Two-Projectile Loads in Snubby for Self-Defense

[rking22]

Pettypace, I was referring to the combination #5. Should have gone back to check that before posting question, sorry bout that. Thanks for the reply and I absolutely agree on vel vs penetration. My mold for the Lee 95 is a group buy 105 of the same (RD) design. I was thinking that a generally 180 gr round flat combo that separated after impact might be close to standard loading parameters. Your most recent test results lead me to that thought.

[pettypace]

Pettypace, I was referring to the combination #5. Should have gone back to check that before posting question, sorry bout that. Thanks for the reply and I absolutely agree on vel vs penetration. My mold for the Lee 95 is a group buy 105 of the same (RD) design. I was thinking that a generally 180 gr round flat combo that separated after impact might be close to standard loading parameters. Your most recent test results lead me to that thought.

So, you're thinking the 105 RF over the 70 WC. I don't think it would strain a snubby to get that combo to, say, 700 ft/s. The Schwartz equation then predicts about 16" of penetration for the 105 RF and about 9" for the 70 WC. But I wouldn't be surprised to see the WC go deeper, somehow "drafting" the front bullet. At least I think I've seen that effect with the little gel testing I've done.

[Ozark mike]

While it isn't even close to being a stubby my bfr 45-70 loaded with 30 grs of h332 with 3 RBs will do a number on deer stumps rocks probably humans to. I can't remember the exact weight but it's cast of ww holds a decent pattern to 25 Yard's does good in the guide gun just as well

[JBinMN]

I think using P. Harrells "meat target" would be the method I would use rather than ballistic gel. I think I can get more use out of the remains of the testing with that meat & fruit than I can with the gel after all is done & possibly more "real life" examples of what the projectiles are going to do in the end.

Of course the ballistic gel allows for better measurement with tape measures etc, for "comparative" use, but the actual effect on the clothing, meat, fruit, etc, that simulates what may be the results of the intended use of the projectile(s), to me at least, seems like a more "visual", as well as "real life" type simulation/scenario that is repeatable if necessary, & also there is a good use for the "leftovers" of the test. If nothing else as dog food.
(IOW, What they hell do ya do with the gel after it is not usable for testing rounds anymore? With the meat & fruit, after ya cut out the bad parts you can always eat it, or feed it to the dogs. )

Regardless of that, I am enjoying reading about the results of the tests.

[LouisianaMan]

Pettypace, my compliments on your interesting duplex load experimentation! It's another possible way to maximize the incapacitation potential of solid .38 projectiles at modest velocities, along with the marginally stabilized tumbling heavy bullet concept many of us have discussed elsewhere.

I'm not the best judge of how well your multi-projectile options might work. But using Fackler's published discussions as a guide, here's what I'm thinking: a 2-second burst of 5 shots, delivering 10 hardcast, sharp-shouldered projectiles into a BG's torso, each projectile chopping a wadcutter wound profile, many of which are in close proximity to each other and therefore likely to turn some temporary cavities into more expansive permanent cavities...seems to provide lots of promise.

The penetration depths for several of your combinations seem to offer promise in that crucially important regard, too, without being a candidate for overpenetration. Since momentum is more important than velocity or foot-pounds of energy when it comes to penetration, I'm leaning strongly towards a heavier bullet + a lighter bullet duplex load. The differing bullet weights should help create at least minor dispersion, which I suspect is beneficial.

As you've reported, case length and crimp groove locations of various bullets all influence your load configurations, and that in turn leads to differing dispersion tendencies of the two projectiles. I think that a very small dispersion is ideal, as it should enhance a critical terminal effect I mentioned above: the front bullet creates a temp cavity somewhat exceeding its diameter, and perhaps before that temporary effect subsides, the second bullet penetrates and possibly cuts through the temp cavity. End result (ideally, hopefully) being enhanced permanent cavities.

A good illustration of that general effect is provided by the SMG wounds of 1930's gangsters and WWII (and later) combat casualties. These apparently often demonstrating a ripping effect visibly greater than a mere row of individual 9mm or .45 bullet holes.

Some options that occur to me:

1. Use a LFP or LRNFP in front to ease speedloader work, with the WC in rear. My sense is the WC should be the heavier bullet. If dispersion fails to occur, you still get decent penetration and wound channel from what amounts to a single large LFP/LRNFP.

2. As above, with LWC in front to ensure full-caliber crush cavity.

3. If having the LWC in front (Option #2 above) proves superior, then you can load two duplex versions: carry the "LWC in front" option in the gun, with the "LFP/LRNFP in front" version in your speedloaders and speed strips.

I realize that "remote neurological damage" has been shown to be limited to velocities of at least 2200-2400 fps, far above what we're discussing here. I'm not sure anybody has, or can, completely rule out that the human body and mind are affected in some way, to some degree, by a larger number of individual traumas happening within a short time frame, vs. a smaller quantity of comparable traumas. Perhaps the human body's shock response often renders it a moot point, but does it always do so?

Would inflicting 10 caliber-diameter hits in the same time as 5 hits serve to confuse, delay, or overload the human nervous system to any noticeable degree? Analogous to the 2200-2400 fps velocity floor for remote neurological damage, 10 traumas vs. 5 might not suffice to overload the human nervous system to a significant degree. I have no idea. Perhaps Fackler spoke to this idea, or perhaps the US Army's 7.62mm NATO duplex load experiments in the Vietnam era (I think?) discussed the issue.

Now, a few ideas re. bone: ballistic gel doesn't provide much insight into how handgun bullets inflict damage upon human bone, nor illustrate how bone strikes affect bullet expansion, tumbling, or wound track. I know BrassFetcher has experimented with a simulated bone material, but I don't know how other wound ballistics professionals evaluate the validity of his experiments.

One thing is certain: it matters whether a bullet hits bone. It can matter a lot: HP expansion, orientation and stability, penetration, possible deviation from wound track, etc. Whether two lighter bullets in a duplex load give up too much penetration in soft tissue is an issue you're already working to address. But if a 148g LWC smashes through bone and still penetrates to the vitals, whereas the lighter duplex bullets can't, that would be a show-stopper. Same goes for the extensive modern testing of JHPs, which leaves open the question of bone-related effects.

BF's skeletal diagrams and surface area calculations do a great job of portraying just how much, and which parts, of the human body are protected by bone--albeit of differing densities between structures, and between individual persons. His percentage figures of skeletal protection of our anatomical vitals make it clear that a great proportion of bullet impacts will strike bone in one way or another. Food for thought by us all, I believe. Variations in bullet shape, velocity, weight, momentum, hardness, and profile all impact handgun bullet wounding mechanisms profoundly. If I thought about it for too long, I might chuck it all in favor of caliber, weight, velocity, shape, and cutting edge!

[Michael J. Spangler]

Attachment 239900

This was 5 rounds from a S&W 642 at 10 yards. It was hitting a little low for my buddy so he kept adjusting just aim till he was in the middle. It worked out picture wise to show the dispersion.
My group was a little more centered but had a big old mess of overlapping holes so it was hard to tell what was what.

[pettypace]

LouisianaMan: Thanks for your last post -- as always, thoughtful, provocative, well-crafted, and just plain fun to read.

[pettypace]

Attachment 239900

This was 5 rounds from a S&W 642 at 10 yards. It was hitting a little low for my buddy so he kept adjusting just aim till he was in the middle. It worked out picture wise to show the dispersion.
My group was a little more centered but had a big old mess of overlapping holes so it was hard to tell what was what.

Well done, Mike! Is that a 50 ft timed and rapid target? What bullets and powder? Could you tell if there was an elevation difference between front and rear bullets? Do there tipping?

[Gray Fox]

Ozark Mike: What diameter balls did you use in the .45-70, and did you check ball dispersion past 25 yards? GF

[bruce drake]

Interesting. I would think the two smaller weight wadcutters would provide the bet chance of "accuracy" but if we are being honest, you are just really looking at something to hit a bad guy at under 5 yards. so if one of the bullets are tumbling from the duplex loading, it still will hit and do some damage.

That saying, I've experimented once with a duplex load in a 357 Magnum case ( a Lee 148gr wadcutter over a Lee 124gr RN) just to try it but never really went deep into exploring its full capability.

Bruce

[Michael J. Spangler]

Well done, Mike! Is that a 50 ft timed and rapid target? What bullets and powder? Could you tell if there was an elevation difference between front and rear bullets? Do there tipping?

Your 70 grain wadcutters. 2.3 grains of clays (just what my measure was already set up for)
Not sure how they grouped but I have 5 left so if I get to the range tomorrow night I can shoot them individually and circle the “patterns”

The pattern with the 1873 was might tighter.

[Texas by God]

Does anyone else remember Wiley Clapp’s article on the”.357 QuadraMaximum? A snubby Colt .357 was reamed out to take .357 Rem Max brass loaded with Four “tuna can” .38 wadcutter bullets- hence the name. Experimenting with loads is fun; carry on. No one who criticizes your work would be willing to “play catch”with your loads- I’m quite certain of that!

[owejia]

Does anyone else remember Wiley Clapp’s article on the”.357 QuadraMaximum? A snubby Colt .357 was reamed out to take .357 Rem Max brass loaded with Four “tuna can” .38 wadcutter bullets- hence the name. Experimenting with loads is fun; carry on. No one who criticizes your work would be willing to “play catch”with your loads- I’m quite certain of that!

Reamed out a cylinder of a N frame S&W 6" barrel last year to use the 357 max brass bee killer loads in, had not even thought about loading multiple wad cutters or rb in it. Another experiment need to do. Should be a really good home defense night stand round.

[pettypace]

The novelty of gel testing is wearing thin for some of my shooting buddies. So at today's Snubbyfest I was able to claim exclusive use of two bricks of Clear Ballistic gel. I decided to stick to a single load -- two Lee 356-95 RF bullets loaded base-to-base over 2400 to about 725 ft/s. I fired a cylinder full of those guys into the gel from about 5 yards.

The picture below was not taken at the range, but shows how the two ammo can size bricks of gel were arranged allowing for a total of 22" of penetration.

Attachment 240032

The next picture shows the second gel block at a better angle for measuring penetration. Nine of the ten projectiles are visible. The front bullet from one shot exited the second brick after 22" of penetration.

Attachment 240035

Average penetration of the front bullets was 20.8". Average for the back bullet (flying base forward) was 17.8". Only one bullet showed any signs of tumbling. That bullet turned almost 45 degrees right at the end of its penetration, maybe on the rebound?

NOTE: At the time of this test I thought there was an inch-to-inch correspondence between penetration in Clear Ballistic gel and in validated 10% ordnance gel. I've since learned that this is not true. Roughly speaking, bullet penetration will be less in 10% ordnance gel than in C-B gel. Recent testing has shown that penetration in real gel would likely be only about 80% of what I measured above. Making that correction would give the front bullets above an average penetration of about 16.5" in 10% ordnance gel and the back bullets an average penetration of about 14".





Attachment 240137

The two entrance holes for each shot were separated by about 1/2" with the back faux-WC cutting a noticeably bigger hole above the front bullet hole.

This is the second re-casting of the C/B gel and I have no clue how re-casting effects calibration. But I did fire one round each of two different factory JHPs also fired in previous tests for a sort of pseudo-calibration. The 90 grain Hornady FTX Critical Defense Lite penetrated just over 9" and is visible in the first picture just to the left of the middle window of the house in the background. A 95 grains Silvertip +P round penetrated to 10" and stopped at the bottom surface of the first block. I pulled that bullet out with my fingers and forgot to replace it for the picture. But the hole I yanked it from is visible as a white dot centered under the middle window and just about in the vertical center of the first gel block.

I've liked this load from the start and with this test I'm beginning to believe it has enough penetration to be an effective self-defense load. I think my next step will be to load up a bunch and see what sort of accuracy it has beyond 7 yards.

[pettypace]

Reamed out a cylinder of a N frame S&W 6" barrel last year to use the 357 max brass bee killer loads in, had not even thought about loading multiple wad cutters or rb in it. Another experiment need to do. Should be a really good home defense night stand round.

Yes, indeed! "...a really good home defense night stand round."

Two 100 grain hard-cast wadcutters at 850 ft/s have a predicted penetration of about 14". Each shot would have a total weight of 200 grains and a combined cross-sectional area of a .50 caliber bullet. That rivals the performance of premium JHPs and, so long as the two wadcutters separate, the "expansion" is guaranteed.

But to me, the biggest advantage of a two-projectile load is the potential to double your score on the Fitz Luck Target. When I mentioned this earlier in this thread, some folks figured I was talking about some sort of "spray and pray" advantage. That's not the point at all.

Attachment 240133

The actual Fitz Luck Target is about the size of a solid center of mass area. And given a solid center of mass hit, the chance of hitting something "vital" is pretty much a matter of luck. A fraction of an inch could mean the difference between, for example, severing an artery or not -- just like the difference between a "9" and a "1" on the Fitz Luck Target. With two projectiles for each pull of the trigger, you're considerably increasing the probability of a good center of mass shot hitting something vital. That, to me, is the real advantage of a two-projectile load.

NOTE: I lifted the picture above from the 'net some time ago and now can't find the URL for proper attribution.

[LouisianaMan]

Pettypace,
I'd never seen the Fitz Luck target, or at least it never registered, but I think it's both funny AND illustrative of the problem at hand. Well, add in movement. Lighting. And hostility. And often lots of "target medium" between gun muzzle and the actual 1-9 score waiting behind....I wish we could at least have BGs agree to wear one of these when they're out and about!

Your underlying point is vitally important IMO, all kidding aside. We can poke holes in a BG if we're fortunate amidst our ill-fortune of finding ourselves in such a fix. But our ability to place shots with surgical precision is generally minimal to downright non-existent. Our problem is not military combat, but a SD/ HD situation in which we find ourselves suddenly and unexpectedly in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm. Nothing in that equation is inherently conducive to precise shot placement, although exceptions can occur when the stars align. Fundamentally, we're in a life or death struggle we didn't invite, on a battlefield we didn't choose, in a tactical situation selected by the BG(s), not by us.

A quote, or near-quote, from Fairbairn and Sykes in "Shooting to Live with the One-Hand Gun": "the more our pistols shoot like submachine guns, the better we like them." I think they would've given a belly laugh of recognition when given a look at the quandary posed by the Fitz Luck target. If Fitzgerald had anything to do with it, they probably did that very thing, as their idea of the perfect concealment gun was a Fitz Special Colt New Service .45 Colt.

I think if your dual projectiles prove to have adequate penetration, F/S would approve of it for the use you foresee, i.e. close range SD. Pull the trigger 5 times and poke 10 holes = a good thing.

If I recall correctly, F/S selected three specific instances to illustrate their views on the crucial issue of "stopping power." One was a BG hit 5-6 times with a .45 Auto, another who was hit 5-6 times with a .455 Webley. In both cases, their Shanghai Municipal Policemen finally stopped the BG only by bashing him in the head with the butt of their gun. The only instant knock-down they'd seen was brought about by a single shot of .380 ACP FMJ from the 1908 Colt of a Chinese SMP member. After dropping like a sack of potatoes, that BG subsequently jumped up and lit out at top speed, escaping arrest.

Their point? Put bullets in your BG first, fast, and try to get good body shots. Even then, deliver your fire with "all the aggressiveness of which you are capable. You'll probably need it."

[Ozark mike]

Ozark Mike: What diameter balls did you use in the .45-70, and did you check ball dispersion past 25 yards? GF

457 Lee mold about a 4 in group at 25 yards it's supposed to be my home defense load so I don't go thru to many walls . No I didn't check past that probably loose to much energy. I imagine they don't have much energy past that cause you have to divide the energy into 3. I maybe wrong who knows. For more info look up 4570 guard load

[JBinMN]

Fairbairn & Sykes was the first thing I thought of, when I saw this pic. Secondly, I thought of Skeeter Skelton, who mentioned that type of handgun on occasion in his articles, and how he was not a fan of the cutaway trigger guard.

There are other surgical procedures that you may perform on your sixshooter, but not all of them will make it healthier. When I was younger and more eager, I loved the looks of the belly guns which had the fronts of their trigger guards cut out and their hammer spurs ground as slick as a dehorned steer. In those days, the front blades of both Colt and S&W double actions were of a profile as round as an apple pie, and most gun jockeys took a file to them and ramped off the back of the blade for a slicker draw and, in some cases, a sight picture that was a hair sharper after holster wear began to set in.

Removal of the front half of the trigger guard, while it makes the belt gun look vicious, serves no good purpose. I know because I’ve tried it a few times. Without the guard, I always felt that I was about to drop the gun. Although I knew it took a harder shove than I was likely to give it to make the cutaway job go off when hung in the clothing, I always took great pains to slip the little demon into my waistband or pocket without hanging the trigger.
A little practice showed that the guardless revolver was no whit faster from draw to shoot than an unaltered specimen. Those ginks with hands large enough to have trouble inserting their finger in the trigger guard (I wear a size 10 glove, and don’t) will do well to emulate gunswift Bill Jordan. Bill has compromised by cutting a half circle from the forward part of his trigger guards, making a passing lane for his big fingertip while still leaving a protective ring of steel around the trigger.

Source:http://www.darkcanyon.net/Home_Gunsm...ur_Six_Gun.htm

I d find that Fitz Luck target to be interesting though & I plan on either making or acquiring some to give to my grandsons to shoot at, to make just one more "game" they can do when shooting. A few of the adults might have a little fun with them as well could be a possibility too.

[pettypace]

457 Lee mold about a 4 in group at 25 yards it's supposed to be my home defense load so I don't go thru to many walls . No I didn't check past that probably loose to much energy. I imagine they don't have much energy past that cause you have to divide the energy into 3. I maybe wrong who knows. For more info look up 4570 guard load

Ozark Mike: The multi-ball load in your 45/70 BFR sounds like a serious self-defense load. Here's what the Schwartz penetration calculation says about a .457" lead round ball at 800 ft/s:

800^0.745 * 145 / 7000 / (0.457/2)^2 / 3.14

Just copy that line of calculations and paste it into a google search. Google should return an answer of about 18" of penetration in ballistic gel. You can change the 800 to match your load.

For HD, I would think three soft lead .45 round balls at, maybe, 800 ft/s would discourage the BG.

[pettypace]

A couple days ago I got to the range to test a couple of the more promising two-projectile loads beyond the 5 - 7 yards I've been shooting. I shot at a standard 50 yard slow-fire target set at 25 yards. The gun was a 2" Centennial. Six o'clock hold on the black. Two-hand hold on the gun. Slow, deliberate, double-action fire, glancing at the chronograph between shots.

Load #1: Two Lee 356-95 RF bullets loaded base-to-base over 7.5 grains of (old) Hercules 2400. Fired 10 shots. Average velocity: 640 ft/s. SD: 35 ft/s. Total of 17 hits on the paper. Front bullets (10 hits): group centered at point of aim, about 17" high and 7" wide. Slight signs of tipping. Back bullets (7 hits): group centered about 12" inches above point of aim, about 7" high and 12" wide.

Load #2: Lee 356-95 RF over 105 grain H&G #50 WC over 7.5 grains of (old) Hercules 2400. Fired 10 shots. Average velocity: 703 ft/s. SD: 28 ft/s. Total of 18 hits on the paper. Front bullets (9 hits): group centered at point of aim, about 13" high and 8" wide. Very slight signs of tipping. Back bullets (9 hits): group centered about 12" inches above point of aim, about 7" high and 15" wide.

As a sort of "control," I fired 10 shots with a single projectile load from the same gun. This load was a Lee 358-200 RF bullet over the same 7.5 grains of 2400. This load fired a group centered about 9" above the point of aim, about 5" wide and 7" high. Although not a target load by any stretch, this group would have fit in the black had it been properly centered. By contrast, the two-projectile load might have fit on the paper had they be properly centered.