[wbond]

Hello. I curious about 9x18 stopping power. I'm not sure anyone knows or has any data, but opinions are interesting too. Please give your opinions, experiences, agree with, or debunk what I've said below.

Below are second hand facts and opinions to consider before answering:

=====================================

The .32 ACP has or should decent 3 shot stop power. I base this on it's one shot stop capability, which I don't remember for sure, but I think was around 40%. However, multiply that by 3 and you are well over 100%. I think this applies to warmer climates only. Cold climates mean thick wool and other winter coats that might act almost like a bullet resistant vest to a .32 ACP.

The Paraguay Police and Military reputedly use .32 ACP CZ-83s and .32 Mag Ruger SP101s as standard issue weapons. Supposedly their laws limit handguns to .32 caliber or smaller. I've heard the police and military have a policy of triple taps. This probably works pretty well in the warm climate where everyone is wearing a thin shirt or less. Also, people bleed more in hot weather. In a cold climate, with people wearing heavy coats, I don't think you could rely on 3 shot stops.

The Ruger SP101 however, is an entirely different matter in .32 Magnum. I think the .32 Mag packs a good wallup with good penetration. Not a powerhouse round, but no wussy either. It probably has one shot stop ability as good as, or maybe better than, a .38 special. I don't think any winter coat is going to stop a .32 Mag. Also, if one shot wouldn't do it with .32 Mag, I'm sure two shots would.

======================================

Many of the police forces and/or civilians in the rest of S. America and Europe use the .380 ACP for standard carry.

Everyone knows a .380 is better than a .32 ACP, but probably not as good as a .32 Mag. The 1 shot stop capablity of the .380 is questionable. However, the .380 has reliable 2 shot stop capability, as long as they're not wearing a heavy coat.

======================================

Where does that leave the 9x18 coming out of a 3.8" barrel? I can guess as follows:

First of all, notice that I said the .380 is a good 2 shot stopper IF THEY ARE NOT WEARING A HEAVY COAT. The 9x18 has enough extra punch that it could probably, in my opinion, defeat any winter coat. Probably. I'm sure the Ruskies must have thought about this when they designed it. If one shot of 9x18 hollow point wouldn't do it, I'm sure a second would.

Now let's be more specific about 9x18 power levels.

The standard is what the Ruskies, Bulgys, and East Germs used in their true Makarov pistols.

The Check (spelling?) CZ-P82 and P83 were designed to shoot 20% more powerful 9x18 ammo, according to CZ and Check claims. The Check military ammo was (supposedly) loaded 20% hotter for use in P-82s and later P83s. This would be +P+ ammo, if the Checks used this term. They just called it Check military ammo and it was understood that is was 20% hotter than regular 9x18 Mak ammo.

Regular 9x18 Mak ammo is equivalent to a .380 +P. This is what is intended for Rusky, Bulgy, East Germs, and other true Makarovs. You might be able to shoot 9x18 +P safely in these guns, but I'm not sure.

The CZ-P82 and P83 can easily handle a steady diet of 9x18 +P+ because that is what it they were designed for.

======================================

Now back to stopping power: Since the standard Makarvo 9x18 ammo is like a .380 +P, we must conclude it's slightly better than .380, but not much. However, every little bit helps a lot when you're borderline for stopping power.

I'd say a standard 9x18 in hollow point should be a reliable two shot stopper, but can't be relied on for one shot stops. However, two shot stops are good enough for me. Unfortunatlely, a thick winter coat would call the two shot stops into question.

Now look at a CZ-P82 or P83 and the ammo it is intended to shoot all the time: Check ammo, which is 9x18 +P+ ammo. That helps a lot. If you can get this ammo in hollow point, you'd have a decent 1 shot stopper with power half way between .380 and 9mm Parabellum. I think 2 shots would do it for sure.

Therefore, I conclude that a CZ-83 shooting 9x18 +P+ hollow points is a good defense round that offers a decent chance of a one shot stop and a near certainty of a two shot stop (assuming good bullet placement). I believe this would be true regardless of winter coats or not.

Also, the CZ-82 and CZ-83 can easily handle a steady diet of +P+ 9x18 because that's what they were made for.

=======================================

Lastly, look at the super hot loaded Mak 9x18 PMM ammo made for the new high capacity, high powered Makarov PMM. The 9x18 PMM ammo is 70% more powerful than standard 9x18 ammo, which is 50% more than a P82 or P83 can handle.

The Makarvov PMM ammo is ballistically the same or very similar to 9MM +P Parabellum. So there is no need to guess about it's perfomance. Don't ever put 9x18 PMM ammo into an old style Makarov or a CZ-83 because it's way to powerful for those guns and I think it would be VERY dangerous.

The only gun you can put 9x18 PMM ammo into is a Makarov PMM pistol. Don't try putting this ammo into anything else.

=========================================

Your thoughts on 9x18 stopping power, or lack of it?

[kirkcdl]

http://www.goldenloki.com/

[denfoote]

Stopping power is a myth.
The "one shot stop" is a farce.
Shot placement is king!!
These truths are independent of caliber!!
The lowly .25acp will stop (kill) if it is put in the right spot!!
My CCW instructor taught us to "shoot and keep shooting" until the threat went away!!

[taliv]

i prefer to think that people (and cover) have stopping-power, while bullets have going-power (aka momentum). some people (e.g. those who frequent mcdonalds or BBQ pits) may have more stopping-power than others.

[Scottmkiv]

I don't think I would run hollow point in 9x18, the penetration just isn't very comforting. The Wolf 109 gr FMJ gets 21 inches IIRC, and is my preffered carry round.

[jem375]

I use Barnaul JHP's in mine but it still is not equal to the 9MM which I personally consider to be the minimum I would carry for SD.

[RON in PA]

Troll!:barf: :barf: :barf:

[Snowdog]

Thought I certainly wouldn't recommend the lowly .32acp for defense, I have been known to depend on a P32 on particularly warm days.
I won't qoute any "one shot stops" as I believe they're somewhat misleading (despite having greatly enjoyed Marshal and Sanows publications).
And for the record, three rounds that are said to have a "40% OSS" shouldn't be expected to offer a 120% of incapacitation. ;) Though interesting on paper, that's not suitable for the real world.

However, I will say that if pushed into a defensive role, an assailant will become much more docile after receiving a couple 71gr FMJs to the "snot locker".

As for the 9x18, I found Silverbears in 115gr flavor are the cat's meow out of my Makarov with heavier spring installed (21 pound Wolff spring if I'm not mistaken).

However, as wisely pointed out, shot placement is the absolutely vital and key to effectiveness. A flesh wound from a .454 Casull, regardless of how nasty it may appear, has nothing on a 9x18 to the noggin'.

[Tomac]

I agree w/much of what's already been posted. No such thing as "stopping power". Sufficient penetration and shot placement, nothing else matters. I have a '62 EG Mak for my bedside/CCW piece and use the Silver Bear 115gr JHP @1,000fps (low-end 9mm peformance, 380+P can't touch it) for the current best combination of expansion & penetration. The lighter weight 9x18 JHP's don't have sufficient penetration IMHO.
Tomac

[Erich]

What denfoote said.

Shot-placement and bullet penetration rule in handgun killing. I've worked on 150 of them, either as primary counsel, a PI (when I was in law school), or a consultant.

The 9x18 Mak works. I've worked on about 5 killings in which it was used. You hit the right place, the guy goes down. Just like with a .45. The 9x18 Mak seems completely capable of sufficient accuracy and penetration to put a man down.

[innerpiece9]

placement, pennetration, and expantion are the key to the shot.
think of yer pistol like a hole puncher.:rolleyes:

[CAnnoneer]

Caliber is secondary to shot placement, but placement is not guaranteed.

So what can one do?

Practice, use as high caliber as comfortable with, have big magazine capacity, shoot until the BG stops.

As simple as that. Comparing grains, fps, etc. is purely academic next to the above simple rules.

[azrael]

well I could be all fancy like those that posted before me, BUT here at Azrael's we have a simple formula for "stopping power"...

Shoot whatever it is that you are shooting LOTs of times in the face...Repeatedly...Shoot it SOME MORE...If undecided?? yup SHOOT SOME MORE!!!..if it doesnt move then it is stopped...See?? works like a charm..

OR for those that arent educated in the Southern Baptist Shooting Method (SBSMtm), then I will make it a bit simpler..

If they are worth shooting once, they are prolly worth shooting seveal times, until they stop doing whatever it is that you decided to shoot them for?? see what I mean?? Stopping power only matters to the guy that just got shot..It is up to him whether or not he is gonna stop..Not some magic formula.:rolleyes:

easy stuff


unpleasant dreams :evil:

[MICHAEL T]

When you get a 9x18 make sure you get one with ABS stops a lot better.:neener:

[The_Antibubba]

One big bonus of the Makarov is how stubbornly reliable it is. If you need it, it will work.

[wbond]

The CZ-83 9x18 is designed to shoot 20% hotter ammo than standard 9x18 ammo. The Checkoslovaks (spelling?) use 20% hotter 9x18 ammo than the Ruskies. The CZ-83 is therefore more potent than a Makarov, if I can get hotter 9x18 ammo.

Plan to use 9x18 +P+ hollow point, if I can find it, or hotter. Of course the limiting factor will probably be my recoil sensitivity (hand held together by 4 screws).

Somebody (forgot who) makes a really hot loaded 9x18 cal. 115 grain hollow point that goes about 1050 fps. I think that would do it. It's a lot hotter than a .380.

I don't think I would run hollow point in 9x18, the penetration just isn't very comforting. The Wolf 109 gr FMJ gets 21 inches IIRC, and is my preffered carry round.

[wbond]

Ya, that's the 115 gr I want to try. I probably won't need to modify the CZ-83 at all because it's already made to shoot 20% more powerful 9x18 ammo than a Makarov. So my stock recoil spring should be fine.

The Checkoslovaks (spelling?) claim their 9x18 ammo is 20% more powerful than Rusky, and that the CZ-82 and CZ-83 are made for this 20% hotter 9x18 ammo. So your recommended hot 9x18 ammo should be perfect, if my recoil sensitive hand can take it. If my hand (held together by 4 screws) can't handle the hotter 9x18 ammo, then I can shoot regular 9x18, or .380 in my .380 CZ-83.

Thought I certainly wouldn't recommend the lowly .32acp for defense, I have been known to depend on a P32 on particularly warm days.
I won't qoute any "one shot stops" as I believe they're somewhat misleading (despite having greatly enjoyed Marshal and Sanows publications).
And for the record, three rounds that are said to have a "40% OSS" shouldn't be expected to offer a 120% of incapacitation. ;) Though interesting on paper, that's not suitable for the real world.

However, I will say that if pushed into a defensive role, an assailant will become much more docile after receiving a couple 71gr FMJs to the "snot locker".

As for the 9x18, I found Silverbears in 115gr flavor are the cat's meow out of my Makarov with heavier spring installed (21 pound Wolff spring if I'm not mistaken).

However, as wisely pointed out, shot placement is the absolutely vital and key to effectiveness. A flesh wound from a .454 Casull, regardless of how nasty it may appear, has nothing on a 9x18 to the noggin'.

[Snowdog]

If you're expecting the JHP uniformity typical of US-made JHPs, you might find the 115gr Silverbears a bit crude. If you're looking for decent accuracy, reliability and positive real-world expansion, you'll likely enjoy them.
I believe they still sell for $5.50/50, so your defensive fodder could double for range ammo.

Here's a previous thread on the 115gr Silverbears:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=141174&highlight=115gr+silverbear

[wbond]

I agree about shooting a larger caliber, if possible. I'd rather shoot a .40 cal Glock 23 like I used to.

The problem is my left hand is now held together by 4 screws and my right wrist fused. So I'm VERY recoil sensitive. I can handle .380 in my .380 CZ-83.

I'm hoping to handle 9x18 in my 9x18 CZ-83 with those hotter 115 grain loads. I don't know if I can handle the hotter 115 gr 9x18 or not, but I'll find out. I don't have the luxury of getting a more powerful cartridge than that. I might not even be able to go over .380.

Note I own two CZ-83s: one in .380 and another in 9x18. Haven't picked up the 9x18 from store yet.

Therefore, I'd like to get an idea of how much confidence I can have in the capabilities I do have. I am a decent shot, especially considering my wrist is fused at an angle that does not line up properly for sighting. I can hit a dinner plate almost every time at 25 yards. At 10 yards I can hit a pie plate (4") almost every time. I'm not as good as I once was of course, but still good enough I think.

I just wanted some idea of what a 9x18 hot load could do. I might have to stick to .380. We'll see. Thanks.

Caliber is secondary to shot placement, but placement is not guaranteed.

So what can one do?

Practice, use as high caliber as comfortable with, have big magazine capacity, shoot until the BG stops.

As simple as that. Comparing grains, fps, etc. is purely academic next to the above simple rules.

[NoScreenName]

One big bonus of the Makarov is how stubbornly reliable it is. If you need it, it will work.

In one way or another... it's all steel... so if you shoot it dry... you can always club someone with it...

Who's going to win a pistol whipping fight? The guy with the Mak or the guy with the glock? :D

[wbond]

Good point actually. The CZ-83 is also all steel and a tad heavier.

In one way or another... it's all steel... so if you shoot it dry... you can always club someone with it...

Who's going to win a pistol whipping fight? The guy with the Mak or the guy with the glock? :D

[RyanM]

You could try a Browning Hi-Power. All steel, recoil-operated instead of blowback, and 9mm. Standard pressure 147 grain loads will usually have less felt recoil than 124 or 115s. Going by the empty w/magazine weights, 147 grain 9x19mm through a BHP only has 25% more recoil impulse than 109 gr FMJ through a 9x18mm CZ-83. Though regular 109 gr 9mm Makarov ammo produces almost 25% more recoil over .380 to begin with.

You could also see if you can track down a 9mm 1911. The 1911's weight will cut the recoil down to just a hair under 9mm Mak.

Raw numbers:
.380 CZ-83: 7.54 fps
9x18 CZ-83: 9.31 fps
9mm BHP: 11.57 fps
9mm 1911: 9.26 fps

Though the (approximate) felt recoils, based on acceleration instead of impulse, are a little different. The 9x18 CZ-83 definitely loses.
.380 CZ-83: 9.2
9x18 CZ-83: 12.6
9mm BHP: 10.6
9mm 1911: 6.5

I don't know whether your fused wrist will make you more sensitive to impulse or acceleration. Most people notice the recoil acceleration more than the recoil velocity.

In terms of "stopping power," the approximate amount of tissue each is capable of crushing, in a frontal torso shot is:
.380 95 gr FMJ: 12.3 grams
.380 90 gr XTP: 14.1 grams
9x18 109 gr FMJ: 12.9 grams
9x18 115 gr HP: 14.3 grams
9mm 147 gr HP: 30.2 grams

According to Duncan MacPherson, around 30-40 grams is the absolute bare minimum to quickly incapacitate a human with lung shots.

[M2 Carbine]

The CZ-83 9x18 is designed to shoot 20% hotter ammo than standard 9x18 ammo. The Checkoslovaks (spelling?) use 20% hotter 9x18 ammo than the Ruskies. The CZ-83 is therefore more potent than a Makarov, if I can get hotter 9x18 ammo.

Plan to use 9x18 +P+ hollow point, if I can find it, or hotter. Of course the limiting factor will probably be my recoil sensitivity (hand held together by 4 screws).

Somebody (forgot who) makes a really hot loaded 9x18 cal. 115 grain hollow point that goes about 1050 fps. I think that would do it. It's a lot hotter than a .380.

I've got a 9x18 CZ-83 and several Makarovs.
IMO the CZ is no stronger than the Mak and I wouldn't trust shooting my hot reloads in the CZ, that I normally shoot in the Mak (with a 21 pound recoil spring).

The normal 9x18 factory load does 1,000fps with bullets weighing 90 to 115 grain.
That means CZ claims that the 83 is designed to use (and they load) 9x18 ammo in the 1,200fps range. I'll believe it when I see it.

If anyone knows of any factory 9x18 ammo that does over 1,000-1,050fps I'd like to know about it. I'll buy a whole bunch.:)
To my knowledge there's no 9x18 +P ammo.

I and another poster, "catbird", have been working on 9x18 hand loads and we have gotten in the 1100+fps range with light bullets, 90-95gr, and that's pushing it.
We haven't been able to test hand loads with 115 grain bullets because there aren't any (.364) available for hand loading.

Bond, with your hand problem, if you could get a hot load you might not be able to handle it.
The Mak is still 100% reliable with even a 21 pound recoil spring and that helps to reduce the "kick".
Maybe the CZ will be also, I haven't tried it.

You might consider hand loading light (700fps) loads for practice.
Lead bullets and JHP reloads are very accurate.:)

The hottest factory load I know of is Silver Bear/Brown Bear 115gr JHP at about 1,000fps.

[wbond]

Thanks very much for the information. You are right. My hand might not take it. I intend to work up gradually. If a heavier recoil spring dampens recoil (I didn't know that), then maybe I should experiment with heavier springs to see what's the heaviest that is reliable with the 115 grain silver bears. What do you think of that idea?

Also, with regard to what power ammo the CZ-82 and CZ-83 are made for: that claim was made by some place called "Guns of the world". That place said that CZ claims that their military ammo is/was 20% hotter than standard 9x18 ammo and that the CZ 82 and 83 were made for that hotter ammo.

So CZ didn't directly claim that to me. Rather this other website stated that CZ claims this.

I've got a 9x18 CZ-83 and several Makarovs.
IMO the CZ is no stronger than the Mak and I wouldn't trust shooting my hot reloads in the CZ, that I normally shoot in the Mak (with a 21 pound recoil spring).

The normal 9x18 factory load does 1,000fps with bullets weighing 90 to 115 grain.
That means CZ claims that the 83 is designed to use (and they load) 9x18 ammo in the 1,200fps range. I'll believe it when I see it.

If anyone knows of any factory 9x18 ammo that does over 1,000-1,050fps I'd like to know about it. I'll buy a whole bunch.:)
To my knowledge there's no 9x18 +P ammo.

I and another poster, "catbird", have been working on 9x18 hand loads and we have gotten in the 1100+fps range with light bullets, 90-95gr, and that's pushing it.
We haven't been able to test hand loads with 115 grain bullets because there aren't any (.364) available for hand loading.

Bond, with your hand problem, if you could get a hot load you might not be able to handle it.
The Mak is still 100% reliable with even a 21 pound recoil spring and that helps to reduce the "kick".
Maybe the CZ will be also, I haven't tried it.

You might consider hand loading light (700fps) loads for practice.
Lead bullets and JHP reloads are very accurate.:)

The hottest factory load I know of is Silver Bear/Brown Bear 115gr JHP at about 1,000fps.

[jem375]

I have tried Barnaul, Wolf, and S&B 9x18 ammo in my Mak. The Barnaul JHP shoots best and is my carry ammo when I carry it. I don't like Wolf and don't shoot that crap in nothing but my SKS's or Ak's. I had 2 malfunctions with the S&B and don't buy that any more either. Haven't tried Silver Bear yet but see no reason to when Barnaul works so good for me.

[RyanM]

Also, with regard to what power ammo the CZ-82 and CZ-83 are made for: that claim was made by some place called "Guns of the world". That place said that CZ claims that their military ammo is/was 20% hotter than standard 9x18 ammo and that the CZ 82 and 83 were made for that hotter ammo.

Sounds like they got the CZ-83 and CZ-52 confused. The CZ-52 is made to fire all 7.62x25mm ammunition, including the submachinegun-only ammo, which is much hotter than pistol ammo.

[McCall911]

In terms of "stopping power," the approximate amount of tissue each is capable of crushing, in a frontal torso shot is:
.380 95 gr FMJ: 12.3 grams
.380 90 gr XTP: 14.1 grams
9x18 109 gr FMJ: 12.9 grams
9x18 115 gr HP: 14.3 grams
9mm 147 gr HP: 30.2 grams

According to Duncan MacPherson, around 30-40 grams is the absolute bare minimum to quickly incapacitate a human with lung shots.


Bravo! At last a "stopping power" analysis that we can actually use, as opposed to that "one shot stop" deal (maybe)! Thank you, Duncan McPherson! You're a credit to Clan McPherson! :D

Conventional wisdom says that with handgun cartridges in the .32ACP and .380ACP range, you can pretty much count on multiple shots to incapacitate an attacker. So it's apparent from McPherson's study that at least 3 or 4 rounds from a .380, in particular, will achieve at least the "paper" result of 30-40 grams.

But, in my book, nothing replaces this: "In a defensive situation, be prepared to shoot and keep shooting until the threat is over." And this is regardless of what caliber you are using.

[CAnnoneer]

The problem is my left hand is now held together by 4 screws and my right wrist fused. So I'm VERY recoil sensitive. I can handle .380 in my .380 CZ-83.

Sorry, I did not know about your injuries.

In that case, why not get a harness machined, which attaches to your forearm? If you have it made like an archer's bracer, you should be able to absorb a lot of the recoil there instead of the wrist. A custom grip on the pistol can lock into the harness. Besides, the .380 kick less than 9mm, and 9mm kicks less than .357, .40, or .45. The harness can look like the ones in Alien Resurrection and Red Heat.

Being the oddball, I actually like the .380 and would not feel undergunned with it. I shot several hundred rounds through a Beretta Cheetah in that a few times at the range and it was deadly accurate. The major downside for me is the more expensive and harder to find ammo.

If all of that fails, maybe consider the FN5.7 ? I hear it has virtually no recoil, but the ammo is expensive.

[NoScreenName]

In terms of "stopping power," the approximate amount of tissue each is capable of crushing, in a frontal torso shot is:
.380 95 gr FMJ: 12.3 grams
.380 90 gr XTP: 14.1 grams
9x18 109 gr FMJ: 12.9 grams
9x18 115 gr HP: 14.3 grams
9mm 147 gr HP: 30.2 grams


Bravo! At last a "stopping power" analysis that we can actually use, as opposed to that "one shot stop" deal (maybe)!

Conventional wisdom says that with handgun cartridges in the .32ACP and .380ACP range, you can pretty much count on multiple shots to incapacitate an attacker. So it's apparent from McPherson's study that at least 3 or 4 rounds from a .380, in particular, will achieve at least the "paper" result of 30-40 grams.



You are missing the importantance of the word CAPABLE... the bullet weights are capaable of that but due to the fact that .380's are loaded to deliver much milder speeds than say 9x18 I don't think they would live up to their potential and capability...

I'd take a 9x18 over a .380 anyday... even with as slight an edge as it has... I think the hotter russian loadings and fps speeds allow it to live up or at least approach it's capabilities moreso than .380...

I think it's accepted by most that multiple shots are generally required for immediate cessation of aggressive activities in most situations...

IMO the arguing over slight differences in "potential stopping power" of various calibers and decisions made thusly, are merely stemming from a place of laziness... There is no substitute, caliber-wise, that will make up for lack of or poor shooting skills, accuracy and/or tactics... there is no magic bullet... except for the JFK bullet...

The old adage, "fear a .22 in the hands of someone who knows how to use it over the .44 in the hands of someone who doesn't.." is 100% true... there is no band aid caliber that will make up for one's lack of ability and proficiency...

[grendelbane]

I too have recently suffered a hand injury. Though I have recovered now, I can still remember the handgunning problems that I suffered.

While I liked the Mak that I owned, I thought its recoil was brisk even before I hurt my hand. Revolvers were out of the question, even dry firing several of my wheel guns was painful.

If I had not recovered, I would now be carrying a 9mm Gov't model clone. The only thing that full length guide rods are really good for is adding weight, so I would add one, preferably tungsten. There are lots of other little tricks for adding weight to a Gov't model.

No 9mm caliber handgun is going to be a great stopper. Or a 10mm, or even a 13mm, if they made one. However, the Gov't model is very accurate and easy to shoot. This would be my choice.

[RyanM]

Actually, the chances of those rounds crushing that amount of tissue is fairly likely. It's the incapacitation where the capable part comes into play, really. Anyone who's interested in wound ballistics should buy a copy of MacPherson's book, Bullet Penetration. It's written in very easy to understand language, and makes minimal use of jargon. And all the equations are there for calculating a real, tangible amount of tissue damage which one round will do compared to the next. http://www.firearmstactical.com/bulletpenetration.htm

MacPherson is a physicist and a literal rocket scientist. He wrote aerodynamics equations which were used in several successful rocket launches. So I have a lot of confidence in his equations.

[McCall911]

Well...I fail to understand what I have failed to understand. But anyway...

I think it's likely that the 9 x 18 (9mm Makarov) should be considered in the same ballpark as the .380ACP for the simple reason that the velocities are practically similar (within 100 fps or so) and the bullet weights are similar (90 to about 100 grains.) And so the differences in performance/power, etc. are nothing to get overly excited about.
To split hairs just a bit, one point in favor of the .380ACP might be the slight advantage in penetration that this round might have compared the the 9mm Mak. Since bullet weights are similar, but the diameter of the .380 is ever so slightly smaller, then it has slightly greater sectional density and, hence, the capability of a miniscule amount of penetration over the 9mm Mak.
But I don't like splitting hairs, so I say: To each his own!

[wbond]

Sounds like they got the CZ-83 and CZ-52 confused. The CZ-52 is made to fire all 7.62x25mm ammunition, including the submachinegun-only ammo, which is much hotter than pistol ammo.

Don't think they're confused. I'm not an expert, but they seem to know their stuff. This is a Russian gun website.

See http://world.guns.ru
Then go to the English part of site. Then to the handguns part. Then to Czech Republic handguns. Then to CZ-82-83 section.

Read it yourself. It says that the CZ-82 and 83 are made to handle 20% more powerful 9x18 ammo than standard Soviet 9x18 ammo.

If you want to go straight to the CZ-82-83 section, then click here:
http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg26-e.htm

As you can see, the Russian gun writer says CZ-82 and 83 were designed for 20% hotter 9x18 than standard Soviet 9x18 ammo. They also say that Czech ammo was traditionally 20% hotter than Soviet ammo in 9x18. Note they said "Soviet" not "Russian" ammo. What's the difference? Well "Soviet" means made under Soviet rule (old days). "Russian" means made in recent times and now.

i.e. - Soviet ammo means the old stuff the Soviets used to make. Russian ammo means the new stuff the Russians currently make. The Rusky gun writer is claiming that communist era Czech 9x18 ammo was 20% hotter than communist era 9x18 Soviet ammo. He's not saying the Czeck ammo today is hotter than Russian ammo today. He's saying that Czeck ammo then was 20% hotter than Soviet ammo then. The Makarov PM (traditional Makarov) and CZ-82 were designed then, not now. So this brings me back to my original conclusion: The CZ-82 was designed for 20% hotter ammo then the Makarov. The CZ-83 is the same gun or very similar as the 82.

I enterpet that as the stock (unaltered) CZ-82 and 83 are designed for 20% hotter ammo than a stock Makarov. Am I misunderstanding the implications of what the Russian gun writer is saying? Is he wrong?

This was supposedly written by a Rusky handgun expert at this Russian site. I'm not an expert on Makarovs or CZ-82s-83s, but I tend to think a Rusky gun website knows about 9x18 ammo and guns for it. We're talking "stock" guns. No changing of recoil springs or other customizations.

However, feel free to disagree and set me straight. I'm a novice to 9x18 myself and don't know anything other than what others tell me.

[wbond]

I'm not saying this myself. I'm a novice to 9x18. So what do I know?

This was told to me by a Russian gun website.

See http://world.guns.ru
Then go to the English part of site. Then to the handguns part. Then to Czech Republic handguns. Then to CZ-82-83 section.

Read it yourself. It says that the CZ-82 and 83 are made to handle 20% more powerful 9x18 ammo than standard Soviet 9x18 ammo.

i.e. - Soviet ammo means the old stuff the Soviets used to make. Russian ammo means the new stuff the Russians currently make. The Rusky gun writer is claiming that communist era Czech 9x18 ammo was 20% hotter than communist era 9x18 Soviet ammo. He's not saying the Czeck ammo today is hotter than Russian ammo today. He's saying that Czeck ammo then was 20% hotter than Soviet ammo then.

The Makarov PM (traditional Makarov) and CZ-82 were designed then, not now. So this brings me back to my original conclusion: The CZ-82 was made for 20% hotter ammo then the Makarov.

I enterpet that as the stock (unaltered) CZ-82 and 83 are made for 20% hotter ammo than a stock Makarov. I'm basing this on the ammo made back then, not ammo made today. These guns were both designed back then. Am I misunderstanding the implications of what the Russian gun writer is saying? Is he wrong?

If you want to go straight to the Russian gun writer's CZ-82-83 section, then click here:
http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg26-e.htm

As you can see, they say CZ-82 and 83 are made for 20% hotter 9x18 than standard Soviet 9x18 ammo. They also say that Czech ammo was traditionally 20% hotter than Soviet ammo in 9x18.

I enterpet that as the stock (unaltered) CZ-82 and 83 are designed for 20% hotter ammo than a stock Makarov. We're talking "stock" guns. No changing of recoil springs or other customizations. Am I misunderstanding?

I'm getting this from the Russian gun writer at this Russian gun website, and this is my interpetation of what he says. However, feel free to disagree and set me straight. I'm a novice to 9x18 myself and don't know anything other than what others tell me. That's why I started this topic. I want to learn.

Thanks from wbond, the recoil sensitive guy who likes CZ-83s in .32, .380, and soon 9x18, if I can handle it.

[thepanda]

I'll admit that I didn't read much of this post; I had to stop after reading one of the first statements in the first post. I believe the author of the statement was saying that a .32 ACP cartridge has "3 shot stop power" because it's "shot stop capability" was around 40% and this multiplied by 3 was well over 100%.

First of all, I have no idea where these "facts" are from our how they could possibly be accurately measured when one considers the number of variables involved and the ethics of shooting other people for statistical purposes.

Second, the author's statistical reasoning is fundamentally flawed. Let us say that "shot stop capability" is an accurate measurement and the cartridge stops threats 40% of the time with one round. You cannot simply multiply this percentage by 3 to get 120%, which is over 100%, and assume the threat has been stopped. Using this same logic you could say that each individual round has a 60% chance of not stopping the threat, which multiplied by 2 equals 120% and therefore you could not possibly stop a threat with 2 rounds. Using this logic your odds of stopping the target would be 60% worse each time you fired! Obviously, using statistics in this manner does not work. Statistically, each bullet acts independently of the round before it. Each time the trigger is pulled and a round is fired, and assuming the "shot stop capability" is accurate, the round has a 40% chance of stopping the threat. It doesn't matter if you fire one or one hundred rounds, each round has a 40% chance of stopping the threat. Now, statistically, your odds of perpetually falling within that 60% range that does not stop the threat decreases the more you fire, but one cannot calculate these odds with simple multiplication.

Also, the concept of "shot stop capability" seems ridiculous to me. The ability of a round to stop a threat is GREATLY influenced on point of impact, age of threat, health of threat, windage, elevation, clothing, type of drugs the assailant is using, and millions of other variables. The simple fact that the threat is moving toward the shooter influences the effectiveness of each round by both creating an additional opposite force in the collision and reducing flight time of the projectile. Additionally, each shot that hits the threat changes the target's surface area and acceleration. Needless to say, an accurate "shot stop capability" would be difficult, if not impossible, to measure even if it weren't unethical to practice shooting people.

Anyway, my rant is over. Maybe it was a bit much considering I'm new around here and new to firearms in general, but I'm not new to statistics and physics. I just thought this information was worth clarifying. Happy reading! :D

[wbond]

Very interesting. With all respect, I'm no expert, but I think the 9x18 is much better than the .380, if my hand can take the Silver Bear 115 gr ammo. If I have to stay with 95 gr ammo, then the 9x18 is a little better, but with enough advantage to still want 9x18.

My philosophy is that the .380 is borderline. So any extra the 9x18 can provide might be just enough extra.

It's like when you're stuck in snow and your compact car weighs 3,500 lbs, but a push from a person can sometimes get you unstuck. A 175 lb person whose feet are on snow can't push more than 70 or 80 lbs max, yet this often gets you unstuck because you were on the borderline of being stuck. It only takes a little force to get you over the borderline. In the stuck car example, a 2% increase in force is enough to get it done.

In the same way, the little extra offered by the 9x18 might be just enough, especially since most experts say the .380 is borderline. Unless of course I can use the 115 Silver Bears, which are a lot extra. Don't know if my hand will tolerate the Silver Bears or not, but 95 gr sounds like a good alternative.

In the stuck car example, a 2% increase in force is enough to get the car moving. Based on momentum, the standard 9x18 loads are 15% more powerful than standard .380 loads. The strongest 9x18 load (Silver Bear) is 16% stronger than a +P .380. To me, that's substantial. This is based on momentum (Mass X Velocity). If you look at Energy (Mass X Velocity^2), then the 9x18 has a large advantage over the .380.

The only question is, is it a substantial advantage (momentum) or a large advantage (energy)? I'm going to assume that both momentum and energy are important. If so, the 9x18 advantage is medium. Anything, even a little, helps when you're on the borderline. The 9x18 advantage is more than a little, in my opinion it could certainly get you on the good side of borderline.

Sure, I might need a 2nd or 3rd shot, but with every shot the advantage multiplies.

As for penetration, I find it hard to believe that a 90 gr .380 can penetrate anywhere near a 115 gr 9x18. The difference in bullet diameter is not substantial IMO because it's way less than 1% difference. Certainly a trivial diameter difference compared to the bullet weight difference.

Therefore, I believe the 9x18 would have more penetration with the 115 gr Siver Bear, and more expansion too. A 95 gr 9x18 might not have any better penetration than a .380 90 gr, maybe less due to the higher velocity of the 9x18. So the advantage of the 95 gr 9x18 is questionable with regard to penetration. The 9x18 95 gr might even have a disadvantage here. However, the 115 gr Silver Bear would almost certainly penetrate more than any hollow point .380.

I know I'm a novice to 9x18 and .380 too, but I do understand ballistics to a point. The above is just my opinion. My shooting experience is oldy, moldy, but ballistic concepts don't change that much. My big adjustment is learning to live with cartridges weaker than .40 S&W.

Why doesn't someone run an actual test in Gelitan or water jugs to see how the .380 really compares to the 9x18 in both 9x18 95 gr and 115 gr defense loads. Then, instead of theorizing (however much fun that is) we can see it. Don't forget to put denim or leather (to simulate a coat-jacket) over the gelitan or water jugs.

To bad we can't repeat the goat tests, but that would be illegal in my state and drive animal lovers to protest and insanity. In Europe, they tested handgun stopping power by shooting large 150 lb goats through lungs, intentionally missing heart. Then timed how long they took to fall over. Great tests. Bad publicity. Don't forget to put a denim jacket on the goats. ;-)

[wbond]

To ThePanda:

You're right about one thing. You're way over the top. You can express your opinion without making it insulting.

While it is not ethical to shoot people, and possibly not goats either, this was tested on goats in Europe. I never suggested shooting people for tests, nor goats either, but it's been done to goats. It's also been done to cattle in slaughter houses. Read Ayoob's book(s). I don't think steers tell us much about people though.

You are correct that "one shot stopping power" can't simply be multiplied by the number of shots to get an accurate number. It doesn't need to be accurate. If it's way over 100% that's good enough for me. If you don't like it, then figure it some other way, or don't figure it.

You are entirely mistaken in several areas. Most notably your comment that each preceding shot has no affect on the outcome of following shots. Clearly, getting shot multiple times is more physically tramatic than once. Anyone knows that.

Each shot takes a toll, even if it doesn't incapacitate by itself. This adds up. Use your common sense. No, maybe we can't put an accurate number to it, but it certainly adds up. Maybe we don't know exactly what it adds up to statistically, but we know it adds up to something larger than one shot by itself. That's common sense. I've also learned this by observation and experience as I'll explain below.

I won't even address your comment about each shot being LESS likely to stop an attacker than the preceding shots. That isn't even worth my time.

As for your statement that a 40% one shot stop possibility would always be 40% for each shot fired, no matter how many shots fired... Let me politely point out that if you get punched in the nose 3 times, it's more likely to put you down than once punch. Maybe not 3 times more likely, or maybe more than 3 times. I don't know. But certainly injuries add up. Same with bullets.

My grandfather used to poach deer with a .22 Magnum semi-auto. He said 3 quick shots always dropped them. I doubt one shot would have. He proved a .22 Magnum is a consistant 3 shot stopper on deer. Here is an interesting parallel. One chest shot with a .22 Mag would not likely put down a deer, but 3 always did over many years of poaching. What does this suggest? Could it suggest that three shots on target is more damaging than one? Mmm. Let's think about that.

I can tell you in detail about shooting possums with a .22 long rifle. No amount of shots would keep them from running off when using round nose bullets. With round nose I could only get about 5 or 7 in them before they'd run off. However, with hot loaded hollow points (stingers or yellow jackets) three chest shots would do it with fair consistency. Sometimes a 4th shot would be needed. Clearly one shot was not enough, but 3 or 4 was with hollow points. Multiple shots add up.

Statistically you can't simply multiply "one shot stop percentage" by number of shots to get an accurate total number. You are right about that. So what? It's a best guess. The best guess I can make without shooting goats multiple times. Hey, that's a good idea. Thanks.

No, I'm not really going to start shooting goats, but I really did take out those possums with a .22 and once with a bow and target arrows. Both required multiple shots :-)

When "one shot stop percentage" is multiplied by number of shots, maybe it's really greater than the total, maybe less, maybe equal. No one knows. It's a guess. In my experience hunting possums, I found 3 shots is 3 times as damaging as one, if each shot gets enough penetration. That's the big "if".

If penetration not adequate, then no amount of shots will do it. If expansion is not adequate, then a lot of shots will do it, but I mean A LOT (more than 5). If penetration and/or expansion are borderline (almost decent), like a stinger .22 on a possum, then I have observed 3 shots to be approx 3 times as good as 1. With round nose .22 bullets, it took 10 shots or more, if I could corner them. Usually with round nose they'd get away because I wasn't fast enough to get more than 3-5 shots in them. That's why I stopped using round nose.

My feeling is this, a severely inadequate cartridge is still severely inadequate until you get about 10 well placed shots. By then an attacker could be carving his initials in your chest with a knife. However, a borderline cartridge (like .380) is probably enough with 2 or 3 shots. 9x18 has just enough edge over .380 that I think 2 shots would likely do it. A 3rd shot is still an option.

Of course the above only applies to an insane or enraged attacker. No sane person would charge any handgun, especially if they were already shot once. Any sane person would be stopped or running the other way. I think most attackers are sane and even the sight of a handgun will deter most. For a sane attacker, the mere sight of a gun would have stopping power.

By the way, that's why I like shiny nickel guns or stainless for day time carry. Besides being prettier, they look scarier to bad guys. At least I read that somewhere. Makes sense to me that a flashier gun attracts more attention, which MIGHT be more intimidating, which MIGHT make it unnecessary to fire a shot. For night carry, I prefer matte black or blue because I think stealth more important at night.

I'll admit that I didn't read much of this post; I had to stop after reading one of the first statements in the first post. I believe the author of the statement was saying that a .32 ACP cartridge has "3 shot stop power" because it's "shot stop capability" was around 40% and this multiplied by 3 was well over 100%.

First of all, I have no idea where these "facts" are from our how they could possibly be accurately measured when one considers the number of variables involved and the ethics of shooting other people for statistical purposes.

Second, the author's statistical reasoning is fundamentally flawed. Let us say that "shot stop capability" is an accurate measurement and the cartridge stops threats 40% of the time with one round. You cannot simply multiply this percentage by 3 to get 120%, which is over 100%, and assume the threat has been stopped. Using this same logic you could say that each individual round has a 60% chance of not stopping the threat, which multiplied by 2 equals 120% and therefore you could not possibly stop a threat with 2 rounds. Using this logic your odds of stopping the target would be 60% worse each time you fired! Obviously, using statistics in this manner does not work. Statistically, each bullet acts independently of the round before it. Each time the trigger is pulled and a round is fired, and assuming the "shot stop capability" is accurate, the round has a 40% chance of stopping the threat. It doesn't matter if you fire one or one hundred rounds, each round has a 40% chance of stopping the threat. Now, statistically, your odds of perpetually falling within that 60% range that does not stop the threat decreases the more you fire, but one cannot calculate these odds with simple multiplication.

Also, the concept of "shot stop capability" seems ridiculous to me. The ability of a round to stop a threat is GREATLY influenced on point of impact, age of threat, health of threat, windage, elevation, clothing, type of drugs the assailant is using, and millions of other variables. The simple fact that the threat is moving toward the shooter influences the effectiveness of each round by both creating an additional opposite force in the collision and reducing flight time of the projectile. Additionally, each shot that hits the threat changes the target's surface area and acceleration. Needless to say, an accurate "shot stop capability" would be difficult, if not impossible, to measure even if it weren't unethical to practice shooting people.

Anyway, my rant is over. Maybe it was a bit much considering I'm new around here and new to firearms in general, but I'm not new to statistics and physics. I just thought this information was worth clarifying. Happy reading! :D

[Mad Chemist]

Plan to use 9x18 +P+ hollow point, if I can find it, or hotter. Of course the limiting factor will probably be my recoil sensitivity (hand held together by 4 screws).


All things being equal, a delayed blowback 9mm will have less felt recoil than a straight blowback Mak or .380 while delivering a hotter round. Don't get me wrong I'm not a Makrov hater, but if you are recoil sensitive then you should consider this.

Wbond, the math tools used for ballistic calculations are much more complex than simple arithmetic. 9x18 is marginal for SD but still effective. However, you will get a cheaper better performing round with less felt recoil if you choose a std. mass-delayed blowback 9mm. Generally .380 and mak have been chosen for concealment, they can be carried very discreetly.
JH

[Mad Chemist]

Why so thin skinned? Panda's post wasn't a personal attack. The post was a refutation of some rather suspect stats and specious links within your reasoning.

For endless piles of data relevant to this thread use the search function. There are many makarov shooters on this site and you can get some excellent advice on models, ammo, parts, holsters, etc.
The search function is your friend.:)

JH

[wbond]

Please recommend a list of 9mm delayed blowback I should try.

By the way, is it the delayed blowback that helps reduce the felt recoil?

All things being equal, a delayed blowback 9mm will have less felt recoil than a straight blowback Mak or .380 while delivering a hotter round. Don't get me wrong I'm not a Makrov hater, but if you are recoil sensitive then you should consider this.

Wbond, the math tools used for ballistic calculations are much more complex than simple arithmetic. 9x18 is marginal for SD but still effective. However, you will get a cheaper better performing round with less felt recoil if you choose a std. mass-delayed blowback 9mm. Generally .380 and mak have been chosen for concealment, they can be carried very discreetly.
JH

[wbond]

s

[Dr.Rob]

I would not beleive anything I read without a chronograph.

Irregardless of who manufactured it when your supposition is that Czech ammo is hotter and the guns were made to handle it.

Let's assume for the moment that this is true.

Let's also assume that it's FMJ and not hollowpoints (which is likely).

Where does one GET this ammo for testing? How does it compare to SAAMI spec for the 9x18 Mak in a side byside comparison. Because given the VERY limited case capacity of the 9x18 I very seriously doubt you are going to get 20% 'hotter' without being very close to blowing the magazine out of the bottom of the gun due to an unsupported chamber.

Trying to recreate those numbers in BRASS cases (most warsaw pact fodder is steel cased) is likely a recipie for a blown up gun and missing fingers.

Is the .380/9mm Mak good enough for defensive work? Of course... but no matter how you stack it a Mak isn't a 9mm Parabellum, and FMJ isn't a quality hollowpoint.

[McCall911]

Very interesting. With all respect, I'm no expert, but I think the 9x18 is much better than the .380, if my hand can take the Silver Bear 115 gr ammo.

Looks like you've really done your 9x18 homework, wbond!
As for me, I was just using what I saw on that table and drew the conclusion that the two rounds had similar performance. For all I know, comparing the 9x18 to the .380 may be like comparing the .380 to the .32ACP: Commonsense seems to dictate that the .380 has more wounding potential (a.k.a. "stopping power") than the .32.

[NoScreenName]

Well...I fail to understand what I have failed to understand. But anyway...

I didn't mean to insinuate that you were failing to understand... not by any means...

I was merely suggesting taking it in as only one piece of the larger puzzle... I remember the days when everybody lived by marshall and sanow's OSS statistics...

SOme very interesting facts and formulas have been presented in this thread... thank you to all...

but they all seem a bit too scientifically oriented for me because there is simply an element of unpredictibility in the varibles... things that are impossible to factor in...

Real life shows us that certain events just do not happen like they should or liek they have been predicted...


Bah... I suppose it all boils down to which caliber/round performance guru or methodology you choose to buy into... but I still emphasize that even if it is a perceived advantage that does nothing else but boost your confidence in your choice, while not taken too far and with reverence... it might be a good thing...but even one step over that fine line and providing false confidence in your ability... is one of the worst things in the world...

Spending all your time finding the best uber bullet in the world while someone else is training their ass off with their "adequate" bullet design is sort of pointless IMO...

I've yet to try the 115gr silver bears... but I have a case headed my way as I write this... along with 19 & 21 lb recoil springs... and I'm very curious myself to see if the perceived recoil is any greater... I have a strong try it out for yourself philosophy since the olden days when the father figure types in my life told me tha .45ACP would knock me on my ass, being a 13yo kid and all... so I avoided it for many years and stuck with 9mm & 40S&W and when I finally shot it I wondered what all the hoopla was about, actually preferring it to .40... more of a shove than the snap of .40...

I had also heard the same thing about 9x18... that "manly men" didn't like the recoil and it was a bit much... once again I was surprised after I tried it for myself...



IMO... if you can handle hotter russian loads like Barnaul and Wolf... the 115gr Silver Bears shouldn't be that much of a difference... but we will see I spose... I'm going to try it with the stock 17lb spring first... with bakelite grips too... OMG...:what:

If the Barny or RAM or Tiger stuff is a bit too hot or snappy then hell... I'd even try the damn 95 grain Hornady XTP in 9x18 since it seems to be loaded comparably to alot of .380 loads...

I'm just a big hippocrit anyways... when it comes to the caliber discussions... I'd rather be all about the practice...

okay gentlemen... back to teh physics discussion... Gonna go out for a little winter morn pre dawn shoot...:D

[McCall911]

:)
Nah, I didn't take your reply as an insult to my intelligence, NoScreenName. That's how come I made my own facetious reply. But anyway...I don't exhibit enough intelligence for anyone to insult anyway. :D

Thinking about all the stuff we've been hearing about "stopping power" over the years, I'm reminded of that scene in Jurassic Park where Jeff Goldblum's character is explaining "chaos theory." Is the water going to trickle to the right, to the left. Or is it going to stay there?

I think trying to quantify "stopping power" is pretty similar.

[Janitor]

Shoot whatever it is that you are shooting LOTs of times in the face...Repeatedly...Shoot it SOME MORE...If undecided?? yup SHOOT SOME MORE!!!..if it doesnt move then it is stopped...See?? works like a charm..
Hmmm. I'm not so sure that going for a "face" shot first is the best possible idea. Certainly - much better chance of stopping the perp quickly if you connect. But ... the head moves a lot more than COM while the fan is being hit. Much lower odds target.

[RyanM]

The other problem with the face is you go from "extremely vital" to "extremely nonvital" very quickly, while the torso is more of a continuum. Anyone catch that thread awhile back with the guy that got his face bitten off by a bear? That guy was missing a sizeable portion of his head, but it didn't kill him. Take that big of a chunk out of anywhere on someone's chest, and they'll be dead pretty quick.

On the one shot stop data, 99% of people that make a living doing statistics (our own Michael Courtney seems to be the sole exception) say that the Marshall/Sanow one-shot stop data is either fabricated, or has been manipulated to the point that it's almost outright false.

http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/undeniable-evidence.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm

Plus the "fuller index" is pretty nonsensical.

0.0057 * energy / frontal area + 61.5

A 1/10th inch wide, 31 grain steel nail at 1000 fps has a 111% chance of a one shot stop. I guess we should stop bothering with these "bullet" things and start doing some R&D on hypervelocity nailguns instead?

[McCall911]

Plus the "fuller index" is pretty nonsensical.

0.0057 * energy / frontal area + 61.5


Yeah, the "fuller index" is fuller it!

[gazpacho]

wbond, I personally believe the 9x18 is only marginally better than 380acp, and any advantage you could gain by greater "stopping power" of the 9x18 could be more than offset by a higher volume of practice with the lower recoiling 380acp. That said, I have a few recommendations.

1) Magna-Porting (http://www.magnaport.com/hgun.html)
2) Beretta M86. Not currently in production, but has a 4.6" tip up barrel. Longer barrel for optimum velocity.
3) Taurus PT938. Never been able to confirm this, but it is supposed to be a Locked Breech semi-auto. Locked Breech reduces recoil.

[Northslope Nimrod]

9mm hits bad guy
9X18 hits bad guy

Bad guy can't tell the diff.

[Thain]

I'm by no means an expert, but I'm goignt o cast my vote for shoot `em `til they fall down. Then shoot `em `til they stop twitching. Then shoot once more.

:D

[wbond]

I agree with you that a 9x18 is only marginally better stopping power than a .380, but I think that any addtional beyond the .380 is a big help. i.e. - even a little more power is a big help because the .380 is borderline. A little extra might get me over the borderline.

However, you make a good point about my being able to shoot a .380 more and practice more due to lower recoil. Also, my hand would be less likely to come unscrewed (literally) with .380.

Several senior members have also recommended I try a delayed blowback or locked breach 9mm Para. My local gun store suggested this in a Beretta. I'm told this reduces perceived recoil below 9x18.

I want to try all of the above. My hand, wrist, and thumb ought to tolerate enough shots of each to test each.

Thanks for your input, by the way.

wbond, I personally believe the 9x18 is only marginally better than 380acp, and any advantage you could gain by greater "stopping power" of the 9x18 could be more than offset by a higher volume of practice with the lower recoiling 380acp. That said, I have a few recommendations.

1) Magna-Porting (http://www.magnaport.com/hgun.html)
2) Beretta M86. Not currently in production, but has a 4.6" tip up barrel. Longer barrel for optimum velocity.
3) Taurus PT938. Never been able to confirm this, but it is supposed to be a Locked Breech semi-auto. Locked Breech reduces recoil.

[wbond]

I'm by no means an expert, but I'm goignt o cast my vote for shoot `em `til they fall down. Then shoot `em `til they stop twitching. Then shoot once more. :D

Any self defense shooting is going to be reviewed by authorities. Do you want to go to prison?

I think that once the person (attacker) is no longer threatening you, you can't legally shoot them. Morally I don't think you should. If you are still shooting them after they are on the ground and incapacitated, it would be difficult to convince a judge or jury that was self defense.

A prosecutor would say (rightly so) that it was self defense until the attacker went down, but after that you had no need or right to shoot him further because he was no longer an attacker. You were the attacker after the other man down. That's what they'd say, and they'd be right.

If they can then prove the final shots after attacker already down killed him, you are in for a world of trouble. Probably man slaughter at least. This if you can prove that it was self defense while the man was on his feet, which will be harder to prove since you kept shooting him after he was "down and twitching".

Kicking a person who is down is considered attempted murder in some states. i.e. - if you continue to shoot (or kick or whatever) the attacker after they are down and incapacitated or no longer attacking, then you have become the attacker. Legally you will be punished severely.

Do you want to go to prison? Do you want to kill a man or just get him to stop attacking you? What is your true goal? If you just want him to stop attacking you, then why keep shooting him after he's "down and twitching" ?

You have the right to use deadly force only as long as a "reasonable person" would believe you were threatened. Do you think a reasonable judge or juror will think you were still threatened by a man who is "down and twitching".

For your own good, and for the good of other gun owners' rights, and for society, don't think so Rambo. Rambo went to prison, even in the movie. Remember that.

My goal and the proper goal is to shoot only as long as I perceive I am threatened. An attacker who has collapsed is no longer a threat, but don't turn you back on them just the same. I would continue shooting as long as they are coming toward me or still have a weapon in their hand. If they drop their weapon AND stop moving forward or back away, or if they collapse, I'd stop shooting, but still keep my gun aimed at ready. Once I was sure they were no longer a threat I'd lower my gun and call 911. If you don't call 911, you can be prosecuted for murder if the man dies for lack of medical care, even if the shooting was self defense. Remember that. I'm not saying I'd dial real fast though.

Think about these things in advance. Maybe consult your attorney. See what he says.

[thepanda]

wbond:

There was no personal attack and you missed the entire point of what I was saying.

If you're going to toss around a statistic such as "shot stop capability" you have to treat it as one. If it's 40% then it's 40% for EVERY SINGLE SHOT. Obviously many factors influence each shot and I tried to express that. Being shot once already definitely helps when trying to stop a threat, but that further proves why "shot stop capability" is an insignificant measurement-- it is a VARIABLE RATE and will be different every time the trigger is pulled. All I was attempting to say is that this statistic is misleading at best and multiplying it to come up with a mythical "3 shot stop" is even more inaccurate. I'm sorry that you took it as a personal attack. I didn't mean for it to come across as one.

You don't have to "address [my] comment about each shot being LESS likely to stop an attacker" because that would be foolish. The whole point of that statement was to point out how little sense employing your statistical logic makes. Obviously that point was lost on you.

I'm sorry if anything in this post sounds hostile, but I don't like coming online to a private message from a user with a "read receipt" that serves only to try and anger me. I was only trying to express why measuring the value of a cartridge in this manner is meaningless when there are far too many factors to consider.

Once again, I APOLOGIZE if you took my previous post as a personal attack. But I believe the manner in which you handled the entire situation was childish. I wished nothing other than to inform you as to why something was incorrect and offer my opinion. I believe that the entire point of a forum is to discuss facts and opinions and if you can’t read an opposing view without losing your cool I respectfully ask you to refrain from reading my posts.

[Thain]

Any self defense shooting is going to be reviewed by authorities. Do you want to go to prison?

<snip>

Think about these things in advance. Maybe consult your attorney. See what he says.

Wow! Dial it down a little, wbond. Not only did you send me this in the main thread, you also sent it to me (verbatim) in a lengthy private message.

To begin with, I don't see how anyone could reasonably find my "advice" to be serious... Not only is it asine in its John Woo-esque violence, I mispell most of it, and I include one of them nice green smilies...

I apologize for wasting everyone elses time with this, but come on...

Okay, let me put it in serious terms sense humor doesn't seem to work.

Shot placement beats caliber, and volume of fire helps too. If your concerned about stopping someone, you shot them `til they stop.

[wbond]

Your extreme sarcasm seemed insulting to me, but that's in the past. Let's not argue. Sorry I got so steamed.

As for not reading your posts, let's not be ridulous. No offense intended, but you read my post and thrashed it to the point of bordering on insult, if not actual insult. I over reacted to your post, but you first over reacted to my earlier post.

Let's both just cool down.

How can I not read your posts when they are about my posts?

I don't mind you disagreeing with me. When I started this thread, I invited everyone to agree, disagree, or debunk what I said. However, there is no need for excessive sarcassm. However, you say that was not your intent. OK. I take your word that that, which is why I apologized for gettng so steamed and sarcastic myself.

Go ahead and read my posts, which you obvisouly do since I'm the one who started this thread. That's OK. Disagree with me too, if you want. That's fine too.

Likewise I will read your posts too. After all they are about a subject I started and sometimes about my posts.

Let's just both disagree in a respectful manner.

I'll cool out. You do the same. Let's just live and let live. I'll try not to be overly sarcastic. I'd appreciate if you'd do the same.

I do agree with some of what you said, by the way. Especially, "Being shot once already definitely helps when trying to stop a threat, but that further proves why "shot stop capability" is an insignificant measurement-- it is a VARIABLE RATE and will be different every time the trigger is pulled." I agree with this, especially the "variable rate" part.

I don't have any hard feelings anymore. I hope you don't either. We both apologized. Let's make nice. We can respectfully disagree. There are some things we agree on too.

wbond:

There was no personal attack and you missed the entire point of what I was saying.

If you're going to toss around a statistic such as "shot stop capability" you have to treat it as one. If it's 40% then it's 40% for EVERY SINGLE SHOT. Obviously many factors influence each shot and I tried to express that. Being shot once already definitely helps when trying to stop a threat, but that further proves why "shot stop capability" is an insignificant measurement-- it is a VARIABLE RATE and will be different every time the trigger is pulled. All I was attempting to say is that this statistic is misleading at best and multiplying it to come up with a mythical "3 shot stop" is even more inaccurate. I'm sorry that you took it as a personal attack. I didn't mean for it to come across as one.

You don't have to "address [my] comment about each shot being LESS likely to stop an attacker" because that would be foolish. The whole point of that statement was to point out how little sense employing your statistical logic makes. Obviously that point was lost on you.

I'm sorry if anything in this post sounds hostile, but I don't like coming online to a private message from a user with a "read receipt" that serves only to try and anger me. I was only trying to express why measuring the value of a cartridge in this manner is meaningless when there are far too many factors to consider.

Once again, I APOLOGIZE if you took my previous post as a personal attack. But I believe the manner in which you handled the entire situation was childish. I wished nothing other than to inform you as to why something was incorrect and offer my opinion. I believe that the entire point of a forum is to discuss facts and opinions and if you can’t read an opposing view without losing your cool I respectfully ask you to refrain from reading my posts.

[wbond]

Sorry. I thought you were serious earlier.

Your serious comment below is right on the money.

Thanks.

Wow! Dial it down a little, wbond. Not only did you send me this in the main thread, you also sent it to me (verbatim) in a lengthy private message.

To begin with, I don't see how anyone could reasonably find my "advice" to be serious... Not only is it asine in its John Woo-esque violence, I mispell most of it, and I include one of them nice green smilies...

I apologize for wasting everyone elses time with this, but come on...

Okay, let me put it in serious terms sense humor doesn't seem to work.

Shot placement beats caliber, and volume of fire helps too. If your concerned about stopping someone, you shot them `til they stop.

[Red Tornado]

Hey NoScreenName,
Would you mind posting the results of the #19 and #21 springs? I think the Mak's just a little snappy, and would love to get your opinion on the difference they make.
Thanks,
RT

[M2 Carbine]

Hey NoScreenName,
Would you mind posting the results of the #19 and #21 springs? I think the Mak's just a little snappy, and would love to get your opinion on the difference they make.
Thanks,
RT

For what it's worth, I use the 21 pound recoil spring in all my Makarovs (14) including the .380.
If you go from a new factory Makarov spring to a 19lb you probably won't notice much difference. The thing is, in the case of the "used" Makarovs you don't know how weak the spring is, so it's probably a good idea to change them out anyhow.

My preference for the 21lb spring is because I shoot my light hand-loads to the hottest ammo I can find or hand-load. The Mak functions 100% with the heavy spring.


BUT, I wouldn't consider using the 21lb spring in a defense pistol until I was satisfied that the particular Mak worked 100% with it.

[abaddon]

www.makarov.com has muzzle brakes for the makarov. They'll thread your barrel and install the brake. It supposedly helps minimize recoil. I have no experience with them. They also give the added benefit of being a mounting platform for a tactical light.

I agree that a standard 9mm, especially a heavy one, could give you better recoil protection. But if you already have a Makarov and like it then the muzzle brake may be a good idea. It could make concealed carry more of a problem, however.

[MCgunner]

Wow, this thread is enlightening. I've learned from the experts here that energy doesn't matter, caliber doesn't matter, expansion doesn't matter, all that matters is bullet placement and PERHAPS penetration. Therefore, I'm thinking .17HMR with FMJ, preferably spitzer, ammo. I don't think it could get no better'n that. No recoil, accurate, and lots of penetration! Perhaps I could find one of those old S&Ws in .22 Jet, but cases might be a problem. That Raging Hornet thing would work, but it's not very concealable.

[Tomac]

MCgunner, is the FBI considered "expert" enough for you?:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm
Tomac

[Erich]

MCgunner, misrepresenting what folks say in a sarcastic rant is not very "High Road." If you've got something to say, why don't you just say it?

[RyanM]

Wow, this thread is enlightening. I've learned from the experts here that energy doesn't matter, caliber doesn't matter, expansion doesn't matter, all that matters is bullet placement and PERHAPS penetration. Therefore, I'm thinking .17HMR with FMJ, preferably spitzer, ammo. I don't think it could get no better'n that. No recoil, accurate, and lots of penetration! Perhaps I could find one of those old S&Ws in .22 Jet, but cases might be a problem. That Raging Hornet thing would work, but it's not very concealable.

Actually, spitzers tend to tumble, which decreases their penetration a lot.

In any case, shot placement is priority #1, penetration is #2, and bullet size is a distant 3rd place. A .45 in the aorta will incapacitate in about 10 seconds, while a .22 in the same spot will do it in 11 seconds. Much of a difference? On the other hand, a .45 in the gut, which misses the spine, may never incapacitate a guy. He may walk into a hospital under his own power. If he does collapse, it'll be from pain, fear, or other psychological mechanisms. Same with a .22. Much of a difference? The only real difference due to hole size is the "in between" areas, like the liver, lungs, etc. And hits to those areas tend to take minutes, not seconds, to incapacitate, regardless of the caliber used. In a gunfight, there's not much of a difference between 1 min to incapacitation for a .45, and 10 min for a .22.

Energy doesn't even enter into the picture, since energy only correlates with temporary cavity, which is pretty worthless at handgun velocities.

[CAnnoneer]

The problem is placement is not guaranteed. Even the best marksmen can miss once in a while, and strange things may happen. Statistics breaks down for small numbers. Thus I'd say that penetration is the most important and so, I consider FMJ to be perfectly good combat rounds.

[RyanM]

Well, as far as most people are concerned, penetration probably is the #1 concern. It's pretty hard to train in a realistic enough manner to actually increase hit probability and accuracy in an actual firefight. Penetration is definitely the #1 concern when comparing defense ammo, since 99% of the ammo out there has acceptable combat accuracy through a decent pistol. Of course, it then comes down to whether more is better, or if penetration beyond a certain point is fairly meaningless (Fackler says 14.5", MacPherson says 15", the FBI says 18"), and if it's worth sacrificing some of that "extra" penetration for the sake of expanded diameter.

And I agree 100% that there's nothing wrong with FMJ. There are so many things that can screw up a hollowpoint, that you may as well be shooting FMJ half the time anyway.

[nored]

I guess I'm just too old but I don't understand WHY you would wish to carry a 9X18 when you can get a well made pistol in .40S&W in the same size package. You may have 1 less round in your mag, however with a well placed double tap with a 165 Gr. 40 S&W HP, you won't need the extra round. You must also remember when you are being grilled by the perps lawyer in the civil action, the more rounds you fire the better they'll like it.

[grimjaw]

I don't understand WHY you would wish to carry a 9X18 when you can get a well made pistol in .40S&W in the same size package

1. For the money (~$140 at the time), the Makarov PM in 9x18 was an excellent value.
2. Reliable (not that pistols chambered for other rounds aren't), and extremely easy to strip/clean.
3. It was less expensive to shoot and practice with than .40S&W.
4. It was a milsurp, and it's somewhat difficult to find those in .40S&W.
5. I can recover quicker for followup shots than with the same size gun in .40S&W.
6. The grip, although not the best, fit my hand well.

Is the caliber a better defensively than .40S&W? Maybe not. It was my first pistol, and money was tighter then, so it made sense. I'm sure there's other people in the same boat. 'Available' doesn't always mean 'affordable.'

jmm

[BHPshooter]

3) Taurus PT938. Never been able to confirm this, but it is supposed to be a Locked Breech semi-auto. Locked Breech reduces recoil.

The Taurus PT938 is not a locked breech. There are locked .380s out there, but I am unsure of what they are.

IMO, the Makarov has more felt recoil than a Browning HP. The Browning may be a 9mm Parabellum, but the Mak is much more sharp and snappy, to me...

Wes

[wbond]

The hottest 9x18 rounds like Silver Bear 115 gr 9x18 give around 1050 fps from a CZ-83, or around 1010 from a stock Makarov. That is fairly potent stuff.

However, those type of potent ammos are very hard on a stock CZ-83 or Makarov (I own both).

For Makarov 9x18 , stiffer, stronger recoil springs are available to make the gun handle it, but my recoil sensitive hands cannot handle it.

For CZ-83 9x18, stiffer, stronger recoil springs are not available at this time, but Makarov.com says they will be offering them soon. So at this time, the gun can't really handle it over the long term and neither can my hands. With stiffer spring in future, the gun could handle it, but my hands still could NOT.

Therefore, for all practical purposes, the standard 9x18 ammo should be used. It gives a 95 gr bullet, 1030 fps from a Makarov, or about 1060 fps from a CZ-83. I'm speaking specifically of Federal Eagle 95 gr ball ammo here. This Eagle ammo is loaded a bit hotter than standard 9x18, but the stock guns can take it fine. It's only a little hot (unlike Silver Bear 115 gr which is very hot).

This means that for all practical purposes, the 9x18 has a substantial advantage over a .380, but is far below a .38 Special. Obviously it is way below a 9mm Parabellum.

All that said, I think the 9x18 is an excellent round for a smaller, lighter guns and is much better than a .380, but the 9x18 is no power house.

If .38 Spl +P and 9mm represent medium power, the 9x18 is far below that.

I think the 9x18 is the most powerful of the weak rounds. Overall, it's a decent round, but a .38 Spl is better and a 9mm Para is much better.

The only real comparison for a 9x18 is the .380 and it definately outclasses a .380 by a wide enough margin to make me still like the 9x18.

I recant any overly optimistic statements I previously made about the 9x18. I still like it and think it useful and usable, but there are better choices.

However, for a recoil sensitive person like myself, a Makarov with a rubber grip added, better sights added, and a stiffer than stock spring added (I like 19 lb), it is a good gun that is small enough, light enough to carry, yet tolderable on recoil . Same with CZ-83, except it's a bit heavy and large for easy carry in waistband or pocket.

For my recoil sensitive hands, the standard 9x18 ammo and slightly hot stuff like the Federal Eagle are usuable (with rubber grips, stiffer spring). The hotter 9x18 ammos kick to hard for my hands and are punishing to the guns (unless spring mod).

[355sigfan]

QUOTE
The .32 ACP has or should decent 3 shot stop power. I base this on it's one shot stop capability, which I don't remember for sure, but I think was around 40%. However, multiply that by 3 and you are well over 100%.
END QUOTE

Your serious? OSS figures don't work like that. If you read Marshalls book he has figures on 2 shot shootings as well and the percentages only go up about 5% per load. Another thing to consider is Marshalls work is hottly debated and even Evan himself says not to take his figures literally. But use them as a comparision point instead. Basically if he says a load has 96% stopping power don't count on it stopping someone 96% of the time. Just use it and assume its better than a load rated at 76%.

As for the Mak. I know I will get flamed but I can not recommend them. Their underpowered, have terrible sights and triggers. If your low on funds look for a nice used Smith model 10 in 38 special or work some extra shifts and get a used Glock 17.
Pat

[Tomac]

355sigfan, this is no flame but if a pistol is accurate, reliable and the bullet penetrates deeply enough to reach the vitals (like the Mak) then what's not to recommend? Personally, I find revolvers (like the Model 10) much harder to shoot fast & accurately than the Mak. I've owned the Glock 17, 19 & 26 and none of them would shoot as accurately for me as the Mak (go figure, YMMV). Is the Mak perfect? No, but I both know and trust what it can do enough that it's both my nightstand & primary CCW piece.
Tomac

[355sigfan]

There is more to life than pure penetration. The mak will penetrate enough with ball ammo. Not with JHP's. Bigger holes bleed more. A .358 hole is not as good as a .75 caliber hole caused from a expanding 9mm jhp. If you like your Mak thats great. But the cartridge is underpowered. Even the Russians are dropping it for 9x19.
Pat

[Tomac]

I agree that the Mak w/lighter JHP's doesn't have sufficient penetration to suit me. That's why my carry load is the 115gr JHP @1,000fps. I also agree that bigger holes can bleed more. However, given the same determined and aggressive attacker w/identical shot placement just how much practical difference would we see between the 9x18 115gr JHP & any other defensive load (115gr 9mm JHP, 185gr .45 JHP, your fav load, etc...)
Hard data, please, no supposition or speculation. If you cannot provide hard data then it becomes just a matter of opinion. The Mak is underpowered? By who's definition? A change in military caliber isn't always to improve performance (ex: the US dropped the .45 for the 9mm, does that mean the 9mm is a more effective round just because our military switched to it?)
Tomac

[355sigfan]

I know of no factory 115 grain mak load doing 1000 fps. Even if it did exist (sounds like a reloaders hand grenade to me) its not likley to expand and penetrate 12 inches. 115 grain 9mm bullets are designed to open at faster velocities usually. The Mak just does not have the horsepower. Its limited by its blow back action.
pat

[Tomac]

Hi, Pat. Both the Brown Bear & Silver Bear 115gr JHP are factory loads that do an honest 1,000fps. Don't take my word for it, check w/the guys who have actually chrono'd the loads: http://www.gunboards.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=110185
Besides, these are true 9.2mm bullets for the Mak, not 9mm bullets (9mm bullets would be undersized & create gas blow-by w/commensurate loss of accuracy & velocity).
My own admittedly informal testing w/water correlates to an appx 12"-14" penetration in gel according to the conversion formula by the guys at Ammo Lab. That's good enough for me but if forced to use a lighter bullet I would go w/FMJ.
Tomac
PS- How many years did the West German police use the .32ACP as their std sidearm? While a bit light for my taste I don't recall hearing/reading any complaints from them.

[wbond]

Quote of SigFan: "I know of no factory 115 grain mak load doing 1000 fps. Even if it did exist (sounds like a reloaders hand grenade to me) its not likley to expand and penetrate 12 inches. 115 grain 9mm bullets are designed to open at faster velocities usually. The Mak just does not have the horsepower. Its limited by its blow back action."

I agree that the 9x18 is not a powerful round, but with 115 gr Silver Bears it's around a .38 Spl standard pressure 3" snub. From a .38 Spl 2" snub the Makarov is very competitive or better.

That means the Mak is a little below medium power, but it's not weak. The 9mm Par is strong and anything above that is very strong.

With regard to what you said about Mak ammo: Silver Bear makes 115 gr JHP that is rated at 1010 fps from a Makarov pistol. CZ-83 9x18 is reputed to get about 1050 from this same ammo, probably due to its polygonal bore. That is not strong power, but neither is it weak. That is medium performance and beats a 2" .38 Spl snub standard pressure. It approx equals a 3" barrel .38 Spl standard pressure. Also, Silver Bears expand quite well. There are numerous independent reports on them.

However, those heavy Silver Bear ammo loads should not, in my opinion be fired in a Makarov or a CZ-83 unless an extra stiff recoil spring is added, which reduces felt recoil and is easier on the gun. However, my arthritic hands still cannot handle that ammo.

I can handle (barely) 95 gr JHP going 1030 fps from a Makarov pistol, or 1070 fps from a CZ-83. This is what Federal Eagle does. So with this ammo that is more comfy to shoot, the Mak pistol is a bit better than a .380, and the CZ-83 is much better than a .380, but less than a .38 std pressure snub.

I'm not saying the Makarov or CZ-83 in 9x18 are the best choice, but I am saying they are decent, in my opinion. I also consider the .38 Spl decent with a 3" barrel. A 9mm is strong. So I'm not disagreeing with you entirely. I'm just saying the 9x18 isn't as bad as you think. It is not good, but neither is it bad, in my opinion.

[wbond]

Regarding your post #61 on the prior page of this thread:

I notice you made another insulting rant and sarcastically ripped into someone. For a change it wasn't me you were ripping on. How refreshing.

I've noticed many a thread where you were castrating someone. Often I'm the castrotee, but often it's others.

How many of your nearly 1500 posts are attacks?

Oh well. I'm not going to try to reason with you or point anything out to you about content or conduct. This group (as any other) is about social interaction as much as information. Apparently you don't understand that.

I get hotheaded myself sometimes, but you seem to always be hot. Let's think about that. Hmm. Hotheaded gun owner. Is that good for gun ownership?

I've been a little hotheaded myself from time to time, but I've learned to calm down and not rip on people. Hopefully you will get there someday.

From here on out, I'm going to ignore you. No matter what you say to anyone on any subject in any thread, I will not respond.

You can rip on me all day long if you like, or rip on others. Whatever. I'm past the point of discussion on this. It's a waste of bandwidth. I'm not angry. I'm calm. Disgusted, but calm. I'm abstaining from you after this post (in any thread).

Mellow out dude.

[355sigfan]

QUOTE
That means the Mak is a little below medium power, but it's not weak. The 9mm Par is strong and anything above that is very strong.
END QUOTE

Actually standard pressure 38 rounds in a snub is considered weak by most people. The 9mm para is coinsidered a good powerfloor. Very strong does not apply to most handguns. The 9mm or 38 special with +p ammo is where most people set their lower power limit. Ie they will not carry anything with less power. The reason being when you get into mouse guns like the Mak your already dismal stopping power than handguns have gets even worse.
Pat

[wbond]

Regarding your post about stopping power, etc:

I don't disagree with you. Nor do I agree. I'm not going to pick a horse in that race.

However, your standards are USA standards (and maybe Israeli), which may be correct. In the Middle East, I think the 9mm is the norm because ammo is easy to come by and they (all sides) take their killing seriously there. Also, they probably don't follow the Hague Treaty, so they probably use 9mm JHP, if they want.

The rest of the world has standards more in line with what I described. In fact, a substantial portion of the world population thinks the .380 is medium and OK, the 9x18 good, and the .38 Spl a powerhouse. Those countries think a 9mm is a cannon. Actually, this is so widespread that whole continents think this: South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa.

Hey that's 5 out of 7 continents. Antartica is uninhabited. So really, North American is the only continent that thinks as you do. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just making an observation. US Citizens tend to think they're always right and the rest of the world is wrong. I think the rest of the world might have some worthwhile knowledge too.

In any case, to my personal situation, it doesn't really matter to me one way or the other what is medium power. My arthritic hands can only handle whatever they can handle.

I would like to step up to a 9mm sometime, if I can. We'll see. However, I don't feel undergunned with a 9x18 with decent ammo. I also feel OK with a .380 ACP. This is especially true with the CZ-83, but also with a Firestorm or Bersa. Now a .32 ACP is underpowered, but it's still a very useful weapon and much better than none.

[Tomac]

Sigfan, could you please give me a scientific definition of "stopping power" and how it can be measured or quantified?
Tomac

[wbond]

I had no idea what a hornets nest I was starting when I began this thread.

However, it is very interesting and sometimes informative. It's the thread that never dies. Like the Energizer Bunny, it just keeps going and going.

Good free entertainment and sometimes a learning experience too. Kind of like educational T.V. combined with a soap opera combined with a night at the fights.

This post is not an attack on anyone nor sarcasm. It's just a light hearted observation.

:-)

[Tomac]

Wbond, sometimes a good "less filling!"/"great taste!" debate can be quite entertaining. I guess you could say my bottom line is that no handgun, regardless of caliber or bullet used, can be depended upon to take down a determined & aggessive attacker quickly w/o a hit to the CNS. Even a solid hit to the heart can leave 10 seconds of oxygen in the brain, plenty of time for the BG to return the favor. While I agree that "bigger is better" I don't believe we can quantify just how much practical "better" is derived from the "bigger" so we end up with opinion and speculation sometimes presented as fact as to just how much "better" "bigger" really is. Pick the largest & most powerful caliber you feel confident with that you can shoot accurately & quickly and that has adequate penetration. IMHO you're better off with a smaller caliber you can shoot accurately than a larger caliber you can't shoot accurately. Here's an interesting FBI read: http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm
Tomac

[wbond]

I just read the FBI link info from your post.

The bad rap on the .380 has already been penetration from 10" to 11" with hollow points. i.e. - it falls short of 12". I'm not sure that I believe 10" not enough since most big men are only 12" thick.

However, if you believe 12" needed, consider this.

The 9x18 (95 to 115 gr) is anywhere from a little to a lot heavier than a .380 bullet (85 to 90 gr) and goes typically 30 fps faster from a Makarov or 70 fps faster from a CZ-83.

That gives a substantial advantage to the 9x18 when compared to .380.

Since the .380 gives almost, but not quite enough penetration, the bit more of the 9x18 ought to get it up to 12" or very close with hollow points that expand.

If so, that would make the 9x18 exactly enough power, but none extra.

That's if you buy into the whole 12" thing of the FBI, which I'm not sure if I do.

However, I do feel even better with the 9x18 after reading your post and the link to the FBI you gave.

To others who I'm sure will jump on this like an angry dog with a bone, let me just say :neener:

I think accuracy is the most important thing and I know I'll be more accurate with a gun I can practice a lot with. I can practice more when the gun kicks less because my hands have arthritis.

However, I wouldn't rule out the 9mm for recoil tolerance because of the type of action spreading recoil over a longer time period. Maybe I'll get a 9mm down the road. However, for now I'm quite happy with my .380 and 9x18 in both Firestorm and CZ-83. The Makarov might work out well, but I've got to get the rubber grips on it and bigger sights.

[355sigfan]

Quote
Sigfan, could you please give me a scientific definition of "stopping power" and how it can be measured or quantified?
Tomac
END QUOTE

Well that is a hornets nest and a huge trap of a question. I will say bigger deeper holes bleed faster than smaller shallower ones.
Pat

[Tomac]

Wbond, glad you enjoyed the read, I found it very informative the first time I read it. Here's some 9x18 test info you might find of interest: http://www.goldenloki.com/ammo/gel/9x18/gel9x18.htm
I've found the 21# Mak recoil spring to be a big help w/the 115gr 9x18 in the recoil dept but still prefer to practice mostly w/95gr. I must admit I was very surprised at how accurate the Mak is for me even with the small factory sights. Aside from a dab of orange paint on the front sight & the heavier recoil spring my Mak is stock and does all I require of it.
Tomac

[Tomac]

Sigfan, I completely agree with you, hence my earlier post about "adequate penetration". My point of contention is exactly how much "better" do we get with "bigger"? IMHO there are too many variables for us to really know (is load "A" 5% better than load "B"? 10%? 35%? Is enough *practical* benefit derived to be worth the possible extra recoil/cost/size?) I guess it's like buying insurance, each person has to decide how much is "enough" and hope we never have to use it.
Tomac

[355sigfan]

I feel a good powerfloor is the 9mm and 38 special with +p ammo. Any load that can penetrate 12 inches and expand to at least .60 caliber is good enough for me. I prefer more expansion if possible so long as it goes 12 inches.
Pat

[wbond]

You Mak sounds dandy, except I'd want rubber grips by Pierce to help tame recoil and the big Novak sights. That stuff is really quite cheap at Makarov.com

You know what else is cheap at Makarov.com?

Brand spanking new 9x18 CZ-83s in matte black ($319), gloss blue (more of a satin really) ($350), and nickel ($350). They're also made better than before. They were good before, but are even better now.

For example, the barrels used to be polygonal and chromed inside. Now they are polygonal and stainless steel, which sounds even better. This according to Makarov.com.

The glossy blue one I currently own has the chromed polygonal bore.

These puppies make great siblings for Makarovs. Your Mak is probably lonely. FYI - a CZ-83 9x18 will get about 40 fps more velocity from same ammo than a Makarov will. However, don't shoot the 115 gr Silver or Brown Bear ammo in a CZ-83 before upgrading recoil spring.

Makarov.com will have those CZ-83 upgrade recoil springs soon, but not yet.

[wbond]

One thing I don't think you've understood is that we are commy gun fans, which includes both Makarovs and CZ-82s and CZ-83s, as well as the Polish P-83, which is like a Makarov, but better due to coil trigger spring and really nice trigger pull. There are other commy guns, but none so nice in fit or function.

I'm not just interested in guns for self defense, it's also a hobby and I'm a commy gun collector, and a mousegun collector.

I'd define a mousegun as anything below a .38 Spl.

i.e. - I own three .32 ACPs, one .380, and several 9x18s.

All in commy guns, plus one Firestorm that I really love and although it's not commy gun, it is a remake of the .32 mousegun Walther, which was a military and police gun. I'd like to also get a Firestorm .380.

I also own a Ruger .32 Magnum, which I'd guess is about equal to a .380, but with a tad more penetration. So maybe a little better than a .380. Maybe not.

[355sigfan]

If your com block gun fans and collect them for fun thats fine. But for serious self defense I would recommend something with a bit more bite. Com block stuff does have its appeal. I have owned my share of AK's. So I understand their draw. Cheap, yet reliable. They have a neatness factor in that their highly affordable yet totally reliable.
Pat

[wbond]

Quoting SigFan: "I prefer more expansion if possible so long as it goes 12 inches."

===========================

Well of course. Who wouldn't? The problem is that this results in more recoil. If you can handle it, that's dandy. Unfortuneatly, I can't. That's were it gets interesting.

I cannot have both optimum penetration and diameter. Therefore, I have to make the best compromise I can.

I think the 9x18 is marginal for acceptable power by my standards and according to my capabilities. I can marginally handle the recoil.

I can more easily handle .380 recoil, but it's got no safety margin at all for stopping power (by my standards). In fact, it may be inadequate by my standards. (I know your standards, but they don't apply to me since I have handicaps you don't)

I can practice more with a .380 because it's easier on my hands. This might mean I can become more accurate with a .380 due to more practice.

There's also the issue that I don't want to further damage my hands which already have arthritis and have been put pack together by 4 screws.

[UWstudent]

9mm + P is minimum for me. but hey, that's just me

[355sigfan]

QUOTE
Well of course. Who wouldn't? The problem is that this results in more recoil. If you can handle it, that's dandy. Unfortuneatly, I can't. That's were it gets interesting.
END QUOTE

True but the 9mm mak sinces its a blow back actually recoils more than most locked breach 9mm's of simular size. So with the mak your getting less power and more recoil hardly a good combination. The smallest female officers (one I trained who is 4 foot 9 ) can handle the very mild recoil of a 9mm with +P+ ammo in a Glock 17. If you feel the mak recoils less its in your head not a reality. Not a insult just an observation.
Pat

[wbond]

Quote of SigFan: "True but the 9mm mak sinces its a blow back actually recoils more than most locked breach 9mm's of simular size."

=====================================

You apparently missed this in one of my earlier posts (an earlier reply to Tomac, see reply #84, last paragraph).

I said that I hope to someday step up to a 9mm and that this might be possible since the action theoretically spreads the recoil over a longer time, which theoretically results in less felt recoil.

I'm aware of this theoretical benefit of locked breech guns.

I say theoretical because I haven't tried a 9mm to know.

I do know that gas operated shotguns are really easy to shoot while pump guns kick hard. So based on this, I know it's possible that a 9mm might be nice. However, are they gas operated? I don't think most are, but I'm not sure. Maybe that doesn't matter.

If you say they offer less felt recoil, then I believe you. However, there are differences in their actions from model to model, brand to brand. So I'm not sure which would really reduce felt recoil, or if they all would.

The other thing I need is a low bore axis to keep muzzle flip to a minium. My wrist is fused and can't roll with the punches at all. i.e. - can't bend with muzzle flip.

I am aware that the blowbacks normally give more recoil, but they offer one advantage, which is a lower bore axis. They also can have stiffer recoil springs put in them, which is what Tomac and I were talking about earlier. With a recoil spring about 4 lbs stiffer than stock, the recoil is said to be greatly reduced in blow back guns. I just ordered such a recoil spring, but it's not arrived yet. I'm also working on getting rubber grips.

If you want to help, please provide me a list of 9mm pistols that have a low bore axis and weigh between 23 and 26 ounces (I'd probably consider 28 oz too) and that you think would offer reduced felt recoil. Also, I really like a cushy rubber grip that covers the sides and back of the grip.

What 9mm pistols sound like this?

I'm kind of fond of Kahr (all stainless) and Firestorm 9mms. Note the Firestorm and Bersa are very similar and both made by Bersa. However, Firestorm is sold by Firestorm. I'm also open to other suggestions.

[355sigfan]

If you want to help, please provide me a list of 9mm pistols that have a low bore axis and weigh between 23 and 26 ounces (I'd probably consider 28 oz too) and that you think would offer reduced felt recoil. Also, I really like a cushy rubber grip that covers the sides and back of the grip.
END QUOTE

A HK P7 M8 would be a good pistol for you. Its a gas operated delayed blowback with a very low bore axis. If you really want a soft kicker you should consider ditching the weight limit and getting a 1911 in 9mm. They have very minimal muzzle jump and recoil. Due to their low bore axis and their 40 ounches of steel.
A Glock 19 would not be a bad choice either. 9mm's are soft kickers. Most 9mm pistols are locked breach not gas guns. There are very few gas operated pistols made.
Pat

[Tomac]

Sigfan, lest I be misconstrued I've never claimed the 9x18 is a superior round for self defense, merely "adequate". I believe any bullet that penetrates deeply enough to reach the vitals to be "adequate" but that no current bullet/caliber is "superior" as that decided superiority cannot be proved scientifically (better, yes, we can all agree that bigger is better but "superior"?). Why do I carry the Mak? Because it works for me: it's reliable, accurate and (IMHO) powerful enough (being relatively inexpensive is just a bonus). Many other pistols I've tried over the decades haven't been. If you believe the 9x18 is underpowered for self defense then you have the right to that opinion. However, if you state your opinion as fact then I'd like to see hard evidence supporting that fact.
Wbond, if you have a local rental range it might not be a bad idea to try out various pistols/calibers to find what you're comfortable and confident with. Regarding the CZ-83, thanks for the heads-up! I've been eyeing them for some time while trying to hold my wallet closed!
Tomac

[KrankyKraut]

Where can I get Barnaul HP for my Mak?

[Tomac]

Barnaul HP has been scarce for some time. I don't know of anyplace that currently has it in stock.
Tomac

[wbond]

Good 9x18 ball ammo is plentiful. My preferred brand of ball is Federal Eagle 95 gr because it's about medium power and burns clean. There are probably many other good brands of ball (Bellier and Sellot, Fiochi, etc).

Good JHP 9x18 is scarce at this time. Barnaul JHP non-existent at this time.

The Hornady 95 gr 9x18 JHP seems like good stuff, but a bit underpowered (even for 9x18). That might be nice for lower recoil though.

The Silver Bear JHP is decently powerful for self defense, in my opinion. However, it's hard on guns and hands. If you must use this, then you need a stronger recoil spring than the stock spring. About 4 lbs stronger than stock spring is ideal.

So the bad news is for 9x18 JHP you currently have to choose from weak or dangerously strong, which might not be safe for the gun (unless modifed spring).

The good news is that Makarov.com told me many new 9x18 brands and loads are just around the corner. In a couple months there should be many good 9x18 JHP choices. I prefer medium power 9x18 JHP loads. Those and others will be forthcoming soon. Hang in there.

Also, the CZ-83 gives about 40 fps more velocity with same ammo than a Makarov. So one way to hop up your 9x18 ammo is to use a CZ-83 instead of a Makarov. CZ-83s have polygonal barrels are great guns.

[wbond]

I'm still satisfied with what I've got (at least for now).

I have no doubt the 9mm is better than 9x18. In fact the 9mm is one of my favorite rounds. I also like many 9mm guns (though that does not mean I can shoot them).

I also still like the 9x18 and especially like the guns made for it. In particular, I like the CZ-83.

If you gave me a choice between a .38 Spl and a 9x18, I'd take the 9x18 without hesitation. Similar performance between a .38 Spl Snub and a 9x18 pistol. Also similar size. The 9x18 pistols hold a lot more ammo, especially my CZ-83 (12+1). I also find the 9x18 pistols much more accurate than a .38 snub.

In my opinion, the 9x18 is a good round, as is the .38 Spl. The 9mm is a great round. Great guns are made for all 3.