bullet grain vs. fps? - Page 2

bullet grain vs. fps?

This is a discussion on bullet grain vs. fps? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I always go with the heaviest grain weights available... In 357 magnum I use DoubleTap Ammunition . Velocity: 1400fps / 4" Ruger GP-100 1245fps / ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40
Like Tree12Likes

Thread: bullet grain vs. fps?

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array 357and40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    St. Charles, Missouri
    Posts
    2,440
    I always go with the heaviest grain weights available...
    In 357 magnum I use DoubleTap Ammunition.

    Velocity: 1400fps / 4" Ruger GP-100
    1245fps / 1 7/8" S&W
    1540fps / 6"bbl S&W 686
    Bullet: Bonded Defense JHP
    Muzzle Energy: 688 ft. lbs.

    Granted, with a 357 magnum it is hard to go wrong...
    "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."
    - Roy Batty


  2. #17
    Distinguished Member Array razor02097's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,974
    A compromise is usually the way to go. Yeah a small really fast bullet packs more energy on paper than a big heavy bullet traveling slow. However you still need some mass in order to carry that energy.

    A good example is how the 5.56mm NATO is a fast and devistating round but is just about useless with almost any sort of hard target.

    I personally carry 185g Speer gold dot. It goes more than 1200 FPS (mv from5" barrel) but still has a good amount of mass.
    There is something about firing 4,200 thirty millimeter rounds/min that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,365
    This is potentially the easiest, but most misunderstood question ever posed on any thread anywhere.

    The answer is ; don't overthink it. In 357, 3 inch tubes or longer, the 125 rules for the thin skinned man. In shorter barrels, slow burning powders are wasted, so go with heavier bullet bullets to compensate.

    In cartridges with shorter cases and less velocity production, ( read as non magnum), always go heavy.
    You are simply taking two different routes to the same destination, but one vehicle does better on dirt roads and one on hard surface.

    But, DON'T over think it.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  4. #19
    Member Array ak74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    This is potentially the easiest, but most misunderstood question ever posed on any thread anywhere.

    The answer is ; don't overthink it. In 357, 3 inch tubes or longer, the 125 rules for the thin skinned man. In shorter barrels, slow burning powders are wasted, so go with heavier bullet bullets to compensate.

    In cartridges with shorter cases and less velocity production, ( read as non magnum), always go heavy.
    You are simply taking two different routes to the same destination, but one vehicle does better on dirt roads and one on hard surface.

    But, DON'T over think it.
    That makes sense. So would you want to go lighter on normal-longer sized barrels? Also is it true that heavier rounds generally recoil softer?

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,365
    Magnum cartridges reach their peak in 4 to six inches of barrel due to slower burning powders. The three inch tube has been shown to be the minimum length to benefit from magnum powder.

    A good rule of thumb with non magnum cartridges is to go with heavier bullets for a good balance.

    The question of recoil with heavier bullets is another enigmatic question, of which in part, has to do with shooter perception.
    As a general rule, the heavier an object is, the more force is required to move it at an equal rate as a lighter object, of which, that will be felt on both ends.

    The longer barrel may add additional weight up fron which will absorb that momentum, therefor, giving the perception of lighter recoil.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  6. #21
    VIP Member
    Array gunthorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    home office
    Posts
    2,355
    Reductio ad absurdio

    A proton traveling at near light speed has more energy than a loaded freighter inching towards the pier. While the proton will pass harmlessly through your body and expend its energy elsewhere, the ship will squish you and expend its energy against the pilings.

    A 22 pistol bullet probably has a similar KE to that of a well swung bowling ball, but the ball has more bone crushing, knock down momentum. A high velocity and accompanying KE may account for the shock of a large temporary wound channel from a rifle round, but there's little difference between this effect from slow or fast pistol velocities. Shock must be caused by bullet placement rather than performance. Eighteen inches of penetration into a full figured abdomen may not incapacitate as quickly as two inches into the brain stem. It can be shown that a heavier bullet is more likely to penetrate and less likely to deflect.

    At the conclusion of the paper, "Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness" (by U.S. Department of Justice Special Agent UREY W. PATRICK, FIREARMS TRAINING UNIT FBI ACADEMY), the author states:

    "Physiologically, no caliber or bullet is certain to incapacitate any individual unless the brain is hit. Psychologically, some individuals can be incapacitated by minor or small caliber wounds. Those individuals who are stimulated by fear, adrenaline, drugs, alcohol, and/or sheer will and survival determination may not be incapacitated even if mortally wounded.
    The will to survive and to fight despite horrific damage to the body is commonplace on the battlefield, and on the street. Barring a hit to the brain, the only way to force incapacitation is to cause sufficient blood loss that the subject can no longer function, and that takes time. Even if the heart is instantly destroyed, there is sufficient oxygen in the brain to support full and complete voluntary action for 10-15 seconds.
    Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding. Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, "too little penetration will get you killed." 42,43 Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable. Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet."
    Liberty, Property, or Death - Jonathan Gardner's powder horn inscription 1776

    Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
    ("Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.")
    -Virgil, Aeneid, vi, 95

  7. #22
    Distinguished Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,248
    I'm gonna take this to a whole new level of dumbed-down... ness.

    I shoot 180gr loads out of my .40 cal better than I do the lighter loads. I like the recoil much better, and I seem to perform much more accurately at the range.

    Since I only have one SD handgun, and it is in .40 cal... The heavy bullets win! Hows that for science?
    bmcgilvray and smolck like this.

  8. #23
    Member Array ConcealedG30's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    KS
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by Lotus222 View Post
    I'm gonna take this to a whole new level of dumbed-down... ness.

    I shoot 180gr loads out of my .40 cal better than I do the lighter loads. I like the recoil much better, and I seem to perform much more accurately at the range.

    Since I only have one SD handgun, and it is in .40 cal... The heavy bullets win! Hows that for science?
    I think its pure genius.
    Anticipation of Death is Worse Than Death Itself.
    Psalm 46:10 "Be still, and know that I am God;

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array smolck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    3,410
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuda66 View Post
    Actually, it is simple physics that makes the highlighted untrue.

    KE is a function of mass times velocity squared. Lighter, faster bullets often have more KE than a heavier bullet.

    That being said, energy is a poor standard by which to choose a defensve round.
    A 124gr bullet going 1250fps (speer gold dot 9mm 124gr +P) has 431lbs of kinetic energy
    A 230gr bullet going 950fps (Hornady TAP 230gr +P) has 461lbs of kinetic energy

    So a heavier bullet moving slower has more energy SOMETIMES......

  10. #25
    Member Array natimage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    126
    After doing ballistics testing using FBI protocols to a "T" and shooting through various barriers and clothing...The slower, heavier rounds performed better in all scenarios...but of course you want max expansion too as well as the 12" penetration. The Federal HST FAR out performed Winchester and Remington rounds...Winchesters weren't bad, Remington's shot horribly...CCI's did well also. Where you'll see the biggest difference is shooting through glass. A fast round ends up getting it's jacket ripped off so the part of the bullet that actually makes it into it's intended target is substantially lighter, thus doesn't penetrate well and doesn't pack much of a punch.

    You can't really compare rifle velocities to pistol velocities either because the would channel caused by hydrostatic shock of rifle rounds will be VERY different than the wound channel caused by a pistol round. Aside from the 5.7 round, no pistol will produce enough velocity to create hydrostatic shock...so you want the biggest wound channel you can get from full expansion and the bullet not shredding but maintaining as close to it's original weight as possible
    Psalm 23
    In God I trust, it's the rest of you I'm concerned about

    Certified Smith & Wesson M&P pistol and MP15 rifle armorer

  11. #26
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    2,348
    Quote Originally Posted by smolck View Post
    A 124gr bullet going 1250fps (speer gold dot 9mm 124gr +P) has 431lbs of kinetic energy
    A 230gr bullet going 950fps (Hornady TAP 230gr +P) has 461lbs of kinetic energy

    So a heavier bullet moving slower has more energy SOMETIMES......
    Apples and kumquats.

    Compare a 147gr 9mm load with a 124+P 9mm load, and see what you get. Or try comparing a 185gr+P .45 with a 230.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  12. #27
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,316
    Just asking, but wouldn't bullet weight vs. fps be more to the point.
    bbqgrill likes this.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  13. #28
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,365
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    Just asking, but wouldn't bullet weight vs. fps be more to the point.
    Yes sir, absolutely. And of the two, I'll go with weight over velocity in handgun calibers. It is my belief that this eliminates variables dependent on speed and unobstructed internal ballistics to give consistent results.

    And, like you pointed out sometime ago, bullets do not have grains :)
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  14. #29
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    Just asking, but wouldn't bullet weight vs. fps be more to the point.
    The weight is measured in grains and the speed is measured in feet per second. Using your logic it would need to be changed to weight vs speed.

    Michael
    bmcgilvray likes this.

  15. #30
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,060
    When talking about handgun bullets at handgun velocities your performance is much more important than the bullet's performance.
    All it is is a little hunk of lead that is moving at significant speed. If you put it where it needs to be it will do it's job. If you don't, it doesn't matter what size or weight or velocity it has. You can't miss me enough with a .500S&W to kill me. A well placed .22 short can kill me before I know I am dead.

    Shoot the fastest, heaviest bullets you can control. Or the heaviest, fastest bullets. If you put them where they need to go there is not going to be much debate as to how "adequate" the cartridge is.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

9mm fps bullet
,
bullet fps
,

bullet grain

,

bullet grains

,
grain bullet
,
grain vs fps
,
grains in a bullet
,
grains vs fps
,
heavy grain vs. light grain bullets
,
what is bullet grain
,
what is the grain of a bullet
,
why use a heavier grain bullet
Click on a term to search for related topics.