You are shot with rifle ball ammo. Are you better off hoping it icepicks through you retaining most of its energy or would you prefer to slow it down at the risk of making the slug deform and lodge itself inside by using pistol rated soft armor?The clock is ticking!
Mod created engagement bait thread
This thread a shit and OP sucks cock
hide threadproblem solved
>>62786710>>62786716Just say you don't terminal ballistics know and move on
>>62786738Just ask yourself if you rather get stabbed by the pointy end or the blunt end of the spear
>>62786706If I'm wearing pistol rated ammo odds are I'm being engaged by someone close enough for the round to reliably fragment, so I'll take the armor because I don't think icepicking is likely.
>would you like kevlar fibers getting pulled into your gunshot woundTry it OP.
>>62786706Having tested this myself, pistol rated kevlar barely slows down rifle rounds. They go through like it isn't there at all.
>>62786706Like >>62787202 said, this won't happen, but to entertain your question, it's actually not very clear-cut. The lethality of a weapon depends entirely and solely on what internal organs it damages. A .22 that nicks the aortic arch means game over. A .50 cal that plows straight through the lung will of course need to be patched, but won't be any more dangerous than any other round passing through it. Cavitation may or may not cause meaningful damage, but in general, it's less of a problem than everyone thinks it is. The question of velocity and fragmentation and tumbling is, how much damage can it actually cause? Organs are surrounded by sheathes of connective tissue of varying strength, meaning they're potentially going to stop a low-energy fragment in its tracks. A tumbling bullet or fragment will strike more structures, yes, but that doesn't always mean it will do more internal damage than a high-velocity round punching straight through. And, these will not be able to punch through bone, though this matters rarely in combat casualties (a femoral or vertebral fracture are the only ones I can think of that would be a big problem and also resistant to a round that fragmented or tumbled internally)I think it depends on where you get shot. In the thorax, I'd probably prefer to avoid as much fragmentation and tumbling as possible. Elsewhere, maybe not.
>>62786706Better to have armor than none. A rifle round is generally supersonic so you end up with hydrostatic shock adding it's velocity to tissue damage. Having a bullet lodged inside you sucks but it also means it isn't exploding out your back so you're only bleeding through a 0.30 inch hole.
