Penetration Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
If it's not a full frontal you will need to be able to explain to the police and maybe even a grand jury how some one not facing you posed a threat to you. Perhaps a loved one is in danger. But if you are not in immediate danger your right to self defense starts to get tricky

First I do know full well the requirements for being able to use deadly force. All I said was you'd better be able to articulate your circumstances to either the police or to a grand jury.

Maybe that is what you meant but that is not what you posted. You posted "If it's not a full frontal you will need to be able to explain...."

As I and GRIZ22 said a full frontal attack / shooting is not a requirement for self-defense. It is your personal choice about if and where to shoot a attacker.

As for what to say to the Police or Grand Jury is a long topic that has been discussed many times on THR.
 
For a variety of reasons living creatures react differently when shot and it is too easy to reach false conclusions.

Very true. As has been mentioned, the variables involved are many; and there are some fundamental differences between humans and animals. Animals don't know they're supposed to lay down and die when shot, as many people believe they should. Animals usually don't have massive amounts of drugs in their system, people sometimes do. Adrenaline affects individuals differently, animal or human. Then there is the mentioned variance of densities of tissues, bone, etc, and as Oddjob mentioned, terminal path. Bullets do strange things inside bodies.

Ballistic gel is the same all the time.

And that is it's major limitation as well as it's major advantage. Comparative repeatability. It'll give you a good comparision of Bullet A vs. Bullet B, or Caliber A vs. Caliber B,other factors accounted for. Live targets, animal or human do not, for the very reasons mentioned above.
 
Would you be willing to share it? I'd be quite interested.

Am willing to discuss any part of it, and pass along any info I have.

What I've read in this thread isn't bad. I find more folks fixated on a bullet or gear than they are in making sure they train for shots required at initial engagement.

Give yourself the best chance with the best gear...which of course "best" is relative to the person...then train like your the third type of like animal on the ramp of Noah's Ark...and it's starting to rain.
 
Folks DO go on about those FBI standards. And IMO, the FBI has concluded that these standards are ANYTHING BUT an "absolute".
If the FBI is SO adamant about penetration, why did they puss out, and drop the 10MM round, altogether?

Another old saw that's dull and rusty, and needs to be put to bed, is that outstretched forearm"blocking penetration" theory. Anybody else see somebody shot through 12" of the bone, nerves, muscle, tendons and cartilage that reside in a hand, wrist, forearm and elbow? Because the folks I've seen shot through the forearm all ended up on the ground, writhing in agony, regardless of where the bullet went next. Anybody here observed anything different?

In the 1986 FBI Miami shootout, I know of five participants that were shot in the hand or arm (FBI agents McNeil, Hanlon, and Mireles; and suspects Platt and Matix). None of them ended up on the ground "writhing in agony" as a result of the wound(s). Indeed, afterward Platt went on to murder to FBI agents Grogan and Dove. Agent Mireles, who was shot in the forearm by a .223 bullet, went on to shoot and stop both Platt and Matix.

Mireles has just written a new book about the shootout - "Five Minutes that Changed the Bureau"

In force-on-force exercises I've been shot in the hand and arm with Simunitions FX marking projectiles. It happens. Hands and arms have a pesky way of obstructing clear shots to the torso.

Finally, you do realize the FBI specified 10mm cartridge was a reduced velocity load that was the genesis of the .40 S&W cartridge? The FBI never issued a full power 10mm round to it's agents. It developed the reduced velocity 10mm load FIRST, then chose the 10mm pistol it wanted afterward (S&W model 1076 (a modified version of the S&W 1006 pistol)).
 
Last edited:
I'll post additional links, in a day or two, presenting evidence about the validity of properly prepared and calibrated ordnance gelatin as a realistic soft tissue simulant.

I might easily have missed a post, but I don't recall anyone asserting that gel isn't a good representation of soft tissue. I've seen multiple people assert that human bodies are more complex than soft tissue.

As a thought exercise, put a human body in a given position and facing (standing facing, kneeling facing, firing stance side, etc.). Project the body onto a plane as if it were a 2D target. Calculate the target area. Now calculate the area where bullets can get 12" of straight-line penetration without hitting one or more bones. The exact percentage is going to vary based on the person, stance, and facing, but I think you'll rapidly note that the "kill zone" is full of bones.

Bones may not matter, or may even help; a bullet that goes through the eye socket and hits the back of the skull was probably a kill shot... but if you can reliably put a round through the eye you don't need a round that goes through 12" of gel.

Bullets in ballistic gel go straight (more or less). Bullets in bodies... often don't, depending on what they hit. They may ricochet or fragment.

All that's just the human body itself. *Most* ballistic gel tests I've seen are just the gel itself (I have seen glass + gel, clothing + gel, etc., but not often). People, however, are usually clothed when they're shot at. Clothing varies even more (on a relative basis) than people. Thin fabric may not present a measurable effect on terminal ballistics, but a thick winter coat, a pocket with a wallet in it... none of these are well represented by gel.

Mind, I'm not saying ballistic gel data isn't useful (it is!), just that it isn't the be-all and end-all. Nor is this something "wrong" with the gel. Gel was designed for a purpose and does a good job at meeting its design. However its a simulation, and simulations, no matter how good, aren't real life.
 
If acceptable to the group here, I will post photos of some bullets taken from victims, along with the accompanying data information as to victim bio make up, bullet path, matter and media contacted etc.

I'll definitely be interested in that, since I also have an interest in gunshot wounds.
However I suggest we have a separate thread, your own one in fact, that can be managed as you like.
 
Bullets in ballistic gel go straight (more or less). Bullets in bodies... often don't, depending on what they hit. They may ricochet or fragment.

I agree.
Not only that, but even if a bullet doesn't hit any bone it can follow an unexpected trajectory. One thing I know is a factor is tissue planes. Depending on what the angle of incidence is and what the nature of the tissue plane is, a bullet can be influenced by that plane and can be diverted parallel to that plane. I've seen it happen towards the end of a terminal trajectory, possibly because the bullet is slowing down and is therefore more readily influenced by a change in tissue density.
 
Finally, you do realize the FBI specified 10mm cartridge was a reduced velocity load that was the genesis of the .40 S&W cartridge? The FBI never issued a full power 10mm round to it's agents. It developed the reduced velocity 10mm load FIRST, then chose the 10mm pistol it wanted afterward (S&W model 1076 (a modified version of the S&W 1006 pistol)).

The FBI may very well have never issued full power ammo to the masses, but they did fire a LOT of it in testing and found the guns not liking it as well as their test personnel having difficulties handling the recoil. These things led them to develop the reduced 'FBI Lite' load of 180@950 which then became the S&W. The full boat 10mm is a bit snorty in the 1911 and though the 1006 tamed it down better I never got along with the Smith and stayed with the Colt.
 
The FBI may very well have never issued full power ammo to the masses, but they did fire a LOT of it in testing and found the guns not liking it as well as their test personnel having difficulties handling the recoil. These things led them to develop the reduced 'FBI Lite' load of 180@950 which then became the S&W. The full boat 10mm is a bit snorty in the 1911 and though the 1006 tamed it down better I never got along with the Smith and stayed with the Colt.

During tests of 9mm and .45 ACP ammunition, it was observed that the 185gr .45 ACP load provided the best penetration performance. Realizing that a 180-grain 10mm bullet possesses the same sectional density as the 230gr .45 ACP bullet (in addition to the fact that there was no 185gr 10mm bullet available), FBI-FTU SAIC John Hall brought in his personally owned Colt Delta Elite 10mm pistol and handloaded 180gr 10mm reduced velocity ammunition that was approximately the same velocity as the 185gr .45 ACP. The reduced velocity 10mm 180gr load demonstrated slightly greater penetration performance (97.5%) than the .45 ACP load (92.5%).

To reiterate the chronology of events: the reduced velocity 10mm load was selected, then the pistol was selected (tests using the reduced velocity FBI 10mm load), then when the FBI had enough 10mm pistols in hand it trained and issued them to agents.

But don't take my word for it...
"Contrary to Internet gun lore, Bureau agents did not have trouble controlling the recoil of the full-power 10mm, resulting in the adoption of a “minus-P” load; rather, Hall and his team determined prior to issuance that the 180-grain bullet at some 1,000 fps would meet their specific needs of penetration with expansion and controllability in rapid fire." -- Massad Ayoob - https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2017/03/9mm-40-45-acp-debate/
 
Last edited:
...that the 180-grain bullet at some 1,000 fps would meet their specific needs of penetration with expansion and controllability in rapid fire." -- Massad Ayoob - https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2017/03/9mm-40-45-acp-debate/
Much like the .41 Magnum "police load"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.41_Remington_Magnum
Keith's original vision called for dual power levels in the .41, a heavy magnum load pushing a 210-grain (14 g) JHP at a muzzle velocity of 1300–1400 feet per second (ft/s), and a milder police loading which was to send a 200-grain (13 g) semiwadcutter downrange at around 900 ft/s.[1][3]
 
Years ago I was able to do some ballistic research and came up with a short non-definitive study.

