Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: flat nosed bullets
theBird    6/29/2008 12:49:49 PM
I was reading a book from the late Jim Cirillo about how he found the best stopping power came from wadcutter rounds, because unlike round nosed bullets they actually destroyed tissue, instead of simply parting it. While wadcutters don't load well into an auto-loader, there are semi-wad cutters such as the the .40 S&W and the 10 mm auto, which load fine. When limited to FMJ only ammo, it seems like these semi-wadcutter type rounds would offer the best stopping power. Would a military handgun in 40 S&W or 10 mm auto or even .357 sig work?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
RockyMTNClimber    Wadcutters   6/29/2008 2:16:22 PM
There once was a school of thought that wad cutters were the best type of round in the .38 spec cartridge. Allot of development has taken place since those days. Modern loads with rapid expansion bullets are performing much better at the modest velicity of the old .38 and the older guns are being replaced with ones capable of handling the +P pressure loads of  modern Hydro-Shok, Gold-Dot, Corbon type bullets. Again improving performance. The Wad-Cutter and Semi-Wad Cutter are out dated IMV. No modern tactical training I am aware of would emphasize use of a wad-cutter profile and only a few hang on to the LSWCHP (Lead Semi-Wad Cutter Hollow Point) as a good defensive round.
 
Re: the .40 S&W as a military round. FMJ is not the best bullet option but it is required by treaty, that said I believe a moderately larger bore/ frontal area can't help but improve performance over the 9mm (.354 diameter). .45 is better, 10mm is probably not in the running as it's higher power and correspondingly larger overall size make it less suitable for petite hands to handle (lots of lady soldiers shooting guns at bad people these days).
 
Wad-Cutters are good for what the name implies, shooting paper.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
 
PS: lots of old time target shooters / reloaders would be suprised to hear that Wad-Cutters don't work in semi auto pistols.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier       6/29/2008 7:25:58 PM
The original military FMJ load for 9x19, way back circa-WW1 and earlier, was a conical bullet that supposedly had increased tissue damage kind of like a semi-wadcutter 40 cal load.
 
40 cal or 10mm would work as a military loading, in theory, but as was noted 10mm is probably out of the running right off the bat due to recoil.  (Or you download the catridge to reduce recoil, but then the case is just kind of wasted bulk to do what 40S&W does, like the road the FBI went down.)
 
There are some 40S&W pistols out there in military service with SOF units, but they've had issues since adoption owing to the recoil impulse of the round.
 
Quote    Reply

theBird       6/30/2008 4:26:07 PM

BTW, The wadcutters Cirillo was using were cylinders with a grove cut across the fact (to allow for a sort of peeling in two expansion), as opposed to usual target shooting wadcutters.

 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber       6/30/2008 4:39:49 PM

BTW, The wadcutters Cirillo was using were cylinders with a grove cut across the fact (to allow for a sort of peeling in two expansion), as opposed to usual target shooting wadcutters.



Cutting the top of a wad-cutter would just take a bad design and make it no more effective. You simply don't have enough velocity to get it to peel. Modern bullets (like I mentioned above) are very effective at typical combat distances they are designed to be used in. Police Dep'ts and Gov't agencies don't use lead bullets anymore for good reason.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       6/30/2008 5:08:27 PM
Truncated cones are fashionable now...maybe not as good as an explosive JHP, but for Geneva Convention purposes it might have something to offer over the old round nose, no?  As for SWC/WS loadings, likewise they might add punch.  I assume an old style lead or solid bullet, even if designed for maximum wounding/stopping/killing, cannot contravene Geneva?  A wide meplat and some kind of hollow could both cut body armor and provide max injury to flesh.  A (soft) +lead gas check round? 
 
Throated race guns and the better-adjusted stock autos will feed ashtrays let alone SWCs, but not all autos will do so.  YMMV even from piece to piece.  

Keep in mind that Cirillo was typically operating at short range with I believe a snubby 2/12" or 3" barrel.  With the technology of the time, it is not clear that he did himself badly.  Of course he had the skill and nerve to make hits under combat conditions.  Equally, he chose and used hardware according to his notions of what worked (unless in fact his preferred pistols were disallowed him), so I don't think he would have done something ineffective more than once.
 
Me, I would look into these nylon Zappers or whatever they were...the average gunfight takes place at 7 yards and I never expect to have to use a pistol outside of half that.
 
Me, .44 Spl. or a Mag shooting Specials, I think.   If Cirillo was using bullets cut across the front that is a dum-dum which are IIRC nasty and effective.
 
Quote    Reply

theBird       7/1/2008 12:43:32 PM
The main problem Cirillo had with hollowpoints is that after expanding they essentially became bigger round nosed bullets, parting tissue instead of destroying it.  Of course for military rounds the question is moot as only fmj's are allowed.
 
For military loads, if 10 mm auto has too much recoil, what about .357 sig?  It has the semi-wadcutter profile for good fmj use, as well as high velocity against armored insurgents or shooting through vehicles and what not.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier       7/1/2008 1:04:56 PM

I assume an old style lead or solid bullet, even if designed for maximum wounding/stopping/killing, cannot contravene Geneva?  A wide meplat and some kind of hollow could both cut body armor and provide max injury to flesh.  A (soft) +lead gas check round? 
 
 


In terms of laws of land warfare and such, the prevailing opinion seems to be that anything that has a full metal jacket on it to begin with is Hague/Geneva compliant, even if it is absolutely designed to cause increased damage and suffering.  On the other hand, a really strict interpretation of the verbage would, I think rule out even using spitzer type rifle bullets since they tumble in tissue (unlike old fashioned round nosed lead bullets from the 19th century), increasing wound profile.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics