The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

adad · August 22, 2001, 02:31 AM

Great job Simthz!

I've been wanting to do something like this for quite a while, but never got around to it.

Someone as analytical as you would really appreciate the book "Bullet Penetration" by Duncan MacPherson. You can get it here: http://www.iwba.com . I highly recommend it.

BTW: I wouldn't bother including sort options for momentum and kinetic energy -- there's no correlation between penetration depth and either of these two factors. Here's my favorite quote on why kinetic energy is pointless when it comes to the terminal performance of bullets:

"He compares the kinetic energy of the M16A1 55 grain bullet to that of the 405 grain lead 45-70 bullet. They have the same kinetic energy and he claims, therefore, they are 'capable of producing the same sized temporary cavities' (which, according to Dr. DiMaio, equates to their being of equal "effectiveness"). Actually, the 45-70 produces a smaller temporary cavity than the M16: a greater percentage of its kinetic energy goes into producing its large permanent cavity -- a far more reliable tissue disruption mechanism than the temporary cavity."

"The claim that the M16 has the same killing power as the 45-70 is simply absurd. The absurdity follows from the fallacy that kinetic energy is the sole measure of bullet effectiveness (tissue disruption), or that the size of the temporary cavity determines the effectiveness of rifle bullets. The deep penetration and the 45 or larger caliber hole (depending on degree of bullet expansion) made by the 405 grain 45-70 bullet is the factor that gives the 45-70 bullet the capacity to bring down the largest game on this continent: yet this permanent tissue disruption is completely ignored by Dr. DiMaio's temporary cavity theory."

This quote is from a book review of "Gunshot Wounds -- Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques." The book review can be found in the Fall 1999 issue of Wound Ballistics Review which is published by the IWBA (www.iwba.com ). The review was written by Martin L. Fackler, MD, FACS and Richard T. Mason, MD, Medical Examiner of Santa Cruz County, CA.

One other thing: you might be surprised how fast expanding ammo expands. When the news about the new expanding FMJ rounds from Federal was just hitting the gun mags and no one but LEOs could get the ammo, the designer (Tom Burczynski
) who came up with the EFMJ posted some pics on TFL of an EFMJ bullet mid-flight, right after going through just two inches of gelatin -- and it looked fully expanded.

Here's a thread with some penetration/expansion data on the EFMJ from (who else?) BrokenArrow: http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...t=efmj+federal

If you do go ahead with your database, you ought to consider making requests of those who do this sort of testing semi-regularly (BrokenArrow comes to mind, of course, and I've seen someone's data on the 32ACP on the web somewhere). But you'd have to insist on good quality control: bb velocity/ penetration and correction is a must.

I think you really might inspire many folks to finally get started doing some gelatin tests of their own. That would be great! The more (good) data points the better!

Take care and good luck.

August 22, 2001, 02:31 AM	#25
adad Senior Member Join Date: December 8, 1999 Location: CA Posts: 148	Great job! Great job Simthz! I've been wanting to do something like this for quite a while, but never got around to it. Someone as analytical as you would really appreciate the book "Bullet Penetration" by Duncan MacPherson. You can get it here: http://www.iwba.com . I highly recommend it. BTW: I wouldn't bother including sort options for momentum and kinetic energy -- there's no correlation between penetration depth and either of these two factors. Here's my favorite quote on why kinetic energy is pointless when it comes to the terminal performance of bullets: "He compares the kinetic energy of the M16A1 55 grain bullet to that of the 405 grain lead 45-70 bullet. They have the same kinetic energy and he claims, therefore, they are 'capable of producing the same sized temporary cavities' (which, according to Dr. DiMaio, equates to their being of equal "effectiveness"). Actually, the 45-70 produces a smaller temporary cavity than the M16: a greater percentage of its kinetic energy goes into producing its large permanent cavity -- a far more reliable tissue disruption mechanism than the temporary cavity." "The claim that the M16 has the same killing power as the 45-70 is simply absurd. The absurdity follows from the fallacy that kinetic energy is the sole measure of bullet effectiveness (tissue disruption), or that the size of the temporary cavity determines the effectiveness of rifle bullets. The deep penetration and the 45 or larger caliber hole (depending on degree of bullet expansion) made by the 405 grain 45-70 bullet is the factor that gives the 45-70 bullet the capacity to bring down the largest game on this continent: yet this permanent tissue disruption is completely ignored by Dr. DiMaio's temporary cavity theory." This quote is from a book review of "Gunshot Wounds -- Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques." The book review can be found in the Fall 1999 issue of Wound Ballistics Review which is published by the IWBA (www.iwba.com ). The review was written by Martin L. Fackler, MD, FACS and Richard T. Mason, MD, Medical Examiner of Santa Cruz County, CA. One other thing: you might be surprised how fast expanding ammo expands. When the news about the new expanding FMJ rounds from Federal was just hitting the gun mags and no one but LEOs could get the ammo, the designer (Tom Burczynski ) who came up with the EFMJ posted some pics on TFL of an EFMJ bullet mid-flight, right after going through just two inches of gelatin -- and it looked fully expanded. Here's a thread with some penetration/expansion data on the EFMJ from (who else?) BrokenArrow: http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...t=efmj+federal If you do go ahead with your database, you ought to consider making requests of those who do this sort of testing semi-regularly (BrokenArrow comes to mind, of course, and I've seen someone's data on the 32ACP on the web somewhere). But you'd have to insist on good quality control: bb velocity/ penetration and correction is a must. I think you really might inspire many folks to finally get started doing some gelatin tests of their own. That would be great! The more (good) data points the better! Take care and good luck. __________________ If you value your right to keep and bear arms, support Citizens Of America -- they're doing it right! Wound Ballistics is the study of effects on the body produced by penetrating projectiles. Great Daily Commentary from a thoughtful Christian perspective. Some fascinating insights into the current market mania from the Prudent Bear fund.