremely well placed shot, (picture an upside down triangle on the target's face from the eye sockets down to the bottom of the nose) a shot or shots (double and triple taps) here would most likely shut them down.
That said; consider the fear factor that would be gripping you along with the adrenaline dump you would experience and that shot that was a breeze at the range is now MUCH more difficult. A big bore round would be able to penetrate heavy clothing much more reliably than a small caliber and deliver a hard hit to the center body mass that is easier to hit in a stressful encounter. Also, many times the SIGHT of the business end of a big bore handgun will be enough. Rember Dirty Harry's " this is a .44 Magnum and it will take your head clean off, so do you feel lucky punk"? Hope It was helpful.
Steve

July 7, 2005, 05:03 PM	#28
stephen426 Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2005 Posts: 3,840	We already know about shot placement. Now lets say all shots will be center of mass for arguement's sake since few of us here will be able to consistently make head shots on a moving target. For all you who claim shot placement is the absolute most important thing, can you put one between the BG's eyes everytime (especially if he is moving and shooting back at you)? With COM shots, firepower DOES matter. Assuming you hit a person in the same spot with different rounds, the more powerful round will do far greater damage and incapacitate that person much more quickly. That is one reason why we use better ammo such as high-tech hollowpoints. More tissue is destroyed. There are going to be exceptions such as people getting 6 rounds of .380 acp pumped into their COM and living long enough to kill the person who shot them or a police officer who shot a perp with a few rounds of .357 mag and the perp surviving. There are going to quirks and few handgun rounds are going to drop a person instantaneously. Bigger and more powerful rounds DO make adifference assuming good shot placement. So to end this arguement, practice, practice, practice, to be able to put a bullet where it will count and make sure you carry enough gun to ensure that bullet will do its job. Enough gun is usually defined as 9mm and above and good ammo must be used for any caliber. The flip side is carry a gun which you can control well enough to shoot accurately. If you miss with a .500 S&W, your follow up shot is going to be a hell of a lot slower than with a 9mm. __________________ The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!

July 7, 2005, 08:19 PM	#30
stephen426 Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2005 Posts: 3,840	Okay John, I agree. If we are talking about .22 LR to .45 ACP, then there is a much greater effect. If we are talking 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP, the difference is not as pronounced. Even with rifles, I was just reading an article about how under powered the .223 is. In the Gun&Ammo Combat Tactics magazine, there was an article about a special forces soldier's experience with the .223's less than desirable performance in Afganistan. Basically, he double tapped the guy using green tipped (steel core?) rounds. The guy dropped and was thought dead. The guy got back up and continued to attack him. I was under the impression that .223 was pretty effective against people. They were pushing for the 6.8 SPC round which could be adapted to the AR-15 platform. I guess that is why they say shoot until there is no longer a threat. That means the guy is down and no longer capable of attacking, not putting one between his eyes at point blank range after he is down. That kind of stuff usually isn't looked upon too favorably by a jury. __________________ The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!

July 7, 2005, 09:33 PM	#31
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,989	.223 in its original incarnation and shot out of an M16 is a pretty good anti-personnel round. After being modified to include light armor piercing capability, having had the bullet weight upped to stretch the range a bit and then being shot out of a shorter barrel with a faster twist, it's anti-personnel performance has begun to suffer. However, I'm extremely leery of anecdotes being used as "evidence" that a particular round is or isn't good at "stopping." There are just too many variables in these stories to be able to draw any useful conclusions from them. I can assure you that if the guy had been hit in the spine or the head he would have gone down and stayed down regardless of the caliber. And that if he wasn't, he might have stayed in the fight--again regardless of caliber. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

July 8, 2005, 07:17 PM	#33
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,989	pebble vs boulder is not 22 vs 45. A pebble is going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of the same weight as a typical pistol bullet. Probably around 200 grains max. A boulder, by any definition I can imagine is going to weigh upwards of 10lbs. That makes a boulder at least 350 times heavier than a pebble. A 45 bullet is about 8 times heavier than a 22cal bullet. A pebble is gonna be about an inch in diameter, max. A boulder, being conservative, would have to be at least a foot across or so. That makes a boulder about 12 times larger than a pebble. A 45 bullet is about 2 times larger than a .22 cal bullet. Weight or size--whichever measure you pick, it's a very poor analogy at best. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

July 9, 2005, 03:14 PM	#34
FLA2760 Senior Member Join Date: July 6, 2005 Location: Hernando County, Florida Posts: 574	Re stopping power Hi I know what you mean about stopping power being a perplexing subject. If you ever have to use your gun in a defensive situation the goal is to have the attacker STOP their aggressive behavior IMMEDIATELY! The point that you make about a .22 head shot is a good one. A small caliber round can do this with an extremely well placed shot, (picture an upside down triangle on the target's face from the eye sockets down to the bottom of the nose) a shot or shots (double and triple taps) here would most likely shut them down. That said; consider the fear factor that would be gripping you along with the adrenaline dump you would experience and that shot that was a breeze at the range is now MUCH more difficult. A big bore round would be able to penetrate heavy clothing much more reliably than a small caliber and deliver a hard hit to the center body mass that is easier to hit in a stressful encounter. Also, many times the SIGHT of the business end of a big bore handgun will be enough. Rember Dirty Harry's " this is a .44 Magnum and it will take your head clean off, so do you feel lucky punk"? Hope It was helpful. Steve

July 5, 2005, 09:18 PM	#26
Heist Junior member Join Date: June 6, 2005 Location: ETN, Again Posts: 760	I tend to ignore words like "shock" and figure that gun wounds work by the fact that they punch painful holes in people, and occasionally those holes hit places that are immediately fatal. Bigger bullets make bigger holes. Faster bullets (rifles) can make bigger holes too. Simplistic but it fits.

July 7, 2005, 10:47 PM	#32
steve154 Member Join Date: June 12, 2005 Posts: 89	"You've got to be kidding me. Comparing a pebble to boulder and a .22 to a .45 is dumb. A pebble and a slightly bigger pebble, maybe a small rock is better. Assuming a 30 Gr .22 round the .45 is usually about 230 grains. So the difference is 200/7000's of a pound or 2/70's of a pound. Not a whole lot. Then you have to consider speed, sectional density, and target placement. Not to mention it's easy as hell to put a whole lot of .22s on target faster than full defensive loads in a .45. Also there is an issue of quantity of bullets" With all the JEDI and .45 is great flamming aside, what is REALLY dumb is you attempting to say that there is "not a whole lot" of difference between a 30 grain .22LR and a 230 grain .45ACP. When comparing 30 grains, 230 grains and a bowling ball and all are sitting on a table, there is not much difference between 30 and 230 grains. In the realm of objects striking human beings at close to 700mph, the difference between 30 grains and 230 grains is absolutely gigantic. (toss the bowling ball in at the same speed and it would be ridiculous) By the way, a sharply pointed knife will also pass through soft body armor, walls and people. Also, I never said the .223 was useless. I said that with ball ammo and at PISTOL ranges I felt that a .45 with hollow points might be a better stopper. I figure that a .45 expanding to .70" and dumping all of it's energy in a target just might be better than a .223 ball round making a significantly smaller hole and expending only a portion of it's energy in the target as it passes completely through while barely slowing down. All of that is of course assuming that the .223 does not strike heavy bone. I realize that if it did, you would have major issues probably greatly exceeding what a .45 would do in the same spot. Strictly thinking of COM shots and soft tissue. I also said that I was not a ballistics expert, so I wasn't sure. Steve