"Knock-out factors" and other math games tend to have very little utility for defensive shooters. They may (or not, I don't know but seriously doubt they do even there) apply to African game; they don't appear to apply to humans.
200 gr. 10 mm Double Tap gives a TKOF of 14.9. (200 gr. bullet at 1600 FPS, .400" diameter.)
M193 5.56x45mm FMJ gives a TKOF of only 5.8. (55 gr. bullet at 3290 FPS, .224" diameter.)
Sorry, but reality disagrees very heavily on this one. No 10mm load is going to top M193 (and a host of even better 5.56 loads that will score only marginally higher in this "test) as a defensive round.
Great info, thanks a lot for posting.
"Knock-out factors" and other math games tend to have very little utility for defensive shooters. They may (or not, I don't know but seriously doubt they do even there) apply to African game; they don't appear to apply to humans.
200 gr. 10 mm Double Tap gives a TKOF of 14.9. (200 gr. bullet at 1600 FPS, .400" diameter.)
M193 5.56x45mm FMJ gives a TKOF of only 5.8. (55 gr. bullet at 3290 FPS, .224" diameter.)
Sorry, but reality disagrees very heavily on this one. No 10mm load is going to top M193 (and a host of even better 5.56 loads that will score only marginally higher in this "test) as a defensive round.
The 5.56 NATO cartridge's wounding ability is all out of proportion to both it's bullet size and muzzle energy because the bullet is over-stabilized and yaws when it hits flesh creating lots of cavitation of soft tissue. If the bullet doesn't yaw, it's effects are much diminished.
From Wikipedia:
"Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance deficiencies with 5.56�45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite them being hit multiple times by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting.This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short barrel weapons or when the range increases. It can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the torso of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. In addition, bullets of the SS109/M855 type are manufactured by many countries in numerous production plants.
Although all SS109/M855 types must be 62 gr. FMJ bullets constructed with a steel penetrator in the nose, the composition, thickness, and relative weights of the jackets, penetrators, and cores are quite variable, as are the types and position of the cannelures. Because of the significant differences in construction between bullets within the SS109/M855 category, terminal performance is quite variable�with differences noted in yaw, fragmentation, and penetration depths. Luke Haag's papers in the AFTE Journal (33(1):11�28, Winter 2001) also describes this problem."
Large bullets don't need to yaw to put a bad actor on his butt. Consider these two cartridges with virtually the same M.E., the .30-30 WCF (1873 Ft/Lbs) and the .45-70 Gov't. (1748 Ft/Lbs) The .30-30 sends a .308" 170gr. bullet down range at 2227fps, The .45-70 sends a .458" 405gr. bullet downrange at 1400fps. Both intuition and field experience (in my case anyway) have shown that the .45-70 is much more devastating on game than the .30-30. I once watched a hunter empty his Win. M1894 magazine into a cow moose's boiler room. She walked off (yes, walked) and expired about 50 yds away. I shot a big B.C. Mule deer buck once with a handloaded .45-70 using cast 500gr. RN bullets from my venerable M1888 Trapdoor Springfield. That big Muley never took a step. Let's look at the TKOF of the two similarly powered cartridges:
.30-30 WCF .308 X 170 X 2227 / 7000 = 16.65 TKOF
.45-70 Gov't .458 X 405 X 1400 / 7000 = 36.45 TKOF
In any event, thank you for the opportunity to hold an interesting discussion. I believe some of the old "saws" still have value today. There is a lot of wisdom garnered from decades in the field, on the range, and from military experience although I firmly believe wisdom doesn't necessarily come from years spent on the Earth, it comes from the number of years one has spent paying attention.
You might work with the son of a friend of mine. Do you know Sgt. Hubbard? I believe he's in Afghanistan right now.
The bolded part is kind of the point. Even if less-effective bullet designs are used, a 5.56 NATO is not going to be less effective than a 10mm auto. Both will poke a hole at worst, and even without the yaw and fragment effects of the M193 I used in my example, you will still get a decent stretch cavity simply from the velocity of the round.
There are two problems with knock-out factors. One: They ignore bullet design, as there's no way to evaluate that on paper. Two: They're simplified to the point of uselessness because there are a multitude of factors beyond the ones used, and the effectiveness of those factors is not always (or almost never) linear. Take velocity. The effect velocity has on wounding potential is not linear at all unless you look at everything under 2000 FPS. Velocity has no effect on wounding potential (assuming equal penetration) until you get to about 2000 FPS. That's when you start getting more damage from stretch, and it would show on a graph as a big step in the "curve", which would then rise slightly as velocity went up.
I believe Paul Gomez, AKA "the Training Bum", has passed away. I didn't know Paul personally, but we had several mutual friends.
If this is not correct, would someone please tell me?
On another subject, I teach courses on imaging of gunshot wounds to young medical doctors and medical students.
The great lethality of the 5.56 // .223 has been massively exaggerated. Think: most deer hunters feel that it is too weak for our little Hill Country whitetails.
And, several years back, when the two "armored" bank robbers were slaughtering FBI & cops in metro Miami, with 5.56's bouncing off them; one round from a .338 Win Mag killed each, clean through their armor.
If you had to get shot; would you rather a 5.56 or a .338 Win Mag ? Lots of folks have survived the 5.56, haven't they? How many survive a .338 Win Mag hit ?
Still, thanks to the late Mr. Gomez for his analyses.
leVieux
Found this today. I doubt it was an AK, IMO the exit wound suggest something faster like 5.56. And no, your handgun cannot do this.
X-Ray Of Patient Shot By AK Rifle (SFW) | The Firearm Blog
Definitely a wound from a high velocity round. Might not a 5.45 bullet from an AK74 leave such an exit wound?
I'm late to the party,but this was an interesting post.
2.My take-a-way is that bigger bullets make bigger holes, and cause greater and quicker blood loss,but incapacitation may take some time. CNS hits bring instant incapacitation,
with virtually any caliber.
I believe that,typically,a .45 will do more and quicker damage than a 9mm. I can't see how this would not be true. Others read the same post and say, "I was worried that 9mm was underpowered,but after reading this post,I no longer worry about this."
What up? I read,"bigger bullets,bigger holes,
quicker blood loss." Do 9mm shooters think that they will always get CNS hits?
I'm late to the party,but this was an interesting post.
Much information,but these points really stand out for me:
1.No pistol bullet has enough momentum to knock down whoever is hit by it. If it did, it would also knock the shooter down.Simple,
well established physics-equal and opposite
forces.I believe it,but virtually everyone I tell it to disputes it.
2.My take-a-way is that bigger bullets make bigger holes, and cause greater and quicker blood loss,but incapacitation may take some time. CNS hits bring instant incapacitation,
with virtually any caliber.
I believe that,typically,a .45 will do more and quicker damage than a 9mm. I can't see how this would not be true. Others read the same post and say, "I was worried that 9mm was underpowered,but after reading this post,I no longer worry about this."
What up? I read,"bigger bullets,bigger holes,
quicker blood loss." Do 9mm shooters think that they will always get CNS hits?
CONCLUSIONS
Physiologically, no caliber or bullet is certain to incapacitate any individual unless the brain is hit.
Psychologically, some individuals can be incapacitated by minor or small caliber wounds. Those individuals who are stimulated by fear, adrenaline, drugs, alcohol, and/or sheer will and survival determination may not be incapacitated even if mortally wounded. The will to survive and to fight despite horrific damage to the body is commonplace on the battlefield, and on the street. Barring a hit to the brain, the only way to force incapacitation is to cause sufficient blood loss that the subject can no longer function, and that takes time. Even if the heart is instantly destroyed, there is sufficient oxygen in the brain to support full and complete voluntary action for 10-15 seconds.
Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding. Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, "too little penetration will get you killed."42, 43 Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable. Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet."