JR47: Well written, sir.
Usually an old theory comes a float due to an advance in either our ability to observe it, better observational tools, cheap high speed cameras, etc. , or, a repeat, or new development, of an old situation. The only solid, constructive ideas I've scene out of this discussion are the 4" initial penetration before expansion, and, bullets designed to fragment, to increase ballistic shock. XTP's seem to follow something along these lines in part, as do Barnes X Rifle bullets.
However, they get the best of both worlds, using near maximum weight for caliber, having the petals come off, and, having the core continue through, sans petals, as a cylinder to accomplish what Fackler would like, straight penetration through vital organs. G and S custom bullets in South Africa has done extensive ballistic work with bullets similarly designed, and, they are monometal bullets, turned by CNC machine. A number of other small companies have experimented, with good results in rifle bullets, with the same design.
The real problem is using such bullets in pistols would be costly, VERY costly. Our government also makes the production of monometal hand turned bullets more costly, since they consider them 'armour piercing' and require another metal be used. So, the end result is you take the
arse end, drill it, fill it with lead, and that somehow makes it less armour piercing? Anyway, the end result is a very expensive bullet to produce.
The major problem I see with this approach to bullet production is cost, and, the lack of case capacity to propel a large enough, or heavy enough projectile, at sufficient speed, to give both the shock effect, and, penetrate sufficiently to strike vital organs. A quick look through the
FBI penetration gello tests illustrates that as the bullets become heavy enough to penetrate to 18", the bullet velocities are considerably lower then the lighter bullets. The light bullets, as a general rule, don't have sufficient weight to maintain penetration after expansion.
Lee Jurras, long ago, designed a very thick jacketed 44 magnum bullet that would go 1900 fps out of a service handgun. When it struck bone, or substantial resistance, it MIGHT open up. Otherwise, the velocity was high enough to insure penetration through most targets. Also, the impact, even without the petal design, was enough to turn varmits to red mist, surely showing the existence of ballistic shock, at least on varmit size criters.
Now, I see no reason, other then expense, that a similar core couldn't integrate petals designed to fall off at that speed, yet have the core still penetrate. The real problem in design is even with a very thin jacket, and pure lead, bonded core, 1200 fps is recommended for consistent expansion. Looking at the current service offerings, I don't see anything that could push a bullet heavy enough to give
adequate penetration with such a designed bullet. 10MM is approaching it, but, with 180-200 grain bullets velocity gets down around 1000 fps, and, most expanding bullets don't give adequate penetration at that velocity, unless they weigh considerably more. 45 Super, or 45 SMC get close, but really, the 460 Rowland would be the one I would think might actually work, with a 230 grain bullet.
I'm sure you could design such a bullet for the magnum revolvers, but, again, the cost so far, would be prohibitive. Look how expensive the expanding Barnes pistol bullets are, aren't they like a dollar each?
Now that producing such a bullet is addressed, the real question is, what advantage would such a bullet design offer, for LEO's, in real shootings? They are, after all, the target market for such a round. Is the effect enough to
enlarge the effective target area enough to justify the cost?
First, what caliber are you going to use for such bullets? Second, given that caliber's limitations, is the bullet design going to enlarge the target area? Is the effect going to occur at all, unless in very rare instances?
At what level projectile speed, and caliber, do you have to have before the shock effect occurs enough to be considered a valid consideration at all? None of these questions have been addressed.
JR47: many of your questions were the result of skim reading my posts, and crossing facts. I'll address the ones I think are valid. The problem with current data is none of it is really any good for this discussion. The number of variables in real shootings are so constant, that they pretty much define random. The variables are so great that any constructive data collection is nearly impossible.
For over 30 years, guys I've known have come up with ideas, based on the Elmer Keith's and the Bill Jordan's, and, they tried their ideas on game, and some on people.
From this 'anecdotal' information has come the development of cartridges, loads, etc. that are present in the industry today. You don't have to look far for the real experts, they are the guys that designed both the calibers, and the guns that fire them. Most have a mentor, a JD Jones, Lee Jurras, Gil Van Horn, that have forgot more then most will ever know about the development of these calibers, and, their use on game and people.
You glossed over my post about the legal liability of the situation. S&M did NOT present substantially false information about the service caliber weapons, and loads they were promoting. I carry a .357, and, while not a 475, or 500 Linebaugh, it has proven very successful in human shootings. I don't doubt that S&M data is not THAT far off concerning their pets. Maybe 5-10% exaggeration, but, none the less, as Mr. Jurras has said, and, he designed and developed the idea, it does work. I can take that to the bank.
What S&M did do was defame the larger calibers, 45 ACP ball, 44 magnum, 41 magnum, etc. As Dr. Courtney notes, and tries to explain away, the numbers are unusually low, and, this is in particular distressing for him, since these are the actual calibers capable of creating the ballistic pressure wounds he's talking about. Even a 135 grain Glasser bullet, at 1900 fps out of a 44 magnum was sufficient to blow a bad guys head pretty much clean off, in a DA shooting in Arizona.
If you go to Marshall's website, and read his comments, it becomes very clear what he believes, and, many tactical shooters agree. Ironically, they don't believe in 'one shot stops' at all, but, they require a weapon that allows them to repeatedly hit their target, quickly, to make up for the lack of shock effect present in the service handgun calibers. The .41 Magnum was Bill Jordan and Elmer Keiths' improvement of the .357 for such shooting, but, it lacked platforms, and nearly died. It's now being reborn, nearly, in the 10mm, and, the .357 Sig is a very pointed effort to develop a service handgun that can fire the 125 grain HP .357 bullet at speeds of the .357 magnum, read 1350-1600 fps. Perhaps, with proper bullet design, we could have a Barnes X type bullet in a 125 grain .357, that would be shootable out of the .357 Sig. Or, maybe, a lighter, like 155 grain bullet in the 10MM might recoil lightly enough for quick second shots.
However, getting such bullets produced here is problematic. Gerard, owner of G&S can punch up pretty much anything on his CNC machine, and, he's a master of the breaking off petal design. However, importing the bullets to the US would be a nightmare.
Barnes has the ability to do it, but, they also have self-intrest in selling their Barnes Pistol bullets with petals that don't come off, at a dollar each, and, currently a monopoly on monometal legal bullets in the United States, resulting in VERY high pricing, and, I'm sure, profits.
Finally, finding a LEO agency willing to carry such loads, and be the test guys, would require the department to invest a lot of money, and, the ammunition would be very expensive as well. In other words, developing data on the effectiveness of such a bullet would require an LEO agency to actually use them in shootings. Since you should shoot
what you use for real, it's going to be a hard sell at a buck each for bullets to any LEO. The developing company would have to be willing to bite the bullet on profit to get the rounds accepted by the public.
Also, without buying new guns, could the fragmenting pistol bullets be developed to actually work in the existing service calibers?
While sitting here it just came to mind Speers 168 grain Match grade hollow point, with perhaps a hard enough core not to deform, and, some sort of insert that forced the petals to break off, and then fragmented might work, and, not be hugely expensive to produce.
Dr. S
JohnKSa: I believe in a situation with so many variables, and, a built in social more that dictates experiments in the lab are NOT going to be done on humans, that observation, and, the use of the scientific method provides better data then an attempt to take other animals, and use them as 'test beds', trying to draw from those observations, and apply them to how humans react when shot. Also, the very nature of the diversity of the human race makes conclusions difficult to draw. The only time that really provides excellent ballistic research for work on humans is war, and, thanks to the bullet rules by the Hague convention, what we hope to use in our country then only relates to solid bullets.
Fackler's 223 soft point gello tests certainly supports Dr. C's theory.
