FMJ Handgun Rounds In Ballistic Gelatin

[charmcitycop]

.......

[Jake'sDad]

I have been reading for a while, and I was unable to find what I was looking for.
I am trying to find pictures of FMJ rounds fired into ballistic gelatin to demonstrate the performance level of these rounds compared to modern JHP designs.
The various links & threads have been very educational, but it is far easier to show others a picture to prove the point.

If the information is not online, but is available in hard text, i.e. books, magazines, please direct me to a source for them.

Also, if anyone has any tests/photos of "bulk pack" JHP ammo, like the Remington Green Box or Winchester White Box, I would be very interested in that as well for the same purpose.

Thank you in advance.

I'll look and see what I might have for pistol ball in gelatin, but they're pretty boring. They all make a hole the size of the bullet, usually all the way through the block.

[ak74auto]

I'll look and see what I might have for pistol ball in gelatin, but they're pretty boring. They all make a hole the size of the bullet, usually all the way through the block.

I was under the impression thsat the actual crush channel was sub caliber due to bullet profile and tissue stretch.


Go here http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

[Jake'sDad]

I was under the impression thsat the actual crush channel was sub caliber due to bullet profile and tissue stretch.


Go here http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

You're right, though obviously the projectile does make a hole the size of the bullet before the gelatin stretches back. Point to the OP, is that's all you get with FMJ's at pistol velocities.

[charmcitycop]

........

[Jake'sDad]

Thanks very much for the link.
I am aware of the shortcomings of the ball ammo, but we still have an issue with some officers attempting to carry non-approved ammo in their off duty weapons.
Per General Orders, only RA40T issued by the armory may be carried in either approved off-duty weapons or service weapons.
Most of it stems from the "we don't carry it so it must be better" mentality you find.
Some of it comes from "I've seen more people killed with ball than hollowpoints" which is faulty logic.
In an effort to educate officers on the reasons why we carry Winchester Ranger-T, I am trying to compile images of various rounds performance in ballistic gel.

That was AK's link, but I will keep looking for a good pic of a gelatin shot with ball. I know I have some.

[bernieb90]

Duncan MacPherson determined the size of the permanent crush cavity left by bullets at hundgun velocities to be direct functions of the shape, and diameter of the bullet.

MacPherson's bullet shape factor for the following bullet shape configurations (p. 205):

.43 Sphere
.69 Round Nose
1.00 Cylinder
.66 Truncated Cone
.66 Semi-wadcutter
.63 45-degree half angle cone
.82 JHP

Permanent cavity diameter = (Shape factor) X (bullet diameter).

This is why JHPs are best regardless of caliber. Not only will a JHP have a larger diameter, but it also has a larger shape factor coefficient leading to much more crushed tissue.

If folks are really concerned about penetration through barriers then a bonded bullet will be the best option.

In this day and age of modern robustly expanding hollowpoints in both bonded, and unbonded versions I see carrying ball (when not limited by law) as introducing a foolish handicap into an already crappy situation.

[tpd223]

Carrying ball ammo in service caliber handguns for defensive use is just retarded as hell.
You get less "stopping power" (I know, but you know what I mean), a much greater chance of a dangerous shoot through on the bad guy, and a much higher level of potential ricochet by using FMJ ammo.

Mainly I would guess guys do this because most cops are basically cheap as hell and don't want to spend the money and/or effort to find the right ammo.


That being said, only having one approved type of ammo is also a bad idea.

When I re-wrote our ammo policy I added approved types of ammo to what the officers could carry in off duty guns or BUGs. Last year was a good example of worst case scenario as to why (even now things ain't great).

We issue the 124gr +P Gold Dot here for our 9mms, but we allow a wide variety of approved pistols and revolvers for off-duty and BUGs. Even in 9mm our officers would have a hard time finding the 124gr +P Gold Dot for personal use if we mandated such, same-same for other calibers.

At one point my whole agency had to switch approved ammo due to the 124gr +P GD being back ordered for more than a year. We found a vendor that could deliver the 124gr +P Ranger-T immediately, so I did the paperwork to approve that ammo for on duty use.

If we had mandated one type of ammo, and only that ammo, then the whole agency would have been out of luck that year.

On our approved list I basically approved Doc's suggested duty ammo list with a couple of additions for the smaller calibers in the BUG type guns (we allow .32s and .380s as an example).

This gives the troops a chance to find something that is available, and hopefully is accurate and reliable in their guns.

[Jake'sDad]

Carrying ball ammo in service caliber handguns for defensive use is just retarded as hell.

You get less "stopping power" (I know, but you know what I mean), a much greater chance of a dangerous shoot through on the bad guy, and a much higher level of potential ricochet by using FMJ ammo.

Maybe the only time ball ammo could be considered a "good" choice, would be in the sub calibers, (.25, .32, .380). Many of the hollow points in those calibers will fail to penetrate deeply enough. All the IWBA guys that I knew took that position, that it was better to at least get the penetration. I've occasionally carried mouse guns, and I put ball in them.

We issue the 124gr +P Gold Dot here for our 9mms, but we allow a wide variety of approved pistols and revolvers for off-duty and BUGs. Even in 9mm our officers would have a hard time finding the 124gr +P Gold Dot for personal use if we mandated such, same-same for other calibers.

At one point my whole agency had to switch approved ammo due to the 124gr +P GD being back ordered for more than a year. We found a vendor that could deliver the 124gr +P Ranger-T immediately, so I did the paperwork to approve that ammo for on duty use.

If we had mandated one type of ammo, and only that ammo, then the whole agency would have been out of luck that year.

What's funny, is that I know of agencies that switched from Ranger to other brands because they couldn't get it. I think some ammo distributors got better deliveries than others, or they picked and chose who got what and when. The last few years were an anomaly, with everyone buying more ammo than they ever had before, both public and LE, and none of the companies were able to keep up. From the amount of ammo I saw at Wal Mart and at the gun show, I think those days are just about over.

[tpd223]

Maybe the only time ball ammo could be considered a "good" choice, would be in the sub calibers, (.25, .32, .380). Many of the hollow points in those calibers will fail to penetrate deeply enough. All the IWBA guys that I knew took that position, that it was better to at least get the penetration. I've occasionally carried mouse guns, and I put ball in them.

I normally recommend FMJ when it comes to the tiny guns, for the same reason.