Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/4/2006 7:57:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 8:00:23 AM EDT by TacticalStrat]
Interesting read for those interested in the testing that General Thompson (inventor of the Thompson SMG) performed to find the best round for the new US military pistol. He tested different rounds on live cattle and human cadavers (see test results at link below).



III. The Thompson-LaGarde Cadaver Tests of 1904

(Author’s Note: The following footnoted paragraphs are based on the article, The Holes in Stopping Power Theory, written by Leon Day. The 1904 live animal and medical cadaver testing may give concern to those who think it was, according to today’s standards, both "barbaric" and highly unscientific. But in the interest of furthering the study of military arms, the testing results are basically presented as Mister Day previously wrote them. Some may find these paragraphs objectionable, but the full story must be told without embellishment and without withholding any pertinent data, no matter how gruesome it may be...)

In 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt appointed Brigadier General William Crozier as Chief of Army Ordnance. In 1904, Crozier assigned two individuals, Captain John T. Thompson of the Infantry and Major Louis Anatole LaGarde of the Medical Corps, to investigate and recommend which caliber should be used in any new service handgun. At the Nelson Morris Company Union Stockyards in Chicago, Illinois, they tested several types of handguns, calibers and bullet styles against both live cattle and medical cadavers.10 Before continuing, some definitions about the types of animals and the bullet types used in the testing are needed:




The Thompson-LaGarde Cadaver Tests of 1904-TEST RESULTS
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 7:59:16 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:02:55 AM EDT
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

In WWII it was without doubt that the .45 was a superior manstopper. Today a .380 JHP will fuck up your day.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:03:06 AM EDT
Seems the hammer was quite effective.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:04:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CS223:
Seems the hammer was quite effective.





LMAO!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:18:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CS223:
Seems the hammer was quite effective.



Ban hammers! Do it for the bovine! MJD
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:19:56 AM EDT
How about someone send Old Painless about 20 head of cattle.

Do ya think 20 head would be sufficient?
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:25:56 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:30:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ARKAN_the_Tiger:
How about someone send Old Painless about 20 head of cattle.

Do ya think 20 head would be sufficient?



...imagining an UPS truck full of cattle....
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:32:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

In WWII it was without doubt that the .45 was a superior manstopper. Today a .380 JHP will fuck up your day.




Thompson tested hollow-points as well.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:33:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

<snip>



B-I-N-G-O!

Funny how people miss that part.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:35:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 8:37:44 AM EDT by PAEBR332]

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

In WWII it was without doubt that the .45 was a superior manstopper. Today a .380 JHP will fuck up your day.




Thompson tested hollow-points as well.



Low velocity, non-jacketed.

If you read Duncan MacPherson's book on Bullet Penetration, you would find that unjacketed hollow points offer essentially NO advantage over other unjacketed bullets at the same velocity.

JACKETED hollow points are a different matter.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:37:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

In WWII it was without doubt that the .45 was a superior manstopper. Today a .380 JHP will fuck up your day.




Thompson tested hollow-points as well.



What they had in 1904 hardly compares.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:37:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PAEBR332:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

<snip>



B-I-N-G-O!

Funny how people miss that part.




No one is saying that the Thompson 1904 tests are conclusive proof of anything that still hold true today. I simply posted the tests as a FYI.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:39:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

In WWII it was without doubt that the .45 was a superior manstopper. Today a .380 JHP will fuck up your day.




Thompson tested hollow-points as well.



What they had in 1904 hardly compares.




Agreed! But no ever said that Thompson's 1904 tests did apply or compare to modern JHP ammo.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:40:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CS223:
Seems the hammer was quite effective.



+1...I can hardly make anything of the data... Not very scientific...
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:41:32 AM EDT
Tag!
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:41:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 8:43:32 AM EDT by PAEBR332]

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By PAEBR332:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

<snip>



B-I-N-G-O!

Funny how people miss that part.




No one is saying that the Thompson 1904 tests are conclusive proof of anything that still hold true today. I simply posted the tests as a FYI.



Actually, they do tell us some things that still hold true today. High velocity but low mass handgun rounds, which pack more energy, do not wound as well as those that make a large hole and penetrate deeper.

What is really interesting is that these tests, which took place before the existence of the Temporary Stretch Cavity was known, found that those rounds (that we now know) that have larger temporary cavities, but smaller permanent ones, were poor "stoppers." Conversely, the rounds with smaller temp cavities, but larger permanent crush cavities, did better.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:45:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

In WWII it was without doubt that the .45 was a superior manstopper. Today a .380 JHP will fuck up your day.




Thompson tested hollow-points as well.



What they had in 1904 hardly compares.




Agreed! But no ever said that Thompson's 1904 tests did apply or compare to modern JHP ammo.



OK...that is what I originally said.

"The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP."
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 8:53:04 AM EDT
Tag

Awaiting "Thompson-LaGarde Cadaver ZOMBIE Tests of 1904" and "Hammer of dead" comments in 5, 4, 3, 2...
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:01:44 AM EDT
A very interesting read. I have seen it before. You gotta admire Gen. Thompson for trying to learn something by actually shooting stuff.

