G&R Tactical
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Question: "Muzzle Energy" vs. "Power Factor"

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Liberty, MO
    Posts
    635
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd.K View Post
    No pistol caliber wounds are impressive.
    None.

    Anecdotal "street" performance is usually used to disregard testing that doesn't match up to ones biases.
    "But! But! All the YouBoobers that shoot meat that was thawed from previously frozen can't be wrong! Muh .40 S&W! Muh .357 Sig!"

    I can't understand the level of self delusion that leads people to think what Trauma Surgeons and Coroners have been telling us for years is incorrect.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    88
    Feedback Score
    0
    Pistol wounds make wounds the size of the bullet themselves. That'll be .357 for a FMJ or wadcutter in .38 Special or .357 Magnum or .357 to whatever the round expanded to in .38 Special or .357 Magnum.

    The extra velocity means nothing as far as energy on target goes. Energy by itself isn't going to knock you out. Energy becomes a factor when the bullet reaches over 2000 fps and stretches the tissue beyond elasticity. Neither of these calibers reach that velocity.

    The .357 had a better reputation because when hollow points were used of the same weight as the .38, the extra velocity made the hollow point penetrate deeper. .38's in hollow points penetrate much shallower.

    The extra velocity of the .357 Magnum also penetrates hard barriers better than the .38.
    Last edited by wtm75; 09-19-18 at 10:52.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd.K View Post
    No pistol caliber wounds are impressive.
    None.
    I didn't exclude 357 Sig and magnum (10mm) from that statement. I didn't include them in common service calibers because they are not common.

    Anecdotal "street" performance is usually used to disregard testing that doesn't match up to ones biases.

    I believe gel testing is a consistent medium to test bullet performance. I believe the experts that say actual shooting results compare well to the gel results. Gel results don't show any significant increase in wounding from magnum or +P.
    My biases come from seeing many, many people shot over a long career as a street cop. You did not address the fact that today"s wonder bullets are no better at stopping threats than they were 30 years ago. I was working the street then too.

    Pistol wounds make wounds the size of the bullet themselves. That'll be .357 for a FMJ or wadcutter in .38 Special or .357 Magnum or .357 to whatever the round expanded to in .38 Special or .357 Magnum.
    That depends. Pistol rounds with significant velocity that partially fragment cause significant wounds.
    Last edited by Nanuk; 09-19-18 at 20:00.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    5,236
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nanuk View Post
    My biases come from seeing many, many people shot over a long career as a street cop. You did not address the fact that today"s wonder bullets are no better at stopping threats than they were 30 years ago. I was working the street then too.




    That depends. Pistol rounds with significant velocity that partially fragment cause significant wounds.
    On unobstructed shots, I suspect you are correct. The biggest issue is when you need to incapacitate someone inside a vehicle. 1. older rounds did not penetrate tissue well after passing through a barrier. 2. This is often caused by fragmanting. You dont want pistol rounds to fragment if you are shooting through something.

    New rounds arent wonder rounds, they just hold together, expand much more reliably, and therefore penetrate much more reliably than older/poor loads. Unless you investigate a lot of OIS involving vehicles, and look at the performance (penetrstion depth, retained weight, expansion, barriers involved, etc), you likely wouldnt notice a difference.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,722
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I'm not claiming any "wonder" in modern bullet design. Just more reliably expanding and penetrating enough, even through intermediate barriers.

    So as good as you expect with your older design 357 HP's (at least for unobstructed shots), but lighter recoil and higher capacity. And of course tested through barriers as well.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MegademiC View Post
    On unobstructed shots, I suspect you are correct. The biggest issue is when you need to incapacitate someone inside a vehicle. 1. older rounds did not penetrate tissue well after passing through a barrier. 2. This is often caused by fragmanting. You dont want pistol rounds to fragment if you are shooting through something.

    New rounds arent wonder rounds, they just hold together, expand much more reliably, and therefore penetrate much more reliably than older/poor loads. Unless you investigate a lot of OIS involving vehicles, and look at the performance (penetrstion depth, retained weight, expansion, barriers involved, etc), you likely wouldnt notice a difference.
    I carried a 357 Magnum for about 20 years on the street 6 years in Ft Worth, Tx and more with the US Border Patrol. Most of the cops I worked with in the 80's and early 90's carried 357's too. The JHP's in 357 magnum penetrated cars and people is no specific order with boring regularity. When we went to the 40 with a 155 grn JHP @ 1250 fps and later @ 1200 fps it behaved in a similar manner.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Todd.K View Post
    I'm not claiming any "wonder" in modern bullet design. Just more reliably expanding and penetrating enough, even through intermediate barriers.

    So as good as you expect with your older design 357 HP's (at least for unobstructed shots), but lighter recoil and higher capacity. And of course tested through barriers as well.
    Blast and recoil are range issues to a certain extent, at least as far as the 357 magnum is concerned.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    5,236
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nanuk View Post
    I carried a 357 Magnum for about 20 years on the street 6 years in Ft Worth, Tx and more with the US Border Patrol. Most of the cops I worked with in the 80's and early 90's carried 357's too. The JHP's in 357 magnum penetrated cars and people is no specific order with boring regularity. When we went to the 40 with a 155 grn JHP @ 1250 fps and later @ 1200 fps it behaved in a similar manner.
    I was specifically talking about 9mm.
    In 2018, you get your “357” performance in 9mm with the tag-along benefits of 17rd mags, less recoil, less blast/flash.
    Last edited by MegademiC; Yesterday at 21:44.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •