10mm vs 45 ACP which has more stopping power.

[Jim..]

New comer here

It really doesn't matter to me which has more power, and that is why I really like this comparison

I'll try to make this simple. Per your post, we'll assume the same shot placement.

You shoot me in the left big toe with your 10mm at the exact same time I shoot you in the left big toe with my .45. Same shot placement, right? Think either one of us is going to give up at that point? I'm not.

While you're dragging your 10mm back down out of recoil I shoot you twice in the chest with the .45, then empty the rest of the magazine into you on your way down before I reload. We never get to see the "stopping power" of your follow-up shots since you never make them because you're dead before you can get them off.

Which caliber had more "stopping power"?

I guess for hunting, according to you guys I would pick a 10mm, but since I don't have one I will use my 45/70 or 44Mag in Contender pistol frame. I've never had anything I shot ask for a comparison

Thanks guys for the great discussion. I had always thought the opposite, but since it didn'tg matter to me I never looked into it.

 

[Loosedhorse]

It's been statistically proven. I could care less if they admitted to it or not.

What has been statistically shown is that it is improbable the lack of fit between earlier data and later data happened by chance alone. There are many possible "non-chance" explanations; including changes in reporting of data and handling of data before it got to M&S. Also, it is not clear how the analysis would "handle" previously mistaken data (a one-shot stop assigned when it later turned out not to be one) being corrrected in a later data-set publication.

Yet the only one you name is lying: deliberate deception.

BTW: it has been similarly "proven" that Gregor Mendel "lied" about his pea plants. I guess there is no such thing as genetics, then.

While you're dragging your 10mm back down out of recoil

If you can't shoot the 10 well, why do you assume that others can't?

 

[45_auto]

I guess you think that the FBI quit using the 10mm because it didn't give the bad guys a fair chance in a firefight?

nope too many girlie wrists.

So actually having some control over where the bullets go could be a significant component of this "stopping power" stuff that nobody can quantify?

 

[ATLDave]

1) Exceedingly little energy is actually needed to disable a man if the bullet strikes the proper place.
2) IF any definition of stopping power can be made, it must be comprised mostly of shot placement.
3) If such weak cartridges can be shown to be effective in real life scenarios then arguing about 45 Vs. 10mm is entirely pointless.

1 is undeniably correct. 2 does not follow, nor does 3. "Stopping power" is about likelihood of equivalent points of impact between calibers/projectiles having a prompt "pacifying" effect on the target. Of course shot placement matters the most. But that doesn't mean that, once shot placement is accounted for, there is no difference in the performance of bullets. Otherwise, the army would just issue .22 short as their universal caliber!

Let's look at this in another context. Take a world class racing driver - Michael Schumaker, for instance. Could he get around a track, even a demanding one, in a Toyota Camry? Sure he could. And if you put me in a Ferrari and leave him in the Camry, will he still win a race between us? Sure he will. But that doesn't mean that the differences in horsepower, torque, handling, braking, etc., are all meaningless. Shot placement is like driver skill - it matters the most, but the other inputs also matter, particularly in the marginal cases (the not-quite-arterial/CNS impact/intersect). Projectile size is like horsepower, velocity is like handling, or whatever... inputs into determining which car is, overall, an inherently faster car. "Fastest car" is like "stopping power" - comprised of multiple inputs, not susceptible to a single formula of calculation, and perhaps varying by situation/environment. Despite these uncertainties, you can bet that professional drivers and their crews spend a lot of time figuring out which car (and car setup) is fastest. Why is it so unreasonable for gun guys to spend time figuring out which cartridge is most effective/has the most stopping power?

 

[mavracer]

I never asserted that a smaller shallower wound could be more effective. The point is that under certain circumstances it can be as effective rendering the one dimensional approach (suggested as "stopping power") an unsuitable method for quantifying what it attempts to quantify.

