shooting through multiple people (19th cent.)

CWatts

down the rabbit hole of research...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
1,751
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Virginia, USA
Yet another gross gunshot wound question...!

I know modern firearms can over-penetrate through a person and kill someone behind them, but what about a late-19th century rifle?

I have a scenario where Person A tries to protect Person B with his body while Enemies are shooting down at them from a nearby rooftop (3 story building). A will die. The bullets enter his back and exit his chest, becoming dirty shrapnel (deformed bullet, possible bone fragments - eww) that will injure but not kill B. Is this plausible?
 

Jack Judah

Lost somewhere on the Nile
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
861
Reaction score
198
Location
Colorado
It depends on the rifle, the ammo, what Persons A and B are wearing, what angle the entry wound is on Person A, etc., but it's definitely possible. Sounds like there's a steep angle involved, which makes it more plausible. What damage Person B takes really is going to come down to the ammo and luck.
 

CWatts

down the rabbit hole of research...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
1,751
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Virginia, USA
It depends on the rifle, the ammo, what Persons A and B are wearing, what angle the entry wound is on Person A, etc., but it's definitely possible. Sounds like there's a steep angle involved, which makes it more plausible. What damage Person B takes really is going to come down to the ammo and luck.

Thanks Jack! Yes it always comes down to ammo and luck doesn't it? Good note about the clothing too.

From what I could find online it appears the speed and energy of period rounds like the Winchester .44-40 are very roughly equivalent to modern handgun bullets of similar caliber.
 

Jack Judah

Lost somewhere on the Nile
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
861
Reaction score
198
Location
Colorado
From what I could find online it appears the speed and energy of period rounds like the Winchester .44-40 are very roughly equivalent to modern handgun bullets of similar caliber.

A close range plunging shot from a Winchester '73? Oh yeah, over penetration is definitely plausible. It's not the most powerful, but it'll do the trick.

I don't own anything in that caliber, but I have spent a lot of time shooting .45LC (which is just a shade slower in the average velocity department than 44-40). I trust it enough my trail gun is chambered for it. They're not the fastest moving rounds by any means, but assuming your shooting takes place at fairly close range, and at a steep angle (the steeper the better), the lead's not going to bleed much velocity on its way to the target. It is going to do all sorts of strange things once it punches into Person A. B could be looking forward to anything from a mortal wounding to getting off without a scratch. You've definitely got options.
 
Last edited:

Bren McDonnall

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2015
Messages
117
Reaction score
18
Location
Wyoming U.S.A.
The .44-40 at relatively short range would do it if the targets were close together. The .45-70 rifle round would definitely do it. The little .31s and short .38s or muzzle loading .36s would be much less likely to.

If we're talking modern v late 19th C handgun bullets, here's a comparison chart.

.31=.32acp
.36/.38S&W=.38spl target load
.38-40=.40S&W
.44-40=.44spl
.45 Colt/.45Sch=.45acp

For instance, the modern .40S&W fires a bullet of the same weight and diameter at the same speed as the standard load of the .38-40, making them virtually identical ballistically.

Some of the older rounds don't have directly corresponding modern versions, and some -- notably the .45 colt have evolved well beyond their original potency due to the availability of modern brass and firearms that will handle the pressure of hotter loads.

Note also that a given cartridge loaded in a rifle will be more powerful because of the extra burn time in the barrel. Also that not all calibers were available in rifle format.

Dedicated rifle rounds of the era might only barely slow on their way through the first target. Think .45-70, .45-90. .50-110. I believe it was a .50-90 that knocked a Sioux chief off his horse at a measured 1,538 yards at Adobe Walls in 1874. Think of what such a shot would do at lesser ranges. As another example, when the U.S. Army was testing the trapdoor Springfield rifle, they found that the bullet, at more than 1200 yards, would completely penetrate 2 rough cut oak boards 1 inch apart. Rough cut, or pre-planed boards are 'true measure', which means that 2 inches is 2 inches rather than the 1 1/2 inch 2 inch boards you commonly find at the home improvement store.

TL;DR, the .45-70, which was common as dirt, had roughly the muzzle energy of a modern day AK47, but with a projectile more than twice as heavy.


Yes, I did a truly demented amount of research on this subject for one of my own projects.

ETA:Regarding your Winchester '73. A .44wcf (.44-40) out of the typical rifle barrel would have slightly less power than a factory 240 grain .44 magnum out of a 6 inch barrel. You'd have to be careful not to kill both characters A and B.
 
Last edited:

JNG01

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
212
Reaction score
53
45-70 would absolutely do it with a 400 or 500 grain lead softnose. Even with the relatively low-speed loads used in the trap-door rifles of the period, exit wounds on buffalo weren't uncommon.

A Sharps 45-120, although a less common chambering, is period-accurate and would have even greater potential penetration.

Google the website "box of truth" and use the search feature to find the 45-70. The testing they do there will give you an idea of the penetrative potential of the round.

If you can push a little past the turn of the century, the .30-06 has huge penetrative potential with lead solid, the only downside is that at short ranges older rounds sometimes had a tendency to blow apart on impact due to the velocity.
 
Last edited:

CWatts

down the rabbit hole of research...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
1,751
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Virginia, USA
Thanks everyone for your expertise. Sounds like my scenario is plausible. Person B is a woman wearing a corset, which where then boned with spring steel, so that could slow down or redirect the round.

I need to quit digging around and write the scene, maybe because I feel strange about it in light of the Florida school shooting (and all the others...). This is meant to be a hellish bloodbath with psychological consequences.