Poll: Bullets: Round or Sharp end?

[jdun]

sharp is for penetration and round is for doing the most damage to an animal.

That's almost right. Both sharp and round will penetrate. Both can be call FMJ in general terms. Both with have almost the same penetrating values.

What you're thinking are hollow points. Hollow points are design to expend when it make contact. A good hollow point bullet full expend inside the body and stay there.

 

[TheTim]

you obviously have no idea what you are talking about,

If youre talking devastation, then look no further then fragmenting rounds
if you want penetration then go for tungsten carbine tipped armor piercers

but come on, round or sharp bullets? Sharp definately

 

[Elementlmage]

http://www.futurefirepower.com/myths-about-the-nato-556-cartridge
-quote
"Other calibers of bullets travel through the body on, more or less of, a straight line after some fragmentation. When the 5.56 round was first designed by Remington, it was meant to tumble through a target, not kill with brute force. It did this not only by the relatively blunt shape, but also by using a rifle barrel with less of a twist. Next time you look at an M-4 or an AR-15, notice it says 5.56 NATO 1:7 on the barrel. This literally translates into; the bullet will make 1 full rotation for every 7 inches of this barrel. This was not always the standard twist set for the new NATO round. The first AR-15 made by Armalite, had a 1:14 twist making it a very, very unstable round. One can only imagine the orientation of the entry and exit wounds. Now if you havent figured it out already, the less the twist, the more unstable the round is. (1:14 twist is less than 1:7) It is said in firearm enthusiast legend that the first tests were done on pig carcasses and that the entry wound could be on the lower right stomach with an exit wound coming out of the back upper left shoulder. It left horrific wounds and terrible internal damage to its intended target, immediately drawing the interest of the US Military, in particular USAF General Curtis Emerson LeMay. Thats right folks, you can thank we in the United States Air Force for the M-16/M-4 legacy (I say this without sarcasm). He thought it was an ideal weapon for his deployed members of the USAF Security Forces for guarding the perimeters of Air Force installations in such places as Korea and Vietnam. Before military trials, Armalite increased the barrel twist to 1:12 to improve accuracy. But when tested in frigid Alaska, accuracy was decreased because of the increased friction from the denser, colder air. Therefore, the barrel twist was eventually increased from 1:12 to 1:9 and eventually to the 1:7 you see it today. Although some bull-barreled AR-15s and Stoner Sniper Rifles can be found in a 1:9, most issued M-16s and M-4;s are primarily a 1:7 twist."

All of that is nothing more than outdated myth. Yes, the 1:14 twist rate made the round unstable in flight, but it had absolutely nothing to do with it's wound potential.

http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/ammo-oracle/AR15_com_Ammracle_Mirror.htm#velocity

Start there and read the next few sections or so. It's incredibly informative and will be the start of your true understanding of terminal ballistics.

http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/wounding.html

Also, an amazing resource that you can learn a crap load from.

-edit-
CRAP, clipboard fail. Will fix it in a couple minutes.

-edit-
Fixed

 

[jdun]

This just came to me out of nowhere while I was playing Call of Juarez Bound in Blood, but I thought that Sharp-end bullets can ricochet off of steel and other similar metals, whereas, a round bullet probably wont. This thread will probably be very one-sided, but think about it. A round bullet would injure someone, but cripple them at the same time whilst the other one would just shoot straight through.

So your thoughts;which are better? Round/sharp-end bullets?
*Example of a sharp-end bullet: 50. Caliber

Most of the time when a lead bullet hit a hard unmovable object it will do one of two things, disintegrate or flatten than bounce a few feet back(most of the energy is lost and thus will not penetrate the shooter).

Here are slow motion videos for your enjoyment.
http://rpginn.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1079&Itemid=39

For it to ricochet the object able to be move or be penetrate/break apart. That translate to the bullet still maintaining velocity (reduced) and energy (reduced). Also the angle of the object will play an important part. Certain angle will redirect the bullet path.

 

[nebtheslayer95]

If they kill the people I shoot at, I couldn't care less.

 

[MikailCaboose]

It's about using the right tool for the right job. Different tips accomplish different penetration and transferred force.

 

[jdun]

you obviously have no idea what you are talking about,

If youre talking devastation, then look no further then fragmenting rounds
if you want penetration then go for tungsten carbine tipped armor piercers

but come on, round or sharp bullets? Sharp definately

Was your post address to me?

 

[jdun]

Round. I swear those are the ones that will stay in the targets body. That is definately worse (think) then having full penetration (thats what she said)

they expand inside which expends momentum but creates a larger wounds (sort of a cone shape)

Round ball bullet does not expand.

 

[2733]

can I just use a Shotgun?
Buckshot is your friend.

 

[jdun]

I use hollow points.

arnt those illegal due to the massive exit wounds?

no, they are the legal ones. all bullets you buy are technically hollow point, because there is only lead in the bullet itself. AP rounds (or full metal jacket) have steel in them, so they go through targets.
But yeah, I perfer rounded rounds for their sheer stopping power.

No they are not technically hollow point. FMJ means that the bullet is encase by a jacket, in most cases cooper. You can have FMJ in lead, steel, or whatever.

This is hollow point bullet.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Hollow_point.JPG

These are ball bullet.
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/sp-5_bulletE.jpg
http://oklahomaconcealedcarry.com/images/fmj.png

 

[jdun]

"Meh" is always the best option.

I don't know enough about guns to pretend I know which type of bullet is "better."

That is the best answer. If you don't know don't spread false information.

 

[DazBurger]

can I just use a Shotgun?
Buckshot is your friend.

But Frag 12 is not. It hates you and everything you point em at.

 

[Elementlmage]

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/sp-5_bulletE.jpg

Ah the good 'ole sp-5, one of the sexiest rounds Mother Russia ever invented.

 

[Ravek]

I don't usually kill people, what do I care.

 

[jdun]

.270 ammunition. Left to Right:
100-grain (6.5 g) ? Hollow Point (expands within target. Banned by the Hauge convention)
115-grain (7.5 g) ? FMJBT(lead core completely surrounded by copper for greater penetrating ability)
130-grain (8.4 g) ? Soft point,(expands on impact. less expansion than Hollow point)
150-grain (9.7 g) ? round nose.(has properties of Armor piercing combined with Soft point expansion)

Hollow points is not banned by the Hauge Convention as long as it doesn't expand. Some hollow points are not design to expand. Expanding bullet is what is banned by the Hauge Convention. However Hauge convention is more or less gone. The countries that signed it no longer exist.

In order to be AP round the bullet must be made by material harder than steel and highly heat resistant, ie Tungsten.

 

[ssgt splatter]

Meh. Both are deadly no matter how you look at them. In the case of the .50 caliber, that bullet is so damn big that round or sharp it would tear your arm off.

 

[Gutkrusha]

I use hollow points.

arnt those illegal due to the massive exit wounds?

no, they are the legal ones. all bullets you buy are technically hollow point, because there is only lead in the bullet itself. AP rounds (or full metal jacket) have steel in them, so they go through targets.
But yeah, I perfer rounded rounds for their sheer stopping power.

Not trying to be a dick, but I'm pretty sure you don't know what hollowpoints are.

 

[jdun]

just checked and yes. its only illegal for the military.
Law enforcement use them as it has greater incapacitaion rates and less chance of hitting bystanders with rounds that emerge from the body.

It's only illegal for military forces to use the rounds against other military forces that have also signed the Hague Accords. It is perfectly alright for military forces to engage insurgents, terrorists, etc. with weapons, bullet, and "techniques" banned under the Hague Accords.

It's not illegal in the military because the countries that signed the Hague Accords are long gone. Two World Wars does that. The USA did not sign the accord.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

I use hollow points.

arnt those illegal due to the massive exit wounds?

Illegal for militaries under the Hauges (I think) convention, but private citizens can have them.

 

[Solstrana91]

Give me a pointy stick anyday.

Don't you mean a poin-ted stick?

If so, my response would be:

"A POINTED STICK?!"

No! Just a stick which is thinner at one end than the other, no point is required.

I sense this was a reference of some sort, went right over my head...

You got that right...

That took until the fire bullet comment for me to realise that it actually wasn't real, even though the stupid remarks were starting to hint at it.

OT: See all above comments from my gun toting peers.