|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 13, 2013, 02:58 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 3, 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 757
|
Different calibers' effectiveness against vehicles
Whenever the pros and cons of the different calibers are discussed, it is - naturally - mostly on penetration and stopping power. Yet, if I'm informed correctly, e.g. the .357 Magnum was introduced to LE (amongst other reasons, of course) to provide a better performance in stopping cars and being able to shoot through car doors. I suppose for LE and military that might still be an issue today. So does this kind of performance go right along with the general penetration performance of a caliber or do other parameters apply?
__________________
"Get off of my lawn!" Walt Kowalski . ISSC PAR .223 |
June 13, 2013, 03:22 PM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: June 6, 2011
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 94
|
In my opinion, it's kind of a non issue. If you're(as LE or Military) in a situation where you absolutely must stop a vehicle with your sidearm, you'll likely need to examine the decision making paradigm that led to this point.
|
June 13, 2013, 03:56 PM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
June 13, 2013, 04:10 PM | #4 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
Gangster Getters....
In the "Crime Wave" era of the 1920s & 1930s, many crooks took to the .38Super caliber for its high vel & use against common barriers like auto glass & metal of the period.
Today, many in US law enforcement view the .40S&W or the under-rated .357sig pistol caliber as working best with auto glass, vehicles, engines, etc. I read a article about a mid south state LE agency(KY or TN) saying approx 90% of the use of force shootings were near or in motor vehicles. They issued the .40 to all sworn members. The Texas Department of Public Safety & the state police of NM, RI, VA, & DE have all used the .357sig for nearly 15 years with great results. I'd feel well armed with a .357sig duty pistol if I were a state trooper or DoT inspector. |
June 13, 2013, 04:26 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,525
|
It seems that most of the major defensive calibers have some bullets that do well in the FBI's testing including test against sheet metal and auto glass. I can see where an armed citizen might have to shoot through a car window during a car jacking so choosing a bullet that performs well might be a good idea.
|
June 13, 2013, 11:49 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 27, 2011
Posts: 226
|
Other than stopping the driver by penetrating metal or glass, what are you thinking a round should do to stop a vehicle? If you are thinking a round penetrating an engine block, you will have to move up to rifle rounds, namely-armor piercing, .50 cals, etc. I'm sure pistol rounds can break radiators, fuel tanks, engine components, etc, but again, they just leave a mark on engine blocks.
I've seen training movies/videos which dispelled common myths of rifle/pistol/shotgun rounds, one being .357s being able to stop engines.....well these movies/videos show they don't even come close. Regular rounds and tracer rounds blowing up vehicle gas tanks like in movies.....nope. I haven't seen these since the '80s and '90s, but I wouldn't doubt there are similar videos on the net. |
June 14, 2013, 12:36 PM | #7 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,675
|
I'm sure that, at one time, under certain conditions the .357 Mag would crack an engine block. OF course, there us just a wee bit of difference between what was on the road in the late 1930s and what is on the road today.
And there is more than a little bit of difference between the .357 Mag of those days and the commonly used loadings today. And also ammo companies used to make "metal piercing" ammo in several calibers (not military AP (armor piercing)), using a load and bullet intended to give superior performance over regular ammo against car bodies and such things. Engine blocks in those days were different as well, generally. Flat, boxer, or straight engines dominated, relatively large surface areas, and I'm pretty confident that the quality of the casting and the alloys wasn't what it is today. Penetration and effectiveness against automobiles? How to figure it? Is it a factor, if so, how much? Interesting questions, and the opposite end of the usual discussion of defense loads, where so many people are concerned about over penetration of their ammo. Choose a round (and loading) powerful enough to punch through cars and that stuff will sail through your apartment or house walls with authority. Bullets with rounded nose shapes can glance off of hard surfaces at certain angles, where they would cleanly penetrate that same surface at a different angle. The list of variables is huge. Personally, I don't think that performance against vehicles is, or should be much of a concern for anyone not in "business" of protecting us from people in vehicles. Police, LEOs, military, and private security types have to deal with that, ordinary citizens generally don't. What you use, and how effective it is depends not just on the ammo, but what it is shot out of, and the specific details of the shooting as well. Read a test done back in the 70s, using cars from the 50s on up, the results, using what was available then, were interesting, and varied. One result sticks in my mind, the (then standard) .38SPL 200gr RN "police"load, fired out of a service revolver (6") would reliably penetrate car windshields. The same ammo, fired out of a 2" Chief Special would not reliably penetrate under the same conditions. On the opposite end of the spectrum, a .44 Mag, fired from behind went through the trunk lid, back seat, front seat. 3/4" plywood cutout representing the driver (also blowing a loop of the front seat springs through the it), through the dashboard, and "raised hell with the air cleaner" before finally stopping. And this was an early 60s sedan, with just a bit more metal than today's avererage car...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
June 14, 2013, 03:36 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 1,037
|
.30 tokarev is good considering the large supply of steel core ammo, and the fact that the cartridge is known for very good penetration. Imagine lighting up an old German Mercedes with a 1400 RPM PPSH-41.
|
June 14, 2013, 04:05 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
I think when police or other agencies are looking for a handgun round the last thing will be looking at is will it stop a car. The thought of police shooting at a car to try to stop it in in my opinion ridiculous. If the police want to stop a car they shoot the driver.
|
June 14, 2013, 07:18 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
Quote:
On a more serious note, what's under discussion here -- the ability of a round to penetrate sheet metal, windshield glass, etc. -- might be pretty important if police wanted to shoot the driver, given that the driver is invariably inside the car.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
|
June 14, 2013, 07:48 PM | #11 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2012
Posts: 8
|
Re: Different calibers' effectiveness against vehicles
An M2 or a MK19 will solve your problem, but unless you're in a combat zone, I can't see the need
|
June 15, 2013, 03:18 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
|
You may want to look over here at the "Box O'Truth" where just about anything that you might want to see shot has been shot.
Here they shoot an engine block. http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot54.htm Here they shoot into and out of an automobile with various calibers and in various places. http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/thebuickotruth.htm tipoc |
June 15, 2013, 04:18 AM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 12,463
|
Great links Tipoc.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson |
June 15, 2013, 06:18 AM | #14 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by manta49; June 15, 2013 at 06:50 AM. |
||
June 16, 2013, 12:50 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
|
Handguns are not good for stopping cars. They can be good for shooting into cars though. My grandfather was a cop in Milwaukee, Wi in the 1920's and 1930's.
I asked him once when I was a lad about chasing bad guys. His reply was simple, " If I turned on the lights and they sped up, I just stopped and used my 03A3 and put a 30-06 armor piercing thru the rear differential, they stopped pretty quick". He also taught marksmanship for the Army during WWI so he could shoot.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement U. S. Army Veteran Armorer My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon. |
June 16, 2013, 01:19 PM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Posts: 779
|
Quote:
Thanks, Grandad - for getting the job done and surviving. Sgt Lumpy |
|
June 16, 2013, 08:48 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 8,273
|
bunny path
I think we're down the wrong bunny bath. Wasn't the .357 mag intended to defeat the body armor of the day? What it might do with a vehicle would be incidental.
The vehicles were stout. I've read an account that one of the officers involved in the Bonnie and Clyde ambush examined a Barrow vehicle from an earlier shootout. He learned the .45 acp slugs from Thompsons did not penetrate the car bodies and supposedly went and procured a BAR some time thereafter. |
June 16, 2013, 08:54 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 8,273
|
While I'm at it
Using a firearm to "stop" a vehicle is forbidden by policy in my agency. I suspect maybe so in most other agencies. (LE) The effect (or more correctly lack of) 115-230 grs of lead, against a vehicle whose weight is measured in tons can easily be predicted.
|
June 17, 2013, 06:15 AM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 9, 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,560
|
A hand gun will NOT! stop a motor vehical. Period. If the Officer did manage to shoot and disable the driver... Now we have a several ton missile going down the road at many miles an hour. Now what? Could the officer who fired the shot be held responsible for any damage the vehical may cause? Another issue is people trying to shoot out the tires. Tires are a relitively small angled moving target. Besides anyone know what tires are made of?
This argument on what round can shoot through a car is not new. One summer during the range cycle they dragged a bunch of old cars out to the range. A range instructor demonstrated how our service ammo (now considered weak) would penitrate auto glass, and auto body. 158 gr semi wad cutter ammo will pass through auto glass like a hot knife through butter. What did happen was the slope of the winshield, or rear window may cause the round to deflect. Like Bamaranger said... Most agencies dont allow Officers to shoot at moving vehicals. The risk is far greater than any reward. My agency allowed shots at the vehical only if the vehical was used as a weapon against the officer and the officer was shooting to save his life, or if shots were being fired from the vehical. |
June 17, 2013, 02:00 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 11, 2008
Posts: 197
|
I paraphrase the late Dean Grennel writing on this subject - 'the best way for a 38 or 45acp to get in the car is to open the door first'
|
June 17, 2013, 06:34 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 3, 2011
Location: Austria
Posts: 757
|
very interesting, thank y'all for the comments!
Again, please note that my interest is of a purely theoretical nature. I don't intend to shoot anything, neither on wheels nor legs
__________________
"Get off of my lawn!" Walt Kowalski . ISSC PAR .223 |
June 19, 2013, 11:14 PM | #22 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
never say never....
Don't say never just yet, in the late 1990s, I watched a VHS video of the Second Chance CEO, a ex cop who did Mythbuster type stuff shoot a old car that was running.
A bullet fired from a large revolver cracked the engine and the car broke down. It was interesting to view. Clyde |
June 19, 2013, 11:39 PM | #23 | |
Junior member
Join Date: February 23, 2012
Posts: 921
|
Quote:
As will virtually anything else that hits anything vital. |
|
June 20, 2013, 01:02 AM | #24 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2004
Location: Redwood City, Ca.
Posts: 4,114
|
Quote:
The one intended to "beat" the body armor of the day was the 38/44 Heavy Duty with a hot loaded .38 Spl. They didn't stop any vehicles unless it was by luck and an accident. Back then cars and trucks were made of steel and cast iron. I've seen old ads for a snubby M&P (the Model 10) claiming it would send a 38 Spl. round clean through a Ford. OK. Colt had the 38 Super. But anyway the .357 was soon in demand and law enforcement wanted it so S&W came up with the Highway Patrolman which was aimed at law enforcement. This was in the post war period. This became the M28 and later there was the Combat Magnum which became the M19. tipoc |
|
June 20, 2013, 12:42 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 14, 2011
Location: WV
Posts: 938
|
.45 Colt Super X goes clear though a helium tank. Ought to do some damage to a car. I can only imagine a 45-70 BFR or a .30-30 BFR.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|