The only placement that will have truely equal effects is a CNS shot above the 4th cervical vertabrae. That's a target for snipers and impractical when discussing handguns for defense.

So actually having some control over where the bullets go could be a significant component of this "stopping power" stuff that nobody can quantify?

Please quantify control so that we may discuss it's existance?
But yes if a 10mm is to much for you to shoot accuratly then by all means carry something with less stopping power.

 

[481]

Taking one part of the sentence out of context as you have shows me that you missed the point being made. I never asserted that a smaller shallower wound could be more effective. The point is that under certain circumstances it can be as effective rendering the one dimensional approach (suggested as "stopping power") an unsuitable method for quantifying what it attempts to quantify.

The only placement that will have truely equal effects is a CNS shot above the 4th cervical vertabrae. That's a target for snipers and impractical when discussing handguns for defense.

Again, not what I said.

Taking something out of context and setting it against one that was never intended is dishonest and reflects an inability to make an intelligent argument.

That you consistently fail to understand and try to convolute what is put before you does not constitute error or fallacy on my behalf.

 

[dsb1829]

This thread reminds me of..........

Yep, 'cept there's more boobs arguing behind the sheet.

 

[481]

You thought wrong. I Actually do have links:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-discrepancies.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/sanow-strikes-out.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm
http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm

It's been statistically proven. I could care less if they admitted to it or not.

Thanks for the links. Unlike a couple of others here you actually present evidence instead of unsupported opinion.

Of course, M&S fabricated their results.

When analysed statistically their data and its alleged correlation for such a small sample population is way outta whack, and Sanow has been confronted by several agencies for misrepresenting and fabricating (both are forms of dishonesty) data.

They cannot be taken seriously.

 

[Bozwell]

I think ATLDave summed it up well. "Stopping power" is, in my mind, asking which round will do more damage assuming equivalent points of impact and that is how I believe most people in this thread are using the term. One way to measure this would be to shoot a block of ballistic gelatin with both rounds and see which creates the largest cavity and shockwave. Some shots will be fatal no matter which caliber is used, but the question is are there points of impact where one of the rounds will be more effective. If so, I'd say that round has more "stopping power".

It's a completely different question to ask which round/weapon is more effective in actual combat and there are way too many variables there to even give a generic answer. The biggest of those factors will be the shooter. A gun that works well for some people won't work well for other people. I think some people are blurring the lines between these questions and just arguing with each other over semantics. I don't think anyone here is suggesting that the round with more "stopping power" will be the round that is always more effective in every single situation for every single shooter.

 

[stinger 327]

What about weight and velocity of bullet? i.e. you can shoot a 230 grain .45 or shoot the 165 grain .45 that travels alot faster.

 

[ATLDave]

So actually having some control over where the bullets go could be a significant component of this "stopping power" stuff that nobody can quantify?

No, at least not as the term is being generally used in this thread. Stopping power is independent of rate of fire. It is clearly rational to accept some loss of stopping power in exchange for things like rate of fire, lack of recoil-induced-flinching, ammo capacity, etc. Otherwise, we should all be planning to use .454, .460, or .500 pistols, or maybe pistols chambered in .308 or the like.

To return to the car analogy, "stopping power" is like "fastest car." "Stopping power" has many different components, and it will be somewhat context dependent. All else being equal, one would generally prefer the fastest car. But all else is not equal. Maybe you have a lot of cargo to carry. In that case, even though a Porsche 911 is a lot faster than a Ford F150, it's not the right choice. Similarly, even though a .454 has more stopping power than a .40S&W, it is probably not the right choice for SD/combat with two-legged opponents.

Whether the 10mm has more, less, or the same stopping power as a .45 is independent from shooter skill, and is equally independent from which one recoils more. Those other things are extremely important variables. But they are not "stopping power," as that phrase is used here.

 

[mavracer]

Again, not what I said.

The point is that under certain circumstances it can be as effective rendering the one dimensional approach (suggested as "stopping power") an unsuitable method for quantifying what it attempts to quantify.

ok so the "it" in bold isn't "a smaller shallower wound" what did you mean to say?

 

[stinger 327]

No, at least not as the term is being generally used in this thread. Stopping power is independent of rate of fire. It is clearly rational to accept some loss of stopping power in exchange for things like rate of fire, lack of recoil-induced-flinching, ammo capacity, etc. Otherwise, we should all be planning to use .454, .460, or .500 pistols, or maybe pistols chambered in .308 or the like.

To return to the car analogy, "stopping power" is like "fastest car." "Stopping power" has many different components, and it will be somewhat context dependent. All else being equal, one would generally prefer the fastest car. But all else is not equal. Maybe you have a lot of cargo to carry. In that case, even though a Porsche 911 is a lot faster than a Ford F150, it's not the right choice. Similarly, even though a .454 has more stopping power than a .40S&W, it is probably not the right choice for SD/combat with two-legged opponents.

Whether the 10mm has more, less, or the same stopping power as a .45 is independent from shooter skill, and is equally independent from which one recoils more. Those other things are extremely important variables. But they are not "stopping power," as that phrase is used here.

Basically if you can hit with whatever you can shoot with.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Sanow has been confronted by several agencies for misrepresenting and fabricating (both are forms of dishonesty) data.

Links?

Again, I find it interesting that we can't be content with criticizing the data-set; it has to become an ad hominem attack on the researchers.

Though, as with Mendel, even if they did as you say--and I'm not close to convinced--it doesn't necessarily follow that "stopping power" is not what they claimed, or that their general approach to the question was wrong...

Or that stopping power doesn't exist. And yet so much time is spent on ad hominem.

 

[481]

Links?

Again, I find it interesting that we can't be content with criticizing the data-set; it has to become an ad hominem attack on the researchers.

What? I gotta teach you how to google something now?

Yep, it is all factual. They got caught red handed doing what they shouldn't have been doing. Goes to credibilty and veracity of the researcher (not their actions really fit that definition in the first place) especially of they are trying to make a case for their "expertise" in the area of study.

Seems like anything contrary to what you believe is taken as ad hominem, but any refutation you have to offer is labelled as genuine debate.

Crying a river isn't a valid debate tactic.

Though, as with Mendel, even if they did as you say--and I'm not close to convinced--it doesn't necessarily follow that "stopping power" is not what they claimed, or that they're general approach to the question was wrong...

Or that stopping power doesn't exist. And yet so much time is spent on ad hominem.

I see that you are still unable to define "stopping power". Even when M&S had their own definition to work from they couldn't prove it. Instead they calculated percentages which are in no way "stopping power" and subsequently failed on many levels especially since armed encounters are separate and independent events whose outcome cannot be said to rely on that of a prior performance. The effect is a binary one- either the attacker is incapacitated or he is not. No "damage points" in real shootings, it isn't a video. Either the aggressor is stopped or he isn't and continues doing bad things until he is.

 

[481]

ok so the "it" in bold isn't "a smaller shallower wound" what did you mean to say?

I am not sure that I can "dumb it down" any further than I have.

Changing the context in which my statement was made doesn't make me wrong. It just means that you've changed the context of the statement.

Read it (again, if you haven't already) without applying your additional context (I may be wrong for assuming this but you do know what "context" means, yes?) and you might get it, although I must admit that I am starting to lose hope that I'll see comprehension displayed anytime soon.

If you don't get it, you don't get it. Not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

Peace

 

[Loosedhorse]

Crying a river isn't a valid debate tactic.

So stop crying! (Ad hom isn't a valid tactic either, yet it's your favorite.)

Yep, it is all factual.

So you say, unsupported as usual. I suspect we are defining "factual" differently; no surprise.

I see that you are still unable to define "stopping power".

Well, I started a discussion along those lines, but no one's picked it up. Can't push a rope.

