The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 18, 2017, 08:43 AM   #101
CDW4ME
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2009
Posts: 1,321
Back to an original thread topic, bullet tech.
10mm has the velocity potential to make most HP bullets expand, (IME) Nosler, XTP, Gold Dot.
New bullet tech not required, regular HP sufficient.
At 1,400 fps the Nosler 150 JHP and 155 XTP will expand after 4 layer denim when shot into water filled gallon jugs, 150 Nosler will fragment, blow jacket
(core ~.5x still penetrates into 4th jug).
__________________
Strive to carry the handgun you would want anywhere, everywhere; forget that good area bullcrap.
"Wouldn't want to / Nobody volunteer to" get shot by _____ is not indicative of quickly incapacitating.
CDW4ME is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 09:23 AM   #102
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
Problem is, 9mm range ammo (FMJ) does not produce the same recoil as 9mm defensive ammo (+P)...
While it is true that 9mm +P does recoil more than typical 9mm range ammo, it is not true that all 9mm defensive ammo is 9mm +P. There is actually a wide variety of standard pressure 9mm premium defensive ammo which means it's not quite accurate to equate the two.
Quote:
10mm has the velocity potential to make most HP bullets expand, (IME) Nosler, XTP, Gold Dot.
It is certainly true that at one time, achieving reliable expansion from jacketed handgun bullets could be problematic. Advances in ammunition technology have reduced that issue to the point that if one buys premium self-defense ammunition from a solid/reputable company they can have pretty good confidence it's going to expand, regardless of velocity.

In addition, there is a lot of expansion testing data out there which makes it easy for people to verify the performance of various defensive ammunition loadings.

Here's one such resource.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/Handguns/Handguns.html
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 09:34 AM   #103
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
A whole .04 second for several averaged pairs, consistent on multiple sessions.
That means that an attacker moving at a "Tueller" pace will move more than a foot more between your first and third shot. That would influence not only where you hit, but how many hits you may be able to make.

Quote:
I ... subsequently decided that .04 was insignificant compared to the approximate 1.5 second it takes to draw and get two shots on target,
That's a different issue.

Think geometry for a moment. Think in three dimensions.

Imagine putting an amorphous, life sized three dimensional target somewhere in front of you at close range. Mark some place on the surface in red. That's your entrance wound.

Now, you will not know just what the bullet will do inside unless you are a forensic surgeon, but imagine that you do.

Perhaps your one shot went in just right and hit something important, but perhaps it did not.

In your mind, turn the "attacker" one way or the other on a vertical axis, and bend him forward or backward and twist him.

Imagine making the same entrance wound from the same place. Realize that the bullet path will result in the destruction of different things inside the body.

Perhaps your first shot did not do anything really effective, but your second one did. Perhaps it was the other way around. Perhaps neither one would have been effective.

I have seen an excellent 3-D graphic illustration of all of this, but I cannot find it.

Now add in linear motion. Let the target move however far it will in your split time, and let it move just over seven inches more in your .04 second split time difference.

This little mental exercise should illustrate what led Messrs Patrick and Hall to write, in the work cited above, that shot placement is "more serendipitous than designed", and to speak the importance of being able to shoot rapidly.

This is also what led Rob Pincus to conclude " for all shooters, at some point, there will be a moment when they can fire one more round of 9mm in any given period of time. That extra round’s capacity to wound will far outweigh the miniscule difference in potential for any individual bullets".

Lest this be seen solely as something about big bullets vs small, people should also realize that everything said above would apply to a comparison between a good service-size pistol with adequate mass, a good grip, and a low bore axis, and some pocket pistol.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 10:43 AM   #104
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,712
Quote:
Quote:
Google is your friend here. You can google "shot once" or "shot once police" in the NEWS subsection and go through the articles. It isn't summary data, but raw data and there are a lot of them.
Quote:
What I have not been able to find is how the number of successful one shot stops compares to those involving multiple hits.

Some indication that there is a "lot" of the former would not be very useful at all for evaluating risk mitigation strategy. Even if more than half of the stops required only one shot, that would not be a prudent thing to bank on.
You asked for proof. I gave you proof. That it did not come in the package you wanted and provided the information you wanted is on you. There are a LOT of incidents where the bad guys only end up being shot just once, regardless of how many times people shot at them.

Quote:
Quote:
You do realize that most people who are involved in shooting other people do not get police training and that most shootings in the US are not by the police, right?
Quote:
Shooting several times to stop an assailant may sometimes result from training, but there is a reason that officers and civilians who avail themselves of training are so trained. That reason is that multiple hits are often needed.
We are talking about effectiveness of shots and you kept referencing police examples as being representative when most shootings are not by the police or by trained individuals. Apparently I was being overly subtle. I will be more overt. You have biased your perspective on shootings (at least by your presentation here) by focusing on police shootings.

Quote:
Quote:
Even then, look at the number of times police only manage to hit the suspect once, despite being well trained and firing multiple shots, or despite their training, only firing once.
Quote:
How does that tell us anything about the likelihood of effecting a timely stop by firing one shot?
I don't know. What it tells us is that just because you are firing a smaller caliber doesn't mean you are necessarily even going to hit the opposition more than once.

Quote:
Quote:
Yes, in an ideal world that would be nice to be able to legally shoot a bad guy multiple times if the situation warranted it.
Quote:
The issue is that it may well be necessary, more times with not, in the real world.

Expert witnesses are often called upon to explain why one shot should rarely be sufficient, why a defender would likely not be able to tell if it had been sufficient, and why defenders cannot always be expected stop shooting immediately even when it might have been obvious in hindsight the whether the additional shots had been required.


In police shootings that is quite likely to happen of there are any indicaopnms that a case will lead to lawsuits under 42 USC 1983.
What happens in court is off topic, LOL.

Quote:
For every man who takes several rounds from a pistol and keeps fighting, there are likely 5 or more that stop instantly..
Quote:
I most seriously doubt it. The authors of the work cited say otherwise. Training routines are based on the assumption that that is not the case.
I don't doubt it. As the NRA likes to point out, there are apparently millions of stops made by citizens with guns without even firing them. Most criminals do not want protracted fights and are doing their best to avoid being shot and to avoid being shot more than once.

That most training routines are based on the notion that they won't stop is true enough. Training that you describe is for worst case scenarios, not because most scenarios are worst case.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 11:19 AM   #105
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
I am one that uses standard pressure quality hp 9 mm ammo for self-defense. The very small difference in +P performance does not justify the greater recoil in my opinion. I'm faster and more accurate on follow up shots.

There may be some who are as fast and accurate with a smaller .357 and full house loads, even an all steel one like an SP101, but I have not seen any. Comparing a midsize revolver in .357 or a full size 1911 in .45 acp to the guns most of us carry daily doesn't tell us much, other than even with handguns larger and heavier than most carry, split times are slower with those calibers. I have and like both, but I carry a compact 9 mm (10+1) most of the time. Based on my research, training and experience I believe it gives me my best chance of surviving a gun fight. I share that opinion with many whom I trust and respect. For the record, some of those guys carry .40 or .45s. Carry what works best for you.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin
K_Mac is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 11:24 AM   #106
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
We are talking about effectiveness of shots and you kept referencing police examples as being representative when most shootings are not by the police or by trained individuals. Apparently I was being overly subtle. I will be more overt. You have biased your perspective on shootings (at least by your presentation here) by focusing on police shootings.
Police officers shoot to defend themselves and others, and so do civilians.

When the targets are human, there is no reason to imagine that here would be any material differences.

In terms of duties, yes, but not in wounding mechanics.

Quote:
As the NRA likes to point out, there are apparently millions of stops made by citizens with guns without even firing them.
That is completely irrelevant to the discussion. We are discussing the likely effectiveness of a single hit. We have a lot of evidence from multiple sources, including real world accounts of defensive incidnts, forensic analysis, and physiological studies of what it takes to effect a physical stop timely, that a single hit should not be something to rely upon than the stakes are high.

