Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: Temporary Cavitation Wounding. Rifle vs. Pistol?

  1. #21
    Ok folks, resurrecting this thread with new information. DoubleTap is now making 77gr SCHP (solid copper hollow points) in 9x25 Dillon that are going ~2100fps from a 6in barrel or about 2015fps from a 4.5in barrel. You can see a gel testing comparison between the 80gr Barnes discussed above vs. the new 77gr SCHP here. The 80gr is going a bit slower, but sheds peddles at 2000fps+ as Doc surmised it might. The 77gr SCHP has been designed properly for such high velocities and does not shed peddles, and has impressive penetration and expansion. I have since bought a drop in barrel and dies to test 9x25 Dillon (which is a ton of fun) and am getting the 77gr SCHP to around 2100fps from a 4.5in barrel with handloads.

    In light of this new information my question for the experts here is: Is a 77gr .355 bullet traveling at ~2100fps that expands to around .66in and penetrates to around 14in creating temporary caviation wounding similar to smaller rifle rounds (like say a 62gr expanding soft point from a 10.3in AR)? Based on Doc's answer above my guess is "yes" but I wanted to confirm since I am no expert.

    On a similar note, is there any way to tell if a bullet is causing TCW as a layman with ballistics gel? That is about all the testing I can do myself.

  2. #22
    Member John Hearne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern Mississippi
    I have it on good authority that 9x23 delivers wounds that more greatly resemble rifle rounds than pistol rounds. IIRC, the load in question was running in that 1800-2000 fps window.
    • It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
    • If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
    • "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by StanBan87 View Post
    Ok folks, resurrecting this thread with new information. DoubleTap is now making 77gr SCHP (solid copper hollow points) in 9x25 Dillon that are going ~2100fps from a 6in barrel or about 2015fps from a 4.5in barrel. You can see a gel testing comparison between the 80gr Barnes discussed above vs. the new 77gr SCHP here. The 80gr is going a bit slower, but sheds peddles at 2000fps+ as Doc surmised it might. The 77gr SCHP has been designed properly for such high velocities and does not shed peddles, and has impressive penetration and expansion. I have since bought a drop in barrel and dies to test 9x25 Dillon (which is a ton of fun) and am getting the 77gr SCHP to around 2100fps from a 4.5in barrel with handloads.

    In light of this new information my question for the experts here is: Is a 77gr .355 bullet traveling at ~2100fps that expands to around .66in and penetrates to around 14in creating temporary caviation wounding similar to smaller rifle rounds (like say a 62gr expanding soft point from a 10.3in AR)? Based on Doc's answer above my guess is "yes" but I wanted to confirm since I am no expert.

    On a similar note, is there any way to tell if a bullet is causing TCW as a layman with ballistics gel? That is about all the testing I can do myself.
    Thats a very interesting 9x25 load.

    In terms of 'rifle effect,' a 77gr @ 2100fps / 754 ftlbs.

    By comparison, a 10.5" 75gr .223 Gold dot is 75gr @ 2240 / 836 ft/lbs. 2100fps is what that round would be doing at ~60yds.
    https://www.ar15.com/forums/ar-15/Su...NE-/16-714088/

    I would say there's every reason to expect that the 9x25 would be comparable to the 75gr Gold dot @ 60yds/2100fps.

    Since we have no 9x25 data, its worth looking at one of the most prolific high velocity handguns, the 125gr .357, which suggests that handguns below 2000fps can begin to produce some element of 'rifle like effect.'

    Handgun hunters have found .357 @ 1300-1600fps to perform "disproportionate to caliber."

    As a general guide to performance, the .357 can produce quite spectacular kills at impact velocities of 2000fps and faster using hollow point projectiles.

    At impact velocities of 2000 to 1600fps, game hit with a fast expanding hollow point tend to react in a drunken manner, often attempting to run but not generally making too much ground before succumbing quickly to blood loss.

    Between 1600 and 1300fps, dead runs may be longer but wounding is still somewhat disproportionate to caliber. Again, bullet weights must be matched to the job at hand. If the bullet is too heavy, it may not meet enough resistance to render a wide wound at low velocities. If the bullet is too light, it may not have enough energy to render a deep and broad wound on larger bodied animals.

