I was enjoying the beautiful Friday afternoon and I daydreamed about my first whitetail deer I took with a hand gun. I used a 357 Magnum Ruger Blackhawk 6.5-inch barrel and was shooting Remington 158-grain cup-and-core JHP. I'm not going to furnish details beyond reporting the kill was made at not more than three yards and I will never hunt whitetail with this combination again. The daydream became a discussion with myself as to why my first shot, placed precisely where I intended on an animal that was unaware I existed, did not stop the buck in its tracks. And I got to thinking about that place in mythology - "stopping power" - as it pertains to human beings.

Testing for "stopping power" in ballistic gel is not really testing and quantifying stopping power. Probably the best way to test would be to shoot human beings - that is, testing on what is the tested projectile's intended target. I do not agree with using human beings as test medium, not only because we have rules and taboos against it, but also because testing on human beings has a major flaw. Human beings will be aware they have been shot. Awareness sometimes causes what I have heard called "psychological stop" - that is, the person shot stops his antisocial actions or "shorts out" mentally and/or emotionally because he knows what has happened to him.

A possibly superior test medium would be a game mammal, about the same size as the average human being, that is or can be hunted regularly and often. The obvious game animal is whitetail deer. Average live weight is similar to a slightly lighter than average person. Whitetail are ubiquitous, and hunted every year by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of handgun hunters. Handgun whitetail hunters almost always take their shots under 50 yards. My own whitetail kills with handguns average perhaps 15 yards. Whitetails will not recognize or understand that they have been shot. There will be no "psychological stops." Yeah, I understand that blood pressure and many other factors affect stopping power and are not predictable beyond being aware they exist. These variables also exist for human beings.

Whitetail stops will be actual actual physical stops. Not understanding what is happening to them may compensate for their slightly lower body weight. So such testing with reasonably well kept records will provide a significantly closer to accurate evaluation of stopping power of [tested] bullet. I specifically use the word "bullet" because that is what achieves the physical stop. It makes no difference how a given bullet achieves a given velocity. Bullet shape, configuration, construction, speed at impact, and location and vector?? (correct word??) of impact are the only factors to quantify. Because of whitetails' ubiquity, perhaps five years of recording will yield valid information on efficacy or suitability of specifically tested bullets.

I suspect that if my hypothesis is worthwhile to test, what would be the first thing in the handgun deer hunter's mind is whether, on its face, the cartridge (a short form of putting together a specific combination to propel bullet to test at a known speed - I think) to test is one the hunter believes is unsuited to use to hunt whitetail deer. Is a 115-grain 9x19 mm bonded truncated JHP at muzzle velocity of 1100 fps a bullet with which you feel comfortable to hunt whitetail? What about your EDC snubnose 38 Special? And on, and on.

Feral hog hunting may be at least as valid a test medium as whitetail deer. Since I don't hunt hogs, I cannot comment further.

Just some thoughts.

What is a stop

That is the first question you need to answer.

quote:

The daydream became a discussion with myself as to why my first shot, placed precisely where I intended on an animal that was unaware I existed, did not stop the buck in its tracks.

"The daydream became a discussion with myself as to why my first shot, placed precisely where I intended on an animal that was unaware I existed, did not stop the buck in its tracks." Extrapolate the meaning, however you might interpret it, to human beings. You'll be as close as such an imprecise word in context can be. That's why I refer to it as a hypothesis.

Hope this makes my post more clear rather than less.

Central nerviest system disconnect.

Destroy the brain, cut destroy the spinal cored. From the middle of the shoulders forward.

Then one can expect Drop right there stops.

Cut destroy the spinal cord to far back and one leaves the animals frontend still mobile.

Other then a CNS disconnect one my or may not get "A STOP"

I seen why to many "dead" but did not know it critters move to know other wises.

If you want to translate this to two legged predators.

If they still have the brain power and the ability to use one or the other arm they still remain a threat if they have a weapon they can use and that can reach you.

N, I am still not sure what you are talking about. Animals unless shot in the brain (CNS) may or may not die from loss of blood. They will run until they cannot run any more. I do not know where you were aiming, but if it was a heart/lung shot then that illustrates my point. The animal, if shot in the correct place, will die EVENTUALLY, guaranteed. That is what hunters want! When dealing with a human or animal threat to one's life, nothing short of a CNS shot is guaranteed to succeed. That is why DG are dangerous! They will try to remove the perceived threat!
Not sure what the issue is. It is certainly true that some folks, when shot in the hand with a 22 lr. will cease and desist, but this is not a guarantee.
Peter

FWIW goats were the test subjects when animal testing was still conducted. They come closest to human bone and flesh densities. I think the last series was in the late 70s or thereabouts but I can't find it on the net anymore. That test was wide ranging with many calibers and many intentionally misplaced shots to investigate wounding effects. Very cruel but the evaluation was as close to real life as could be had.

Pssst, you didn't get this from me.

http://guninstructor.net/Strasborg_Tests.pdf

A very scientific and well done study. I would like to see it done with our modern loads.

Additional information regarding that first handgun deer.

1. First shot hit a cervical vertebra immediately forward of right shoulder blade, animal facing right. Autopsy verified I hit precisely where I aimed. At three yards with a walking animal that was feeding as it walked, it was not challenging to hit where I aimed.

2. Animal dropped like a stone, then jumped up. I was astonished. My second shot missed everything. Shot taken at same distance.

3. Third shot, again taken at same distance, hit high lung on right side, again precisely where I aimed. Animal dropped, trying frantically to regain its feet. It could not. It was clearly down. Final shot was right side of head between right eye and right ear.
***
First bullet cracked the vertebra (can no longer recall which cervical vertebra) and would have been fatal eventually. Remington 158-grain JHP had flattened to about the size of a half-dollar.

Third shot penetrated rib cage, then high into right lung less than one inch. It, too, was severely flattened. It, too, would have been fatal eventually. Fourth bullet I ignored for discovering why things had almost gone terribly wrong.
***
Merely hitting central nervous system wasn't the sure "stopper" I anticipated. Make no mistaken impression. That first shot that severely cracked a cervical vertebra was a killing shot. It just was not a stopping shot.

The problem you had was with the bullet. Too higher striking velocity at short range with bullet flattening and not penetrating.
I have shot a few feral goats and a couple of red deer at close range with a 455 Webley I owned some yeas ago. Using 250 grain cast projectiles at around 650fps MV these animals all dropped okay with full penetration through shoulders, lungs or head. Also shot an injured cattle beast at a few feet in the head with same bullet, full penetration and instant drop.

The US Army did some interesting trials when looking for a handgun to replace the poor performing 38 Long Colt (I think it was) back in the early 1900's. They shot cattle beasts in the Chicago stockyards with a variety of pistol cartridges and eventually chose the Colt 45 Auto. The 455 Colt did as well as the Auto but the other 9mm and 38s with the bullets of the day performed rather poorly. The beasts were shot in the abdomen and the effects noted. With the 45 cals the beasts usually dropped or showed great distress after 3 shots but with the lesser calibres the beasts were often still standing after taking 10 shots, at which point they were dispatched humanely if you could call it humane after being shot in the guts 10 times.

quote:

Originally posted by eagle27:
The problem you had was with the bullet. Too higher striking velocity at short range with bullet flattening and not penetrating. . . .

While we agree on this, would not nearly all self-defense confrontations, as non-LEO, also occur at extremely close range? Until that daydreaming I would have had no doubt regarding the capability of a "full power" 357 Magnum shooting 158-grain JHP regardless of barrel length, regardless of how old the JHP's technology - so long as it hit anywhere on the upper spine. And I do consider a cup-and-core bullet to be old technology.
***
Parenthetically, one unexpected result within the Thompson-LaGarde tests (1904 I believe) was the excellent performance by the Luger (not yet referred to as P-08) and M-96 Mauser shooting 7.62 Luger and Mauser respectively. The reason for this performance was attributed to these small bullets hitting at great velocity, penetrating to cause secondary missiles by way of shattering bones. This result occurred most emphatically when shots were directed at pelvis, and sternum/thoracic spine.

quote:

the Thompson-LaGarde tests

Those tests where totally unscientific was the totally base on what the observers thought the reaction was.

Bullets designed to be the most effective on two legged predators are not always the best for hunting.

We have some of the best bullets ever available for the use against two legged predators ever.

We also have bullets the are great hunting bullets.

The two can over lap in some situations and work well but used in the wrong situation they can fail.

No matter how extensive the testing is they can never duplicate all the situations one can run into when hunting or self defense.

All these test when done right the results are base on the average.

At 10 feet at the average velocity at 175 pounds shot at this angle hitting this spot or what ever the perimeters are.

Well shots in the field hardly ever match the average.

Lets get this down to truth of general math. The Taylor K.O formula is this.Multiplying calibre by bullet weight by velocity + dividing by 7000.
Let us use the the .44 mag. as an example. (.429x240x1250/7000) That would give you a Taylor Knock Out Formula of 18.4. Of course there are always detractors on the subject claiming velocity etc. as a deterent. However IOP math never lies.

The above is real but some find theoretical.For eyes only truth conformation,I have used soaked phone books(when we had them) stacked end to end to show the true performance of a given round.I/E depth of penetration + bullet deformation/expansion,etc.The soaked phone books simulate human tissue( because that is really what we're talking about);I have on occasion installed beef bones in the books for obvious reasons.

quote:

The soaked phone books simulate human tissue( because that is really what we're talking about

The thread started about shooting deer.

Thoroughly soaked paper is a fairly good media.

The trouble with soaked paper one cannot duplicate the consistently from test to test.

It is too easy to get hard spots

Plain water gives about the same results.

Water and soaked paper are close but tend to cause a little more expansion and a little less penetration.

10% ballistic gelatin has become the standard.

For hunting I would choose bullets the tend to give more then 16 inches of penetration in 10% gel.

Those that give less are more suited for use against two legged predators but there is a lot of cross over room.

Just a little story the family and myself were in a restaurant when a man walked in. He was huge well over 6 foot in the 350lb range, arms the size of my thighs all muscle.

Covered in gang and prison tats I am sure he spent he a lot of time in the prison weight room.

I though to my self I wish I had my 44mag with my 315 hard cast bear loads instead of my 40S@W and its 165gr Golden sabers.

We all sat and had a good time eating. but the thought crossed my mine if he would have cause trouble.

He would take a lot of stopping.

I struggle to understand what makes a "stopper round" since practical experience has shown too much variation to come to a final conclusion.

Shortly after Dirty Harry made his debut, I shot a feral goat in the chest with a .44 Magnum, 240 grain hollow point. I immediately noticed that it wasn't flung off it's hooves and slammed into the tree trunk behind him. I then determined that it seemed content to resume feeding - oblivious to the Hollywood hype. Several rounds later, it lay down and expired.

Fast forward several decades, I shot a smallish feral pig with a .357 Magnum 158 grain soft points. It took the first round in the chest, charged and slammed into the side of the trap panel, backed off and made a lap or two around the enclosure, took another (surely) fatal round to the chest, charged again and slammed into the hog wire a few feet from my exposed shins - repeat. Made a believer of me - anything not a CNS penetration is NOT a stopper.

quote:

Originally posted by Arniet:
Pssst, you didn't get this from me.

http://guninstructor.net/Strasborg_Tests.pdf

A very scientific and well done study. I would like to see it done with our modern loads.

Thanks!

#1 If confronted with 'Danger Close NOW', my .380 peashooter always in my pocket has a LOT more stopping power that quad 50's back in the truck.

#2: The purpose of a handgun is to give you the ability to fight your way to a rifle (or quad 50's)

#3: I go out of my way to avoid ever having to prove #1 or #2

The British Army after WWII did a "Show And Tell" on stopping power in that it attempted to question those that had shot an enemy and their opinion of the stopping power of the weapon used.

At this time we British had the 9mm Brownin High Power, the .380 Mk II cartridge (that's the old .38 S & W with a 178 grain FMJ bullet at about 630 fps), the .455 Webley Mk VI cartridge (a 265 grain FMJ at about 630 fps.

The conclusions were in fact entirely what logic would actually have predicted. The respondents stated that what THEY had used was the weapon they judged had the best stopping power.

Why logic? Simply those soldiers that answered the survey were alive. Those soldiers whose weapon didn't work were dead. So these surveys, for that reason, are inherently flawed.

I did know a man whose friend had shot Germans in WWI. (My father's MD in fact. With whom my father had been sat school). Anyway this friend on my father's MD had spent a lot of WWI in trench raids. He was of the opinion that .380 ACP was a better stopper than 9mm Parabellum as the .380 ACP stayed in the body and didn't pass through.

Now whether that was actually the reason why may not be. It may be that the .380 ACP not passing through caused bone fragments that then acted like a modern JHP in that these acted as secondary projectiles to cut arteries and shred lungs. Who knows?

However what we British eventually decided was the best stopping power was a HEAVY bullet at HIGH velocity but that if this couldn't be achieved then it was better to choose speed in preference over weight.

quote:

The British Army after WWII did a "Show And Tell" on stopping power

Do we mean effectiveness? And presumably by effectiveness we mean rendering the adversary "hors de combat".
Obviously this depends in large part on bullet placement, and, whether the projectile had to pass through any obstacles.
"Hors de combat" depends to a certain extent on the determination of the adversary (or animal).
Certainly, anecdotally, there is plenty of evidence on the civilian front, that many shootings are not fatal, and don't even prevent someone from leaving the scene or even driving themselves to the hospital! Most police shootings are non fatal, even including multiple hits (somewhere) on the target.
The real issue is the one about obstacles. A 380 might work fine on a soft target 8 feet away, but if there was an intervening windshield, the results would certainly be different. I believe that was one of the reasons why the 40 S&W was chosen. The 9mm with a lighter bullet was deflected by the windshield, whereas the heavier 40 caliber penetrated.
So, the "stopping power" debate IS effected by the issue of obstacles ie. walls, doors, clothes, windshields etc.
Peter

You shot the deer with a bullet which was too fragile to do the job. Why you didn't shoot him in the heart remains a question or the skull? Get better bullets. The .357 Mag with decent bullets will kill any deer that walks with good shot placement.

Enfield,although the 38 S+W was not that impressive,I would not have wanted to be shot by one. The loaded round was a .38 200G. bullet. I have the Hensley + Gibbs moulding blocks for the same + beau coup brass, (moot point now as that lend-lease S+W was another of the ones that the thieves stole).The Germans were so concerned at its effectiveness that they were ordered to shoot on sight any RAF pilot that was using lead bullets.

Re: the Strasbourg tests. Pretty impressive how well Glasers did, but I wonder if they would have failed miserably if they had to shoot thru some kind of barrier first?

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Re: the Strasbourg tests. Pretty impressive how well Glasers did, but I wonder if they would have failed miserably if they had to shoot thru some kind of barrier first?

Pre-fragmented projectiles like the Glaser do not handle barriers very well.

A stopper round is one of sufficient power, weight and bullet design to reach vitals after going through clothing if nessesary. It will only LIKELY be an immediate stopper if CNS if struck or causes enough trauma of tissue to temporarily stop the actions of the aggressor and more shots may then be needed to finish the job. PROPER BULLET PLACEMENT always beats caliber and power, in other words one must TRAIN OFTEN with a weapon used for personal defense if you really want to win the battle. Just my opinion but I have a background in LE and have seen many shootings and studied many more.

Ive seen small Texas Hill country deer, Africas duiker run up to half mile shot with all manor of rifles, even big bores..Stopping power of pistols is weak for sure, and like animals it depends on so many factors...According to police reports going back many years the 357 is number one, the 9mm is no. 2 according to Marshall and Sanow in Handgun stopping power, some even challenge that, but police reports are pretty damn accurate IMO..

Ive seen the 45 ACP fail miserably on several occasions..and its the holy grail of the citizen clan of gun scribes..

For self defense I like a Browning High Power, mostly because it holds a truck load of ammo and running out of ammo in a gunfight is terror personified IMO...I still have that pistol..

but like most things its where you stick the bullet that counts most.

This guy goes to a lot of trouble using fruit and meat to simulate a human torso to check bullet performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTTDgZZZFa0

Anyone using a pistol or a bow has no qualifying credibility talking about stopping power.

I'll buy that Will..your spot on..

Agree with Will. Most of the folks on this forum, which seems to me to really be a big-game forum, know FAR more about "stopping power" and anatomy than most of the fools posting on various internet forums that discuss handgun "stopping power."

Y'all know what I'm talking about, so I hardly think that I need to elaborate.

quote:

Originally posted by Greg K:
This guy goes to a lot of trouble using fruit and meat to simulate a human torso to check bullet performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTTDgZZZFa0

Probably the best comparison I’ve seen, and yes the .40 is more effective and I have owned .40’s. However, I feel with the newer critical defense ammo available for the 9mm, the 9 is a very effective personal defense round.

stopping power is a mathematical calculation, just because it stops one animal in its tracks does not mean if it will stop another.
Death comes from a lack of blood to the brain, like a knock out in fighting...lights go out.
Every animal acts differently depending on the hit, if you severe the the spinal cord near the brain or destroy the brain, that is a lights out. A shot to the heart sometimes drops them but they also can run 100's of yards, heart lung can also stop them but I have shot several deer and most run for distances of up to 100 yards or less.
You can stop any animal with a properly placed shot to structural parts like the spine or slow them up by shots to the shoulders or hips
Generally shot placement is more critical than the mathematical calculation of stopping power.
Again bullet type is important assuming it is capable of proper penetration.

It is indeed a mathematical formula as I described earlier on this post. Scroll back to 5/19/18.This is John Taylor's formula + I for one believe it.I have always believed that math is the only real truth.

Stopping power is simple, don't make a big deal out of it..It is a bullet that stopped further function of the perps body..Has nothing to do with killing effect...

Pound for pound I believe animals are tougher and in better physical condition than people and therefore can be harder to kill in most instances, but a lot depends on adrenaline..

a lighter faster bullet would probably put that deer down quickly..What bothers me is the deer could function after a spine shot regardless of penetration, something is wrong with that scenario...Ive never seen a spine shot fail to knock an animal down for the count and get up regardless of the stated damage..Even chipping a vertabre has always been a non functional animal..

Norman,
Never walk in the big bend park or any where between the Rio and Interstate 10 without a pistol these days anyway, the stuff that's going on in that area is plump scary..Thats my home and I even started carry a rifle on my horse in the mid 70s as pack trains of Marijuana were crossing weekly, and its oh so much worse these days..My son Richard had a serious deal down there on a fishing trip that could have ended up real bad.....

I ofter hear that bullet placement is all that counts, a small caliber properly placed is deadlier than a big bullet in the gut for instance..We are all hammered with that scenario form birth, its become a given, Why? because someone coined the term and it makes since,mostly to the uninitiated..

So I don't believe that a 22 or 380 lung shot is as deadly as a 44 magnum gut shot in most cases or a heart shot .243 in some cases is as deadly as a 375 H&H in the lungs perhaps..Its not a given its a possiblility in either case, but when it comes to knock down stop'em, I'll take a 44 mag or a .375 in either case and take my chances..That said there is merit to both questions, the results however can conflict at times with humans and creatures of the wild,

Ammo and Ballistics Edition 6 has a great article about stopping power on human assailants.

It includes pictures of bullets taken from autopsies on suspects.

The author (forgot his name) differentiates between killing and stopping.

Bottom line is hit them with as heavy a quick expanding bullet as fast as you can and as often as you can. And, of course, you have to be able to hit the target at the range you are shooting.

The real advantage of the heavier calibers is that the shock of being hit, will physically knock down or slow the assailant giving you time for followup shots.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by BuffHunter63:
Ammo and Ballistics Edition 6 has a great article about stopping power on human assailants.

It includes pictures of bullets taken from autopsies on suspects.

The author (forgot his name) differentiates between killing and stopping.

Bottom line is hit them with as heavy a quick expanding bullet as fast as you can and as often as you can. And, of course, you have to be able to hit the target at the range you are shooting.

The real advantage of the heavier calibers is that the shock of being hit, will physically knock down or slow the assailant giving you time for followup shots.

BH63

Neither killing nor stopping, in people or wild animals, results from a generality. It results, as most on Saeed's site know, from any one of a number of very specific injuries, such as massive bleeding, incapacitation of most or even all of the CNS, inacapacitation of certain parts of the body, etc.

Almost no heavier calibers will physically knock down ANYTHING, unless we're talking about moving mice or even chihuahuas around a playing field with a .416 Rigbys.

Penetration or expansion, or both, often affect what kind of wound one inflicts upon the target, but is the ACTUAL wound that has the effect, not some generality about bullets or the general location of the POA.

Again, most of the users of this site know this. Those who don't should read rather than post.

I’ve seen whitetails double-lunged with a 270 run a couple hundred yards. I don’t think there’s a human ever born that could do that.

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:
I’ve seen whitetails double-lunged with a 270 run a couple hundred yards. I don’t think there’s a human ever born that could do that.

+1

I have seen an impala with 3 30/06 180 grain Barnes tsx and 2 470 finally killed with a knife to brain/spine. Animals are remarkably tough and humans are punny.

Mike

Yes indeed,they're tougher than I am for sure.I hunted with an old gent years ago that would always take his time before making a shot.
He was watching through the scope + waiting for the deer to exhale then fire.They don't run so far with no air in the lungs. He was right.