And I see that you still have not defined what it is that you claim doesn't exist.

since armed encounters are separate and independent events whose outcome cannot be said to rely on that of a prior performance.

True...but M&S said that themselves. So, you have agreed with them.

Either the aggressor is stopped or he isn't and continues doing bad things until he is.

Good point--is that the start of your definition? It's a good beginning premise.

 

[481]

Can't push a rope.

Yet you keep on trying.


Please keep emoting.

 

[481]

So you say, unsupported as usual. I suspect we are defining "factual" differently; no surprise.

Still unable to google that? What a shame. Perhaps someone will be along to help you figure it out.

Who is helping you post all of the genius that you've shared with us here?

 

[Mike1234567]

Directed at no on in particular but... :banghead:

 

[Bozwell]

I can't even remember what you two are arguing in favor of/against any more.

 

[481]

^^^^

Mikey, not drunk again are you?

 

[stinger 327]

I can't even remember what you two are arguing in favor of/against any more.

.45 ACP vs. 10MM

 

[481]

I can't even remember what you two are arguing in favor of/against any more.

Happy to clear it up for you.

Loosedhose wants everyone to do his work for him and is looking for someone to show him how to do a search on google while he deals with a persecution complex.

I am just enjoying the show.

 

[45_auto]

Despite these uncertainties, you can bet that professional drivers and their crews spend a lot of time figuring out which car (and car setup) is fastest. Why is it so unreasonable for gun guys to spend time figuring out which cartridge is most effective/has the most stopping power?

How often do professional drivers and their crews find one setup which is the fastest for the whole season, or even for two different tracks? Why do gun guys think that they can find one cartridge which is most effective/has the most "stopping power" in any situation? Fact is we're all running around the track in identical Yugo's except for the color (red one = 9mm, blue one = .45, pink one = 10mm, etc) and it's really irrelevent which one we're in.

All handgun cartridges are anemic. You can argue all day over 580 ft-lbs vs 540 ft-lbs vs 480 ft-lbs. Or momentum numbers, gelatin numbers, etc. Fact is you can take two identical shots with two identical handgun cartridges and they will perform differently. One case will be a "one shot stop", the other one the guy will run away and you'll never see him again. If energy makes you happy, go with the biggest energy number. If gelatin numbers make you happy, go with the biggest gelatin number. It will make no difference in any case.

I've personally seen a single center mass hit by a 9mm drop a guy in his tracks. I've also had to help pull a guy hit 11 times center mass with a 10mm off the deputy who shot him before he beat the deputy to death. I watched a guy shot 3 times in the head from point blank range with a .45 (deputy was standing on the running board of the truck holding the gun to his head) keep driving his truck through a Mardi Gras crowd until the deputy physically hauled him out of the truck.

Only 3 reasons an attacker will stop:

#1 Psychological - he figures "oh no - I'm shot, I don't want to get hurt any more" and gives up.

#2 Central Nervous System hit - brain or spine hit that shuts down his electrical system.

#3 Blood pressure loss - his hydraulic system leaks out.

#1 doesn't care what caliber you're using. This is the reason the fact that you have a gun will handle most situations.

#2 depends on shot placement. Any of the full-power (9mm-up) handgun calibers using modern ammo will be essentially indistinguishable if you can place them appropriately, which means physically putting a bullet in the brain or spine somewhere that will shut off his CPU (I've never heard of a temporary wound cavity from a handgun bullet causing anybody to shut down, although there are documented cases of rifle cartridges causing temporary paralysis from close contact).

#3 again depends on shot placement. Maybe the bigger temporary wound cavity from a 10mm pushes the aorta away from the jagged hollowpoint, while the smaller TWC from a 9mm allows it to cut the aorta. Next time it might be the opposite, who knows.

Want me to let you in on a secret on how to double your puny handgun "stopping power", no matter which cartridge you're using? Shoot him again!

Want to triple it? Shoot him three times!