View Single Post
Old December 12, 2006, 01:49 AM   #20
nobody_special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2006
Location: Southwest US
Posts: 277
Quote:
There is one other thing I forgot to mention. While the 9mm can be pushed to +P+, is the gun actually designed to handle those pressures. How many rounds are you going to fire to test the reliability in the gun?
That's a gun question, and is not a caliber issue.

Quote:
Please refer to this website
I'm aware that the Marshall and Sarnow data aren't the best and have obvious statistical problems, but I haven't seen anything better. And unless it was essentially fabricated, it's still useful. Besides, my conclusions are pretty self-evident from the ballistic gel data alone.

Quote:
Do you have proof that arrows do more damage than pistol rounds at close range? Lets refer to field points rather than broad heads since we are talking about penetration rather than hemmoraging. Arrows have excellent penetration due to their momentum from their greater weight. The produce very little shock though since they don't expand. Like I said, broad heads are another story since they have a larger wound channel with the sharp blades.
No statistical evidence, just anecdotal. But look at the ballistics. And let's not restrict ourselves to field points; those razor-sharp flanges in broadheads are there for a reason, and they penetrate just fine if you're not shooting a rhino. Arrowheads are typically much larger than bullets, and with a 2" wide arrowhead you probably do have a much greater chance of hitting something vital on a single hit (compared to a ~.4" handgun bullet). The energy involved is comparable to a handgun round; a 1m draw at 100 lbf. is 444 Joules, assuming constant draw force. (I realize that modern hunting bows often are weaker, but historical war bows were actually much stronger than this.)

Now let's talk momentum. I don't know the actual weight of a typical hunting or war arrow, but let's assume 1/30 kg (about 500 grains). At 444 Joules, the arrow can move at 163 m/s and the momentum is 5.4 kg m/s - 2 times more than the 124 grain 9mm bullet with 490 J energy. More momentum gives more penetration (though this is affected by the cross-sectional area of the projectile).

Another advantage to bows is that the arrowhead is usually flanged, unless you're trying to punch through armor. A circular cross-section is the worst for causing trauma as it concentrates all the damage in the smallest possible cross-section. Arrowheads do damage over a larger area, but without completely penetrating that entire area. That gives them a much better chance at hitting a vital organ or severing an artery.

Quote:
Now if you say that there is little difference between many handgun rounds (according to Marshall and Sanow's research) why does the .357 Magnum has such a high one stop shot percentage compared to the .38 special and even the 9mm. If you use the heavier .38 special loads, you will get the deeper penetration, but not the tissue damage of the .357 magnum.
The .357 magnum does not have a much higher one-shot stop rate than the other rounds. It's 96%, while 9mm is 90% - on average. But the 9mm result, to within 1-sigma errors, is really 90+/-5%. That means that the 9mm result is only different from the .357 magnum result by one standard deviation, which is not strong statistical evidence for any difference between their performances at all! So it's reasonable to conclude that their stopping performance is similar. (I'm not saying identical; but even if we take the numbers at face value and ignore the statistical uncertainties, the difference between 90% and 96% is not huge.)

Quote:
Like I said, if penetration is the most important factor, why does almost every law enforcement agency use hollow points instead of full metal jacketed rounds?
Maybe they don't want to injure the innocent bystanders in the next apartment. Too much penetration is a problem, especially in urban areas. And sure, expanding bullets do more damage than FMJ ball rounds; but I don't think they give a huge advantage in immediately stopping an opponent.

Quote:
I still assert that the transfer of energy from the round to the person shot is what causes the damage, as long as there is sufficient penetration and vitals are hit.
Hm... well, I can't argue with that. But I strongly believe that direct penetration is substantially more important than the shock wave.
nobody_special is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.05394 seconds with 8 queries