Posted on 06/16/2004 12:35:51 PM PDT by 45Auto
No subject in the firearms industry generates more print or heat than terminal performance. In the last fifteen years this issue has even become one of considerable moment with federal agencies, the FBI particularly, leading to the decision to replace entire arsenals of sidearms. Similarly, within the commercial industry we have seen the development of numerous, and occasionally exotic, bullet designs based upon various theories of wounding behavior. Some have worked well, while others have not. But for the most part, shooters and many in the firearms community still do not understand why these things work or fail. My purpose in this study is to examine what we do know and to reconsider the theories which attempt to account for the observed performance. I intend to cover the entire field of terminal ballistics controversy as fairly as possible, but I do have some very definite conclusions of my own which I believe I can explain and defend to the satisfaction of most. Furthermore, I will offer some criticism of the popular formulas for calculating terminal performance and suggest a couple which may provide a real estimate of absolute performance on game (not just a relative comparison to other loads). Although this discussion is intended for the sportsman, I will include material and argument which is of interest to the individual using small arms for self-defense or in police or military applications.
A brief word about my background is warranted. I am a mechanical engineer by profession and employed in the defense industry as an analyst and designer of anti-armor lethal mechanisms (ie, warheads and penetrators). Terminal ballistics is both my hobby and my profession. On the job I use a computational tool known as a "hydrocode" called CTH, which was developed by Sandia National Laboratory, to perform penetration analyses, along with code that I have written for specific applications. My knowledge and studies cover the entire spectrum of penetration mechanics from small arms to high explosive shaped charges. I have extensively read the best forensic studies of bullet behavior, as well as the classic works on field performance by Whelen, Baker, Selous, Taylor, O'Connor, etc. While I freely admit that I haven't personally shot a great number of game animals, I have witnessed others being shot and examined still more post-mortem, to confirm or refute by my own experience the published observations and "pontifications" of hunters. I try not to speak dogmatically on subjects beyond my ken, but where the concensus of thought by sage and seasoned hunters tends toward a clear conclusion, I am not hesitant to assert it.
I believe in being forthright, so I will jump in with both feet and state the premise of my own theory of terminal ballistics. The title of this article is a hint. Plainly stated, I maintain that the effect of bullets upon living targets is caused by the wound track made by the bullet. Now, before you accuse me of being a wise guy, recall that most theoretical explanations of wounding are tied to the kinetic energy or momentum or some other such physical quantity of the bullet which is "transferred" or imparted to the target. My theory recognizes these characteristics, but relies upon a fundamentally different premise, which is that two physically equivalent wound tracks in a game animal will have an equivalent effect, no matter how different were the kinetic energies or other physical attributes of the bullets which caused them. There are some extremely rarely encountered exceptions to the general rule, but for most purposes the hole caused by a bullet is its only measure of terminal effectiveness.
Your description of my old and very reliable Marlin lever .35 Remington is quite accurate. As a deer gun in Central VA it is quick handling and invariably effective.
I would love to have the semi-auto version you mention but have not seen any...
Where does one procure such elegant rounds??
The most important thing in stopping is bullet placement then velocity, followed by bullet size and construction.
There really doesn't seem to be many hard and fast rules. I once read a good true story about a Belgian paratrooper who actually had killed lots of people with a handgun. This was during the 50's when the Congolese were literally killing and eating Whites. His favorite pistol was the little Browning .32 auto.
Interestingly another famous fighter also liked the little .32, he was William Fairbairn.
I appreciate the old .45 auto and also the Browning HP but suspect the .357 magnum performs better than either.
I recall reading a great magazine article by Russell Annabell in Sports Afield maybe 30 years ago. He was an old Alaska Sourdough and was telling about killing a pack of wolves which attacked his mule train. His gun was the Colt Woodsman .22 of which he said there should be a monument built somewhere.I have personally seen the .45 acp fail miserably on raccoons and had a .22 auto kill easily with a single shot. Now I don't think a .22 is better than a .45 but I do think placement is by far the most important factor.
The ones I have are a bit wider in the point than the ones you get these days, BUT they come in 3in for a little extra thwack.
http://www.remington.com/ammo/shotshell/pcs_sabsl.htm
Accuracy is exceptional, producing groups of 2 ½ inches or less from Remington's fully-rifled slug barrels. The result is the most effective game-dropping performance of any known deer slug.
Thanks! I will check it out!
I've run prolly 30 or so of these rounds through my Mossberg.
They hit your shoulder hard, but it blows the hell outta the target even at 50 yards. Sounds like a cannon going off. /snicker.
I can only guess that the recoil is not as bad as a .50bmg or a .4570 Sharpes Buffalo gun, or is it??
>>Any barrel damage?
I can only guess that the recoil is not as bad as a .50bmg or a .4570 Sharpes Buffalo gun, or is it??<<
I've got a rifled slug barrel on it. Visually there's no damage. Never shot either of those. Hits like a muzzle loader with no recoil pad on it. It hurts, heh. I've got a picture of blue shoulder after I shot 25 rounds one afternoon.
I have no doubt that it's one shot one kill. None. Specially if you hit them mid chest or higher. In a limb, the limb comes of, no question. Fun to shoot a few times just for pure shock value at the range. Usually get "is that a 10ga."? Heh.
Been some years now though. Don't know what the shelf life is one these, the ones I have are getting a bit older.
-Mal
I agree. I own an HK-91 and and AR-15 and if I had to carry one very far with accompanying ammo I would definately carry the AR. For home protection I have a .45 Kimber and a 12 guage Mossberg with 3 inch 000 buck.
My 12 gauge Winchester 1300 has a pistol grip at both ends. I didn't like it at first, but I like it now. I have more left hand control.
Take care and stay safe!!!
Eaker
The .50 gives you a violent shove. The Sharpes is like getting hit with a hammer. A big hammer.
Take care and stay safe!!!
A .22 might require more than just a few shots to get a youthful thug, scared and full of adrenaline (or drugs) to go down and stay down.
It depends on where you hit him (even one round in the head could 'crash his computer' pretty well): I consider myself a pretty fair shot and believe I could empty a clip within a head-sized area even in the longest distance I could manage a shot inside my house. Granted, emotions/adrenaline/lighting/etc. are factors against gaining such an accomplishment but I can empty/reclip/repeat/repeat/repeat/etc. (got a bunch of clips at a GOOD discount) at a pretty decent speed.
...the last six when into the dead guy AFTER he was on the ground...
"Nossir y'r honner, I wuz just s'scared I couldn' stop pullin'." (and just ran-out the clip) Note to all: only keep triggering as long as they're upright, and remember that head shots are a noble and time-honored tradition - his torso isn't your immediate enemy; the brain is running the show. Naturally, the torso is an easier target of opportunity but if your weapon is loaded with 'tankstoppers' the jury might misunderstand.
...crossed the mental Rubicon...
LOL! I honestly haven't heard that since my first safety course! Honestly! Did you ever see "Shoot, Don't Shoot"?
Seriously though, of course a one-round upright show-stopper is the easiest thing to explain (and clean up/repair afterward) but you have to take any advantage you can get. I like your 00/slug/00/slug idea. I have several pieces secreted around the house within convenient reach, with special attention to the bedroom.
I too hope I never have to use them but my initial plan (for a single target) is just to knock 'im down and then apply the ubiquitous "heavy brass candlestick" ("well sir: I ran out of shots, and he started getting up again and reachin' for his gun, and..."). They ARE rather baroque-looking but are family heirlooms (since we stopped at that tag sale last fall). Projectiles are more efficient, but there's something compassion-inducing and believable (in court) about protecting your family by simple, old-fashioned bludgeoning (I would refer you to several 'Rumpole of the Bailey' stories). :D
In my opinion the best inside home defense weapon is a 12 ga shotgun with a short barrel loaded with #1 shot. Around town I pack an Officer length 45ACP 1911. I have a large assortment of weapons from .17 HRM Revolver to a Barret 50BMG and a 75 caliber Brown Bess Musket. They are all fun to shoot, but there are only a few that I "train" with and the shotgun and the 45 are the ones I trust most.
Bottom line is the most effective round is the one you use, the one you are competent with.
Plus there's one law in physics that I always liked;
f=ma (force = mass x acceleration)
For example, take a 45 grain .223 at 3550fps (muzzle) or a 170 grain 8mm Mauser bullet going at 2360fps. Remington test data states that at 200 yards the .223 has 590 ft-lbs of energy compared to 993 ft-lbs for my 8mm. Plus over 200 yards the .233 data is blank - except for "short range bullet drop". To me, that sort of says it all. An AR is fine for certain uses but not as a main-line rifle.
As pistols and the .40 S&W, I can't say much. I tend to shy away from new 'designer' type calibers. I mean, wasn't the 10mm the 'hot' caliber a few years back?
Anyway, I like the 9mm for one basic reason, standardization and ammo availability. As when the U.N. Blue helmets come here, and they will, they'll be packing 9mm guns and extra ammo - for me :-)
But you know, this is another great things about guns, we all have our favorites and it's all a matter of personal choice.
God bless America and the 2nd Amendment.
I'm still not done with my 'collection'.
A shotgun is on the list along with a 1911 .45ACP, a 7.62x39 SKS (interchangeable 20 round mags are available), and a .45LC 'Peacemaker' - or good clone by Barreta or US Arms. The Ruger Vaquero isn't bad either.
Oh and in my 1st post I mentioned the 9x18 Makarov, well I actually bought that for the wife.
Good shooting :-)
my ar15 68 grain at 2700 feet
Range Vel. Energy Total
yds fps ft/lbs Drop
0 2700 1100 0.0
25 2639 1051 -0.2
50 2580 1004 -0.6
75 2521 959 -1.4
100 2463 915 -2.5
125 2406 873 -4.0
150 2350 833 -5.9
175 2294 794 -8.2
200 2240 757 -10.8
225 2186 721 -13.9
250 2132 686 -17.5
275 2079 652 -21.6
300 2027 620 -26.1
325 1976 589 -31.1
350 1925 559 -36.7
375 1876 531 -42.8
400 1827 503 -49.7
425 1780 478 -57.1
450 1733 453 -65.5
475 1687 429 -74.6
500 1643 407 -84.2
525 1599 386 -94.7
550 1556 365 -106.0
575 1514 346 -117.9
600 1472 327 -130.9
625 1433 310 -145.6
650 1396 294 -160.7
675 1359 278 -177.6
700 1325 265 -195.0
725 1291 251 -214.1
750 1258 238 -234.6
775 1227 227 -255.6
800 1199 217 -279.7
825 1173 207 -303.9
850 1147 198 -331.0
875 1124 190 -359.1
900 1103 183 -388.1
925 1083 177 -419.8
950 1064 170 -454.2
975 1047 165 -489.3
1000 1031 160 -526.5 43.8 feet
Your mauser 8 mm at 2360 fps
Range Vel. Energy Total
yds fps ft/lbs Drop
0 2360 2102 0.0
25 2304 2003 -0.2
50 2249 1909 -0.8
75 2195 1818 -1.9
100 2141 1730 -3.4
125 2088 1645 -5.4
150 2036 1564 -7.8
175 1985 1487 -10.7
200 1934 1411 -14.3
225 1884 1339 -18.4
250 1835 1270 -23.1
275 1788 1206 -28.5
300 1741 1144 -34.6
325 1695 1084 -41.5
350 1650 1027 -49.1
375 1606 973 -57.5
400 1563 922 -66.6
425 1521 873 -76.4
450 1479 825 -87.2
475 1440 782 -99.5
500 1402 741 -112.6
525 1366 704 -126.7
550 1330 667 -142.6
575 1297 634 -158.8
600 1264 603 -176.8
625 1232 572 -196.1
650 1204 547 -217.2
675 1177 522 -239.6
700 1152 500 -263.0
725 1127 479 -289.3
750 1106 461 -316.7
775 1086 445 -345.5
800 1067 429 -376.9
825 1050 416 -409.1
850 1033 402 -445.3
875 1018 391 -482.0
900 1004 380 -520.0
925 990 369 -562.1
950 978 361 -602.3
975 965 351 -650.4
1000 954 343 -695.2 58.1 feet
yds fps ft/lbs Inches
We kill more gorilla in ND and SD with the 223 that we do with the 308 bullet 100 to 1.
The 223 has it place.
Semper Fe
PS I noticed the drop is signifcantly more 58 vs 42 feet for the two bullets.
long time gorilla hunter from South Dakota.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.