Human Targets

[DocGKR]

As noted numerous times previously, obviously rifle shots and slugs that penetrate into the cranial vault are quite destructive.

We've also seen very few people walk away good high torso hits with a high quality, early upsetting rifle projectiles like a .308 Hornady 155 gr AMAX; rifle projectiles with more variable upset are a different matter, as a plethora of wounded veterans can attest...

[Mr_White]

I know it is a sin to say here, but I hate the FAST drill. Does all the right things in all the wrong order and wrong time and the folks who are repetively doing it over and over are likely setting themselves up for an auto pilot they may not want. Folks can do what they want, but I would think rapid rounds into a body area most likely to cause incapacitation, followed by an automatic response to failure and emphasizing the out of battery speed reload in context with what it is. But that is just me. I also have started adding close range immediate singles to the head as a hostage solution for the times when you or another are under the gun and immediate incapacitation is required,.

I was really only using the FAST as a convenient example. I have no disagreement with the issues you raise about it, but I also feel sure that Todd would say it is a technical test that does not represent a recommended engagement process. My point was really only about anatomical target size and the often-asserted 50% accuracy thing.

[Malamute]

As noted numerous times previously, obviously rifle shots and slugs that penetrate into the cranial vault are quite destructive.

We've also seen very few people walk away good high torso hits with a high quality, early upsetting rifle projectiles like a .308 Hornady 155 gr AMAX; rifle projectiles with more variable upset are a different matter, as a plethora of wounded veterans can attest...

Do you have much experience with 30-30 150 gr loads?

As a deer hunting and general use gun, Ive mostly used 170 gr loads, but the bum shoulder and potential as a defensive arm have me looking more at 150 gr loads. They are generally considered to be faster expanding than the 170s.

[Dagga Boy]

I was really only using the FAST as a convenient example. I have no disagreement with the issues you raise about it, but I also feel sure that Todd would say it is a technical test that does not represent a recommended engagement process. My point was really only about anatomical target size and the often-asserted 50% accuracy thing.

It was always one of those things Todd and I bitched about to each other. The canned answer was "technical drill" to which my retort.."shot on an anatomical human looking target", and....you had a bunch of folks working on it constantly and repetitively for a particular goal score, in which case folks start building habits. I prefer something like a failure drill or box drill on two targets....but that's just me.

Do you have much experience with 30-30 150 gr loads?

As a deer hunting and general use gun, Ive mostly used 170 gr loads, but the bum shoulder and potential as a defensive arm have me looking more at 150 gr loads. They are generally considered to be faster expanding than the 170s.

Just got off the phone with GJM on this. I think animals give us very good indicators on performance. The ones I like to look at in particular if we are looking for anti personnel performance are things like 180 pound deer. Weirdly, lots of things good on human drop them real well. Also, things they tend to kill the crap out of the smaller deer tend to also be devastating on humans....I think the answer will be "30/30 works REALLY good" on people.

[Malamute]

Thanks D.

Ive shot a couple deer with different makes of bullets, the Speer 170s seem pretty hard and don't tear stuff up much. A doe deer I shot with them was hit 3 times before staying down. There wasn't much meat damage when I butchered her. I'm wanting to try the 150s and maybe 125/130s out also. Not everything needs to be a bear load, especially when not in grizzly country, which unfortunately, I'm not as much as usual for the time being. One skunk I shot with a Hornady 170 was pretty much turned inside out. I think they aren't as tough of a bullet as the Speers. They also have a terrible BC compared to the Speers.

[GJM]

I was really only using the FAST as a convenient example. I have no disagreement with the issues you raise about it, but I also feel sure that Todd would say it is a technical test that does not represent a recommended engagement process. My point was really only about anatomical target size and the often-asserted 50% accuracy thing.

Gabe, it isn't a training scar until you start loading your primary magazine with only two cartridges, and your immediate reload magazine with six cartridges, so you are ready for the next FAST.

[DocGKR]

An expanding .30-30 load works as well or better than expanding .300 BLK or 7.62x39mm. Typical .30-30 125 gr is quite excellent on game up to 200 lbs or so. 150 gr is better for larger animals up to 300-350 or so, beyond that 170 gr is preferable.

[GJM]

Anyone have experience shooting stuff with the Barnes VOR TX, 150 TSX-FN 30-30 offering? That is a load that I would like to know more about.

[Sigfan26]

During my career, I got to meet a lot of veterans who took 7.62x39 mm, 7.62x54 mm, 7.7 mm, 8 mm Mauser, etc... through the lungs and were quite alive and active 10, 20, 40, 60 years later...

I've also seen a lot of facial GSW in the ED and OR who also did not succumb to their injuries--including quite a few who walked into the ED after sustaining their injuries on the street several hours earlier.

This is a pretty good target:

My father is a great example of this. 7.62mm rounds and shrapnel peppered him from his neck to his feet (he is missing feet of intestine, large part of his bowel, and 2/3 of his stomach)... And he's dieing of cancer at 68.

[11B10]

My father is a great example of this. 7.62mm rounds and shrapnel peppered him from his neck to his feet (he is missing feet of intestine, large part of his bowel, and 2/3 of his stomach)... And he's dieing of cancer at 68.

Please tell him "thanks for your service" from me?