I don't know where the magic of hydrostatic shock happens.
I may have read ,"somewhere " it starts at around 1800fps
All the metrics used to attempt to quantify "stopping power" boil down to one simple fact, the slug that does the most tissue damage wins the contest..
Could it be 357m and 10 enjoy an "upper tier" stopping power reputation due to simple increased penetration??
In other words, more tissue damage
I think maybe
LTA
I don't know, but lets test this "hypotheses":
We can "model" the damage in the target as a cylinder's worth of tissue damage. So the question is, which cylinder is bigger (containing more volume of tissue damage).
It is impossible to get a perfectly apples to apples comparison because of the numerous different loads, and because we do not have data on all loads...What we do have is data from lucky gunner on 45 and 357 both out of a 4" - well almost the 45 is out of a 3.64" barrel.
I will use HST in 45-230, and Hornady 158 in 357M. Both of these are very respected in their space and I've shot both of them. Here is the data from Lucky-Gunner:
Horn.-357M 158: Depth (average 5 shot) 24.7"; Diameter .53".
HST-45 230: Depth 14"; Diameter .85.
Convert the diameters' to radius and stick them in an on-line "Volume of a cylinder" (representing the tissue damage) calculator, we get:
357M 158 at 5.45 cubic inches of tissue damage.
HST 45 230 7.95 cubic inches of tissue damage.
Conclusion, nope, it is not the penetration based on this choice of data. In this hypothetical example, HST in 45 is doing 45% more tissue damage....Thinking about this, the diameter of the expanded HST round far exceeds (in %) the 357M round and the radius (D/2) is "squared" in the volume equation (whereas the depth is not). A little extra diameter goes a long way. {Aside: This is indeed what makes 45 more effective than a 9mm (round for round, all other things equal, and where the muzzle energies are very similar)}....
So the 45 is hypothetically doing more tissue damage round for round (even if the 357M did "find a way" to spend all 24" within the target.)
Although this is more anecdotal than a one-for-one comparison, it does give us some view as to what is going on with each caliber, and I have to go back to saying it is the high-energy that the 357M brings to the table vs other typical pistol calibers (and the opportunity for Hydrostatic -shock to start to be meaningful) which is the differentiator. Open to other ideas, certainly.
Check my calculations, I can barley remember my address anymore:biglaugh: so certainly something could be off. And let me know what you think overall.