[FIVETWOSEVEN]

I hear alot about how it is good now with modern ammo for self defense but what about before all these hollow points came onto the market? Are there examples of it failing to stop when a .45 would?

[gofastman]

Are there examples of it failing to stop
YES
when a .45 would?
probably not many

[verdun59]

I eagerly await this discussion, I've got popcorn and beer.

[rcmodel]

Well, a WWII vet friend of my dads got stitched across the body with a German 9mm sub-machinegun.

According to the story my dad related to me, the guy killed the German with his .45 pistol and then walked some distance on his own back to an aid station to get patched up.

Whether that really happened with the .45 pistol or not is hard to say.
But I did see the 9mm bullet hole scars in his arm and chest cause he showed them to me when I was about 7 years old.
Something I have still not forgotten.

I somehow doubt he would have survived had the Germans been using Thompson's or M3 Grease-guns.

rc

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

By the way this isn't a 9mm bashing thread, I'm just wondering about the ammo I have ready to go for my 9mm. I still need to get some proper HP ammo but I just wanted to know how effective this ammo is.

[Nomad, 2nd]

9mm HP... I'll trust.

My 'concern' like yours, goes back to when I was doign WW2 renactments.

When the DD museum opened I was one of the renactors.

A Old guy was talking to us, pulled up his shirt and showed us several bullet wounds across his torso.

Told a similar story about 9mm vs 45...

One of the Assaultmen in Iraq took 13 rounds to put a Haji down...
Only reason that was enough was because the last 2 were in the head. (Rest were int he Torso)

Too many stories like those for my taste...

[sidheshooter]

Just one opinion: It'll kill people, for sure. But it's not what you want for hedging your bets as a "stopper", more to the point.

I've only met two people (that I know of) who have shot someone who needed shooting with 9mm ball. In one case, the guy dropped (placement), and in the other, the guy ran off, never to be seen again. That correspondent was as sure as he could be, at least given the circumstances, that he hit the enemy at least a half-dozen times. Who knows, but that same story is one I've heard of before and since, FWIW.

Placement is more important, but it's just as easy to place a decent HP loading.

[KodiakBeer]

9mm fmj, as low as 58%. 9mm +P+ HP's, as high as 91%

http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=15&Weight=115

[FullEffect1911]

Even if 9mm FMJ was enough, it is still a better idea to run a quality HP. As long as it is reliable in your firearm there is no good reason not to run the HP, they are at worst at least as effective as an FMJ and at best way more effective.

[Carter]

9mm fmj is pretty effective if you hit the brain, CNS, or heart. Other than that I'd say not very effective without multiple follow ups.

9mm HP is another story though.

[918v]

I'd go for the FMJ if being attacked in close quarters by a group of assailants.

[sidheshooter]

^^^^subtle.

:)

[Katana8869]

I think that the experiences of the security contractors mentioned in this article give a pretty good view of what one can expect from 9mm fmj. As usual, the information from their perspective seems to bear out the theory that placement is more important than caliber.

http://www.gunweek.com/2005/feature0910.html

[frank c]

I carry Cor-bon (+P) 115 grain in my 9mm for self defense(Velocity 1350 fps and energy 466ft.lbs) and FMJ for plinking.:)

[KodiakBeer]

I'd go for the FMJ if being attacked in close quarters by a group of assailants.

Why?

[918v]

The overpenetration will help to incapacitate others in the group.

[bigfatdave]

I hear alot about how it is good now with modern ammo for self defense but what about before all these hollow points came onto the market? Are there examples of it failing to stop when a .45 would?

"alot" is not a word.
Until you get a set of twins, convince them to attack someone, and then shoot one with 9x19mm and the other with 11.43x23mm (aka .45acp) you won't have a valid comparison.
In the vast majority of defensive cases, the need for defense diminishes as soon as the opportunistic predator realizes their victim selection was in error, rapists, muggers, murderers and the like don't measure your bore and chamber size before deciding how to react when shot, they GET SHOT and change their plans on the fly (or have plans changed for them)
If I were planning on a gunfight, I wouldn't take 9mm, .45, or ANY handgun caliber, I'd have a rifle and lots of ammunition. For unforeseen circumstances, any duty loading* will do just fine, assuming you are capable of wielding your chosen defensive weapons.


* (duty load = modern HP in 9x19, fo-tay, .45, .357sig, .38spl, .357mag, etc ... maybe 9x18mak and 7.62x25 if that's your thing)

Any story about how a 9mm wasn't effective and a .45 would be contains two things:
-A secondhand story
-An assumption of how it would have gone with one very small variable changed

Anyone can cherry-pick stories to demonstrate why their favorite caliber is best, but duty loadings have roughly the same available energy and are designed to do the same job, about 12" of penetration in ballistics gel with reliable expansion.

[bigfatdave]

The overpenetration will help to incapacitate others in the group. Seriously? You're going to take the neat small wounds of ball ammo (regardless of caliber) rather than the messy torn-up wounds of an expanding round ... all for the possibility that you might have someone lined up just right to catch the overpenetrating round?

Carry Tokarev or 10mm if you want over-penetration.

[gofastman]

^ it was a joke :banghead:

[918v]

The energy a handgun projectile expands inside a human being is too small to be useful as a variable in determining effectiveness. The efficiency of the wound is the only thing that matters. Bigger wounds are more efficient. Wounds through vital areas are more efficient. Dumping 500 foot pounds into a non vital area will not stop a determined attacker from shooting at you.

