[amprecon]

It seems each pistol caliber has a huge following of it's own. Some dedicated to one caliber or another and defends it to the end. I've been mulling over a couple new pistols in 9mm, .357Sig and .40S&W and have been looking at the ballistics of each. Particularly the Kahr standard size steel pistols and the compact Glocks, 19/23/32?. I've also been trying to get some ideas of how the recoil is in these pistols.

I've owned a K9 previously and loved it aside from the perennial rusting problem it had. I understand they've resolved the finish problem now. I currently own a G21 and a SP101 in .357mag.

I've never shot the .357Sig or .40S&W from any pistol and would like to know how the Kahr K40, G19/23/32 compares to the recoil from the K9, SP or G21.

I am drifting towards the .40S&W because of the larger bullet diameter and energy, I'm not too serious about the .357Sig, I've been hearing and reading reports of the afterburner flame, loud report and expensive ammo, but was just curious of how it compared.

My wife is not a big shooter but might need to use one of them possibly and the little practice she might get may pay off better if she has a good experience.

That being said, I want to get a Kahr and a Glock, just don't know which caliber. I believe the K9 has a one round advantage over the K40 and the G19 and G23 are limited to 10 rounds. Would I be undergunned with a 9mm? Or should I get these compact pistols in the supposedly more effective .40S&W or .357Sig and learn to like the recoil and flamethrowing?

If possible I'd like to rent them and see for myself, but lack of an indoor range here won't make that likely for now.

[10-Ring]

Don't feel under gunned w/ 9mm. As long as you use quality defensive ammo, you're fine ;) Especially if you've already got experience shooting 9mm.

[txgolfer45]

What 10-Ring said!!! :)

[JMag]

Shot placement is the key with any handgun. You are undergunned if you believe yourself to be. Best to think happy thoughts and place your shots in the right spot. It's usually not the best gun that wins, but the best man (most determined, least afraid) who wins!

[Marko Kloos]

When you compare the top loads in 9mm, .40S&W, .357SIG, and .45ACP, there is very little difference in terminal performance in both expansion and penetration. I feel perfectly comfortable with carrying any of those calibers, but my favorite is the 9x19 thanks to lower recoil and ammo cost. Cheaper ammo translates into more practice and more proficiency at arms, and lower recoil means faster shot recovery and faster accurate placement of multiple rounds.

Load your 9x19 with premium HP ammo, and you're armed just as well as the guy with the .45 or the .40S&W.

[Mike Irwin]

If I'm undergunned with a 9mm (I have a Kahr K9 that I occasionally carry), then I'm completely screwed with my regularl carry gun, an S&W Model 042 in .38 Spl.!

[P95Carry]

Pretty much all been siad .. but would add that also ... you will probably have benefit of double stack mag capacity .... this ''evens the score'' a tad!:evil:

[Wildalaska]

The 9mm is far less effective than the 45, and unless its a Glock 45 its not worth anyhting. So if you have anyhting other than a Glock 45, give it to me.

WildchainpullerAlaska

[Ian11]

I don't think it makes that much of a difference and so do many here on THR based on a recent poll.

Shooting something bigger or faster has a psychological effect on the shooter and I won't deny that. And if it makes you feel more confident (not delusional) that can be a good thing, I guess. What's more important is how well you shoot a particular gun in a particular caliber.

More often than not the main reason I shoot .40 and .45's is because I like shooting them and the particular guns they're chambered in.


Get a 9mm if you like it. Pick good defense loads and practice. Don't sweat it too much. People like to make a big deal they shoot "macho" rounds.

[Alan Fud]

When you start to look at the best loads in each caliber, you begin to see that they're almost identical in terminal performance (ability to penetrate, expand, and otherwise wound a violent threat) ...
http://users.net-lynx.com/~fudal/TFL/fhs9mm.gif (http://www.greent.com/40Page/)
... The 9mm versions on most "premium" loads are very close and sometimes superior to the .40S&W and .45ACP versions. It's all about bullet design, not bullet weight or velocity.

The problem is that while there are few "bad" loads in the other calibers, there are tons of "bad" 9mm defensive choices out there. Many rounds either fail to expand or fail to penetrate, or both. Most of the super-fast stuff from places like Corbon and Triton simply fragments, creating a shallow wound.

So for 9mm, load selection becomes paramount. But once you choose a good load, it works just like a good load in .40S&W, .45ACP, or any of those other calibers. Sure, it's not as heavy as the heavy bullets, and it's not as fast as the fastest bullets. But if it penetrates the same, expands the same, and disrupts tissue the same, who cares?

[Parker Dean]

If you are looking at the .40, I would like to suggest a look at the 10mm (the 10 and the .40 have the same bullet diameter).

The cartridge is very flexible. You can get low-power loads which are what the .40 was designed to approximate, or run up to full-power Magnum level loads depending on ammo manufacturer.

As for stories of limited ammo availability personal experience indicates that you can find the low-power cartridges just about anywhere (Remington, Federal/PMC). It's when you start looking for the REAL 10mm that it gets a bit difficult since Winchester is the only large manufacturer that I've found loading the 10 close to its original spec in the 175gr Silvertips (although some have indicated a possible downloading of even those). But smaller manufacturers like the Texas Ammunition Co. make some that are pretty close to, if not beyond, the original spec.

So, much like the .357's, you could have good SD and hunting capabilities in the same gun depending on loading chosen.

[Alan Fud]

Parker, not to go off-topic here, but does anyone still make the full-power 200grn 10mm round?

[Boats]

I've quit engaging in these types of arguments when I can because they are IQ droppers.

However, this time there is one point I'd like to make:

"Shot placement! Shot placement! Shot placement!" chanted over and over as if it were all that matters can't help but remind me of certain other protestations made by those with small man's syndrome.

It is in fact a rather non-sensical mantra. Of course "shot placement!" matters. However, "shot placement!" is a beginning, not an end. Of course one must hit the target. Whenever that is done though, "shot placement!" has run its course. From there in, the issue is how much work can your meager handgun bullet do on the target? When was the last time you saw a gelatinous assailant, lacking maybe a down coat or a ribcage? Gelatin is garbage and even then, why not compare apples-to-apples? A 230 gr +p+ level loading (45 SMC or Super) is going to have it all over a 124 gr +p+ hydrashok, especially on denim clad jello.

And that, Marshall and Sanow garbage contentions aside, is why many big bore pistol fans, deride rabid medium caliber fans. Large caliber fans use the same exact argument that 9mm/.38 Special fans use against anyone who might have the temerity to suggest that a .32ACP or a .22 Magnum might be as good for self defense as a 9mm or .38 snub revo. "Oh no, there is a minimum floor of acceptable caliber performance," most will say. What of "shot placement!" then? No one wants to stand in front of a .22lr revolver just to show how ineffective it is either. No one has ever volunteered to play catch with my downrange .32ACP rounds.

Which is where the train leaves the tracks for the medium bore fans. They want to argue equivalency of performance with the .44/.45 rounds, but they can only do that through charlatan cops with bogus stat tables or cherry-picked lab stats. Anecdotally, the "equivalency" of 9mm and rounds bigger than it doesn't hold water. It doesn't gain any credibility from battlefield accounts, actual shootings, hunting-----anywhere. Of course no one wants to catch a 9mm, but a lot of people don't want to shoot it either.

Are you undergunned with a 9mm? Not compared to having a .22lr revolver. Are you undergunned compared with a bigger pistol caliber? Maybe, maybe not--but one thing is certain--you'll periodically wonder about it.

Shooting a .45ACP, I never ask if I am undergunned caliber-wise for self-defense against humans because I know I am objectively not when only able to carry a handgun. My experience is that medium and small bore shooters ask this adequacy question routinely and as if they were trying vainly to talk up their confidence before disrobing in the locker room for the first time.

[WonderNine]

Supposedly the guy here that was involved in the shooting outside the gun range switched from .45 230gr. Hydrashocks to 185gr. Golden Sabers because the Hydrashock failed to expand. I would tend to think a 9mm round in 124-127 ish weight would expand more reliably than any .45. And as you can see, the 9mm hollowpoints make a larger wound.

What do I carry? 9mm FMJ. Because I've seen how "inneffective" it is. :rolleyes:

Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement.

.357Sig is nice, but they make ALOT of noise. I won't be looking at any until after the AWB sunsets. Then I may consider one like a Sig P229. No plastic fantastics for me.

[Boats]

The hydra-shok is yesterday's news. It has never really been the premier SD load in .45ACP. I do believe that honor would go to the 230gr Golden Sabre.

[WonderNine]

The 185gr. GS has more energy and speed than the 230gr. version. IMO 185gr. is plenty heavy.

[Boats]

Speed isn't what .44/.45 rounds are about, they're about momentum brought to target. It is well proven in wound science that those impressive "temporary stretch cavities" you guys are so proud of in the volumetric calculations you cite don't mean squat to lethality or incapacitation in the short term, which is when you want lethality or incapacitation.

It is a well known ballistic axiom that self-defense handgun rounds are all too slow to create the dynamic tissue disruption caused by many rifle rounds. Since what one is effectively doing with a handun is "icepicking," penetration depth and permanent wound channel are by far the most important factors given equal shot placement. Weight in a bullet prevents liquid deflection of the bullet path during penetration and gives better odds of damaging or passing through bone when it is encountered. Every small bore gunner pooh-poohs the extra diameter a big bore usually has whether particular rounds both expand or both fail. Since fractions count in a wound and could be all of the difference between clipping an artery and missing, between partially severing the spinal cord and not, and between all kinds of anatomical structures being damaged or not. I will take the best frontal section I can throw on target that will penetrate to a reliable "killing" depth assisted by as much momentum as can be achieved by the platform.

So I'd rather have a 9mm than a .380
A .357 Mag than a .38 Special
A .40S&W than a 9mm or .357 SIG
A 10mm than a .40S&W
A .45 over any flavor of .40
A .44 Special than a .357 Mag
A .44 Mag than a .44 Special

[WonderNine]

I was talking about speed in relation to expansion. The faster a round is, the more likely it is to expand given the same bullet design and weight. And typically the lighter rounds are faster. I wasn't talking about penetration at all. I tend to abandon any talk of penetration when discussing with the hollowpoint minded shooters. But that's why the 124-127gr. 9mm hollowpoints are so effective, they tend to give the best of both worlds.

The smaller diameter that a bullet is, the penetration tends to go up exponentially. This is why you can shoot through certain types of armor with .220 Swift, but not .30-06.

[WonderNine]

Talking 8+1 of .45 in a 1911, vs. 15+1 of 9mm in a BHP. Hmm, the choice shouldn't be difficult.

[Boats]

Maybe someone should neck down a 50 BMG to accept a .17HMR bullet then?

[Boats]

Trick question since the BHP is usually only found with either 13 or 17 round mags. All of which comes back to the old "planning on missing a lot?" :neener:

[WonderNine]

Maybe someone should neck down a 50 BMG to accept a .17HMR bullet then?

Why, you plan on having to shoot someone behind a concrete bunker? :D

Trick question since the BHP is usually only found with either 13 or 17 round mags. All of which comes back to the old "planning on missing a lot?"

You might eat those words if you ever get mixed up in a shooting someday with multiple assailents. 1 shot does not equal 1 kill.

[sm]

Shot Placement...
I do not feel undergunned when I carry a 9mm.

I can still ( as of two days ago) draw from concealment and hit a playing card at 7 yds first shot in .8 , I kept all shots in playing card from 7 yds using my niche gun---Keltec P-11.

Be the firstest with the mostest

[WonderNine]

How could you possibly feel undergunned when you're carrying twice as much or more ammo as the .45 shooters? :D

[amprecon]

Gentlemen, I by no means wanted to start a flame war. My objective was to determine whether the muzzleblast and recoil of the .40S&W or .357Sig in the aforementioned pistols was significantly prohibitive in accurate, sustained and effective shooting by a non-shooting person, such as my wife. Or is the added recoil not worth the gain in supposed power?

[WonderNine]

You didn't start any war, just the typical 9mm vs. .45 debate that's all.

.357Sig-.40S&W for your wife? And she's a non-shooter? I would say no. 9mm or .38 special.

If she's a non-shooter, I'd really be looking at revolvers, not autos. That's for sure.

[firestar]

For some reason the 9mm gets treated like the red headed stepchild of the gun world. I once had a guy tell me that my 9mm was puny and weak and wouldn't get the job done (not in those exact words) while he was carrying a .357 loaded with .38s! My 16 shot 9mm Beretta loaded with +P JHps must be at least as good as a 6 shot .38spl!

9mm is more powerful than the .38spl but facts and reality have no place in some people's minds.:rolleyes: I guess the fact that his gun was a .357 somehow imparted more power to his .38spl loads.:D

[WonderNine]

Hmm, 9mm Ranger +P+ SXT's @ 460ft/lbs vs. .38 spec +P's out of a snub.....:rolleyes:

The normal .357 out of a 4 inch tube is gonna have more power than a +P+ 9mm, but when you compare it to the difference of power in say rifles...is it really worth it for all that extra noise and recoil? Not to mention slower reload and less shots to start with?

No. :uhoh:

What does the .38/.357 have going for it? Not much. .355 diameter 9mm vs. .357 diameter .357/.38.

And a true defensive load like the .357 Golden Saber @ 400ft/lbs doesn't compare either, even out of a 4 inch barrel.

[Kenneth Lew]

I wouldn't like to be shot by any of them.

[Parker Dean]

Originally posted by Alan Fud
Parker, not to go off-topic here, but does anyone still make the full-power 200grn 10mm round?



The Norma 10mm was 200gr@1200fps. Texas Ammunition Company www.texas-ammo.com offers a 200gr FMJ-FP@1250fps for 694ft-lbs ME

From their website:

10 MM (Express). One of our most popular loads are our 10mm (Express). Our goal was to provide a full line of 10mm loads with the power the 10mm was designed for. We have chose the Nosler 135 Grain JHP loaded to 1450 fps for 630 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle; a 165 Grain JHP loaded to 1350 fps for 668 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle; and the Hornady 200 Grain FMJ-FP loaded to 1250 fps for 694 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle.

As a Note, it seems there may have been some confusion over our introduction of these loads last year. These are 10mm loads loaded to what we describe as our "Express" velocities -- It is NOT a new cartridge. This ammunition can be fired in any modern 10mm handgun, in good condition, and manufactured to handle the maximum levels that the 10mm was originally designed for.


These are probably a bit too hot for good SD use except for those VERY experienced, but make for some fun shooting.

[Lancel]

The other calibers you listed just fall in between somewhere.:)

My thoughts on caliber as regards the all important Bullet Placement is that the ammo should provide:

Reliable functioning so the bullet gets to an effective place.
Penetration so the bullet gets to an effective place.
Sharp edged bullet (eg. expanded hollow point) so it's more effective at that place.

So with proven ammo in a proven handgun - nine is fine.

Of course only your wife can tell you what she likes best. But I've found that most neophytes prefer shooting 9mm over larger calibers in small autos.

Larry

[chaim]

No big surprise that this turned into your typical caliber war. However, for my take on your question only, here it goes:

Undergunned with 9mm? No. I think Alan Fud put it best in his first post here. In quality loadings the 9mm is quite good. Ammo selection is very important w/ 9mm, more so than with .40 or .45, since there are some bad choices in 9mm ammo. However, today there are enough good 9mm choices that I am very confident using a 9mm, .40 or .45 for my defensive needs.

However, (and I am a 9mm guy), if I was you I would buy the .40s&w versions of the guns you are looking at. Why? Because you don't sound completely confident in the 9mm. If you need to be talked into it you aren't comfortable with it. If you aren't comfortable with it there is that chance that you just might hesitate a fraction of a second when you need to act most. If you are uncomfortable with a 9mm, for whatever reason, you should relagate your 9mms for range/fun use only.

As for recoil, yes the .40 is noticably stronger in felt recoil. The 9mm is a light but very fast round that gives a short, sharp recoil into your hand. The .45acp is a slow heavy round that gives a slow but strong push into your hand. The .40S&W is both (relatively) heavy and fast so you have a heavy recoil in a sharp, short shock. To me the .40 is a far less comfortable type of recoil than 9mm or .45acp. However, in guns heavy enough to handle it you will be ok. I don't know about the Kahr in .40 v. in 9mm. A buddy has the MK9 in (obviously) 9mm, a range had one to rent. It isn't bad at all. However, I have not fired a MK40 or K40. If I was to venture a guess though, I doubt that it would be tougher than a J-frame shooting +Ps.

[VG]

Would I be undergunned with a 9mm? Or should I get these compact pistols in the supposedly more effective .40S&W or .357Sig and learn to like the recoil and flamethrowing?

See if you can get a copy of the Army Medical Corps "Wound Book." You'll need a very strong stomach, but once you see what has happened to many soldiers shot with FMJ 9mm, you won't have any concerns about the ability of that round to blow humans apart.

[Son of John]

Anybody with any handgun is undergunned if they run up against someone with any rifle or shotgun. If some of us feel superior with a bigger handgun load, get a reality check against real firepower.

Crappy calibers don't survive in the market place. 9 mil has been around a long time and is chambered in a lot of guns. Same for .45. For handguns, all of the modern loads of major calibers do a good job be it .357, 9, .40, 10, .45, .44 mag, etc. Cops and FBI who live and die with their guns like .40 for a good reason, fast and heavy bullet means good penetration and good knockdown at the same time.

These handgun caliber wars are never settled and the same old arguments come up every time. It all boils down to bragging about what you got and putting down somebody else to feel like king of the hill.

[New_comer]

Would I be undergunned with a 9mm?

Definitely not!

[Dobe]

How could you possibly feel undergunned when you're carrying twice as much or more ammo as the .45 shooters?
I beleive that is called the "spray and pray" technique.
What was it that Bill Jordan said? Paraphrased: if you can't solve your problems with six, you won't solve it with......

I do have and have had 9's before. I would not feel unarmed with one. But the added insurance of the larger caliber is the reason I carry the .45.
I do agree that with the "right" bullet selection, the 9mm can be an adequet manstopper. The problem is that even the best design fails. The best bullets do not always perform as planned. A big bullet is always big, even if the hollow point fails to open.

[Dobe]

Crappy calibers don't survive in the market place. 9 mil has been around a long time and is chambered in a lot of guns. .
Wasn't the .32 ACP used for years by some European police? That doesn't make the .32 ACP a great defensive round.

[goon]

There is nothing wrong with the 9mm.
It will kill just as dead as any other caliber.
The whole debate is rediculous.
Holes in your chest are bad.
One may not be enough no matter what the caliber so you are best to just put two or three there in the first place.

[Sean Smith]

Parker, not to go off-topic here, but does anyone still make the full-power 200grn 10mm round?

Cor-Bon also has a full power 200gr 10mm hunting load. Same as the Norma spec (200gr @ 1,200 ft/sec from a 4.6" barrel).

Yes, you are undergunned with 9mm. But you are undergunned with ANY handgun caliber. What lots of people don't grasp is that with most handgun calibers, you are arguing over degree of suckitude. Handguns are compromise weapons by design, pick a compromise you can live with.

[antediluvianist]

Just get a hi-cap .45. That equalizes the capacity advantage of a 9mm over the standard single-stack .45, and retains the momentum advantage of the .45 round.

You cannot possibly feel undergunned with a hi-cap .45.

Hands too small for a hi-cap .45? I've seen women 5 feet tall with small bones handle hi-cap .45s perfectly easily. I suspect it's not really a problem for most, almost all, people .

Hey, everybody, get a hi-cap .45. It's the best of both worlds.

[Sean Smith]

You cannot possibly feel undergunned with a hi-cap .45.

You should.

[George Hill]

No kidding. Your always undergunned with a handgun. For serious work, you need a rifle.

[antediluvianist]

I'm talking about house defense. Short-range defense, not offense.

Of course rifles beat handguns. For that matter, artillery beats rifles. Go all the way and use a thermonuclear bomb.

[Island Beretta]

As Boats said these questions tend to be IQ droppers but I know that sometime there is a genuine issue with the poster.

Note the following and form your own conclusions:

1. The 9mm is used by most of the world's military and police forces.

2. 9mm can be safely loaded to approach the performance of the .45 and .40.

3. You would not stand in front of a gun firing one (I suppose you wouldn't either for a .22 caliber round).

4. Momentum = mass x velocity. Do the math..9mm or .45 has the greater momentum?? You are not so concerned with momentum as you are with the ability of the round to impart that energy to you-hence the concept of the hollowpoint.

5. Medical records show great devastation and mortality infliction by handgun rounds even .22; key factors contributing to this included shot placement, penetration, psychological reaction to the wound and wound entry angle. Guess what bullet diameter (.355 for 9mm and .45 for .45) was not a big issue.

If you can get a .45 going 1700 ft/s in a handgun like a .50 shotgun slug then you have a winner though you may be devastated/wounded by the recoil.

6. As a close combat weapon a knife is more lethal than any handgun round-larger wound capacity, greater shock effect and quicker loss of blood- but again it depends on cut/stab placement.

[Skunkabilly]

What 10-ring, Marko and George Hill said....

I'm only undergunned with my 9mm because my .308 is too loud to shoot indoors :p

[antediluvianist]

Exactly as you said : momentum is mass x velocity.

A standard 230 grain .45 bullet has TWICE the mass of a standard 115 grain 9mm bullet.

The 9mm's velocity of roughly 1200 ft./sec. is certainly NOT twice the velocity of the .45's roughly 850 ft./sec. Ergo using the mass X velocity equation, the .45 bullet clearly has more momentum. The math is clear.

Of course a heavier 9mm bullet can be used, but even a heavy 145 grain 9mm bullet only has 63% of the mass of a 230 grain .45 bullet. The equation mass X velocity clearly still gives the advantage to the .45 bullet for momentum.

It is NOT necessary for the .45 bullet to go faster than its usual approx. 850 ft. per sec. for this momentum advantage to be retained. The math clearly proves that.

But of course it is true that if the .45 bullet is FMJ and goes right through the target-person, and if the comparison is with a 9mm HP bullet which delivers all its energy inside the target-person's body, then 9mm might be better given those particular assumptions.

A bullet-strike of even a .22 into the brain may be instantly fatal: we all know "bullet-placement" is the most important factor. However, perfect shot placement is not to be counted on, especially in a stressful/dark situation. The .45 slug's superior momentum relative to the 9mm slug is not to be sneezed at.

[hd1.]

All wives are not created equal, so I'm not making any generalizations about women's ability to handle firearms. I can only relate how being married to this particular one effected my choice in selecting a carry caliber. My wife has a Ruger SP101 in .357, but only shoots .38s . When I was deciding which Kahr MK to buy, (the 9mm or the .40) I was able to rent both of them to try. I wanted to get a carry piece that my wife would shoot if the need ever arose. I ended up with the 9mm. The .40 had some muzzle flip, while the 9mm tended to stay more on target. My wife is comfortable picking up and firing the MK9. To me, this is an important consideration in my selection of a carry piece; I'm lisenced, and she's not. The extra round along with the cost of ammo are bonus points. If I'm downed, I want a gun that she will not hesitate to pick up.

(I should also mention that she is more comfortable with my full-sized .45ACP than she is with .357 from the snubby.)

[Mike Irwin]

Momentum is great if you're shooting bowling pins.


It's pretty much worthless as a parameter for judging bullet performance if you want a round that's going to expand, penetrate, and open up critical wounds.


The ability to creat a permanent wound cavity -- disrupting muscles, nerves, blood vessels, and organs -- and the effects from that wound cavity are what causes a hostile individual to cease hostile activities.

The chart posted earlier is a pretty clear indication that Federal Hydrashoks have this ability.

It's funny how the expansion of all 4 bullets is virtually identical, and the 9mms cut permanent wound cavities of much greater volumn, and yet somehow the 9mm is inferior because the bullet isn't as big?

:rolleyes:

[45auto]

I haven't shot all those combinations you mentioned, but I would go with the 9mm and just be concerned that your wife can hit anything with it and that the gun functions for her...everytime.

Although the chances are probably slim to none that she would ever have to fire it, statistics that I read indicate that you must be able to fire multiple shots. I believe it was 2-3.


I do believe bigger bullets are better :D , but not at the cost of not being able to fire accurate, multiple shots or having a gun that you will actually carry.

[Sean Smith]

Obsession with handgun bullet momentum as a factor in stopping a hostile attacker is sound evidence that you don't know what you are talking about.

[Mikul]

I've fired all of the calibers. They're all acceptable for self-defense. Real-world documented shootings back this up, statistics, physics, and lab testing also back this up.

Personally, I don't like the .40 S&W guns. They recoil similarly to a .45, so why not just use a .45 which will accomplish the same thing at much lower pressures? Which brings me to my next complaint... the .40 S&W beats guns up. Glock, H&K, and Sig make quality firearms; probably the best in the industry. When I see one break, especially a newish one, it's in .40 S&W or .357 Sig. The pressures are nothing that a gun can't handle, but it doesn't seem that the manufacturers have worked the kinks out just yet.

I find the recoil of the .357 Sig to be sharp. It's controllable, but I wouldn't want to run 200 rounds of it as I usually do in a practice session. The brass should be more annoying to reload due to the bottleneck, but I know of no one who reloads it that is having a problem. This cartridge can replicate the magical 125-grain .357 Magnum round that seems to be the undisputed man-stopper, which is it's saving grace.

[ColonelJim]

If you can't hit what you're aiming at.......I don't think it much matters what caliber you're using.
If you CAN hit what you're aiming at.....I don't it much matters what caliber you're using.

[Marko Kloos]

They recoil similarly to a .45, so why not just use a .45 which will accomplish the same thing at much lower pressures?

Well, the idea behind the cartridge was to downsize the 10mm Auto, so it would fit into 9mm-sized platforms. (The 10mm requires a .45-sized frame.) That particular goal was accomplished, but I don't like the .40 for exactly the same reasons you described. The small amount of extra performance over the 9mm in a imilarly-sized platform is bought at the expense of more recoil, higher pressures, reduced frame life, less capacity, and much higher ammo cost.

I'm a big 10mm fan and consider it superior in every respect to the .45ACP. The "10mm Lite", on the other hand, does not offer any significant gains for me to prefer it over the 9mm Luger.

[Sean Smith]

One minor correction: .40S&W and 9x19mm both have the same pressure limit according to SAAMI: 35,000 psi. 9x19mm +P is about 38,000 psi IIRC. Pressure doesn't directly correlate to performance; 10mm's peak pressure is "only" 37,500 psi, but the extra case capacity lets you stuff in more slow-burning powder to get higher speeds at manageable pressures.

[Deepdiver]

You' re only undergunned with a 9mm if

1. you can't hit what you are shooting at, or

2. your opponent is a faster/steadier/better shot than you are, or

3. your opponent has a long-gun, and you are within his range, but he is outside of your range.

...there are probably other scenario's, but you get the drift - it won't be because you don't have a 40 or 45.

[Boats]

Of course when we examine the sleight of hand required to make 9mm look equivalent to bigger bores, the arguments made are exposed for what they are.

Remember this chart of Hydra-shoks evidently shot on two dimensional jello as the wound is given in area rather than volume?

9mm 124gr. +p+ Pen. 13.3" Expansion 0.67 Wound Area 44.8 sq. in.
.40 S&W 155 gr Pen. 13.3 Exp. 0.68 Wound 47.9
.45ACP 185gr +p Pen. 12.9 Exp. 0.69 Wound 31.5
.45 ACP 230gr Pen. 13.7 Exp. 0.71 Wound 28.4

Well. . . volume of a cylinder, which an actual bullet track most geometrically resembles, is area of the base pi r(squared) times height. Sorry, mathematical notation doesn't work here.

Actual wound volume caused by passage of the bullet:

9mm 18.75 cu. in.
.40 S&W 19.31 cu. in.
.45 185 19.28 cu. in.
.45 230 21.69 cu. in.

The rest of that "wound area" crap from the Calibers site is temporary stretch cavity in gelatin, which has exactly nothing to do with anything.

Then again, a cursory review of ammolab reveals the truth. Any 9mm expanding to 0.67 or more is a rare event, so much so that it should hardly be counted on, especially in a clothed target, whereas 0.71 for .45 ACP is rather ordinary.

http://ammolab.com/9mm_section1.htm

Let the statistical cherry picking and apples to oranges comparisons resume. I don't mind fruity efforts to give the 9mm big bore equivalency, I just don't eat what I am offered.

[Mike Irwin]

Wow...

Less than 3 cubic inch volume difference between the 9mm and the .45...

LAWDY LAWDY LAWDY!

I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT!

VASTLY SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE!

Oh.

Wait.

3 cubic inches, quite frankly folks, isn't ???? of a difference between the rounds.

You're engaging in a little mathematical slight of hand yourself, Boats. :)

You seem to be making the assumption that each bullet, immediately upon impact, was fully expanded, and cut a cylindrical channel through the testing media as if it were being pushed at the end of a stick.

Don't think so.

The .45 is a great cartridge. But despite all of the hooting and hollering and chest beating of the most ardent, and blindered, cheauvinists, the simple fact remains that today's modern high performance ammunition has erased any true advantages that the .45 once held over the smaller calibers, and especially the advantages that it truly did hold when hardball was the only game in town.

[Mike Irwin]

Just noticed something, as well, about Ammo Lab's testing, something I'd like explained to me...

The 9mm testing? 4 layers of denim cloth.

The .45 ACP testing? 1 layer of denim cloth.

I can't remember the last time I walked out of the house with FOUR layers of denim on, or even clothing that would come even remote to simulating 4 layers of denim.

Why the discrepancy?

[sm]

Mike,
I agree. I still think it boils down to shot placement. Yes we have better ammo today. Me, I shoot .45ACP because I like the platform, the gun fits enabling me to get my shots where I want them. I can also do this with a 1911 style 9mm or 9x23, or .38 super...

I can shoot my Keltec P-11 in 9mm well.

Yes, I have let my revolver skills slide, but I again wouldn't feel undergunned with a .38 spl from my 3" model 64, or any other .38 spl platform, J frame/K frame-snubby or otherwise. "Undergunned" well duh...sure I'd rather have a 12 ga...Instead of Calibers, Platforms, and Ammo types, which a person has to figure for THEMSELVES what they shoot best, quickly and accuratley, Pick one, preferablly that fits, get good at shot placement, and not worry about.

I shot with a former "person" whom had worked with SF at one time. " I like the 32ACP better than the .380". OK I asked why. "Because where I had to be the ammo was plentiful, and the gun was generic to region..380 was scarce and used by the cops. I could practice all I wanted and not attract attentionwith the .32. I got really good with it and did not feel I couldn't use it effectivley. " Besides , we just had ball ammo, my shot placement was the critical component, not the ammo, the gun, or the caliber". Yep, makes sense to me.

His Bug was a .25 ACP, used ball ammo in a 950 Jetfire.

I figure I have a greater chance of getting to shoot a Hottentot than a blue jean clad jelloman. " hang on jelloman...how many pairs of jeans you wearing--oh crap! shoulda bought that super duper blue jean ammo...I knew I should have".

I shoot dirt, mud and critters. I figure jello man ain't wearing that much fabric...if he his, head shot, neck shot...bet his carotid bleeds like warm jello anway

OCD is not worth obsessing over.

[amprecon]

"...comparison in suckitude..." LMAO :D That was funny.

The pistols I'm considering would not be for the wife primarily, I want them for myself. I was just wondering if the recoil in .40S&W and .357Sig would make them prohibitive for her to shoot if she had to shoot them.

From what I've read so far, the gain in power is not sufficient enough to warrant the added recoil and cost.

We have a .357mag SP-101 loaded with .38's primarily as a house gun and I carry the G21 with me in my truck. Don't plan on selling either. My wife actually wants either a 2" .38 or one of the NAA .22 mini's. I think she'd be better off with the .38 snubby.

Anyway, thanks for all the input, I think I'll go with the K9 and the G19.

[agtman]

Regarding Alan Fud's question on the "full-power" 200gn 10mm loads, actually Texas Ammo markets 2 of these loads. TA uses Hornady bullets and launches both @ 1250fps/694fpe. One is, as mentioned, a 200gn FMJ-FP, while the other is Hornady's venerable XTP-HP. (Wilson raves about these for SD in the .45acp loads).

A while back a did a Range Report on both of these TA loads using 3 types of 10mm pistols commonly owned by 10mm fans. It's posted here, if you're interested:

http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=84117

Regarding whether anyone should feel "undergunned with a 9mm," it's probably true that handgun calibers in general suck for self-defense, when compared to rifles or even a good 12-gauge pump. :scrutiny:

However, when the issue is strictly limited to the handgun calibers discussed here, some calibers suck more than others. :evil:

For easy target practice, competitive "gun games," cheap plinking, breaking in a girlfriend, or executing your neighbor's yappy poodle, you're probably not "undergunned" with a 9mm. As well, the 9mm attracts politically-correct police administrators, arthritics and the terminally limp-wristed from various walks of life. :neener: Hey, it's a diverse world out there. :D

But for any serious social situation involving an armed assailant, where you only have access to a pistol, there are certainly better choices available than the 9mm - notably the .40S&W, 10mm Auto and .45acp.

[Boats]

I would only pause here to point out the reason why cubic is more meaningful than square in these measurements. The surface area of three cubic inches is actually quite substantial, especially if blood is leaking from it all.

The reverse argument is perverse and not backed by reality. If 9mm hollowpoints were really the real world equivalent of the larger and/or faster rounds, there would have been no perrennial search for something to replace it.

Facing facts in auto rounds, there was once really only 9mm and .45ACP in "service pistols."

Then there was the 10mm, a direct R&D response to the perceived inadequacies of the 9mm.

Then there was the downloaded .40S&W, again trying to be more of a replacement for the 9mm than the .45ACP

Then there is the .357SIG, trying to take the bullet of the 9mm and give it more zip, again a move, whether grounded in reality or marketing hype, in response to the question, "what can we do to improve upon the 9mm?"

Then there is the phenomenon of police agency trade-ins. The trend has been a distinct migration away from the 9mm despite all of this ballistic equivalency, nay outright advantages it allegedly has over the .40-.45 pistols replacing them.

You can beat the drum until it breaks, but 9mm has always been, and will probably remain, viewed as more marginal, even for a pistol defense round, than the bigger bore ones.

Railing against gravity doesn't make one lighter. Arguing the 9mm is as effective as larger rounds is just about as vainglorious.

What next? "With modern high-performance bullets, the .38 Special +p is as effective as the .45LC with the same bullet technology?":scrutiny:

[Harold Mayo]

Of course when we examine the sleight of hand required to make 9mm look equivalent to bigger bores, the arguments made are exposed for what they are.


Hmmm....

I don't look too much at the tables, though I have viewed almost all of them at one time or another. They all say the same thing...that handgun rounds suck.

I don't have to engage in "sleight of hand" to make the 9mm look equivalent to bigger bores...I shoot animals and see what happens.

Let's see...

I shoot a deer with a 9mm BHP and he dies.
I shoot a hog with a 9mm BHP and he dies.
I shoot a deer with a .45 ACP 1911 and he dies.
I shoot a hog with a .45 ACP 1911 and he dies.

Logically, then, according to my "sleight of hand" while looking at dead animals than I've slain with the aforementioned calibers, I get the following:

Shoot with 9mm=shoot with .45 ACP=dead animal

My "sleight of hand" arrived-at conclusion is, then, that 9mm=.45 ACP.

Pretty neat how slight of hand arguments work pretty well with dead animals. I guess those shot with the 9mm ought to be protesting their deaths.

[Intune]

"I guess those shot with the 9mm ought to be protesting their deaths."


I bet the ones shot with the .45 would too if they could! :D
Mmm, venison, it's what's for dinner!

I was going to ask if you saw a time diff in going down, but I've noticed a diff with .243 and '06, The .243 shot deer went down quicker in my case. Both lung shot at about the same range. Wuss deer!

[matsaleh]

LOL - Religious wars can be fun. Some pretty cool one-liners in this thread.

Shoot what works for you. What can you afford to practice with, what you feel comfortable carrying, and what allows you to be confident.

Practice. Get familiar and good at it.

For me, I chose 9x18 first because both the gun and the ammo were inexpensive, reliable, and accurate as hell.

Then I got 9x19 because I wanted something that would be most likely to be carried by any invading foreign military or police force if the SHTF. You know, something with plenty of ammo available to "liberate" if necessary. Paranoid? I dunno... Hillary is a Senator now, with a possible move for Prez, and Ol' Bill has his eyes on the Secretary-General seat at the UN. They might just leave the back door open for the jack-booters.

But, meanwhile, 9x19 is cheap to practice with, and I'm getting pretty good with it, and more confident.

Cheers.

[Al Thompson]

Harold, I can't believe your injecting real life into an internet argument! Shame on you! :D :D

About once every two years, someone I know who is a dedicated handgunner shoots a critter with his/her "uber" load. They usually come back like this - :what: - when they find that handguns have a lot more relationship to an arrow than a rifle.

After popping a few critters with ball ammo (9mm/.45), I was extremely unimpressed. My carry loads are all HPs, Gold Dots preferred.

[Boats]

Some dudes also allegedly shot up some mean French goats and said the same thing--"9mm equals .45ACP!"

Except of course for that one small detail, namely fraud.

About the only people who have meaningful combined experience shooting people with handgun hollowpoint ammunition are cops. LEOs have been running away from the 9mm in droves.

Maybe they didn't shoot enough hogs, deer, or javelinas, amped on coke or meth? :evil:

You will note that I agree that having only a handgun when the balloon goes up would suck and a prayer would be uttered even had I the prescience to be carrying a .454 Casull that moment. However, I do agree with the notion that some handgun rounds suck more than others do, so I will go with one of the less sucky ones. It is remarkable, to say the least that shot placement advocates don't put their trust where their rhetoric is and carry Beretta Bobcats or something.

[Harold Mayo]

Actually, most of the LEOs that I know who have a choice in their duty weapon carry a 9mm. I can't actually think of any (that I know personally) who carry a .45, anymore. Almost ALL of the ones that I know USED to carry a cocked and locked 1911 in .45 ACP and are now shooting 9mm Glocks, H&K P7M8's or M13's, or custom 1911s in 9mm.

Conversely, pretty much ALL of the LEOs that I know who DO NOT get a choice in their duty weapon carry a .40 caliber of some flavor, normally a Glock 22.

Boats, maybe your ballistic gelatin that was shot with various rounds didn't contain enough coke or meth, either?

:banghead:

[Harold Mayo]

Harold, I can't believe your injecting real life into an internet argument! Shame on you!

About once every two years, someone I know who is a dedicated handgunner shoots a critter with his/her "uber" load. They usually come back like this - - when they find that handguns have a lot more relationship to an arrow than a rifle.

After popping a few critters with ball ammo (9mm/.45), I was extremely unimpressed. My carry loads are all HPs, Gold Dots preferred.

Yes, I am ashamed. I will strive to NOT interject anything but hearsay, rumor, and innuendo into by posts from now on.

I carry +P Gold Dots in everything, too.

Everything that I've shot in the thoracic area with either handgun round has expired rather quickly if not immediately. The 0.09" difference in bullet diameter hasn't seemed to make any difference in length of time.

[Mike Irwin]

Actually, physisologically, 3 cubic inches isn't really all that significant, unless it's 3 cubic inches of heart muscle or brain tissue.

"You can beat the drum until it breaks, but 9mm has always been, and will probably remain, viewed as more marginal, even for a pistol defense round, than the bigger bore ones."

The funny thing about it is, it's really not so much the 9mm people beating the drums as some of the .45 people coming swooping down like the screaming meemees over what most often are only perceived insults.

The .357 Mag. round certainly isn't viewed as being a marginal round. Yet it's nominally a 9mm bullet, and some of the 9mm loads available are pretty close ballistic matches to highly regarded .357 Mag. loads. Curious.

Take your pick, Fackler's jello junkies or even Marshall & Sanow's one-shot-stop crapola. Both agree that the 9mm with modern bullets and .45s with modern bullets show performance levels amazingly similar.

Then we have this...

"Some dudes also allegedly shot up some mean French goats and said the same thing--"9mm equals .45ACP!"

You know, it's been a long time since I read the reports on the supposed goat tests, but I don't remember getting that at all.

I do remember getting the supposed fact that the Glaser was supposed to be the best performing bullet in all calibers over .380, and the results were fairly mixed.

That is, if you believe the goat tests ever took place. I'm still out on the subject.

Now, if you go back to FBI tests in the 1980s, and the reasons why the 10mm and the .40 came about, in large part it's because both the .45 and the 9mm failed the early batches of tests that FBI designed, and failed them pretty miserably.

That's right, they both failed.

Largely due to the bullets that were then available.

Now we need to look at this...

"The trend has been a distinct migration away from the 9mm despite all of this ballistic equivalency, nay outright advantages it allegedly has over the .40-.45 pistols replacing them."

In order to understand that properly, one has to understand the contextual timeline.

It looks pretty convincing, on its face. But if you understand what was going on at the time, you'll finally begin to understand that appearances can be very very deceiving.

Timeline...

Early 1980s. The "Wonder9" craze starts, drug wars start breaking out, police everywhere feel that they're outgunned, and the mad rush from revolvers to 9mm semi-automatics begins.

1986 (IIRC). Miami shootout. Despite the piss poor tactics and preparation of the FBI agents involved, which result in several of them being killed or gravely wounded, the blame for the entire situation isn't placed on the men involved, it focuses almost squarely on a single 9mm Winchester Silvertip bullet.

That Silvertip bullet, despite actually showing good penetration and almost textbook expansion, is pilloried as the reason the FBI screwed up.

Police agencies all over the nation pause in their tracks, wondering if they did the right thing in adopting the 9mm.

Later 1980s. Glock is quickly winning the lion's share of police handgun sales in the nation with their 9mm 17s and 19s.

FBI begins testing possible successors to the 9mm Winchester Silvertip, including the .45 ACP and a variety of rounds, and finds that most all of them fail to one degree or another in the test procedures that they've laid out.

FBI allows its agents to carry either a 9mm OR a .357 Magnum, as they see fit, during this period.

Very late 1980s, early 1990s. FBI adopts a 10mm pistol despite many reservations. After numerous problems in testing, they load the round down to the 10mm Lite. The new bullet designed for it, however, shows very good performance in the FBI's tests, including a variety of penetration scenarios.

At the same time, S&W begins working on the .40 S&W, essentially the 10mm FBI reound in a cut down case. It is masterfully marketed, essentially as the second coming of Christ.

When the round is released in late 1989, it already has huge popular support, based largely on supposition, and police forces that went to the 9mm in the early 1990 now start to move to the .40.

Early 1990s. Based on the FBI's testing, bullet manufacturers begin to move designs into the computer age. New designs offer VASTLY superior performance. Dr. Martin Fackler laid out his criteria for what a bullet should do, and the manufacturers responded.

Early 1990s. The initial batches of .40 caliber ammo didn't have these new bullets, and California departments report several rather frightening failures of the round to do the job, based almost solely on bullet performance.

Late early 1990s and up to today. The new generation of bullets in all calibers has shown what the proper application of computers can do for ballistics. With properly designed bullets, performance in all calibers used in police work show amazingly similar results and efficacy.

And all through the 1990s?

The move away from the 9mm that began after Miami began to slow, and numbers of departments that use 9mm vs .40 vs .45 has stabilized.

There are still something like 100,000 police officers in the United States that use the 9mm, and have good results with the round as long as the proper ammunition is selected.

[Mike Irwin]

"It is remarkable, to say the least that shot placement advocates don't put their trust where their rhetoric is and carry Beretta Bobcats or something."

I carried a Taurus TP-22 exclusively for almost 5 years...

What does that tell you?

[antediluvianist]

I said momentum is important. I said bullet placement is the most important. That is not obsession with momentum.

You, on the other hand, have written nothing useful.

[Starpower]

After 17 years in my current department, I have used a .357 mag revolver, a 9mm Sig 226, then a Beretta 92 9mm, and currently we are issued Sig 229 in 357. I have seen the results in arms and legs of all three sizes, (we don't all shoot "Expert")and I intend to empty everything I have if they can still shoot back at me. Believe me, when that paper target starts shooting back, slow, deliberate shot placement becomes suppresive fire. My Baretta 92 with 16 rounds (one in) is my best off-duty choice. I have fired the Glocks but didn't care for them.

[Island Beretta]

Good thread so far with sound reasoning and a sprinkling of maths/physics here and there!!;) That said the quest to improve on the 9mm should not be taken as an indictment on the round it is just a part of humans to be dissatisfied and seek better.. Cars, computers, planes, phones etc. etc. go the same way and I do not look down on the say, Ford Model T of yesteryear, when compared to the F150s or Evos of today.

Shoot well!!

[matsaleh]

The new generation of bullets in all calibers has shown what the proper application of computers can do for ballistics. With properly designed bullets, performance in all calibers used in police work show amazingly similar results and efficacy.

What should we look for in a properly designed bullet for 9x19? What brands use these designs?

Currently I'm using Aguila IQ because it shoots well and because the mkt info matches what my CHL instructor told me was important: hi velocity, light bullet, and massive shock value. Also it's affordable.

Thanks.

[Boats]

I carried a Taurus TP-22 exclusively for almost 5 years...

What does that tell you?


It tells me that you're a little off your rocker.;)

I knew someday that the FBI tests would rear their head in this thread. Here you go. The .45 was "rejected" not because of its performance, but because the OAL of the cartridge requires a frame that some agents couldn’t handle. (Just like in the real world). Those that could handle the frame size were apparently also thought capable of handling the new favorite full-house 10mm round rather than a .45ACP which was outperformed. Of course the birth of the .40S&W puts the lie to the 10mm being the wunderround for everyone. (I still want a G20 15+1 when the mag ban sunsets--I'm no Luddite after all).

Here is what the FBI tested various ammunition upon:

1. Bare Gelatin at 10 yards
2. Heavy Clothing at 10 feet.
3. Automotive sheet metal at 10 feet
4. Wall board at 10 feet
5. Plywood at 10 feet. One piece 3/4" AA fir plywood
6. Automotive glass at 10 ft.
7. Light clothing at 20 yds.
8. Automotive glass at 20 yards

All shots fired had to defeat the above obstacles (where present) AND penetrate 12" into a block of ballistic gelatin. The 12" was developed on anatomical averages, and failing to penetrate to that depth was considered a failure.

All portions were tested using 40 rounds of each ammo sample and gun combination.


FBI AMMUNITION TEST PERFORMANCE DATA

CAL MAKER BULLET Wt. GUN BBL VEL. FPE SUCCESS

.45 Fed HS 230 4506 5" 802 328fp 95%
.45 Rem JHP 185 645 5" 903 334fp 95%
.45 Fed HS 230 1911 5" 828 358fp 82%
.45 Fed JHP 185 4506 5" 874 313fp 90%
.45 Fed JHP 185 645 5" 953 373fp 57%
.45 Win S-Tip 185 4506 5" 951 371fp 50%

10mm Norma JHP 170 Delta 5" 1358 696fp 100%
10mm Fed JHP 180 Delta 5" 931 346fp 95%
10mm Win JHP 180 Delta 5" 955 364fp 92%
10mm IMP-3D JHP 180 Delta 5" 991 392fp 92%
10mm Buffalo Prfrg 191 Delta 5" 916 355fp 30%

.357 Fed HS 158 M13 3" 1183 490fp 100%
.357 Win JSP 158 M13 3" 1096 421fp 97%
.357 Win S-Tip 145 M13 3" 1166 437fp 82%

38sp Fed HS 147 M13 3" 874 249fp 92%
38sp Rem LHP 158 M13 3" 871 266fp 67%
38sp Fed LHP 158 M13 3" 834 244fp 70%
38sp Fed HS 129 M13 3" 841 202fp 60%
38sp Win LHP 158 M13 3" 808 229fp 65%
38sp Win S-Tip 125 M13 3" 843 197fp 17%

380 Win S-Tip 85 PPK 3" 954 171fp 20%

9mm Fed HS 147 226 4.25" 914 272fp 82%
9mm Fed HS 124 226 4.25" 1062 310fp 82%
9mm Win JHP 147 226 4.25" 902 265fp 62%
9mm Win S-Tip 115 226 4.25" 1091 303fp 35%

By these measures, the best .45ACP rounds didn’t do as well as the best 10mm round, but just look at how much more ballistic energy was required to get that last 5%! It is also interesting to note the best .38Sp performer outclassing the best 9mm by 10%. It is even interesting to note that the .45ACP 230 gr Hydra-shok had two different performance percentages from two different platforms.

Look, I like the 9mm just fine as an autopistol round. It has a lot of virtues. In "modern" loadings, it would probably represent better in the above tests. However, the 9mms "equivalency" is hotly contested, and not just because a bunch of .45ACP aficionados beat their chests about it. The perception the 9mm is a little lacking in the power department is backed by fact.

[agtman]

For those interested in the actual FBI report, .....


... by the Bureau's SA John Hall, you can find it here:

http://www.totse.com/en/bad_ideas/guns_and_weapons/10mmpist.html

The 10mm Auto bested both the 9mm and the .45acp in penetration AND in accuracy. From the last pages of Hall's Report, the careful reader will note:

"As an additional consideration, the 10mm was by far the most accurate round tested, consistently providing one hole 10-shot groups at 25 yards of less than an inch (0.77" average) with both handloaded and factory ammunition built to FBI specifications. By contrast, the 9mm averaged 2.3" and the .45 averaged 2".

"The conclusion was obvious. The best performing round within the parameters of the FBI's test protocol was the 10mm."

[Boats]

However, the careful reader would also note from the Hall report:

As a point of reference, the standard issue .38 Special, 158 grain lead hollowpoint round was fired through the battery of tests. Although the .38 was not a "test" round, and therefore not fired under the same strict test controls, the penetration performance was similar to that of the 9mm, producing acceptable penetration 67.5% of the time.

AND

Averaging the volumetric results over all eight test events, the 10mm and .45 displaced similar volumes of tissue within the desirable penetration range of 18"--4.11 and 4.22 cubic inches respectively-well beyond that displaced by the 9mm and .38-which respectively measured 2.82 and 2.16 cubic inches.

So really, with the exception of barrier pentration in some media, the 10mm doesn't produce awe-inspiring advantages over the .45ACP. (I still want one though!) I do find it interesting that the "offensive" units of the FBI use the .45ACP when the same platform, i.e. the 1911, can chamber either round and give a slight capacity advantage to the 10mm in the process.

I'm gone. http://www.kurts-smilies.de/undwech.gif

[Mike Irwin]

And, once again, please note that Mr. Hall was writing about ammunition/bullets that can only be classified as FIRST GENERATION, with none of the advantages of the later research and development that was done AFTER the results of the FBI's testing were published.

Also note that the data posted by Boats is the data from FBI's initial testing, again, what Hall was writing about, and which used the FIRST GENERATION bullets -- bullets that had been designed more on what appeared to look good and what the designers THOUGHT might work, rather than any large body of investigative research.

It's no coincidence that within a few years of the conclusion of the FBI's first round of testing, which Hall is discussing, Winchester, Remington, Federal, and others had all adopted the FBI protocols, including gelatin testing, and had begun massive R&D programs to design bullets that would expand reliably at handgun velocities, and which would penetrate deeply while expanding.

Winchester's Black Talon, Remington's Golden Sabre, a slightly redesigned Federal HydraShok, Speer's Gold Dot, PMC's Starfire, all were deveoped based on FBI's test criteria, gelatin testing, and lots of computer time, both for design and simulation.

The efforts are proving worth the time and expense. Winchesters first generation 147-gr. 9mm, which FBI tested, and which a number of police forces adopted, proved to be an extremely disappointing performer in actual use.

Winchester's (and other makers') second generation 9mm 147-gr. slugs, however, have proven to be excellent performers, both in testing and in actual use.

We're both a generation and light years away from the performance levels shown by the ammo in FBI's testing, and time has been VERY good to just about every caliber now availble, to the point where once again I state that the obvious differences that used to exist between the rounds is, anymore, a matter of barstool bickering and conjecture.

[Mike Irwin]

"The .45 was "rejected" not because of its performance, but because the OAL of the cartridge requires a frame that some agents couldn’t handle."

Think about that statement for a moment and you'll see that it doesn't make a lot of sense, Boats...

Because the 10mm, which FBI did adopt, has a LONGER overall length than the .45 ACP.

However, the grip frames of the 10mm S&Ws that FBI did adopt were dimensionally identical to the grip frames of S&W's .45 ACP handguns.

That fact puts your claim into a little hot water...

[Sean Smith]

So really, with the exception of barrier pentration in some media, the 10mm doesn't produce awe-inspiring advantages over the .45ACP.

... if you use weaker 10mm loads and/or obsolete bullet designs, that is. :p

[Boats]

Not so. I will quote myself with the sentence you didn't include:

Those that could handle the frame size were apparently also thought capable of handling the new favorite full-house 10mm round rather than a .45ACP which was outperformed.

They weren't going to have two calibers in the same size frames. One loading of 10mm beat all of the .45ACP offerings. They didn't then turn and issue both. The large frame gun, for a time, became the full power 10mm. That is of course not the case today.

That water didn't feel too hot. Looking at the .45ACP performance data, it was certainly no slouch. The 9mm, as shown, was really found wanting. You have been lumping the .45ACP and the 9mm together as rejected equally. It looks like one was rejected more out of hand than the other from the data.

You keep going on about CAD generation bullets. No empirical testing has been done that I have seen which would cast any doubt on the conclusions of the FBI tests. The improvements, such as they are, amount to conjecture until tested one against the other.

[Boats]

... if you use weaker 10mm loads and/or obsolete bullet designs, that is.

Since the 10mm fans I know are about 30/70 factory/reloaders, some of those folks are consistently shooting hot .40S&Ws and the rest shoot whatever it is that they cook up.

Lest we forget a .45ACP round can be hotted up.

I am not in this thread to mix it up with 10mm fans. I am a fan of the round, but the platform choices are still rather limited. That is what primarily holds me back from getting one, not that I don't believe in the round.

The 9mm is a whole 'nuther ball game.

[agtman]

Boats:

Just so we're clear, I like the .45acp and used to carry a Sig 220. It's a venerable warhorse of a cartridge, one that I'd carry again if the 10mm Auto weren't available to me.

But the choice of the 10mm over the .45 was a fairly easy one for the Bureau. Whether the 10mm's advantages were "awe-inspiring" is irrelevant.

The fact is the 10mm offered three primary advantages over the .45, two of which were stated in Hall's Report.

First, it penetrated to the desired depth more consistently and more reliably than the .45. As Hall states:

"10mm - 39 shots out of 40 (97.5%); .45 - 37 shots out of 40 (92.5%); 9mm - 27 shots out of 40 (67.5%)."

Believe it or not, when encountering intermediate barriers in LE work (e.g., auto glass, various metals, and wood of differing densities), you want all the probabilites on your side if bullets suddenly get exchanged.

The 10mm's second advantage, as noted, was it's accuracy over the 9mm and .45acp. I mean, who'd want one of the less accurate calibers? ("Here, Agent Mulder. We're issuing you this pistol in the least accurate caliber we have, 9mm. Doesn't really matter, though, since you can't shoot for sh*t anyway." :scrutiny: ).

The 10mm's third advantage is simple: it offered an increase in magazine capacity over the .45acp by 1 or 2 cartridges. With the S&W 10XX-series pistols, which use single-stack mags, there is a 9+1 capacity, as against 8+1 in the 45XX-series. (The Bureau actually had Smith make a "+2" floor plate for the mags its agents were issued with their 1076s). The 10mm Glock 20's preban mags hold 15+1, as against the .45 G21's prebans which hold 13+1.

Another point to remember is the one Sean made. The 10mm has a far greater energy (fpe) range than the .45, which leads to a greater versatility of application than the .45, even over 45 +P loadings. The careful reader of Hall's Report will note that the particular 10mm load used that bested the 9mm & 45 was a purposely down-loaded 10mm/180gn HP (@ 950fps). :rolleyes: Not only are hotter 10mm loads available today, but they come loaded with much better HP bullets (e.g., Gold Dots) than Hall's people had access to. These bullets penetrate sufficiently and mushroom reliably - and do so at high velocities that the .45 simply can't duplicate.

As far as your reference to Hall's quote about the .38 Special, I assume you were just out to "tweak" the 9mm fans a bit, since it really doesn't speak to the 10mm issues above. But that's okay, the 9mm mavins need to be tweaked once in a while. It's good for 'em. :neener:

By the way, as far as the FBI's HRT unit being issued custom-built 1911s in .45acp, the fact is that the unit did consider chambering them in 10mm Auto, but Bill Wilson balked at it. He claimed the 10mm has "feeding problems" in 1911-pattern pistols and would only submit samples in .45acp . :rolleyes: Pretty lame claim. :scrutiny:

Funny how pistolsmiths Dane Burns, Richard Heinie, Ed Brown and only about a hundred others, including my 'smith Vic Tibbets, have absolutely NO PROBLEM building feed-reliable 1911s chambered in 10mm Auto.

In fact, here's what the HRT unit ought to be carrying (or something similar):

http://image1ex.villagephotos.com/2133785.jpg

Ciao .... :cool:

P.S. In the pic above, that CMC mag holds 9rds of 10mm (+ 1 for the chamber). Cartridges shown are 10rds of GA 10mm/180gn GDHPs (@ 1150 fps). :)

[LeonCarr]

I shoot a 9mm ( I own a .40, but I like the 9mm better), and everybody tells me I need to shoot a .45. If the 9mm is so puny, why is it that I can find nobody to volunteer to let me shoot them with a 9mm? :)

I shoot a .223, and everybody tells me I need to shoot a .308. If the .223 is so puny, why is it that I can find nobody to volunteer to let me shoot them with a .223? :)

Any of the above calibers will work, with proper shot placement.

Never go to a fight with just a handgun.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

[Boats]

agtman--

Just so we're clear.:D

The 10mm advocacy has hijacked the thread, not that I mind. The 9mm is the topic here.

Again, I have more of a beef with the lack of available 10mm platforms than I do with the round.

Bill Wilson didn't even win the HRT contract so who cares if he can build a reliable 10mm or not?

The real problem is one of market dynamics. Until next fall, we mere mortals can only get a full-cap G20 by selling body parts to finance both the pistol and 5 full-cap mags. All of the 1911s available for the 10mm are in one of three categories: Used. Limited run. Custom.

If someone would make a quality factory 1911 available without a Schwarz safety system and price inflated through limited availability I would buy one for Christmas and buy the reloading gear and leather for it now.

That might one day happen, but it has been a long hard slog to popularity for the ne plus ultra has it not? Until I can approximate the 1911 in platform variety and somewhat similar reloading cost, the ubercartridge can wait and I will merely make due with an ancient round that does 90+% of what the 10mm can allegedly do.

BTW, no one could say with a straight face that the .45ACP is not capable of .75" groupings. One could say Hall's test results were a statistical fluke in favor of the 10mm given the representative sample.:neener:

[Silver Bullet]

Geez, you guys are getting me interested in 10mm. :uhoh:

WonderNine, you stated

.357Sig is nice, but they make ALOT of noise. I won't be looking at any until after the AWB sunsets.
Why wait for the end of AWB ? I've been thinking about getting a P239. Are you waiting for the return of hi-cap mags ?

[Sean Smith]

Sure the topic got hijacked, but it was a dumb topic. :neener:

Everybody chill, we're talking about calibers, not yo momma. :D

And if us 10mm cultists have piqued any interest, you can just click on the link in my sig for some comparative factory ballistics... and guess which one comes out on top! :evil:

[Lancel]

amprecon's start was prophetic:
It seems each pistol caliber has a huge following of it's own. Some dedicated to one caliber or another and defends it to the end.
:D

Larry

[Mike Irwin]

"They weren't going to have two calibers in the same size frames."

Beg pardon?

When FBI was testing these rounds, there were two firearms available that chambered 10mm -- the Colt Delta Elite, a rechambered 1911 (with l grip dimensions identical to the .45) and a rechambered S&W 4506 (with grip dimensions identical to the .45).

When FBI chose the 10mm over the other calibers, it chose the S&W, which was based on the 4506. No changes in the grip dimensions were made.

It's the GRIP dimensions that the testers were talking about when talking about being able to handle the gun from an ergonomic standpoint.

Even if FBI had adopted chopped versions of the 10 or .45, the grip dimensions would have been identical.

"You keep going on about CAD generation bullets. No empirical testing has been done that I have seen which would cast any doubt on the conclusions of the FBI tests."

Then you really need to read the reports in the firearms magazines from the early to mid 1990s, in which testing of the new generation rounds was done and compared to the results from FBIs 1980s testing.

Charlie Petty, Wiley Clapp and others wrote articles for a variety of magazines at the time, relying on both their own testing as well as on the results of testing done by Remington, Winchester, Federal, etc., all of which was done in accordance to FBI-established protocols.

Then there's also the work done over the past decade by Martin Fackler, who incidentally helped design the FBI protocols.

All have reached the same conclusion, that the newest generation of bullets perform much better and much more reliably than those available for FBI testing in the 1980s.

[Boats]

Cool Mike,

I bow to your superior knowledge base.

In case you missed this ongoing thread in General Discussion concerning THR trading cards, I think this thread is about to this point:

http://www.phoenixguild.com/images/9mm.jpg

[Blackhawk 6]

Amprecon-
I would like to attempt to put aside much of the subjective debate that has gone on and answer your original question,"Would I be undergunned with a 9mm?" My answer is a resounding "No," and I will explain why.

Had the question been "Long gun or handgun which would you choose?" almost everyone that responded that they would have chosen a long gun of some type. (12-guage, AR-15, AK, etc.) The reason for this is simple, it is recognized that in comparison to long guns, handguns are relatively ineffectual "man-stoppers." In fact, if one takes the time to do a little research, we find that long guns often are not the panacea everyone believes they are. This is important because it is important to make an informed decision and the first essential piece of information to have is no firearm can be relied upon to stop/neutralize/kill/insert the verb you are comfortable with here 100% of the time. The second piece of essential information to have is that as a class handguns are inferior to longuns. This statement, when combined with our first essential piece of information, begins to put things in perspective.

Now that it has been established that we cannot expect great things from any round, let alone a handgun round, we nonetheless need to begin examining handgun rounds as concealed carry is the objective. I have read many of the studies cited in other posts and some that were not. While they were helpful, I came to my own conclusions based not on what the FBI or some other agency recommended, but on that data collected in the studies combined with my rudimentary understanding of physics. Please bear with me as I explain.

Energy is the ability to do work. By way of oversimplification, the work we are concerned with the bullet doing, is causing damage to the body. The more energy a bullet has, the more damage it is capable of doing. Why are long guns better? Simply put, more energy.

Some will attempt to draw a parallel between the .45 vs. 9mm debate and the 9mm vs. .380/.32/.25/.22. Energy is where there arguement falls apart. The 9mm, 45 and most other recommended defensive calibers are equivelent in the amount of energy they generate. The .380 and below class are not. How much energy is enough? I think this is at the heart of the stopping power issue and to be honest I do not know. Based on what I have read, rounds generating about 350 ft/lbs. or more seem to have a good track record and I have personally drawn the line at 400 ft./lbs.

But energy is just one part of the equation. Having the mere capability to do the damage does not mean that the damage will be done. The second component we are interested in is the ability to expend this energy within the target. Energy possessed but not expended in the target is wasted and in a defensive shooting situation manifests itself as a perforation results in a hazard to other persons behind the target. This is a deficiency particularly prone to long guns. The surface area of the projectile has a lot to do with the round ability to deposit its energy into the target. It is here that the caliber debate holds some relevance. Obviously a larger bullet has more surface area. Likewise, this is the reason we usually opt for some sort of expanding ammunition (hollowpoints). Clearly, a non-expanding .45 round is more capable of depositing its energy than a non-expanding 9mm. No arguement. But once expanding ammunition enters the equation, caliber ceases to be a focal point. Some will point out that the hollowpoint may not expand and this is a valid concern. That is why it is important to select 1) a bullet we believe will expand under a variety of conditions (many of the aforementioned studies are helpful in determining this) and 2) a caliber we are comfortable carrying with the knowledge that the bullet may not expand. With regard to item #1, almost every manufacturer produces bullets that meet this criteria. Item #2 is really what much of the debate is about, if people would put their ego/personal preference aside and think about it. The bottom line is item #2 is a personal choice, enough said.

Our third consideration is combining the other two criteria into a package that is managable. A 29 oz. 44 magnum loaded with premium hollowpoints meets both of the aforementioned criteria, but is a handful and is difficult to shoot well. What we are looking for is a pistol, chambering a round meeting the established criteria, that is light enough for carry but affords us enough size and weight to help control the recoil. There are a number of firearms that meet this criteria, but in response to your original question, I will focus on the 9mm.

Few will argue that the recoil of a 9mm, when compared to the other amjor defensie calibers, is fairly light. In fact, it is probably the lightest. Some will point out that proper technique will allow you to control any of the heavier recoiling rounds. This is a true statement, but the application of proper technique is always going to allow you to control a lighter recoiling pistol better than a heavier recoiling one. As you already know, many compact, easy to carry pistols are chambered in 9mm.

This rather lengthy explanation is why I believ the 9mm is an excellent choice for concealed carry. I hope it is helpful for you. By the way, I carry a 9mm SIG with 124-grain +P Gold Dots.

[1911Tuner]

Howdy amprecon,

I decided to let the fires die down before puttin' in my nickel's worth.

Though I'm a die-hard .45 loyalist, and no fan of the 9mm parabellum,
modern bullet designs and upped velocities have enabled the round
to move into the big leagues. While it's true that if you compare apples
to apples as with 9mm ball vs .45 ball, the .45 is going to be the clear
winner by means of bullet diameter and mass. Compare the .45 ball to
Federal's 115-grain +p+ LEO loading, and the advantage shifts to the
smaller round.

In any event, multiple, well-placed shots will greatly increase the
chances that you or your lady will come out on top. Even a shot or
two in a non-vital area will most often shut down an attacker, because
nobody wants to get shot by ANYthing...all the way down to a .22 short.
In those rare instances that a determined attacker absorbs multiple
hits and keeps coming, it's likely that he would have done the same
no matter what caliber that he got hit with.

Get her...or yourself...a suitable sidearm in the most powerful caliber
that you can shoot well with. Shoot the pistol often, and under realistic
conditions so that she will keep her head, watch her front sight,
and shoot for center of mass. Don't trust anything to stop an attack
with one shot...or even two or three, and all will be well in most cases.

Tunefucious say: One is only outgunned if one misses."

Take care, and watch your six!
Tuner

[Silver Bullet]

Get ... a suitable sidearm in the most powerful caliber
that you can shoot well with.
That sums it up very succinctly.

I take "suitable" to take in various aspects such as reliability, capacity, and size.

[1911Tuner]

SilverBullet said:

I take "suitable" to take in various aspects such as reliability, capacity, and size...

Exactly so. Comfort and ergonomics also play a role, especially so
for a woman. If the pistol hurts her hand or is too large in the grip
for her to feel comfotable with, she is not going to look forward to
practicing with it. Likewise if the muzzle blast is disquieting for her.

I know a tiny little gal who carries a 9-shot Taurus .22 revolver.
She has worked with it until she can literally knock a fly off a
bull's ear. She can eat the X ring out of a B-27 at 20 paces
in about 3 seconds with her "Cute Little Gun"...I don't know about
anybody else, but I for SURE don't want to make her nervous as
to my intentions. Undergunned? Nah...

Cheers!
Tuner