General Categories > General Firearm Discussion
.25 APC v .22LR
Kendahl:
--- Quote from: BranchMillardian on October 30, 2016, 03:07:51 PM ---Something I ran across a few years ago: http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power
--- End quote ---
This study has appeared in several places including Ellifritz's own blog, www.activeresponsetraining.net. It generated considerable controversy. It also met with considerable criticism some of which I think was excessive and unfair.
The biggest problem is that it doesn't quantify the statistical uncertainty in the results. It's not enough to say that a given caliber produces a one-shot stop X% of the time. If Ellifritz repeated the study with a different set of shootings, he wouldn't get exactly X% the second time. After many repetitions, he would be able to say that it was X% ± Y%. With enough data, Y would be small enough that you could see meaningful differences. Ellifritz says that he doesn't have enough data to get reliable results for Y. I believe him.
The second problem is that the study doesn't separate out several important independent variables. The ones I can think of are bullet design (brand and model, not just weight and expanding or not), where the target was hit (central nervous system, upper torso, peripheral areas) and whether drugs rendered the target insensitive to pain and shock. Even if Ellifritz limited bullet variation to expanding and non-expanding, he would need 2 x 3 x 2 = 12 times as much data. It took him several years to accumulate 1,800 data points. I wouldn't want to be the one to say, "Come back when you have 21,600 points."
It may be possible to get a hint at the internal consistency of the study by ranking calibers and looking at violations of those rankings. If all other factors are the same, a faster bullet should be at least as effective as a slower one and a bigger one should be at least as effective as a smaller one. With those assumptions, .44 mag >= .357 mag, .357 mag >= .38 special, 9 mm >= .380 ACP >= .32 >= .25 ACP. (>= means that the caliber on the left is at least as effective as the caliber on the right.) The parameter of most interest to me is failure to incapacitate since that's the situation in which you most desperately need the bullet to do its job. Violations in the rankings are .44 mag < .357 mag by 4%, .32 < .25 ACP by 5%. Everything else makes sense. Uncertainty in a result is inversely proportional to the square root of the number of samples. Since .44 mag and .32 were used least often, by more than a factor of two, this is a plausible explanation for these two exceptions.
Most stops are psychological. A combination of fear, shock and pain persuades the bad guy to cease his attack. If that's not enough, stopping him requires physical incapacitation through damage to the central nervous system or through blood loss resulting in loss of consciousness. For me, the one thing in Ellifritz's study that stood out, but may still not be statistically significant, is that failure to incapacitate was noticeably lower with .357 (mag and Sig) than with any of the other handgun calibers. The most popular self defense calibers, 9 mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP, were identical. .380 ACP and .38 special aren't far behind. I wonder if .38 special isn't more like .380 than 9 mm.
shooter:
one small detail that most of these studies miss, they all use factory ammo, while its extremely hard to reload of even change the powder load in a 22lr. altho it can be done. Its a lot easier to reload 25 to a higher level..
SemperFiGuy:
Two of my Luvly Daughters have been provided by their loving Daddy with Beretta 21A Bobcats in .22LR as their concealed carry handguns.
Small. Lightweight. Very economical for practice. Almost no recoil to speak of.
Fit nicely and quietly into purses and jogging outfits. Fairly straightforward DA/SA mechanics.
Not so EZ-of-operation as an LCR, but then there's no need to rack stiff slides, stuff like that.
7 in the magazine; 1 in the tip-up chamber.
And 8 screaming loud, zipping CCI Stingers in the Perp's face as fast as the trigger can be pulled will serve quite well to neutralize most adverse social security situations. The handgun never recoils off target.
I read up, studied, and learned everything I could about Mouse Guns before making these gifts.
And having considered all the currently available literature, we are quite comfortable with the current arrangements.
Thanx, GG, for this excellent posting.
sfg
JTH:
--- Quote from: SemperFiGuy on November 01, 2016, 10:47:45 AM ---And 8 screaming loud, zipping CCI Stingers in the Perp's face as fast as the trigger can be pulled will serve quite well to neutralize most adverse social security situations. The handgun never recoils off target.
--- End quote ---
Any particular reason for Stingers? I'm just curious, since Stingers lose almost all of their velocity advantage out of a short barrel like that. Penetration is often along the lines of 10" or so, with velocities less 1000 fps. (As compared to something like the CCI Mini-Mag, which has a very-slightly lower velocity, but gets better penetration, probably due to the slightly heavier bullet.)
I like the "Ballistics by the Inch" website, because it is always interesting to take a look at the velocity differences that occur based on difference barrel lengths. (For example, certain loads in 9mm work well in both G26s and G34s, and some definitely don't.)
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/22.html
I have a Beretta Tomcat that I like shooting (same gun as the Bobcat, effectively, but in .32acp), though I personally wouldn't carry it. Good little gun, though, and much more fun to shoot than you might think.
SemperFiGuy:
--- Quote ---(As compared to something like the CCI Mini-Mag, which has a very-slightly lower velocity, but gets better penetration, probably due to the slightly heavier bullet.)
--- End quote ---
Another insightful observation from jth, which is his usual standard here on the Forum. Let's talk about it.
Yes....
CCI Mini-Mags may be even better, one reason being that they cycle through the 21A system better than the CCIs, based on tests that we've run at the range. The 21A is a straight blow-back device, which tends to work well when it's newly cleaned and very lightly lubed. One nice feature is that it will shoot as fast as the trigger can be fingered and still stay right on the target. My lightweight 9mm carry gun won't do that.
(Suggestion for interesting test: Side-by-side pocket 9mm and Beretta 21A>> See how many 9mms can be pumped out in the time it takes the 21A to empty. Then check targets for shot-placement hits.)
Anyhow, the Stingers may actually have too much Ooomph for the 21A and its blowback system. (Also, FWIW, somewhere in official literature I read that Beretta doesn't want the 21A to have a steady diet of Stingers.)
Stingers tend to have more FLASH-BANG-FLAME effect at night, which is kind of an additional side-benefit, assuming that the Perp will thusly be more intimidated. Never been a Perp, so can't really say.
It doesn't take much shooting for some of the 21As to get sticky-stoppy-FTF. Which is unacceptable for self-defense. Always leave the house with the 21A in tip-top state of clean-and-ready. And check for pocket lint.
And yes, that Ballistics by the Inch website is bookmarked on my computer. Lotta useful data therein
Here are some data:
CCI Stingers: 32gr HP 1640fps (rifle test barrel, I suppose)
CCI Mini-Mags: 36 gr HP 1260fps (""""""""""""""""""""""""""")
One of these days I should comparison-test actual muzzle velocities out of both Stingers and M-Ms to see exactly what kind of performance difference may exist between the two cartridges out of the 21A. Convert that info to muzzle energy and see wot's wot. Maybe shoot some punkins, eggplants, squash, bottles............stuff like that. (Never sure exactly how to quantitatively analyze that kind of testing, but wottheheck, it's fun.
Interesting stuff.
sfg
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version