[Zerodefect]

I carry as big of a caliber as my choice of "sized" CCW can handle. Some smaller guns require weaker ammo to shoot well. I see no point to 9mm in a fullsized gun.

My Mouses are: .380 (Corbon is my choice in this caliber)
Sub compact: 9mm or .38 J-frame (Federal HXT ot EFMJ)
Medium: .40 (Speer Lawman, Federal HXT 180gn)
Medium to fullsize: .45 ( Winchester 230gn)

I put all of those into my CCW quiver, my CCW needs change alot.

I do feel better with .40 or .45 than I do with 9mm or .38. I'm more confident that the heavier rounds will be less likely to get deflected by auto glass, heavy clothes, or a bone.

Assuming I'm hitting a target at a bad angle, I have more confidence that a heavy round will be less likely to skip off of a bone and into a less vital area. Where a heavy .45 may crush right through. Still that's a shot placement problem, but you have to be that much better with shot placement and 9mm. May not be much, but every little bit counts.

Also there is no promise that 9mm will expand. 9mm FMJ is near useless, but .45 FMJ isn't too bad.

Bottom line: If you have passed advanced pistol classes and shoot on a regular basis, you should be plenty lethal with a 9mm. In fact you may have a huge advantage.

[W.E.G.]

Aim here, hit here, get good results.

Caliber not very important.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd7/rkba2da/trivia/shirt.jpg

[amd6547]

My father served in europe is WWII. Though he owned a 45 aquired during the war and brought home, he also owned a Radom 9mm, and seemed to have a good deal of respect for the 9mm cartridge...and this was in the days before JHP's were common.
While I load Ranger 127gn +P+ in my Browning HiPower, I also carry a mag of good 124gn FMJ, and I wouldnt feel underarmed with it.

[shoot2kill]

I eagerly await this discussion, I've got popcorn and beer.rab

Power of suggestion worked on me. I had to go pop the corn and grab a cold one before I could read any further.

We pray that we never have to pull our pistol but if we do we bet our life we can stop the threat. At that time we want the most accurate, powerful, life destroying bullet made for our pistol. Then we better put those bullets where they will stop the threat immediately. Practice like your life depends on it with the same described ammunition.

[exdetsgt]

Verdun59 - "I'm eagerly awaiting this discussion, I've got popcorn and beer," put me on the floor laughing. Best post this month!

[Perseverance]

Aim here, hit here, get good results.

Caliber not very important.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd7/rkba2da/trivia/shirt.jpg


+2000

Learn to shoot, hit where it counts, bring down your target. This is one beat to death discussion...

[chieftain]

How many former German soldiers did you talk to about being hit by the 45acp and walked back to their aid stations?

Did you talk to any of the American troops that were killed by German 9mm fire? Or Germans killed and wounded by British 9mm fire, or Russians killed and wounded by 9mm fire? Probably not, sorry just trying to make a point. The 9mm is still the leading sub Machine gun round world wide today. Why? It works and works well.

My point is just that. Wounded German soldiers tell the same story. Thankful for the poor penetration of the 45acp round, compared to the 9mm superior penetration.

Understand that as I write this, there is a Springfield Professional sitting on my hip. I am not in the least anti 45 or 9. I like them for what they are. Either will do what all week cheese handgun rounds can do (and they ALL are weak), if I do what I need to do with my handgun when necessary.

Both cartridges have been around successfully for over 100 years. There is a reason, they both work. In that 100 years no one has ever been able to "PROVE" one 9mm or 45acp FMJ cartridge "better" than the other, NO ONE.

If you like the 1911 platform, use a 45acp, if you like the SIG, Beretta, Glock, S&W etc.... use a 9mm. I still ain't figured out a reason for the 40 S&W. Nothing seriously wrong with it, and obviously many folks I respect like it, I am still looking for a reason for it though.

Go figure.

Fred

[Ohio Gun Guy]

A friends Grandfather had one eye from a 8mm mauser round. The bullet was still in his head. Dont think anyone will say the 8mm isnt a stopper.....

It seems there are 1,000,000 ways to get hit in a war, and fortunately a select few arent leathal.

[Zombiphobia]

ya know, as long as they person you're shooting isn't dooped up on some serious stuff like PCP or other nerve numbing, super-human BS drugs... they're gonna feel being shot with anything even as small as a .22.

BUT, assuming they're pretty doped up and can't feel it, or crazy enough to not care, then you have a whole new ball game. My assumption is that this is the reason why most 9mm's have a much higher magazine capacity than a .45. If the first one or two doesn't stop them, you have plenty more to follow up and not much recoil.

But if you're really bent on having the biggest most damaging bullet you can find. There's the .50AE and 500 S&Wmag. The concussion alone ought to incapacitate any other accomplices with cerebral hemerages.
You'll have entry wounds the size of golf balls and exit wounds the size of an escalade.
There won't be any bleed-out peroid. There won't be any law-suit from the wounded assailant.
There won't be any need to shoot him twice(if you hit him). There won't be any concern about what drugs he's on because if the bullet hits, it won't matter.
He'll be dead before he hits the ground.
John Moses Browning invented the 1911.. but God invented instant death from the .50 caliber bullet.

Please note the attempt at humor.

I happen to know for a fact a 9mm ball round won't drop a red-nose pit bull in his tracks, but he'll feel it for sure and go the other way. I imagine it'll be about the same on humans.
I use HP only now for SD.

but either way, it's called "Parabellum" for a reason. It's designed for war, and inw ar, we like our enemies to be in speaking condition to tell us where their buddies are hiding. A wounded enemy soldier is more useful than a dead enemy soldier.

[CharlesT]

Lets say I have a 92F in my hand and 19 bullets. That's 19 dead assailants.

No matter the bullet.


If it's one person and you have 7 or 10, or 19 and you don't succeed. Put the weapon down and run.

[Nomad, 2nd]

Lets say I have a 92F in my hand and 19 bullets. That's 19 dead assailants.

No matter the bullet.


If it's one person and you have 7 or 10, or 19 and you don't succeed. Put the weapon down and run.


Sorry.

I've shot people repeatedly in the chest with a 5.56... That's what it takes.

One doesn't.

Pistol is lesser.


If your gonna tell me 'accuracy'

I have a test for you:


Take a 3x5 index card (About the size of a 'kill' for the heart or cranial cavity)

Attach it to a car tire.

Have someone roll it down a hill.

WHILE running (Because if you are not moving in a gunfight... or hiding behind cover your gonna get hit)

Hit that playing card with your one round.


It's STILL not dealing with someone shooting at you.

But it's as close to real as I can come up with.

IF you are accurate in that...

Teach me.


...I'll take capacity and power thankyouverymuch...

I'm not that good.

[mljdeckard]

Charles T -if that were the case, you are doing much better than real-world averages. Most people don't stop when hit with a single handgun bullet. If I am trying to drop 19 people, I want something other than a pistol to do it with. The Beretta on my hip right now holds 15+1.

As for shot placement, of course we all want to get good COM hits, but again, real life won't always let you. The target is moving and fighting back, plenty of people miss entirely.

The real world difference between defensive rounds is limited. I don't tell people that with a 9mm, they are going to get killed because the bad guy won't even feel them and will keep attacking. I tell people with a .45, no it won't make people fall over and die instantly. But in a gunfight, I want all the advantages I can get. Expanding big bullets do more damage, plain and simple.

[Philo_Beddoe]

Are there examples of it failing to stop when a .45 would?

Impossible to know unless you happen to own a time machine.

I happen to think a .355 diameter bullet will do less damage then a .452 diameter one, but there are way to many variables in a shooting to say that a 45 would have suceeded when a 9mm failed.

[481]

I am always amazed by those who argue "equipment" (platform, caliber, ammo type, etc.) instead of "training".

It ain't the "arrow", guys, it's the "Indian".

[918v]

I've shot people repeatedly in the chest with a 5.56... That's what it takes.



Is a 7.62x39 any better?

[W.E.G.]

It is comforting to know that this REALLY IS a 9mm vs. 45 thread.

I can get to sleep now.

[Spec ops Grunt]

A friends Grandfather had one eye from a 8mm mauser round. The bullet was still in his head. Dont think anyone will say the 8mm isnt a stopper.....

It seems there are 1,000,000 ways to get hit in a war, and fortunately a select few arent leathal.

George Orwell survived being shot in the throat with a rifle in the Spanish Civil War.

[Nomad, 2nd]

How many former German soldiers did you talk to about being hit by the 45acp and walked back to their aid stations?

Did you talk to any of the American troops that were killed by German 9mm fire? Or Germans killed and wounded by British 9mm fire, or Russians killed and wounded by 9mm fire? Probably not, sorry just trying to make a point. The 9mm is still the leading sub Machine gun round world wide today. Why? It works and works well.

My point is just that. Wounded German soldiers tell the same story. Thankful for the poor penetration of the 45acp round, compared to the 9mm superior penetration.

Understand that as I write this, there is a Springfield Professional sitting on my hip. I am not in the least anti 45 or 9. I like them for what they are. Either will do what all week cheese handgun rounds can do (and they ALL are weak), if I do what I need to do with my handgun when necessary.

Both cartridges have been around successfully for over 100 years. There is a reason, they both work. In that 100 years no one has ever been able to "PROVE" one 9mm or 45acp FMJ cartridge "better" than the other, NO ONE.

If you like the 1911 platform, use a 45acp, if you like the SIG, Beretta, Glock, S&W etc.... use a 9mm. I still ain't figured out a reason for the 40 S&W. Nothing seriously wrong with it, and obviously many folks I respect like it, I am still looking for a reason for it though.

Go figure.

Fred


Ummm.... You MIGHT want to rethink that.

Physics....


I carry a 9mm because (As another posted already pointed out) I Can TRAIN more with it (Ammo costs)

But I would NOT be comfortable with FMJ.

Fortunately there's this company called Corbon...

[sidheshooter]

Nomad, that drill (the tire, not the 5.56) sounds like a fun way to spend an afternoon.
---

Parts of this thread remind me of the old joke about a 911 call with 9mm ball:

"I need to report a shooting at 1st and main... And 2nd and main... And, it looks like 3rd and main too..."

