Smaller handgun cartridges FMJ better than JHP???
I've actually believed this for a while but it recently came up in a debate with some friends and I kinda wanted to get some other viewpoints.
In smaller and weaker handgun cartridges such as the .25acp and .32acp from my understanding it is better to have a fmj than any type of expanding bullet because of the already limited penetration capability of the cartridge that it may be ineffective in reaching a vital organ if an individual is large, thick boned, and or wears thick cloths.
I understand that until they endorsed the DPX cartridge that Thunder Ranch for the longest time preached the use of FMJ in 1911's and other guns as opposed to hollow points for reasons of reliability and penetration.
In smaller and weaker handgun cartridges such as the .25acp and .32acp from my understanding it is better to have a fmj than any type of expanding bullet because of the already limited penetration capability of the cartridge that it may be ineffective in reaching a vital organ if an individual is large, thick boned, and or wears thick cloths.
I understand that until they endorsed the DPX cartridge that Thunder Ranch for the longest time preached the use of FMJ in 1911's and other guns as opposed to hollow points for reasons of reliability and penetration.
0
-
I have a very low opinion of the .25 ACP w/fmj for the following reason. In the early 80's I happened to drive up on a drug transaction in an out of the way area near my farm. The dealer immediately pointed a little 25 at me and I raised my hands to show I was compliant. He then shot at my head from about 10'. The 25 fmj bullet went through my right bicep, struck my forehead, skidded under the skin for 1 1/2", exited the skin, entered my left bicep, and stopped. Stunned, I jerked my head back as his second shot from about 6' entered the skin at the hairline center of my forehead and failing to penetrate the skull exited the skin, poked a hole in my cap and was found in the headliner of my pickup. Neither bullet was damaged in amy way except for very light rifling marks. I have no faith in fmj of any size and use them only for targets. One advantage of a HP is the edge created by the divot which tends to prevent sliding on an angled target. 0 -
For what it is worth, my experience has been as follows: years ago I investigated an armed robbery/attempted homicide. The actors attacked the victim as he was entering his van after departing a convience store. Once inside they displayed handguns and ordered the victim to porceed to a MAC machine and withdraw cash. He would then be let go. However, once he did this they forced him to the back of the van and shot at him point blank, several times. He was struck twice before the guns "jammed" and the actors fled. He was rendered unconscious for a time and upon regaining consciuousness he managed to return to the store and enter before collapsing just inside the door. To shorten this a little, I will fast forward to my interview at the hospital. He tells me he was shot in the face/head because he heard the "bang" and saw the flash! Upon questionsing the E.R. Doctor I was told "no he was not shot, he was struck with a blunt object." When I explained to the Doctor that he heard the "bang" and saw the "flash", the doctor dismissed this as the "strike" and the accompaning "flash" from such trauma! At that point an x-ray tech. produced an x-ray displaying two small Cal. bullets lodged under his scalp, one having entered in the area of his right cheek bone, proceeding up around his ear and stopping just below the ear. The other other entering above his left eye and proceeding along his skull until stopping near the base of the left ear! End of the story: weapons used: two junk semi-autos in 25 & 32 Cal. Bullets: FMJ.
Obviously this could have been much worse! The good news is the idiots were "bad shots." The bad news is, they did in fact know what they had to do using small Cal. weapons! I found this out while interviewing them after the arrest! They indicated, via confession that they new they had to use an "ocular" shot to possibly complete the execution!0 -
The anecdotes are fascinating, but neither one of them addresses what might have happened with hollowpoints, instead of jacketed bullets. Seems to me like the victims in both cases would still have survived, with similar outcomes, and probably not even that different wound profiles.
I'll add my own personal anecdote here, that I saw essentially the same thing happen with a 9mm luger. To make the story short, the "victim" was shot in the head at point blank range with a 9mm execution style. The bullet entered the front of his head, tracked around under the skin and soft tissue, and ended up under the skin at the back of the neck. He walked out of the trauma department a short time later.
The point is, the skull is made of 3/8" thick dense cortical bone, and there is a potential space between it and the soft tissue on top. This sort of thing is relatively common and can happen with ANY handgun bullet (even soft/hollowpoints, which are likely not to expand in this sort of situation).
The fact is that .22lr. .25ACP, and .32ACP are all fairly weak rounds using low-energy light bullets. All are hampered by poor penetration.
Everything I know supports leeblackman's conception that ball ammo is the best defensive choice for low-power handguns due to potentially increased penetration. If you want to hit a vital organ, than you may need to get through multiple layers of clothes, and a chest wall containing bone. Assuming they even open up from the low-velocity rounds, hollowpoints won't make this easier.
Apart from penetration, there is another REALLY good reason to use only ball ammo in the little tiny automatic guns.
That is that these guns (pretty much ALL of them) are ammunition sensitive and generally unreliable. Whether or not hollowpoint ammo might have better terminal ballistics is irrelevant if it won't properly cycle the gun.
Edit: For Mobuck;
Ballistically, 25ACP and .22LR are fairly similar using similar weight loads from short barrel guns. .22 has an advantage of much cheaper and more readily available ammo. Rimless .25 cartridges may have an advantage of being more reliable.
Neither one of them is all that impressive from a 2" barreled gun. The 25 will put out a 50 grain bullet at around 800 FPS, for about 70 ft-lbs of energy. That's maybe 1/3 the energy of a .38 wadcutter round, which itself is considered fairly marginal.
IMO both .22s and .35s are effectively obsolete as pocket guns nowadays given the advent of super-small .380 guns like the Kel-Tec.
I think the late Jeff Cooper summed it up well:
quote:"... carry a 25 if it makes you feel good, but do not ever load it. If you load it you may shoot it. If you shoot it you may hit somebody, and if you hit somebody - and he finds out about it - he may be very angry with you."
Obviously Col. Cooper was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. . .plenty of people have been killed with .25s. . .but if you get the choice, there are better choices out there.
Edit #2, Hawkster
If your remark was directed at me, I've never shot anyone nor been shot myself, and I rarely do so anymore, but I think I've seen enough handgun wounds from the INSIDE and picked out enough bullets from peoples brains to feel like I have at least some clue about what happens when people get shot.
"Dueling anecdotes" aren't generally helpful, but I will add one more here. In addition to the above story where I've seen someone walk away essentially unhurt from a point-blank execution style 9mm luger headshot, I've seen a case where a guy was dropped dead instantly by a .22 short point blank to his head.
The point is, its not always what you are shooting, but where you hit. Luck can be a factor too. If the 9mm guy had turned his head this way instead of that way, or the bullet had hit him another inch up instead of down, he'd probably have been killed instantly. With the .22 short guy, the opposite is probably true.
Adult fatalities due to .177 AIR RIFLES have been described (eg http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC500806/ see page 526).
Again, with slow-moving tiny bullets, I think you're just more likely to hit something important with a solid round. In my opinion, to the extent that you get it at all, expansion generally works against you with the mini-guns.0 -
I'll advocate the use of 22lr with HP or the flat point "game" bullets over the .25 ACP. 0 -
My cousin was a Deputy Sheriff. He exchanged gunfire with a fleeing felon. The felon shot him 3 times with a 25 ACP, he returned fire with his 45 ACP. One 45 ACP hit from his 45 immediately stopped the fight. He took the guy's gun away, sat down, told the office he had been shot and requested medical help. 0 -
Gee, I guess we should "bow" to your better understanding of the question, AND thank you for you for your constructive critique! 0 -
I would say yes, in general, for any caliber in any firearm, FMJ bullets will penetrate more than JHPs. If you had a slow FMJ versus a fast JHP of equal weight and modern design, maybe not.
Quite frankly these days I see no reason whatsoever for .22, .25, or .32 caliber handguns for social use. There are so many good, tiny handguns in 9mm, let alone .380, that you'd gain what, a half an inch in height or length by going to a lesser caliber? The stories of pathetic failures of .25s and such are many. I'm with the Colonel on this.
Nine-milly, circa late '90s:
0 -
The .22, .25, and .32 will do the same thing they always have. 0 -
All the stories of people shot w/various caliber guns who survived are interesting. But IMO not worth much.
Would we agree that in general the military uses weapons & calibers specificaly designed for killing human beings, by people well trained in the use of them.. Yet battle stats invariably show that far more soldiers are wounded than killed. And these stats include use of weapons we don't have. Such as artillery/grenades etc. Which would suggest that percentage wise, humans have an amazing ability to survive gunshot wounds.0 -
Now, I am really confused! First the information regarding wound channel penetration doesn't answer the question. Ok, let's see; the penetration of the small Cal. 25 & 32 utilizing FMJ bullets is to say the least, sub par! Now, as reasonably intelligent people we "may" begin to establish a baseline, at least regarding the small Cal., small case projectile. In the event someone with similar experience regarding the HP or frangibile bullets, posts some information we can compare some real life situations, and begin to draw some preliminary conclusions.
Next we see no value in this when we refer wartime convention rules regarding projectile use! Then we venture into the human condition!
This seems to be a question that needs to be answered when the presenter is provided information so that he may ultimatley draw his own conclusions.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments