Defensive Carry banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just got done reading an ammo war thread here, and people do seem to have different experiences. This video is quite revealing IMO. It's of various rounds being shot point blank at a gel in torso shape, and it's shown in vivid slow motion. The slow motion really demonstrates the shock wave, the size of cavitation, etc., and the torso shape helps visualize the extent of damage more than the rectangular blocks of standard gel tests. We tend to compare measurements of wound damage after the shot which reveals permanent wound damage at the macro level. This one gives a real time portrayal of how the dynamic forces are working, and then how they differ from round to round, gun to gun. You can better imagine the damage at the micro level, beyond the permanent wound cavity.

No .40 or 357 tested unfortunately.

The Lehigh XD 9mm didn't do so bad. The .223 was underwhelming, though I'm sure it's a good penetrator and better at long distance. The shotgun slug was amazingly better than the rest. At one point, you can literally see through the torso to the other side as the slug penetrates. It almost turns the torso inside out (slight hyperbole).

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
Aaaaaaaand, the winner is 12 ga. slug. What a surprise :tongue:

Interesting stuff. I certainly would have expected the .223 to make a bigger splash.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
Aaaaaaaand, the winner is 12 ga. slug. What a surprise :tongue:

Interesting stuff. I certainly would have expected the .223 to make a bigger splash.
If you weren't a believer before, you are after having watched this.

People always point to how much better a rifle is than a handgun, and if you look at muzzle energy, it's undeniable. But compare the 223/556 vs the 9mm Lehigh XD, and the muzzle energy differences don't translate to overall tissue impact as depicted here. Much of the 223/556 round energy is still with the bullet as it penetrates and goes its merry way beyond. The 9mm Lehigh XD has dumped nearly all its energy in the gel (would have been all had the torso been 17 inches thick).

To me, when people talk about over-penetration and minimize it as an issue, they are speaking of the risk to innocents beyond the target and how infrequent that is a problem. The other, perhaps more relevant issue is that over penetration means your ammo is terribly inefficient in that you are not harnessing all the advertised ft-lbs of energy. A good deal is gone with the wind, as seen with the 223 round here. The XD round dumps it all within the FBI limits. It's a good reason defensive ammo is superior to FMJ's, in addition to protecting folks beyond the BG.

The shotgun probably wastes energy too, but it has so much to start, and is so wide, that it can easily waste a bunch and still prevail over the rest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,140 Posts
They did not indicate what round was used with the 223. If you look at the work of Fackler you can see that a 55 grain FMJ military round penetrates 3 inches or so before it begins to yaw. It would be interesting to see that shot with a 55 grain Nosler ballistic tip.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
They did not indicate what round was used with the 223. If you look at the work of Fackler you can see that a 55 grain FMJ military round penetrates 3 inches or so before it begins to yaw. It would be interesting to see that shot with a 55 grain Nosler ballistic tip.
Yeah, I have to believe that in a real human torso, the bullet would have tumbled a fair amount and produced a better wound than indicated in this video.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
144,124 Posts
Folks should keep in mind that immediately after the first shot was taken the structure of the ballistic material was compromised and compromised even further with each successive shot....even though those subsequent shots were taken in slightly different body locations.

It was (admittedly) a fun experiment but, in order to be scientifically accurate/valid you would need a new, pristine, test subject for each projectile fired.

Just my personal opinion after waching the Video.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,452 Posts
I'll bet a .223 varmint load would have made a more impressive splash. I fired a .223 45 grain fiocci varmint load into water jugs from about 3 feet. That round completely destroyed the first jug but only a few fragments made pin hole pricks in the second.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Folks should keep in mind that immediately after the first shot was taken the structure of the ballistic material was compromised and compromised even further with each successive shot....even though those subsequent shots were taken in slightly different body locations.

It was (admittedly) a fun experiment but, in order to be scientifically accurate/valid you would need a new, pristine, test subject for each projectile fired.

Just my personal opinion after waching the Video.
Yeah, for sure true, but they did seem overall proportional to the gun/round fired. The two that surprised me were the 44 and the 556, both of which I anticipated producing a bigger effect than was portrayed. Considering the 9 was first, while the gel was virgin, it did quite well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,600 Posts
Aaaaaaaand, the winner is 12 ga. slug. What a surprise :tongue:

Interesting stuff. I certainly would have expected the .223 to make a bigger splash.
That's not how 5.56 NATO works. This is gel that was intended to provide a consistent medium. It is not mimicking flesh and bone. The 5.56 is designed to fragment after shallow penetration. I would suspect the gel provided less resistance (negative acceleration force) than flesh. Best case scenario, the round exited the gel in pieces. More likely, the gel didn't provide enough resistance to fragment the round.

That's what you get when comparing JHP to a completely different wounding mechanism. A cool video, but not scientific. This is also a good example for those who think 12" of gel penetration is "enough" or even too much. Gel is just a control. It isn't a muscle and bone simulator.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,140 Posts
That's not how 5.56 NATO works. This is gel that was intended to provide a consistent medium. It is not mimicking flesh and bone. The 5.56 is designed to fragment after shallow penetration. I would suspect the gel provided less resistance (negative acceleration force) than flesh. Best case scenario, the round exited the gel in pieces. More likely, the gel didn't provide enough resistance to fragment the round.

That's what you get when comparing JHP to a completely different wounding mechanism. A cool video, but not scientific. This is also a good example for those who think 12" of gel penetration is "enough" or even too much. Gel is just a control. It isn't a muscle and bone simulator.
Not to mention the expanding gases. We can see that the semi autos generally injected more gas into the jello. My guess is that if the 223 did not have a muzzle break it would have looked much different.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top