He tried shooting cattle. Maybe not the best test, but better than "I think" or "I imagine". He was doing the best he could with the methods available for that time period.

Of course, testing has improved a lot since those days. And bullet construction has definitely improved since then. But in his day, a big solid bullet was better than a small solid bullet.

Must have taken some stout men to shoot those cattle and then deal the Hammer of Death to them to stop their kicking. Not too politically correct for today.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:03:33 AM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:04:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
A very interesting read. I have seen it before. You gotta admire Gen. Thompson for trying to learn something by actually shooting stuff.

He tried shooting cattle. Maybe not the best test, but better than "I think" or "I imagine". He was doing the best he could with the methods available for that time period.

Of course, testing has improved a lot since those days. And bullet construction has definitely improved since then. But in his day, a big solid bullet was better than a small solid bullet.

Must have taken some stout men to shoot those cattle and then deal the Hammer of Death to them to stop their kicking. Not too politically correct for today.



...I bet they ate well for a few weeks after, though!
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:13:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 9:15:14 AM EDT by BlammO]

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
Must have taken some stout men to shoot those cattle and then deal the Hammer of Death Dead to them to stop their kicking. Not too politically correct for today.



Slight correction.

May I propose the Gitmo O' Truth test to obtain new and modern results?


Originally Posted By macman37:
Awaiting "Thompson-LaGarde Cadaver ZOMBIE Tests of 1904" and "Hammer of dead" comments in 5, 4, 3, 2...



Glad to oblige.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:16:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 9:23:25 AM EDT by t-stox]
It's total Bull shisse!! Don't have the linky but many people have debunked the test as totally unscientific and unprofessional. They only tested one cow on the .30 mauser and improperly tested on the .45 as well as the other calibers involved. All people today have debunked this from the Facklerites to the hi-vel (marshall& Sarnow crowd). It was totally gauged to make the .45 look good and the others look bad.

If you really want a nasty graphic (cat and dog) there is a ballistics testing made by Army medical corps. It actually shows that the .45 was underpowered compared to some other calibers of WWII. It also is chock full of very cool stuff. every gunnut, OPPS I mean sporting enthusiast! should check this out. history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/chapter3.1.htm

here is the content page: page 1
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:19:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/4/2006 9:19:27 AM EDT by ScaryBlackGuns]
.476 Eley
Weight: 288 grs.
Style: LRN
Velocity: 729 FPS
Energy: 340 FPE
Stag
Weight: 1300 lbs.

00:00 - One shot through intestines.
02:00 - One shot through intestines again.
03:10 - One shot through intestines again.
06:10 - Shot twice in the head.
07:15 - Shot in the ear.
08:15 - Shot behind the ear.
08:15+ - Killed by four hammer blows to head; no round reached brain.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 9:19:47 AM EDT
I would donate my body to science if they would test bullets on it before I was cremated.

Link Posted: 1/4/2006 10:05:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
A very interesting read. I have seen it before. You gotta admire Gen. Thompson for trying to learn something by actually shooting stuff.

He tried shooting cattle. Maybe not the best test, but better than "I think" or "I imagine". He was doing the best he could with the methods available for that time period.

Of course, testing has improved a lot since those days. And bullet construction has definitely improved since then. But in his day, a big solid bullet was better than a small solid bullet.

Must have taken some stout men to shoot those cattle and then deal the Hammer of Death to them to stop their kicking. Not too politically correct for today.




I read somewhere that initially Thompson tried to use prisoners that were up for execution as bullet test subjects, and maybe went to Germany or someplace outside of the US to try to do it. It's been years since I read it. Does anyone know the details on this or if it's true?
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 10:51:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By PAEBR332:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
The ball ammo that was used in 1904 is hardly related to JHP.

<snip>



B-I-N-G-O!

Funny how people miss that part.




No one is saying that the Thompson 1904 tests are conclusive proof of anything that still hold true today. I simply posted the tests as a FYI.



Thanks for an interesting read!

Sometimes it's just interesting to see the "state of the art" way back when. It's not about proving or disproving anything, but about the history that got us where we are.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:05:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

I read somewhere that initially Thompson tried to use prisoners that were up for execution as bullet test subjects, and maybe went to Germany or someplace outside of the US to try to do it. It's been years since I read it. Does anyone know the details on this or if it's true?



I do know that they actually used cadavers (dead human bodies) for some of the tests. Of course, we now know that live tissue would make a difference, but he was at least trying to learn something.

And, to his credit, he wasn't trying to "prove" any theories, he was only trying to learn something.

It's easy to look back 100 years and find fault, but he was doing as well as he could for that day.
Link Posted: 1/4/2006 11:42:22 AM EDT

It seems the thing to learn from this is to hit them in the head with a hammer if you really want to kill them.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 11:28:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalStrat:

Originally Posted By CS223:
Seems the hammer was quite effective.





LMAO!!!!!!!!

+1
Top Top