It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
bobbyrlf3 wrote: »
For those of you who have done the testing and found that handgun rounds penetrate more than rifle (.223) rounds, and those of you with experience in these matters:
Please elaborate on the disparity of effectiveness in these rounds with regards to SD/HD situations. It has been said on numerous occasions by several members here that handgun rounds offer "poor" performance as man-stoppers, yet we have here some evidence of performance that may appear to contradict that statement.
For the sake of clarity, please explain the difference between the penetration performance we've read about here, and the overall effectiveness difference between handgun and rifle rounds with regards to stopping a determined threat.
I need more edjumucation!
Zee wrote: »
In simple terms..........speed kills.
Rifle cartridges generate more velocity. More velocity results in more hydrostatic shock. More hydrostatic shock results in more catastrophic damage to surrounding tissue (temporary cavity) apart from the permanent cavity caused by the bullet. More bang for your buck!!
Watered down simple answer.
Teach wrote: »
Speed kills, but getting bludgeoned might end the fight a little more quickly. If you stab me with an ice pick you might inflict a fatal wound, eventually, but if you hit me with a Louisville Slugger it's a lot less likely I'll be in shape to press on with an attack, for the next few seconds, anyhow. A peripheral hit with a fairly slow-moving 230 grain bullet might be a better deterrent to an attacker than a hit in the same place with a 55 grain .223. Either one would get the job done with a central core hit, but under stress, with possibly less than ideal lighting and/or shooting positions, I think I'd err on the side of putting a heavier, albeit slower persuader downrange. A shotgun slug or a densely-packed group of pellets that will have virtually the same effect on a living target would be even better, IMHO.
tubabucknut wrote: »
A local PD did some testing on cars. Their 9mms penetrated the car more than the 223 rounds. The 223 were not strong enough for the high velocity hits on the steel. They just disentegrated in most instances. On drywall they were just lasers.
pjames777 wrote: »
M1 Carbine at my house. Short and easy to manuver around corners and 15 rounds fire quickly with little recoil....backed by a .38spl with laser grips.
Teach wrote: »
The paneling in my living room has a 6.5 MM hole in one corner thanks to a real stupid attack on my part. I opened the bolt on a Swede Mauser, checked the chamber, closed it, and handed the rifle to a friend- - - -"Try the trigger pull". He did, and shot a hole in the wall! I had picked up a round out of the magazine I didn't realize was there when I closed the bolt. A 125 grain Nosler Partition went through the paneling, diagonally through an 8" concrete block, and put a hole in the vinyl siding. That bullet is somewhere out in the front pasture now!
Zee wrote: »
I like choices.
By my bed, I have an:
AR with 64gr GD
Shotgun w/ 2-3/4" 00 Buck
G34 9mm w/ 124gr +p+ Hydra-Shok
NCFUBAR wrote: »
As HD, the worst thing for an AR to me would be the damn report ... an SBR with a can would be okay but you'll blow an eardrum touching off a few rounds of 5.56 indoors ... try it in a shoot house and just feel it the report with hearing protection and you'll see.
breamfisher wrote: »
I picked up tinnitus from shooting a .357 without ear protection, outside, some 22+ years ago. And it wasn't that much ammo. I'm sure a 5.56 is worse but....
I think anything that's sufficient for HD/SD will cause hearing issues if fired indoors.
Temporary Price Reduction
Give a Gift
PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE
Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.