Personally, I have never come upon any credible source that contends otherwise.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 11:48 AM   #107
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,616
Well, this thread has wandered around a bit, and it seems we're currently passing through the one shot stop zone....

Missing fast doesn't win a gunfight. Only hits matter and only hits where the bullet reaches a vital spot result in rapid incapacitation. I don't care if you fire one round, and get one hit, or fire 15 and get one hit. (though a court might, ).

That one additional round (in a given, and very short amount of time) you might get from the "softer recoiling" faster shooting 9mm might be the one that saves your butt.

OR it might be the one that goes through your neighbors walls and kills Grandma, or baby Jane.

I'll believe big bullet technology is "dead" when the factories stop making big bullets due to lack of sales...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 12:06 PM   #108
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
The only ways that could be possible is if you're shooting more slowly than you could with the 38s or if you have sufficient upper body/hand strength to completely overpower the recoil so that muzzle lift is essentially imperceptible even with the magnum loadings.

Even the top pros acknowledge that they shoot faster with lighter calibers/loadings. That is precisely the reason that the "practical" pistol sports classify pistols or alter scoring strategies based on scaled momentum figures.
I am a big guy. I have been shooting pistols competitively for close to 40 years. We are talking a difference of .02 seconds between magnums and specials.

I am first and foremost worried about defensive gun use. Light competition is for fun and trigger time. I was a Ft Worth Cop in the 80's for several years before going to the Border Patrol. I have seen more than a few people shot and will gladly take the difference in the magnum class defensive gun.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 01:42 PM   #109
5whiskey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
That one additional round (in a given, and very short amount of time) you might get
I still contest that handgun "fit" to the shooter has at least as much affect on recoil in service sized weapons as whether the caliber is 9/40/45. Split times absolutely are useful in demonstrating this for individual shooters. And split times are much more scientific than watching a line of shooters on the firing line and concluding that 45 shooters were slower. What variables existed that could have affected their speed other than caliber? Where those variables controlled? Were all shooters of equal skill? Were they using comparable ammo across calibers (wouldnt be fair to compare wwb 9mm to buffalo bore 45). Without answering these questions, this "observation" was exposed to subjectivity.

Take one competent shooter, then compare his split times across calibers platforms. That is much more scientific
5whiskey is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 02:01 PM   #110
CDW4ME
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2009
Posts: 1,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMarksman View Post
This is also what led Rob Pincus to conclude " for all shooters, at some point, there will be a moment when they can fire one more round of 9mm in any given period of time. That extra round’s capacity to wound will far outweigh the miniscule difference in potential for any individual bullets".

Lest this be seen solely as something about big bullets vs small, people should also realize that everything said above would apply to a comparison between a good service-size pistol with adequate mass, a good grip, and a low bore axis, and some pocket pistol.
Unless I go back to appendix carry, not currently planning to, the difference in Glock 19/23/32 and 2nd shot time doesn't matter.

For strong side IWB (3:00) a 1911 is more comfortable - for me.
I have 1911's in 45 acp and 10mm and do not plan to buy a 9mm 1911.
Comparison between a 1911 in 45 acp and 10mm (big bullets as related to thread topic)
Speed of follow up shots is a factor but no timer in this example just subjective and a calculation.
Calculator: http://www.shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php
2.5# firearm weight assigned for 1911
Actual power charge for 10mm handloads, 45 acp powder charge assigned from AA manual
10mm Handload 180 Gold Dot @ 1,152 fps / 531# KE - recoil energy 8.1 - PF 207
10mm Handload Nosler 150 JHP @ 1,402 fps / 655# KE - recoil energy 9.4 - PF 210
10mm Handload Hornady 155 XTP @ 1,400 fps / 675# KE - recoil energy 9.6 - PF 217
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
45 acp Federal 230 HST @ 891 fps / 406# KE - recoil energy 7.8 - PF 205
45 acp Winchester 230 Ranger T @ 915 fps / 428# KE - recoil energy 8.2 - PF 210
45 acp Remington Golden Saber 185 +P @ 1,157 fps / 550# KE - recoil energy 9.0 - PF 214

Subjectively the 180 gr. 10mm Gold Dot has similar recoil and speed of 2nd shot as 230 gr. Ranger T
The calculations of recoil energy and PF support my subjective impression.

Objectively the moderate 10mm 180 Gold Dot has about 20% more KE than 230 45 acp Ranger T (whether one thinks KE makes a difference or not)
Capacity favors 10mm with an extra round.

Yes, I do carry that 180 Gold Dot handload, same velocity as DoubleTap Colt Defense:
http://www.doubletapammo.net/index.p...product_id=769
Before anyone replies about carrying handloads being a bad idea or references H. Fish, I know and I know. I've only shot a few factory rounds of 175 Critical Duty in the Delta Elite, the other hundreds of rounds have been my handloads, they function 100%, they're accurate and approximate factory velocity (above link).

I've tested the 180 Gold Dot and after 4 later denim shot into water filled gallon jugs expansion is .75 - .80 (tested twice)
Remove the denim (just water) and it "over expands" to the point of pushing petals down closer to base resulting in smaller diameter of about .65
Either way, I consider bullet performance about perfect at cited velocity.

I do have a use for a pocket pistol, carried as a 2nd option to the 1911 IWB on my belt.
Benefits of 2nd option PM9 include:
-put hand on it without revealing I'm carrying
-primary pistol suffers part breakage or demonic jam
-carried in weak hand pocket in case something happens to dominant hand
Yes, I have shot the PM9 one hand weak hand with carry ammo (Corbon 115 +P) and it was less abusive to my hand than a LCP 380.
__________________
Strive to carry the handgun you would want anywhere, everywhere; forget that good area bullcrap.
"Wouldn't want to / Nobody volunteer to" get shot by _____ is not indicative of quickly incapacitating.
CDW4ME is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 02:07 PM   #111
BBarn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2015
Posts: 887
I see no evidence that the larger bore handgun rounds are being left behind. When new bullets or ammo are introduced, the most popular calibers seem to be included.
BBarn is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 02:07 PM   #112
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Split times absolutely are useful in demonstrating this for individual shooters. And split times are much more scientific than watching a line of shooters on the firing line and concluding that 45 shooters were slower. What variables existed that could have affected their speed other than caliber? Where those variables controlled? Were all shooters of equal skill? Were they using comparable ammo across calibers (wouldnt be fair to compare wwb 9mm to buffalo bore 45). Without answering these questions, this "observation" was exposed to subjectivity.
Yes indeed.

But after carefully observing many people shooting for several days, one does start to notice a meaningful pattern.

No precise measurements, but something from which one can draw conclusions.

Quote:
Take one competent shooter, then compare his split times across calibers platforms. That is much more scientific
Do that, but do it for a meaningful number of shooters.

Quote:
I still contest that handgun "fit" to the shooter has at least as much affect on recoil in service sized weapons as whether the caliber is 9/40/45.
I agree that grip variations can be important, but the mass of the gun, the load, and the bore axis are undoubtedly big drivers.

It's Newton's Third Law. The mass of the gun and the mass and velocity of the projectile and other ejecta will determine the recoil velocity vector of the gun.

The grip and the bore axis will influence the muzzle rise.

A Model 1911A1 with full loads will recoil more than a 9mm version of the same pistol for any shooter. Use the old pre-A1 grip for both and the same thing will be true.

I haave no idea how the A1 grip might influence shooting speed, but I do now that it can mean a lot in terms of pointing.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 04:18 PM   #113
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
I am a big guy.
That could make a difference. If you have significantly more upper body/hand strength than normal, you might have enough to overpower the muzzle lift, reducing the recovery time until the gun is back on target. If muzzle lift is nearly negligible in both cases then there wouldn't be as much difference in splits as would be seen in more conventional situations.
Quote:
I have been shooting pistols competitively for close to 40 years. We are talking a difference of .02 seconds between magnums and specials.
Which is, I might point out, not the same thing as "identical", even though it is a small difference.

It should be very obvious that there is an accuracy/speed advantage in shooting pistols with less muzzle rise--if there weren't, the practical pistol competitions wouldn't classify guns/alter scoring based on "power factor". The amount of the advantage obviously isn't constant across the range of guns & shooter skill levels, but it's always there.

But let's take a look at what small split differences do as time progresses from the start of a gunfight. An earlier post quoted a 0.04 second split difference which sounds quite small. However, a 0.12 second split would work out to 9 shots in the first second while a 0.16 second split (0.04 seconds longer) works out to only 7 shots in the first second.

In fact, assuming a 1.5 second draw time, that scenario (0.12 splits vs 0.16 splits) gives the faster shooter a 1 shot advantage just 0.36 seconds after he/she fires his first shot. At that point (1.86 seconds after starting the draw) the faster shooter will have fired 4 shots while the slower shooter won't get off a fourth shot for another 0.12 seconds. So about a third of a second after the first shot is fired, the faster shooter already has a one shot advantage.

If the gunfight lasts for 2.5 seconds (including the 1.5 second draw time), then the faster shooter will have fired 9 shots while the slower shooter will have only had time to shoot 7 times. An advantage of 2 shots just 1 second after the first shot is fired.

Three seconds after the draw, the shots fired advantage has now grown to 3 shots.

Of course, those examples assume that both firearms have sufficient capacity to fire the requisite number of shots--but that's a topic for another thread.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 06:59 PM   #114
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
John, I think you are over thinking this. You make it sound as if a gunfight is gonna happen squared off at high noon.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 07:56 PM   #115
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
There are many, many very complex aspects of gunfights. Things that can be difficult or impossible to understand even when huge amounts of data are available and one has the resources and ability to perform very complex analysis.

Then, on the other hand, there are things that are quite simple and can be easily understood and explained quite easily.

Understanding that muzzle rise results in shot recovery time increasing, and then relating that difference in recovery time to the number of shots that can be fired in a given amount of time is quite simple and can be thoroughly explained with basic mathematics and rudimentary analysis.

In my opinion, it makes a lot of sense to take the opportunity to understand the simple things when one happens upon them. Not because they provide a thorough understanding of the overall picture, but because they allow insight into one more small piece of the overall picture. And then that's one less thing that's wrapped up into this huge, unknowable cloud of mystery.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old November 18, 2017, 10:15 PM   #116
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
Quote:
In fact, assuming a 1.5 second draw time, that scenario (0.12 splits vs 0.16 splits) gives the faster shooter a 1 shot advantage just 0.36 seconds after he/she fires his first shot. At that point (1.86 seconds after starting the draw) the faster shooter will have fired 4 shots while the slower shooter won't get off a fourth shot for another 0.12 seconds. So about a third of a second after the first shot is fired, the faster shooter already has a one shot advantage.

If the gunfight lasts for 2.5 seconds (including the 1.5 second draw time), then the faster shooter will have fired 9 shots while the slower shooter will have only had time to shoot 7 times. An advantage of 2 shots just 1 second after the first shot is fired.
JohnKSa that is as good an explanation of how slight differences in split times can make a real difference in a gunfighft as I've seen. As seen here, many dismiss those differences as unimportant. I don't. When combined with the fact that most of us are also more accurate with lower recoil, I'll stick with the wimpy 9 mm.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by K_Mac; November 18, 2017 at 10:22 PM. Reason: Incomplete thought/ sentence
K_Mac is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 05:28 AM   #117
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
Quote:
John, I think you are over thinking this. You make it sound as if a gunfight is gonna happen squared off at high noon.
My impression exactly......

I neither know, nor do I care to know - what - a "split time" refers to.
Please, don't tell me. I really don't care/want to know.

One huge reason I avoid competition like the plague is - I believe more effort is spent on making one a "good competitor", than goes in to making one a "survivor".
Hal is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 06:33 AM   #118
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
I neither know, nor do I care to know - what - a "split time" refers to.
Please, don't tell me. I really don't care/want to know.
One needn't ask permission to remain uninformed. It is the prerogative of all and the practice of many, if not the majority.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 08:10 AM   #119
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
One huge reason I avoid competition like the plague is - I believe more effort is spent on making one a "good competitor", than goes in to making one a "survivor".
And that is one reason I got out of serious competition years ago.

For example; My work/shooting partner is a IDPA 5 gun master. His first focus when looking at most guns is competition, my first focus is carry/SD role.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 09:18 AM   #120
mavracer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2008
Location: midwest
Posts: 4,209
Quote:
One needn't ask permission to remain uninformed. It is the prerogative of all and the practice of many, if not the majority
And that's the same whether you don't want to know what split times are or don't know what your split times are or what the difference in split times should be.

.12 splits would be 540 rounds per minute just shy of what a M16 is, extremely unrealistic for the average shooter.
__________________
rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6
Quote:
originally posted my Mike Irwin
My handguns are are for one purpose only, though...
The starter gun on the "Fat man's mad dash tactical retreat."
mavracer is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 02:52 PM   #121
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 1,850
mavracer there is no question that .12 splits are lightning fast. There is also no question that 540 shots per minute from a handgun is a bit faster than the average shooter can manage. I don't know how that is relevant to this conversation. Whether my (or anyone else's) split times with a 9 mm are .16 or .56 it is a very good bet that with a similar size and weight handgun in .45 or .357 they will be slower. The average shooter will also be more accurate with the 9 mm. You can spin that any way you want, but those are simply the facts.

Are the differences enough to change the outcome of a gunfighft considering bigger holes and greater velocities? That is less certain. I believe it is. Y'all believe what you want.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin
K_Mac is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 04:41 PM   #122
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
Quote:
.12 splits would be 540 rounds per minute just shy of what a M16 is, extremely unrealistic for the average shooter.
0.12 splits work out to 500 rounds per minute give or take a round. The cyclic rate of an M16 is probably closer to 700rpm at the low end.

Anyway, that said, it is true that 0.12 splits would be very fast shooting--not out of the realm of reality by any means, but certainly very fast. It is also true that the faster both shooters are, the more rapidly a given split time difference will add up into a larger shot advantage.

Here's an example that compares a faster shooter with 0.2 second splits and a slower shooter achieving 0.24 second splits.

Obviously after the first shot, the faster shooter is going to get off his next shot before the slower shooter and that will be the case until the faster shooter's 7th shot which will happen simultaneous to the slower shooter's 6th shot.

By the faster shooter's 8th shot, 1.4 seconds after both shooters fire their first shot, the slower shooter would still have only fired 6. At the faster shooter's 14th shot, the slower shooter will have only fired 11.

If you have split values that you like better, post them and I'll run those too.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 05:29 PM   #123
ShootistPRS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2017
Posts: 1,583
I think the first "high tech" bullet I ever saw was the Speer 200 grain 45ACP bullet with a quarter inch hollow point. It easily expanded at 850 fps and it was made long before the "new" 9mm bullets. Not a bullet made today has been left behind in the technology race except for the 358 cast 158 grain Kieth style bullet. There is just no way to improve that one.
ShootistPRS is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 08:16 PM   #124
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,616
Quote:
the 358 cast 158 grain Kieth style bullet. There is just no way to improve that one.
Actually, there is, you make it 250gr and in .44 and .45 caliber..
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old November 19, 2017, 08:58 PM   #125
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
That bullet actually performed better than some of the old design hollow points. Flat point,gut spreading taper,sharp shoulder. If you are going to fire a round that has no expansion you can at least make sure that it doesn't just squirt through like a needle.

A lot of the older designs just didn't expand, and didn't do much better than a round ball. I have several old brands from over half a century ago and some of the .357 ones have cavities that wouldn't even fit a bb. Most of them are as hard as steel. I did some expansion and penetration testing and with a lot of them, other than the rifling marks there was no evidence that they had been fired at all.
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.12681 seconds with 8 queries