ANALYZING 1800 SHOOTINGS: WHICH CALIBER HAS THE BEST STOPPING POWER?

[pgupta]

Found this very interesting article.

https://www.tierthreetactical.com/analy ... gB9mZALn-Q

[Vineet]

Found this very interesting article.

https://www.tierthreetactical.com/analy ... gB9mZALn-Q

How come .45 acp, .38 special and 9mm are below .32 acp ?

Screenshot from the article

20210518_210006.jpg

[timmy]

Note:

I wouldn’t put much stock in the data for .32 calibers, as there were only a total of 25 cases.

Just what these statistics measure is debatable. One might argue that the data represent real world results, but even if one accepts this, consider that the real world results don't say how they will apply to any given individual.

For example, the 9mm is quite popular, probably the most popular carry round in the list. (Note that I say "carry" here, as the 22 may be owned by more people, but not necessarily carried for personal defense.) One might also say that it has more users who are new to firearms and have a lesser degree of practice.

Comparing strictly handgun cartridge performance -- just the cartridge itself -- gathering valid data would need to hold to one variable: the cartridge. Ideally, one would use a machine rest in such tests. This would test what cartridge is more effective at a given task. The mind boggles at the number of different bullet choices that would need testing for each cartridge.

A test might also be designed to see what cartridge a shooter can handle most effectively. This also would separate into many avenues: there would be several guns for each cartridge, for instance. There would be experienced shooters and inexperienced ones. One would also need to consider the conditions: are we looking at an immediate surprise, or a calculated time in which the shooter can take whatever measures to obtain the best results. Have the shooters just eaten, just woken up, just got out of their car, etc. There are many variables associated with the shooter, in other words.

Gathering "real world" statistics doesn't test for one variable and because of this, I would question the validity of any analysis, and even if such data could produce a reliable analysis, the application of any analysis to any individual would still be in question.

The RIGHT way to go about this is to change one variable at a time. For this, test each cartridge for penetration. Ballistic gel is often used for this, and can give a reasonable approximation, but the medium must be the same for every test, so apples can be compared only to other apples. This isn't a simple task, as each cartridge must be tested for any number of bullet types. Penetration is key, but expansion also needs to be examined. Then, barrel lengths must be tested, as well, and preferably each possible gun. A Glock or some types of Kahrs use polygonal rifling, and this may have an effect on performance.

Another issue, which is often pointed out on this board, is shot placement. A modern, ergonomically designed pistol is more likely to obtain better shot placement in 9mm than a clumsy, heavy Mauser C96 "Broomhandle" pistol, for instance. Some people don't shoot a 1911 very well because their small hands can't control it as well as other pistols in 45 Automatic, and the recoil of the 1911 slide also might factor into this. But even with small hands, some folks do better than others -- small hands are not a binary factor in proficiency with a 1911. The point here is that each individual will probably differ from other individuals in what gun they shoot best.

Then, there are factors of judgment to consider: Do I use a 1911 because I like it, because I have it, or because I shoot it better than others? This last consideration is, I fear, the last one usually considered. Also, WHEN do I shoot? Is it when I'm nervous, am I "trigger-happy", do I have a bad flinch, etc. All of these factors and more are included in the "real world" data, but because they are mixed in with all of the other results, we can't really sort out which gun is best for us, can we?

Perhaps in one case, this data come close to what might happen in India: perhaps a lot of these shootings occurred in the inner city of the USA, where cheap guns predominate. Someone shooting with some big hunk of zinc in their hand, versus shooting with a ergonomic Sig, Walther, or 1911 (yes, John M Browning did incorporate ergonomics in his design!) isn't going to be as effective of a shooter as they could be -- how does that relate to each one of us? So, economics and availability do play a role in the data, and how it relates to each of us. But in India, very few firearm choices are available on a widespread basis, and the same holds true for cartridge choice and bullet type. Therefore, we come down to 32 Automatic versus 32 S&W Long, and revolver versus semi-automatic for the vast majority of folks looking at this data on this forum.

[pgupta]

Note:

I wouldn’t put much stock in the data for .32 calibers, as there were only a total of 25 cases.

Just what these statistics measure is debatable. One might argue that the data represent real world results, but even if one accepts this, consider that the real world results don't say how they will apply to any given individual.

For example, the 9mm is quite popular, probably the most popular carry round in the list. (Note that I say "carry" here, as the 22 may be owned by more people, but not necessarily carried for personal defense.) One might also say that it has more users who are new to firearms and have a lesser degree of practice.

Comparing strictly handgun cartridge performance -- just the cartridge itself -- gathering valid data would need to hold to one variable: the cartridge. Ideally, one would use a machine rest in such tests. This would test what cartridge is more effective at a given task. The mind boggles at the number of different bullet choices that would need testing for each cartridge.

A test might also be designed to see what cartridge a shooter can handle most effectively. This also would separate into many avenues: there would be several guns for each cartridge, for instance. There would be experienced shooters and inexperienced ones. One would also need to consider the conditions: are we looking at an immediate surprise, or a calculated time in which the shooter can take whatever measures to obtain the best results. Have the shooters just eaten, just woken up, just got out of their car, etc. There are many variables associated with the shooter, in other words.

Gathering "real world" statistics doesn't test for one variable and because of this, I would question the validity of any analysis, and even if such data could produce a reliable analysis, the application of any analysis to any individual would still be in question.

The RIGHT way to go about this is to change one variable at a time. For this, test each cartridge for penetration. Ballistic gel is often used for this, and can give a reasonable approximation, but the medium must be the same for every test, so apples can be compared only to other apples. This isn't a simple task, as each cartridge must be tested for any number of bullet types. Penetration is key, but expansion also needs to be examined. Then, barrel lengths must be tested, as well, and preferably each possible gun. A Glock or some types of Kahrs use polygonal rifling, and this may have an effect on performance.

Another issue, which is often pointed out on this board, is shot placement. A modern, ergonomically designed pistol is more likely to obtain better shot placement in 9mm than a clumsy, heavy Mauser C96 "Broomhandle" pistol, for instance. Some people don't shoot a 1911 very well because their small hands can't control it as well as other pistols in 45 Automatic, and the recoil of the 1911 slide also might factor into this. But even with small hands, some folks do better than others -- small hands are not a binary factor in proficiency with a 1911. The point here is that each individual will probably differ from other individuals in what gun they shoot best.

Then, there are factors of judgment to consider: Do I use a 1911 because I like it, because I have it, or because I shoot it better than others? This last consideration is, I fear, the last one usually considered. Also, WHEN do I shoot? Is it when I'm nervous, am I "trigger-happy", do I have a bad flinch, etc. All of these factors and more are included in the "real world" data, but because they are mixed in with all of the other results, we can't really sort out which gun is best for us, can we?

Perhaps in one case, this data come close to what might happen in India: perhaps a lot of these shootings occurred in the inner city of the USA, where cheap guns predominate. Someone shooting with some big hunk of zinc in their hand, versus shooting with a ergonomic Sig, Walther, or 1911 (yes, John M Browning did incorporate ergonomics in his design!) isn't going to be as effective of a shooter as they could be -- how does that relate to each one of us? So, economics and availability do play a role in the data, and how it relates to each of us. But in India, very few firearm choices are available on a widespread basis, and the same holds true for cartridge choice and bullet type. Therefore, we come down to 32 Automatic versus 32 S&W Long, and revolver versus semi-automatic for the vast majority of folks looking at this data on this forum.

As always a well drafted elaborate point of view.

[Vikram]

Tim,

Excellent analysis as ever.

[SoulSniper]

[mention]timmy [/mention] great coverage!
Also, wouldn’t stopping power also translate to energy (ma) being transferred to the target?
And then Target’s behaviour? The article is around stats, and some stats e.g. incapacitation % look useful/considerable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ambi]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1 ... rivesdk
Bar graph from wiki. .32, .22,.380,.357 seem more dangerous than 9mm!

[rs123in]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1 ... rivesdk
Bar graph from wiki. .32, .22,.380,.357 seem more dangerous than 9mm!

After going through discussion threads in the post, I thought of expressing my thoughts on topic via video on You Tube, uploaded in Hindi, as in India, Hindi audience doesn't have access to any such material. If required, I can dub it in English also.

Aim of posting on forum is to generate discussion and get it audited by experts like timmy sir. I am open to criticism, as apart from deflating my human ego, any criticism adds on to one's knowledge only.

SO PLS HAVE A LOOK AT VIDEO AND TELL ME YOUR SUGGESTIONS/CORRECTIONS ON OUR IFG GROUP. THANKS.