A different take on stopping power

questions, comments , film clips and pictures on guns and weapons and HEST.

Moderator: Hitoru

A different take on stopping power

Postby Woodsman » Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:47 pm

Copied from another forum. Good info. (keep in mind this data includes any type of ammunition used.)

This was posted by Greg Ellifritz, TDI Instructor/Staff

Firearm Stopping Power…a different perspective.
I’ve been interested in firearm stopping power for a very long time. I remember reading Handguns magazine back in the late 1980s when Evan Marshall was writing articles about his stopping power studies. When Marshall’s first book came out in 1992, I ordered it immediately, despite the fact that I was a college student and really couldn’t afford its $39 price tag. Over the years I bought all of the rest of Marshall’s books as well as anything else I could find on the subject. I even have a first edition of Gunshot Injuries by Louis Lagarde published in 1915.

Every source I read has different recommendations. Some say Marshall’s data is genius. Some say it is statistically impossible. Some like big heavy bullets. Some like lighter, faster bullets. There isn’t any consensus. The more I read, the more confused I get. One thing I remember reading that made a lot of sense to me was an article by Massad Ayoob. He came out with his own stopping power data around the time Marshall published Handgun Stopping Power. In the article Ayoob took his critics to task. He suggested that if people didn’t believe his data, they should collect their own and do their own analysis. That made sense to me. So that’s just what I did.

Over a 10-year period, I kept track of stopping power results from every shooting I could find. I talked to the participants of gunfights, read police reports, attended autopsies, and scoured the newspapers, magazines, and Internet for any reliable accounts of what happened to the human body when it was shot. I documented all of the data I could; tracking caliber, type of bullet (if known), where the bullet hit and whether or not the person was incapacitated. I also tracked fatalities, noting which bullets were more likely to kill and which were not. It was an exhaustive project, but I’m glad I did it and I’m happy to report the results of my study here.

Before I get to the details, I must give a warning. I don’t have any dog in this fight! I don’t sell ammo. I’m not being paid by any firearm or ammunition manufacturer. I carry a lot of different pistols for self defense. Within the last 2 weeks, I’ve carried a .22 magnum, a .380 auto, a .38spl revolver, 3 different 9mm autos and a .45 auto. I don’t have an axe to grind. If you are happy with your 9mm, I’m happy for you. If you think that everyone should be carrying a .45 (because they don’t make a .46), I’m cool with that too. I 'm just reporting the data. If you don’t like it, take Mr. Ayoob’s advice….do a study of your own.

A few notes on terminology…
Since it was my study, I got to determine the variables and their definitions. Here’s what I looked at:
• Number of people shot
• Number of rounds that hit
• On average, how many rounds did it take for the person to stop his violent action or be incapacitated? For this number, I included hits anywhere on the body.
• What percentage of shooting incidents resulted in fatalities. For this, I included only hits to the head or torso.
• What percentage of people were not incapacitated no matter how many rounds hit them
• Accuracy. What percentage of hits was in the head or torso. I tracked this to check if variations could affect stopping power. For example, if one caliber had a huge percentage of shootings resulting in arm hits, we may expect that the stopping power of that round wouldn’t look as good as a caliber where the majority of rounds hit the head.
• One shot stop percentage- number of incapacitations divided by the number of hits the person took. Like Marshall’s number, I only included hits to the torso or head in this number.
• Percentage of people who were immediately stopped with one hit to the head or torso

Here are the results.

.25ACP-
# of people shot- 68
# of hits- 150
% of hits that were fatal- 25%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.2
% of people who were not incapacitated- 35%
One-shot-stop %- 30%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 62%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 49%

.22 (short, long and long rifle)
# of people shot- 154
# of hits- 213
% of hits that were fatal- 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.38
% of people who were not incapacitated- 31%
One-shot-stop %- 31%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 60%

.32 (both .32 long and .32 acp)
# of people shot- 25
# of hits- 38
% of hits that were fatal- 21%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.52
% of people who were not incapacitated- 40%
One-shot-stop %- 40%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 78%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 72%

.380 ACP
# of people shot- 85
# of hits- 150
% of hits that were fatal- 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.76
% of people who were not incapacitated- 16%
One-shot-stop %- 44%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 62%

.38 Special
# of people shot- 199
# of hits- 373
% of hits that were fatal- 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.87
% of people who were not incapacitated- 17%
One-shot-stop %- 39%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 55%

9mm Luger
# of people shot- 456
# of hits- 1121
% of hits that were fatal- 24%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.45
% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%
One-shot-stop %- 34%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 74%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 47%

.357 (both magnum and Sig)
# of people shot- 105
# of hits- 179
% of hits that were fatal- 34%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.7
% of people who were not incapacitated- 9%
One-shot-stop %- 44%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 81%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 61%

.40 S&W
# of people shot- 188
# of hits- 443
% of hits that were fatal- 25%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.36
% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%
One-shot-stop %- 45%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 76%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 52%

.45 ACP
# of people shot- 209
# of hits- 436
% of hits that were fatal- 29%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 2.08
% of people who were not incapacitated- 14%
One-shot-stop %- 39%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 85%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 51%

.44 Magnum
# of people shot- 24
# of hits- 41
% of hits that were fatal- 26%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.71
% of people who were not incapacitated- 13%
One-shot-stop %- 59%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 88%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 53%

Rifle (all Centerfire)
# of people shot- 126
# of hits- 176
% of hits that were fatal- 68%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.4
% of people who were not incapacitated- 9%
One-shot-stop %- 58%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 81%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 80%




Shotgun (All, but 90% of results were 12 gauge)

# of people shot- 146
# of hits- 178
% of hits that were fatal- 65%
Average number of rounds until incapacitation- 1.22
% of people who were not incapacitated- 12%
One-shot-stop %- 58%
Accuracy (head and torso hits)- 84%
% actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head hit)- 86%

Discussion

I really would have liked to break it down by individual bullet type, but I didn’t have enough data points to reach a level of statistical significance. Getting accurate data on over 1800 shootings was hard work. I couldn’t imagine breaking it down farther than what I did here. I also believe the data for the .25, .32 and .44 magnum should be viewed with suspicion. I simply don’t have enough data (in comparison to the other calibers) to draw an accurate comparison. I reported the data I have, but I really don’t believe that a .32 ACP incapacitates people at a higher rate than the .45 ACP!

One other thing to look at is the 9mm data. A huge number (over half) of 9mm shootings involved ball ammo. I think that skewed the results of the study in a negative manner. One can reasonable expect that FMJ ammo will not stop as well as a state of the art expanding bullet. I personally believe that the 9mm is a better stopper than the numbers here indicate, but you can make that decision for yourself based on the data presented.




Some interesting findings:

I think the most interesting statistic is the percentage of people who stopped with one shot to the torso or head. There wasn’t much variation between calibers. Between the most common defensive calibers (.38, 9mm, .40, and .45) there was a spread of only eight percentage points. No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.

The average number of rounds until incapacitation was also remarkably similar between calibers. All the common defensive calibers required around 2 rounds on average to incapacitate. Something else to look at here is the question of how fast can the rounds be fired out of each gun. The .38spl probably has the slowest rate of fire (long double action revolver trigger pulls and stout recoil in small revolvers) and the fewest rounds fired to get an incapacitation (1.87). Conversely the 9mm can probably be fired fastest of the common calibers and it had the most rounds fired to get an incapacitation (2.45). The .40 (2.36) and the .45 (2.08) split the difference. It is my personal belief that there really isn’t much difference between each of these calibers. It is only the fact that some guns can be fired faster than others that causes the perceived difference in stopping power. If a person takes an average of 5 seconds to stop after being hit, the defender who shoots a lighter recoiling gun can get more hits in that time period. It could be that fewer rounds would have stopped the attacker (given enough time) but the ability to fire more quickly resulted in more hits being put onto the attacker. It may not have anything to do with the stopping power of the round.

Another data piece that leads me to believe that the majority of commonly carried defensive rounds are similar in stopping power is the fact that all four have very similar failure rates. If you look at the percentage of shootings that did not result in incapacitation, the numbers are almost identical. The .38, 9mm, .40, and .45 all had failure rates of between 13% and 17%.

Now compare the numbers of the handgun calibers with the numbers generated by the rifles and shotguns. For me there really isn’t a stopping power debate. All handguns suck! If you want to stop someone, use a rifle or shotgun!

What matters even more than caliber is shot placement. Across all calibers, if you break down the incapacitations based on where the bullet hit you will see some useful information.

Head shots = 75% immediate incapacitation
Torso shots = 41% immediate incapacitation
Extremity shots (arms and legs) = 14% immediate incapacitation.

No matter which caliber you use, you have to hit something important in order to stop someone!

Conclusion

This study took me a long time and a lot of effort to complete. Despite the work it took, I'm glad I did it. The results I got from the study lead me to believe that there really isn't that much difference between most defensive handgun rounds and calibers. None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s. I've stopped worrying about trying to find the “ultimate” bullet. There isn't one. And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough “stopping power”. Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.

Take a look at the data. I hope it helps you decide what weapon to carry. No matter which gun you choose, pick one that is reliable and train with it until you can get fast accurate hits. Nothing beyond that really matters!






A "little" about Greg...

Greg Ellifritz is a 16-year veteran police officer, spending the last 11 years as the fulltime tactical training officer for his central Ohio agency. In that position, he is responsible for developing and instructing all of the in-service training for a 57-officer police department. Prior to his training position, he served as patrol officer, bike patrol officer, precision marksman, and field training officer for his agency.

He has been an active instructor for the Tactical Defense Institute since 2001 and a lead instructor for TDI’s ground fighting, knife fighting, impact weapons, active shooter, and extreme close quarters shooting classes.

Greg holds instructor, master instructor, or armorer certifications in more than 75 different weapons systems, defensive tactics programs, and law enforcement specialty areas. In addition to these instructor certifications, Greg has trained with most of the leading firearms and edged weapons instructors in the country.

Greg has been an adjunct instructor for the Ohio Peace Officer’s Training Academy, teaching firearms, defensive tactics, bike patrol, knife defense and physical fitness topics. He has taught firearms and self defense classes at the national and international level through the International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors, The American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers and Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police. He has a Master’s degree in Public Policy and Management and has written for several publications including: ‘The Firearms Instructor”, “Ohio Police Chief”, “Combat Handguns”, “Concealed Carry Magazine” and “The Journal of the American Women’s Self Defense Association”.
Life is short. Eat, Drink & Be Merry!
User avatar
Woodsman
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 7429
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:59 pm
Location: Enchanted forests

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby RYP » Sat Jun 04, 2011 4:15 am

Where is "Mack Truck"?
User avatar
RYP
Ownerus Websiteus Authorus
 
Posts: 27774
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:42 am

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby Wakaw101 » Sat Jun 04, 2011 10:50 am

I need to break out the links to Box of Truth as I think it would go very nicely with this stopping power post!
User avatar
Wakaw101
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:03 pm
Location: USA

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby Woodsman » Sat Jun 04, 2011 11:52 am

RYP wrote:Where is "Mack Truck"?


At 2,000 caliber + that doesn't fit in the small arms category. ;-)
Life is short. Eat, Drink & Be Merry!
User avatar
Woodsman
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 7429
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 10:59 pm
Location: Enchanted forests

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby 8mtal » Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Interesting that the kill shots of centerfire rifles are way better than pistolas,even shotgun: maybe that says something about sight-radius vs point & shoot, guess i'll leave the mini-14/bull-pup close.

Any current info on the 5.7mm...like the looks and breakdown of the PS 90
User avatar
8mtal
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 3:34 pm
Location: Texas

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby hso » Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:58 am

If the on-target energies of the projectile were added to the information you'd see that centerfire rifle bullets are putting far far more energy and momentum on target than even energetic pistol rounds. That helps explain the "success" rates of centerfire rifle rounds over pistols. The fact that not all that energy stays in the target due to shooting through only goes to show that the percentage that is lost to the target is still greater than pistol rounds.
hso
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:31 am

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby hso » Thu Jun 16, 2011 3:26 pm

Forgot to include this.

Hornady provides a ballistics resource that you can use to find out what the energy of a bullet will be at different distances from the barrel. That will allow you to make comparisons of the energy available to completely or partially impart to the target by different bullets out of different firearms. Simple energy comparisons can then be made between the available energy say of a 240 gr .44 mag out of a 4 inch revolver barrel vs. a 55gr .223 bullet out of a 16 inch AR-15. http://www.hornady.com/ballistics-resource

This site provides just quick and dirty tables. http://www.ballistics101.com/45_acp.php
hso
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:31 am

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby Wakaw101 » Sat Jun 18, 2011 11:14 am

hso wrote:Forgot to include this.

Hornady provides a ballistics resource that you can use to find out what the energy of a bullet will be at different distances from the barrel. That will allow you to make comparisons of the energy available to completely or partially impart to the target by different bullets out of different firearms. Simple energy comparisons can then be made between the available energy say of a 240 gr .44 mag out of a 4 inch revolver barrel vs. a 55gr .223 bullet out of a 16 inch AR-15. http://www.hornady.com/ballistics-resource

This site provides just quick and dirty tables. http://www.ballistics101.com/45_acp.php
Hornady builds some great ammunition. I'd run their stuff exclusively if it wasn't so expensive
User avatar
Wakaw101
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:03 pm
Location: USA

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby cowboycraig » Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:18 pm

The 9mm with 456 people shot... wonder if that is because it is the "gangster #1" weapon?
If that is the case maybe shooting it sideways doesn't screw up accuracy as much as I thought. Although the study does not state if the person shot, was who was intended.

CC
cowboycraig
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:26 pm

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby zuluninja » Tue Jun 21, 2011 3:53 pm

I really like this line: "The more I read, the more confused I get." Great post! Carry what you like, what you feel comfy with, what you have practiced with...
zuluninja
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 2:49 pm
Location: south of Canada, North of Cuba

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby lok8 » Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:13 am

Re: 9mm & .40
Thats the LEO round of choice, 9mm yesterday and transitioning into .40 pretty much across the board recently. (i'm no professional)

Just go to the range where your locals qualify and you'll see what I mean, if you haven't already. ND,ND,ND. A cruiser almost always takes a hit where I'm from.

RE: site radius

1st rule of gunfights- bring a rifle

2nd- bring all your friends w/ their rifles
Stay behind. don't follow.
User avatar
lok8
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 12:59 pm
Location: is relative.

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby RYP » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:40 pm

he forgot the mention the obvious. Handguns were never meant to "stop" people. They were created as sporting weapons and then carried by officers who at best could use them for a coup de grace after a sloppy execution. Even the 9mm parabellum was a "humanitarian" round. If you want to stop someone you have to use either a) put an object with mass proportionate to their weight and velocity or b) sever the nerve or muscle system used to propel them or c) use the person's brain and motivation to change his initial plan (Stop...or I will shoot) of d) use an artificial method that includes both like a grenade. large shotgun blast or large office safe dropped from ten stories (the Wiley Coyote method).

But dicking around with semi automatic handguns as a way to stop a 200 lb person from attacking you...nope.
User avatar
RYP
Ownerus Websiteus Authorus
 
Posts: 27774
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:42 am

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby nowonmai » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:00 pm

Yeah right.
User avatar
nowonmai
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 11542
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:52 pm

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby Hitoru » Mon Jul 04, 2011 11:51 pm

nowonmai wrote:Yeah right.


No doubt.


"But dicking around with semi automatic handguns as a way to stop a 200 lb person from attacking you...nope."

.45 gunna put your dick in the dirt.
What are you? Some short sighted trigger puller? - RR3 .
Mr.wRong.
User avatar
Hitoru
Arbol Basura
 
Posts: 3549
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:49 pm
Location: Tejas

Re: A different take on stopping power

Postby diamondcutter13 » Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:46 am

Pistols are for fighting your way back to the rifle you never should have dropped in the first place.

The origin of any weapon is conflict, not sport. Pistols were designed from the very beginning as a backup to primary weapons, officers with swords and mounted troops used them as a one-handed back up to their primary (sword, lance etc) and to give them some stand-off range in close combat. Later in the modern age military they would back up a rifle but plenty of armed professionals have only a pistol as their primary weapon. Most professional western organizations carrying only pistols (LEOs mostly) have chosen 9mm or .40.

The definition of "stopping power" is the starting point of an discussion with as many different views by "experts" as there are calibers on the market. Does stop mean:
kill?
disable?
physically drop?
immobilize?
push back 10' like in the movies?
stop the attacker from using his hands or weapon anymore as he falls?

Many of these desired outcomes are physically impossible even with rifle calibers. They toughest man on earth quickly drops like a rock when a bullet disrupts his upper spine, mass has nothing to do with it. If you fail to disconnect the central nevous systom with a solid hit you fail to prevent the target from responding in some manner. Otherwise he is essentially bleeding to death more or less quickly depending on the size of the hole(s). An extremity hit with a .45, 9mm, or 7.62mm all fails to "stop" in any respect. Read about why some of our Medal of Honor or VC winners did not bother to stop after being hit several times.

The best idea IMHO is to generally treat it as a training issue, if a pistol is all you have you better be able to hit your target (that CNS column hopefully) within the range the weapon is good for. A gunfight is a bad time to figure out you can't shoot or the .44 desert eagle you bought is too much gun for you.
Tacuero ceruisa, vigilate hoc
User avatar
diamondcutter13
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:14 am
Location: The Great White North, Loyalist Township.

Next

Return to Guns, Knives, Gear, Tech and ....STUFF!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests