For your education:
A human body is not ballistic gelatin. A human body has cavities and emptiness inside. A bullet will pass through a man if it does not hit bone better than through this material, which provides constant resistance.
Okey dokey?
[quote=“IRONMAN”]
For your education:
A human body is not ballistic gelatin. A human body has cavities and emptiness inside. A bullet will pass through a man if it does not hit bone better than through this material, which provides constant resistance.
Okey dokey?[/quote]
I always thought it was quite tightly pack inside the body, the only empty space is between your ears.
The Garand and Springfield can be directly compared because they fire the SAME cartridge with the SAME barrel length, and the only difference between them is that one is a bolt-action and one is semi-auto. They have the same muzzle velocity. Thus the self-loading mechanism has NO effect on the muzzle velocity. QED. The only scientific comparison is firing the same cartridge with the same barrel length, no hand-waving “in general” without supporting data.
Thus, if I can get hold of a chronograph I will shoot my L1A1 over it with the gas turned on and the gas switched off. The difference will be immesurable.
You made your contention without supporting data. I provided data to the contrary, and you ignore it. Thus you are TROLLING.
If you want to see this difference magnified, compare cannons which are breech-loading to auto-loading cannons
I’d like to see an auto-loading cannon which is NOT breech-loading.
Right. I shall re-post the wound patterns in order of penetration:
.38spl +p 110gn hollowpoint. Penetration 21.5cm
.45ACP Winchester Silvertip JHP, penetration 25cm:
.22rf 37gn HP. Penetration 26.5cm (FROM RIFLE)
.38spl 158gn FBI load, penetration 32cm:
.357 Mag 125gn JSP, penetration 36cm:
.22lr RNL, penetration 36.5cm (FROM RIFLE):
9mm Para M885, penetration 70cm:
.45ACP 230gn FMC, penetration 70+cm:
So apart from projectiles designed to expand (and produce hydrostatic shock and stay in the target), handgun ammunition in general will penetrate more than .22lr, particularly FMJ. And where do you get this rediculous idea that velocity is the be all and end all of terminal ballistics???
As for the use of ballistic gelatin, the site which provides the diagrams says:
"The entire missile path is captured in one or more 25 x 25 x 50 cm blocks of 10% ordnance gelatin at 4°C. The penetration depth, projectile deformation and fragmentation pattern, yaw, and temporary cavity of the missile in living anesthetized swine tissue are reproduced by this gelatin.
So it adequately reproduces what happens when shooting at pigs, which are made of similar stuff to humans. Thus the penetrations in this gelatin can be expected to be close to what would occur in humans.
I dunno why you’re banging on about differences between .308WIN and .30-06 - all I did was point out that the diameter of the .30-06 projectile is .308".
Stoat, most automatic rifles use a rotating bolt.
There’s a whole heap that don’t, e.g.
TIPPING:
SKS
VZ52
CZ58
FN49
FN FAL (FN49 derived)
FN CAL (scaled-down FAL)
IMBEL MD2 (FAL based)
Japan Tyoe 64
Ljungmann AG42
MAS49
MP44
Tokarev SVT38
CZ ZH29
OTHER:
FAMAS (delayed blowback)
HK G3 (roller-delayed blowback, CETME derived)
HK33, HK G41 etc - (G3 derived)
CETME (roller-delayed blowback Stg45 derived)
SIG SG510 (roller-delayed blowback)
Simonov AS-36 (rising block)
EDIT TO FIX BBCode
26.5 centimeter = 10.4330709 inches
Yup. You blundered again. You just proved to yourself that a HV .22 LR can pass through a man. Stoat, most 9mm won’t pass through a man if they don’t hit bone either. LOL
Learning now are you?[/quote]
Is that not exactly what MoS said? That it would penetrate about 10’’
Why oh why oh why do you make it so easy for us Tinny?[/quote]
Yes, precicely. he did show that it can pass through a man at over 10". That is true. Alas, his contention that a .22 does not have the power to pass through a man was false![/quote]
You know, I was lead to believe at school that 10.6 was a larger number than 10.4. Although this doesn’t seem to hold in TINWALTLAND.
Yea. I did say minimal.
You don’t read so well. Read my statement in the previous post about the “fattness” of the 9mm or 380 round. Now you’re going to bring up mass. Bring up whatever you like Staot. It will not disprove that my statement:
“A .22 LR can pass through a man at near PB if it does not hit bone.”
… is anything but true, as you have proven to yourself, because you would not take my word for it.
That is not reflected in the charts. Those are single blocks of ballistic gelating.
The first illustration you provided was of a single block of gelating, and the .22 LR passed through over 10 inches of it. :shock:
See your graphic:
:lol:
Staot, are you still trying to say, after providing yourself with the chart that proves it, that a .22 LR cannot pass through a human if it does not hit bone? Is that why you keep posting stuff about this after providing the very proof yourself?
Now that you see the expert’s article (an armory expert) which states that there IS a marginal difference, you say I"M the one carrying on about eh?
:lol:
But most do. Are you stating that all rifles with rotating bolts are based on each other?
Stoat, it’s ok to be wrong sometimes Stoat. I’ve been wrong. I once thought the M1 Carbine was spring action! But I learned otherwise. I can admit it though. But you seem incapable of admiting being wrong about anything, ever, as many times as I have shot down your wild contentions. But it’s not ok to be wrong, proven wrong, then carry on, dancing around the subject without making any clear statements, making it look like you are still right. It does not change a thing. It does not earn respect.
Let me recap:
A .22 LR can pass through a person at near PB if it does not hit bone.
The M1 Carbine IS NOT based upon the M1 Garand.
Because 2 weapons have a rotating bolt, does not mean one is based upon the other.
26.5 centimeter = 10.4330709 inches
Yup. You blundered again. You just proved to yourself that a HV .22 LR can pass through a man. Stoat, most 9mm won’t pass through a man if they don’t hit bone either. LOL
Learning now are you?[/quote]
Is that not exactly what MoS said? That it would penetrate about 10’’
Why oh why oh why do you make it so easy for us Tinny?[/quote]
Yes, precicely. he did show that it can pass through a man at over 10". That is true. Alas, his contention that a .22 does not have the power to pass through a man was false![/quote]
You know, I was lead to believe at school that 10.6 was a larger number than 10.4. Although this doesn’t seem to hold in TINWALTLAND.[/quote]
Let us know when every human body, bullet, trajectory of penetration, and shootable point in a person’s torso are exactly the same, every time.
Make sure you provide technical data about bullets passing through lungs or missing them, stomachs, intestines, etc. We need that data because it all proves stoat’s chart wrong!
Listen to yourself. I know it pisses you that I was right and patent Office Clerk was not, because you are both members of the gang, but don’t swerve to farr from reality BBL.
Get over it already.
The following are penetrations using short-barel (2-3 inches) .22 pistols:
Remington .22 LR 36gr Viper Hyper Velocity Solid Bullet TC
Product # 1922, Lot # E03J1D
Gelatin block s/n V1-990530-1, calibration: 9.9cm @ 622 fps (9.3cm corrected1)
Test gun: Beretta M21A, 2.4" bbl. Date tested: 7-16-99. Bare Gelatin
Shot # Velocity (fps) Penetration Expansion
1 861 25.9cm (10 1/8") None
2 865 32.0cm (12 ½") None
3 880 30.8cm (12") None
4 901 24.0cm (9 3/8") None
5 Error 26.6cm (10 3/8") None
6 Error 23.4cm (9 1/8") None
7 787 27.5cm (10 ¾’) None
Averages 859 27.2cm (10 5/8")
CCI .22 LR 32gr Stinger HP
Product # 0050, Lot # J30D01
Gelatin block s/n V1-990528-1, calibration: 9.0cm @ 563 fps (9.5cm corrected1)
Test gun: Beretta M21A, 2.4" bbl. Date tested: 6-14-99. Bare Gelatin
Shot # Velocity (fps) Penetration Expansion
1 971 See remarks None
2 1002 See remarks None
3 999 See remarks None
4 972 See remarks None
5 Error See remarks None
6 993 See remarks None
Averages 987 30.7cm (12")*
Bullet A: 34.0cm
Bullet B: 29.6cm (backwards at rest)
Bullet C: 30.8cm
Bullet D: exited block at 29.7cm
Bullet E: 28.7 (penetrated 25cm and ricocheted off test stand surface under block)
Bullet F: 28.5 (backwards at rest)
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm
Now for Christ’s sake STFU already about a .22 LR can’t pass through a person if it does not hit bone. :roll:
I just noticed something. They used CCI Stingers in that last test. Those are the rounds I use in my Colt .22 LR revolver with a 9 1/2 inch barrel.
:lol:
Oh, so now ballistic gelatin IS a valid test medium? But you said:
At least be effing consistent. You also did a selective quote - there’s another data set on that page:
Magnum Performance Ballistics .22 LR 32gr Quik-Shok Hyper-Velocity PFB-HP, 14.9cm (5 ¾")
You also have forgotten that you said that a “9mm Para will stop inside a person because it has less velocity than a .22rf.” But, the data from the wound profile for the US M885 9mm Para ball cartridge shows a wound channel 70 centimetres long. This is more than twice the penetration of your beloved .22rf.
Why this obsession with velocity? Are you aware of such important concepts as MOMENTUM and ENERGY? The importance of projectile design?
And why would you want the bullet to overpenetrate anyway? Much time, effort and money goes into developping bullets which will cause massive hydrostatic shock and stop in the target at a depth to cause the most trauma. This ensures the maximum transfer of energy. 9mm Para ball is a poor combat performer and is dangerous, precicely because it overpenetrates. This is why the police use JSP or JHP.
If, as you claim, .22lr is such a better manstopper than larger handgun bullets, why do people not use it for combat? Why is it considered inhumane for anything larger than a small mammal?
Oh, and for your information, revolvers suffer velocity loss due to the flash gap between the cylinder and forcing cone. This is significant and measurable.
OK, this is only from a forum, but I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the figures: http://survival.com/IVB/index.php?showtopic=277&hl=
One tester’s results have shown a drop of approximately 15 fps (feet per second) in muzzle velocity for every 0.001-inch of flash gap. The tester suspects this may be slightly higher for hotter, high-pressure handgun cartridges such as the.480 Ruger or the .454 Casull, although he did not test for this.
A revolver must have a flash gap in order to function correctly (the M1895 Nagant the notable exception). If the gap is too tight, reliability suffers. The SAAMI lists 0.012-inch as an industry maximum for revolver flash gap. Most current revolvers from our better manufacturers (Ruger, Smith and Wesson) beat that substantially in their tolerances. Personally, I feel a flash gap of between 0.003- and 0.004-inch is about ideal, and even 0.006-inch is nothing to raise an eyebrow over.
For the mathematically challenged or heinously lazy, a gap of 0.012-inch should result in a theoretic loss of 180 feet per second, while our ideal range of 0.003- to 0.004-inch results in a loss of just 45 to 60 fps—about four percent for a .357 Magnum-class cartridge.
However, it has been demonstrated that for 2 rifles with the same barrel length and same cartridge, one being a bolt action and the other semi-auto, there is no measurable change in muzzle velocity. QED.
Show me where I said it wasn’t. And yes, the human body has cavities. I don’t know what you point is.
Other tests. which you’ve seen, show far more penetration, up to 12 inches, with a 2-3 inch barrel! Now imagine how my 9 1/2" Colt would pergorm compared to theose! Heh. Yup buddy. The comment you quoted me on originally and said was false is so true! Perhaps now when I say something, you won’t be so quick to argue about it. Maybe you should investigate first, argue second, huh?
Honestly, That test seems odd to me. I’ve shot 2x4’s of pine with a .22 and seen them bust a hole the size of a nickel out the back. And pine is much tougher than ballistic gellatin, I assure you! :lol:
Yes. And it’s true. Most often a 9mm will stop inside a person at close range. The same is true of a .22, which I have also already stated. But then, you already knew that.
Are you trying to say that a 9mm will most often pass through a man at close range? Because that’s what it sounds like. Let me tell you, that is not true. We can prove that too, if you want to put your foot into your mouth once more. 
Once more Stoaty, read my post where I mention the diameter and mass of the bullet. For crying out loud, stop asking the same question repeatedly. I’ve said the above once already.
You tell me. I only said a .22 LR can pass through a man at near PB if it does not hit bone. You said it couldn’t. You were wrong, as we see.
Now you’re trying to put words into my mouth. Don’t putz out here. Nobody said a .22 is a “better man-stopper” than a larger bullet.
I stated:
“A .22 LR can pass through a man at near PB if it does not hit bone.”
You siad it could not. You were wrong, as the ballistics test prove. Why not just say, “Ok IRONMAN, I was wrong. I see that it can.”
Watching a certain colonial arguing is sometimes like watching a battleship desperately firing off chaff…
just before the torpedo strikes :lol: :lol:
No, it is not significant. It’s niminal. A typical flash gap of a quality revolver is roughly less than .010 inches. It can be as small as .007 to .008 inches. This is an extremely close tolerance, and only nominally effects performance. The difference is not worth mentioning. Some people hunt deer with large calibre revolvers. They do not do that with autos.
Furthermore, revolvers like mine with a longer barrel provide considerably more velocity than the puny 2-3" ones in the tests of the previous post.
Yuppers.
You have not proven, as you are now attempting to allued, that my 9 1/2 inch revolver will not penetrate better than a 2-3 inch one. It sertainly will. 
Stoaty, now that we have seen the data, I’ll ask you to answer this question once more:
Can a .22 LR with a 9 1/2 inch barrel pass through a man if it does not hit bone at near PB range?
What’s your answer now? Yea or nay? Let’s see what you say now. :lol:
I guess thats you banned then.
So if it loses 15fps of velocity for every 0.001in of flash gap, that is between 105fps and 150fps, depending on the quality of the revolver? Is that not a fairly large loss of velocity?
So if it loses 15fps of velocity for every 0.001in of flash gap, that is between 105fps and 150fps, depending on the quality of the revolver? Is that not a fairly large loss of velocity?[/quote]
I’ve never heard of a revolver that lost 100+ fps because of the flash gap. 10-20 is common for the weapon. What they lose they more than make up for with in long barreled models, such as a 6" or longer barrel.
Autos don’t have long enough barrels to provide the velocity that is common with a long barreled revolver of the same calibre.
and after the torpedo has struck, sits at the bottom of the ocean and loads up with more chaff.
This morning, in the interests of science and because I had a dead lamb (maggots :roll:) lying aroud waiting for the kennels to come and pick it up I decided to put Tinbreeches claims to the test.
The Subject
A one day dead Texel x lamb having died due to toxaemia due to infestation of blowfly larvae in the quarters, (serves the stupid little sod right for escaping last time the flock was treated with insecticide :x ).
Mass <30kg at five months old (not much of a loss then). Depth of thorax, sternum to spine 26/7cm.
The Rifles
Walther G22 semi-auto in .22LR
CZ ZKM 452 Classic bolt action in .22LR
Marlin 17V in .17HMR
All moderated.
The Ammunition
22LR Eley High Velocity, 40gr, 1312fps, solid
22LR CCI-32 Standard Velocity 40gr, solid (approx 1060 fps)
17HMR Hornady V-Max, 17gr, ballistic tip.
17HMR Unknown solid round.
Methodology
The Carcass was suspended by the forelimbs 10 metres from a benchrested firing point and three shots of each ammunition type were fired from each compatible weapon at predetermined aimpoints between the ribs and on either side of the sternum.
Results
No 22LR round passed through the carcass from any weapon. One round of 17HMR V-Max passed though as did two of the unknown solid 17HMR.
Conclusion
22LR even in High Velocity form is incaplable of passing through the ~10in thorax of a juvenile sheep at 10m. It is therefore unlikely that a similar round would pass through the torso of an adult human.
Edited for HTML and to add: If you do this the kennelman will complain, even though he was only going to incinerate the corpse anyway.
I thought this was an interesting site, shows the horrors of war and what type of wounds were encountered in WWII.
http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/default.htm
http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/woundblstcs/chapter6.htm
The second site shows the effects of bullets and shrapnel on bodys.