Is a rifle round always better than a pistol round?

[DocGKR]

Upsetting occurs when the bullet is not longer traveling in a streamlined, nose forward, un-deformed attitude in tissue.

A rifle bullet that upsets by yaw only may or may not create a larger wound than an expanded handgun projectile, depending on the size of the projectile and velocity.

[j.d.allen]

Thanks Doc, I was under the impression that the extreme velocity of a rifle round added to the wounding mechanism by itself without the need of upset because the stretch cavity actually tore in some places instead of just snapping back into place like it does with a slow pistol round. I guess not.

[DocGKR]

Just like with handgun projectiles, there is NO stretch cavity within tissue if the rifle projectile stays point forward without upsetting in the body--this is true for impacts up to the 5000-6000fps range with projectile diameters from .18" to .338".

[j.d.allen]

Very informative. Thanks doc

[Jeep]

Yes--very informative. Doc, while you undoubtedly don't have the time to write a book on the subject now given all that you do, perhaps when you retire you might consider doing so. There is a real need to have all of your knowledge on terminal ballistics in one place.

One of the reasons that the Army is so far behind in this field is because there really isn't an authoritative text and one needs to be written. Your response to the Infantry magazine article on 5.56 mm rounds--which I regard as perhaps the most persuasive article on the subject that I have ever read--began the process of removing scales from my eyes on a lot of issues.

Anyway, in the meantime, thank you for continuing to provide guidance on this subject to the rest of us.

[Wayne Dobbs]

The Army and lots of other entities are behind because, due to bureaucratic inertia and organizational idiocy/stupidity, they choose to be behind.

[John Hearne]

Just like with handgun projectiles, there is NO stretch cavity within tissue if the rifle projectile stays point forward without upsetting in the body--this is true for impacts up to the 5000-6000fps range with projectile diameters from .18" to .338".

I've seen pigs run off after taking a 12 gauge slug that went through and through. I've also seen pigs DRT because they got smoked with a 5.56 that did not exit - that damage was amazing. Energy that doesn't stay in the body doesn't add much to the equation.

[Hunter Rose]

So where does expanding 5.56 like the Black Hills 50gr TSX fall out in the terminal ballistic spectrum? Does it sacrifice the terminal ballistic effect of a yawing/fragmenting 5.56 round for more consistent performance through barriers? Is it more than just an expanded .45 equivalent going much faster in regards to terminal effectiveness?

[j.d.allen]

So where does expanding 5.56 like the Black Hills 50gr TSX fall out in the terminal ballistic spectrum? Does it sacrifice the terminal ballistic effect of a yawing/fragmenting 5.56 round for more consistent performance through barriers? Is it more than just an expanded .45 equivalent going much faster in regards to terminal effectiveness?

I have wondered this too. If I understand correctly the added velocity does contribute to more substantial wounding with a rifle round that expands. I think a 5.56/.223 round that expands to .40 at 2700 FPS does more damage than a .40 round that expands to .60 at 900 FPS. As always I could be wrong though...

[DocGKR]

"I think a 5.56/.223 round that expands to .40 at 2700 FPS does more damage than a .40 round that expands to .60 at 900 FPS."

There is a MUCH larger temporary stretch cavity produced by the 5.56 mm projectile at 2700fps than the .40 bullet at 900fps.