Agree/Disagree

[pop pop]

Just read this and found this interesting. Do you agree or disagree. 

Question Text Handguns do less damage because they shoot a smaller bullet than a rifle.

• A.

  True

• B.

  False

• Correct Answer = B

Many handguns shoot a larger bullet than that of a rifle and can cause equal or more damage than some rifles. For example, a 0.45 acp fires a 230 g bullet and can produce over 400 ft/lb of energy. A 0.22 LR fires a 40 g bullet and only produces 130 ft/lb of energy. Some pistols like the 0.500 S&W Magnum can fire a 300 g bullet producing 2800 ft/lb of energy whereas a popular deer rifle, the 30–30 Winchester will fire a 130 g bullet and only produce 1799 ft/lb of energy.

[MacGyver]

Pistols generally do less damage because they generate less hydrostatic shock than supersonic rifle rounds.

 

[RED333]

This is what I see. Please understand if you copy and paste you will get this effect.

 

[TripleGGG]

42 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Pistols generally do less damage because they generate less hydrostatic shock than supersonic rifle rounds.

 

This

[FUJIMO]

3 minutes ago, RED333 said:

This is what I see. Please understand if you copy and paste you will get this effect.

 

 

[btq96r]

45 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Pistols generally do less damage because they generate less hydrostatic shock than supersonic rifle rounds.

 

[gregintenn]

I disagree. Pistols usually do less damage because they shoot a SLOWER bullet.

[papa61]

just to throw a wrench in the machine. There are pistol caliber rifles and rifle caliber pistols. Shot placement is the only answer. If you hit off center either will do less damage. JMHO.

Edited December 15, 2023 by papa61
spelling

[gregintenn]

12 minutes ago, papa61 said:

just to throw a wrench in the machine. There are pistol caliber rifles and rifle caliber pistols. Shot placement is the only answer. If you hit off center either will do less damage. JMHO.

Shoot a carcass, pumpkin, etc. with a 9mm and then with a 220 Swift and see what each does. You just might be surprised.

[papa61]

2 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

Shoot a carcass, pumpkin, etc. with a 9mm and then with a 220 Swift and see what each does. You just might be surprised.

That's not my point. with the same caliber how much difference in a 15.5 inch pistol barrel and a 16 inch rifle barrel? While a weaker powder charge might lost velocity in a longer barrel, it gains stability. What I would ask is would you carry a pistol to a gunfight? (maybe I would, depends on the distance) A better question is would you pick a pistol to go into battle with? Sure, caliber makes a difference, but that was not my point.

[gregintenn]

4 minutes ago, papa61 said:

That's not my point. with the same caliber how much difference in a 15.5 inch pistol barrel and a 16 inch rifle barrel? While a weaker powder charge might lost velocity in a longer barrel, it gains stability. What I would ask is would you carry a pistol to a gunfight? (maybe I would, depends on the distance) A better question is would you pick a pistol to go into battle with? Sure, caliber makes a difference, but that was not my point.

Gotcha! It was really a loaded question. No pun intended.

[10-Ring]

3 hours ago, gregintenn said:

Gotcha! It was really a loaded question. No pun intended.

I think that the original post was a loaded question derived of cherry picked data to encourage fear mongering, though I don't believe that was the OP's intent. It's a very subjective question that could have a variety of different answers depending on the calibers compared. This question was undoubtedly tailored to misinform. 

[Luckyforward]

6 hours ago, MacGyver said:

Pistols generally do less damage because they generate less hydrostatic shock than supersonic rifle rounds.

 

I agreed after I looked up  "hydrostatic."   You is smart, Mac!

[Johnny Rotten]

Well let me add this..

One night at my best friend's house during High School, his dad had a BB pistol at his Archy Bunkers chair in the front room, he used it on neighborhood cats that climbed on his car, parents away for the evening, we started screwing around with it, we shot it in the front yard, you could literally see the bb leave the barrel and go out about 25yrds, me WTF that can't hurt, told my buddy shoot me in the ass let me see what it feels like, he shot me in the pocket I dropped to my knees crying like a little bitch.

So I don't want to hear about  Ft/Lbs, Ft/per second, grains, Energy, I'm pretty sure if someone shot me with a 22 short at a 1000yrds, I'm going to die..

[papa61]

15 minutes ago, Johnny Rotten said:

Well let me add this..

One night at my best friend's house during High School, his dad had a BB pistol at his Archy Bunkers chair in the front room, he used it on neighborhood cats that climbed on his car, parents away for the evening, we started screwing around with it, we shot it in the front yard, you could literally see the bb leave the barrel and go out about 25yrds, me WTF that can't hurt, told my buddy shoot me in the ass let me see what it feels like, he shot me in the pocket I dropped to my knees crying like a little bitch.

So I don't want to hear about  Ft/Lbs, Ft/per second, grains, Energy, I'm pretty sure if someone shot me with a 22 short at a 1000yrds, I'm going to die..

Pain is not a measure of effectiveness. I read a comparative report years ago on the effectiveness of pistol cartridges. It quoted several shooting reports and evidence. To make a long story short, if you believe it will, it will. The one that is relevant to your thoughts was a young officer responding to an armed robbery. He was shot in the arm by a .22 or .25 and he fell to the sidewalk and died. Official cause of death was shock. This contradicts what I stated earlier about shot placement but it is an anomaly. Mindset is very important. This was not relevant to the original question. And now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.

[Garufa]

I’m having difficulty understanding the point of this entire discussion.

Is it questioning how much meat gets chewed up or what kills?

 

[RED333]

40 S&W is way better than 9mm

[DWARREN123]

Pistols usually do less damage because people miss the target!

[gregintenn]

44 minutes ago, Garufa said:

I’m having difficulty understanding the point of this entire discussion.

Is it questioning how much meat gets chewed up or what kills?

 

You think we know?

[Garufa]

21 minutes ago, RED333 said:

40 S&W is way better than 9mm

The first time I ever heard the term “hydrostatic shock” was in reference to the mighty .40.

[Omega]

9 hours ago, Garufa said:

The first time I ever heard the term “hydrostatic shock” was in reference to the mighty .40.

Yes, but now the 9mm will "blow your lungs out". 

[pop pop]

Wowzer ,Spirited discussion. I say to the original question, False. My opinion a Rifle "with the right kind of ammo" will be far superior. IMO, the WWII 30 06 caliber and 308 of the M 14 were far superior to the M 16 556 of today. Of course, the military is subject to ball ammo because of the Geneva Convention restrictions for war rules. 

Does make me wonder what a 357 2" snubby revolver, and a 357 16" or 18" brl lever gun results would be firing the same ammo. I have plans of water jug testing both these and see the result soon. 

I don't know the intent of the person who wrote the question, or his politics. He compared a 45 pistol or 500 Mag Revolver to a 30 30 Rifle.

RED233, I will NOT cut and paste any more. Did not know the result it would cause. Black screen, Sheese!

BIG Throwdown Guys. 

[Omega]

7 minutes ago, pop pop said:

Wowzer ,Spirited discussion. I say to the original question, False. My opinion a Rifle "with the right kind of ammo" will be far superior. IMO, the WWII 30 06 caliber and 308 of the M 14 were far superior to the M 16 556 of today. Of course, the military is subject to ball ammo because of the Geneva Convention restrictions for war rules. 

Does make me wonder what a 357 2" snubby revolver, and a 357 16" or 18" brl lever gun results would be firing the same ammo. I have plans of water jug testing both these and see the result soon. 

I don't know the intent of the person who wrote the question, or his politics. He compared a 45 pistol or 500 Mag Revolver to a 30 30 Rifle.

RED233, I will NOT cut and paste any more. Did not know the result it would cause. Black screen, Sheese!

BIG Throwdown Guys. 

You can cut and paste, but on the lower left it will pop up a link to convert it to plain text.  Using it will make the text normal 

 

IMO a handgun is just to get to your rifle, but in a pinch can make a difference, no mater the caliber.  Even the lowly .22 has been used to good affect on the most dangerous targets.

Bella Twin, the .22 Used to Take the 1953 World Record Grizzly

[Grayfox54]

Which is deadlier? A .30-06 fired from 1000 yards away or a .22 to the head at contact distance? 

I think a lot of it depends on distance. Pistol bullets start out slower and lose velocity rather quickly. The bigger the bullet, the faster it sheds speed. Rifle ammo is designed to maintain velocity over a much longer distance. 

Fact is than many of the most popular rifle calibers fire a smaller diameter bullet than the most common handgun calibers. 

The OP is discussing muzzle energy. Depending on caliber, barrel length and distance, that energy can diminish rather quickly. 

 

[-boatman-]

5 hours ago, Grayfox54 said:

Which is deadlier? A .30-06 fired from 1000 yards away or a .22 to the head at contact distance? 

 

 

I can't say which is deadlier but if I had to choose I'd take my chances with the 30.06 at 1000 yards. Much better chance of a miss.