7.62x25 cont.
Actual chronographed velocity averages from military 7.62x25 are as follows from A TT33:
Polish 1481fps, Romanian 1954 1458fps, Romanian 1985 1485, Russian steel case 1504. All bullets were copper wash over soft steel with lead core.
I believe recent Czech Sellier & Bellot commercial ammo is or was advertising 1600-1650fps.
Std 9mm and mil loads are very shootable for follow on shots.
9mm Hirtenberger +P+ 124 gr from 9mm Tokarev 213 1308fps.
Recoil from from this load is severe.
A commercial muzzle brake tames recoil significantly from this 31 ounce pistol.
Polish 1481fps, Romanian 1954 1458fps, Romanian 1985 1485, Russian steel case 1504. All bullets were copper wash over soft steel with lead core.
I believe recent Czech Sellier & Bellot commercial ammo is or was advertising 1600-1650fps.
Std 9mm and mil loads are very shootable for follow on shots.
9mm Hirtenberger +P+ 124 gr from 9mm Tokarev 213 1308fps.
Recoil from from this load is severe.
A commercial muzzle brake tames recoil significantly from this 31 ounce pistol.
0
-
This is good information, though I don't think it really speaks to the original question about whether or not a 7.62x25 will go through the ACH LV3a helmet.
Responding to comments from the earlier thread on this:
quote:Its [7.62x25] a common round used by the alleged enemies of the u.s. government. Not sure exactly whom/what you mean by "alleged enemies of the US gov't"; ie we're not technically in a state of war with anyone right now, except maybe North Korea, as a historical legacy from the 1950s.
North Korea very well may still be fielding 7.62x25 handguns, but unless you're currently stationed in S. Korea, I think the likelihood of you getting into a gunfight with a North Korean soldier is fairly "remote".
So far as I know, all of the Commie bloc countries that used to issue 7.62x25 in handguns have moved on, almost uniformly to 9mm luger. A few do still issue 9x18mm handguns, though I think you can feel good that your helmet will stop those! Russia, Czech Republic, Poland, Lithuania, etc, all issue 9mm luger guns standard now, and many of these are just issuing Glocks! Even China now issues 9mm guns standard.
I'm not saying you can't go across the globe and find 7.62x25 handguns in use. . .there are plenty of old guns still in service. . .just that these are probably more of the exception than the norm now and they're more likely to be carried by private individuals or militias than nation-state armies. Longarms capable of punching right through your fancy helmet are probably 20x more prevalent, and realistically probably most a much higher risk.
quote:and as stated its a personal carry round of mine in the Yugo M57 Tokarev using jhp rounds due to its destructive capabilities over many other rounds. I see the interest, obviously, but realistically, I don't really see how that matters unless you expect someone to shoot you in the head with your own gun. As a general rule, American criminals, police and military are not carrying 7.62x25 handguns.
To try and answer your question, here is a youtube video. Cutting to the chase, the poster's 7.62x25 handgun did go through the tested level 3 vest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1o6IXyp8q4
"Box of Truth" testing had a 7.62x25 go through BOTH SIDES of a Kevlar helmet, unfortunately brand/make not specified:
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot29_4.htm
This vendor CLAIMS that their IIIa helmet stops 7.62x25 (I think a few others do as well), but bluntly, I'd feel a lot better trusting the claim if I could see the test results with my own eyes. Again, WHICH 7.62x25, from what gun, and at what angle all matter.
http://www.tradekorea.com/e-catalogue/lotus/product-detail/P00358279/Bullet_proof_Helmet.html#.U2Khy6JkXlc
Bottom line for me is what I said in the last thread on this. If you really want to know the truth, you probably have to get a helmet then test it yourself.
quote:Helmet companies really should include the Tokarev round in their testing since they test another pistol round in the 9x19mm also used by the alleged enemies of the u.s. government.In an ideal world, I'd agree they probably should, ESPECIALLY for any helmet designed for military use (which presumably is ALL of these), but realistically, I get the sense that many won't stand up to this round. Helmets are mostly for repelling shrapnel, not so much for blocking direct hits from small arms.0 -
quote:Originally posted by v35
Actual chronographed velocity averages from military 7.62x25 are as follows from A TT33:
Polish 1481fps, Romanian 1954 1458fps, Romanian 1985 1485, Russian steel case 1504. All bullets were copper wash over soft steel with lead core.
I believe recent Czech Sellier & Bellot commercial ammo is or was advertising 1600-1650fps.
9mm Hirtenberger +P+ 124 gr 1308 from 9mm Tokarev 213 1308fps.
A commercial muzzle brake tames recoil significantly from this 31 ounce pistol.
One more to the pile, I was at J&G in the late '90's when they chronographed Chinese military 7.62x25, also of a soft steel jacket with a lead core. Ten shots averaged 1,541 FPS, with one round pulling down an average that would have been otherwise higher.
Not dealing with bullet-resistant material, my running count of incidents of the one-shot effectiveness of the cartridge (from a Russian-hosted veteran's website), is up to 15, with 14 DRT's and one survivor who said he was knocked out by the bullet strike, which was a torso hit. I excluded multiple hits and hits in the head, for obvious reasons. The last two incidents were that of: a Russian squad leader who eliminated a German squad leader when their respective squads met in the woods. The Russian missed with his first shot, but scored with his second one, while the German was still trying to get his MP40 unslung; and a Russian officer with two broken legs who was being dragged to the rear by two antitank gun crewmen, who had not taken their Carbines. They encountered two German infantrymen, and the Officer took both of them out with one shot apiece from his Tokarev.
I included a kind of a Murphy's Law incident in my count, that of a Russian NCO who took a pot-shot at a discarded German helmet with his Tokarev. The bullet took the inside curve of the helmet and did a 180, coming straight back at the sergeant and striking him in the chest, killing him. And now I am way off the subject of kevlar helmets...0 -
In Shooting To Live by Sykes & Fairborne they quoted the effectiveness of the '96 pistol and 30 Mauser ctge as pulping bone if struck by it.
In '53 I put a captured 7.62x25 TT33 & PPSH 41 round through a fresh USArmy creosoted RR tie using a real doggy Russian TT33.
More recently I repeated the act using later Comnibloc ammo thru a new TT33.
Given the Tokarev's thickness, weight and size it would make a good CCW weapon.
Some ROK Army officers carried them in preference to 1911A1 service pistols.
If they wont penetrate todays' US helmets they have been handloaded to much higher levels.0 -
Responding to above, the 7.62x25 is, in effect, a miniature rifle round. It uses a bottleneck cartridge and fires a relatively light .30 (ie rifle-type) caliber projectile really fast.
While I don't think you can discount stories of its effectiveness in the field, ultimately these kinds of things are anecdotal; the numerous stories of 7.62 FAILURE don't get ingrained into the memory and you're not going to hear about them 50 years later.
Conversely, I'm sure you can find plenty of interesting performance stories about 45ACP and even 9mm luger rounds if you look hard enough. I've got a few 9mm stories. . .I won't bother to post them here again, but suffice it to say that despite the popular conception, my impression is that 9mm luger is pretty effective too.
If you look at the actual ballistics of 7.62x25, (lets call it a .310 caliber 85-90 grain bullet at 1400-1500fps), they're virtually identical to a premium 9mm+P with the same bullet weight. EG, Corbon claims 1500 fps for its 90 grain 9mm luger +P. Grizzly claims 1550 fps for its 90 gr 9mm+P. Allegiance claims 1450 fps for its "powerstrike" 9mm 90 grain. I think Winchester's frangible 9mm+P Ranger 90 grain gets 1400 fps.
These are every bit as good as the 7.62x25 with the biggest difference being that the 9mm luger uses fatter bullets (IMO probably a GOOD thing). Meanwhile 9mm guns are available in a much wider range of configurations, including compact concealable forms with excellent sights, polymer frames, redundant safeties, high capacity, and all the other modern features that people like.
Interestingly, the conventional wisdom is that you *DON'T* want to use these lightweight 90 grain 9mm rounds because they have REDUCED penetration compared to more conventional 115 or 124 grain 9mms!
If you want to step up a notch, you can get even higher velocities using the same 90 grain 9mm bullets in a .357 SIG. EG, Grizzly claims a screaming 1850 fps with its version of this:
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/613708/grizzly-ammunition-357-sig-90-grain-jacketed-hollow-point-box-of-20
Here's the point. There is no doubt that 7.62x25 is a potentially good round. The bottleneck cartridge shape aids reliability, and of course steel core ammo doesn't hurt penetration (if that's what you're after). But in terms of pure external ballistics, this cartridge really isn't any better than current service rounds loaded with light bullets and the modern guns offer many potential advantages.
How can it be that a 90 grain .310 caliber bullet at 1500 fps is a super-penetrating death ray, but a 90 grain .356 caliber bullet at 1500 fps is a weak pill you want to avoid for lack of penetration?
I think the answer here is mostly that the 7.62x25 is a more exotic round fired from less common (in the USA) guns, so it just SEEMS better, even if it isn't really true. Ultimately there are reasons why virtually all of the countries experienced with 7.62x25, have abandoned it, and why almost nobody is making new guns for this.
Now in terms of contemporary self-defense application, stipulating that this round actually DOES offer the high penetration its supposed to, to me that's more of a DISADVANTAGE than an advantage.
Realistically its unlikely that you'll actually have to shoot through armor or semi-hard cover in a self-defense situation. Meanwhile, the chance of you firing a shot and missing your target, or even hitting it and having the bullet zip right through (eg soft tissue) is reasonably high.
What happens if/when you're launching projectiles that have a serious. . .and recognized. . .side effect of penetrating through armor and one of them hits something that maybe you didn't mean to hit? Not sure I want an expert witness to testify that if only I were using a "normal" gun like "everyone else" that my launched bullet would not have hit the (gas tank, baby, whatever).0 -
From all that I've read, I think that equal reliance can be placed on the .45, the 9mm, and the x25, as regards taking down an aggressor. Granted, each cartridge has its detractors (or champions), but I also think that, in civilian circles, too much emphasis is placed on making a one-shot stop with anything. Life is best preserved by filling the air with flying empties until the bullets start going over the top of a target that is down, [:0].
I also think that the danger of over-penetration, is over-billed. Street criminals usually pick environments where there is no one around to intervene or to even be a witness.0 -
quote:From all that I've read, I think that equal reliance can be placed on the .45, the 9mm, and the x25, as regards taking down an aggressor. Granted, each cartridge has its detractors (or champions), but I also think that, in civilian circles, too much emphasis is placed on making a one-shot stop with anything. Life is best preserved by filling the air with flying empties until the bullets start going over the top of a target that is down, [:0].
I also think that the danger of over-penetration, is over-billed. Street criminals usually pick environments where there is no one around to intervene or to even be a witness.
Agree with all of above.
My main point is just that 7.62x25 isn't some kind of "super round", that's all. You can get the same external ballistics with an "ordinary" 9mm, if you like, and you can do even better yet with a few other fairly conventional rounds.
Put differently, there is a functional limit to what kind of ballistics you can get out of ANY handgun that is both practical to carry and to issue as a defense/service weapon. 7.62x25 lies at one end of the "light-fast bullet"/"heavy slow bullet" spectrum, with something like a 45ACP on the other end of that spectrum.
Empirically speaking, all these things can work. Personally, I'm firmly convinced that once you hit a certain energy and penetration level, caliber just isn't that important. Its much more about WHERE the bullet hits, then what type of bullet it is.
On your second point, I've heard that statistically speaking, the likelihood of mortality from projectile impacts is not directly proportionate to the number of hits, but actually proportionate to the SQUARE of the number of hits.
In other words, if you're shot twice, you're roughly FOUR times more likely to die than having only been shot once, and if you're hit three times, you're actually NINE times as likely to die. Its not just that two hits are twice as likely to hit a vital organ, but rather that two cumulative wounds are more than twice as disruptive as one (etc). So that's a bit of food for thought in terms of self-defense and rounds fired!
On the last point, I think overpenetration is much more of an issue with police (or civilians) who may need to use their guns in populated/urban areas. It might be an issue for someone who is picking a home-defense gun especially if they live in a crowded area (ie maybe you DON'T want to pick 7.62x25 for that!). But just because nobody is standing around outside watching when the criminals mug you doesn't necessarily mean that nobody is INSIDE and your bullet fired outside can't find them.
Stray bullets (fired by criminals AND law enforcement) DO go through buildings and hit people. This kind of thing isn't uncommon. . .here are just a few examples of this sort of thing from the last 12 months:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/11/police-belt-buckle-saves-employee-hit-by-stray-bullet-inside-philadelphia/
http://www.whas11.com/news/Girl-hit-by-bullet-from-outside-Indianapolis-home-254920471.html
http://wavy.com/2014/04/15/stray-bullet-hits-woman-in-face/
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/29/4-men-face-new-charges-in-death-nebraska-girl-hit-by-stray-bullet-while-eating/
In most of these cases, these were bullets fired by "bad" people in "bad" areas, but I think the general principle still applies. If you fire a weapon in self-defense, unfortunately, you're probably much more likely to be held accountable for the results compared to some punk criminal who shoots in the dark and then runs away. So if you have the ability to choose whatever you like, this probably is still a worthwhile factor to think about, even if the likelihood of you actually hitting a third party is remote.0 -
There is also specialty ammo for the 7.62x25 having higher velocity and lighter bullet, hence greater energy.
I'd be wary of 9mm specialty bullets for self defense should a defense attorney get wind of it.
The TT33 having .825" slide width stands alone in a high power pistol; most of which are 1- 1 1/4" wide and are pretty bulky for ccw.
The Czech 52 shoots 7.62x25 very well but is also bulkier.
Add to that,Tokarevs can also shoot +P+ 9mm.
38 Super conversions were put out by China Sport at one time.
A former contributor converted one to 9x23 and failed to blow it up.
Given these features at a $200 price it's a tough combination to beat.
Service holster pistols have different criteria.0 -
quote:Originally posted by v35
I'd be wary of 9mm specialty bullets for self defense should a defense ["plaintiffs"] attorney get wind of it.
In terms of legal liability, I've always been told that anything labelled by the manufacturer as "for personal protection/defense" is what you're after for carry purposes. As a secondary consideration, if said ammo is carried by a local police force, that doesn't hurt either (ie if the ammo in question is so dangerous/unconventional why do the friendly neighborhood cops carry it?).
What you want to avoid is any sort of "whiz bang" ammo with crazy labels (ie "widowmaker" "Zombie neutralizer") or true armor piercing ammo. The latter all by itself is probably good evidence of negligence, and any secondary damage you cause with that kind of ammo is probably indefensible in court.
In this particular case, for example, the Corbon 90 grain 9mm+P is labelled "Cor-Bon Self-Defense Ammunition 9mm Luger +P 90 Grain Jacketed Hollow Point".
Of course you never know what "expert" witnesses are willing to say in exchange for cash, but I think a plaintiff's or State attorney is really going to have a hard time making much out of that particular type of ammo. EG, you'll find any number of true experts who would be happy to testify that 90 grain 9mm ammo is typically selected to reduce recoil and/or over-penetration, and that not only is it no more deadly or dangerous than the conventional ammo, but the converse is probably true.
Again, I'm not actually advocating that anyone use 90 grain 9mm+P; I just brought this up to show the ballistic similarity to 7.62x25.
In terms of a Tokarev for actual carry, there are two questions really. A. Is the thing effective?, and B. Are there any special legal implications?
On the first thing, I don't think anyone is denying the efficacy of either the 7.62x25 or that platform. For several reasons, that wouldn't be my choice, but this is largely a question of personal preference; if you like it, carry it. . .you could definitely do worse.
On legality, that's going to depend on the circumstances. If the shooting is otherwise "clean" it pretty much doesn't matter what you use; if you're facing an unambiguous threat to your life, you otherwise behave responsibly and you shoot an assailant with an otherwise legal gun, its going to tough to persuade a jury that you should face legal sanction.
The legal issues really spring up either with bullets you shot that hit something OTHER than your attacker, or if the shooting is not perfectly "clean". Without getting into detail, if you happen to be carrying a particular type of gun/ammo known to penetrate armor, then you're potentially putting yourself at more legal risk should your bullet hit something it shouldn't, particularly if it passes through a wall or such in between. I don't think this by itself invalidates something like a Tokarev for carry, its just one more consideration, that's all.
EDIT
quote:An interesting legal angle emerges. Perps can be held responsible for the death of an accomplice at the hands of a victim who is acting defensively. Which may mean that they could be held responsible for death or injury to a third person, if it was caused by a defensive response of an intended victim to their criminal act.
They probably could, but even assuming an accomplice is held criminally liable for the bad shot YOU took, that won't let you off the hook, certainly not in civil litigation.
The way it works in civil litigation is that the plaintiff finds the money first, then connects backwards to create a chain that connects the money to their client. As a matter of practice, criminal defendants usually don't have insurance or seizeable assets, where as civil defendants have homes, bank accounts, etc.
If you pull the trigger, and accidentally hit person "Z" causing them "grievous physical and emotional injury", the fact that thug "X" might be held criminally liable for your shot doesn't let you off the hook. You're still responsible for what you did and if it looks bad/wrong/questionable to a jury (or even if it doesn't, but they find the plaintiff sympathetic) you may still have to pay according to whatever fraction the jury assigns to you.
Bottom line is, if you injure something or someone with a stray shot and you've got money, there is a real chance you may have to pay up. Even if you don't have money, you could still be held financially liable via garnishment of future earnings/income if the plaintiffs think you might have enough in the future to bother going after it.0 -
An interesting legal angle emerges. Perps can be held responsible for the death of an accomplice at the hands of a victim who is acting defensively. Which may mean that they could be held responsible for death or injury to a third person, if it was caused by a defensive response of an intended victim to their criminal act.
There is probably a body of case law, somewhere...0 -
It isn't a matter of "legal liability". It's a matter of fact that the lawyer WILL use anything they can to make you look bad to the jury.
I have mentioned before that I was a juror in a murder trial & the prosecutor went way out of his way to mention SEVERAL times with different witnesses that the defendant used hollow-point bullets.
He did mess up once though.
He failed to properly prep one detective & when he asked why someone would use hollow -point bullets the answer was, "To prevent over-penetration to protect innocent bystanders." It was all I could do to keep from laughing out loud.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments