Why Use Hollow Points?

[Marine Cpl]

You are comparing diameter, but try comparing the surface area of the expanded bullets. A quick check shows a .355 diameter object, has a front surface area of .09, while an expand bullet with a diameter of .5 has a front surface area of .2, so that extra millimeter or so of expansion is nearly doubling the front surface area of the projectile, not a small change.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Sorry tripled tapped the post with tapatalk

Correct but we are talking about numbers that are in values of less than a millimeter.

A human body will never know the difference within a millimeter or two but on paper you have big numbers in the percentage game.

That Alaskan Guide killed a Grizzly Bear with a flat pointed 9mm hitting vitals. The same result would have occurred with a 10mm with a bigger frontal area of a millimeter more.

A millimeter more in diameter is insignificant in flesh but inches in penetration is very significant.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I will still carry 9mm Standard Pressured Federal HST's at 124 grains that will penetrate 16 inches in gel to limit overpenetration on objects behind the target but will not hesitate using flat pointed, solid bullets that'll penetrate the target and keep going in a SHTF scenario, or woods encounter if that's what my gun is loaded with.

 

[pmcjuryny]

Correct but we are talking about numbers that are in values of less than a millimeter.

A human body will never know the difference within a millimeter or two but on paper you have big numbers in the percentage game.

That Alaskan Guide killed a Grizzly Bear with a flat pointed 9mm hitting vitals. The same result would have occurred with a 10mm with a bigger frontal area of a millimeter more.

A millimeter more in diameter is insignificant in flesh but inches in penetration is very significant.

We are talking about more then doubling the size of the hole created by the bullets path, that means more tissue destroyed, a wound track twice as big, more potential for bleeding, a greater potential to strike a vital organ or artery. Unless you feel that more then 18" of penetration is needed there is literally no down side to hollow points, and lots of benefits.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Marine Cpl]

We are talking about more then doubling the size of the hole created by the bullets path, that means more tissue destroyed, a wound track twice as big, more potential for bleeding, a greater potential to strike a vital organ or artery. Unless you feel that more then 18" of penetration is needed there is literally no down side to hollow points, and lots of benefits.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Let me ask you this. If you get shot in a non vital area like the pocket of your shoulder, do you think the shot would be deadlier with a hole the size of .355 compared to a hole the size of .60?

You will bleed the same whether the hole is .355 or 60. You aren't going to bleed more with a hole about 2 millimeters larger to make a difference in seconds. It doesn't work like that. You bleed from the edges of the hole and not from the hole itself. 2 extra millimeters isn't going to make the difference in losing an extra pint of blood in a matter of minutes.

Now take the same situation and instead of the pocket of the shoulder, you are instead shot in the heart or the brain. Whether the hole is 1 or 2 millimeters larger or smaller, it's a life ending shot.

My point is that shot placement that reaches vitals is everything. You aren't going to bleed more and faster with a hole that's one or two millimeters larger in a non vital area.

Millimeters that are close to one another are such a minute difference in measurement when it comes to this. Penetration reaching vitals is everything.

Take the FBI shootout in Miami for example. Those Winchester Silvertips expanded large but stopped an inch short of the man's heart. Because he didn't get incapacitated immediately, he was able to continue fighting and subsequently killed a number of agents after being shot. Would the result have been different if the same shot was a FMJ and hit his heart?

Because of this shootout, the FBI came up with parameters dependant on penetration and not expansion for hollow point ammunition. They have no such parameters on how much a bullet should expand. Expansion is a plus but penetration is must.

If a hollow point bullet reaches those parameters of 12 to 18 it is good to go. If however your only choice is between hollow point ammo that doesn't reach those parameters but expand large, then a solid bullet works better. This is why many just load .380's in FMJ's because there are only 3 or 4 hollow point loads that reach those 12 inch parameter and did so just barely.

12 inches is the very minimum and not optimal.

This is why I carry Federal HST in standard pressure because from a 3 inch barrel they will exceed the 12 inches and penetrate to 16 inches. If that weren't the case and all 9mm ammo just barely made 12 inches, I would rather carry a solid bullet that is a guarantee to penetrate to a vital.

 

[NirvanaFan]

Let me ask you this. If you get shot in a non vital area like the pocket of your shoulder, do you think the shot would be deadlier with a hole the size of .355 compared to a hole the size of .60?

You will bleed the same whether the hole is .355 or 60. You aren't going to bleed more with a hole about 2 millimeters larger to make a difference in seconds. It doesn't work like that. You bleed from the edges of the hole and not from the hole itself. 2 extra millimeters isn't going to make the difference in losing an extra pint of blood in a matter of minutes.

You probably won't die, but the wound will be worse. A .355" hole has a circumference of 28.77mm. A .6" hole has a circumference of 47.88mm. That's a lot more tissue destroyed and area to bleed out from. I'm sure that people have been just nicked by a bullet in an organ by an expanding bullet where they wouldn't have been with a FMJ.

 

[Marine Cpl]

You probably won't die, but the wound will be worse. A .355" hole has a circumference of 28.77mm. A .6" hole has a circumference of 47.88mm. That's a lot more tissue destroyed and area to bleed out from. I'm sure that people have been just nicked by a bullet in an organ by an expanding bullet where they wouldn't have been with a FMJ.

You said you won't die but the hole would be worse. None of that matters when a guy is still shooting at you.

It's not going to make a difference in a matter of seconds or a minute. Nicking an organ is also not an immediate stop either if you happen to get lucky for that to happen in that unlikely scenario of chances.

If one guy gets shot with a round that nicked his heart, the heart would still continue to work enough to allow him to keep firing at you. If another guy gets hit in the heart with a smaller bullet dead center, he's pretty much done immediately.

 

[pmcjuryny]

Let me ask you this. If you get shot in a non vital area like the pocket of your shoulder, do you think the shot would be deadlier with a hole the size of .355 compared to a hole the size of .60?

You will bleed the same whether the hole is .355 or 60. You aren't going to bleed more with a hole about 2 millimeters larger to make a difference in seconds. It doesn't work like that. You bleed from the edges of the hole and not from the hole itself. 2 extra millimeters isn't going to make the difference in losing an extra pint of blood in a matter of minutes.

Now take the same situation and instead of the pocket of the shoulder, you are instead shot in the heart or the brain. Whether the hole is 1 or 2 millimeters larger or smaller, it's a life ending shot.

My point is that shot placement that reaches vitals is everything. You aren't going to bleed more and faster with a hole that's one or two millimeters larger in a non vital area.

Millimeters that are close to one another are such a minute difference in measurement when it comes to this. Penetration reaching vitals is everything.

Take the FBI shootout in Miami for example. Those Winchester Silvertips expanded large but stopped an inch short of the man's heart. Because he didn't get incapacitated immediately, he was able to continue fighting and subsequently killed a number of agents after being shot. Would the result have been different if the same shot was a FMJ and hit his heart?

Because of this shootout, the FBI came up with parameters dependant on penetration and not expansion for hollow point ammunition. They have no such parameters on how much a bullet should expand. Expansion is a plus but penetration is must.

If a hollow point bullet reaches those parameters of 12 to 18 it is good to go. If however your only choice is between hollow point ammo that doesn't reach those parameters but expand large, then a solid bullet works better. This is why many just load .380's in FMJ's because there are only 3 or 4 hollow point loads that reach those 12 inch parameter and did so just barely.

12 inches is the very minimum and not optimal.

This is why I carry Federal HST in standard pressure because from a 3 inch barrel they will exceed the 12 inches and penetrate to 16 inches. If that weren't the case and all 9mm ammo just barely made 12 inches, I would rather carry a solid bullet that is a guarantee to penetrate to a vital.

Yes adequate penetration is a must, and if you stick with a tested/proven round, you will get penetration. 1mm might not seem like much, but the difference between missing the heart, lungs, aorta, etc can be a matter of millimeters. Given that modern hollow points are specifically designed to expand in a controlled manner, while still giving penetration adequate to reach vitals, why is this even a question. Once upon a time you had to choice between penetration and expansion, but that is no longer the case.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Marine Cpl]

Yes adequate penetration is a must, and if you stick with a tested/proven round, you will get penetration. 1mm might not seem like much, but the difference between missing the heart, lungs, aorta, etc can be a matter of millimeters. Given that modern hollow points are specifically designed to expand in a controlled manner, while still giving penetration adequate to reach vitals, why is this even a question. Once upon a time you had to choice between penetration and expansion, but that is no longer the case.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I agree with everything you said except for the missing an organ part.

You either hit it, miss it totally, or nick it. Nicking it isn't going to take the fight out of a man that's determined. A shot that nicks the brain or the heart at the extreme edge isn't going to damage the organ enough to make an immediate stop while the criminal is still determined to kill you.

You either hit or you don't.

 

[pmcjuryny]

I agree with everything you said except for the missing an organ part.

You either hit it, miss it totally, or nick it. Nicking it isn't going to take the fight out of a man that's determined. A shot that nicks the brain or the heart at the extreme edge isn't going to damage the organ enough to make an immediate stop while the criminal is still determined to kill you.

You either hit or you don't.

The same logic still applies, hitting the brain, may or may not cause an immediate shutdown of the body, to get that affect you need to strike a specific piece of the brain, and or cause enough damage to larger portions of the brain. Having a larger diameter projectile will help increase the odds of both of these. Hitting the brain stem can cause an immediate shutdown, but how much of the brain stem needs to be damaged in order to cause this. I don't know, but I do know that causing a wider wound tract through the brain stem increases the chances of an immediate shutdown, weather it's a slightly off center hit, or dead center, a larger surface area will cause more damage, which increases the odds of me walking a way

The same holds true of all vital organs, exactly how much of the organ do you need to destroy to end the fight as quickly as possible. I don't have an answer but I can say the larger surface area, destroying additional tissue is not going to slow the process down.

Again thus isn't saying that penetration isn't important because it is, but with a quality tested, street proven round, you can get penetration and expansion.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Marine Cpl]

Ask those FBI agents if that larger wound cavity from that well expanding Silvertip that failed to penetrate to vitals made a difference in those few minutes of the shootout that killed a few of their partners. Had they used a HP that penetrated further or a ball round, they would have lived.

The point is in those few seconds, it doesn't matter enough to stop the threat.

 

[Marine Cpl]

All those what if scenarios about 2 millimeter larger wound channels causing more bleeding and nicking this and that mean nothing in the short term when he is firing at you.

If we were talking about 30 minutes to an hour later, you might have a point. But in the immediate gunfight, penetration trumps expansion each and every time.

As an example, birdshot doesn't penetrate enough to reach vital organs. It'll leave a larger wound then a buckshot would yet it won't kill you immediately.

We are not trying to kill someone an hour later. We are trying kill someone now.

 

[pmcjuryny]

Ask those FBI agents if that larger wound cavity from that well expanding Silvertip that failed to penetrate to vitals made a difference in those few minutes of the shootout that killed a few of their partners. Had they used a HP that penetrated further or a ball round, they would have lived.

The point is in those few seconds, it doesn't matter enough to stop the threat.

First of all the only even remotely guaranteed to immediately stop someone is a shot to the cns, any place else and people can and do continue to fight through. So if you want an immediate stop, you aren't aiming for vitals, you are aiming for the brain stem/primitive brain.

Assuming you are aiming for center mass, the more damage you do to those vital organs, the faster a threat will stop. You keep talking about old hollow points, from the late eighties and earlier nineties, known for poor and inconsistent performance as if they are the same as modern hollow points, when that couldn't be further from the truth. If the question was why would anyone use hollow points designed three decades ago, with a proven record of failures to preform, it would be a valid point. Given that option I would carry ball/wc/swc as well, but given the fact that we have modern ammunition that is proven both through lab testing and use on the streets, to provide adequate penetration, while nearly doubling the size of the wound tract, I'll chose that every time.

Ultimately penetration is important, but why anyone would champion penetration alone, over penetration and expansion is beyond me.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk