-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Bigger is not always better
- Thread starter grampayeehaa
- Start date
Task Force 16
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Grapeshot wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
Fixed, try it again.
Walleye
Regular Member
imported post
Pointman wrote:
With the exception of the fact that a .45 HP will have less penetration than a 9mm HP, which is also a critical element in addition to wound cavity. Consider that the velocity of a standard 9mm is about 400fps greater than .45, combined with a smaller diameter, and I fail to see how .45 is that much better if the threat is wearing thick clothing.
I've had no problems with my 9mm JHPs opening 'properly' and I significantly doubt I will in the future.
P.S. My intention is not to knock caliber selection, but one gets tired of hearing how lame the 9mm is without any real evidence to back it up.
Pointman wrote:
With the exception of the fact that a .45 HP will have less penetration than a 9mm HP, which is also a critical element in addition to wound cavity. Consider that the velocity of a standard 9mm is about 400fps greater than .45, combined with a smaller diameter, and I fail to see how .45 is that much better if the threat is wearing thick clothing.
I've had no problems with my 9mm JHPs opening 'properly' and I significantly doubt I will in the future.
P.S. My intention is not to knock caliber selection, but one gets tired of hearing how lame the 9mm is without any real evidence to back it up.
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
I respect your experience but isn't the reason most people are killed by a .22 is the fact that more people own .22's than other firearms? Almost every boy/maybe girlgets a .22 at an age deemed appropriate by his parents.
I do agree that the .22 is an effective round for a head shot. It enters the skull but doesn't have the energy to exit, therefore it bounces around causing major and usually fatal damage.
I'm just not sure that everybody can make a head shot in a real-life shoot out, including me, if I'm being honest with myself. I would go for center mass first (as you said) but I doubt the .22 rounds in center mass would result in a quick end to the gun fight.
Personally, I've decided on the 5.7 x 28mm round fired from a FNH Five Seven handgun. The ballistic results are very impressive and it causes more trauma than a .45 or .44 magnum. The bullet is designed to tumble upon entry. I'm sure you know that SWAT teams are converting to this handgun.
I do sometimes carry my North American Arms .22 magnum, 5 shot revolver with CCI Maxi-Mag, 40 grain, high velocity hollow points. It has a velocity of 1875fps, but the velocity would be lower with the very short barrel! This is the 'best' .22 round that I can find. Anyone know of a better one?
open4years
I respect your experience but isn't the reason most people are killed by a .22 is the fact that more people own .22's than other firearms? Almost every boy/maybe girlgets a .22 at an age deemed appropriate by his parents.
I do agree that the .22 is an effective round for a head shot. It enters the skull but doesn't have the energy to exit, therefore it bounces around causing major and usually fatal damage.
I'm just not sure that everybody can make a head shot in a real-life shoot out, including me, if I'm being honest with myself. I would go for center mass first (as you said) but I doubt the .22 rounds in center mass would result in a quick end to the gun fight.
Personally, I've decided on the 5.7 x 28mm round fired from a FNH Five Seven handgun. The ballistic results are very impressive and it causes more trauma than a .45 or .44 magnum. The bullet is designed to tumble upon entry. I'm sure you know that SWAT teams are converting to this handgun.
I do sometimes carry my North American Arms .22 magnum, 5 shot revolver with CCI Maxi-Mag, 40 grain, high velocity hollow points. It has a velocity of 1875fps, but the velocity would be lower with the very short barrel! This is the 'best' .22 round that I can find. Anyone know of a better one?
open4years
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
madcapmag wrote:
I posted about the FNH Five Seven elsewhere on this forum. Find it and in the replies are some great links that shows ballistic results on all handgun rounds, some rifle rounds and shotguns.
After soaking up the data, I carry my Five Seven as my primary firearm. Twenty rounds in the magazine and it comes with two more magazines. That is 61 rounds, with one in the chamber! That should take care of most problems.
open4years
madcapmag wrote:
I posted about the FNH Five Seven elsewhere on this forum. Find it and in the replies are some great links that shows ballistic results on all handgun rounds, some rifle rounds and shotguns.
After soaking up the data, I carry my Five Seven as my primary firearm. Twenty rounds in the magazine and it comes with two more magazines. That is 61 rounds, with one in the chamber! That should take care of most problems.
open4years
Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Pointman wrote:
Pointman wrote:
Kinetic energy = 1/2 m v[sup]2[/sup] so kinetic energy changes with the square of the change in velocity and linearly with mass. Double the mass and double the KE. Double the velocity and quadruple the KE.
Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Pointman wrote:
Pointman wrote:
I addressed nothing but abuse of physics. To be equitably personal, abuse of physics to make a twisted point by a property speculator. We are enjoying the fruits of property speculation and its practitioners ignorance.
Don Barnett
Regular Member
imported post
It is like the anti-gunners saying that having a firearm in your house increases the likelihood of a gun accident happening on your premises. Makes sense. I counter by saying that those people whoride ina car have an increased probability of being involved in an auto accident than those who don't.
It is like the anti-gunners saying that having a firearm in your house increases the likelihood of a gun accident happening on your premises. Makes sense. I counter by saying that those people whoride ina car have an increased probability of being involved in an auto accident than those who don't.
Walleye
Regular Member
imported post
Here's a small article the FBI did about the one-shot myth:
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2004/oct2004/oct04leb.htm#page_15
I quote:
"[font="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"]In one case, the subject attacked the officer with a knife. The officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest. [/font] [font="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"]Only then did the offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain, .45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender later stated, “The wounds felt like bee stings.”"
So why did the threat not immediately drop dead after the first shot from a .45ACP to the chest? The most plausible explaination: none of the rounds hit a critical area on the threat. We all know what would of happened had the threat been hit in the head instead of the chest.
Further, a comparison done over several factory 9mm defensive loads:
http://frag.110mb.com/
[/font]
Here's a small article the FBI did about the one-shot myth:
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/2004/oct2004/oct04leb.htm#page_15
I quote:
"[font="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"]In one case, the subject attacked the officer with a knife. The officer shot the individual four times in the chest; then, his weapon malfunctioned. The offender continued to walk toward the officer. After the officer cleared his weapon, he fired again and struck the subject in the chest. [/font] [font="TimesNewRoman,Times New Roman,Times,serif"]Only then did the offender drop the knife. This individual was hit five times with 230-grain, .45-caliber hollow-point ammunition and never fell to the ground. The offender later stated, “The wounds felt like bee stings.”"
So why did the threat not immediately drop dead after the first shot from a .45ACP to the chest? The most plausible explaination: none of the rounds hit a critical area on the threat. We all know what would of happened had the threat been hit in the head instead of the chest.
Further, a comparison done over several factory 9mm defensive loads:
http://frag.110mb.com/
[/font]
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
Pointman wrote:
I said it, but I said it does itin the case of a head shot as it has the energy to enter the skull but not enough to exit. I don't have data to support this, but I've read it numerous places and it is the reason professional "hit men" use the .22 for a head shot, plus the lower sound.
I'll look on the net and see if there is any data to support what I've read numerous times for many years. I did not say that it does that consistently anywhere else in the body, just the head. I would not carry a .22 as my primary weapon even if it does what I said in the head. I admit that I'm not good enough to make a head shotin a real-life shooting. In other words, I wouldn't bet my life on being able to make that shot.
A person, who worked in a gun shop, was being teased for carrying a 9mm. He told me, very seriously, that he would shoot "them" in the eye. I told him that he was a better man than me if he could do that under extreme stress.
open4years
Pointman wrote:
I said it, but I said it does itin the case of a head shot as it has the energy to enter the skull but not enough to exit. I don't have data to support this, but I've read it numerous places and it is the reason professional "hit men" use the .22 for a head shot, plus the lower sound.
I'll look on the net and see if there is any data to support what I've read numerous times for many years. I did not say that it does that consistently anywhere else in the body, just the head. I would not carry a .22 as my primary weapon even if it does what I said in the head. I admit that I'm not good enough to make a head shotin a real-life shooting. In other words, I wouldn't bet my life on being able to make that shot.
A person, who worked in a gun shop, was being teased for carrying a 9mm. He told me, very seriously, that he would shoot "them" in the eye. I told him that he was a better man than me if he could do that under extreme stress.
open4years
imported post
Morgue Ballistics - http://tinyurl.com/2vzgd7
Tend to fragment when fired through the skull , not bounce around.
Some are IMO perpetuating myths and Hollywood fiction - .22 LR (forget shorts and longs) are the most inefficent in terms of energy on the target.
Yata hey
Morgue Ballistics - http://tinyurl.com/2vzgd7
Tend to fragment when fired through the skull , not bounce around.
Some are IMO perpetuating myths and Hollywood fiction - .22 LR (forget shorts and longs) are the most inefficent in terms of energy on the target.
Yata hey
Wheelgunner
Regular Member
imported post
Speaking to the 5.7mm round, I have never been impressed with the round. A micro rifle round in a pistol (?), when our guys in Iraq are already pissed about the .223 and it's lack of stopping power.
So I began to research the thing. I quote from the Box O' Truth website:
"Also useful is that while doing the Buick of Truth shoot I was talking to some members of a very large and very well respected SWAT team who has had more operational use of the weapons than any other group in the United States, and they were absolutely sour on the weapon.
One of them told me about a particular incident where two SWAT officers, one armed with a shotgun and the other armed with a P90, engaged a bad guy. The P90 armed officer was the first to engage the bad guy....which caused the bad guy to start hollering "Stop shooting me with that thing!!" after sustaining multiple hits with the weapon.
The officer with the 12 gauge used his weapon and the bad guy was dropped instantly and apparently no longer had the ability to complain about what he was being shot with.
Another member of that same team recently posted on another forum that his team was in a firefight where the P90 was used again. The officer armed with the P90 fired on a bad guy...but the round was stopped by the bad guy's rib.
Scientific gel testing has shown the 5.7 to offer pretty poor ballistic performance when compared to the 5.56 or even to more common handgun/subgun rounds like the 9mm and the .45 ACP.
The benefit of the 5.7 round is that it reputedly penetrates body armor...but only with rounds available to LE/military that ordinary civilians cannot get. Even then, there are AP rounds for more common handgun/subgun calibers (9mm, .45 ACP) that will also penetrate body armor and give superior terminal ballistic performance.
When you combine the results of scientific testing with the observed results of real life firefights the worries about it being a weak penetrator and a bad choice for stopping the hostile actions of a bad guy seem to be solidly founded. "
The round, though new, just does not seem to be passing the smell test. If it were, you would have guys crowing about how the round just puts 'em down. Instead, you have this impression that they are really cool in full auto (P90) but the round they fire sucks.
Speaking to the 5.7mm round, I have never been impressed with the round. A micro rifle round in a pistol (?), when our guys in Iraq are already pissed about the .223 and it's lack of stopping power.
So I began to research the thing. I quote from the Box O' Truth website:
"Also useful is that while doing the Buick of Truth shoot I was talking to some members of a very large and very well respected SWAT team who has had more operational use of the weapons than any other group in the United States, and they were absolutely sour on the weapon.
One of them told me about a particular incident where two SWAT officers, one armed with a shotgun and the other armed with a P90, engaged a bad guy. The P90 armed officer was the first to engage the bad guy....which caused the bad guy to start hollering "Stop shooting me with that thing!!" after sustaining multiple hits with the weapon.
The officer with the 12 gauge used his weapon and the bad guy was dropped instantly and apparently no longer had the ability to complain about what he was being shot with.
Another member of that same team recently posted on another forum that his team was in a firefight where the P90 was used again. The officer armed with the P90 fired on a bad guy...but the round was stopped by the bad guy's rib.
Scientific gel testing has shown the 5.7 to offer pretty poor ballistic performance when compared to the 5.56 or even to more common handgun/subgun rounds like the 9mm and the .45 ACP.
The benefit of the 5.7 round is that it reputedly penetrates body armor...but only with rounds available to LE/military that ordinary civilians cannot get. Even then, there are AP rounds for more common handgun/subgun calibers (9mm, .45 ACP) that will also penetrate body armor and give superior terminal ballistic performance.
When you combine the results of scientific testing with the observed results of real life firefights the worries about it being a weak penetrator and a bad choice for stopping the hostile actions of a bad guy seem to be solidly founded. "
The round, though new, just does not seem to be passing the smell test. If it were, you would have guys crowing about how the round just puts 'em down. Instead, you have this impression that they are really cool in full auto (P90) but the round they fire sucks.
open4years
Regular Member
imported post
Grapeshot wrote:
I'm not sure what you are asking by saying: Cite? Are you asking for me to prove my point that more people are killed by a .22 because more people own .22?
open4years
Grapeshot wrote:
I'm not sure what you are asking by saying: Cite? Are you asking for me to prove my point that more people are killed by a .22 because more people own .22?
open4years
imported post
open4years wrote:
I have never heard this statement before so I naturally question it.
Asking for a cite is not a personal challenge but a request for reference which supports the validity of a statement.
I think that .22 cal is a very popular loading in this country and may be the number one selling gun but in what terms. Does this take into consideration all of the M1, M16, AK47 ever built?
Even excluding military and limiting the conversation to this country, I sincerely question the statement as presented - so the request for a cite. I'm always wiling to receive further knowledge.
Yata hey
open4years wrote:
Not prove your point but provide data for "most people are killed by a .22."
I have never heard this statement before so I naturally question it.
Asking for a cite is not a personal challenge but a request for reference which supports the validity of a statement.
I think that .22 cal is a very popular loading in this country and may be the number one selling gun but in what terms. Does this take into consideration all of the M1, M16, AK47 ever built?
Even excluding military and limiting the conversation to this country, I sincerely question the statement as presented - so the request for a cite. I'm always wiling to receive further knowledge.
Yata hey