Check out this Pig

This may be more than you want to know !!!

Ok, I'm going to avoid terms here like stopping power and knock down power and go purely scientific.

One major reason to have a larger diameter bullet is because of how handgun bullets work.

Unlike a rifle bullet which has sufficient velocity to cause a destructive temporary cavity a handgun bullet can only crush what is in front of it.

The bigger the bullet, the more critter is in front of it.

Jesus :cen Christ you people are going to make me do math !!!

Now Justin said that there is only 1/4 inch difference between the largest and the smallest. This is close to being true. But the math is deceptive grasshopper.

Instead of diameter you need to look at frontal area.

The smallest commercially produced cartridge that I know of is the 17 HMR or Mach 2. Lets Use the 500 Smith as the other end.

Between .17 and .511 there is .341 difference in diameter.

Now lets look at the area of a circle.
http://www.math.com/students/calcula...cle-solver.htm

The .17 weighs in at .022 square inches
The 9mm tips the scales at .098 square inches
The 44 mag thunders in at .144 square inches
Maybe you like the 45 ACP? .160 square inches
The 500 shames them all at .205 square inches



Ok here goes the volume vs weight of lead.
I'm doing this to show other advantages of increased diameter.

I'm going to use the same length of 1 inch for all bullets and calculate as if they were all perfect cylinders to make it easy for myself. :rolleyes:

The .17 would have a volume of .022 cubic inches and would weigh 63 grains
The 9mm volume would be .098 cubic inches and would weigh 281 grains
The 44 mag volume would be .144 cubic inches and would weigh 412 grains
The 500 volume would be .204 cubic inches and would weigh 585 grains

I'm sure by now you are asking yourself.... WHAT THE HELL IS HE TALKING ABOUT ???? :confused:

Bullet performance in handguns is dependant on 3 basic factors. One of these is shot placement and we will just stipulate to proper shot placment and leave it out.

The other two are diameter of permanent hole left by bullet and depth of hole.
In other words permanent cavity left by bullet and depth of penetration.

I carry a 9mm at work. A 9mm is .354 inches.
A 45 ACP is .452 inches.

Suppose for purposes of illustration we assume that both rounds penetrate 12" and the only tissue they destroy is that directly in their path. A 9mm round would therefore create a cavity with a 13.4 square inch surface area from which blood would be lost and the .45 would create a cavity with a 17 square inch surface area which is 27% more surface for blood loss. Due to the elasticity of the tissue the wound cavity will in fact contract after the bullet has passed through. For a non-exanding, non-tumbling bullet wound channel diameter will reduce to 66% of the bullets caliber but the bullet will have damaged a surface area of tissue equal to its full circumference multiplied by depth.


There are 4 basic sorts of handgun bullets in use (for hunting) which are the hollowpoint, expanding jacketed bullets, expanding lead or soft cast and the hardcast or non expanding solid lead bullet.

There are also brass and tungsten and other non expanding bullets now available.

A hollow point serves to increase final bullet diameter by flattening of the nose.
It is very possible for a 9mm to expand past .452 and hence see the benefits of larger bullet diameter while fitting in a smaller weapon and offering reduced recoil, ie increased shootability.

A disadvantage of a hollow point is that the bullet is more fragile and may fragment on heavy bone.

Hard cast bullets are designed for maximum penetration and minimal expansion.
The standard by which defensive(against humans) handgun ammo is measured is 14 inches.

I'm sure you can see why 14 is not sufficient for a big bear or rhino or some such ugly critter.

You need more like 45. The big hand cannons offer it.

Proceed with more specific questions and I can answer them with more detail and less confusion.

Here is some reading.
http://www.ballisticsupply.net/Defau...x?tabid=252105
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ammuni...05/index1.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr

This may be more than you want to know !!!

Ok, I'm going to avoid terms here like stopping power and knock down power and go purely scientific.

One major reason to have a larger diameter bullet is because of how handgun bullets work.

Unlike a rifle bullet which has sufficient velocity to cause a destructive temporary cavity a handgun bullet can only crush what is in front of it.

The bigger the bullet, the more critter is in front of it.

Jesus :cen Christ you people are going to make me do math !!!

Now Justin said that there is only 1/4 inch difference between the largest and the smallest. This is close to being true. But the math is deceptive grasshopper.

Instead of diameter you need to look at frontal area.

The smallest commercially produced cartridge that I know of is the 17 HMR or Mach 2. Lets Use the 500 Smith as the other end.

Between .17 and .511 there is .341 difference in diameter.

Now lets look at the area of a circle.
http://www.math.com/students/calcula...cle-solver.htm

The .17 weighs in at .022 square inches
The 9mm tips the scales at .098 square inches
The 44 mag thunders in at .144 square inches
Maybe you like the 45 ACP? .160 square inches
The 500 shames them all at .205 square inches



Ok here goes the volume vs weight of lead.
I'm doing this to show other advantages of increased diameter.

I'm going to use the same length of 1 inch for all bullets and calculate as if they were all perfect cylinders to make it easy for myself. :rolleyes:

The .17 would have a volume of .022 cubic inches and would weigh 63 grains
The 9mm volume would be .098 cubic inches and would weigh 281 grains
The 44 mag volume would be .144 cubic inches and would weigh 412 grains
The 500 volume would be .204 cubic inches and would weigh 585 grains

I'm sure by now you are asking yourself.... WHAT THE HELL IS HE TALKING ABOUT ???? :confused:

Bullet performance in handguns is dependant on 3 basic factors. One of these is shot placement and we will just stipulate to proper shot placment and leave it out.

The other two are diameter of permanent hole left by bullet and depth of hole.
In other words permanent cavity left by bullet and depth of penetration.

I carry a 9mm at work. A 9mm is .354 inches.
A 45 ACP is .452 inches.

Suppose for purposes of illustration we assume that both rounds penetrate 12" and the only tissue they destroy is that directly in their path. A 9mm round would therefore create a cavity with a 13.4 square inch surface area from which blood would be lost and the .45 would create a cavity with a 17 square inch surface area which is 27% more surface for blood loss. Due to the elasticity of the tissue the wound cavity will in fact contract after the bullet has passed through. For a non-exanding, non-tumbling bullet wound channel diameter will reduce to 66% of the bullets caliber but the bullet will have damaged a surface area of tissue equal to its full circumference multiplied by depth.


There are 4 basic sorts of handgun bullets in use (for hunting) which are the hollowpoint, expanding jacketed bullets, expanding lead or soft cast and the hardcast or non expanding solid lead bullet.

There are also brass and tungsten and other non expanding bullets now available.

A hollow point serves to increase final bullet diameter by flattening of the nose.
It is very possible for a 9mm to expand past .452 and hence see the benefits of larger bullet diameter while fitting in a smaller weapon and offering reduced recoil, ie increased shootability.

A disadvantage of a hollow point is that the bullet is more fragile and may fragment on heavy bone.

Hard cast bullets are designed for maximum penetration and minimal expansion.
The standard by which defensive(against humans) handgun ammo is measured is 14 inches.

I'm sure you can see why 14 is not sufficient for a big bear or rhino or some such ugly critter.

You need more like 45. The big hand cannons offer it.

Proceed with more specific questions and I can answer them with more detail and less confusion.

Here is some reading.
http://www.ballisticsupply.net/Defau...x?tabid=252105
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/ammuni...05/index1.html

---

Thanks GW --- I knew you could fill us in ;). I did forget about the .17 but indeed I was looking at it wrong ---surface area of bullet not diameter. So I suppose as you start mixing handgun rounds and rifle rounds --things get a little more complex -- as you start dealing with high velocity rounds?

Anyway good job buddy and thanks for the info.

I guess my overall intention was to point out other factors that sometimes get passed on.

Justin

I'm not going to get into the rifle thing because you have to start factoring in velocity and I'm not going there.

I will say however that there are two camps in the bullet world.

The small-fast camp.
The big-slow camp.

Both have valid points to make.

Can I shoot an elk in the ass with my 300 Win Mag and go clean out the front with a 180 grain Trophy Bonded Bear claw going 3050 fps?
Probably.
Can I shoot an elk in the ass a 45-70 with a 475 grain cast lead bullet at 1500 and go clean out the front??
Hell yeah !!

The bugs on the windshield of my car are proof that big slow bullets work.

My blasting a groundhog over a 50 foot diameter circle is proof of small fast bullets.
So is Roy Weatherby gut shooting antelope in Africa just to prove the theory of hydraulic shock.

One name: Elmer Keith. End of comment.

Thanks GW and I don't want to push you any farther--- all interesting stuff. I can stand as evidence to the lethality of well placed small caliber rounds as I have seen cattle dropped with one shot of a .22 long rifle between the eyes before butcher. I never looked at the "little 22" the same way again. Anyway don't want to hijack John's thread ------back to megahog.


Justin

This pig just won't lay down and die!;):D

I'll kill off the pig theme, and while on the topic of all things that go bang, I shall carry on with the topic of firepower.

I recently recieved this email of someone who was attacked by a polar bear while camping overnight in a tent.

They obviously got one shot off and killed the bear and it must have been some sort of elephant rifle or something, but not before the bear inflicted his own amount of damage.

People be warned these are graphic...............open at own risk

Cheers
John

And a couple more to finish................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaegerhund

Thanks GW and I don't want to push you any farther---

Justin

---

Hell I don't mind.

It's just that normally someone from one camp or the other will come forward to dispute whatever you say about velocity being king or weight being king and it just turns into a big thing.

I have personally killed a 350 lb hog with my 357 mag.

I hand load all my own and could choose from anything between a 90 grain at over 2050fps up to a 180 grain at a slow, slow( ;) at you velocity guys) 1400 fps.

The lighter bullet makes more energy than the heaviest bullet due to velocity but won't penetrate nearly as far.

Which did I choose?

DUH ! I chose the heavy bullet so if the bastard charged and my shots missed the vitals I might break his damn pelvis !!!:tu

Take THAT evil piggy !!! :roflmao

http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpag...eitemid=724735

Good God John ----- you don't want to mess with bears. I remember seeing footage of a grizzly (brown bears smaller brother) lifting and moving a 500 lb boulder with one paw to get to a morsel.

The polar bears and browns get all the press but even a small black bear is not something to screw around with. I remember hearing a story about a momma black bear killing two people and wounding a kid in less than a minutes time at a national park.

Justin