    At impact velocities of 1200fps and below, bullet expansion may be fully evident, yet wounding can be narrow (proportionate to the expanded caliber of the bullet) and blood trails poor. At these velocities and in the absence of any major hydraulic force, the .357 is reliant on mechanical wounding, the size of the wound being directly proportionate to the diameter of the expanded bullet.


    https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Kno...57+Magnum.html

    There are other accounts, less formal, of .357 125gr @ 1450fps providing much more effective against hogs / deer then 124gr 9mm JHP, despite their expanding projectiles being identical in size. This suggests some additional X effect due to the increase in velocity and energy.

    And in the calibers studied in 1 year of Boston police shootings, .357 also showed a disproportionate effect relative to other handgun calibers:


    Caveat emptor, this was a flawed study, in that it includes 100% of bostons homicides, but only a % of the woundings, selected at random. Still, this bias would effect all the calibers, making the unusual ratio displayed by .357 noteworthy.

    Finally, Brassfetcher has done one of the best studies to date on temporary cavitation:
    http://www.brassfetcher.com/Wounding...Expansion.html

    Pistol cartridges including .22LR, .32ACP, .380ACP, 9x19mm, .40S&W, .45ACP, .357 Magnum, .44 Magnum JHPs as well as 22 K-Hornet, 223 Remington, 260 Remington, 308 Winchester and 30-06 Springfield rifles were evaluated in 20-percent ballistic gelatin and the results recorded on high speed video. From these videos, analysis was conducted of the velocity and instantaneous kinetic energy of the point of maximum temporary cavity diameter for each shot.

    It was found that the magnitude of kinetic energy present at any point during the expansion was directly attributable to the initial velocity of the projectile at impact. Expanded diameter appeared to play little, if any role in influencing temporary cavity diameter. Handguns such as 9x19mm and .40S&W appear to be the lower threshold for wounding through tissue expansion, with .357 Magnum a marked improvement over the two. Rifles of moderate recoil demonstrate impressive tissue expansion upon bullet impact.


    All of this is to say, that 9x25 load has a lot of potential, as do other high velocity loads like some of the full power .357 sig's loaded by Underwood (125gr @ 1525fps from a 4.5" / 65gr @ 2100fps.)

  4. #24
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by StanBan87 View Post
    Ok folks, resurrecting this thread with new information. DoubleTap is now making 77gr SCHP (solid copper hollow points) in 9x25 Dillon that are going ~2100fps from a 6in barrel or about 2015fps from a 4.5in barrel. You can see a gel testing comparison between the 80gr Barnes discussed above vs. the new 77gr SCHP here. The 80gr is going a bit slower, but sheds peddles at 2000fps+ as Doc surmised it might. The 77gr SCHP has been designed properly for such high velocities and does not shed peddles, and has impressive penetration and expansion. I have since bought a drop in barrel and dies to test 9x25 Dillon (which is a ton of fun) and am getting the 77gr SCHP to around 2100fps from a 4.5in barrel with handloads.

    In light of this new information my question for the experts here is: Is a 77gr .355 bullet traveling at ~2100fps that expands to around .66in and penetrates to around 14in creating temporary caviation wounding similar to smaller rifle rounds (like say a 62gr expanding soft point from a 10.3in AR)? Based on Doc's answer above my guess is "yes" but I wanted to confirm since I am no expert.

    On a similar note, is there any way to tell if a bullet is causing TCW as a layman with ballistics gel? That is about all the testing I can do myself.
    @DocGKR
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  5. #25
    deleted
    Last edited by the Schwartz; 01-18-2020 at 02:21 PM.
    ''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein

    Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.

  6. #26
    Interesting thread...

    The problem with using very light-weight projectiles (even if they retain most—or all—of their initial mass) even if they are launched a very high speeds (approaching 1,600 fps from a pistol) is that they are simply incapable of producing the minimum 12 inches of penetration needed to ensure that critical organs and CNS are struck if/when barriers are encountered.

    Here are some tests conducted this summer that illustrate the issue:

    July 10th, 2019
    89° Fahrenheit
    49% Relative Humidity
    Moderate over-cast skies
    653 feet ASL


    1.) Corbon 9mm 90-grain JHP (control)

    Test Firearm: Glock 17; 4.49-inch barrel
    Barrier: None
    Test Medium: H₂O

    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.524 inch
    Retained Mass: 42.6 grains
    Impact Velocity: 1,455 feet per second

    Name:  1.).JPG
Views: 756
Size:  64.6 KB

    Name:  1a.) Corbon 90-grain JHP, no barrier, front, 1,455fps.jpg
Views: 746
Size:  23.2 KB

    Name:  1b.) Corbon 90-grain JHP, no barrier, reverse, 1,455fps.jpg
Views: 764
Size:  26.0 KB

    Predictive Analysis:

    Q-model
    DoP: 6.162 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.654 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.089 cubic inches

    mTHOR model
    DoP: 6.181 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.656 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.092 cubic inches


    2.) Corbon 9mm 90-grain JHP vs. 4 layers of 16-ounce denim

    Test Firearm: Glock 17; 4.49-inch barrel
    Barrier: IWBA 4LD mechanical failure test protocol
    Test Medium: H₂O

    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.4895 inch
    Retained Mass: 44.3 grains
    Impact Velocity: 1,448 feet per second

    Name:  2a.) Corbon 90-grain JHP, 4LD, front, 1,448fps.jpg
Views: 718
Size:  27.5 KB

    Name:  2b.) Corbon 90-grain JHP, 4LD, reverse, 1,448fps.jpg
Views: 717
Size:  22.3 KB

    Predictive Analysis:

    Q-model
    DoP: 7.414 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.687 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.143 cubic inches

    mTHOR model
    DoP: 7.340 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.680 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.131 cubic inches


    3.) SuperVel 9mm 90-grain JHP (control)

    Test Firearm: Glock 17; 4.49-inch barrel
    Barrier: None
    Test Medium: H₂O

    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.515 inch
    Retained Mass: 47.5 grains
    Impact Velocity: 1,524 feet per second

    Name:  3.).jpg
Views: 751
Size:  37.1 KB

    Name:  3a.) SuperVel 90-grain JHP, no barrier, front, 1,524fps.jpg
Views: 713
Size:  26.9 KB

    Predictive Analysis:

    Q-model
    DoP: 7.312 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.750 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.248 cubic inches

    mTHOR model
    DoP: 7.384 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.757 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.260 cubic inches


    4.) SuperVel 9mm 90-grain JHP vs. 4 layers of 16-ounce denim

    Test Firearm: Glock 17; 4.49-inch barrel
    Barrier: IWBA 4LD mechanical failure test protocol
    Test Medium: H₂O

    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.518 inch
    Retained Mass: 49.4 grains
    Impact Velocity: 1,520 feet per second

    Name:  4a.) SuperVel 90-grain JHP, 4LD, front, 1,520fps.jpg
Views: 712
Size:  31.3 KB

    Name:  4b.) SuperVel 90-grain JHP, 4LD, reverse, 1,520fps.jpg
Views: 724
Size:  33.6 KB

    Predictive Analysis:

    Q-model
    DoP: 7.499 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.778 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.295 cubic inches

    mTHOR model
    DoP: 7.576 inches
    Wound Mass: 0.786 ounces
    Wound Volume: 1.308 cubic inches


    5.) DoubleTap 9mm 80-grain TAC-XP (control)

    Test Firearm: Glock 17; 4.49-inch barrel
    Barrier: None
    Test Medium: H₂O

    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.574 inch
    Retained Mass: 80.0 grains
    Impact Velocity: 1,451 feet per second

    Name:  5.).jpg
Views: 752
Size:  68.6 KB

    Name:  5a.) DoubleTap 80-grain HP, no barrier, front, 1,451fps.jpg
Views: 713
Size:  30.0 KB

    Name:  5b.) DoubleTap 80-grain HP, no barrier, reverse, 1,451fps.jpg
Views: 703
Size:  22.7 KB

    Predictive Analysis:

    Q-model
    DoP: 9.472 inches
    Wound Mass: 1.207 ounces
    Wound Volume: 2.008 cubic inches

    mTHOR model
    DoP: 9.654 inches
    Wound Mass: 1.230 ounces
    Wound Volume: 2.046 cubic inches


    6.) DoubleTap 9mm 80-grain TAC-XP vs. 4 layers of 16-ounce denim

    Test Firearm: Glock 17; 4.49-inch barrel
    Barrier: IWBA 4LD mechanical failure test protocol
    Test Medium: H₂O

    Average Recovered Diameter: 0.560 inch
    Retained Mass: 80.0 grains
    Impact Velocity: 1,471 feet per second

    Name:  6a.) DoubleTap 80-grain HP, 4LD, front, 1,471fps.jpg
Views: 710
Size:  21.5 KB

    Name:  6b.) DoubleTap 80-grain HP, 4LD, reverse, 1,471fps.jpg
Views: 709
Size:  27.6 KB

    Predictive Analysis:

    Q-model
    DoP: 10.071 inches
    Wound Mass: 1.221 ounces
    Wound Volume: 2.032 cubic inches

    mTHOR model
    DoP: 10.246 inches
    Wound Mass: 1.243 ounces
    Wound Volume: 2.067 cubic inches

    DoP = maximum equivalent depth of penetration in 10% ordnance gelatin (or soft tissue)
    Wound Volume = total volume of the permanent channel
    Wound Mass = total weight of tissue damaged/destroyed within the permanent wound channel


    As can be seen in tests #2 and #4, the light-weight JHPs of conventional "cup and core" construction (CorBon and SuperVel) lost approximately one-half of their initial mass (on average) reducing their ability to penetrate adequately (≥ 12 inches). Predicted penetration in the 4LD tests for the "cup and core" JHPs averaged just 7.45 inches.

    In test #6, the Barnes 0.355" all-copper monolithic TAC-XP 80-grain hollow point at 1,471 fps as loaded for the 9x19 by DoubleTap, retained 100% of its mass, yet its predicted maximum penetration—while better than that of the conventional "cup and core" JHPs—still fell far short of the 12-inch minimum which an average modeled prediction of just 10.159 inches.

    Penetration of bullets in gelatin (and bodies) is a function of momentum: mass times velocity.

    Adequate mass is needed to ensure that the bullet can penetrate adequately. No ''free lunches''.
    Last edited by the Schwartz; 01-18-2020 at 03:10 PM.
    ''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein

    Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.

  7. #27
    @spyderco monkey yes that is what I'm figuring as well. At least in the case of the 9x25 Dillon with the 77gr SCHP @ ~2100fps, I see no reason why it wouldn't be wounding about the same as that 75gr Gold Dot from a Mk18 or similar at around 50y. But I am no expert hence my question. If it is true, then I have to say that it is a real honest "game changer" (for once that term actually applies) for the pistol world. You can CCW 10+1 (or more with mag extensions) with a G29, which is about the size of a G19. If this proves to be true, you are basically getting Mk18-ish performance to EDC in an ultra-reliable G19 size semi-auto pistol with basically the same recoil as quality .40S&W 165gr loads (no joke run the numbers). I don't think there is basically anything else that can give rifle (all be it the low end of rifle) TCW and is concealable, reliable, and/or doesn't recoil like crazy.

    @the Schwartz Did you watch the testing video? The 9mm loads using both the 80gr Barnes and 77gr SCHP fail to get much past 10in as you would expect (around 1600fps I believe). But the 9x25 Dillon has a MV of around 2100fps with both bullets, and both go about 13-14in in the blocks. Hardly a definitive test, but they certainly seem to be reaching good levels of penetration with the 9x25 Dillion which is the only interesting part of this really as that is the only one going fast enough to cause serious TCW as far as I can tell.

    I am going to get some gel made up next month to do some of my own testing unless the experts here shoot this down. I'm hoping others can test as well as some of yall will likely do it much better than I can. You just need a 10mm pistol (like a G20) and a conversion barrel, that's it basically for the pistol.
    Last edited by StanBan87; 01-18-2020 at 09:00 PM.

  8. #28
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Canton GA
    My head hurts just thinking about 9x25 anything - I remember when they hit the competition world - I hated ROing around those.

  9. #29
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by StanBan87 View Post
    @the Schwartz Did you watch the testing video? The 9mm loads using both the 80gr Barnes and 77gr SCHP fail to get much past 10in as you would expect (around 1600fps I believe). But the 9x25 Dillon has a MV of around 2100fps with both bullets, and both go about 13-14in in the blocks. H
    I watched the video. Clear gel testing only from what I saw.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  10. #30
    I don't really want to get the thread off track, the wounding is what we are here to talk about. But I do want to address the whole "blast" thing with 9x25. What I've found from my 4.5in barrel is that the blast is no worse than hot .357sig when using good modern powders. I think the old competition guns running huge comps/brakes and specifically running powders that generate a lot of gas to effectively use those brakes is what gives it such a bad rep. Honestly going through a few mags of proper 10mm is more abrasive all around than a few mags of 9x25 Dillon.

    Can confirm pretty big fireballs, though nothing any ported/comped guys would write home about.

    As for the video, yes it seems they used both clear and real gel, but had the clear block out front. The 13-14in in clear gel seems to be pretty representative of actual performance in real gel (it is my understanding that if anything in clear you will get a little less penetration on average), but like I said more testing needed. I just wanted to be sure he knew that from preliminary results it doesn't look like underpenetration is going to be an issue with the 9x25 77gr load.
    Last edited by StanBan87; 01-18-2020 at 10:07 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •