I am wonder if some of the newer mega fast rounds might afford such more often with the effects of hydraulic overload effect (sometimes mistakenly referred to as hydraulic shock) with some of the really fast rounds like 22TCM, 5.7x28 and a couple of others.

Anyone read any reports on these rounds effectiveness?

Mega fast..
Hydraulic overload..

Not sure I understood the comment/question? My 5.7 is fast and deadly accurate, but I haven't shot any people with it lately. The little critters that I have shot with it in the past seemed "shocked" and died quickly.

He's medicated.

357 Magnum 125 gr HP would be your best bet

Actually, I believe the correct term is hydraulic pressure, but why argue semantics?

Or, hydrostatic pressure - or, hydrostatic shock.

Actually, a shock wave can be created when fluid is rapidly displaced by an explosive or projectile.

Tissue behaves similarly enough to water that a sonic pressure wave can be created by a bullet impact,
generating pressures in excess of 1,500 psi. - - - Just off the top of my head. (plagiarized)

Sometimes I use words that I don't know the meaning of so I can sound more photosynthesis.

Yes indeed, the "magic bullet" Haven't found it yet but the search continues.

Careful Blue, you wouldn't want to leaf yourself open to flippant remarks

The wounding effect, that occurs when 2000+ fps projectiles strike tissue, results from that tissue being stretched to the point of tearing and secondary damage from bone fragments.

Depending on exactly where the bullet strikes, incompressible body fluids may or may not be driven away from the impact; but the others are the concern of those responsible for treating the wounded and documenting injuries of the dead.

That is more to the point. I know that big slow bullets work and kill stuff such as my 416Rigby on Elephant and Cape Buffalo and such which are just too big to get 'shocked' to death by any rifle that a normal man could fire from his shoulder but by the same token, deer die - IME and IMO - MUCH faster when hit by a 257WBY than a 38/55 or 44 Magnum carbine. Even, and maybe even especially, up close.

I have observed broken blood vessels on deer and elk as far as 20 or more inches away from the impact point of a bullet when hit by extremely high velocity rounds like the 6/284 on deer and 300RUM on a not too distant bull elk.

And the difference in impact reaction on varmints between a 22LR, which runs in the same speed class as a 9mm loading and a 22WMR or 22 Hornet which is more in the same speed class as the 5.7 FN round and the 22TCM is very dramatic.

So my point or query/thought pattern is this:

Maybe we have been doing this all wrong....

Instead of bigger bullets like a 230gr .45 (which according to some does not give markedly different results than the much smaller - by 1/2 - 9mmx19 or Parrabellum) perhaps we should be looking to extreme speed rounds like I mentioned above.

PERHAPS, and I do not know nor do I have a good way to test this, the result and effect of bursting blood vessels and nerve centers more than a foot away from an entry point and the pressure that extreme velocity brings to the table VS making a larger permanent wound cavity would result in fewer rounds being needed to incapacitate a would be attacker, felon, or other threat.

I know that here in Walla Walla, some officers train with the few FN 5.7x28 pistols the Department has and that these handguns are sent out with officers who are doing high value target protection. The main idea is, I am told, to be able to defeat possible body armor of a more highly trained and equipped potential assasin. That is all well and good and it is pretty well known that a small projectile at very velocity works far better than a 230gr 45 caliber slug (and at typical speeds of around 800fps THERE is an apt name) from a large bore handgun.

BUT... what if these super speed rounds, due to the well known and well documented effects of high velocity are far MORE effective, even with just one hit, than the tried and true rounds of the past?

I am thinking they might, and would not be at all surprised if they soon prove themselves to actually be much more effective.

Has anyone here heard or read about the use of any of these over 2,000 fps rounds in a life or death shooting scenario?

Even if the now oft proffered idea of most pistol fight stops needing more than one hit, and little to distinguish the effect of a hit from one round or another, perhaps the low recoil and thus shootability plus the many round capacities of the double stack 22TCM and 5.7x28 really are a better choice.

I don't know, but I thought the topic worthy of the good folks here and an idea which merits some investigation, conversation and follow up.

It's hydraulic torque converter.

Well a Volkswagen beetle at 100mph or a semi truck at 60mph? Thinking dead is dead. For myself bigger is better.

Apples and oranges, and a very old cliche'

1)The size differences between a Beetle and a Semi are FAR more vast than between even the largest and smallest pistol bullets.

2) Neither is reaching supersonic speeds let alone anywhere near the speed to create the effect of a very high speed bullet

and

3) against human flesh, both would be equally lethal and definite "one shot stop" events.

Pretty poor analogy, does not fit the topic at all.

And we have to now question our old ideas that "bigger is always better" now that empirical data is showing that in the case of pistol or handgun rounds VS quick fight stopping this is just not being shown as true.

In fact, even the fairly old now Evan Marshall data we have was trending in the direction of speed VS mass or permanent wound channels. Remember that the 45ACP was trumped and trounced by the 357 Magnum, and that round with a light for caliber FAST bullet.

Apples and oranges. My favorite is a 45ACP. Perhaps because I shoot them better in a 1911 platform. Could not even make Marksman with the M9. 357 Sig looks interesting, just bought a CCW type CZ Rami in 40 S&W, seems good to go, but then again I haven't had to actually to shoot anything other than paper with it.

Well since the 22 TCM only comes in the RIA 1911 as far as I know, and I don't make a habit of trusting my life to a sand casting made by uneducated kids in the Philippines. I don't think I'll be finding out if it's decisive on bad guys. I also see no value for me and my uses in the FN 5.7 other than shooting rabbits and coyotes. I have nice 22 and 32 revolvers for that duty so I'm not going to be dropping the coin for one of them either.

I have lots of 357,9mm,45acp, and 44 magnum handguns. They've all been proven reliable as fight stoppers using the right ammo. If I feel for some reason that I'm headed somewhere super dangerous where getting into a bad situation is very likely I'll grab one of them, hell I may even take a spare magazine or speed loader. Until I start frequenting such areas I'll happily go traipsing about town with a pocket full of J frame, some common sense, and good shooting skills without getting too wrapped up in whatif ballistic gack.

I shot and carried a 44 Special for a long time, then a bunch of different good 1911's in 45ACP. My daily carry gun now is a 1911 in 10mm with Norma Equivalent loadings in it i.e. 180gr HP's (either Gold Dots or Golden Saber's) at a chronographed 1375fps. So, I am with ya not against ya.

But, anyone with an open mind and capable of rational thinking should be looking that the interview with the Chicago cop plus many other field experience reports and sitting back with thought and cogitation. Looking for a better mousetrap, so to speak.

THEN, we have Allan Jones. Former ballistician at a large metropolitan PD crime lab in TX and chief ballistician at Speer co. for quite a long time. He has also been reciting the 'no guarantee's of a one shot stop' idea of late and reported in a recent magazine article (he now writes the "Going Ballistic" column of Shooting Times) that the 22WMR is about as good a man stopper as most other cartridges. He went on to say that he was excited to see the development of handgun specific 22WMR ammo, and was hoping to very soon test some of the newer personal defense designed ammo for the 22WMR made by Speer (30gr Gold dot) and Hornaday (45gr flex tip "Critical Defense" loading) as he thought those loading might make the 22WMR a quite good option.

If this man is pumped up over the 22WMR, one would generally surmise that the much more powerful 5.7x28 and even faster still 22TCM might be extremely effective rounds. Both from a standpoint of high damage to a bad guy target and from the perspective of easy shooting and quick repeat shots when needed.

To my thinking, this idea merits consideration and investigation.

For now, my 10mm stays on my hip. But the thought of 18 rounds of alternating expanding and non expanding 45gr bullets at over 2,000fps is very intriguing to me. Thus, this query and thread.

Well now, YOU are just no fun at all here!

You cite the rounds you have on hand as having been proven as good fight stoppers. You must have missed the interview with the Chicago police officer and many other recent studies showing that these pistol rounds are actually NOT good fight stoppers. THAT fact, is kind of the point that we all need to be considering.

If mankind never tried to find out if a plan B was better than plan A for defense of home and hearth, we would still be throwing rocks at each other.

Trying to learn what is better and improving ones defenses are always hallmarks of thinking men.

And, FWIW, (though this thread is not about them) the RIA's are damn fine pistols. The one I have is better out of the box than my Delta Elite was after trips to three different 1911 specialists and a fitment of a new aftermarket barrel. And I have had a lot of 1911's that were considered to be among the best of thier time.

you do realize the 22TCM isnt "mega fast" its flying at 2000fps...you can do that with "bricks" launched out of a 45-70 in a strong action.......not sure what shock your expecting to see along ways from the bullet impact

looking in one of my reloading manuals the 357 Maximum launches 158 Grain bullets the same speed as a 40 grain out of the 22TCM if you want a comparison in the handgun realm.....yeah its "mega fast" alright

By rifle standards, it is merely a 22 Hornet, if that. By handgun standards, it is indeed very fast.

Maybe it isn't fast enough to create lots of collateral damage to distant tissue. This is what I would like to find out. I CAN say with certainty that collateral damage to rodent pelts is far reaching with 45gr bullets launched from a Hornet rifle or a Contender.

I might have to bring one to the 2016 hog hunt and try it out.

not really even by handgun standards.....in my 13 year old Speer manual there are around 10 handgun rounds(not counting rifle rounds in a single shot pistol, talking straight walled , short handgun rounds) that are within 200fps of a 22TCM launching heavier bullets by 2 or 3 times.....your not gonna see much of any "extreme shock" on anything bigger than a ground squirrel.....

still wouldnt mind one as a rabbit/gopher gun for fun but there isnt anything "uber" about its ballistics.....

still cant figure out how you think if the speed really doesnt cause that much shock out of a rifle it will in a handgun.....most the shock from teh mild velocity 22 rounds is from highly fragible bullets, not cause 2000ish fps is some magic threshold.....

Gawd!

Mark,
I'm not sure of your source re: the 5.7 at Walla Walla PD. That said a good friend who is a SWAT member and Narc detective from an local dept in previous discussions has told me that several depts in the area got (6) 5.7's for T&E and all declined to buy them as the 5.7 never gained much terminal effects, reliability and energy to their issued 40 S&W and 5.56's.

I will have to double check but last i knew the Columbia, Garfield, Adams and Benton county teams all ran 14.5" or 16" AR's with a few residual MP5's and a few new UMP's scattered around for SWAT and special assignments.

In the end KE (if one believes in it) is still determined by the equation of KE=1/2 (m+v^2). Due to this fact an increase of mass will always outweigh an increase in velocity in terms of KE. In other words a 55gr projectile at 2300fps (conservative from a 5.56 with 7.5" AR barrel) will always out trump any 5.7 rd.

A better comparison would be the 5.7 to the 22 WMR. Granted the 5.7 has more effective projectiles then 22 WMR but if the same technology was applied to the WMR the race would be damn near negigible and i cannot fathom a single LE application where either is preferred.

My brother in Law is a Sergeant in the local PD and one of the SWAT team leaders. It is he who told me of the Departments purchase and use of the FN 5.7 pistol and round. He liked the gun so much that he got one of his own.

I do think that speed might count for more than originally thought, that is why I am wondering aloud if the speed factor should perhaps be more of a sought after item in the pistol world. And it could be that the bullets are helping the faster rounds as well. I am not trying to make the case that the fast 22 caliber pistol rounds will or will not be better. I am merely asking the question of the various camps here "might it be THE factor and more than we have thought over the years?" And seeking posts from anyone who has used this round on bigger than a squirrel or have a link to a report of the use of them.

I don't think in a handgun platform we will ever be able to get any "significant" speed to what you are articulating, without going absurdly light on bullet weight. Having said that, I have killed a truckload of game with handguns, many in the man-size range, and I can tell you that light and fast can be a recipe for disaster.

I think the only way to a reliable one-shot stop is placement- CNS.

The 5.56 NATO round is faster than any of these 22 caliber handgun rounds and it isn't a good shot stopper either. Fact is a determined attacker can continue to press an attack after his internal organs are destroyed for a period of time.
The only way to always effect an instant 1 shot stop is to take out the central nervous system.
It is as simple as that.

If I were inclined to research it, I would try to dig up everything I could on the Fort Hood "workplace violence" incident. Major Hassan used a 5.7x28.

Also bear in mind when you talk to police that they may be using ammo not legal for non-police.

I did not know that, THANKS! I will try to look for that.

Don't bring mere facts into this.

Damn, beat me to it, so according to the OP a 22 cal rifle is inadequate for a SHTF rifle, but a 22 cal pistol going at least 1,000 fps slower is a one shot killing machine on men?

Wow

Yep, I am always amazed at his "logic".

Those that insist on defining "hydraulic shock" as something that doesn't exist or can only occur at supersonic speeds rely on a single and often inappropriate definition of the word "shock". In fact hydraulic shock is a well known phenomena that is dealt with regularly n the engineering of liquid transfer systems, i.e. piping, and there are formulas to predict the amount of hydraulic shock that will occur given various input parameters.

Here is one definition:

"Hydraulic shock is the term used to describe the momentary pressure rise in a piping system which results when the liquid is started or stopped quickly. This pressure rise is caused by the momentum of the fluid; therefore, the pressure rise increases with the velocity of the liquid, the length of the system from the fluid source, or with an increase in the speed with which it is started or stopped. Examples of situations where hydraulic shock can occur are valves, which are opened or closed quickly, or pumps, which start with an empty discharge line. Hydraulic shock can even occur if a high speed wall of liquid (as from a starting pump) hits a sudden change of direction in the piping, such as an elbow. The pressure rise created by the hydraulic shock effect is added to whatever fluid pressure exists in the piping system and, although only momentary, this shock load can be enough to burst pipe and break fittings or valves."

The question is whether or not sudden increases in hydraulic pressure can cause damage well beyond the point of impact and of course the answer is "yes". One only needs to shoot a watermelon with a suitable projectile to verify this,

People can argue semantics all day long but in the real world high-speed bullet impacts can and do often do cause damage far from the impact site due to pressure waves. If one chooses to insist "hydraulic shock" doesn't exist or exists only at super-sonic speeds they may want to do a little more research.

I'm with Whitworth on this. I've killed somewhere around a dozen deer with handguns. If you want to track them or lose them, use a 357 with 110 grain bullets. I learned that lesson on my first handgun deer in 1974 after reading some Ayoob story about a Corsican ram hunt with a Jerry Moran Python. I switched to 44's & heavy 45 Colts a few years later using heavy SWC's and JHP's. That was the game changer and I've never looked back.

I have killed some deer with rifles too, including a .223/65 SP running about 2800. Heart shot at 160 yards-



Ran about 20 yards and plunked over as if I had shot him with my 45 Colt.

My standby deer stomper is a 150 grain Nosler BT at 2944 and with shoulder hits it literally drops them from 20 to 250 yards. I have seen plenty of bloodshot meat but I have never seen these 'ruptured vessels' a foot from the impact. But then I was paying attention to the obvious effect of the bullet and not trying to prove a theory irrelevant to the task.

FWIW I spent 33 years as a cop and 12 of those as the investigator for a state prosecutor. Saw plenty of human carnage there including both handguns and high powered rifles. I don't recall a single ME report where vessel damage away from the wound site was noted.

Something to remember about anti-personnel use of the handgun- people getting shot at often reflexively throw their hands and arms up and or turn away at odd or oblique angles. You better have a bullet that will penetrate in a relatively straight line and knock a big hole while doing it. The old 45's do this as well as anything and I'm sure not abandoning them for some little pistol that squirts 25-40 grain bullets.

PS. Do yourself a favor and forget all this 'one shop shot' nonsense, which is designed to sell you books and the latest greatest magic bullet. Shoot well and keep shooting until your problem is solved, regardless of how many legs it has.

This.


Very early in my career we had an officer involved shooting where the suspect ended up with a 12 gauge slug through his belly. He still continued to advance and was brought down by a second slug. This one center ounched him and removed a sizable chunk of his spine.

shot placement is the key to one shot stopping, not what magic bullet or new cal you are using at the time. If i had to pick a round for the semi-auto handgun as having the best potential for one shot stopping it would be the 357 Sig . I don't remember who said this , but a handgun is a tool you use to fight your way to a rifle .

I know of at least one bear that would've appreciated a hot .22 caliber projectile in the boiler room rather than a "T-Rex" round through the azz, but I suppose that's a different scenario....🙈

I have done a ton of research on the subject and I believe that the most reliable info on the subject is by Dr. Martin Fackler. By the way a water melon isn't a deer, pig or human and doesnot react like tissue and muscle. As the size of the animal increases so does their ability to soak up the hydraulic pressure created by speed.

Whom ever said that a handgun is a "tool to fight your way to a rifle" is an idiot. If one is involved in a lethal confrontation the best way to survive is to end it quickly and that means with what you have at the time of the confrontation.

That "idiot" would be Clint Smith.

I'll side with Clint.

If a rifle is available - I'd MUCH rather have that. If a rifle isn't available - I'd make due with the pistol but I'd rather have the rifle.

I don't think that Clint said that.



Clint did say this

"The handgun would not be my choice of weapon if I knew I was going to a fight. I’d choose a rifle, a shotgun, an RPG or an atomic bomb instead."

Clint Smith

yet hard cast rounds launched out of a 45-70 at that speed dont do what you say cause the speed is not enough to do it.....the ONLY reason mild 22's SEEM to do it at these speeds on SMALL targets is highly frangable bullets dumping their energy in a short distance.....but unless your target weights only a couple pounds your not gonna see anything spectacular as far as on shot stops....for phug sakes as others have pointed out you thought the 223 in an AR was to wimpy to reliably save your arse, you needed atleast a 308....WFT do you think a 22TCM is really gonna do?

Any Peace Officer with 5 or more years on the job will say that.

Truly portable handguns are inherently under-powered if one is looking for a one-shot stop. Handguns are for emergencies that you don't see coming. If you know you're going to be in a gun fight and have time to prepare, holster the pistol and grab the rifle.

The whole "fight your way to a rifle" catch phrase is just that, a catch phrase. IME it's used most often by people who suck at pistol shooting.

The overwhelming majority of good guy shootings in this country are resolved with pistols, and that ought to be clear enough evidence that "fighting your way to a rifle" just ain't so

This has not been my experience. As I mentioned in my earlier posts to this thread, Deer and Elk I have shot with high velocity rounds (more than a couple of lbs, and most often using very non frangible Barnes solid copper bullets) have died in very sudden fashion many times and exhibited bloodshot meat and seriously damaged organs and parts quite a ways distant from the bullet path.

I am NOT saying that for sure a 2000fps bullet from a pistol would do this, I am wondering 1) might they? and 2) Does anyone here have or know of any solid, factual information about or experience with this yet?

RE the 5.56 VS 308 debate, I have gone back and forth on this. It seems that, based upon my most recent readings (and this is all I have, not a veteran) of reports is that within the shorter ranges where velocity is still very high quick stops are quite often exhibited.

The Chicago Police officer interview posted in this forum and reading Allan Jones material as well as other persons who have real life experience is what is leading me to consider other options, opinions and viewpoints other than what has been commonly held for a long time. And I have been a big bullet proponent my whole life. Packing lots more 44's and 45's and 10mm's than smaller cartridge handguns over the course of my now 33 years of carrying daily.

you are an idiot....2000FPS IS NOT HIGH VELOCITY.......for phug sake its barely over black powder numbers........

And who decides what is "High Velocity"? When the 30/30 was first introduced, it was considered VERY high velocity as it was going - GASP! - 2,000 fps! 22LR ammo that is running 1250fps is marked "High Velocity" Most consider the 357SIG to be a very high velocity number for a handgun. To persons accustomed to shooting 230gr bullets at 800fps or so, a bullet travelling 2 and a half times that speed certainly seems to be pretty high velocity. By the standards of handgun speeds - and handguns are what we are talking about - 2,000fps IS very high velocity.

No, it is not high velocity in the same realm as my 220 Swift, 7mm Mashburn Super and such but in the realm of handguns it very much is.

The question at hand, and the one I sought to answer with this post or at least begin discussing is this:

1)IS a 22 caliber bullet at apx 2000fps high velocity ENOUGH to produce tissue damage far from the bullet path AT HANDGUN AND DEFENSIVE DISTANCES and

2) If such a round can and does produce significant tissue damage far from the bullets path, then is it enough additional damage to overshadow the obvious larger permanent wound channel of the traditional rounds, and enough additional to significantly increase the number of one shot stops in HANDGUN RANGE encounters.

Whether the 223 is an effective man stopper at 500 meters or more, is not part of the concern or query.

I could now call you a derogitory name here for still not understanding the question at hand or the parameters surrounding the question being discussed, but I shall not stoop to such.

I guess you two aren't BFF's anymore.

Dink

Exactly. I would suggest that bad pistol shots not impose their limitations on those who can. Again, placement will be your determining factor on effectiveness.

actually having a rifle would be ideal.....but much of life is not ideal, especially when chit tends to go wrong on you and knowing how to shoot with a pistol you have with you trumps a rifle 100 yards away outside in your truck or back in the house by a whole hell of alot........

Mark it is you that does not understand. Since we have mayrs 3000 or more FPS this would definately mean that 2000 FPS is no longer high velocity. My cousin spent 3 1/2 years in Iraq/Afganistan and he found the 5.56 to not be an effective combat round on average at relatively short combat ranges. The 7.62 is vastly superior at all ranges. You should know this. A friend that is a policeman told me about a guy that his department shot over 40 times before he went down and most hits were from the 223 at close range (inside 50 yards).

You argue with everything that does not suit your agenda. Just get a dam 22 TCM and give it a rest.

i publicly ate that plate of crow a fair while back....

Why does anyone ever even try to reason with Mark?

Let's try this in something approaching rational, sane, and coherent discussion, shall we?

First of all, 2k fps is not "high speed". It's certainly not "ultra", or "hyper", or any other "uber" word. It's pedestrian. It doesn't matter whether the platform firing it is a handgun or a long gun, the velocity is still pedestrian. Carry handguns all operate in pedestrian velocities.

Now, look at the bullet weights you're describing; 40-50 grains. Think about that: 40-50 grains. That rimfire territory.

To begin with the analysis of the .22TCM, You're talking about something that has just over 1/2 (yes, ONE HALF) the velocity of the .223 with a 40 grain soft point. Is this round known for "hydrostatic shock" and "one shot stops" on deer size game? Is it known for it at 250-300 yards, where the ballistics equal the .22TCM?

You're talking about something that is roughly 700 to 800 fps SLOWER than the .22 Hornet. Is the Hornet know for "hydrostatic shock" and "one shot stops" on deer size game? Is it known for that at 100 yards (where the ballistics equal the .22TCM)?

You're talking about a round that almost exactly the same ballistics as the .22WMR from a rifle. Is that round known for "hydrostatic shock" and "one shot stops" on deer size game?

You bring up the shock kills of deer and elk with magnum rifle cartridges. Yes, that happens. You're also talking about true HIGH velocity rounds (over 3,000 fps) that deliver to the target energy that is several multiples of the target weight. For example, a .300Wby with a 180 grain bullet delivers well over a ton and one-half ft.lbs. at 100 yards (and at roughly 3k fps) and over one ton of energy at 400 yards. A 200 pound deer is being hit with 20 to 30 times it's body mass. An elk is being struck roughly 4 times it's mass.

Now, look at the TCM. At the muzzle it delivers under 400 ft.lbs. That's barely 2x times the body mass of a reasonable man, and could be considerably less than that depending upon the size of the person involved.

We know from many years of testing and many decades of research that one of the factors that play into a handgun delivering effective results on game and on humans is energy, yes, but it's also bullet profile and diameter, it's penetration, and it's momentum. The TCM is delivering the same energy on target as almost any other decent defensive round, but it's doing so with a needle thin front profile and very little mass of it's own.

The concept of a high-ER speed handgun round is not new. Remington loaded for years the 9x19 with a +P load and a 95 grain JSP. That load clocked out of 4" barrels at about 1500 fps. It didn't perform well on humans because it lacked the mass to penetrate. At 95 grains, it's over 2 times heavier than the TCM bullet and almost identical sectional density (.107 to .114).

We can go back even further and find a round that more closely approached the TCM in velocity: the 7.62x25. The Russian ".32" launched an 85-88 grain slug at up to 1800 fps. The sectional density is slightly greater than the TCM (.125-.129 to .114) and the velocity very close; within 200 fps. The Russian ".32" delivered well over 500 ft.lbs.; more than 25% more than the TCM and did so with a greater front bullet profile. I like the Russian .32; it's a good round. It is not known for being a "fight stopper", though, and it has a very long service record.

If you want a "one shot stop", go with the odds. Those odds stock up heavily in favor of the .357 Magnum with a 125 JHP, the .45ACP with a 200-230 JHP, the .40S&W with a 155-165 JHP, or the 9x19 +P with a 115-124 JHP. All of these, save the .45, have almost identical characteristics as far as velocity, energy, and bullet construction and sectional density. They delivery 400-500 ft.lbs., the do so with a bullet constructed to penetrate well WHILE expanding (and not coming apart), and with more than .35" in frontal profile. The .45 overcomes the slight velocity edge of the others by adding mass to the bullet.

The .22TCM does not compare to those proven show stoppers in any characteristic. It's marginally faster, yes, but it's 1/3 to 1/6 the weight, with a diameter profile that is at least 60% less, and with a bullet that is not designed to penetrate while expanding.

It's a neat design, and it'd be fun to shoot; like the 7.62x25. But, it's no "one shot stopper".

your question has been repeatedly answered....you just keep ignoring it cause it doesnt fit what you want to believe....you think a 2000fps 22 bullet should cause major hydrostatic shock yet show me one big cased black powder rifle round that does....that should answer you phuggin question right their if you could actually comprehend what you read.....

I don't know, but it's always good for 6 or 7 pages.

if a 500BPE launching 570 grain bullets doesnt cause major hydrostatic shock at 2000fps a 40 grain 223 bullet at the same speed aint going to.........

Mark is never, ever, ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever gonna listen to anything that contradicts what he's already thinking.

That is for sure and certain.

Now, on a related note:

safariman, you recently posed a question about "insurance" to protect you from litigation should you ever be involved in a shoot. Here's what you should know:

Everything in your history and everything you have ever posted here or anywhere else will be subject to discovery and WILL be used to paint a picture of you should you ever be involved in a shoot. Think about that.

If you've ever had any financial difficulties, that will come out and it will be used to question your responsibility. If you've ever had troubles with your licenses and business practices, it will be used to question your veracity and your ethics. If you've ever been on any medications or narcotics, it will come out and be used to question your state of mind. From those alone, I think you should seriously consider whether even contemplating a "shoot" is something you should do. Much less post about it (repeatedly).

Every one of your posts on this forum and elsewhere will be used to "get inside your mind". You used to post about hunting, a lot. Now, all you post about are carry weapons, defensive shoot possibilities, "one shot stop", penetrating and defeating body armor, and SHTF scenarios. The significant shift in your post history will be used to question whether you have mental fixation issues on this stuff and whether, perhaps, you put yourself in a situation you shouldn't have been in in the first place because you WANTED the shoot to happen.

You really ought not be as concerned about whether the new TCM round can cause the type of damage on human as you're used to seeing in game animals stuck with real high velocity rounds, at least not publicly. That kind of fascination and fixation will be used to paint a picture of you that you're not going to like. Add to that all the comments you've made about shooting dogs, or nearly "having to shoot" dogs, and you're going to come across as a "quick draw"; someone itching for a "fight" or a "shoot". Put in your most recent concept of loading one "penetrator" round and one expanding, alternating, as you describe will be something that comes up and it's not going to look good. Everything you've posted here and elsewhere will come up.

If you want to do yourself a huge favor: shut up. If you're ever in the situations you seem fixated on in recent times, everything you have said and are saying will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

You're fixated on "new, shiny, FAST (well, not really fast)" and fantasizing about whether it'd do the damage you think is necessary against a human if you had to use it. You're willing to risk your life and safety, and that of people around you, on an unproven round (with the TCM), or hot-rodding handloads that are likely overpressure and certainly more than what's generally available over the counter. All of this, and you're openly discussing whether "it's enough", in combination with the rest of your history, in contemplation of a "shoot".

If you doubt me, ask anyone you know that has ever been involved in a shoot and see whether or not that kind of information came up at all. Talk to the cops here; they'll tell you. All you're doing right now is digging yourself a hole that, should you ever find yourself in it, you will have one helluva time getting back out of.

My advice? Shut up. If you're going to carry, carry something very plain jane and that does NOT scream "tactical" or "uber" or anything else. A J-frame or K-frame revolver in .357 with FACTORY loads; a vanilla as possible, and pray you're never in a situation to use it. No, it's not "uber", and it's not "new", and it's not "shiny", and it's not anything special at all. That is entirely the point and something you, given all the rest of the above and your history, might really want to consider.

Then again, I don't expect you to listen to any advice except that which supports a position you've already decided to take.

The use of shotguns and rifles in even police shootings is rare ad generally occurs only on calls where we deploy by policy with the long gun. Bank alarms, robberies in progress and active shooter incidents.

Among the general public, defensive long gun deployments are even rarer. They almost universally occur during residence burglaries where the resident is home and has some advance warning that they have been invaded. I've seen a couple where nothing more tactical than a bird gun with field loads was used, quite handily, to flip off the 'threat' switch.

Clint is a good guy who brings a lot of knowledge and experience to his classes. He also makes his living keeping paying customers entertained, so he spouts off stuff occasionally that make no sense to me and apparently, a few others. That "fight your way to a rifle" thing is irrelevant to the guy walking across the theatre parking lot who is confronted by an armed robber. You better seize the first opportunity & use what you got to drive that OODA loop like a dragster.

Another is "Two is One, One is none." One is what the Average Joe is likely to have on him. What you don't have on you doesn't exist. So choose one good serious sidearm and become proficient with that.

also do know ive shot enough sub 60 pound critters with mild 22 caliber rounds to KNOW it aint gonna be a reliable one shot fight stopper on man size critters.....anyone thats shot alot of yotes should know that lil fact.....hell ive been surprised how much a big jackrabbit can suck up when its adrenalin is up....

just cause its fired out of a handgun dont make it magic......

While I would much rather end a problem with the first shot, if that wasn't happening for any reason and a rifle was an option, I'd generally opt for the rifle. Very short ranges being possible exceptions, longer ranges favoring the rifle choice.

Good grief people....Of course a rifle is a better choice. A small nuke would be a better one. But that doesn't mean that "fighting to a rifle" isn't a nonsensical catch phrase.

Preferring a rifle, choosing a rifle, knowing that a rifle is better DOES NOT EQUAL fighting to a rifle with the pistol in your hand.

But nobody can understand that, so the catch phrase lives on.



"Using a pistol to fight your way to a rifle" is engaging in a gunfight, then continuously gunfighting your way to a different location (however near or far), then holstering your pistol-retrieving a rifle-charging a rifle (the whole time still being engaged in a gunfight) and then re-engaging in the ongoing gunfight. The catch phrase has nothing at all to do with simply preferring or wishing you had a rifle.

I responded to somebody, guess it got deleted.

Blue is spot on.

As near as I can deduce the phrase was used decades ago.
This is what Clint said;

"The handgun would not be my choice of weapon if I knew I was going to a fight. I’d choose a rifle, a shotgun, an RPG or an atomic bomb instead."

Spot on!

Only if I could set off the nuke 1,000 times without cleaning it to make sure it would go bang every time.

I cannot fathom the insanity, unless a pistol hits a major blood vessel or vital organ its not that effective. IIRC 80% of those shot once with a pistol live to tell about it. I cannot find the surgeon seminar right now.

Let me throw something else in here. I've seen a number of justified defense shootings over the years. From a LE and prosecutorial perspective, nobody gave a flip about what gun or ammo was used. It was a justifiable self defense shooting or it wasn't. End of story.

And no prosecutor is going to have any influence on you, much less 'crucify' you, unless you get charged with a crime. If that happens you've got a lot bigger problems than what gun or ammo you used.

Now if you get sued, any number of factors may or may not get introduced. But many states now have provisions in the Defense laws that prohibit any kind of civil suit when a person acts within the parameters of that law. Sort of renders a whole lot of book salesman scare tactics obsolete now, don't it?

Sarge,

Look at the OP's history; here and in real life. One charge, and a prosecutor will have a field day with him. One opening and a civil attorney will make that field day look like a walk in the park.

Hell, let him cap "an unarmed black teenager" and he's a damn fed poster child against concealed carry.

He uses no logic or rationale, listens to no advice, and fantasizes about the most ridiculous schit. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

True, the odds of him ever being in a situation to actually HAVE to use deadly force are remote. Yet, he's quick drawing on dogs on a regular basis, and eventually he's going to do something stupid. If you think the ass-shot bear incident was a complete clusterphuck, just imagine how FUBAR any "shoot" involving him would be.

I posted what I did, both times, in hopes that he has any smarts at all.

Wouldn't know. Never been scared by a book salesman...

I know nothing of the OP and the above was not directed at you or anyone in particular, 4rager. Just thought it might be germane to the discussion.

Understood completely, Sarge. No slight intended. But, as I am sure you know, context is everything. You weren't "wrong" in any way, and your post was and is completely pertinent.

Claiborne has posted pix of the piles of pill bottles he eats out of, admitted he's either in a ALOC or a world of hurt most of the time, and has been found by a state reg board to be a conning, lying, self serving POS.

And now he has some fantasy about being a world saving night fighter..

I used to think Ringman was going to be the first from here to be on the national news, but now I don't know..

I just remembered that I've seen and handled the ultimate, might even say uber, safariman carry piece. We sold a bunch of guns for a widow a few years ago and in the bunch was a SS derringer chambered for .223. Just imagine the hydrostatical badassery you could unleash with that baby.

i listened to that interview with the chicago cop. His first shooting taking 15rounds and not dieing until ten days later.
And that included six out of a model 25 smith in .45colt.
He did say it, but i find that somewhat hard to believe, seeing the .45colt in action.

He never said what was hit, or where.

Yes he did. He said all rounds from the .45 LC to the chest and five more from a J-frame S&W .38 Spcl were between the shoulder blades.

Him full of schit.

The old time gunsmith P.O. Ackley did some interesting tests and became an advocate of small caliber, light weight bullet, and extreme speed for critters. He wrote about his tests in the forepart of one of his publications Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders. It is out of print and does fetch some $$ to acquire the two volume set.

As you probably already know his formula the Ackley improved everything rifle cartridges but was fond of his .17 Javelina.

How many of those Ackley Wildcats topped out at 2000fps?

Can I AI a 25 ACP?

I encourage you too. Push it to 2000fps and become a ninja assassin.

The ultimate in mouse gun pocket pistol badassery.

A Kimber Montana in 7mm Mag will kill more surely and faster than any handgun made. I purposely exclude the hand-rifles like the Thompson Contender or Encore. Those are not handguns.

Generally Patrol Officers aren't far from their patrol cars, where if policy allows, 90% will have some form of an AR. Almost ALL have a Remington 870.

Brazos County, TX Pct. 1 Constable Brian Bachman, a good friend of mine, was killed in the line of duty on August 13, 2012. Back up arrived quickly, and retreated quickly as the murderer continued to fire on civilians and police alike with the rifle he killed Constable Bachman with, a 30-06. I don't know whether it made the news or not, but as the back up units began arriving, they advanced on the house, side arms drawn. The murderer fired on them and wounded two other College Station Police Officers. They began using their Glock 23s for suppressive fire so they could get back to their cars for cover, and to retrieve shotguns. Eventually the murderer was killed at the scene.

That is an example of what I refer to when I say use your handgun to fight back to your rifle.

I'm well aware that the gunfight that killed Brian was atypical. As has been noted most gunfights are settled with handguns and usually with the white hats winning. However, you can bet your last dollar that after the first responding officers were injured by gunfire the remaining responding units to that gunfight that killed Brian deployed a shotgun or rifle upon arrival at the scene if they had one in their patrol unit.

I am on my third set of those two volume sets....

Completely wore out two sets of the paperback version, bought a hardback version in the classifieds here a few years ago and am taking better care of it than I did the paperback books and hoping to be able to hand these down someday.

Great reading, especially the military tests of various projectiles in anesthetized and specifically set up and placed animals. Pigs and goats mostly, IIRC.

It is from those pages and the writings of Roy Weatherby and Warren Page that I developed my affinity for wildcats and high speed projectiles.

Fu cking uber, man..

Yeah, that's the exact example I gave. But it has nothing to do with non-LE pistol carry or really even the idea of fighting back to your pistol. They chose to fight their way into a gunfight and then back out with a pistol, not really an apples to apples comparison, since they could've just carried their rifles in with them to begin with.

I'd even propose that wasn't a self-defense situation. When you go running toward gunfire to kill someone, that's pretty offensive. But that's just semantics I guess.

well...I scanned through most of this thread.

The law of hydraulics says that with an incompressible fluid, every part of the system sees the same pressure. That's how a hydraulic jack works. You apply 50 lbs of pressure on a piston with 1/2 sq in of area, creating 100 psi pressure. The hydraulic ram that it's connected to has 20 sq inches of area, so your effort is magnified, and your jack can lift 2000 lbs.

The problem with "hydraulic shock" is that tissue is not an incompressible fluid; it dissipates pressure waves.

We want the bad guy to not complete the act he was shot for attempting. A CNS hit is a guaranteed stop, but hard to do reliably. One shot stops do occur with pistol rounds, if the bad guy is hit hard enough & well enough to shut off his aggression. Maybe the huge muzzle blast of the .357 mag added a psychological impact, which might explain why it was revered as a fight stopper for so many years.

I had a buddy in college who was a fur hunter. He was constantly searching for the perfect round that would decisively kill critters but not exit and tear up hides. When the .17 Remington came along he bought one, then sold it after he had to shoot a bobcat 4 times, all at less than 100 yards.

If little bullets and high speed expand and penetrate straight, they can do great damage, and if they hit bone there will certainly be secondary missiles. But if they don't expand, they don't do much.

The .22 TCM would be fun to play with, but I'll pass on it, and the FN5.7 as serious defensive weapons.

tex n cal,

Thank you sir for a reasoned and on track addition to this thread.

I am not going to put any eggs in the fast CF 22 pistol for defense basket yet, either.

I was, and am, hoping and looking for some field reports to come back as well as some adult, reasoned conversation. To you and other who added such to this thread, many thanks.

I may try to get my hands on a 22TCM to play with sometime this summer, and begin using it on various game and non game animals as the opportunity presents ittself, but until I hear and see some concrete evidence regarding these two rounds effectiveness I will stay with my combination of a fairly large well constructed hollow point bullet pushed as fast as I can safely push it in an easy to carry and conceal package. So far for me this means my 10mm 1911 but I plan to continue to try to learn and adapt to or adopt a proven winner as more information is added to our base of collective knowledge.

I don't want to still be throwing rocks after the spear, atlatl or bow and arrow have been invented and proven

Some mis read my thread here as my suggesting that the fast 22's are the cat's meow. I do not recall expressing or taking that position. If it looks like I did or was to some then my communication was lacking there. I only wished to begin a conversation as to whether they are viable or perhaps even superior to what we have all been using the last 100 or so years. And to find out if there was yet any kind of field results in that we could all consider.

BS, I have put moose on the ground with a 475L with one shot as fast as any rifle.

Yeah, at 4000+ FPS.

I too read those two volumes about 20 years ago and departed down the dark path of the small caliber, high velocity and light bullet path and have never gone back.

There just is something about shooting stuff at the upper end velocity wise whether it be rifle or handgun that is soul satisfying.

I'll was not aware that his handbooks were in hard back. I'm also a hard back book collector and will now look into that, thanks.

Except when the animals in question are really large, then you will want something that launches more than a mouse bullet.

Finish the job with the pistol and you won't need the rifle.
WILL

And we had the conversation, you just didn't like what you heard so you're gonna keep doing this until somebody agrees with you.

Read 4ager's post that compared the TCM to other rounds. We had the conversation Mark, you're just not listening.

And no, there aren't any field tests using the new round on stuff that it's not suitable for.

There is plenty of data available with 22 caliber rifle bullets used on game and we know exactly what a 22 magnum is capable of. That is the ballistic mark is talking about here.
There is really nothing to discuss.

Lets remember that Mark has a history of trying to make up for shiddy marksmanship by using uber fast guns. His whole thoughts of wanting tissue damage caused by "shock" far away from the bullet path corroborates this. Hell just look at the azz shot bear that he was incredibly proud of having someone else kill for him

Tissue is elastic and stretches the most amount of stretch will be near the impact area. This tissue will tear and break away, the thought that the system holds together well enough for the stretch to be great enough the tear/destroy tissue well away from the impact area is a pipe dream, unless a secondary projectile does so. Secondary projectiles require at least 2000 FPS impact velocity and thus does not always happen at 2000 FPS. Fact is shoot a projectile through vital tissue and all ends well not matter the velocity.

Appears to me to be the long way around to justify a new gun purchase.

How far from the moose were you John? Was there powder stippling around the entry wound? I'm sure you're good with your 475 Linebaugh, but it is no match for the 7mm Magnum as a hunting firearm.

The point is that it has more than enough power and I was 50 plus yards. I have killed game well past one hundred yards with a revolver, but that is not the point.

Nonsense. Have you taken any big game with a handgun?

The idiot never listens; or he has serious comprehensions issues.

Then again, it's likely both.

MM

A 440 grain hardcast 475 bullet traveling 1350 fps shades the original 45-70 load by a considerable margin. It will shoot through about five feet of heavy muscle and pulverize big bones w/o changing its course. Where that kind of penetration is needed, the 7 Mag is 'no match' for the 475.

Exactly.

Thank you. Well said.

Just a few random thoughts...
1. What is the big deal with "one shot stops"? Anything worth shooting is worth shooting again. Bad guys so they won't kill you and animals to save them from suffering.
2. All these people who talk about fighting their way back to their vehicle to get their rifle are crazy. If I can get back to my car, I'm getting in it and getting the hell out of there.
3. We're all insane when we answer one of Safariman's posts. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Mark comes on here with a (stupid) preconceived notion and will not listen to any other answers, no matter how logical they are.

OK guys, I give up. It was my fault anyway because I made a declaration which pitted me against the three or four that have now gathered to defend the honor of big-bore handguns. The posts were also taken as a me vs. you. I readily admit that the four guys yelling at me now are much MUCH better hunters than I ever was or ever will be.

But, let me try and phrase it this way: If you didn't kill something to eat you and your family would go hungry. Your children are not old enough to hunt with either weapon yet. You have at your disposal a 475 Linebaugh custom revolver and a Remington 700 in 7mm Magnum, with of course, a fast twist barrel, to stabilize the Barnes TSX 150 grain bullets your ammo is loaded with (And pretend there is enough room in the mag to accommodate the COAL of that round). If you choose you can scope either firearm. But, here's the artificial caveat (because most of you would take both), which firearm do you leave the house with and which one stays home with your hungry family? Remember all those hungry eyes watching you.

Everything is relevant - My handgun is a B-B gun.

I'd be a fool not to use it to fight my way to my rifle -
Which is a pellet gun!

I did not see your comments as being us against them, and the post you just made is well stated. I think that any of us would choose the 7 RemMag rifle under those circumstances. But I would want mine to be a Mauser or a CRF Model 70

And if big slow bullets were the be all end all of hunting cartridges, we would have all stopped looking for anything better than the 45/70. Or maybe the 50/70.

Oh for [bleep] sake, you can't stop a god damn bear with an ass shot from a 338 uber saurus magnum and your fine picking the semantics of a 22 for self defense.

If you want a new gun just to have, get it.

Don't justify it with reinventing the self defense argument.

Were already provided with enough options.

Why did you introduce all of this in the discussion? We can all make up scenarios that fulfill the narrative we are trying to paint. You made the declaration that the 7mm mag is always the better choice for moose (I'm paraphrasing), over the .475 Linebaugh. You got challenged on the statement by those who have actually killed big-game with a big handgun, and then you introduced this ridiculous scenario. Your original declaration was just wrong -- it ignores way too many significant factors.

Spoken like someone who has never shot a head of game with a big handgun. The handgun will NEVER achieve high velocities, but this does't preclude it from being damn effective on big-game animals. Oddly enough, the big Nitro Express cartridges are still popular hunters in Africa. Big and slow, not light and fast, is still really good medicine for big and dangerous game.

This is the original quote, that I my answer addressed. This quote is referring to therms all ballistic, which is what the opening post is also referring and every answer that I have given in this thread is also referring to terminal ballistics.

Of my years shooting game and seeing game shot with a hangun and rifle, I can swear on a stack of bibles that I have never seen this to be true. The properl caliber handgun with a proper bullet placed in the vitails will put game on the ground as fast as will a rifle. That is far sure and certain.
In all of my years of hunting moose, I never saw a bullet from any rifle exit, that includes 7 mag, 300 mags, 338 win mags and 375 H&H. I never shot nor seen a moose shot with a Barnes X, TSX or TTSX bullet. I did see plenty shot with Nosler Partitions and I never saw one exit a moose. A 420 grain LFN hard cast from a 475 revolver, a 525 grain WFN from a 500 Linebaugh will exit and also leave a larger wound channel than will any 7 mag. This I know from experience.

A large heavy big bore bullet has advantages over smaller diameter lighter faster bullets for terminal performance in certain situations. The smaller diameter lighter faster projectiles have advantages over larger diameter heart projectiles in certain situations. It is not one is always better than the other. It depends.

In a life or death confrontation with a defensive handgun IMHO one advantage of a 45 with proper bullets is the better chance of seeing the visual indication of a hit. The advantage of the 9mm is the larger magazine capacity.
It is rarely a straight up one is better than the other. Let's stick to the original discussing of terminal performance. Another thread can discuss ones ability or inability to shoot certain calibers and/or platforms better than others.


PS. A 7 mag will blow a much larger wound channel in a deer than it will in a moose. The increased "hydraulic pressure" produce because of the higher velocity will stretch the tissue past it's elastic limits. The will not happen in a moose as the large mass of the animal will soak up the increased pressure. It all depends on the situation as to which is best from a terminal ballistics position.

The leg came off when skinning because of the damage from a wide meplat flat point hard cast.



Proper caliber and bullets from handguns produce excellent terminal performance. There is no question about that.

The idea of "one shot" without a CNS hit is a pipe dream no matter the platform, rifle or handgun.

That's a completely different question but I'll answer it anyway.

First, it would depend on the largest unfriendly animal I was likely to encounter.

In close timber I would still take the handgun; in my case a heavy-loaded 45 Colt.

In open country I would take the rifle, which in my case would be a 30-06.

Sarge I totally agree.

As do I.

I don't reload for pistol bullets, I guess I should, anyone know where to find some 45 ACP cartridges loaded with lead semi wad cutters? They used to sell cartridges like this or at least lead round nose about everywhere, now you don't see them anymore.

Buffalo Bore, Double Tap Ammo, I believe Underwood ammo, and Grizzly Cartridge to name a few.

45-110 Sharps High Speed Cam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj6xNdK2rZk

Note the secondary explosion.

Cant believe I just stumbled onto this thread today. I should really pay more attention. I have some new loads available for testing soon. There is no projectile, just powder which expands as a gas to about 7000fps, should leave a heck of a hydraulic something wound as long as your within a few inches.

There's been a lot of old-timers scratching their head, trying to figure out "that secondary explosion"

I do know that bullet didn't hardly slow down in those blocks...

Sorry I didn't answer this right away. You asked and deserve an answer from me.

The answer is no, unless you count several feral hogs that were all around the 260 lb mark. I wasn't really hunting hogs or anything else when I shot them though. I killed 4 feral hogs that size over a 6 year period while working as a Deputy Sheriff in Brazos County, Texas. The ranchers and farmers in our county and the surrounding counties begged us to kill any feral hog we saw or coyote. They told us to kill them and if we wanted, just leave the remains and the ranch/farm owner would dispose of it. I killed them with my Glock 20. I killed 10 more over that same time span with my M1A. When you have 600 square miles that is mainly dirt or gravel roads and cow pastures, plenty of chances to kill a hog presents itself.

I don't dislike big-bore handguns. We moved to IL in 2000, where taking big game with a rifle is banned; we have to use a Shotgun shooting slugs. Recently the IDNR introduced a handgun season. I have since acquired a S&W Custom Shop 500 Magnum with a 6" barrel, and a Gary Reeder "Grim Reaper" chambered in 500 Magnum. I've probably put 100 rounds through the S&W 500 Magnum; it's not much fun to plink with, nor is it the fire-breathing, wrist-breaking monster some people seem to think it is. I haven't shot the Reeder "Grim Reaper". I'm saving it for something else...

Sounds to me like you've killed big game with a handgun by any reasonable definition. Whitworth and jwp didn't put many restrictions on their original claims but then jumped you over not caveating your own. If I were facing a Grizzly, I'd rather do it over a scoped 7mm Mag. at 300 yards than with one of their custom big bores at 50.

Big slow bullets have their place just as light high velocity ones do. IDGAF about the credentials of the guy who claims the 22 Mag. is about as good as anything else for stopping bad guys. That's a crock of [bleep].

Both Marshall and Ayoob had a significant number of shootings (supposedly) compiled. Most here chose to venerate the FBI's "scientific" test results over real-world experiences. That's fine. Whatever somebody wants to stake their life on is up to them. If I had to go into a gunfight at normal handgun ranges I'd say that Glock 10mm you used would be about as good as anything. So would a .40 Smith M&P. Even better would be a 12 gauge riot gun if that is allowed in the discussion-given proper loads. All given proper loads. The vaunted penetration doesn't seem to be as vaunted when some here are talking about the lowly 556.

Why some of y'all continue to step in Safariman's traps is beyond my ken.

We can hardly be blamed when he launches this statement: "A Kimber Montana in 7mm Mag will kill more surely and faster than any handgun made. I purposely exclude the hand-rifles like the Thompson Contender or Encore. Those are not handguns."

I understand that maybe when comparing the 7 Mag with a 10mm loaded for defensive purposes is your measuring stick, but you can hardly compare that to a properly loaded .475 or .500 Linebaugh, or even a .45 Colt or .480 Ruger. That is like comparing apples to grapes, terminally speaking (and more a factor of the way it is loaded and not an indictment of the 10mm as a caliber).

As we all know Elmer Kieth had it right with his 250 gr "Keith" SWC out of a 44 Mag as being superior...

Haha, the APEX round.

But Elmer was good out to 600 yards... Being a mere mortal I would take the scoped rifle if hunting medium size and up game at ranges over 75 - 100 yards.

Huge difference in the 2 quotes above. One is preference, the other is an absolute that is not correct in fact.

Tough crowd.

Yet realistic, in many cases.

Wasn't it Col. Jeff Cooper that made the comment about using the handgun to fight his way to a rifle?
whelennut

...Clint Smith...and it ain't never going to happen. What you start with is what you are going to finish with.

Bob

This is a true, factual statement. ^^^^^^^^^




I do not think the colonel would have said something this stupid. ^^^^^^^

Careful with the absolute statements John. You guys climbed all over me for making one. I gave a factual account earlier in this thread where two College station Officers, trying to get to the fallen Constable Bachman, returned fire coming from the murderer using their Glock 23's, retreated to their patrol units and transitioned to their shotguns.

Since this is not a law enforcement web sight I cannot see a civilian in that unique situation. Con you?

An exception does not negate a truism.

As a side note once it comes to extended ranges I am more accurate with the glock than hoping a 00 lands somewhere on the bad guy. If we had slugs or other than a bead sight I might feel different about the SGN.

There is also a big difference between getting to your rifle during the fight and coming in as a secondary unit and deciding what to deploy.

In the last shooting we had I was the second one in. I made a conscious decision that if I still heard shooting when I arrived I would get out with an AR, if I did not hear shooting I would exit with just a trauma kit and my pistol to have greater flexibility. On other cases the rifle is in my hand when I bail out of the car.

I see guys carry extra trauma kits with medical equip, extra mags etc but if it is not attached to you when you get out of the car it is unlikely you will be able to retrieve it and use it in a timely fashion. I carry 3 pistol mags on my belt and a 20rd AR mag and trauma kit in my cargo pocket at all times.

+1.....

+1...

That's a red herring. This whole argument got started because someone attributed the notion of using their side arm to fight back to their long gun to LEOs, not non-LEOs. And, of course, the notion was immediately dismantled and called ridiculous. Add to that that Clint Smith gets as many LEOs in his classes as non-LEOs. I readily agree that incident I described is a very rare occurrence. I doubt that one like it occurred within a year of it on either side, a year before or a year after. It's rare...but it did happen. Given the number of LEOs in the US, LEOs use of deadly force is relatively rare; but they are sensationalized by the media.

We used to talk about "one shot stops" all the time as the ideal for defensive pistol performance. But, I think more recently professionals have mostly given up on the idea. Most of what I hear now is that you will likely have to shoot several shots to put somebody down, and that they won't fall/stop immediately no matter what pistol round you hit them with. Most shot with a pistol have a good chance of survival.

Many (most?) people have gone to 9mm because they hold lots of rounds and they can put multiple rounds on target accurately and quickly. This is a big change from the way people used to look at this issue.

That said, the last I heard, the .357 Magnum 125 gr JHP is still the most likely one shot stopper out there. Better than everything else, even larger calibers like .41 and .44 Magnum.

There are lots of reasons I don't carry my Marlin .45-70 with hot Marlin-power loads as my standard defensive weapon but at ranges of more than a few yards I would take it any day over the semi-auto pistols I do carry. It may not kill instantly but it sure as hell will take the fight out of an attacker and there isn't much in the way of concealment that would qualify as protective cover.

Just saying, comparing rifles to handguns as daily-use defensive weapons in an urban environment is kind of pointless as the handguns are far better suited to that type of work - which is why everyone chooses them.

When the girls were young and we took them camping in the NF, my Browning B92 .44 Mag was a constant companion. Loaded with 10 rounds it was adequate protection against predators of both the two- and four-legged variety. But that was a very different environment than urban defense.

Fighting your way back to a shotgun is even more absurd than fighting your way back to a rifle.

If they ran through gunfire to get a shotgun, then ran through gunfire back to where they were, what did the shotgun offer them that a pistol didn't that warranted all that?

What the shotgun offers - more than a pistol or any other type of firearm is not the 'firepower' -
but, the distinctive 'sound' of a slide-action shotgun being cycled -
which in turn causes instant fear and paralysis to your assailant.

I thought everybody knew that.

Insert "sarcasm" thingy here... right?

Years ago I worked in Killeen Texas with the pd there.
I still remember my partner handing me the 12 gauge pump and he grabbed the m1 carbine saying "Don't let me see you pull that 45 unless you run out of shotgun shells!"

I think you just like to argue. They didn't try to get back to the Constable, who was deceased, though they didn't know he has deceased at the time. They, of course, stayed behind their patrol units with shotguns trained on the house where the murderer was still barricaded and waited for the SWAT team. The reason they approached the Constable's body to begin with is because they didn't see an immediate threat, like the murderer standing on his porch with the rifle he killed the constable with. He shot at them just as he had killed the constable; he shot through his front door and front screen door. Had the murderer made the decision to charge the two patrol cars he would have run into a virtual storm of 000 Buck shot.

I prefer to call it a spirited debate. It sounds so much nicer that way.

What those guys did wasn't fighting their way back to a rifle (or shotgun).

Agreed, more like they retreated

Having been shot, I really don't know how to explain it to you guys, I don't believe a crook [non-narcotic] knowing he's doing BAD will be as hard to stop as a man running in with GOOD on his mind and in his heart.

I can tell you, I didn't feel it, I was deaf, my tongue numb and tingling and teeth clenched so hard they shoulda been crushed to powder, and everything in this world 'except' the dude I was going after was a blur, kinda like he was in a ghost ring sight or something.

I have been shot as well and it was simply numb, until the next day.

Yes, numb, then cold, then hurts like hell.

I've been shot "at".

Guess my bad guys didn't have good shootin skills.

I would think being shot AT would be the luckiest day of a mans life, albeit, still sucks.

didn't do much for my shorts...

May have added a bit of color?

Really? Really? They're trading rounds with the murderer, and granted, they were just trying to keep his head down to try and keep him from shooting at them as they did the right thing...they sought cover. But I doubt either one of them would have shed a tear if the murderer was killed by their suppressive fire. What are your requirements for a violent interaction between the LEOs and a bad guy, both sides using deadly force, to be classified by your aloof definition as a "fight"??

i was shot at as well. still cant find my shorts, they were puckered in pretty deep

Good grief MD...Where did I say that they weren't "fighting"?

I said that they weren't "fighting their way back to a rifle (shotgun). That's the whole context of this part of the discussion....Fighting your way back to a rifle to use it. And those guys didn't. They fought their way back to a point of cover and pointed shotguns at the house, just like they could have pointed their pistols at the house.



The whole notion of the conversation is that I'm going to shoot my way to my car, get a rifle, and then re-engage the bad guy. And from your account they didn't do that.
______________________________

Nobody's knocking what they did. But what they did isn't what we're talking about.

I have a feeling that anytime I offer an opinion on something you'll be there to engage me in a spirited debate.

I appreciate their efforts in every aspect but moving back to the car as an option to get a long gun did not seem to be part of the direct plan, just a result of positioning.

In the fight I referenced earlier the initial officer was pissed he did not get his AR out but it was in the trunk (old car with no rifle rack). He was quite candid to admit he always thought there would be time to get it out of there but once the bullets started flying there was no time. He shot from behind the drivers side door and even the racked shotgun seemed a million miles away.

I said it before but there is a huge difference between a proactive response and deciding to bring a long gun vs reacting in a dynamic, changing environment when you are playing freeze tag with live rounds.

Even the USSC has recognized that deadly force encounters are very fluid, ever-changing situations; and the changes are not predictable. You have to be able to adapt, change your solution to the very present danger, and hope that you made the right decision(s) and come out of the encounter alive. That's what the two officers did. Their first plan was to try to get to the downed Constable. Unfortunately, he died very quickly where he was standing by the front door. The officers didn't see the bad guy, so they decided to try and get to the Constable and pull him out of harm's way (they didn't know he was already dead). When they started taking rifle fire they had to adapt to the new variable (taking fire) and correctly decided to retreat to their patrol cars, transition to shotguns and take a defensive position behind cover (their patrol car engine block and front wheel). So, in a way I agree with you, but as the dynamics changed they adapted their plan to counter the new variable (rifle fire).

Another "notion" that I mentioned: handguns are for deadly force encounters that you don't see coming. If you know a fire fight is imminent, and you have the time, grab the AR-15 A4 and meet your opponent with overwhelming force.

Excellent point.

In a NON-LEO context, handguns are for daily CCW and for immediate access in the home. If you KNOW someone is breaking in and you have time to access a long gun, it makes sense. However, the handgun is supposed to be "handy".

Rule 1, right?

At the same time we are told to keep guns unloaded and locked up.

Who is telling you that crap?

He lives in Minnesota so I would assume everybody he meets.




Travis

Not only unloaded but with the ammo separate...

Those who espouse that can go pound sand. I have every gun lock my guns have come with, in their original, unopened packages.

Absolutely. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get me. I keep a couple (maybe more) of handguns hidden in strategic places in my home so that I'm not ever very far from a handgun no matter where I am in my home. One stays in my truck console and I carry when I leave. I am of the opinion that our Nation is not very far from some serious civil unrest. My wife, who tends to dismiss the idea of large scale civil unrest as "chicken little-the sky is falling" hysteria, is now getting the same vibe and has even asked me to get her a Glock 17 to carry after she takes the CC course here.

So...in a long-winded answer...yes...rule #1. If you don't have a handgun handy, and TSHTF, Darwin finds and punishes those who left home without at least a handgun.

You wouldn't hear me tell you that! An unloaded gun is just something heavy you can hit your assailant with. If I plan on being able to turn to a particular firearm for self-defense it's LOADED.

BUT...my kids are grown and out of the house. When my son visits and brings my 2 1/2 year old grandson with him, I put my pistols in my gun safe, and my night stand Glock 20 goes in the Biometric gun safe. It takes about 1.5 seconds to access the Glock from that safe.

I may have missed it but what officer involved shooting with a constable are you guys talking about?

Brazos County Constable's Office - Precinct 1, Texas - Constable Brian Bachman was shot and killed on 08-13-2012 while serving papers on a subject in College Station, TX.

Dittos...the only reason I haven't discarded them is I don't want that used against me in court should I ever have the misfortune of having to use deadly force against another human being.

The instructor for my concealed carry class told us it is our responsibility to keep em unloaded and locked up.
That sound you hear is them pounding sand.

I don't know if one of them would tell you what he really thought or not. I'm betting that when they went through the certification course that allows them to teach CC, part of the curriculum written by the state requires them to tell you that. They don't have much of choice - the state administers that program and trains the instructors, and the instructors have to follow the curriculum to the letter. I bet most of them swallow a little vomit each time they have to tell the class that.

safariman - IIRC, Marshall and Sanow (sp?) researched, studied, and reported on much that same subject in the 1980's.

Want one shot stops...ever see the results of taking one between naval and the nutz....even a .22. I have several friends who have "inadvertently" (as in jerked the shot low) shot suspects there and the results have been instantaneous...drop to knees and then down. Have seen two YouTube videos in the last month for store clerks shot robbers in the same spot with the same results...

One of my friends was cashing a juvenile car theft suspect who bailed out and ran on him. Just as he caught up to the kid, the kid turned with gun in hand and tried to shoot...the gun, one of the el cheapo Clerke revolvers, was missing the center pin that held the cylinder in place. So the kid was trying to hold the cylinder closed with his left thumb and pull the trigger at the same time. The firing pin did not hit the center of the primer and it failed to fire...my friend drew and fired two rounds from a .357 Model 19 at about 8'. The first round hit a few inches below the bellybutton and "Bob the kid dropped so fast my second round went over his head....". The kid didn't die but has a colostomy as a reminder not to screw with the police ever again...

The last shooting I worked was a guy on the ground who unloaded a Ruger Standard Model .22 semi-auto into the upper leg and groin on a guy who had knocked him to the ground and was threatening to throw him out a second story window. He hit the guy six times out of nine rounds fired between the upper leg and the lower groin...the guy turned and took one step and collapsed. He died in the hospital a short time later from a clipped femoral artery.


As to finishing the dance with the gun that you brought...the FBI shooting has several great examples...

Supervisory Agent Gorden McNeil....had a shotgun in an open case on the back seat of his car. Got out without it and after being wounded in the hand and running his revolver dry tried to get back to his car to get the shotgun and was hit in the neck and temporally paralyzed. He later said if he had taken the shotgun out in the first place that he would have probably ended the fight before Platt and Matix ever got out of the car.

Edward Mirales....Got out of the car with both a shotgun and his revolver. Even wounded he was able to empty the shotgun and then put the final kill shots in with his revolver.


Rule #3 of the NRA Safety Rules states to always keep a gun "unloaded till ready for use". We teach that if the gun is being kept in the home for personal protection that is the "use" and as such should be kept loaded for immediate use. That said it is the responsibility of the gun owner to make sure that a gun, loaded or not, not be accessible to unauthorized persons.


Bob

Bob,

Was that the 1986 FBI vs. turds Miami shootout that the last two LEOs you mentioned were involved in?

Yep.

RJM,

Yep, that "magic spot" works.

can think of a few reasons why a gut shot would stop someone right the phug now over a chest shot....alot more liquid than the chest so the shock of the impact is gonna be felt more....same shock waves are gonna push up on the diaphragm and knock the wind out of yah......doubt it is a "magic spot" always effective but can see why it would work even given the lack of immediately vital organs(heart, lungs, cns)....

...yes, the 1986 Miami shooting....

Lots of nerve centers down there. Think about getting punched in the chest vs. getting punched it the gut... Most guys can take a substantial hit in the chest but will double right over with a punch or knee to the groin. Think of a heavy cast bullet punching you in the gut and then slamming into your pelvic bone or lower spine. And a lot of the people I know who shot I the guts survived...lungs/heart you're usually toast.

I've been told the best way to stop a dog is to shoot them in the guts. They can't take the pain...kinda hard when it's charging but one feral dog hunter I read an article by, he would try and shoot the alpha dog in the guts and while he was withering in pain the others in the pack would stand around and he would drop them before they ran off.

I have heard, and it makes sense, that if one can break up the pelvic bones the support support system for remaining upright comes unglued. And I have heard that the pain is immense and intolerable.

This is all second hand stuff, I have thankfully never been involved in a shooting. But it sounds very reasonable.

actually fair number of times with handguns it just punches a hole through the bone and doesnt shatter it.....yeah it hurts but so does any gunshot and adrenalin can cover it up for awhile....

The shot to the pelvis originated as a body armor drill. A lot of turds are wearing bullet resistant vests in anticipation of being shot. We followed the protocol of most agencies that drilled on the assumption that the bad guy was wearing body armor. Two choices were practiced: double tap to the body one to the head & double tap to the body one to the pelvis. Head shots are difficult because people move their heads almost constantly whereas the pelvis is almost a stationary target. The whole reason for drilling double tap to the body then one to the head was in the event you had no shot to the pelvis. The shot to the pelvis can cripple or kill quickly; hit the hip joint and the bad guy will drop. The femoral arteries run through there as well. Clip one of those and the bad guy has about 2 to 3 minutes to live before he bleeds out.

true on all that but most of "the hip" is just muscle, fat and the thin bone of the illiac crest which most low speed pistol bullets arent gonna shatter to the point of crippling....you can hit the femoral artery and you can shatter the actual hip joint but both are small targets buried in tissue and easy to miss....hit them and you are golden, miss and not alot is gonna happen on average....

I'm not a doctor and I don't play one on TV, so I'll have to bow to your knowledge of the human anatomy that I lack.

aint a doc either but my ex did have issues with her SI joint, so like my knees did alot of reading....though aint hard to see what your shooting through....outer 1/3s down there are mainly muscle with the thin bone of the hip going through....in all that tissue the hip joint your aiming for is bout fist sized(so bout the same as aiming for a heart shot, except not as obvious where its at, especially in someone packing extra weight), femoral artery is around an inch wide.....middle third would be better....hit to the lower guts may still push up on the diaphram and knock the wind out...straight back is the sacrum which could destabilize the hips but not sure how bad, prolly depends on alot of factors, to low down to be a paralyzing spine shot(based on my blowing a disk and pinching those nerves they are higher up)

hitting tissue beats hitting a vest for sure but not as sure of a thing as you were prolly led to believe

But, did you stay at a Holiday Inn Expresss last night?

My theory on low shots is a disruption of the nerves of the cauda equina. When your spinal column gets low in the back it flares out from the commonly understood concept of a "spine" that is a narrow structure, to a wider fan based structure. The name is derived from the tail of a horse. A projectile might not be hitting the preconceived notion of the "spine" but disrupting the nerves that are fanning out into the lower body. Yes, there are plenty of major arteries in the lower body, as mentioned the femoral in the legs but also the lower abdominal aorta, hitting either of those will result in a rapid loss in blood pressure and lead to unconsciousness or at least diminished physical activity due to lack of oxygen.

When you reach down and touch the area around your belt we normally call the hip, you are actually grabbing the upper region of the pelvic girdle call the iliac crest. I am not volunteering to be shot here but I have seen bullets pass through the IC and it leaves a puncture wound that does nothing to negate mobility, nor are there any vital organs located there. At that point even the major arteries are being shunted down through the pelvic inlet, away from the IC. Rattler hit it well, to really break someone down with a pelvis shot you need to hit a fist sized joint that can be confusing to find on someone wearing clothes, let alone baggy sweats. To find it on yourself stand up, push your junk out of the way and push up until you find your pubic bone, now depending on your build slide your hand out about 3-4 inches and you have found your hip. To further clarify it while standing, lift your knee up to your chest and find the joint in the flexed area.

I personally would not target the hips unless everything else was somehow covered up. From an anatomical view the pelvic girdle is a circle and would need to be broken in two points to destabilize its structure. My overwhelming choice will be center rounds on the armpits and go up from there. The cranial region may be more mobile but it is frequently more exposed from cover as assailants tend to be like us, they want to locate the threat and will primarily search with their eyes.

I strongly encourage force on force training with simmunitions or airsoft to expose some of the dynamic realities of being in a gunfight. It is great to understand what you might be facing and even better to learn your own limitations based on your skill set, age, physical abilities and hardware.

Sorry, will climb off of my soapbox now, and yes I spent a week at the Holiday Inn recently.

We weren't led to believe anything regarding how fast those two combinations would incapacitate a assailant. Basically, if we were engaging a single assailant he got triple tapped whether he had a vest on or not. The vest materials just get better and more comfortable and concealable. One thing the vests were not designed to do is protect you from multiple hits. The vest material will give quite a bit; enough so that under where the bullet struck the officer will have at least a nasty bruise if not broken ribs too. If you shot someone in the vest 5+ times with a good self-defense round they are going to suffer significant blunt force trauma. I have "heard" of people dying of internal bleeding due to taking multiple rounds in the vest, however, I can't site a source so take that observation however you wish. Additionally, if you have your .223 or .308 with you, unless the perp is wearing a level IV Flak jacket a .223/.308 round hardly slows down going in the front and out the back of the vest and person wearing it.

I have trained with simmunitions and they hurt like a bitch when you get hit in an unprotected area. I have also searched a dark building, by myself, for a burglary suspect that was allegedly armed. I can tell you the pucker factor from training with simunitions doesn't even come close to engaging in the real thing. If I hadn't had a close fitting pair of uniform pants I would have sucked 6" of pant material up my colon. But...simmunitions certainly beats not training at all. Gunner's description of what he experienced when he was shot tracks very closely with the descriptions LEOs have given after being shot. Tunnel vision is almost a given among other debilitating bodily reactions.

my Marlin Guide Gun has generally lived by the bed cause i have never had much for handguns and its the handiest rifle i have.....always figured on the 1 in 1,000,000 chance one of the rez rats around here broke in AND was wearing a vest even if it didnt go through the phugger was not gonna be happy taking a warm loaded 405 grain hard cast from a 45-70 to center mass

If your vest is not designed to be multihit capable your wearing a low bid vest. Yes if you take a hit on a vest you should be checked out, trauma from backface deformation is not something to be ignored but multiple non penetrating rounds cannot be counted on to stop a fight.

I never claimed it did, but not even the most expensive well constructed SOFT body armor is designed to take multiple hits (think of a turd with an HK MP5 dumping a mag into your torso). It's flexible and gives, in some cases pushing the vest deeply into your body causing serious trauma. The soft body armor[sic] was designed to allow you to recover and return fire if you don't get the first shot off. Gunfights are fast and generally at close range, and they guy who gets the first HIT on his opponent will likely win the fight. There are always exceptions, but the above is true.

I guess I will have to ignore my experiences of touring some facilities, watching multihit testing in person (which ironically included a mag dump from an MP5 into a 6" section of the vest) and examining typical trauma from backface deformation. Yes there can be crushing injuries if the energy is high enough. Somewhere I have a picture of a fatal hit from a large bore lever gun. The vest "caught" the round but also drove the vest several inches deep into the chest, killing the officer but that is the exception. In the vast majority of cases the impact will cause a bruise that looks like you took a hit from a baseball with no medical treatment necessary.