Ignorant statement of the day....

Don't let people know that the differences in the big three (9mm, .40, .45) are so slim.


They'll start taking all my 9mm off the shelves.

You hit him with facts. Shame on you, don't you know that you should respect your elders... by blindly agreeing with any mythology they want to rattle off?

I shouldn't talk... I'm closer to 60 than 50.

Hey! You kids get off my lawn!!!

I usually just look at them all starry eyed and do my best little rascals "gee mister, really"
then proceed to dump my BUG into the foil pie tin (I like how it sounds when you hit em)

and point out that I doubt that guy is going to be arguing about sectional density...

Reminds me of a BBQ I recently attended...guy said, "I prefer a .45 Long Colt to a regular .45 Colt...and there IS a difference."

I bit my lip.

Here's the way I like to look at it...

As far as bullet cross section goes 7 rounds of 45ACP = 10 rounds 40S&W = 13 rounds 9mm

The smaller rounds will put more energy into the target, not round to round, but magazine to magazine.

It's all about trade offs!

The energy isn't what's important; the hole in the target is. And, assuming similar bullet construction, the .45 will make a bigger hole than the .40. That said, most similiar designs will be roughly the same overall, it's just the .45 will penetrate slightly farther and/or expand slightly wider.

SDDL-UP, actually that's incorrect. Let's take a very common pistol, the Glock. You're comparing 13, 15, and 17 across the board. So you have in each magazine (assuming unexpanded for simplicity):
(.45/2)^2*3.14 * 13 = 2.06 in^2
(0.40/2)^2*3.14 * 15 = 1.88 in^2
(0.36/2)^2*3.14 * 17 = 1.73 in^2

Quick and dirty napkin math, but per magazine you'll get bigger holes out of the .45, at least in this comparison.

In the end, though, I'll take the 9. Simply because I have more chances to hit something important.

(.45/2)^2*3.14 * 13 = 2.06 in^2
(0.40/2)^2*3.14 * 15 = 1.88 in^2
(0.36/2)^2*3.14 * 15 = 1.73 in^2

Click to expand...

The 15 should be a 17 there, but you used a 17 in the math, so the outcome is still correct.

What other math and science subjects can we utilize to argue about caliber selection?

Some of us old farts just can't deal with getting old and tend to cling to the ideas of our youth. Why, I once met a man who claimed a 45 ACP hit to a man's finger would spin him around and knock him down.

But one thing's for sure, we'll all be one of those old windbags one of these days trying to figure out the latest do-dad. At least we will if we live that long.

My next door neighbor (70 years old) keeps free range chickens. I've been trying to explain to him that the only thing he needs roosters for is more chickens, the hens can lay eggs all by themselves. Of course I "Don't know what I'm talking about" so he has lots and lots of chickens.

As my grandmother was fond of saying; "There's nothing wrong with 'don't know', it's 'won't learn' that matters."

wow, dont you just hate know it alls

My favorite was when a senior citizen asked if I liked his gun and I said "yeah thats a nice 1911" and he said "i dont think its a 1911, its called a dan wesson"

....guy said, "I prefer a .45 Long Colt to a regular .45 Colt...and there IS a difference."

I bit my lip.

Click to expand...

The old .45 Long Colt for .45 Colt makes me want to call .45 Schofield the ".45 Short Colt."




The cavalry-era Army issued .45 Schofield cartridges for use in the Schofield revolver and the Colt Single Action Army revolver which also took the longer .45 Colt cartridge. That's the only reason the .45 Colt gets called .45 Long Colt.

Back to opening post, I like to compare .40 S&W to .45 ACP 180gr loadings. i consider them equivalent in the same bullet weights.

"There's nothing wrong with 'don't know', it's 'won't learn' that matters."

Click to expand...

This is one of the best quotes I've read in a while.

I have an old timer friend that gets all worked up when I go shoot to practice.
"Just throwing your money away!" He says.
"What you need to practice for? just line up the sights and pull the trigger," he says.
I take everything with a grain of salt from most "experts."

According to this theory a 45 ACP would be more effective than a 357 magnum.....which clearly is not...

Click to expand...

Do you have intrinsic proof to back this up? Or just quotes about the .357 as a "manstopper" and the failed one-shot-stop statistics?

Also note I didn't just say "the diameter of the hole" I said "the hole". There are many factors here, including penetration depth, that make up the difference. The point is, you can talk about energy numbers all you want, but its what actually happens in the target that matters. That's more up to bullet constructon than anything else.

Could it be that he was talking about dry-firing? Even the best shooters recommend that.

As for the .40 vs. .45 question, who cares? Many departments are actually going either to the 9x19, or the .45 ACP again, in order to enable officers to qualify without the snappy recoil of the .40 S&W.


The .40 S&W guns are essentially upgraded 9x19 platforms, adding more power to a small platform is always a great way to add more flinch to a new shooter.

In the end, though, I'll take the 9. Simply because I have more chances to hit something important.

Click to expand...

I don't pay any attention to those young 60 year-old kids... they're still wet behind the ears.

In common handguns, energy is a meaningless factor, and the bigger the primary channel is the better. But the key to stopping an assault is bullet placement - more so then bullet diameter. You may have more rounds in your pistol magazine with a mid-bore vs. a large one, but it takes time to shoot those smaller cartridges, and doing it rapidly does not likely improve accuracy. Regardless of the number of hits you make, if they don’t disable the other individual(s) they can keep attacking you. In addition if any of those subsequent shots miss and go wild, you can be, and likely will be held responsible for whatever (or whoever) they hit, regardless of your intentions. In the end what will matter most is precise hits rather then simply numerous ones.

I do think "Grandpa" got you there. Did you know that ole' smokey .44-40 "put up" more tombstones then anything else? It took tremendous amount of will power for me to walk away from N-framed S&W revolver so chambered. It was very limited "pre-Dirty Harry or Great Grandpa Special".

In common handguns, energy is a meaningless factor, and the bigger the primary channel is the better. But the key to stopping an assault is bullet placement - more so then bullet diameter. You may have more rounds in your pistol magazine with a mid-bore vs. a large one, but it takes time to shoot those smaller cartridges, and doing it rapidly does not likely improve accuracy. Regardless of the number of hits you make, if they don’t disable the other individual(s) they can keep attacking you. In addition if any of those subsequent shots miss and go wild, you can be, and likely will be held responsible for whatever (or whoever) they hit, regardless of your intentions. In the end what will matter most is precise hits rather then simply numerous ones.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying that I'm likely to miss 60% of the time so I might as well have more bullets (although I don't know what my actual accuracy would be in a real self defense situation, it probably won't be 100%). What I am saying is that the best way to cause a physiological stop is to hit the CNS or the heart. From my rudimentary understanding of physiology, if I hit the lungs, or a major artery, or some other vital organ, it can take a while before the attack stops if the attacker is determined enough. So even though I might hit the target (the attacker), it doesn't mean I've hit my target (the heart).

I'm not trying to get into a caliber war here, just to clarify what I mean by "hit something important."

The 357 is considered an entry level hunting and wildlife defense round, the 45 ACP...no so much....

Click to expand...

And is it because the .357 has more energy? Or is it because of the depth of the hole that the .357 makes? Are all .357 bullets of similar energy equal in terms of performance, or does bullet construction matter? That's what I'm getting at. Energy by itself is a useless statistic to know. I read somewhere recently, if your neighbor tells you a meteorite smashed into his yard, and you ask how big the crater is, what you want to know is how wide is the hole and how deep does it go. If he gives you the retained mass and the impact velocity...it's all nice and good, but it doesn't actually answer your question.