The 22 TCM comes very close, definitely over 2000.
I owned one but never used it as my EDC.
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Handgun caliber arguments are dumb
- Thread starter Deleted member 79987
- Start date
I owned one but never used it as my EDC.
this seems to be the conventional wisdom now-a-days.
Unless you are dealing with a large dangerous animal or someone strung out of their minds on drugs, I would imagine that most criminals, once they realize that they are being shot back at, and are hit, are looking to get the hell out of Dodge...
I know some people that have this inner movie footage rolling of them engaging in some tactical shootout where they save the day trading shots with bad guys, but I don't know that that is representative of most encounters... At least not from the reports that I have seen...
Now let's get back to arguing about ODT charging membership fees and $700 used Glocks... Oh, wait, wrong thread...
I think the point of the video was that 9mm, 45, 40 effect the physiology of the human body the same. so that extra 100 ft lbs of energy you get from 45 acp doesn't really do or mean anything. Its an overrated statistic. So if these rounds do equal damage to human tissue and organs why choose a gun that fires less "effective" rounds or ones that shoot "less-effective" rounds when others are readily available? As for dangerous game that's not even the same conversation. You wouldn't hunt Cape Buffalo with a Glock 19. and nothing in North America short of Grizz couldn't be considered dangerous or everything else can be killed by one of those calibers.
good video. settles those questions.
Any time a bullet pushes incompressable (mostly liquid) tissue out of the way, there is a shock wave that travels away from the wound track and damages other stuff, over-stimulates nerves, etc.
This can happen at speeds far below Mach 2.
If you know of some scientific definition of "hydrostatic shock" that requires 2,200 f.p.s. at impact, please post a link.
Over 100 years ago, the U.S. Army had a General Hatcher who arranged a test of handgun effectiveness at dropping cattle. Big steers that weighed over 1000 lbs each. They shot these animals with various caliber pistols. Some used light and fast bullets. Some used big and slow bullets. The study found that both were equally ineffective, when the animal was shot in the body. But a bullet in the brain always dropped the critter.
The Army misused this study to decide that a .45 caliber handgun was needed to replace the .38 caliber revolvers they'd been using.
But I say the real value of it is to emphasize bullet placement, with the central nervous system as being the "target" that most readily results in a "bang-flop" among handgun rounds.
shooting a cape buffalo in the head defeats the purpose of hunting dangerous African game. You want the animals head for a trophy. which is why I said that is a different conversation
