One Caliber?
- Thread starter USMC1775
- Start date
- Status
There are two schools of thought, capacity and momentum. Some will advocate for the .45 because it delivers a heavier projectile and will point out that most defensive handgun use involves 5 or fewer rounds fired. Others will point out that the 9mm bullet design has advanced considerably to the point that target damage is now improved and the size and capacity of 9mm handguns make them more likely to be carried and will more easily address the rare situation multiple attackers might occur. Decide what YOU want to focus on and pick what you want to carry.
Over my 40 years of shooting handguns I’ve tried just about every caliber available usually is a couple of different gun platforms. I have grown to really respect the 10mm for its power and available bullet sizes for hand loaders like myself to tailor loads to my situation. I also like the ability to, though not recommended, shoot the .40 from my 10mm in a pinch.
If it ever came to only revolvers being legal for ownership it would be my .41 magnums.
If it ever came to only revolvers being legal for ownership it would be my .41 magnums.
FlSwampRat
Member
IMHO, I'd stick with the 9mm if I had to pick one caliber. Question is, which caliber do you feel most comfortable shooting and which do you shoot best?
That said, I have pared down to 5. I keep a minimum of 500 rounds on hand for each caliber, of course, that's a floor limit. I can't afford to start another ammo can full of ammo for a 6th caliber.
500 rounds minimum - We think alike I see. Although now I could easily get by with less as I seldom get a chance to shoot at all. No local ranges and I am significantly handy caped for mobility until my wings come. I answered the OP's question with the .45 ACP and haven't changed my mind. I however do clearly see why many choose the 9MM . Specified with the correct bullet design it has been considered a good choice and much more effective than it used to be. I have a 9MM but took it in on trade during ammo shortage so have very little ammo for it. Personally I do not use any of the 3 calibers mentioned by the OP. I have a 9MM and a .45 ACP , but carry a .32 H&R Magnum, and my night stand gun is in .44 Special. (I have 500+ rounds for them)
danez71
Member
I prefer 9mm and would like to believe that.
'Little difference', sure. But 'no difference' seems counter intuitive to physics, at least on the surface.
Do you have a link or can you explain how/why that is?
If the bullet penetrates deeply enough (and if so, more deeply won't help ), strikes in and goes to the right places, and expands properly, I don't think it is as much physics as it is forensic medicine.
Look up "Handguns Wounding Mechanics and Effectiveness"
FlSwampRat
Member
Of course, all of those are flintlocks and matchlocks. No scary guns here, nope, not at all. See my muzzleloading 9mm? isn't it cool?!?!
danez71
Member
Are you referring to this?
Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness
FIREARMS TRAINING UNIT FBI ACADEMY QUANTICO, VIRGINIA July 14, 1989
http://gundata.org/images/fbi-handgun-ballistics.pdf
If so, it doesnt seem to support those statements and relies mostly on physics but also considers forensic medicine to read it's conclusion
It mostly relies on physics & favors permanent wound channel while largely discounts temp wound channel and hydrostatic shock.
Page 15, under the Conclusion heading,
the very last few sentences.
The paper is over 30 yrs old... perhaps you were thinking of a more recent study?
The conclusion did say say that, given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet, and that with penetration. the edge is always with the bigger bullet. It also said that the effect could not be quantified.
It did not say that bullets with an expended diameter that is larger by a small amount than that of other bullets can be reasonably expected to be measurably more effective.
The emphasis was on penetration.
In a later report, the same organization said this:
What had changed in the interim was the availability of new premium 9mm bullets that could be expected to meet both penetration and expansion requirements.
http://looserounds.com/2014/09/21/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/
It did not say that bullets with an expended diameter that is larger by a small amount than that of other bullets can be reasonably expected to be measurably more effective.
The emphasis was on penetration.
In a later report, the same organization said this:
"Due to the elastic nature of most human tissue and the low velocity of handgun projectiles relative to rifle projectiles, it has long been established by medical professionals, experienced in evaluating gunshot wounds, that the damage along a wound path visible at autopsy or during surgery cannot be distinguished between the common handgun calibers used in law enforcement. That is to say an operating room surgeon or Medical Examiner cannot distinguish the difference between wounds caused by .35 to .45 caliber projectiles."
There was nothing new there.
What had changed in the interim was the availability of new premium 9mm bullets that could be expected to meet both penetration and expansion requirements.
http://looserounds.com/2014/09/21/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/
- Status
Similar threads
