M1 Carbine - Unsung First Assault Rifle

[Lethal Dosage]

Snakeye, i'll have a little look around, but most of my info concerning the lack of penetration power of the 9x19 was first-hand from ex-servicemen who served in the 60's and 70's in the Aust. Army (including national servicemen and a cook). It goes without saying that i'm not going to start listing names and contact details either. I do understand that it's also a pretty well known myth, so i'll look around for other sources to confirm this.

 

[Snakeye]

Snakeye, i'll have a little look around, but most of my info concerning the lack of penetration power of the 9x19 was first-hand from ex-servicemen who served in the 60's and 70's in the Aust. Army (including national servicemen and a cook). It goes without saying that i'm not going to start listing names and contact details either. I do understand that it's also a pretty well known myth, so i'll look around for other sources to confirm this.

Well to be honest the common 9x19 myth is rather their lack of "stopping power" than penetration. As for clothing stopping 9x19s (or any other bullet) try here: Rags of Truth.

I'm not even starting to claim the box of truth is scientific, but I don't really see any reason those two old gentlemen would make this up either. For this test they took two layers of denim and a few terry cloth towels, placed a milk jug filled with water behind and fired at it (from close distance). The point is, that a .22LR penetrated the cloth AND the jug of water - a freaking .22LR. Now a 9x19 weighs about 3 times more, travels at the same or higher speed and has about 3 times the energy - and just because of a 1.57 times higher diameter it won't go through clothing? [For the record the 9x19 JHP (not even a FMJ) went straight through the cloth, the jug and three pine boards.]

While you might want to argue that 9x19 before the 1980s where less hot loaded than modern 9x19 rounds, I still doubt that this would lead to such a tremendous reduction in performance. I still have no doubt a 9x19 will have problems taking down a target of shot placement is sub-optimal - but the only clothing that will stop a 9x19 is body armor, unless you do find really convincing evidence otherwise.

 

[Gnam]

Considering ballistics, were did you get the information that 7.62x39 doesn't yaw? The ballistics I found clearly indicate a yawing of the bullet in target, which I personally would expect from any tail heavy bullet.

If you look at Fackler's data, as well as brassfetcher.com and any other wound profile or ballistics test, you'll see that while the 7.62x39 can yaw, it does so some 12" after entry and therefore typical exits before it yaws at all. As confirmed by combat surgeons, in most cases the bullet makes a clean in and out with no yaw. The exception to this is the Bulgarian 7.62x39, which is designed like a giant 5.45mm, with an airspace in the bullet, yawing only a few inches in, breaking in 2 peices, framenting and creating a massive wound. Unfortunately for users of AK-47/AKM though, the vast majority of them are not using the Bulgarian rounds.

I`ve read some books and reports of WW2 and Korea Vets who had those "funny" moments during firefights. I`ve read a AAR from a Seargent who shot at a North Korean Soldier at a range about 150m, he saw that he hit him in the chest but the Korean only stopped running, looked at his Gear and continued running at the Sarge`s position !!!!
That would be an interesting experiment, but first we try this out on a Dummy Can you manage to get a Carbine from somewhere ??

Those "report" are popular on the internet because they are peculiar and sensational, not because there is credibility to them. I've seen about 15 variations on this story in different places, and from all of them it's obvious the story is some second hand exagerated rumor. As the box of truth shows, it's quite plainly a tall tale. The .30 USC does more damage than a 7.62x39 at close range, and at 200m has the same velocity as a 9mm from the muzzle.

Just to keep things a bit into relation. The 7.62 Tokarev is generally supposed to be a powerful pistol and SMG round. According to various internet sources [so you may want to check this] a .30 carbine round at 100-150m has more or equal speed and weighs more than the 7.62x25 Tokarev [the weight part applies also to ranges outside 100-150m ];since both are similar in diameter and shape you would thereby assume a 7.62x25 will be stopped by winter clothing at point-blank range? Go and ask German soldiers being shot point blank by PPSh-41s chambered for that round if their coats stopped them (if you can find one that's still alive, that is)...

Actually speaking of the box of truth, 7.62 Tokarev was shown to have the best penetrating power out of any common pistol round, including many magnums. They shot at a steel helmet, and out of 9mm, .45, and a few others, 7.62 T was the only one that punched through. As such, if any sub rifle round would be unperturbed by clothing, it would have to be 7.62x25mm Tokarev...its behavior is actually fairly simmilar to the FN 5.7mm round.

In any case, it's too bad we don't have a real M1 Carbine, a PPSH, an STG-44, and loads of ballistic gelatin to test all this stuff out.

 

[Snakeye]

If you look at Fackler's data, as well as brassfetcher.com and any other wound profile or ballistics test, you'll see that while the 7.62x39 can yaw, it does so some 12" after entry and therefore typical exits before it yaws at all. As confirmed by combat surgeons, in most cases the bullet makes a clean in and out with no yaw. The exception to this is the Bulgarian 7.62x39, which is designed like a giant 5.45mm, with an airspace in the bullet, yawing only a few inches in, breaking in 2 peices, framenting and creating a massive wound. Unfortunately for users of AK-47/AKM though, the vast majority of them are not using the Bulgarian rounds.

Right. I took the not yawing too literally then, because most (if not all - which still isn't that many..) ballistic profiles I saw of the 7.62x39 showed a clear yaw, although at about the depth you cited.

In any case, it's too bad we don't have a real M1 Carbine, a PPSH, an STG-44, and loads of ballistic gelatin to test all this stuff out.

Well, if I owned any of the above I'd probably go to jail here, so I am kinda glad I don't - still it would be very interesting; I would actually throw in a .303 Enfield with Mark VII ammo too, since their design makes them good yawers - to the point where German troops suspected the British soldier to cut off the front part of their bullets (which was filled with wood or aluminum instead of lead to make the bullet tail heavy). Might be a nice hobby if I ever win in the lottery (I don't play so don't expect anything soon )

 

[Lethal Dosage]

Interesting about the 7.62 Tokarev, i would certainly be interesting to see it's performance in ballistic gelatin.

As for the .303Brit, i think everyone in the commonwealth knows, you shoot something with a "303", it ain't getting back up. I've taken my (legally still my dads, for the moment) Longbranch No4 MkI and sporterised Lithgow No1 MkIII on many hunting strips, and i've found that while military FMJ's aren't the best on game, if you hit a vital region it'll die fairly quickly. That said, i actually don't like the the FMJ's as to my experience they have a tendancy to wound game more often than an outright an on-the-spot kill because it doesn't fragment or expand before exiting (experimentated on adult male goats, broadside shots), which unless you hit the heart itself, the goat will at least run 50m before expiring. Personally i prefer heavier boat-tail soft points, they give good accuracy and wind resistance out past 150m (i won't shoot beyond that), and on impact they expand rather violently and even if there aren't the right vital organs hit to warrant an instant kill, the sheer shock of the hit is often enough to drop them on the spot.

Since we're talking about military ammunition though, SPBT's don't really count, but i'd expect (without seeing any gelatin tests) the MkVII .303Brit ammo to behave somewhat like a strongly constructed 7.62x51 FMJ - that being a projectile that goes through the body and exits without too much yaw and very little damage so far as the permanant wound cavity goes.

 

[Snakeye]

Well, FMJs aren't really made for hunting regular game - to the point where it's actually forbidden in Austria to use them for hunting, since they cause less damage than expanding rounds. I personally don't hunt but some of my family/friends do and I was out on a few hunting trips with them (just spectator of course); from these I found that even expanding rounds don't reliably instant kill game even when the target is mortally hit - I've seen a share of game being hit and running anywhere between 50m and 200m, although I've also seen a lot dropping dead the instant they've been hit. From my limited experience (and from what I read from "reliable" sources) terminal ballistics are far too complicated to even start arguing there is something like a one hit killer round - you always will have to hit the right place to instant kill.

As for the .303 MK VII performing similar to a 7.62.x51 FMJ, IIRC the 7.62 FMJ bullet is entirely filled with lead, making it a "standard tail heavy" desing, while the Mk VII has the front part filled with material considerably lighter than lead, making it a "very tail heavy" design. This makes the Mk VII "more" unstable than the 7.62 thus resulting in earlier yaw upon target impact; I don't have gelatin tests but the box of truth tested various .303 designs once and found all of them yawing pretty early - also various books I read support this theory. It's kind of similar to the 5.45x39 (or the other way round), which is also deliberately lighter at the front (the front being lead free IIRC) and starts to yaw early in target.

 

[Gnam]

Interesting about the 7.62 Tokarev, i would certainly be interesting to see it's performance in ballistic gelatin.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/762x25mm.html

As for the .303Brit, i think everyone in the commonwealth knows, you shoot something with a "303", it ain't getting back up. I've taken my (legally still my dads, for the moment) Longbranch No4 MkI and sporterised Lithgow No1 MkIII on many hunting strips, and i've found that while military FMJ's aren't the best on game, if you hit a vital region it'll die fairly quickly....

Since we're talking about military ammunition though, SPBT's don't really count, but i'd expect (without seeing any gelatin tests) the MkVII .303Brit ammo to behave somewhat like a strongly constructed 7.62x51 FMJ - that being a projectile that goes through the body and exits without too much yaw and very little damage so far as the permanant wound cavity goes.

Hmm, I don't know, I think an FMJ 7.62x51 has pretty heavy yaw damage even if the yaw happens in the latter portion of its pass through the body. 16cm = 6", the average depth of human torso is 9", so the bullet has time to make a pretty nasty exit wound. Another example is the 7.62x54R, which should be pretty similar to .303 as well.

http://www.brassfetcher.com/148gr Czech FMJ (silver painted tip).html

Again, pretty nasty.

Of course, how temporary cavities compare to permanent cavities in terms of stopping a target instantly is a grey area, but AFAIK, since many internal organs don't stretch the same way muscle, flesh, and fatty tissue does, any internal organs in the area of the temporary wound = bursted/shattered/liquefied organs = you're not doing too good.