# Knockdown power



## JimL (Aug 13, 2007)

No doubt some will say this is mere theorizing, but everything is based on a theory of some kind.

At first glance at least it would seem that a bullet something like a lawman with the flat nose will have better knock down power than a round nose of the same weight, given that the round nose can tend more to go looking for a different target. The idea being that the lawman would have something of a wadcutter effect.

I have no brief to present for lawman. It's just what popped into my head when I thought about the general idea of round nose alternatives.

And I have no wish to argue with anyone who insists that one must or must not use hollow points of whatever ilk. It just so happens I'm not talking about hollow points.

Nor am I talking caliber or velocity. For sake of argument (if argument is necessary) assume I'm talking about 100 caliber hand gun cartridges with 100 grain loads when referring to the two (and only two) kinds of bullets above - round and flat nose. That way maybe we can avoid getting into brands.

I hope that leaves the simple "round versus flat" question standing by itself. Flat nose? Better knock down?

Thanks


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

"Knock-down power" seems to be something of a myth. Maybe "fight-stopping power" is a more useful term. Generally, bullets fired from a handgun don't knock anything down, except certain metal targets and bowling pins.
Not being Marvin Fackler, or either Thompson or LaGarde, I can only theorize about the external-ballistics and wound-causing differences between round nose (RN) and flat-point (FP) bullets.
Intuitively, FP bullets probably cause a little more tissue and organ disruption than do RNs, but I'm willing to bet that the difference is pretty small. Given the same construction (_i.e._, lead, jacketed, or plated), mass, and velocity, they both would expand (or not expand) in about the same way, to about the same size.
To my knowledge, non-hollow-point bullets of any caliber, in any form other than full-on wadcutter, all do about the same damage. If the bullet doesn't markedly expand, or present a sharp-cutting-edged "star," the damage done is entirely a matter of placement and quantity of hits, not bullet shape. (And true wadcutters, usually driven at slow, target-shooting velocities, don't do a lot of damage either.)
In a fight, and limited to non-expanding bullets, I would want a big, heavy slug travelling at a relatively moderate velocity, to ensure that the bullet stopped and stayed within the body of the BG, thus transferring all of its momentum to him. Under those circumstances, given the choice of RN or FP, I would take FP only because even the tiniest advantage is better than none.
However, I believe that such a choice is based more in the realm of faith and speculation than in that of reason and science.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

JimL said:


> No doubt some will say this is mere theorizing, but everything is based on a theory of some kind.


Sir Isaac Newton had a theory that for every action, there is an equal and opposite _reaction._ That theory has since been well proven to be scientific fact. That being the case, any round that will actually knock a human or large animal down, is also going to knock the shooter down, or at least, send the firearm flying backwards.

In fact, the only common round that is even capable of 'staggering' a human, or large animal, is something along the order of a shotgun slug. Other than that, the only way to drop a human in his tracks is to hit a golf ball sized area at the base of the brain, which immediately switches off all body functions. But that has very little to do with the so-called 'knock-down' power of the round fired.

I don't know the answer to your round nose/flat nose question. Seems like the flat nose might do a little more damage, but as always, if the shot placement is such that there is trauma to major organs and arteries, it probably does not matter that much.

Either way, the 'shootee' is only going to be 'knocked down' because he knows he has been shot, and thinks he is supposed to fall down. Otherwise, he'll keep going till blood pressure loss causes him to faint.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Generally, bullets fired from a handgun don't knock anything down, except certain metal targets and bowling pins.


What are you talking about? In the movies, people get shot with a handgun and go flying backwards all the time; usually out a window. Get it right, Steve. :smt033


----------



## BeefyBeefo (Jan 30, 2008)

Todd said:


> What are you talking about? In the movies, people get shot with a handgun and go flying backwards all the time; usually out a window. Get it right, Steve. :smt033


:anim_lol::smt023


----------



## Growler67 (Sep 8, 2008)

Shot placement will increase the likelyhood of dropping your target regardless of bullet type or caliber. Ever hunt or watch hunting shows? Ever see that buck crumple down into the fetal position immediately after the bang? .243, 30-06 or whatever bullet type is being shot, you hit your target in the right spot then all of the fight in it will be gone. Off a bit and it'll run a while at least.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

The round nose will go a bit deeper were as the flat point will dump its energy a tad bit quicker and not go as deep. Neither will put a person on his keister unless its moving at rifle speeds and a major bone is hit. Even with that it's questionable. On this same note I was watching an ER program the other night and some gal was checking the fit of her new .357 in the glove box of her boyfriends car. It was a snubby and she had a hold of it from the barrel end. Needless to say it went off. Wow was her hand a mess. The bullet took out the web between her thumb and first finger. It took some bone too. It looked like a small grenade when off in her hand. She almost lost her thumb and first finger. That's a hard lesson to learn about the wrong way to handle a loaded gun.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Todd said:


> What are you talking about? In the movies, people get shot with a handgun and go flying backwards all the time; usually out a window. Get it right, Steve. :smt033


He didn't ask about the Hollywood Atomic Bullet*, but only about round-nosed and flat-nosed ones.
How can he expect to knock somebody down, if he uses the wrong bullet?

*The "Hollywood Atomic Bullet" is actually made in Culver City and, occasionally, Burbank.


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Shot placement is King, Penetration is Queen, and everything else is Angels dancing on the head of a pin.:smt033


----------



## unpecador (May 9, 2008)

Click here if you're bored


----------



## Wyatt (Jan 29, 2008)

Well, I was bored. I like those guys. That test should put the "myth" to rest.

Interesting at the end of the vid when they show how the old movies had it right.

One thing though that I think is a flaw in their reasoning is the "equal and opposite" deal. While yes I understand the physics, it doesn't take into account the fact that the shooter is braced for the forces while the target is not. Like on the school yard if you went up to a kid and surprised him with a shove, he'd go flying but it wouldn't send you flying backwards. But maybe that's what they should start doing in the movies - have the target fly backwards through a window and the shooter fly backwards off a bridge. :anim_lol:


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

Poor Buster! He don't get no respect!:gib:


----------



## Growler67 (Sep 8, 2008)

As stated earlier, "crumpled down".

There's more fake in Hollyweird than just b00bs.


----------



## unpecador (May 9, 2008)

Growler67 said:


> There's more fake in Hollyweird than just b00bs.


I don't have a problem with a woman having fake boobs.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

unpecador said:


> I don't have a problem with a woman having fake boobs.


Lift kits are great after a couple of kids are out the shoot. Kinda gets the blood flowing again. The little lady is running at just over 55 and they still look GREAT!:smt047 That was the second best thing we ever did. The best thing we ever did was get my plumbing fixed. I like being an RV!:supz:


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Um, guys...can we go back to "knockdown power" now?
OK, so mostly-metal "Buster" was hit with a 50-caliber bullet at very close range, and it knocked him off of his steel perch. So what?
If "Buster" had been a real, live man, his muscles and skeleton would've supported him reactively. After being hit with that 50-caliber bullet, he would've wavered a bit as his body absorbed, and reacted to, the blow. Only after a short time, probably less than a second, would he have crumpled. As the experiment proved, he would not have been "blown off of his feet."
Further, that demonstration says absolutely nothing about being hit with a 230-grain, RN, FP, or hollow-point bullet, even one travelling at about 1,200fps, which couldn't carry anything like the momentum brought along by that huge, fast, 50-caliber slug.
Sorry—there's just no such thing as "knockdown power," when you're using any practical pistol cartridge. And only the best-placed hits will cause a crumple.
Even if you're using Dirty Harry's .44 Magnum.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Baldy said:


> Shot placement is King, Penetration is Queen, and everything else is Angels dancing on the head of a pin.:smt033


That sounds sorta like my sex life!


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

When I hunt giant tree squirrel's with my 7MM Magnum I blow them away! :numbchuck:


----------



## Tuefelhunden (Nov 20, 2006)

Nice TOF. Very nice. :smt082

Tuefelhunden


----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)

Bisley said:


> the only way to drop a human in his tracks is to hit a golf ball sized area at the base of the brain, which immediately switches off all body functions. But that has very little to do with the so-called 'knock-down' power of the round fired.


I've started designing my own targets for defensive shooting practice...

I think the perfect target design is a man silouette, with a vertical line about an inch wide, representing the spine extending from the "belly-button" area of the target, up to the line of the eyes (mid head). At the top, in the head area, the "line" grows to about 4". Kind of a 4" lollipop on a 2.5' stick. (My new "A-zone")

I figure, bullet placement is king... and a bullet placed within the vertebral column, or brain cavity, has the best chance of a 1-shot stop. If you sever or damage the spinal column, you likely take out the legs. The only flaw being, he can still technically shoot back, but he cannot follow you.

The secondary hit zone ("B-zone"), is an area similar to a ISPC A-Zone, representing a heart/lung hit.

Finally, any torso/head hit would score a "C-zone".

For practice, I think hitting this vertical line is much more important. Therefore a 5" group with one bullet directly above the other, but both on the line, is better than a 1" group, placed 3" right of the line...

Comments??? I'll draw one up today.

Jeff


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

JeffWard said:


> I figure, bullet placement is king... and a bullet placed within the vertebral column, or brain cavity, has the best chance of a 1-shot stop. If you sever or damage the spinal column, you likely take out the legs. The only flaw being, he can still technically shoot back, but he cannot follow you.


I agree, but if your going for the spine, penetration comes into play more heavily. The correct 9mm load would probably penetrate to the spine, but a .380 (or smaller) with the very best hollow point ammo, probably would not.

That's the reason I order the Buffalo Bore 100 grain hardcasts for my Ruger LCP. I figure a hit on the spine or pelvic bone will put the most determined drug zombie on the ground, and a hit on any bone may be debilitating enough to give a middle-aged man time to waddle off to safety.

Please post the target, when you get it drawn, so I can steal it. :mrgreen:


----------



## Growler67 (Sep 8, 2008)

JeffWard said:


> I've started designing my own targets for defensive shooting practice...
> 
> I think the perfect target design is a man silouette, with a vertical line about an inch wide, representing the spine extending from the "belly-button" area of the target, up to the line of the eyes (mid head). At the top, in the head area, the "line" grows to about 4". Kind of a 4" lollipop on a 2.5' stick. (My new "A-zone")
> 
> ...


Your concept is generally okay as it's based on hunting targets done the same way. However, the caveat is target presentation. You will not always have a direct head on shot presentation. Basic knowledge of anatomy might prove more helpful, but recall under duress would be the issue. That is generally why LE and Military train for "center mass". It provides the largest target area to place "reaction shots" into. Unlike the hunting practice targets, you will likely not have the same environmental conditions to place SO much effort into the shot.

I think a better option is a black silohette with an 8 inch paper plate taped or stapled to it over the sternum/stomach (not belly) area. From the draw or ready position of choice (or whatever is allowed at your range), raise, allignment, sqeeze and follow-up. What you want to achieve is hits in the white and eventually the smallest groups possible. Do this at different ranges too. The paper plate will cover the vital areas even if (hope it never happens) the bad guys torso is turned to any degree. Cheap, effective and more realistic than the hunters styled. Good concept, not terribly practical.

You asked for feedback. My $0.02 FWIW.


----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)

I teach anatomy as part of the curriculum for my job, and I agree, a target at a 45 degree angle presents a significantly different spinal hit thatn straight on... Put I think the concept of shooting at a verticel line, as opposed to a circle, or square, is also sound...

Especially in the area of double-taps. If I string the doubles a little verically, but keep them in the spine, I'm fine. It teaches my eyes to follow the front sight up the column as it recoils, and as long as your keeping windage correct, a few inches of elevation are acceptable.

In a close-range, "metal-over-meat" sight picture, elevation is the hardest element, windage is easy... It's also easier to shoot "over the gun" in a close quarters scenario.

Visualising the spine on your adversary, and training yourself to shoot it, then doing what you are training to do, should you heaven forbid need it, would seem to be more instictive.

I'll post my 8.5X11 prototype...

Jeff


----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)




----------



## JeffWard (Aug 24, 2007)

One more target I made up for real precision practice...


----------

