Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/26/2005 12:28:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 12:33:40 PM EDT by BigButch301]
Please be gentle with me, I am not trying to start a flame war. At least give me time to get my flame proof undies!


I have seen quite a few posts that deal in one way or another with "Stopping Power". Now I do not claim to be an expert but I have read much of the work of Theodore Kocher and Dr. Feckler and I have done some ballistic testing myself. I think that stopping power is a myth!

It seems that wound depth and cross sectional diameter of the permanent cavity are the two factors that make the difference in whether you disrupt bodily funtions enough to stop a perp. or not. The larger the cross section and the deaper the penetration the more likely you are to stop what ( or who) is coming at you. BUT it is not really stopping power, it is killing power. If you do not casue enough damage to the tissue and neves to disrupt motion or cardio/vascular function then you will not stop anything.

When I was a CIT ( cop in training) we had to watch that painful film on the Dade Couty FBI shooting from the 80's. While the perps were repeatedly shot there was never enough damage to vital nerve and life support systems to cause a quick death. They bled to death but were not stopped. It seems that when we are talking about stopping power we need then to look at killing power since it is in the fatal ( or near fatal ) disruption of bodily function that causes the stopping we so desire.

Am I wrong? Fire away, I have my Nomex jock on now!
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:30:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:31:05 PM EDT
Bigger holes bleed better, that's all I need to know. Shot placement is more important than caliber though. So I just get both
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:32:26 PM EDT
The FN5.7 has so much stopping power that just seeing a photo of a round in a magazine will cause instant death!
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:33:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DzlBenz:
The FN5.7 has so much stopping power that just seeing a photo of a round in a magazine will cause instant death!



That has to be the dumbest, lamest fad round out there.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:33:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DzlBenz:
The FN5.7 has so much stopping power that just seeing a photo of a round in a magazine will cause instant death!



I'm dead

damn.......that sucks.

Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:34:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:

Originally Posted By DzlBenz:
The FN5.7 has so much stopping power that just seeing a photo of a round in a magazine will cause instant death!



That has to be the dumbest, lamest fad round out there.

Close second: .45 GAP
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:35:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:

Originally Posted By DzlBenz:
The FN5.7 has so much stopping power that just seeing a photo of a round in a magazine will cause instant death!



That has to be the dumbest, lamest fad round out there.



DmL5 will be along soon with his list of "high-speed, low-drag" units that use this wunder round. He personally knows of over a DOZEN cases of people across the globe who have been killed by the 5.7 round. Over a dozen.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:36:01 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:36:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:37:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:38:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Aim4MyHead:
It's not what you shoot. It's what you hit.
J



Concur
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 12:40:48 PM EDT
is a .270 or .30-06 gooder for deer hunting?

Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:00:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 1:08:08 PM EDT by tommytrauma]

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Bigger holes bleed better, that's all I need to know. Shot placement is more important than caliber though. So I just get both



Agreed. However, I find 9mm easier to make multiple rapid hits with, and it's cheap enough that I practice a lot more with it than I do with .45. I took the Defensive Edge pistol I class with a combat commander in .45 and then took the De pistol I and II class as a package with a Springfield XD-9. Found it much easier to place multiple hits with the 9, and came to subscribe to the 'zipper' theory which lends itself well to high-cap weapons. I've also had a chance to see GSWs from several calibers in the field, (I work as a paramedic) and read several follow up autopsy reports. ( a good friend is the medical transcriptionist who types up the reports.) The difference between 9mm and .45 seems to be overshadowed by shot placement. Hence, the 9 has become my primary.

My shooting buddy has bigger hands, stronger forearms and reloads his own ammo. He prefers .45. No biggie.

I do get a kick out of people who scream from the rooftops that the .45 is an 'ultimate stopper' and 9 is a 'pussy round'. On another thread on the subject here, a poster noted that he "knew" the .45 was everything and the 9 was useless 'cause he's "killed people and works in a hospital". He declined to elucidate on these credentials. I actually felt emberrased for him.

Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:08:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:






Is that graphic right?

I think 9mm is .355". That means .40 is .045" larger. .45 is .050" larger still. Almost the same difference. That graphic makes it look like the diameter increase from .40 to .45 is twice the difference between .40 and 9mm.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:19:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 1:21:07 PM EDT by NewbHunter]

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Bigger holes bleed better, that's all I need to know. Shot placement is more important than caliber though. So I just get both



Agreed. However, I find 9mm easier to make multiple rapid hits with, and it's cheap enough that I practice a lot more with it than I do with .45. I took the Defensive Edge pistol I class with a combat commander in .45 and then took the De pistol I and II class as a package with a Springfield XD-9. Found it much easier to place multiple hits with the 9, and came to subscribe to the 'zipper' theory which lends itself well to high-cap weapons. I've also had a chance to see GSWs from several calibers in the field, (I work as a paramedic) and read several follow up autopsy reports. ( a good friend is the medical transcriptionist who types up the reports.) The difference between 9mm and .45 seems to be overshadowed by shot placement. Hence, the 9 has become my primary.

My shooting buddy has bigger hands, stronger forearms and reloads his own ammo. He prefers .45. No biggie.

I do get a kick out of people who scream from the rooftops that the .45 is an 'ultimate stopper' and 9 is a 'pussy round'. On another thread on the subject here, a poster noted that he "knew" the .45 was everything and the 9 was useless 'cause he's "killed people and works in a hospital". He declined to elucidate on these credentials. I actually felt emberrased for him.
upl.silentwhisper.net/uplfolders/upload1/9mmvs40vs45.gif



I just finished the DE handgun 1 class myself with a G19. I haven't shot a lot of .45's, but I can do followup shots with the 9mm faster than the .45's I have shot.

I am by no means an expert, but I agree with you that shot placement being far and away the most important factor, and because realistically (as your diagram illustrates) there isn't a whole lot of difference in diameter between a 9mm and .45, that personally I'd rather have less kick, faster follow up shots, and more ammo in the mag to place more hits with. That's just me though.

YMMV.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:30:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 1:33:30 PM EDT by tommytrauma]

Originally Posted By SNorman:

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

upl.silentwhisper.net/uplfolders/upload1/9mmvs40vs45.gif




Is that graphic right?

I think 9mm is .355". That means .40 is .045" larger. .45 is .050" larger still. Almost the same difference. That graphic makes it look like the diameter increase from .40 to .45 is twice the difference between .40 and 9mm.



I blatently stole the graphic from another board, and can't confirm it short of printing it out and getting out the calipers. Looks about right to me though, and does a good job of illustrating the nominal difference (less than a tenth of an inch) between 9mm and .45. If your observations are correct, it would slightly overemphasize the size advantage of .45.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:33:40 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:37:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Aim4MyHead:
It's not what you shoot. It's what you hit.


J



Just that simple; and it explains a lot.

I'd just add a few points.

1. Some have commented that hitting vital points is the key to stopping the threat. I saw a writeup in which the author made the point that two quick shots, say, 4 inches apart increased the odds of hitting a vital area. Makes a lot of sense to me. I'm sure he did not mean the 4" was planned, but a double tap should do that.

2. Most wound channels are temporary. Organs flex around the channel and then "bounce" back. Many studies have shown similar wound channels for 9mm and .45 and all calibers in between. Hitting a vital part, as above, is key. Multiple shots can increase the probability of severe bleeding.

3. Modern ammunition, if permitted in a particular use/jurisdiction/agency can go a long way towards accomplishing the goal. Using 9mm SXT or Ranger T, for example, creates what looks like a small food processor going through the body. That kind of tearing has to do something. ANd, we haven't even talked about +P+.a performance 9

If ball has to be used, though, I would say only .45, even though that would be less effective than a performance 9. The rules, ,etc.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:37:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By SNorman:

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

upl.silentwhisper.net/uplfolders/upload1/9mmvs40vs45.gif




Is that graphic right?

I think 9mm is .355". That means .40 is .045" larger. .45 is .050" larger still. Almost the same difference. That graphic makes it look like the diameter increase from .40 to .45 is twice the difference between .40 and 9mm.



I blatently stole the graphic from another board, and can't confirm it short of printing it out and getting out the calipers. Looks about right to me though, and does a good job of illustrating the nominal difference (less than a tenth of an inch) between 9mm and .45. If your observations are correct, it would slightly overemphasize the size advantage of .45.



The funny thing is though, looking at the rounds in person, a .45 looks HUGE compared to 9mm.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:37:42 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:45:29 PM EDT
The_Beer_Slayer is right on both counts.

1)Handguns are for fighting your way to your rifle/shotgun. The rounds are poor man stoppers and usually require a perfectly placed shot for an immediate stop. A .223, shotgun slug, or 7.62 is much better

2)A .45 is much, much better than a 9mm. Not only is the .45 bigger in diameter but the weight is much greater as well. Bigger heavier bullet is the key to one shot stops.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:47:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 2:41:25 PM EDT by NewbHunter]

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By SNorman:

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

upl.silentwhisper.net/uplfolders/upload1/9mmvs40vs45.gif




Is that graphic right?

I think 9mm is .355". That means .40 is .045" larger. .45 is .050" larger still. Almost the same difference. That graphic makes it look like the diameter increase from .40 to .45 is twice the difference between .40 and 9mm.



I blatently stole the graphic from another board, and can't confirm it short of printing it out and getting out the calipers. Looks about right to me though, and does a good job of illustrating the nominal difference (less than a tenth of an inch) between 9mm and .45.



Translated into metric (which I like better anyway ) 0.45 inches is 11.43mm. So, assuming a .45ACP is exactly 0.45inches (is it?) that's roughly a 2.5mm difference in diameter.

I understand that there is more to a bullet than simply its diameter, but for shits and giggles this is a quick diagram I whipped up on my CAD workstation, so it should be accurate (assumes .45ACP is exactly 0.45in and .40SW is exactly 0.40in. and 9mm is exactly 9.00mm ). Looks like the diagram you posted is a little different than mine.

EDIT: Nevermind. I just realized that image was not to scale

Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:51:05 PM EDT
Give me the 230 gr. .45 any day, against a 9mm. Think 20 ounce claw hammer hitting something versus a 2 # sledgehammer. Big difference. The .45 may be slower but it is a man stopper.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:53:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
there is a bit more to 45 than the size of the round. it is typically almost twice the weight and mass as well.



True, with considerably less velocity as a result. Around 1200 fps for 9mm compared to 900 for .45, right?

Both the 9mm and the .45 would outweigh a .223 round out of an AR. If mass is the deciding factor, than either handgun round should outperform the AR easily. A 230 grain .45 round outweighs a 55 grain .223 by better than a factor of 4.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:56:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 2:04:26 PM EDT by tommytrauma]

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
The_Beer_Slayer is right on both counts.

1)Handguns are for fighting your way to your rifle/shotgun. The rounds are poor man stoppers and usually require a perfectly placed shot for an immediate stop. A .223, shotgun slug, or 7.62 is much better

2)A .45 is much, much better than a 9mm. Not only is the .45 bigger in diameter but the weight is much greater as well. Bigger heavier bullet is the key to one shot stops.



So on one hand, a 55 grain AR round is superior to a 230 grain .45 round, but on the other hand the .45 round weighing better than 4 times as much as the rifle round is better? Your statements are mutually exclusive.

The 'key to one shot stops' is neurological or cardiovascular compromise. Tissue disruption is the mechanism by which this is accomplished. "energy transfer" is junk science, and has been debunked.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:57:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
there is a bit more to 45 than the size of the round. it is typically almost twice the weight and mass as well.



True, with considerably less velocity as a result. Around 1200 fps for 9mm compared to 900 for .45, right?

Both the 9mm and the .45 would outweigh a .223 round out of an AR. If mass is the deciding factor, than either handgun round should outperform the AR easily. A 230 grain .45 round outweighs a 55 grain .223 by better than a factor of 4.

Funny that someone who goes by tommytrauma would post in this thread.......
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 1:59:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
The_Beer_Slayer is right on both counts.

1)Handguns are for fighting your way to your rifle/shotgun. The rounds are poor man stoppers and usually require a perfectly placed shot for an immediate stop. A .223, shotgun slug, or 7.62 is much better

2)A .45 is much, much better than a 9mm. Not only is the .45 bigger in diameter but the weight is much greater as well. Bigger heavier bullet is the key to one shot stops.



So on one hand, a 55 grain AR round is superior to a 230 grain .45 round, but on the other hand the .45 round weighing better than 4 times as much as the rifle round is better?

If the .45 was coming out of a 16"bbl then yeah. A 9mm AR or sub gun is very formidable.

If we are talking handguns then .45 will be better than a 9mm everytime. If we are talking about weapons with barrels longer than 14" it becomes completely different.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 2:05:47 PM EDT
It doesn't matter what you hit them with as long as it does damage to a vital, life-supporting organ. Heart, Brain (primarily brain stem), Spine, Lungs. It doesn't matter if it's .22LR or .50BMG as long as it hits, penetrates enough and damages the necessary organs. I believe expansion is a good friend to have, but you must have the minimum necessary penetration before you can begin concerning yourself with expansion. The biggest one thing is shot placement. If it doesn't hit something important/vital, it doesn't count and that is independent of caliber.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 2:08:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Bob1984:
It doesn't matter what you hit them with as long as it does damage to a vital, life-supporting organ. Heart, Brain (primarily brain stem), Spine, Lungs. It doesn't matter if it's .22LR or .50BMG as long as it hits, penetrates enough and damages the necessary organs. I believe expansion is a good friend to have, but you must have the minimum necessary penetration before you can begin concerning yourself with expansion. The biggest one thing is shot placement. If it doesn't hit something important/vital, it doesn't count and that is independent of caliber.



There are also a lot of factors to being a good stopper. It all comes down to velocity, bullet size, weight and bullet construction.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 2:18:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/26/2005 2:21:01 PM EDT by tommytrauma]

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
there is a bit more to 45 than the size of the round. it is typically almost twice the weight and mass as well.



True, with considerably less velocity as a result. Around 1200 fps for 9mm compared to 900 for .45, right?

Both the 9mm and the .45 would outweigh a .223 round out of an AR. If mass is the deciding factor, than either handgun round should outperform the AR easily. A 230 grain .45 round outweighs a 55 grain .223 by better than a factor of 4.

Funny that someone who goes by tommytrauma would post in this thread.......




I instruct both Basic Trauma Life Support and Prehospital Trauma Life Support, and am a bit of a "trauma magnet" when I'm on shift. I was a huge advocate of the BTLS assessment in the early 90's, and sold it aggressively at my service. Hence the nick name.


If we are talking handguns then .45 will be better than a 9mm everytime


We'll have to agree to disagree. My own observations and discussions with everyone from trauma surgeons to forensic pathologists has led me to believe that the difference between 9mm and .45 is pretty nominal as far as tissue disruption goes, and that it's massively overshadowed by shot placement and the ability to get multiple fast hits on target.

I'm emberrased to realize I've been drawn into the classic '9mm vs .45' thread. Guess I'm just part of a gunboard cliché.

Shall we cover AR vs AK next?
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 2:21:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:

Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
there is a bit more to 45 than the size of the round. it is typically almost twice the weight and mass as well.



True, with considerably less velocity as a result. Around 1200 fps for 9mm compared to 900 for .45, right?

Both the 9mm and the .45 would outweigh a .223 round out of an AR. If mass is the deciding factor, than either handgun round should outperform the AR easily. A 230 grain .45 round outweighs a 55 grain .223 by better than a factor of 4.

Funny that someone who goes by tommytrauma would post in this thread.......




I instruct both Basic Trauma Life Support and Prehospital Trauma Life Support, and am a bit of a "trauma magnet" when I'm on shift. Hence the nick name.


If we are talking handguns then .45 will be better than a 9mm everytime


We'll have to agree to disagree. My own observations and discussions with everyone from trauma surgeons to forensic pathologists has led me to believe that the difference between 9mm and .45 is pretty nominal as far as tissue disruption goes, and that it's massively overshadowed by shot placement and the ability to get multiple fast hits on target.

I'm emberrased to realize I've been drawn into the classic '9mm vs .45' thread. Guess I'm just part of a gunboard cliché.

Shall we cover AR vs AK next?

Thats ok, I just about went home from a gunshow with a Sig 226 9mm that had a threaded barrel for a silencer.

FWIW I carry a .40 Bottom line for me is if you use a 9mm use heavy +p hollow points. A rifle/carbine/shotgun is clearly superior to a handgun.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 3:31:08 PM EDT

Bottom line for me is if you use a 9mm use heavy +p hollow points. A rifle/carbine/shotgun is clearly superior to a handgun.


After a recent class, I switched to Federal HST 124 grain. Expansion was impressive in a class demo.

Someone once noticed Col. Cooper's handgun, and asked if he was expecting trouble. He responded "if I was expecting trouble, I'd have a rifle." Pretty much sums it up for me.
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 3:31:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:
I was a huge advocate of the BTLS assessment in the early 90's, and sold it aggressively at my service. Hence the nick name.




BTLS? What about DCAP? Don't you have love for DCAP too?
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 3:36:13 PM EDT
I carry both-at various times-my P239 in 9mm and my Kimber .45

If I KNEW something was going to happen, I'd take my Kimber. Bigger grain bullet, bigger hole....

HH
Link Posted: 8/26/2005 3:44:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By napalm:

Originally Posted By tommytrauma:
I was a huge advocate of the BTLS assessment in the early 90's, and sold it aggressively at my service. Hence the nick name.




BTLS? What about DCAP? Don't you have love for DCAP too?



Now I'm dating myself. The BTLS assessment wasn't the DCAP-BTLS nemonic you're thinking of it was a basic trauma life support assessment, pretty much supplanted by DCAP BTLS.

The basic trauma life support assessment (scene loc air vent pulse skin cap trach neck neck chest bleed mast) works pretty well for massive trauma, but was overkill for 99% of what we were actually seeing. That's why it pretty much died out. DCAPBTLS is a handy nemonic, but not related to how I was using 'BTLS'.

Top Top