Handgun Caliber Selection Insight

Status
Not open for further replies.

HoboCoastie

Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
60
Location
Nashville, TN
Just thought I'd throw this out there to help anyone who is pondering their firearm and caliber buying decision. I did a lot of research before settling on what I bought and I found that if you are purchasing a handgun for personal defense, there are some pretty common sense priorities that, if adhered to, make your choice much easier.

I found it pretty unanimous, and common sense really, that the following priorities should be utilized when using a firearm for personal defense:

1) Shot Placement - The equalizer of most calibers. The idea is to incapacitate and eliminate the threat. You put the bullet in the right place and it doesn't matter what caliber you have. The FASTEST way to incapacitate is with a head or upper spinal shot, though this is not likely. The military will tell you to aim for Center Mass. This is defined as the center of the biggest part you see. If an entire sillhouette is presented to me, I train for upper torso focusing on the heart area. It's the biggest area and any low, left, or right misses are probably going to hit the lungs. High misses have a decent chance of a head shot.

2) Penetration - Aside from being able to penetrate the target deeply enough to reach and damage the internal organs, your next possibility of incapacitation is blood loss...as rapidly as possible. The round you use should be able to penetrate at least 12" into the target. This includes going through the denim, leather, cotton, etc. clothes that the target is wearing. The more penetration, the better. If you have a through and through, then the target is bleeding from two holes rather than one. Don't get caught up in the myth that over-penetration kills innocent bystanders. Studies show that in a real gun fight where you and the target are both moving, you can really only expect to actually hit the target 20% of the time. The rounds that went THROUGH the target are significantly less dangerous than all the ones that missed completely. If you're buying pistol ammo to NOT over-penetrate the target, you're making a mistake.

3) Capacity - Due to the frequent misses mentioned above, I place a high value on magazine capacity. If the caliber meets the above criteria, then give me as many of them as possible! Those aren't just bullets in there...They are opportunities at my continued life and I want as many as possible between reloads.

4) Recoil - Lighter recoil will enable a faster follow-up shot and will usually result in higher accuracy. Smaller caliber doesn't necessarily mean lighter recoil (see Caliber Selection below). Someone who has a frail frame or is new to firearms will generally benefit from a lighter recoil, however an experienced shooter can overcome recoil deficiencies.

5) Expansion - I feel (my opinion) that expansion is an over-rated statistic with regard to pistol rounds and I do not place a high value on it. Handgun velocities are simply not fast enough to cause the tissue damage from shock that is characteristic of rifle rounds. One benefit of expansion is perhaps a FMJ round that nearly missed a vital organ, would have clipped it had there been a few hundredths of an inch of expansion from the initial radius like that of a JHP. Another minimal benefit is felt impact by the target. Studies show that a person who knows they've been shot will instinctively fall down, though that's not always characteristic of attackers who may be under the influence of drugs. If the bullet meets the criteria of 1-3 AND I can get some expansion, very well, but I'd rather over-penetrate.

6) Knock-Down Power - Knock-Down Power is a myth as far as pistol calibers go. People do not get lifted into the air and thrown back 6 feet because they just got shot by a pistol. The surface area of a bullet is too small and the velocity is too high to push the body of a human being down. The bullet simply penetrates however deep it will and either comes to rest or exits out the other side. Don't shop for a caliber based on Knock-Down Power. If the gun shop owner tells you "This baby's got more Knock-Down Power!" he's marked you as someone who doesn't know any better, or he himself doesn't.

TIME TO EVALUATE THE CALIBERS!!!

I knew that I wanted an automatic pistol, so I was only looking at 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP as they are the most popular and widely available. I evaluated all three using the above criteria.

9mm - Usually has the best capacity in full-sized pistols. You can buy an Springfield XDM-9 and load an ENTIRE 20RD BOX of 9mm in a single magazine!!! You can buy a sub-compact Springfield XDM-9 and use that same magazine in it. Also, 9mm has the best selection of Concealed Carry firearms compared with .40 and .45. There are many single-stack options out there which result in a thinner firearm. Thin is a hot commodity when you CC. Furthermore, 9mm generally has significantly less felt recoil compared to .40 & .45 enabling higher accuracy and quicker follow-up shots. One negative I found from research was that penetration is at the lower end of adequate on about 50% of available COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) ammo. That being my top priority as far as bullet pre-requisites, it definitely factored into my end choice, however, if you do the research and you're picky about what ammunition you buy, you'll be fine.

.40 S&W - Magazine capacity on a .40 is in my opinion a happy medium between 9mm and .45. A comparable Springfield XDM that I mentioned above still holds 16 rounds of ammo in a magazine and 15 in most other full-size pistols. Single-stack availability is slightly more limited, but they're starting to pop up and now I believe there are 4 or 5 manufacturers who are making excellent single-stack .40 products including Springfield and Sig to name a couple, though capacity is significantly reduced when going to the single-stack configuration in .40. I found penetration to be well within acceptable ranges for all the ammo I could find where penetration testing had been done, so you can buy whatever's available and not have to worry too much about performance. A significant negative about .40 is the violent recoil. It's more of an unpredictable snap compared to the others, though once experienced, it can be overcome. Another benefit of .40 is that most LE (Law Enforcement) are using it. That means when the Zombie Apocalypse happens, there'll be more .40 laying around than anything else.

.45 ACP - Performance wise, the .45 is very comparable to the .40 with significant difference in velocity...the .45 being quite a bit slower. Cross-section is much better than the other two with penetration comparable or slightly less than the .40. The big negative about .45 is magazine capacity. The same full-size XDM mentioned previously is now down to 13 rounds of ammo. Because the diameter of the bullet is significantly larger, the grip of the firearm is usually much fatter even with the reduced capacity. I looked at the G21 (Full-size Glock .45), and found it very uncomfortable in my hand due to the size of the grip. It was comparable to holding a bar of soap. This isn't true for everyone, as my hands are what I would consider to be slightly smaller than average. There are numerous single-stack .45's out there as it's the platform for the famous 1911, however, you are now down to 7 rounds in a magazine and still carrying a full-size frame. A huge benefit of the .45 is the recoil. Still significant, but due to the lowered velocity, it's more of a "push" rather than a kick. I think .45 has the best feel of the three and I personally have been historically more accurate with it than the others. I really wanted to land on .45, but with the very significant reduction in capacity, I had to decide against it. Another significant factor that detracted from my selection of .45 is the cost of ammunition. That is NOT to say that I won't own a nice 1911 one day. :rolleyes:

In closing, I'd like to say that I conducted extensive research over several months to compile the above results and much of the information in this article is my OPINION derived from that data, so please keep destructive and counter-productive comments to yourselves. This is about helping people make their decision.

I am not a "Fan Boy" of any Caliber or Firearm Manufacturer and kept an open mind in my selection process and encourage you to do the same.

Of course, whatever firearm you buy should have a history of being immaculately reliable. Don't be cheap...This is your life we're talking about. You WILL get what you pay for.

I hope I've helped people with this article, but the best advice I can give is to:

A) Find something that feels the best in your hand. As soon as you pick that weapon up for the first time, you'll know what I'm talking about. Feeling good in your hand is the first step in obtaining peak accuracy. It's different for everybody!!!

B) Fire that weapon in all of the calibers available and see which one you are the most accurate with. Remember, it's widely agreed upon that Shot Placement is the most important factor. Be accurate FIRST.

C) Practice Practice PRACTICE!!! Be masterfully familiar with your firearm, practice drawing and acquiring the target, and shoot OFTEN. Keep your skills honed.

Good luck with your selection process and I hope that my insight has been of some benefit to you.
 
Last edited:
You're missing a big one - Caliber. I would place it Placement > Penetration > Caliber > Recoil > Capacity > Expansion.

With regards to placement, caliber selection is important. My Mom can only accurately shoot 9mm and .38 specials. She can't handle the .357s, .40s or .45s, or the featherweight .380 pocket guns.

You are right on penetration.

Caliber (and by derivative, expansion) will hit more blood vessels and cause more tissue damage. There are more than just a couple blood vessels - you have capillaries all over your body. Expansion isn't reliable in pistol rounds, but it is still something to look at. Expansion gets more reliable as the rounds get FASTER, not slower. That's why .223 has much more reliable expansion.

Velocity is what causes the shockwave more than the expansion (although the expansion helps), and you are right that in pistol rounds this isn't enough to cause permanent damage. However, it is with the FN 5-7. (I'm not saying it's the God round, just that it's moving fast enough for the TWC to matter).

I place capacity low, because most of the defensive shootings are 3-3-3: 3 feet, 3 shots, 3 seconds. I have a 5-shot revolver and 6-shot pocket gun that I carry (not at the same time), and I don't feel undergunned. I also have a .40 that can potentially hold 16+1, but I'm usually holding 11.

ETA: You only evaluated handgun rounds that met YOUR criteria. You also left out all of the revolver family (.38 and .357 being very popular for SD), .380s (popular in pocket pistols), 10mm, .357 sig, FN 5-7 (which holds more than an XDM9), and that's just naming some of the more popular ones.
 
Based on this "research," I'm amazed the 30-shot Kel-Tec .22 Magnum P-30 wasn't the obvious choice.....
 
HoboCoastie wrote,
The .45 is quite a bit slower usually resulting in better expansion than the other two with penetration comparable or slightly less than the .40.
I believe this to be in error. You need more velocity to get better hollow point expansion. Too little velocity and the round won't expand, though newer technology HP bullets have been designed to expand at slower speeds than those of the past.
 
The .45 is obviously superior to two other mentioned in original post.
 
I believe this to be in error. You need more velocity to get better hollow point expansion. Too little velocity and the round won't expand, though newer technology HP bullets have been designed to expand at slower speeds than those of the past.
Yes Sir, you are most definitely correct. Good catch. I'm also in error to say that the .45 has better expansion than the .40 or the 9mm. That eludes to an assumption that 9mm and .40 do not expand properly and that is untrue. All three calibers of JHP expand well, as designed. What I was trying to convey was actually cross-section. The .45 being the leader.

I'll re-word that portion of the post to convey accurately.
 
I looked at the G21 (Full-size Glock .45), and found it very uncomfortable in my hand due to the size of the grip. It was comparable to holding a bar of soap. This isn't true for everyone, as my hands are what I would consider to be slightly smaller than average.

The G21 also comes in an SF (Small Frame) model, which has the same overall stats except for the grip size. There are also many more models of .45 that are double-stack, such as the Springfield XD, which have less complaints about the grip size. (In fact, Glock has been criticized about their engineering on the magazine and grip of their .45s compared with other semi-auto manufacturers). There are also a lot of handguns with 10 rounds of .45 that are more of a medium width.
 
The "SF" actually stands for "short frame." While it's not a lot different from their standard frame, it's enough different to matter.

As noted, the XD and XDM are known for their better grip, as is the M&P .45
 
So by all of the information above, one could assume 22LR to be a good self defense calibur.

It should be (in my opinion) obviously not so... but I dont see any mention of size.
 
You're missing a big one - Caliber. I would place it Placement > Penetration > Caliber > Recoil > Capacity > Expansion.

With regards to placement, caliber selection is important. My Mom can only accurately shoot 9mm and .38 specials. She can't handle the .357s, .40s or .45s, or the featherweight .380 pocket guns.

I placed caliber outside of the selection criteria and listed the pros and cons of them seperately at the end as I feel that all three can do the job.

However, it is with the FN 5-7. (I'm not saying it's the God round, just that it's moving fast enough for the TWC to matter).

The 5-7 I wouldn't really consider a pistol round...more like a small rifle round that you put in a pistol. I could throw the PMR-30 (as was mentioned) or the PLR-16 in there if we were looking that way.

I place capacity low, because most of the defensive shootings are 3-3-3: 3 feet, 3 shots, 3 seconds. I have a 5-shot revolver and 6-shot pocket gun that I carry (not at the same time), and I don't feel undergunned. I also have a .40 that can potentially hold 16+1, but I'm usually holding 11.

ETA: You only evaluated handgun rounds that met YOUR criteria. You also left out all of the revolver family (.38 and .357 being very popular for SD), .380s (popular in pocket pistols), 10mm, .357 sig, FN 5-7 (which holds more than an XDM9), and that's just naming some of the more popular ones.

Yes, you've got me. There are other factors behind my madness. I ended one bout of research with those three calibers as the answer, then began this bout of research to eliminate two of them. Those three fit into my endgame (Zombie Apocalypse) plan. I want to eventually be down to .40, 12ga, .308, and .22lr ONLY.

With the 9mm, .40, and .45 cartridges (I chose .40), I can use the same caliber and magazines for my CC gun, my full-size pistol, AND a pistol carbine like the Kel-Tec Sub-2000 (not available in .45). I'll probably choose the Glock 23 configuration so I can use any Glock 40 caliber magazine from 10 round all the way up the the 29 round hi-caps...and I'm already significantly invested in that direction.

Likewise, for .308, I have a Remington 700 VTR for the long range stuff and I intend to purchase some variant of the .308 AR-style or a SCAR in the .308 configuration as my battle rifle...probably the AR as they are more compact and the SCAR's are heavy. I chose .308 again for it's prevalence in LE and Military applications...and immaculate track record.

The 12ga will probably be my hunting gun that I already own in conjunction with a tactical shotgun. I'm still debating on that one; but the KSG, Saiga 12, and Mossberg 930 SPX are at the top of my list.

The .22lr is for small game due to the fact that I can carry 1000 rounds in my pocket and only be out about $15.

Eventually, I'll only be stock piling four different calibers that will meet all the needs I could have.

So you see, this article is a bi-product of my personal agenda that I know can be useful to those considering these calibers for personal defense. Take what you can from it and PLEASE, if you see inaccuracies, vocalize them!

Thanks.
 
There is mention of size.

He points out that the proverbial 1/100 of an inch lost between a .45 and a .40 are not significant enought to actually worry about bullet diameter.
He seems more worried about penetration, which correlates largely with size of bullet, being "mass." So penetration and caliber are kind of an amalgamation in this particular hypothesis. His primary focus is penetration, but larger calibers tend to penetrate better, thus as a secondary factor it is figured in. "Diameter" does not a good bullet make, otherwise we would be throwing disks with the flat side first.
I know, there is special cases, but in broad strokes I agree.
 
I placed caliber outside of the selection criteria and listed the pros and cons of them seperately at the end as I feel that all three can do the job.

That's because you only consider those 3. There's also the .22, which in some specific loads does meet the recommended penetration in ballistics gel.

The 5-7 I wouldn't really consider a pistol round...more like a small rifle round that you put in a pistol. I could throw the PMR-30 (as was mentioned) or the PLR-16 in there if we were looking that way.

So because it's a necked cartridge it's a rifle bullet? The FiveSeven can be carried as easily as a Glock or 1911. Thus, for the same application as a 9mm or .45, the 5.7 can be compared.

Pistol carbines are significantly lacking next to a similarly-sized rifle. It's a matter of velocity. The fast-moving bullets have more controlled expansion and a TWC that actually matters.

He points out that the proverbial 1/100 of an inch lost between a .45 and a .40 are not significant enought to actually worry about bullet diameter.
He seems more worried about penetration, which correlates largely with size of bullet, being "mass." So penetration and caliber are kind of an amalgamation in this particular hypothesis. His primary focus is penetration, but larger calibers tend to penetrate better, thus as a secondary factor it is figured in. "Diameter" does not a good bullet make, otherwise we would be throwing disks with the flat side first.
I know, there is special cases, but in broad strokes I agree.

He has a priority list, and in my list I put penetration above caliber, but caliber is still important. If you're going to have a through-and-through hole with both options, why not have a bigger option?

This "article" seems more to me to be a post by someone who picked the three most popular calibers, did some internet research on them, and then made the post. No offense to the OP, but I prefer to read the articles that are hosted by renowned experts, which cover the same points you did, but with a lot more experience behind them.
 
No offense to the OP, but I prefer to read the articles that are hosted by renowned experts, which cover the same points you did, but with a lot more experience behind them.

All fine and dandy, but excluding anyone other than people you think have a clue is not the most intellectually feasible option. 8) More experience is certainly helpful, but I do not see any glaringly obvious "untruths."
 
Based on this "research," I'm amazed the 30-shot Kel-Tec .22 Magnum P-30 wasn't the obvious choice.....
Nah. That doesn't have enough stopping power. :cool::evil:
read the articles that are hosted by renowned experts
Experts make mistakes and have biases, just like all of us. Well, maybe fewer mistakes and stronger biases. Unless they are relying on data...in which case, anyone can just look at the data.

So I always consider what they advise, and always ask why they advise what they do...and I sometimes follow the advice.

BTW: given the emphasis on shot placement, I'm surprised "recoil" only comes in at #4. And where is "speed of follow-up shots"? "Speed of reloading?" Where is "reliability"? "Durability"? "Concealability"? "Customer service"? "Safety"? "Cost" (of gun, and of ammo)?

Seems like you're mixing factors intrinsic to the caliber (capacity), with things dependent on the bullet (expansion), and things dependent on the shooter--and many things dependent on the firearm. If I want to improve my SD capabilities, am I supposed to conclude I need a different caliber, bullet, gun...or just more practice?
 
Last edited:
THIS IS BEATING A DEAD HORSE
and it's by-products...

gees another caliber war
just get want you want and be done with it
some are happy with a .32 others will never be happy with anything short of a S&W .800 hand howitzer.
 
2) Penetration -...The more penetration, the better. If you have a through and through, then the target is bleeding from two holes rather than one.

5) Expansion - I feel (my opinion) that expansion is an over-rated statistic with regard to pistol rounds and I do not place a high value on it.


I have to disagree with these notions.

Yes, adequate penetration is desired, but over-penetration contributes very little.
The old 9mm ball ammo penetrated very well....too well...often passing completely through the body.
Back in the days of WWII the .45 performed better than the 9mm despite the fact that the 9mm typically provided better penetration.
The 9mm performs much better in hollow-point form, which offers the possibility of expansion even at the cost of penetration.
In fact, you'll often hear/read that modern hollow-point ammo designs are what has "saved" 9mm ammo in the self-defense arena.
 
EasyG, that's because the goal in penetration is to hit vital organs, and penetration is valuable up to and through them. It's sort of a "good enough" value, that up to a certain point it's the most important thing your cartridge is in charge of (shot placement is more up to you, as long as you can handle it) but after that point it doesn't do much.

The goal isn't to make the target bleed, although that is often the by-product. The goal is to do enough damage to the vitals to cause a loss of blood pressure. If bleeding was the goal, we'd all be shooting for the femoral artery.

You'll also see that with some of the smaller rounds, HP is NOT recommended, due to inadequate penetration, and that FMJ is required for SD.
 
Experts make mistakes and have biases, just like all of us. Well, maybe fewer mistakes and stronger biases. Unless they are relying on data...in which case, anyone can just look at the data.

No offense to the OP, but he doesn't have the experience to interpret the data. It may be a good start, but he presents it as a definitive for everyone else.

Looking at data alone isn't enough, as the conclusions drawn, either by the one providing the data, or the one drawing from it can result in vastly different conclusions.

I'm reminded of the old joke where the scientist tells a frog to jump. On his command, It goes 12', he writes down, "frog with 4 legs jumps 12'."

He cuts off a leg. "Jump, frog!" it obediently jumps 9', so he writes "Frog with 3 legs jumps 9 feet."

He repeats cutting off legs, noting the decreasing distance each time. Finally, the frog is legless.

"Jump, frog!....Frog! Jump!" The frog won't jump. The scientist concludes, based on the data he has accumulated, that a frog that loses all it's legs.......goes deaf.
 
Alternative method:
Get a shot timer and some pistols that you would consider for CC: 9mm, 357 Sig, 40 S&W, 10mm, and 45 acp are all acceptable calibers.

Place a 6'' circle on a larger target and stand about 6-7 yards away.
The timer is used to measure the time between the 1st & 2nd shot.
Only count the pair if BOTH shots hit the circle to "qualify", close doesn't count in this little drill.
After a couple of practice runs start keeping track of qualifying pairs and average them after about a dozen qualifying pairs.
You think the 9mm will always win right? Not so.
In my hands, a Glock 19 9mm and a Colt XSE Lightweight Commander 45 acp had exactly the same average time after I averaged a dozen pairs for each.
I did not do as well with my Kahr 45 or XDsc and eventually sold them.

Does this mean I always carry the Glock 19 or XSE Commander? No.
Sometimes I need a smaller pistol and go with my Glock 27, which surprisingly had about the same 1st-2nd average as my 26 (using +P in the 26).

I expected I would shoot the Glock 19 well when speed was a component of assessment, I was surprised that the 45, or 40 in subcompacts did just as well. The 45 and 40 produce more recoil than the 9mm, but it wasn't a hinderance to quick & accurate shooting in more than one drill. Amazing what you can discover with a timer.

The Commander has a 7 + 1 capacity with Tripp magazines, but it's a simple thing to carry a spare magazine and have 15 total rounds available.

What this little test did was allow me to see which pistol types I could typically shoot best with a speed and accuracy component, seems like reasonable criteria.
 
CDW4ME, you do bring up a good point, but you're testing multiple variables. How do you compare with the G17/19 vs. the G21? How do you compare with a 9mm 1911 vs. a .45 1911?

However, I do believe that it is important to look at the difference in your shot times when selecting a caliber. Since quality HD ammo from most handgun calibers that are popularly carried will meet adequate penetration, what you really have is a difference in recoil, bullet width, and capacity. Since the effect of recoil is subjective, I do like your salad plate test.

DAVID E, that's what I was trying to say. This looks more like the author explaining his thought process on why he chose one caliber over the other two, than one which will start you at "what should I get?" and give you a full range of options. A lot of the points were "I want this, so that's what I'm looking at".
 
I am partial to .40 Cal. .... XD - 40 and BUG Glock 27sc Gn. 4

Then there is the Judge with the 45 LC and 410 shot shell...

Then there is the home denfce Mossberg 500 12 Ga

Then there is the SKS...

I know, I know.. We are talking handgun rounds....

Just sayin....

Outdoorsman1
 
Actually specifically autoloaders since we got moved to the autoloader forum.
 
Based on this "research," I'm amazed the 30-shot Kel-Tec .22 Magnum P-30 wasn't the obvious choice.....

That's exactly what I was thinking. .22 Magnum FMJ ammo has plenty of penetration to leave an exit hole.

The .22 is a quite accurate round, scoring points in the most vital shot placement catagory, it has on the order of twice the capacity of the competition, and a winner for recoil as well.

It should have it hands down.

What we're all alluding to is that size of the hole does matter. Also exapansion with modern rounds often comes close to doubling the initial radius. Further smooth curves are known to result in a narrower permanent cavity as velocity drops sooner than jagged spinning petals.

Anyway, the amount of permanent cavity is going to be proportional to radius squared. And flowrate in pipes is proportional to the radius to the fourth power.

So smaller bullets have lower odds of catching something important, but they should result in much slower blood loss for a given shot placement.

Another issue is deflection. There are plenty of stories of bullets failing to penetrate the skull. Lighter and faster rounds are going to tend to experience more deflection (though they might do well for penetration against a flat surface).

I wish that was covered more. But you can find some things on it. Poking around now I found
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/buickot1_2.htm

and

http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal Ballistics as viewed in a morgue.htm

with

I can't tell you how many times I've seen a .380 or 9mm strike bone on a well-placed shot and skip off in a non-vital direction, leaving the BG free to return fire. With the .40 and .45, this seldom happens. Bone is in the body for basically two reasons--to give support as with the legs and spinal column and to protect major organs, such as the ribs protecting the heart or the skull protecting the brain. Skip a bullet off a support bone, such as the leg, and the BG will keep shooting. Break it, like you generally do with a .40 or .45, and the BG is going to hit the pavement and your chances of survival increase dramatically. It's the same with a shot to the chest. Skip a 9mm off the sternum (breastbone) and the fight continues; plow through the sternum with a .45 and, trust me, the fight is over
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top