Thread: Ballistics confusion

Not always immediately........

can never go wrong w/an AR-15...



as for some round info...


45's have a big, blunt nose...meaning when they hit you, they hit you HARD! as far as their stopping power, its basically like punching somebody in the chest to knock them back......many people won't even carry hollow points because they move so slowly, they don't open up right...and can be more damaging as FMJ's.


now 5.56/.223.......it's a man-dropper. it has such a pointy, narrow profile that once it strikes something, the ass-end of it has a SHIT TON more momentum than the front end, and therefore the back end flips over the front end and it "tumbles" through it's target.....often meaning it scrambles your organs.......


People talk about velocities, mass, and energy transfer.....but few people remember to think about basic physics of contact.

If you actually want to learn about terminal balistics, this isn't the best forum for it. You're going to get a lot of half-baked stuff and suppositions and absolutist statements like "a 5.56 will scramble your organs." Google "terminal ballistics" and prepare to read for hours and hours, and see loads of examples of wound cavities in gelatin, and all kinds of other research.

*In General:*
Kinetic energy, momentum, and bullet design all matter. Even something like "How does a 5.56mm bullet behave on impact?" varies a lot depending on bullet weight, barrel twist rate, barrel length, range, and so forth. In sum-total, 5.56mm is a medicre rifle round, but beats the hell out of a pistol at range. 7.62x39 is probably marginally more effective, and 7.62mm x 51mm and 7.62x54 are considerably more effective than either, with larger wound cavities, greater probabilty of full penetration, and resultant higher blood loss.

In terms of one-shot-stop percentages for handguns, .357 mag, .45acp and 40 S&W all perform very well. Some other cartridges should do as well or better based on their ballistics, but don't have the same amount of usage in military/law enforcement engagements to define the same statistical probabilities, like 10mm.

9mm does not perform as well historically at handgun velocities, but part of that is due to statistically poor performance of the 9mm FMJ. A modern 9mm HP is generally reasonably effective. While perfomance of 9mm is not as good as .40 or .45, the trade-off is reduced recoil, and there will be endless debate as to whether the controllability of a 9mm makes it superior. The reality is (IMO) it depends on the shooter. If you have enough practice, you can put .40 or .45 on target just as quickly, in which case why would you go with the less effective round? Others will argue that if you can do well (in terms of accuracy per unit time) with a .40, for example, you can always do better with a 9mm. In my experience this isn't necessarily true, but I practice a lot more with .40 than 9mm, so YMMV.

And yes, .22LR can be lethal. It has been said that more people have been killed by .22LR than any other cartridge. What matters to my purposes though is maximum probability of rapid incapacitation, and on a shot for shot basis, .22LR, .25, 7.62Tokarev, 9mm Short (.380 ACP), and similar rounds simply do not perform as well as the "major" cartridges. That having been said, I have a P3AT (.380) for occasional back-up use because I think it's still better than a sharp stick.