.40sw vs. .45acp question


PDA






retgarr
April 14, 2008, 06:59 PM
I'm not looking for speculation or who like what calliber better. What I am trying to find is hard data on muzzle energy of a .45acp vs. a .40sw out of a 3.5" barrel. Recoil has never been a problem for me so I'm not worried about it. I hope someone out there knows where I can find this data!

If you enjoyed reading about ".40sw vs. .45acp question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Wayne G.
April 14, 2008, 07:08 PM
Can't help out w/ the 3.5" barrel, but I think you can figure out the kinetic energy at muzzle via the following formula:

Kinetic energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity^2

rcmodel
April 14, 2008, 07:38 PM
IMHO: Muzzle energy isn't all it's cracked up to be in a semi-auto pistol.
None of them have enough energy to make that much differance until you get into the big Magnum revolvers.

What is important is penetration & bullet performance.
(And to some extent, recoil, blast, & the ability to control the gun)

http://www.brassfetcher.com/40%20S&W.html

http://www.brassfetcher.com/45ACP.html

rcmodel

TAB
April 14, 2008, 07:40 PM
its not about what energy the projectile is, what maters is how much energy the projectile transfers to the target.

Wayne G.
April 14, 2008, 08:44 PM
What is important is penetration & bullet performance.

Amen!

94GT
April 14, 2008, 09:39 PM
http://www.federalpremium.com/ballistics/Ammo_Search.aspx?act=choose&firearm=2&s1=1

Not all inclusive, but something to play with.

recole
April 14, 2008, 10:03 PM
94GT, that's a good site. You're right, it's not all inclusive, but it certainly answers many of the main question s we see over and over again. :)

Thank
Ron Cole

Pat-inCO
April 14, 2008, 10:13 PM
Here is a discussion on the FBI tests in late 1980s http://www.thegunzone.com/miami-ammo.html that provide a little insight into your question. In the FBI tests the .45 was four percent less effective than the "FBI 10mm" (now the 40S&W).

retgarr
April 15, 2008, 12:42 AM
In that case I am having trouble finding data to compare penetration and expansion comparison of the two rounds out of a 3.5" barrel. I know there are different rounds for each. But I am trying to compare the best of each.

MachIVshooter
April 15, 2008, 01:10 AM
Kinetic energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity^2

That formula is difficult to use when trying to get foot pounds from bullet weight in grains and feet per second.

Use velocity squared, divided by 450,240, then multiply by bullet weight in grains. This will give you foot pounds of energy.

Example:

A 230 gr. bullet at 850 FPS. 850 times 850 = 722,500. 722,500 divided by 450,240 = ~1.6047. 1.6047 times 230 = 369 ft/lbs.

boomstik45
April 15, 2008, 04:29 AM
Heh....

Long story short, a .40 will generally do better than a .45 out of a barrel that short, at least if you're looking at mathematical figures on paper. Personally, if the ammo design and platform are up to par, you'll be fine with either. Keep in mind that the .45 is usually truly optimized when coming out of 5" barrel and weighing in at 230 grains. Yes, it's an opinion, but it's a widely held opinion by a lot of folks who know what they're doing. Or so I read and hear...

If you enjoyed reading about ".40sw vs. .45acp question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!