• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Mass vs. velocity for "stopping power"

Wrenches said:
Tom, I'm interested in your tests with your HP 40sw carbine. Have you done one with the Hornady 40sw 165 FTX? This is what I keep in my HP 40sw carbine.
Click to expand...

I haven't yet, but I think I might have a few of those rounds in my stash. It will be a good while before I build my milk jug supply back up, but when I do, I'll see if I can't try one of those rounds through the Hi Point. :) Take care. Tom Worthington
 
Sometimes if I need several milk jugs I just go to the bottled water aisle and buy distilled water in gallon jugs for $0.79 each or so.
 
Tom396 said:
Do you think a hollow point projectile weighing 135 grains and traveling 1200 fps or one weighing 180 grains and traveling 1000 fps would be more likely to stop the threat? And yes, I acknowledge that neither one might get it done. Also, my primary plan would be to travel at several feet per second away from the threat. Take care. Tom Worthington
Click to expand...

Something we are missing is Caliber. For more surface contact, or more tissue damage, bigger drain hole ect. My money falls on Big Caliber, bigger mass and slower velocity for more absorbed energy. Remember the 45 acp was *Issued* for the muscular pissed off and drugged up islanders in ww2.
 
Tyler said:
Something we are missing is Caliber. For more surface contact, or more tissue damage, bigger drain hole ect. My money falls on Big Caliber, bigger mass and slower velocity for more absorbed energy. Remember the 45 acp was *Issued* for the muscular pissed off and drugged up islanders in ww2.
Click to expand...

Actually the M1911 was issued long before WWII. The M1911 got the reputation you mention in the later stages of the Phillipine-American war (around 1912/1913), and later more widely used in WWI. The 1911A1 was adopted in 1924 and was the standard sidearm thru Vietnam, until the Beretta came in. Modified/updated versions of the 1911a1 are still in use, as well as the new Colt CQBP the USMC purchased a couple years ago for MarSoC and similar special use.

PS: as for the reputation of the .45acp ball, there are many far more powerful cartridges available now. The 230grn .45 acp in a 5" barrel produces approx 850fps & 369ftlbs. Compare that to my 210gr XTP .41 mag ammo in a 6 1/2" barrel Blackhawk which produces 1560 fps & 1135 ft. lbs at the muzzle (Over 3 tmes the energy, and it's not even the big boy on the block) . I guarantee the .41mag will do far more damage than the .45. :)
 
Last edited:
caliber is irrelevant in this discussion ...a 500 S&W mag will shoot through 6 islanders and make a 41mag look like a 32acp. Put a 22mag in an islanders eye or ear hole and I bet he goes down, placement trumps caliber and power probably does too like Gunny states with the lesser caliber 41 vs. bigger the 45acp .....capacity is also a viable factor in all this. 1911's and revolvers are about comparable but high power coupled high capacity leave them in the dust IMO.....
That entire WW2 45 thing don't hold water with me, I mean we are talking about a modern military that was going up against primitive people , and they regular battle rifle was a 30-06 and they needed a pistol with less or same capacity and less power than any rifle on the battlefield to bring these supermen down....how the hell did the Army run out of rifles all of a sudden ?
 
oli700 said:
caliber is irrelevant in this discussion ...a 500 S&W mag will shoot through 6 islanders and make a 41mag look like a 32acp. Put a 22mag in an islanders eye or ear hole and I bet he goes down, placement trumps caliber and power probably does too like Gunny states with the lesser caliber 41 vs. bigger the 45acp .....capacity is also a viable factor in all this. 1911's and revolvers are about comparable but high power coupled high capacity leave them in the dust IMO.....
That entire WW2 45 thing don't hold water with me, I mean we are talking about a modern military that was going up against primitive people , and they regular battle rifle was a 30-06 and they needed a pistol with less or same capacity and less power than any rifle on the battlefield to bring these supermen down....how the hell did the Army run out of rifles all of a sudden ?
Click to expand...

Prior to the M1911, the standard sidearm was a .38 revolver, which was woefully inadequate, so the .45 was a great improvement especially in terms of being able to throw lots of bullets downrange. Biggest advantage was magazine reloading of course. I'm not knocking the .45. I really like the weapons that use the cartridge and have fired many thousands of rounds thru them, (including the old grease gun, which is tons of fun). But in terms of combat effectiveness the .45acp has seen it's day, regardless of my sentimental feelings towards the old girl. I also like big roundballs in front stuffers, and the old percussion revolvers were as great an improvement over the one shot flinters as the .45 was over the .38. Progress keeps progressing. ;):) Gotta wonder what the next big leap in firearms tech will be - handheld lasers maybe? :)
 
now military use pistols I might side on size ONLY due to the fact of FMJ usage and a bigger hole.
If we are talking modern hollow point, give me a high cap 9 full of HST or Ranger
 
I think speed vs mass boils down distance and material being penatrated. I have bonded hollow points for all my pistols. I've seen the liquid displacement of a .380 through a 2 liter bottle. It was impressive. A bigger caliber would be more impressive.
 
In the early 70's when I worked for the Idaho State Police we were evaluating new handguns and ammunition. I had the opportunity to review a CHP report on their ammunition evaluations. At the time, they were using 357 Magnum ammunition. They switched to (at the time) the new +P+ 110 Grn hollow point made by Winchester. After about a year with the new ammunition, they did a report to compare the 357 and 38 Spl in actual shooting incidents. What they found was suspects shot with the 38 Spl +P+ seldom were capable of returning gun fire while suspects shot with the 357 Mag were returning gun fire. The medical experts said the shock, tissue damage and blunt force trama from the smaller but faster bullet was the reason for suspects not being able to return fire with the 38 Spl +P+ versus the 357 Mag.

It all boils down to what you want the bullet to do once it enters a material whether it be flesh, hide, sheet rock, metal, ect.

Just some food for thought.
 
terry2425 said:
They switched to (at the time) the new +P+ 110 Grn hollow point made by Winchester. After about a year with the new ammunition, they did a report to compare the 357 and 38 Spl in actual shooting incidents. What they found was suspects shot with the 38 Spl +P+ seldom were capable of returning gun fire while suspects shot with the 357 Mag were returning gun fire. The medical experts said the shock, tissue damage and blunt force trama from the smaller but faster bullet was the reason for suspects not being able to return fire with the 38 Spl +P+ versus the 357 Mag.
Click to expand...
one of the big reasons the US shoulders a 5.56 ......it dosent shoot through things as well as the 7.62x39 but flesh vs flesh the faster 556 usually does more devastating, explosive damage and takes weird turns in the body.....I have seen a couple deer taken and the damage is surprising, more meat bloodshot than a 30-30 in my exp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top