Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "How effective is your 9mm carry ammo? 9MM VS HUMAN TORSO" video.

@DV8 *** The long distance thing ticks me off precisely because the big issue with 5.56 was the failures to stop in Somalia where the fighting occurred at street distances. Where if you tag someone and they don't immediately go down, they might still get a shot on you. Someone is 500 yards away? I don't care if the 5.56 FMJ is acting like a .22 WMR at that point, I don't think someone with a .22 lodged in their body is going to have an easy time aiming those 500 yard shots at me.
40
Great White Dugan Ashley (from Carnik Con) said he witnessed an insurgent take a burst of 7.62 from the coaxial on an Abrams to the gut, he went down, got up and ran away.
3
"it's an FMJ round which meant that it doesn't expand and it goes straight through without dumping the velocity energy into the muscles" - I mean in gel tests you can see that 9mm FMJ is a pretty good yawer. The problem with 9mm is the problem with all pistol rounds - you get no remote wounding effects. Energy dump means nothing with pistol calibers, because the energy is spent moving tissue out of the way. It just springs back into place. Rifles actually put so much energy into tissue, it rips it apart.
3
@ricksanchez9669 I know. I'm just pointing out that the reason that most hunting is done with JHP or soft points is because many cartridges and bullet designs cannot be relied on to yaw appropriately at the right depth to get that stretch cavity with FMJ. JHPs and soft points have remote wounding effects, and sometimes you even see the effect with deer that get shot in the thorax, their hind legs start off running but the front legs are paralyzed from the hit. So the reasoning with hunting can't be applied to humans and defensive pistol ammo. The reason regarding hunting has much more validity. With defensive pistol ammo, the added bleeding is a bonus but we've all been trying to search for the mythical stopping power through the scientific method and we simply can't find it.
2
@ricksanchez9669 The "how fast" changes every single time that particular bullet in a particular caliber is used. Therefore stopping power is mythical, it's the unicorn we have been searching for decades. Someone shot in the chest multiple times with .40 can still have enough fight in him to shoot back, while someone shot in the pinky finger with a .22lr can drop instantly to the ground in pain. Does that mean .22lr has more stopping power?
2
@ricksanchez9669 I'm not talking about exceptions. Each and every individual bullet is its own case with wildly different outcomes. That's not exception but the rule. If bodies do weird things, then stopping power is a myth. Please don't argue this with me, argue with the people who have been studying wound ballistics and pretty much say the same thing - there's no quantifiable metric for stopping power. If there are odds to be stacked, you don't have stopping power.
2
It's viable if you carry FMJ or those extreme rounds that look like a Phillips head. Hollow points in 380 underpenetrate.
2
55gr out of a 20" barrel sure does nuke people, the barrel twist isn't very important as long as the accuracy is good. When the bullet comes out the muzzle there's something called "fleet yaw" where no matter how stable or unstable the bullet is, it yaws up and down until it settles into a more stable precession. The 62gr out of 1:7 performs fine when conditions allow but again, the fleet yaw can make you unlucky. The M855 is a very yaw sensitive bullet and the three piece construction makes it even more inconsistent. The 62gr M855A1 was designed to be yaw insensitive, so in gel tests it usually penetrates one inch and then yaws violently independently of the angle at impact.
2
There's a video online of a coroner in Mexico (?) showing a real body of some cartel guy shot by a Black Talon.
2
Anything that reliably stops people comes out the back.
1
Just get knox gelatin powder and check the back alleys behind clothing stores for mannequins they tossed out.
1
@HaloDude557 Drugs don't matter that much when a 5.56 tears everything apart inside the chest. The issue is, M855 suffers from fleet yaw at close range.
1
@ricksanchez9669 Most hunting is done with rifle calibers, though. Always remember that rifle JHPs and soft points will cause added tearing that handgun rounds won't.
1
@HaloDude557 Let me rephrase. M855 is one of the rounds that suffers the most from the effects fleet yaw.
1
@HaloDude557 For you. Either way it doesn't matter. Despite the rollout being a mess that killed it, 6.8 SPC was designed to have very little sensitivity to fleet yaw. M855A1 was designed to be insensitive to fleet yaw. We know that M855 has huge performance inconsistencies compared to M193 and M855A1. I don't have to convince you, the people who made the decisions already were convinced and the real world results seem to support their decision.
1
@HaloDude557 I don't care. The claim has been proven. I owe you nothing and the more you latch onto me the less I'm interested in spoon feeding you.
1
@HaloDude557 You're being evasive about your disbelief.
1
@Eric Nunya 14.5 is good enough, especially at close range. The issue is that the angle at which the bullet enters. Zero degrees? Zips straight through. Three degrees? The bullet damn near explodes. M855A1 fixes this by having a one inch neck and then near-instant fragmentation independently of angle.
1
@Eric Nunya Not true either, because one of the goals of M855A1 was not deviating from the ballistic drop compensation reticles on ACOGs. The early batches had signs of overpressure, and there's rumors that this was due to primers. The issue has been resolved. At this point you're denying reality. There's actual published scientific studies investigating the fleet yaw issue. If velocity were the issue, the USMC would not have developed Mk318. If velocity were the issue, the problem wouldn't be so apparent at close range, where the bullet strikes at the highest velocity of its trajectory. If velocity were the issue, then 6.8 SPC wouldn't have been brought up as a potential replacement due to the fact that it's slower. Another hint, the reason 6.8 SPC was 6.8 was because it was one of the calibers least affected by fleet yaw. Go figure.
1
@Eric Nunya I don't need to post links stating that the sun rises in the East every day. It's not my fault you're not aware of basic facts and public knowledge that's been available for almost 15 years. You have also provided no links proving that the issue with M855 was due to velocity (especially since the M16A4 did not solve it) so I don't even understand why you're suddenly asking for sources.
1
@Eric Nunya "The powder burns faster and creates more pressure" - It also means less velocity gain down the barrel. You know who loads .223 with fast powder? Tula. Their velocities are actually lower. Higher peak pressure, but also falls down quicker which results in lower total work done by the gasses. The "area under the curve", if you've ever taken calculus. "meaning its terminal effects are not yaw dependant" - So like I said, it eliminates the fleet yaw issue from M855. Thanks for proving my point. "This is a quote from an authoritative source" - I probably have read it anyway. It should probably also state that it's meant to match the BDC on sights. I'm right, and your source backs me up. They said that the terminal effects are more consistent. This is due to fleet yaw making M855 inconsistent. Not velocity.
1
Because FMJ just keeps on chugging while in the real world JHPs are usually found a few feet away from the perp. The issue is that when you design something not to exit, now you're shooting some dude with his arms in front (because he's holding a gun or something) and the bullet has to go through skin, arm muscle, skin, clothes, skin again, pectoral muscle, rib and now the heart or artery wall - which is a pretty tough and chewy material. The bullet probably got stopped by the rib and if it did go through, it probably stopped short of the heart. With just a few extra inches you prevent what happened in the FBI Miami shootout where a guy with a bullet an inch from his heart kept fighting.
1
Energy dump theories were disproven in the 80s and 90s. Bullets designed for energy dump was precisely what lead to the abysmal track record 9mm used to have.
1
"Energy dump" is a flawed theory from the 80s/early 90s projectile design, and was responsible for 9mm failing to stop people. The majority of the energy is used to dislodge tissue radially, which springs back into position after the bullet passes through. This energy is wasted as it causes no injury to the target unlike rifle rounds.
1
Usually harder lead has higher antimony content - which is lower on the periodic table than lead, so it's a hair less dense than pure lead.
1
In the real world they typically pop out the back like a zit or are found in the perp's clothes. Modern rounds are pretty good at preventing collateral damage - the peril is missing entirely and hitting a bystander.
1
@pontiacmaniac2 It's still on youtube lol /watch?v=ntLR34ozSdY
1