;)

[~Boomslang~]

These are always rediculous questions. Look at it this way. How effective would it be in changing your plans in assuting me for the night, if I stuck a piece of 1/4" Rebar through your sternum...... Stop watching movies, and reading speculative gun magazines, or goofy "Street reports". Gunshots suck, they hurt really,really,really,really bad. You will want attention from the nearest E.R. fast, continuing their skulldugery will be the last thing on a criminals mind. Aim well, shoot first, hit first. You win .380 or whatever.

[Nomad, 2nd]

Is a 7.62x39 any better?

What you have to ask yourself is:

"For what"

On a 500 yard rifle range (With an M16A4 or M16A2 I'll give you 8 or 9 outa 10 hits consistantly)
No..

Man sized targets ~ 300...
(Although several people have done realistic testing out to 500)


I think so.

sidheshooter:
Let me know how it goes.:D


We have NO idea what the circumstances, Mental state, or drug use (Or numbers) of 'our situation' may be.
Use the best you can.

[NWCP]

A pistol is a last resort weapon at best. It's for up close and personal shooting. Given our druthers we'd all druther have a semi auto rifle, or a decent pump 12 GA shotgun when confronting a determined bad guy. At least I would. That's why my old 12 GA Mossberg is easy to get to in the house. I have a 9mm in the nightstand, or on my person. It happens to be loaded with Golden Sabers, but if all I had was FMJ so be it. Run what you brung as long as you're comfortable with it. Shot placement is paramount regardless the caliber of the weapon you're using. 9mm, 40 S&W, or .45ACP... they're all going to leave a mark. It's up to your ability as to where the mark is and how effective it is. Fortunately most criminals aren't looking to get shot at.A good dog and a loaded pistol, or shotgun can be quite effective when looking to defend one's own. The dog lets you know you're not alone and the weapon is a rapid reminder that the intruder is not welcomed under your roof.

[Double Naught Spy]

In that 100 years no one has ever been able to "PROVE" one 9mm or 45acp FMJ cartridge "better" than the other, NO ONE.

Ummm.... You MIGHT want to rethink that.

Physics....

What is it that chieftan might want to rethink about the physics? Are you saying that somebody has proven one cartridge to be better than the other?

For God's sake, don't keep such insights to yourself. Based on the discussion in this thread alone, you seem to be the only one who knows this information.

[PabloJ]

Examination of .45 and 9mm side by side should sort things out in ones mind. It's wrong to put down cartridge because one can't handle extra recoil force involved in shooting it. I like when some mention that most military forces use 9x19 as standard issue side arm. Ok, but isn't handgun on officers belt just a proverbial "hood ornament"?

[DasFriek]

My opinion may not be based on fact, But facts in this area are few and far between.
With FMJ 9mm would have no disadvantage over a .45 as long as both shots were in the same spot, And some would say a 9mm would be more advantageous due to Hydrostatic shock with its higher velocity.
If all the stories of survival in WWII of GI's being hit by multiple rounds, Which i see no reason to doubt would most likley put Hydrostatic shock into the category of a "Myth" in handgun calibers.
Both rounds will not expand or dump much energy and pass threw the body and only damage a small path along its way. The larger bullet has a slight chance to damage a bit more as long as soft tissue is all thats hit.
If you add in a shot that hits bone both will deflect with the 9mm more so and the .45 being lessor and possibly crushing more bone which WOULD send bone fragments threw the cavity inflicting more damage. A 9mm would tend to deflect more and just change course with a 50/50% chance of deflecting or fragmenting bone also.

Seeing both will most likley exit creating 2 holes bleed out would happen faster with the round that put more holes in the body. The hole size upon exit wont vary much imo.

Ill admit to being 100% .45acp biased but only with HP's, FMJ the field is more even and round count would be more important. Of course with shot placement being king and even then i dont believe it matters if you shoot a BG's heart with a 9mm or .45

If possible the US Military would be much better off switching from a fmj too a lead flatnose with a soft enough lead that will deform enough to expand but not fall apart.

I know if i was a soldier in todays Military id do my best to get HP's into my weapon and if not id make sure i never have to rely on that weapon.

Hollow points change the game to a whole new level imo.
FMJ will kill you with 1 shot or 10 shots, But most likley not right away unless you have a critical hit and most would die within hours or days and not right away and many wouldn't even be stopped with up to 10 rounds if they weren't placed just right.

[GunTech]

The reality is the difference between 45 ball and 9mm ball is such that their performance overlaps to the extent that probably no one could construct a scientifically valid test to prove things one way or another. The infamous Marshall and Sanow test used small data sets and unrealistic sampling. The much vaunted Thomson Laguard tests relied on shooting animals and cadavers.

If one looks at survival rates in ERs, the number of times hit seems to be the biggest factor in survival since it increases the chance that something vital will be hit.

As noted, there are plenty of people walking around after being hit with rifle bullets in the torso.

I wouldn't carry ball ammo in anything for a variety of reasons - ricochet being a big on of concern for a civilian CCW. If I were forced to carry ball, I admit I'd want a bigger bullet. But I can give no statistically valid argument in favor, juts a general gut feeling.

[481]

Both cartridges have been around successfully for over 100 years. There is a reason, they both work. In that 100 years no one has ever been able to "PROVE" one 9mm or 45acp FMJ cartridge "better" than the other, NO ONE.

Ummm.... You MIGHT want to rethink that.

Physics....

What is it that chieftan might want to rethink about the physics? Are you saying that somebody has proven one cartridge to be better than the other?

Guys,

Despite providing material for never-ending gun-rag debate, I really think that there is little objective difference to discuss here between both rounds. (the .45 ACP 230 grain FMJRN and the 9mm 124 grain FMJRN)

The .45 ACP 230 grain FMJRN @ 850 fps will produce a minimal temporary stretch cavity and a very narrow permanent crush cavity while (almost) guaranteeing "through-and-through" penetration with 29.7 inches of soft tissue penetration capability.

The 9mm 124 grain FMJRN @ 1275 fps (M882) will produce a minimal temporary stretch cavity and a very narrow permanent crush cavity while (almost) guaranteeing "through-and-through" penetration with 31.8 inches of soft tissue penetration capability.

I've been accused, and perhaps rightly so, for seeing things in purely "black-and-white" terms, but there appears to be very little practical difference between the two, at least from a "physics" perspective.

:)

[speaksoftly]

I've missed this topic. It's been almost 30 minutes since it was last brought up. ;-) Maybe this time we'll come to a solution unlike the 3 million other times it was debated. :banghead:

[CharlesT]

When one of these
http://www.btfh.net/shoot/images/bullet-test-2/after/hst-147-small.jpg
meets the baddies little soft pink head. I don't think he is going anywhere.


;)

[dom1104]

The answer to your question is "Not Very Effective at all."

[KBintheSLC]

I think the NYPD has some good examples of FMJ failures when they were going though their political correctness phase.

[Double Naught Spy]

Guys,

Despite providing material for never-ending gun-rag debate, I really think that there is little objective difference to discuss here between both rounds.

Well see, that's the problem, 481. You think there is little objective difference. Nomad, 2nd claims differently. I think we should reserve judgment until either Nomad, 2nd shows us the supposed proof or we relegate his post as being a crank, without credit or merit. :scrutiny:

Of course 481, you did show your work and that goes a long way towards supporting your claims.

[481]

Well see, that's the problem, 481. You think there is little objective difference. Nomad, 2nd claims differently. I think we should reserve judgment until either Nomad, 2nd shows us the supposed proof or we relegate his post as being a crank, without credit or merit.

Of course 481, you did show your work and that goes a long way towards supporting your claims.

Fair enough, DNS.

Just for the sake of honesty, my work, courtesy of Duncan MacPherson's penetration model, really wasn't displayed all that thoroughly since I didn't feel like cluttering the place with all of the math that it took to generate those two numbers.

Just the same, thanks for realizing that I didn't just pull the numbers outta thin air either. :)

As for Nomad 2nd's assertions, I agree with you, let him show what material he uses to support his claims or otherwise have his post relegated to that of unsupported hyperbole.



.

[CZguy]

I know if i was a soldier in todays Military id do my best to get HP's into my weapon and if not id make sure i never have to rely on that weapon.


If you were a soldier................you would know not to do that. ;)

[longhair75]

I am always amazed by those who argue "equipment" (platform, caliber, ammo type, etc.) instead of "training".

It ain't the "arrow", guys, it's the "Indian".

...and it is 481 for the win!

[verdun59]

Well I passed out around 4 am from all the beer,combined with the bloating from the popcorn, I feel miserable; however I've caught up on all the posts and I'm ready for more.

P.S. Please mention Glock vs 1911

[Nomad, 2nd]

What is it that chieftan might want to rethink about the physics? Are you saying that somebody has proven one cartridge to be better than the other?

For God's sake, don't keep such insights to yourself. Based on the discussion in this thread alone, you seem to be the only one who knows this information.

I have 2 hammers here:

a 1 pound sledge hammer

and a 2 pound sledge hammer.

Which would you rather I smash your hand with?

Not saying it's gonna be 'earthshaddering', and I am aware that there IS a velocity difference, but given the relative slow velocities we are dealing with, and the minimalness of pistol rounds...

There's a winner here for one round.

NOW, when we're talking 7 vs 15....

That may be a different story and open to more debate.

But no matter what yoru GF told you... Bigger is better!;)

(Or should we replace .50BMG's with .22's?):D

[Zerodefect]

If you were a soldier................you would know not to do that. ;)

Some of the Marines I know don't bother carrying a sidearm when they're with thier rifle.

[longhair75]

So, to recap:

Our friend 481 posted:
Guys,

Despite providing material for never-ending gun-rag debate, I really think that there is little objective difference to discuss here between both rounds. (the .45 ACP 230 grain FMJRN and the 9mm 124 grain FMJRN)

The .45 ACP 230 grain FMJRN @ 850 fps will produce a minimal temporary stretch cavity and a very narrow permanent crush cavity while (almost) guaranteeing "through-and-through" penetration with 29.7 inches of soft tissue penetration capability.

The 9mm 124 grain FMJRN @ 1275 fps (M882) will produce a minimal temporary stretch cavity and a very narrow permanent crush cavity while (almost) guaranteeing "through-and-through" penetration with 31.8 inches of soft tissue penetration capability.

I've been accused, and perhaps rightly so, for seeing things in purely "black-and-white" terms, but there appears to be very little practical difference between the two, at least from a "physics" perspective.


Our friend Nomad, 2nd posted:
I have 2 hammers here:

a 1 pound sledge hammer

and a 2 pound sledge hammer.

Which would you rather I smash your hand with?

Not saying it's gonna be 'earthshaddering', and I am aware that there IS a velocity difference, but given the relative slow velocities we are dealing with, and the minimalness of pistol rounds...

The first post actually dealt with the ballistics of the two rounds under discussion and showed that the .45 round performs less effectively than the 9mm when measured for depth of penetration.

Now I was pretty sure the OP of this thread posed a question about the effectiveness of the 9mm round rather than hammers, but to ask for a clarification on the second post, is there any evidence that a one pound sledge hammer would be ineffective if used to smash one's hand?

[481]

I have 2 hammers here:

a 1 pound sledge hammer

and a 2 pound sledge hammer.

Which would you rather I smash your hand with?

What's the point?

Your analogy is seriously flawed and proves nothing because either sledgehammer would seriously damage and incapacitate the hand that it was used to smash.

Both sledgehammers would crush and break the bones in the hand struck rendering each hand struck, respectively, equally useless. If anything, your analogy actually proves my point.

There would be little difference in the remaining use of a hand smashed by either sledgehammer. To argue otherwise suggests a departure from reality.


NOW, when we're talking 7 vs 15....

We are discussing a specific bullet configuration's "effectiveness", not a pistol's magazine capacity.


From the apparent lack of substantive or independent material presented in support of your assertion above, I can only conclude that you've got nothing.

Your prior claims seem to have been nothing but empty proselytizing.

[481]

I am always amazed by those who argue "equipment" (platform, caliber, ammo type, etc.) instead of "training".

It ain't the "arrow", guys, it's the "Indian".

...and it is 481 for the win!

Thanks longhair75. Every once in a while I come up with a good one and have to pass it on. I am certain that it has been said many times before and I first heard it from a great Firearms Training Instructor at my first Academy many years ago.

[vaherder]

But if I can swing the 1lb sledge faster then the 2lb sledge I may get more hits and you may not be able to avoid the sledge. How many of you have swung a 1lb or 2lb sledge ? Anyone done it for any 8hr day? Been there and done that.


Was the 556 in an M4 or M16? Read Mr Wakeman's article on his website.

Having used both neither would be my battle rifle of choice and I did not carry one unless it was a mission requirement.

Each scenario requires a choice of weapons and calibers to do the job most effectively and expeditiously.

The operator and his or training is paramount in this discussion. Type of weapon and caliber really doesn't matter if the operator has not been trained.
Most LE and soldiers, airmen, marines and sailors aren't going to hit the target in a high stress situation. Either is a civilian.

Va herder

[Double Naught Spy]

Okay, so Nomad, 2nd offered his proof that had nothing to do with ballistics or even the ammo being discussed. So the claim of proof is relegated to being without credit or merit. It is a crank post.

Your prior claims seem to have been nothing but empty proselytizing.

I didn't use the P word because I can't spell it. It is a very good $2 word, however.

Nomad, 2nd, I am very disappointed with your post. You sounded so confident that you had some high science proving one caliber was betterthan the other and all you left us with is a barrel of hammers.

[481]

I didn't use the P word because I can't spell it.

Hell, neither can I.

Had to look it up just to make sure that I didn't misspell it.

[KodiakBeer]

You can research the actual street effectiveness of just about any handgun ammo here: http://www.handloads.com/misc/stoppingpower.asp?Caliber=15

9mm comes out a bit behind the .45 in just about any form from hardball to the latest hollowpoints. However, (and it's a big however), the data does not factor in any of the other things that might sway a shooter to choose one over the other. Things like magazine capacity, speed of follow-up shots, etc.

If ballistics was the only valid criteria, we'd all be carrying .500 S&W's.


.

[PRM]

Been carrying 9mms and 45s since the late 70s Carried both calibers as an LEO and military. Had an M9 in Afghanistan 2009-2010.

I like both, and would not feel outgunned with either. If I had to choose one over the other for a fight, it would be the 9mm. Nothing to do with caliber. I go with capacity - given the choice, I will take 15+1 any day over 7+1.

Shot for shot ~ bigger is better IMO, but when your down to chunking rocks, less is more.

[hardworker]

This thread is 3 pages long and we still haven't touched on birdshot vs buckshot or polymer vs steel.

Come on guys, we can do it!

[481]

But if I can swing the 1lb sledge faster then the 2lb sledge I may get more hits and you may not be able to avoid the sledge. How many of you have swung a 1lb or 2lb sledge ? Anyone done it for any 8hr day? Been there and done that.

"Follow up" (aka: "shot-to-shot" times) has nothing to do with how a particular bullet configuration behaves in flesh.

Certainly either sledgehammer (one or two pound) would effectively destroy one's hand should it strike it, but again the prior analogy is a poor one for its intended purpose (proving anything about terminal ballistic performance) unless one were to throw the darned things.

I worked my way through college doing that (swinging a sledgehammer among other things) and I am grateful for the perspective that it has provided me throughout my professional career. There is nothing wrong with a day's hard work as it is truly well-deserved money by those whom do so.

[PRM]

polymer vs steel - hardworker

You forgot aluminum and its alloy variations

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Now that I remember, at a 4H campout there was a sick skunk that survived several rounds from a .38 super before finally dying. Caliber to body size is huge if it were a person yet it took several rounds to stop it. I also read about some guy that survived a
.41 magnum revolver being completely emptied into him yet had to be run over by the officers partner with the crusier to be stopped.

I'm not looking for a comparison, but how 9mm FMJ performs when someone is shot by it.

[chieftain]

But if I can swing the 1lb sledge faster then the 2lb sledge I may get more hits and you may not be able to avoid the sledge. How many of you have swung a 1lb or 2lb sledge ? Anyone done it for any 8hr day? Been there and done that.


Be advise, if you have swing that hammer for 8 hours, I really don't care which weight it is, you already lost the fight. Trust me.

THEY BOTH WORK JUST FINE: That is both hammers and 45 fmj vs 9mm fmj.

If I put my 45acp bullets where they belong, what would be different if I made the exact same hits with a 9mm instead? No maybe's or probably's. I want to know?

If I put my 45acp bullets where they don't belong or poor hits, what would be different if I made the exact same poor hits with a 9mm? Again no maybe's or probablies.

That is my point. That is why every Terminal Ballistic researcher I am aware of states that most bullets do the same thing. Camparing one calibers FMJ to another calibers FMJ, or one calibers quality JHP to another calibers quality JHP, in terminal ballistics there is no measurable or "real" difference.

As stated earlier, IT'S THE INJUN, NOT THE ARROW. You will not be able to buy yourself a win in a real gunfight. You have to do the fighting with the weapons at hand. Reliable platform, training, quality practice, and mindset will win or loose the fight. Not which caliber you have in your gun.

That is an absolute.

I am taking a class next week on being more assertive. Hi Brian

Go figure.

Fred

[Nomad, 2nd]

Nomad, 2nd, I am very disappointed with your post. You sounded so confident that you had some high science proving one caliber was betterthan the other and all you left us with is a barrel of hammers.

I'm sorry, I didn't figgure it was really so hard to grasp?

From the Relative Incapacitation index:
Big Hole School - In this school of thought, sometimes referred to as the Fackler/IWBA school, and the medically correct one, the more permanent damage that is done to the target (and incidentally the more rapidly the target bleeds out) the more effective the bullet and more likely incapacitation. The more tissue cut, crushed, and/or destroyed by the bullet's passage the better, as more real system trauma results. In addition, in order to be effective at all target angles the bullet must penetrate sufficiently to reach vital organs in the target no matter from what direction the bullet impacts. Most authorities agree that for anti-personnel use a minimum penetration in calibrated ballistic gelatin of about 12" (with 14" - 15" being considered ideal) is needed. This is necessary to achieve reliable performance under all conditions against a human target. It should be noted that minimum depth for major blood vessels and organs in a human is about 15cm ( 6")--from straight on, but it is considerably more from various angles. With bullets used for hunting the general consensus is the deeper the better. In both cases this has to be coupled with the ability to create the largest diameter permanent hole possible. Most authority seem to agree that the permanent hole needs to be at least .4" or greater in diameter and as deep as possible. A problem arises here in that as a bullet expands it tends to penetrate less, so expansion and penetration have to be carefully balanced by bullet weight and bullet construction. This bullet design problem is exacerbated by the fact that if a target is covered by some material such as cloth, glass, metal, etc. the expansion--and hence the penetration of the bullet--can alter dramatically.

The big hole school tends to favor medium to heavy weight bullets at moderate velocity, with a general preference to bullets of .40 caliber and greater, that penetrate deeply and destroy a lot of tissue in the process. The stated requirements for optimum performance are:

* An average penetration of 12" - 15" in 10 percent bare gelatin
* Velocity of between 800 and 1000 f/s
* Maximum practical bullet weight for the caliber. (9 mm - 147 gr, 10 mm - 180 gr, .45ACP - 200-230 gr) with a preference for the larger diameter (.40" or greater) bullets



And:
Interestingly, the big hole school has always been accepted in the dangerous game hunting field as the way to go, yet for some reason tissue damage and deep penetration have taken a while to be accepted by handgunners. Maybe the reason that energy dump and temporary cavity believers aren't vocal in the hunting area is that it is hard to talk when you are in between the toes of a cape buffalo or in a lion's or bear's stomach. Another interesting observation is that much of the existing medical literature on bullet wounds is still full of misconceptions and false statements. While things seem to be slowly improving there is quite a way to go for medical literature to catch up with the truth. (The whole "I have a theory" that is then taken as gospel movement is the same one that seems to infect the global warming folk.)


As to temporary stretch cavity:

Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness
FBI Academy
Firearms Training unit
Last paragrah, Page 7
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

I'm sorry, I honestlywas not aware that it would take any more than a simple analogy.

As to 'the speed at which you swing the hammers' I addressed that:

Not saying it's gonna be 'earthshaddering', and I am aware that there IS a velocity difference, but given the relative slow velocities we are dealing with, and the minimalness of pistol rounds...

To Recap:
Not saying it's gonna be 'earthshaddering',
-I mean the 'difference in effectiveness'
But there IS a difference.
(Carry a Quality HP);)

As to:
We are discussing a specific bullet configuration's "effectiveness", not a pistol's magazine capacity.


From the apparent lack of substantive or independent material presented in support of your assertion above, I can only conclude that you've got nothing.

Your prior claims seem to have been nothing but empty proselytizing.
I was stating (As I use a 9mm) That It is my belief (See attached articles... it's hard... atleast for my technologically deficient self to find and post articles/materials from other pages while using my I Phone as I was earlier... so I figured the analogy would work. Apparently I was wrong) that a sinlge round vs a single round... will have one result.

I was just 'looking ahead' (Although I will admit I did not see this degree of an 'attack') As several recient posters have said when you factor in a carry gun, other things (Such as capacity) become factors.

Enjoy the reading, maby next time it'll be a little less hostile.

(And I STILL believe it's apparent...)

[HippieMagic]

When millimeters matter you aren't doing it right.

[Double Naught Spy]

I'm sorry, I didn't figgure it was really so hard to grasp?

It isn't. You just tried to use a hammer analogy as proof as to the difference in effectiveness between 9mm and .45 acp. It was a poor analogy.

Sadly upon re-explanation, you have still failed to provide any proof. You have provided indices and opinions. Indicies and opinions do not directly translate to real world effectiveness.

So there is a difference in performance? We knew that. The question isn't if they perform differently. The question was one of effectiveness. Nobody has come up with any sort of equations that actually translate into bullet or caliber effectiveness. This is actually important because nobody cares about a bullet's reputation or projected temporary stretch cavity in a gun fight. All they care about is whether or not the bullet will be effective and how effective it will be when it hits the bad guy and there just isn't any math for that.

I am afraid that your ship set sail while you were at the bus station contemplating your barrel of hammers.

[481]

Enjoy the reading, maby next time it'll be a little less hostile.

Nomad,

If you've taken anything that I've written here as 'hostile', you have my apologies. Please understand that you have made a claim that you've so far been unable to substantiate and my direct responses are nothing more than that. This format does seem to make direct commentary seem a bit less than friendly at times and I apologize for that.

I mean the 'difference in effectiveness'
But there IS a difference.

Then perhaps that is what you should've said.

As for professing about the "difference" between the two rounds in question (.45 230 gr. FMJ and 9mm 124 gr. FMJ), you have yet to define any such quantity and the differences therein.

Both rounds produce deep terminal penetration, minimal temporary cavity and a nominal permanent crush cavity. There is very little else to distinguish the two from one another other than the fact that the larger slug produces a slightly wider permanent crush cavity. It is highly unlikely that this rather small difference in width (~2.49mm or about a tenth of an inch) would make a difference on a questionably placed shot or that it would increase the effectiveness of the slightly larger round.

[verdun59]

I'm loving it !! We even have a hammer debate -- how about corkscrews vs sabers ? Keep it going....I sent the wife out for more beer.

[9mmforMe]

Yawn...next?! :D

[Nomad, 2nd]

481:

Is Ok. As I said, I still don't get it... Perhaps because I know too many hunters (See the bit about 'big game hunters) SO it was a little shocking.
(Perhaps also because my analogy seems perfectly logical to me:D)
Mass, Velocity and all that... (With as I said, the difference in velocity being statistically insignificant)


Then perhaps that is what you should've said.
As far as I am aware... I did.


As for professing about the "difference" between the two rounds in question (.45 230 gr. FMJ and 9mm 124 gr. FMJ), you have yet to define any such quantity and the differences therein.

I let the FBI do that for me....


Both rounds produce deep terminal penetration, minimal temporary cavity and a nominal permanent crush cavity. There is very little else to distinguish the two from one another other than the fact that the larger slug produces a slightly wider permanent crush cavity. It is highly unlikely that this rather small difference in width (~2.49mm or about a tenth of an inch) would make a difference on a questionably placed shot.

I understand that a 1/10 of an inch is not alot...

A more'math inclined' person once broke down the difference into %...
Perhaps one of you who are would like to do so.
Kinda puts things in a differing prespective.

Double Naught Spy:
I'm guessing you ether missed or didn't read what I posted and linked to...

[M1key]

Very effective when you hit 'em right..................

[481]

I'm loving it !! We even have a hammer debate -- how about corkscrews vs sabers ? Keep it going....I sent the wife out for more beer.

D'oh!

No, no, no...it has to be more comparable! Y'know...like sabres v. foils, grenades v. Molotov cocktails or pitchforks v. scythes.

:)

[481]

A more'math inclined' person once broke down the difference into %...
Perhaps one of you who are would like to do so.
Kinda puts things in a differing prespective.


Well, the difference in frontal area of a .45 FMJRN and 9mm FMJRN is about 61.59%

Sounds large doesn't it?

Proportionalities are like that, they can be misleading without a context against which to judge them.

When we compare the actual difference in frontal area of both rounds we see that the difference in frontal area is actually very small, on the order of a little more than 6/100ths of a square inch. Imagine a tiny square that measures just a little less than 1/4th of an inch on a side.

That's the difference in frontal area (the part of the bullet that does all the damage) between the two rounds (.45ACP v. 9mm) being considered here.

Not much of a difference there afterall, huh?

:)

[hardworker]

Maybe we could debate roman legions vs spartans.

[481]

Maybe we could debate roman legions vs spartans.

Yeah, like that. I'll take the Spartans!

[verdun59]

I have a Spartan, and it's better than a Glock.....

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

Time to get a mod to kill this, strayed to far from my original question.

[Holo]

Take the best of both worlds...Polymer tipped HPs!!!

[Larry Ashcraft]

Closed at OP request.