Colt .36 Navy. Stopping power and use

[Coffinmaker]

Since the only contribution to the original post currently being made is the entertainment of the "other" readers, I'll let it drop.

[Graveyard Jack]

That's very convenient. I may adopt that tactic. I'll start making outlandish claims and then when someone disagrees with me, instead of countering with a valid argument, I'll just call them ignorant and walk away.

Take issue with the term "stopping power" if you wish. Whatever you want to call it, it should be painfully obvious that some cartridges/loads are better at "stopping" a threat than others. Be it home invaders or Cape buffalo. A threat "stops" being a threat when either the physical pain overcomes the desire to do harm, the body no longer functions due to soft tissue trauma, blood loss or CNS damage or the support structure is damaged to the point that it cannot physically be a threat. So in turn, the cartridges/loads that cause more damage, 'should' be more likely to stop a threat more quickly. If you believe stopping power (or whatever you want to call it) is a myth, then the only logical conclusion is that you do not believe there is any difference from one cartridge/load to another. If that is true, then I guess we need to just all start carrying .22's, even for Cape buffalo, because anonymous internet character "Coffinmaker" says it makes no difference.

The problem comes in quantifying a cartridge/load's ability to do damage. Because there are just too many variables. None of the available formulas take bullet construction/design into consideration. TKO is only valid for big bores firing solids and kinetic energy is too dependent on velocity, the most rapidly diminishing factor.

[Slowhand Bob]

Sounds like it is time to stop this one, taint no winners coming out of an argument that has far to many examples on both sides.  Remember one old test that was reported as having a one shot stop miss, the victim fainted! 

[Pettifogger]

I have no idea why we are arguing about killing on a Cowboy shooting sight.  We aren't in the killing business.  All that 80 grain ball has to do is hit the target and make a ding.  The target ain't gonna die and no one else in this sport is either.

[MJN77]

I have no idea why we are arguing about killing on a Cowboy shooting sight.

Because like it or not, "punching paper" isn't what made the guns we shoot famous and some folks wonder how well they performed. How many people do you think became interested in "cowboy" guns because of the thrilling adventures of Annie Oakley? How many little boys do you think watched Gunsmoke (notice the title of the show) to see if Marshal Dillon would finally marry Miss Kitty? Probably not as many as those that watched it to see Dillon dispense "frontier justice" to the bad guys or read about Billy the Kid, Wild Bill Hickok, Wes Hardin, the Dalton gang or Jesse James and fantasized about owning a "peacemaker" of their own. People don't much care about "Wild" Bill shooting fence posts, but folks still talk about Bill's fatal 75 yard shot at Dave Tutt. And I dare say, Wes Hardin isn't famous for the playing cards he shot up. That's why. As for the arguing, that's a bit stupid. This thread has turned from a discussion into a "peeing" contest.

[wildman1]

Because like it or not, "punching paper" isn't what made the guns we shoot famous and some folks wonder how well they performed. How many people do you think became interested in "cowboy" guns because of the thrilling adventures of Annie Oakley? How many little boys do you think watched Gunsmoke (notice the title of the show) to see if Marshal Dillon would finally marry Miss Kitty? Probably not as many as those that watched it to see Dillon dispense "frontier justice" to the bad guys or read about Billy the Kid, Wild Bill Hickok, Wes Hardin, the Dalton gang or Jesse James and fantasized about owning a "peacemaker" of their own. People don't much care about "Wild" Bill shooting fence posts, but folks still talk about Bill's fatal 75 yard shot at Dave Tutt. And I dare say, Wes Hardin isn't famous for the playing cards he shot up. That's why. As for the arguing, that's a bit stupid. This thread has turned from a discussion into a "peeing" contest.

Well some folks always think if ya disagree with them yer wrong. Ta me it means ya have a different opinion or experience. WM

[Graveyard Jack]

IMHO, it went from a discussion between two people who disagree to an argument the minute one side called the other ignorant. 

[Slowhand Bob]

JEEEZE, ok lets all pretend the last word was gotten in by CC uhhh twice and now we can move on, ok.  The truth is I read and reread what both partys had to say and both were probably off base a pretty good bit!!  If yall will beg a lot (well perhaps not a whole lot) I would be glad to pontificate or perhaps even bloviate, come on  just ask!

[MJN77]

Well here is the truth from my way of thinking. Any bullet, weather it is a 22 or a 45, is capable of immediately stopping an attack. All are also capable of failing to stop one. The fact is weather you use a 38 or a 45 you have to be able to put that little piece of lead where it needs to go. In the charge up San Juan hill, Teddy Roosevelt shot a spanish soldier with his .38 long colt revolver. Teddy said the spaniard "folded up like a jack rabbit". On August 25, 2008 Skokie Ill. police officer Tim Gramins was involved in a prolonged gunfight with bank robbery suspect Raymond Maddox. During this fight, Maddox received 17 wounds from the officer's .45 Glock before he went down from a head shot. You can argue over which caliber is the best all you want, but reality and bullets don't always do what you expect them to.

[PJ Hardtack]

Yawn .... yadda-yadda-yadda ..... this ranks right up there with the .270 vs .30-'06 debate.

A lot of puny calibre S&Ws were carried during the Civil War. Doesn't mean that they were effective, just convenient to carry.

The late Jeff Cooper used to say that a "serious social encounter" was settled by the first round that hit the intended mark, not the first round fired. This would apply regardless of the calibre.
However, he designed his own "Baby", a behemoth of a rifle for Africa. Like Ruark said - "Use enough gun" for the application. But that means a gun that you can handle. If that happens to be a .36 Navy or a .32 ACP, so be it.

I've read time and again that the best defensive calibres start with the number '4'. During bear/blueberry season here, I pack a 1911 tucked into the waist band of my pants. There is something comforting in that that I wouldn't have with a lesser calibre. I could pack a 4" M29, but it doesn't carry  or conceal as well, paper ballistics notwithstanding.

[Paladin UK]

BWOI...

Any pards here got any views on the... Colt .36 Navy.  Stopping power and use  

Paladin (What needs ta know ) UK

[Drydock]

Here's what I think I know.    According to the Coroners report, Dave Tutt was killed by a single shot from a Colts .36 Navy Revolver.

Confederate cavalrymen supposedly preferred the round ball over a conical in the .36, considering it more effective.  Probably because you can get more powder in, thus more velocity out. 

My guess is that men of the period sat around the fire and vociforisly debated .36 velocity vs. .44 diameter/weight.  And it continues to this day.

[Slowhand Bob]

Actually there is no record in the report as to caliber but frequently modern references are made to WBHs preference to the '51 Navy Model, a notion that seems to have grown wings through the legend building of Rosa.  Notice the assumption assigned to the .36 Navy in this otherwise good account and remember that most will automatically assume this as coroners verification as to caliber when it does no such thing.  There is a lot of period accounts that WBH actually preferred the .44s that has been ignored or forgotten after the Rosa legend sprouted wings.  If I am right, several Colts of differing models and calibers have been traced to WBH.  It seems there are at least several versions of every gunfight, or other killing, involving WBH and the numbers would seem to far exceed a hundred, if you count injuns and take Hickocks version! 

http://www.ozarkscivilwar.org/archives/585 

[Niederlander]

When you look at the results of actual shootings, stopping power seems to come down to three things:  Bullet placement, bullet placement, and bullet placement.  (Read some stuff by Evan Marshall sometime.) The best caliber to use is the one you have with you, not the .458 Urban Blaster you left at home because it's too heavy to carry.  Obviously the .36 Navy worked well enough for most of the people who used it. Even that British officer who had his head cleaved opened would have stopped his assailant if he had put one of those bullets in the head once he realized what he'd been doing wasn't working.  The account I read of it also mentioned he stood there admiring his handiwork instead of getting out of the way.  The Navy is even more effective on steel targets that don't shoot back!

[Graveyard Jack]

Proper shot placement is ALWAYS a given. Like JD Jones said, "an arrow in the heart is better than 10,000ft-lbs in the ass". The question is, what works better and more importantly, why?

[PJ Hardtack]

We get all bent out of shape over the ballistic failings of the .36 '51 Navy, forgetting that the .38 RF and .38 CF rounds (apologies to Teddy R.) that replaced it were even more anemic and ineffectual.

American troops learned the same hard lesson the Brits learned - "If you're going to shoot someone and prevail, use a calibre that starts with the number '4'. Elementary, eh, Watson?"

I was recently involved in the slaughter and butchering of two 300 lb. pigs, and they politely dropped to well placed shots from a .22 rifle. But - they were docile and not coming at us with intent.

Theoretically, a Grizzly could also be dropped with a .22. In fact, one of the largest fell to the .22 of a berry picking, crippled native lady in British Columbia who shot it with her .22 grouse gun; one shot to the head. Everyone else had run away, abandoning her to the bear.
All I can say is - "You first!" I want my .44 Spl. loaded to the hilt and my 50-70.

[Slowhand Bob]

A hard lesson was learned, when dad bought me my first semi auto 22.  I made several impromptu rabbit and squirrel hunting trips that proved the 22 can be anemic, even on the tiny ones.  I remember riddling both tiny creatures with fast multiple body shots that would not stop them until the lead became to heavy to bear.  Guys, if BBs were magic, David would never have needed to seek a bigger rock for Goliath. 

I know we all envision ourselves as being the exception to the rule but very few will ever be able to act with intention when we know that return fire is coming our way.  To go into a gunfight with the idea that we are gonna shoot him in the eye with our .22 would be folly, something I am sure was not lost on an experienced gunfighter like WBH.  Different versions had the two shots being fired either simultaneously or with Tutts shot fired first.  A gunfighter would have to live with the reality that any shot fired at you would be potentially fatal, even if there were a bit of luck on the shot.  To go into the fight with the notion that his slightly faster first shot will miss will, at some point, get you killed. 

I have always considered Wes Hardin as the consummate killing machine amongst the old west gunfighters.  His numbers are easily double or more those of WBHs, whether the legendary counts or the modern 'prove it' numbers are used.  He was claimed to have extreme speed, also developed by conscientious practice.  According to what I read he actually killed many of his adversaries with head shots and his own words describe shooting his enemies "in the face".  Was the act of shooting people in the face due to his taking time for shot placement?  I think not, he was a very mentally disturbed individual and I think there was something about looking into a mans face that made this an unconscious target for him?  He was seriously shot several times himself and would have realised that a lost second could be fatal.

Even with all of the rhetoric concerning the incidence of a 22 bringing down an elephant, Ill take the RPG any time its allowed!  I have heard just as many stories of the 22 short riding around the skull and never penetrating as I have heard of it killing bulls with forehead shots!           

[PJ Hardtack]

"First rule of applied firepower:

It isn't the first round fired or the number of rounds fired that settles the matter; it's the first round that hits the intended mark."

Attributed to the late Jeff Cooper, guru of combat pistolcraft and father of the modern pistol technique.

Cooper was not a fan of the 9mm (modern equivalent of the historic .36/.38 rounds) or any of the current 'wonder nines'. His opinions were based on the real world of personal combat experience and that of many others who "have seen the elephant" and lived to tell about it.
There has to be a reason the US military is making a return to the Colt .45 ACP.

[U.S.M.R.]

From Thirty Years of Army Life on the Border by Col. R.B. Marcey.  A somewhat condensed version.  A grizzley bear was shot 10-12 times by a Navy and twice by a Dragoon.  Upon butchering the animal it was found the .36 balls penetrated about 1 inch and the .44 balls penetrated to the vitals killing it.  His last sentence of the event was " I resolved thenceforth to carry the larger size."

[Niederlander]

Agreed..........if I'm shooting a grizzly bear.  By most accounts, the .36 was fine on people.  The Dragoon was rated far more effective if you were trying to shoot the horse, too!