I was fortunate in my LE career to be forensic trained. In that time I attended many autopsies, and was able to assist with many.

What started my ballistic research...One time I was waiting for a victim of case I was working to be done, but there was a gunshot victim from another agency before me. I was allowed to watch, photograph and have them slow down to examine the entrance, bullet path etc. Once that was over I asked if at any time they had a gunshot victim to please call me any time day or night, as I wanted to do my own research on the subject.
I was also fortunate to be able to do the same in a neighboring state at their lab, both were extremely helpful and knowledgeable and provided me with a lot of valuable information about what I was doing, and went out of his way to make this research possible.

Overall I was able to attend and document 42 shooting victims in a span of almost 5 years, from 2003 to 2008. Examine bullet entrance and exit, if there was one. Bullet path, damage, and projectile diameter, weight and make, model ID.

I also gathered data from LE shootings from NW agencies and added what I could into the research, because I was able to positively ID the bullet make and model and some information as to the victim size, weight, distance of the shot and angle etc.

Some of what I learned, I never found in any book on the subject. I have read most every book out there about ballistics, even the famed Stopping Power book by Marshall & Sanow, which I thought was lacking.

What I learned;

Pistols don't produce enough power to effectively have consistent bullet performance. aka pistol bullet performance sucks.

In talking with a friend of mine who's an engineer for ATK, but overall works for Federal - Speer - CCI, creating a HP round is a delicate matter. If the velocity is too great, the HP opens up too fast creating a parachute affect, thus not getting penetration. If it goes too slow, the HP won't open up and will act like a FMJ.

Folks don't realize the differences in each human that can affect bullet performance. Things such as age, medications, drug use, smoker, weight, muscle density etc., all have affect on skin, organ and bone density...which affects bullet performance. Even race, culture and place of residence around the world have some bearing. This information came from one of the Dr's which spent many hours with me going thru this part of the study, showing me the differences...fascinating...to me anyway.

One can shoot 6 different people in the same place, with the same caliber and bullet and get 6 slightly different results. Why 6?, because I witnessed it myself through the autopsies.

Some bullets were hard to identify as to make and model, but others were readily identifiable. After a few victims where I was able to identify the bullet, I would receive a call now and then from a med examiner asking if I could make an ID for them.

A person can be shot through the heart, and sometimes totally destroy the heart and still live over 2 minutes. A lot of damage can be done in that amount of time.

9mm is what I found to be the absolute smallest pistol caliber to use/carry. And #4 or #6 shot is way more effective than 00 Buck. Yes, I know .22 rimfire and other small calibers have killed many a person, but the smaller calibers needs even more emphasis on shot placement.

9mm = .355"; 40 = .400"; 44 = .429" 45acp = .452"

Stay away from the gimmick bullets, and go with a solid constructed HP. What works in ballistic gelatin, wet newspapers, even live or dead animals is not the same performance you'll see in human media.

Bonded bullets work well when going through media such as glass, boards etc., but lack consistent performance when entering a human without going through the above first, won't get consistent reliable expansion.

Finally, shot placement is paramount...Period! If a bullet doesn't go in the snot-locker, you'll be waiting for the person to faint. Yes, that is the medical term for someone who loses enough blood pressure...they will faint. More bullet holes, equal faster blood loss, which in turn lowers the blood pressure until the person faints. So the ultimate goal of such a confrontation is to have the threat faint really really fast...unless there's the snot-locker shot.

Another person I relied on was Dr. Gary K Roberts. He came to our state LE firearms instructor conference some years ago and made a ballistic presentation, and I was able to compare some things with him, and confirm some of what I was seeing. What I liked about his presentation is that it dispelled some of the myths in the firearm ammo community. Attending his presentation were some ammo manufacturer reps we had there, they were not happy to hear that some of their product was junk.

My study is in no way definitive, but each autopsy and other shooting info kept proving the above...and gave me information that I felt was not available to the public.
Very good points. In your experience, was there a certain HP that performed as advertised that your observed?
 
There are two HP loads that I recommend and work as advertised. Federal HST and Remington Golden Saber (non-bonded) in all calibers.

From what I've personally witnessed along with reports from shootings from LE agencies, they work well. Consistent reliable expansion, excellent crush cavity, HST can hold its own through windshield glass, and reliable feeding.
 
Last edited:
Here's a HST (Left) and a Gold Dot side by side...both shot into a gel block.

