Hollow Point vs. Round-Nose Ammo

[Jon651]

Greetings All,

Can anyone with more knowledge than I please lay down some info for me comparing round-nose full metal jacket ("ball"?) ammo vs. hollow point for self/home defense?

I realize that hollow point ammo (of varying types and prices) has always been the accepted choice for this, but I can't get a good reading as to why. After all, isn't round nose full metal jacket what the military uses? If it's good for them, then wouldn't it also be good for me?

Another benefit I can see to using it is the price, and that I can "practice with what I carry" instead of blowing a wad of money on shooting up expensive self-defense ammo at the range just so I can get used to how differently it shoots.

I would appreciate any educated info!

 

[OKFC05]

The military uses hollow points for gate guard duty since it is more effective and US gate guards are not covered by the ban on "expanding combat ammunition". So the comment about "good enough for the military" is misplaced.
I use some version of FMJ for range practice, but ball ammo is a poor choice for handgun defensive ammo basically because it does not expand and tends to zip through with minimal damage and expend its energy beyond. That said, I tend to wear my IDPA rig home from the range, and anyone dumb enough to try to rob me is going to be shot with the plated range ammo, probably as many times as I can until the threat is stopped.
In my usual carry revolver, I carry Gold Dot SB .38.

You don't have to use the expensive ammo for all your practice. I just load something similar for range use, so POA is the same.

 

[jimmyj]

In my part of the world FMJ factory ammo is all that is available

 

[OKFC05]

In my part of the world FMJ factory ammo is all that is available

Well, I must admit my stash of defensive ammo was bought a year ago, along with 20K primers, bullets, and more than enough powder to load them for range use. I really hate these feast/famine ammo cycles, but they seem to be reality, and he who hesitates....you know..

 

[Rpg]

The fundamental issue is how much damage the projectile does to the target.

The good old 45acp makes a much bigger hole (and wound canal) than a 9mm. The math works out that increases in diameter results in a three fold increase in the volume of the wound canal.

Expanding ammo is designed to get small caliber bullets ( eg 9mm, 38 or 357) up to the old 45 hardball in terms of the volume of the wound canal.

Lots of folks imagine that expanding ammo is less likely to pose a danger from over penetration than ball ammo. That may be true ASSUMING that the expanding bullet actually expands as hoped, although missing is much more likely than a hit that over-penetrates.

You’ll run into a lot of folks that will flash ballistic gel photos and ballistic tables in their arguments urging expanding ammo, but these folks haven’t shot big game or other critters and have no experience about bullet performance in flesh and blood targets.

Bigger holes create more tissue damage than smaller holes. Bullets that start off with larger diameter make bigger holes, and create more tissue damage than bullets that start off with smaller diameters.

One final issue: lots of folks are impressed by ballistic table energy figures expressed in foot pounds. The problem with that measure is that it uses the square of velocity which inflates the impact of velocity at pistol velocity. Momentum is much more important in evaluating bullet performance on living things at pistol velocities.

Mathematically, the formula for foot pounds of energy is velocity squared times weight while momentum is velocity times weight. If you incorporate a factor to account for diameter (eg 1 for 45 cal), you get much better predictions of actual bullet performance than if you focus only on energy.

 

[URIT]

When our PD switched from ball to hollow-point ammo we were told it was because hollow-point ammo didn't pass through the body like ball ammo.

 

[fmflorida]

Couple of points.....

First the military doesnt have the same collateral damage issue you and I have firing a weapon in a crowded area. Thus over penetration is a concern more so in private life than in a war zone.

Second...Practice with what you carry.....if the round you carry works in your gun, most of us luckily can afford to fire a box of it every 3-6 months. You dont need to put thousands of hollow point ammo downrange to be good with it. Get self defense ammo that shoots similar to the ball ammo you use.. Eliminating that problem

Third, ballistics, ball ammo wastes a lot of energy as the bullet just keeps flying. Hollow point ammo dumps its energy into the target upon impact. Thus getting better results.

Im not saying you MUST use hollow point ammo in your guns, ball ammo works and Im not volunteering to stand in front of it....but if you can afford hollow point ammo and can find it....Id use it.

 

[shocker]

This video is instructive.
Dr Andreas Grabinsky Lecture on Gunshot Wounds - YouTube

Based on it, 9 mm FMJ for me.

 

[elpac3]

Military ball ammo was designed to wound - which requires more support personnel to care for the injured vs caring for the dead.

ack in the day when you carried six in the gun and twelve on the belt, the LEO world hollow points were justified by stating they did not ricochet like ball ammo would. The topic of wound channels was never brought up as a consideration due to public perceptions.

Modern hollow points will expand and put the energy into the target without exiting and risking collateral casualties.

 

[JJEH]

This video is instructive.
Dr Andreas Grabinsky Lecture on Gunshot Wounds - YouTube

Great video. I use two kinds of bullets for edc, depending on where I'm going.

I see that a lot of people are worried about over-penetration, and I can't help myself but to refer to Tim Sundles and to one of his great articles;

CONCERNS OF BULLET OVER-PENETRATION IN CIVILIAN SHOOTINGS

Also this one;

AMMUNITION FOR "SELF DEFENSE"

Perhaps we do worry to much about it. Imagine having the "best" gun with the "best" sights, the gun is loaded with the "best" ammo and your projectiles still don't connect

 

[mikerjf]

Awesome video! Recommended...

 

[LoboGunLeather]

One more time:

Hollow-point ammunition performs as designed some of the time, not every time, and those who count on it performing as the advertisements claim are at least somewhat likely to be disappointed.

Ball ammunition performs as designed nearly 100% of the time, including magazine fit, feeding, firing, extraction, ejection, and every other part of the life cycle of a cartridge.

If your defensive handgun will function reliably 100% of the time with ball ammo you are well ahead of the decision making process than if your handgun functions less than 100% of the time with something else.

Absolute reliability is the gold standard. Everything else is a secondary consideration.

Now, everybody pile on and tell me how wrong I am!

 

[ContinentalOp]

This is a topic that has been discussed many times, so I'd suggest doing a search if you haven't already.

In the meantime, I'll try and share my opinion, based on what I've been able to research regarding terminal ballistics.

TL;DR: HP has a higher probability of disrupting tissue and a lower probability of overpenetrating than RN, but nothing can replace shot placement as the most important factor.

For my reasoning...

Two main issues: Wounding and overpenetration.

Wounding

Simply put, HP has more potential to damage tissue than RN. Tissue is elastic. With RN, tissue is going to stretch until it hits its elastic limit before the bullet will penetrate. After the bullet passes through, the elastic nature of the punctured tissue will cause it to return to its normal state, which means the bullet hole will actually be smaller than the caliber of the bullet that caused it. In some cases, it may even close up, minimizing trauma and/or blood loss.

The rounded profile is also more likely to ricochet off bones instead of breaking them, unless the bullet hits the bone dead-on. Similarly, it may be more likely to push aside blood vessels rather than cut or tear them, further reducing its wounding ability.

With a HP, the expanding bullet will actually crush more tissue, and be more likely to cut a wound channel larger than its caliber. It is also more likely to dig into bone and damage it, even if the hit isn't perfectly centered. Similarly, it's more likely to cut or tear blood vessels, leading to more blood loss. Unless you get a CNS hit, blood loss is probably going to be the primary physiological cause of an attacker stopping after being shot (psychological stops are a factor, but not something I'd count on).

Even if a HP bullet doesn't expand, it still has a relatively sharp edge with a cookie-cutter effect, so it still has a better potential for disrupting tissue than RN bullets.

Some will argue that this doesn't happen, or that HP is no better than RN when it comes to effectiveness. Even if that is true, HP has a documented advantage over RN in one aspect...

Overpenetration

Despite what some say, overpenetration is a very real concern. There've been several documented instances of RN bullets exiting people and injuring others. NYPD changed from FMJ to JHP because of numerous instances of FMJ rounds exiting and injuring not only bystanders, but also other officers. Two instances of .45ACP FMJ overpenetrating and causing injuries comes to mind. In one, an officer fired at a suspect. The .45ACP FMJ bullet exited the suspect and struck a second officer, who was coming to the first officer's aid, in the abdomen below his vest, causing a life-threatening injury. In the other, a SWAT officer shot a hostage taker with .45ACP FMJ and the bullet exited, injuring one of the hostages.

Can HP exit? Sure, but 1) it's not as likely, and 2) it's not as dangerous because of the velocity loss caused by expansion and slowing down as it travels through the attacker's body. I've read about one shooting, I believe with 180gr .40S&W, in which the round exited a suspect's body, but was stopped by the suspect's T-shirt. Another one involved a NYPD officer firing a 124gr GDHP +P at a suspect. The round exited, with textbook expansion, and was stopped by the suspect's jacket. One incident involved .357Sig exiting, but falling on the ground about 10ft behind the suspect, indicating a significant loss of velocity and a much reduced likelihood of causing an injury.

Penetration is important. The deeper a bullet penetrates, the more tissue it can disrupt. But we also want to reduce the probability of overpenetration. Fortunately, there are plenty of HP options that strike a good balance between adequate penetration and expansion to minimize that risk.

Everything we do with regard to self defense, and, in a way, life in general, is all based on probabilities. Whatever hardware (guns, bullets, etc.) and software (shooting techniques, tactics, etc.) we choose to use, we make those choices on the basis that it will improve our odds in a self defense encounter. The way I see it, I want to maximize those odds in my favor, and choosing HP over RN is one factor we have control over. Obviously, people can choose what they want, for whatever reason they want, but the evidence I've seen suggests HP will usually be the better choice.

Unfortunately, with the ammo market being the way it is, good HP ammo may be difficult, if not impossible, to find, so we may just have to do the best we can with what we have or what we can get. Regardless of bullet type, shot placement is still the most important factor in stopping a violent attacker.

Just my opinion.

And sorry for the novel.

 

[lrrifleman]

Jon651, back when I was in ROTC, my instructors focused on how FMJ was mandated by the Geneva Conventions (Accords?), then proceeded to explain how the objective of war was not to kill, but to injure as many of the enemy as possible. (A wounded soldier takes three or more soldiers out of the fight, but a dead soldier takes only one out of the fight.)

That said, in a civilian scenario, the key to any gunfight is making your shots count. Chances are good that a person may miss more than they connect with the threat. While over penetration is a concern, a miss with FMJ can ricochet and be a greater threat. HP ammo can have two benefits. First, if you hit the threat, the round could expand and increase the wound channel. Second, if you miss the threat, the HP stands a greater likelihood of flattening when it hits something hard, which reduces the risk of a ricochet.

If you reload, you can actually purchase bullets similar to your expensive carry ammo and replicate it for practice sessions. Warning: never load carry ammo in your EDC and start carrying it without thoroughly testing it for reliable functioning. Especially some of the earlier production 1911s won't reliably feed hollow points without "throating" the feed ramp.

 

[AJ]

IIRC, the military's ban on fragmenting ammo results from Dum-Dum ammo. Dum-Dum ammo was designed to break in at least four sections, causing wounds that were much harder to treat. First World War.com - Encyclopedia - Dum-Dum Bullet Expanding bullet - Wikipedia As the articles state the Hague Convention of 1899 bans the use of them.

I tend to use hard ball ammo for greater penetration, I also tend to use a .45 caliber handgun as a defensive weapon around the house. If I am using a smaller caliber revolver in my pocket, I load three hardball and three hollow points of the +P variety.

 

[Rule3]

And we are off!. RBvs HP. Tjere is no real energy dump or Kinetic energy with a handgun bullet. Been over this a million times. Shot placement is what matters.



There really is no "ban" on the US military using HP ammo. We never signed the Hague Convention.


Declaration concerning the Prohibition of the Use of Bullets which can Easily Expand or Change their Form inside the Human Body such as Bullets with a Hard Covering which does not Completely Cover the Core, or containing Indentations This declaration states that, in any war between signatory powers, the parties will abstain from using "bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body." This directly banned soft-point bullets (which had a partial metal jacket and an exposed tip) and "cross-tipped" bullets (which had a cross-shaped incision in their tip to aid in expansion, nicknamed "Dum Dums" from the Dum Dum Arsenal in India). It was ratified by all major powers, except the United States.[14]

 

[armadillo]

Some guns and magazines function more reliably with round nose bullets than hollow points. It is important to have confidence in your gun/ammo combination.

Hollow points have to expand to have any advantage over round nose bullets. To expand they have to have enough velocity and proper construction.

 

[AJ]

And we are off!. RBvs HP. Tjere is no real energy dump or Kinetic energy with a handgun bullet. Been over this a million times. Shot placement is what matters.

I have always said that shot placement is the key. The problem is that quite a few folks have a hard time hitting a target with no stress on them. When it is a high stress environment, their shooting gets even worse.

 

[ContinentalOp]

I have always said that shot placement is the key. The problem is that quite a few folks have a hard time hitting a target with no stress on them. When it is a high stress environment, their shooting gets even worse.

I remember reading somewhere that one can expect marksmanship skill to degrade by 50% when stress is added.

 

[AJ]

I don't doubt it. When I went to Battalion Schools to learn Combat Shooting, we did a lot of man on man competition. That is two shooters standing side by side and shooting a targets that were the same for each shooter, the first shooter finished was the winner. Also our instructors would try to distract us while we shot. Also they would rig our targets to fall with only head shots, and not tell you.