Controversy coming up..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Zombiphobia

Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
646
I really wasn't sure where else to put this, but I'm seeking knwoledgeable opinions, fact sheets, and legit measurements on the velocities, and terminal ballistics of two very different hand guns.


One is an 1858 Remington style pistol(steel frame) with a 12inch barrel, firing a 180grn lead conical ballet over 40grns of any given black powder or appropriate substitute.

The other is a Beretta 92FS firing 124grn gold dot facotry ammo.

This is not a debate over which is better suited for what or which is more accurate. This is for scientific comparisons of terminal ballistics. The main objective here is to find out how they compare ballistically once the projectile penetrates flesh.


One is a lighter, faster moving hollow point which is capable of excellent penetration and expansion.

The other is a little heavier, slower moving, and with a softer bullet, I'm asking, is it possible for the 1858 .44 in this configuration compare, in kinetic energy transfer to the 9mm luger hollow point in any way?


Pick different factory ammo for 9mm or powder for the revolver if you want, but these are the platforms I'm wanting to compare just for the sake of doing it.

Why did I choose these two? Because...:neener:
 
I can't give any factual information, other than it's pretty obvious from watching ballistic gel videos that I don't want to play catch the bullet with either one.

The '58 is gonna pretty much leave a 1/2 hole from start to finish. Victim would most likely be bleeding on both sides, unless a major bone stopped the bullet. The most comparable modern cartridge would be a .45ACP with solid bullets, and even without a hollowpoint they are a proven man stopper.

9mm with a hollow point might not exit regardless of hitting bone or not, but the folded back petals after mushrooming would shred more flesh.

I'm not a big believer in expended energy being a major factor in stopping power. I'm sure it helps, but I think the effect is minimal. Pistol bullets just don't have that much energy.

My best guess is it would be a toss-up. Which is worse, a long narrow wound channel, or a shorter bigger wound channel?
 
Good afternoon
Get shot with a pure lead bullet pushed by BP and you have the best recipe for infection and nasty lead fragmentation that anyone could hope upon a vile intruder. An expanded projectile of .70 is common from my .44 BP revolvers. I have yet to see a 9mm do anything like that from my S&W 39-2.
Mike in Peru
 
smokeless bullets usually cut a practically sterile wound channel, while blackpowder is really filthy and made of soft lead. i have shot soft lead at various things and found that the soft lead really gets squished. i have seen Civil War era Minnie balls that were recovered that got so squished that they were like a lead puddle the size of my palm. i can only imagine how devastating a .58 caliber Minnie ball would be to a soldier during the Civil war, and all they had was primitive equipment and no real anesthesia. you got a rag to bite down on and a shot of whiskey if you were lucky. there was some really bad infection too. blackpowder bullets are usually subsonic letting powder residue, maybe patch material, and other contaminants get all over the bullet. here's a Minnie ball i found online, you can see the expansion.
 

Attachments

  • civil war bullet.gif
    civil war bullet.gif
    25.3 KB · Views: 15
In the Feb'98 issue of HANDGUNS, Ed Sanow published gelatin test data for a few different percussion revolvers. He just used round balls, though, no conical slugs.

The .44 Colt 1861 with 35 gr. FFFg penetrated 19.8 inches, recovered diameter 0.48 inches, stretch cavity 38.8 cubic inches.

According to the Marshall/Sanow book STREET STOPPERS, the 124-gr 9mm Gold Dot penetrates 12.8 inches of gelatin, recovered diameter 0.55 inches, stretch cavity 35.2 cubic inches.

Without actual test results, can't be certain about your 180-gr conical slug... if you're talking about "antipersonnel" use, I doubt that the conical slug would work any better than the round ball.
 
The .44 Colt 1861 with 35 gr. FFFg penetrated 19.8 inches, recovered diameter 0.48 inches, stretch cavity 38.8 cubic inches.

According to the Marshall/Sanow book STREET STOPPERS, the 124-gr 9mm Gold Dot penetrates 12.8 inches of gelatin, recovered diameter 0.55 inches, stretch cavity 35.2 cubic inches
Click to expand...

so what you're saying is that a .44 roundball will throroughly ruin someone/something's day?

Kidding aside, this is more like the kind of info I was asking about, thanks.
 
I really don't understand how a round ball / BP will be any more likely to cause an infection than JHP / smokeless. What small amount of BP fouling ends up on the ball isn't an especially good food source for many microorganisms to feed on. It may be "dirty", but that doesn't always translate to an infection. Infections were common in the Civil War because or poor sanitary practices/conditions.

Can I say that the 9mm might expand, but a round ball sure won't shrink? Just please don't shoot me with either! :D
 
Bullets are normally sterile from shooting due to the heat generated by the friction of traveling down the barrel.
The problem with any gunshot wound, as far as infection is concerned, is that they often pass through clothing prior to penetrating your "personal space" and they push bits of that clothing into your body.
Your clothes are not sterile.

124 Gold Dot 9mm isn't moving all that fast, compared to .45ACP +p or .40 S&W.
I think it averages around 1150 fps.
I don't want to get shot by anything.
 
"Remington style Pistol with 160-odd Grain Ball and 40 Grains" of good BP, will be going a lot faster than that 'gold dot'...probably into the 1300s of FPS.

This is Ballistically well into .357 Magnum Territory.

I do not believe this is being taken into account in the off the cuff Ballistics comparisons.
 
My first throught was "Will a 180g conical fit over 40g of powder in an 1858?"
Click to expand...

yes, with compression it will. Anyway, guys the question is about ballistics and terminal effects other than infection, please stick to the topic.

"Remington style Pistol with 160-odd Grain Ball and 40 Grains" of good BP, will be going a lot faster than that 'gold dot'...probably into the 1300s of FPS.

This is Ballistically well into .357 Magnum Territory.
Click to expand...

according to who and what?
 
i think that load would stop someone, i think it would be at least .45 ACP energy. that load is by no doubt more powerful than some modern smokeless handguns of smaller calibers. all i know is i wouldn't want to be shot with one. anyways, stopping power IMHO isn't as important as shot placement, if you can hit the right place you could kill a bull with a .22 Magnum. but that's beside the point, if you use proper shot placement you should be in good shape. the main goal is to stop the threat so you can save yourself from major bodily damage or death, handgun ballistics are no good if you don't shoot in the right place. you need to stop them from hurting you, not give them an infection. as the old saying goes a .22 that hits a vital spot is better than a .45 that misses, can't argue with that. besides i feel like my .44 Remington is plenty powerful. it's my personal handgun of choice! my favorite handgun caliber used to be the .357 Magnum, but now i have decided i like my 1858 Remington better. to me, the 1858 Remington is the coolest handgun in the world. (that's my opinion, I'm sure there are other BP addicts that agree" the soft lead really flattens out, if i were to shoot soft lead in a .357 with smokeless it would lead the bore. not to mention it's a bigger projectile too.
 
My comment WAS on topic :neener: If a load won't work it's not a realistic scenario. I hadn't heard of anybody fitting that much lead and powder in an 1858.
 
Last edited:
i said it once and I'll say it again (and you might want to quote me on this one of you like) "the 1858 Remington is the coolest handgun in the world" in fact i mean that so much i will now put that in my signature. if i could only own one handgun, it would be an 1858 Remington steel frame. for concealed carry i would just get a wool jacket with a holster like Dirty Harry has. the top strap, the feeling in my hand feels like a "man's handgun" the fact that the frame is one piece, if you drop it onto cement it will most likely be just fine. that series of clicks when you pull back the hammer, it means business. not to mention the hammer looks cool! and when you pull the trigger that real man's handgun speaks with some serious authority. the top strap is one of my favorite things about the handgun. you can shoot more powerful loads in a brass Remmy than the other option. the fact that your sizing dye and reloading press is right on the handgun. the loading lever has a gentle sweep too. all the way down the pipe to where it latches. the nice sights i like too. i can get a good sight picture with mine. i don't care if they are small, i like them. i have eyes like a hawk and those sights don't bother me. oh yes, and that long blue and cold barrel. gotta love that octagon barrel, i like octagon barrels a lot. and the fact you can safely load all six chambers due to the safety notches, it's the original sixgun! and let's fave it, "did he fire five, or only four? to tell you the truth in all of this excitement i seem to have forgotten myself" doesn't sound as cool. everything about Remingtons i love. i mean there is a reason why colt and almost all the other revolvers have a top strap. i mean it's a brilliant design, resulting an an awesome handgun. and my favorite handgun!

Levi
 
Vermonter, I wasn't talking about your comment, but pretty much every other one in this thread.

I don't mean to be rude, but I'm going make a quick list of example subjects irrelevant to this thread-
1: ANY cartridge or bullet or black powder/substitute loading not mentioned in my question unless you are making a legitimate comparison which directly relates to the question.
2:Shot placement; unless of course you're talking about that the bullet does when striking that particular spot.
3: Pictures of your collection; if it's not part of a ballistics test in effort to help answer my questions. Pictures should involve mangled bullets pulled from an organic, fleshy body or ballistic gellatin or your velocity meter tool reading. Sorry, I'm too tired to remember what those are called.
4: Your opinion of the weapons themselves. I own one, I know it's awesome, but there ar other threads here to discuss that.
5: I also am aware that Colt ripped off Remington's design with the top-strap. It's a litt-nown much denied fact. Irrelevant to this topic.
6: The sterility of a bullet of any sort or the anesthesia practices of the American Civil War.
7: what leads to gangrenous infections- see #6.
8: I never said this is to help me understand self-defense situations, so self-defense scenarios and laws, and any other hypothetical is 100% irrelevant.

I'm sorry if I seem like a jerk, but it seems there every gun-loving ADD victim congregates on THR and flubbers up good topics with irrelevant rambling that i tend to not even want to bother reading. I'm sorry, I thought it was a fairly simple question and to those of you who answered with helpful info pertaining to the question, thank you very much. To those of you who crowd up my threads with non-sense, please stop.

I apologize if I'm being rude and offensive, but these types of totally irrelevant posts are obstructing my quest for knowledge.
 
As far as ballistics go, here is what I've come up with using my cusom modified .44 caliber Pietta NMA w/ 5.5" barrel.
Remember this revolver has the chambers reamed to .4510 & the barrel was cut, throated & crowned with some other modifications so your velocities may vary.

Lee Conical .456 220gr.
28gr. FFFG Goex
Remington #11 caps
710 FPS. AVG. measured from 10 feet from the muzzle.
245 FT. Lbs.

Penetration into a cardboard box 24" X 24" filled with news print & soaked with water was 9.4" AVG. shot from a distance of 15 yards.

As far as a comparrison to the 9mm projectile I can not give you that info because I personally do not own a 9mm pistol but when I get with a friend of mine I can set my chrono up & see what he gets from his.
 
Zombiphobia, are you familiar with Duncan McPherson's book, BULLET PENETRATION? McPherson is an aerospace engineer, MIT grad, associated with Martin Fackler and the IWBA (very prestigious group). His method for predicting bullet penetration (in gelatin) is the best I've ever seen.

I've been using McPherson's formulas to simulate the blackpowder load you specified - if you cannot find any actual test results, these estimates might give you a "ballpark" idea.

.44/180 round-nose, flat base @1000 fps >>>>> 27.3 inches
.44/180 round-nose, flat base @1100 fps >>>>> 28.9 inches

Then, assuming that the slug might deform out to .50 caliber....

.50/180 round-nose, flat base @1000 fps >>>>> 21.8 inches
.50/180 round-nose, flat base @1100 fps >>>>> 23.0 inches

You can calculate the permanent crush cavity, it's simply the bullet's cross-sectional area multiplied by the penetration distance.

The temporary stretch cavity is anybody's guess. For what it's worth, the IWBA doesn't consider the temporary stretch cavity to be important anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Snowdog
  • Locked
.44 ball meets playdough... any guesses at ballistics?
Replies
20
Views
4K
Snowdog
Snowdog
R
  • Locked
Pistol Projectiles
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
kituwa
K
T
  • Locked
JHP opening greater with larger bullets?
Replies
10
Views
633
Skribs
Skribs
B
  • Locked
Is The 45ACP Too Slow?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
145
Views
17K
CSA 357
CSA 357
A
  • Locked
surrogate measures for wounding effectiveness
Replies
10
Views
502
Soybomb
S
Back
Top