You won't get the expansion with a heavy constructed bonded bullet as you will with a non-bonded. The bonded bullets are made to hold together and maintain weight retention when going thru media.

bullets1.jpg
 
During tests of 9mm and .45 ACP ammunition, it was observed that the 185gr .45 ACP load provided the best penetration performance. Realizing that a 180-grain 10mm bullet possesses the same sectional density as the 230gr .45 ACP bullet (in addition to the fact that there was no 185gr 10mm bullet available), FBI-FTU SAIC John Hall brought in his personally owned Colt Delta Elite 10mm pistol and handloaded 180gr 10mm reduced velocity ammunition that was approximately the same velocity as the 185gr .45 ACP. The reduced velocity 10mm 180gr load demonstrated slightly greater penetration performance (97.5%) than the .45 ACP load (92.5%).

To reiterate the chronology of events: the reduced velocity 10mm load was selected, then the pistol was selected (tests using the reduced velocity FBI 10mm load), then when the FBI had enough 10mm pistols in hand it trained and issued them to agents.

But don't take my word for it...
"Contrary to Internet gun lore, Bureau agents did not have trouble controlling the recoil of the full-power 10mm, resulting in the adoption of a “minus-P” load; rather, Hall and his team determined prior to issuance that the 180-grain bullet at some 1,000 fps would meet their specific needs of penetration with expansion and controllability in rapid fire." -- Massad Ayoob - https://www.personaldefenseworld.com/2017/03/9mm-40-45-acp-debate/

This is some revisionist history IMHO and goes against what I remember actually having been around and keeping tabs on the 10mm as the FBI was searching for a new caliber. This was NOT done in a vacuum....and despite what Wikipedia or modern accounts of what happened might say, how it happened was documented regularly throughout the process back when it was actually going down. They looked at 45 ACP but were not wanting to go to it for a couple reasons: First and foremost they weren't liking the idea of adopting such an ancient cartridge...being all modern and whatnot so they were looking for something 'new'. Also....what really sealed the deal for the 10mm was how it performed in the MP5's they had built to evaluate the round.

At first...when the decision to adopt the 10mm was made....it was not on the radar screen to use a reduced load. Not reported by anyone at the time and do you seriously think they would have bothered with adopting a whole new cartridge if the existing 45 ACP platform would do the same job? They wouldn't and didn't. It was only after the initial batch of agents to be issued the full power 10's had a multitude of problems did the reduced load idea come about. The guns weren't real happy with the loading and the agents also weren't performing up to snuff.

Back when the FBI first announced their adoption of the 10mm mine was the only one most shooters had seen and everyone was keen to give it a go. Several Sheriffs from a large Sheriff's Department in Southern Florida tried it and to a man were AMAZED that the FBI would use such a thing. Full power ammo in the Delta is pretty snorty and for fellows that mostly struggled to qualify with 9mm's it was a LOT to handle, and most didn't do very well with it. Actually, most were absolutely dismal with it but did much better with the reduced IPSC Major load I used that was well shy of full power and not so remarkably pretty much duplicated the eventual 'FBI load' before they officially adopted it.

My Delta was one of the first batch and no ammo was to be had for several months after I got it....because Norma was fulfilling the FBI contract and were the only game in town. I also became aware that the pistol didn't function well for everyone who shot it....in fact no woman was able to get two rounds in a row through it and many men also limp-wristed it enough to make it choke with the full power Norma ammo as first delivered. This paralleled what was reported about the FBI's experience with the 'rank & file' when they first started transitioning to the new round. They like to blame the gun (see Sig and NJSP) when they malfunction, but limp-wristing happens and the hotter the ammo the worse it can get.

Of course they didn't dump 1000's of guns en mass on the entire agency.....the adoption was slow and measured at first and these initial shooters were having problems with the guns and ammo. This is where the 'FBI load' was invented trying to mitigate the problems and was adopted before the rest of the agency was issued the new guns. I think what people are saying today is an attempt to smooth over their initial problems....'Oh NOOOoooo....we didn't have a problem, we wanted to do this all along!' Right.....:(

So you could say the full power 10's were never issued to the entire agency and be correct....but that was the initial intent and was only modified when problems were encountered. They still had the full-boat ammo for the MP5's where it really shined and I believe the Agency is still using them today because they work very nicely.:) At least this is what I remember from being involved with the 10mm back when the FBI was adopting it. While it's possible the multitude of reports as the days and months rolled by were all fabricated and lies....somehow I think that the modern interpretation of what went down is being glossed over and brightened up just a wee bit.
 
Last edited:
Your involvement with the 10mm and the Delta probably resulted in your experiences and interpretation of the events at the time being biased. Even if your own perspective was somehow neutral, other people would have been responding to you as one already involved in the 10mm. For certain, you weren't privy to all the deliberations at the time (nor did you claim to be). It's reasonable to assume not every analyst came to the same conclusions or had the same convictions, or that they all agreed with the decisions as they were made. Your assertion that the FBI spun their own story is more than reasonable though. It is the legacy of J. Edgar Hoover after all. Besides, I think there was an expectation of government authorities (and doctors) back in those days that they present with clear, unwavering authority, even in the face of uncertainty, doubt, and ignorance. There was little tolerance for honesty and transparency if it cast any doubt on the validity of the answers. An official wavering in their conviction was likely to be replaced by someone who was unequivocal, even if they were wrong.
 
Urey Patrick, FBI-FTU ASAIC at the time when 10mm was tested and selected, e-mailed me his "FBI 10mm Notes" (as well as the FBI's instruction manual for the S&W 1076 pistol) that I published online on my old website, FirearmsTactical.com. I found a heavily edited version of Patrick's paper here - http://www.w0ipl.net/FBI-10mm (I have no means to post the original (full) .pdf version that used to be on my website). As I was just beginning my study of wound ballistics at the time (I was invited by Dr. Fackler to his US Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory at the Presideo of San Francisco to perform ballistics testing) I followed closely the FBI test program and its testing and selection of the 10mm cartridge. I agree with Ayoob's statement because it is correct.
 
Quote from the linked article by Mr. Patrick: "The first disclaimer here is that the 10mm full power load is far more than most of their agents were willing to use. They then devised a reduced power 10mm load that is the performance equal to what we now call a .40S&W. The second item is that the "FBI 10mm" (.40S&W) is only "marginally better" (their exact words) than the .45ACP."

Note the 'than most of their agents were willing to use'.....and just how did they make this determination without letting at least some of them try the full power loading and getting feedback on both performance and preferences? If everyone was able to shoot the full power stuff proficiently....why in the world would you want to download it? Seems to me that they used full power ammo until it was found to be unsuitable for many shooters and also the guns had some initial problems which started the FBI on a path that ended up with them cancelling the contract with S&W.

This all might have happened before the formal adoption of the 10mm and was just not reported on....which left everyone believing that the FBI was going to be using full power 10mm's, and if that's the case I'd fully believe it as they've been known to exaggerate things in the past to make them appear more competent. But at the time the weekly reporting was of guns having problems....which also could have been shooter induced as many of the malfunctions were not able to be duplicated by later testing. Still....they were shooting a LOT of ammo at first before making the decision to download it. Was this all done before the actual formal adoption date? I don't know...but we were all told the FBI was going to the 10mm and it was announced with great fanfare and publicity and it was much later that the reduced loading was admitted to.

I'd be very curious to see a timeline of their testing, date of adoption and when the reduced power load was decided upon. Any reliable reports on the testing before adoption?
Edit: It seems a stretch that the FBI would contract S&W for pistols in a light10mm and begin transitioning then having breakage and malfunctions which had them scrambling to try to correct the problems if the reduced load had been intended to be used all along....doesn't it? Or do they issue contracts for new pistols before adopting the cartridge? Doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:
Just looked a little deeper in what is now available about this.....and it seems that some semantic games are being played. Mas Ayoob is technically correct....but it's hinging on the word 'adoption'. The FBI Brass decided on the 10mm then they went looking for the pistol to fire it and this is where all the problems started to happen. Took a couple years before they finally chose the S&W and by this time had figured out that the full power 10's were too much for the Rank-N-File Agents to handle....so rather than admitting the decision was a poor one they went with a down-loaded version that was very marginally better than the 45 ACP. The poor gun suppliers meanwhile were gearing up to produce pistols that would fire the full power stuff...and this is part of what led to some of the functional problems with the finally adopted ammo. This final 'adoption' of the 1076 and 'FBI Lite' loading by Federal satisfies the statement that 'they never issued full power ammo' as none was officially 'issued' until it was formally 'adopted'.

But the 10mm was chosen as the full power variant and only once this was proven to be too much for both guns and agents that the lighter loading was developed then finally issued to the masses. Seems to me that what we're hearing now is glossing over the fact that they initially tried to use the full power 10mm....not that they went in all along using the 'lite' version of it. They're reluctant or just plain refusing to admit that the full power 10 IS too much for Duty use. Perhaps a nit-picky point on my part but for the first couple of years after the announcement that they were going for 10mm's.....we all were amazed that they could use it as the loadings of the time were available. Turned out they tried but they couldn't and wouldn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top