User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 6:53:12 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do we have better data on the creation of a large permanent wound cavity vs lower velocity crushed tissue wounds? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted:... pistol rounds vs rifle rounds, still a problem today. No argument there, I'm sure the survivors spent many nights laying awake and thinking exactly that, but sometimes you gotta work with the tools you have. Human tissue is very elastic. Below a velocity threshold of about 2,200 FPS - which the FBI figured out while studying this fight - it just soaks up energy with a “temporary wound cavity”. In other words, at handgun velocities there won’t be massive tissue destruction outside of the actual path of the bullet. The crush cavity is what does the work. So with handguns we want adequate penetration, as much expansion as possible, and direct contact with vital organs. The engineering of the projectile trumps velocity, energy and caliber. Will we stop with this magic 2200fps myth Do we have better data on the creation of a large permanent wound cavity vs lower velocity crushed tissue wounds? I think the 2200fps number came from m193 bullets. Its really not relevant to anything else and it's really just at the point the bullet fragments and creates secondary wound tracks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 6:54:36 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it's a myth. There is a point where tissue does not rebound but tear Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Will we stop with this magic 2200fps myth I've absolutely destroyed hearts with .357s and 12 gauges. Neither are even close to 2200fps |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 8:08:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the 2200fps number came from m193 bullets. Its really not relevant to anything else and it's really just at the point the bullet fragments and creates secondary wound tracks. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted:... pistol rounds vs rifle rounds, still a problem today. No argument there, I'm sure the survivors spent many nights laying awake and thinking exactly that, but sometimes you gotta work with the tools you have. Human tissue is very elastic. Below a velocity threshold of about 2,200 FPS - which the FBI figured out while studying this fight - it just soaks up energy with a “temporary wound cavity”. In other words, at handgun velocities there won’t be massive tissue destruction outside of the actual path of the bullet. The crush cavity is what does the work. So with handguns we want adequate penetration, as much expansion as possible, and direct contact with vital organs. The engineering of the projectile trumps velocity, energy and caliber. Will we stop with this magic 2200fps myth Do we have better data on the creation of a large permanent wound cavity vs lower velocity crushed tissue wounds? I think the 2200fps number came from m193 bullets. Its really not relevant to anything else and it's really just at the point the bullet fragments and creates secondary wound tracks. I believe that's actually a higher #, around 2500 fps. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 9:22:38 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've absolutely destroyed hearts with .357s and 12 gauges. Neither are even close to 2200fps |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 9:30:08 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It has more to do with bullet construction. A .30-30 bullet in a .300 win mag will probably fragment but may not penetrate the same as a .30-30. You're confusing the "crush" mechanisms of a bullet making direct contact with tissue with the damage that is done by hydraulically displacing tissue so quickly that it tears. Above a certain velocity threshold (2,200 is a generalization, there other factors like bullet diameter and shape) the "temporary wound cavity" expands so rapidly that it becomes part of the "permanent wound cavity", i.e., there is massive tissue damage several inches beyond the path of the bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 9:34:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the 2200fps number came from m193 bullets. Its really not relevant to anything else and it's really just at the point the bullet fragments and creates secondary wound tracks. Above a certain velocity, M193 fragments, which creates multiple crush cavities. All bullets create a hydrostatic shock wave as they displace tissue. Above a certain velocity - 2,200 fps give or take - that hydrostatic shock wave will exceed the elastic limits of tissue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 9:38:37 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've absolutely destroyed hearts with .357s and 12 gauges. Neither are even close to 2200fps |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 9:42:17 PM EDT
[#8]
Sonic boom inside tissue
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 10:03:03 PM EDT
[#9]
Imagine a projectile that was engineered to have zero expansion, and stabilized so well that it would have zero yaw.
Imagine firing it at 500 fps, and imagine firing it at 5,000 fps. The difference in tissue damage would be due to the velocity at which tissue was pushed aside as the hypothetical projectile plowed through. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 10:38:06 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Imagine a projectile that was engineered to have zero expansion, and stabilized so well that it would have zero yaw. Imagine firing it at 500 fps, and imagine firing it at 5,000 fps. The difference in tissue damage would be due to the velocity at which tissue was pushed aside as the hypothetical projectile plowed through. Yes. More powerful bullets do more damage. No, it doesn't start at 2200fps |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 10:39:52 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're confusing the "crush" mechanisms of a bullet making direct contact with tissue with the damage that is done by hydraulically displacing tissue so quickly that it tears. Above a certain velocity threshold (2,200 is a generalization, there other factors like bullet diameter and shape) the "temporary wound cavity" expands so rapidly that it becomes part of the "permanent wound cavity", i.e., there is massive tissue damage several inches beyond the path of the bullet. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It has more to do with bullet construction. A .30-30 bullet in a .300 win mag will probably fragment but may not penetrate the same as a .30-30. You're confusing the "crush" mechanisms of a bullet making direct contact with tissue with the damage that is done by hydraulically displacing tissue so quickly that it tears. Above a certain velocity threshold (2,200 is a generalization, there other factors like bullet diameter and shape) the "temporary wound cavity" expands so rapidly that it becomes part of the "permanent wound cavity", i.e., there is massive tissue damage several inches beyond the path of the bullet. Mass and velocity absolutely change the dynamic. That's my point. Think 12gauge slug and heavy fast handguns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 10:42:35 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That does not mean that it was hydrostatic shear that did it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I've absolutely destroyed hearts with .357s and 12 gauges. Neither are even close to 2200fps Who knows. But when people say handguns only poke holes and I ask them how a .357 swc @ 1200 fps produces a 1" hole in a heart they can't give me a good answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2023 10:55:18 PM EDT
[#13]
Blaise Pascal: Just because we can't have perfect knowledge does not mean that we can't have any knowledge.
So if you say 2200 fps is an inaccurate number, what number would be more accurate? You can't say "who knows?", for then you don't actually know how 2200 compares. Just because someone does not know how a 357 produces a 1" hole does not mean that is impossible to know that a 2200-2500 fps spitzer bullet causes hydrostatic shearing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 8:22:51 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Who knows. But when people say handguns only poke holes and I ask them how a .357 swc @ 1200 fps produces a 1" hole in a heart they can't give me a good answer. If you doubled the velocity of your .357 bullet - which would quadruple its energy - do you think that the size of the permanent cavity would increase? You could Google "wound ballistics", or "terminal ballistics", or "projectile/tissue interaction" and go down all kinds of rabbit holes. You could even subscribe to the Wound Ballistics Review, it's forty bucks a year. Here's a great article to start with, written in laymen's terms: https://www.denverhealth.org/-/media/files/departments-services/trauma/2022-trauma-conference/terminal-ballistics-pres.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 8:29:37 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Blaise Pascal: Just because we can't have perfect knowledge does not mean that we can't have any knowledge. So if you say 2200 fps is an inaccurate number, what number would be more accurate? You can't say "who knows?", for then you don't actually know how 2200 compares. Just because someone does not know how a 357 produces a 1" hole does not mean that is impossible to know that a 2200-2500 fps spitzer bullet causes hydrostatic shearing. I can't give you a number because it's different for different loads depending on mass, velocity, and bullet construction. Look at the latest ww2 weapon poll in GD. The carbine was tied with the M1. If 2200fps is the magic number why would people choose to carry the carbine with a sub 2000fps bullet if it didn't act like a rifle bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 8:30:40 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The engineers at any of the big ammo companies could explain it. If you doubled the velocity of your .357 bullet - which would quadruple its energy - do you think that the size of the permanent cavity would increase? You could Google "wound ballistics", or "terminal ballistics", or "projectile/tissue interaction" and go down all kinds of rabbit holes. You could even subscribe to the Wound Ballistics Review, it's forty bucks a year. Here's a great article to start with, written in laymen's terms: https://www.denverhealth.org/-/media/files/departments-services/trauma/2022-trauma-conference/terminal-ballistics-pres.pdf Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Who knows. But when people say handguns only poke holes and I ask them how a .357 swc @ 1200 fps produces a 1" hole in a heart they can't give me a good answer. If you doubled the velocity of your .357 bullet - which would quadruple its energy - do you think that the size of the permanent cavity would increase? You could Google "wound ballistics", or "terminal ballistics", or "projectile/tissue interaction" and go down all kinds of rabbit holes. You could even subscribe to the Wound Ballistics Review, it's forty bucks a year. Here's a great article to start with, written in laymen's terms: https://www.denverhealth.org/-/media/files/departments-services/trauma/2022-trauma-conference/terminal-ballistics-pres.pdf I'm not disputing that more power does more damage. I mean that's why I carry a .357. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 8:53:12 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can't give you a number because it's different for different loads depending on mass, velocity, and bullet construction. Look at the latest ww2 weapon poll in GD. The carbine was tied with the M1. If 2200fps is the magic number why would people choose to carry the carbine with a sub 2000fps bullet if it didn't act like a rifle bullet. It's not like bullets do zero damage until they hit 2,200 fps and then do "magic" damage. But the degree of damage isn't linear, either. Picture a "hockey stick" graph. There is a disproportionate increase in tissue damage due to hydrostatic shock above a velocity threshold of about 2,200 fps. If you can't understand that, it's probably because you don't want to understand it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 9:26:55 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Dropping the "magic" strawman would help. And how scientific is a poll in GD? Most of the polls in GD don't even spell "poll" correctly. It's not like bullets do zero damage until they hit 2,200 fps and then do "magic" damage. But the degree of damage isn't linear, either. Picture a "hockey stick" graph. There is a disproportionate increase in tissue damage due to hydrostatic shock above a velocity threshold of about 2,200 fps. If you can't understand that, it's probably because you don't want to understand it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I can't give you a number because it's different for different loads depending on mass, velocity, and bullet construction. Look at the latest ww2 weapon poll in GD. The carbine was tied with the M1. If 2200fps is the magic number why would people choose to carry the carbine with a sub 2000fps bullet if it didn't act like a rifle bullet. It's not like bullets do zero damage until they hit 2,200 fps and then do "magic" damage. But the degree of damage isn't linear, either. Picture a "hockey stick" graph. There is a disproportionate increase in tissue damage due to hydrostatic shock above a velocity threshold of about 2,200 fps. If you can't understand that, it's probably because you don't want to understand it. Or I've seen a lot of animals killed with slugs, pc lever guns, 38-55s, .45-70, etc |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 9:55:28 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I can't give you a number because it's different for different loads depending on mass, velocity, and bullet construction. Look at the latest ww2 weapon poll in GD. The carbine was tied with the M1. If 2200fps is the magic number why would people choose to carry the carbine with a sub 2000fps bullet if it didn't act like a rifle bullet. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Blaise Pascal: Just because we can't have perfect knowledge does not mean that we can't have any knowledge. So if you say 2200 fps is an inaccurate number, what number would be more accurate? You can't say "who knows?", for then you don't actually know how 2200 compares. Just because someone does not know how a 357 produces a 1" hole does not mean that is impossible to know that a 2200-2500 fps spitzer bullet causes hydrostatic shearing. I can't give you a number because it's different for different loads depending on mass, velocity, and bullet construction. Look at the latest ww2 weapon poll in GD. The carbine was tied with the M1. If 2200fps is the magic number why would people choose to carry the carbine with a sub 2000fps bullet if it didn't act like a rifle bullet. Because most small arms are carried about a great deal without ever being fired, and a carbine weighs less than 6 lbs? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 10:22:52 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or I've seen a lot of animals killed with slugs, pc lever guns, 38-55s, .45-70, etc Lethality doesn’t have a linear relationship with tissue destruction. Last two deer I killed fell to a .177 steel BB (lung shots) from a $40 Crosman. Didn’t solve the problem of the herd denuding the yard. But informative of the concept of “energy” versus “lethality.” Each was seemingly indifferent to having been shot while succumbing. Probably because we had previously pelted them with slingshots, shovels, and sticks. Neither went farther than 10 yards before going down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 10:29:40 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or I've seen a lot of animals killed with slugs, pc lever guns, 38-55s, .45-70, etc |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 11:59:36 AM EDT
[#22]
I don't claim to know much about ballistics but the guys at Federal probably have a pretty good idea. Skip to 5:06.
 Why Ballistics Gel Works and Caliber Arguments are Dumb |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 12:13:03 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lethality doesn’t have a linear relationship with tissue destruction. Last two deer I killed fell to a .177 steel BB (lung shots) from a $40 Crosman. Didn’t solve the problem of the herd denuding the yard. But informative of the concept of “energy” versus “lethality.” Each was seemingly indifferent to having been shot while succumbing. Probably because we had previously pelted them with slingshots, shovels, and sticks. Neither went farther than 10 yards before going down. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Or I've seen a lot of animals killed with slugs, pc lever guns, 38-55s, .45-70, etc Lethality doesn’t have a linear relationship with tissue destruction. Last two deer I killed fell to a .177 steel BB (lung shots) from a $40 Crosman. Didn’t solve the problem of the herd denuding the yard. But informative of the concept of “energy” versus “lethality.” Each was seemingly indifferent to having been shot while succumbing. Probably because we had previously pelted them with slingshots, shovels, and sticks. Neither went farther than 10 yards before going down. I'm not talking strictly about lethality. I'm talking damage done to tissue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 12:16:41 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You oughta show up at the next FBI Wound Ballistics Seminar and set those egghead forensic pathologists straight. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Or I've seen a lot of animals killed with slugs, pc lever guns, 38-55s, .45-70, etc I've actually never seen them say that 2200fps is an across the board speed for everything. I've read them reference that number for a specific bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 12:29:52 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't claim to know much about ballistics but the guys at Federal probably have a pretty good idea. Skip to 5:06.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6kUvi72s0Y"With expanding projectiles, the .30 caliber M1 Carbine creates a temporary cavity stretch that is slightly larger than that produced by heavy expanding .357 Magnum hunting loads and may be able to produce permanent splitting, tearing, and rupture injuries in tissues susceptible to stretch insults, such as the liver, kidney, spleen, pancreas, brain, and completely full fluid or gas filled hollow organs, such as the bladder" https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4339-M1-Carbines I think that video is trying to simplify what happens. Unfortunately some think it's a hard and fast rule with no wiggle room. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/18/2023 12:40:32 PM EDT
[#26]
"Firearms responsible for GSWs are commonly stratified by the velocity of the expelled projectile. High-velocity projectile injuries are typically from firearms with a muzzle velocity greater than 2000 ft/s (commonly rifle calibers) and are associated with more substantial tissue damage.13 Low-velocity projectile injuries are caused by firearms with muzzle velocities less than 2,000 ft/s (commonly pistol calibers).13 Shotguns are a common example of a low-velocity firearm (1,000–1,500 ft/s), but they provide a unique ballistics pattern that differs from the behavior of a single projectile.14–17
While categorizing firearms by projectile velocity alone is convenient, this neglects much of the nuanced outcomes of wound ballistics. For example, when a low-velocity shotgun is fired at close range, a high-velocity type wound results, due to increased energy transfer.18 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9462949/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2023 1:11:36 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryThose sure are interesting, if nothing else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2023 2:30:56 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The FBI came up with its organic gel protocol simply to standardize testing. Shooting dead pigs is great, but they wanted a more consistent medium for comparisons. Other agencies developed different protocols, but the FBI’s became the industry standard. Penetration and expansion in organic gel does not equal penetration and expansion in people, nor is it intended to. It’s just a means for making data comparable. Clear synthetic gel is popular with YouTubers because it’s cheaper and more convenient than organic gel, but it’s inappropriate to apply FBI protocol criteria to a medium that isn’t part of the FBI protocol. There is no “rule of thumb” conversion factor that can be applied, either. We shouldn’t try to equate synthetic gel with organic gel, and we shouldn’t try to equate either with human bodies. Exactly. I have said this before and got shit on for it, but it’s the truth. Gel is a testing medium that correlates to observations/data gathered from shootings, but it’s not a 1:1 analog for a human body/tissue, not at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/26/2023 5:04:01 AM EDT
[#29]
Sadly the HST Micro has been discontinued. I can’t imagine why.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2023 2:05:52 PM EDT
[#30]
I’ve got mine stoked with Speer Gold dot Short Barrel. However I wouldn’t have an issue running lswc-hp and have quite a bit of them loaded. Long as the proper bullet hardness to expand at the velocity they’re being shot from a snubby is used. Buffalo Bores are good to go and you can pick up the bullets for loading from Rim Rock.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2023 4:38:12 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fwiw clear gel gives inaccurate results. 13-14" in clear gel probably gets 8-9" in organic gel or tissue. True. When I look at Lucky Gunner results I focus on the loads that expand well plus seemingly over penetrate significantly. For those of you just joining us, bullet expansion increases drag through the target medium, slowing the bullet down and limiting penetration. My main goal is expansion and penetration, and yes, it's all very confusing and self-contradictory but if you can find a happy medium you just may have found something significant. Bonded and homogenous bullets have a distinct advantage in this area. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2023 1:05:08 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: True. When I look at Lucky Gunner results I focus on the loads that expand well plus seemingly over penetrate significantly. For those of you just joining us, bullet expansion increases drag through the target medium, slowing the bullet down and limiting penetration. My main goal is expansion and penetration, and yes, it's all very confusing and self-contradictory but if you can find a happy medium you just may have found something significant. Bonded and homogenous bullets have a distinct advantage in this area. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Fwiw clear gel gives inaccurate results. 13-14" in clear gel probably gets 8-9" in organic gel or tissue. True. When I look at Lucky Gunner results I focus on the loads that expand well plus seemingly over penetrate significantly. For those of you just joining us, bullet expansion increases drag through the target medium, slowing the bullet down and limiting penetration. My main goal is expansion and penetration, and yes, it's all very confusing and self-contradictory but if you can find a happy medium you just may have found something significant. Bonded and homogenous bullets have a distinct advantage in this area. I do like lucky gunners info for velocity. Also, sometimes if it's fast enough and the bullet holds together it expands quickly then kinda folds back and penetrates pretty well. I found 147gr HST pushed to 1275fps performs wonderfully. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/6/2023 8:19:57 AM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2023 8:06:37 PM EDT
[#34]
Winchester Ranger JHP, wadcutters, or hard cast lead depending on your use and recoil tolerance.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File