40 or 45

[Ridgerunner665]

What will adding or using the heavier bullet do?

Increase momentum...

The examples you are using are too close together for any extreme difference.

 

[stinger 327]

Increase momentum...

The examples you are using are too close together for any extreme difference.

Means more penetration? but shorter distance?
What about the difference between a 165 grain .45 and a 230 grain .45?

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Shorter distance...to the target you mean? If so...that depends on the round, or more precisely the BC of the bullet used. (heavier bullets usually retain a much higher % of their velocity downrange because heavier bullets are generally longer and have a higher BC...muzzle velocity is only one part of the equation)

I'll give you the muzzle velocity of those 45acp bullets...and the 25 yard velocity, and the 50 yard velocity...and just for giggles, the 100 yard velocity.

230 grain Hornady XTP, 850 fps muzzle velocity.
25 yds = 833 fps, 369 ft. lbs of energy
50 yds = 818 fps
100 yds = 788 fps, 317 ft. lbs of energy (Only lost 62 fps in 100 yards)...and dropped 17.7 inches

185 grain Hornady XTP, muzzle velocity 950 fps (couldn't find the 165 bullet specs...but they ARE worse than the 185's, which suck too IMO)
25 yds = 920 fps, 370 ft. lbs of energy
50 yds = 893 fps
100 yds = 846 fps, 293 ft. lbs of energy (lost 104 fps)...and dropped 14.5 inches.

 

[MachIVshooter]

How about a 40 grain .22 LR? All of these bullets would be in HP form. What will adding or using the heavier bullet do?

all else being equal and velocities adjusted so that kinetic energy is equal, a heavier bullet will have more momentum.

That said, penetration is also very much a function of bullet design. A 100 grain .257" Barnes TSX will usually penetrate deeper than a 120 grain Jacketed Spitzer, partly because the advanced TSX design has more controlled expansion and partly because, while the 120 grainer starts out heavier, it will shed mass as it travels through the animal. The solid copper TSX will not.

 

[stinger 327]

all else being equal and velocities adjusted so that kinetic energy is equal, a heavier bullet will have more momentum.

That said, penetration is also very much a function of bullet design. A 100 grain .257" Barnes TSX will usually penetrate deeper than a 120 grain Jacketed Spitzer, partly because the advanced TSX design has more controlled expansion and partly because, while the 120 grainer starts out heavier, it will shed mass as it travels through the animal. The solid copper TSX will not.

These are all the same design hollow points just different weights.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

These kinds of debates were raging 20+ years ago when I was old enough to purchase my first handgun. Then it was mostly a 9 vs 45 thing. There is no piece of evidence that I have ever seen in over 20 years that would sway me one way or the other. I happen to like the way the 45 round feels when it goes bang with one pistol I own so that is why I chose it You will just have to shoot the two and see what you like more. The more you like it, the more you will practice with it.

 

[stinger 327]

These kinds of debates were raging 20+ years ago when I was old enough to purchase my first handgun. Then it was mostly a 9 vs 45 thing. There is no piece of evidence that I have ever seen in over 20 years that would sway me one way or the other. I happen to like the way the 45 round feels when it goes bang with one pistol I own so that is why I chose it You will just have to shoot the two and see what you like more. The more you like it, the more you will practice with it.

I remember this too the 9mm vs. the .45 ACP and also when US military went to 9mm along with NATO.
Don't forget the revolver vs. auto too.

 

[MachIVshooter]

These are all the same design hollow points just different weights.

You know this how? What particular 40 gr. HP are you comparing against the Stinger? Does it have the same copper wash thickness? Is the lead alloy of identical composition? The shank, ogive, cavity depth and cavity width are all the same?

Not that it really makes much difference with .22 LR bullets, as they're all close in weight and made of soft lead, and the copper wash thickness is truly negligeable. But do you kinda see what I'm saying about all else being equal? There are a lot of variables to consider. Two bullets of identical weight, shape and material proportions may behave very differently because one has a bonded core while the other does not.

 

[GLOOB]

Velocity counts the same as mass in terms of momentum. Velocity counts more than mass in terms of energy. Mass does not count more than velocity for either case.

So you believe a 1000 pound missile at 5,000 feet per second has more momentum than a 1,000 ton freight train traveling at 75 miles per hour? Because the kinetic energy would be the same at 390 million foot pounds.

What the heck is your point? I said mass and velocity count equally when calculating momentum. If you multiply the mass by 2000 and only divide the velocity by 45.45, of course you'll end up with more momentum, just like I said. 44 times more momentum.

Now let's look at meaningful examples. These are the fastest loads on Hogdon's reloading center for the bullet weight. I am comparing the most popular weight for SD loads, IMO:

45 ACP: 230 gr bullet, 908 fps.
40 SW: 180 gr bullet 1159 fps.

45 ACP energy: 421 ft-lbs
40 SW energy: 537 ft-lbs

45 ACP momentum index: 230x908 = 208,840
40 SW momentum index: 180x1159 =208,620

45 ACP test barrel: 5"
40 SW test barrel: 4"

So yeah, the 45 ACP load has a whopping TENTH (of one percent) MORE MOMENTUM! Sure, the 40SW bullet has a little more kinetic energy. But it's just a piddling 28% more. That can't possibly make up for the 0.1% lower momentum. Afterall, the 45 ACP is like a frikkin FREIGHT TRAIN @ 75mph!

Looking at these numbers, you'd think 40SW should recoil like a pussycat, and 45 should be a handcannon. The fact that 40SW doesn't have significantly less recoil than the 45, like it's supposed to, obviously makes it a terrible SD cartridge. (I'm still pissed to this day that my 9mm recoils more than my .38. Can you believe that!?)

So bottom line: you add 50-70% more firepower in a smaller, lighter gun with cheaper ammo, but which has only 99.9% of the momentum and 28% greater kinetic energy, and the results are clear. It's just an answer to a question no one asked, and it's sorely, sorely lacking. My vagina hurts just thinking about the snappy recoil on that underpowered "short and weak" round.

 

[dorfer21]

<FlameSuit>

Drop the MP, pick up a Taurus 840 or 845 all the pluses of a striker and the ability to carry cocked and locked or hammer down. Mine has been 100% reliable when using quality ammo, I figure the crap ammo is good for malfunction training and general pistolmanship but marginal at best for accuracy training. Also pretty much any holster built for a Taurus 24/7 will fit an 800 series and the have a .22 cal conversion for when you wanna get really cheap training, or introduce someone to handgunning.

As far as caliber goes, at the distances handguns are used, it's a wash, anyone who says otherwise is selling something.

</FlameSuit>

* the opinion expressed in this post is to be taken (or not) at face value and any action commited (or not) by any induhvidual (or mob) is at the sole discretion of said entity. Opinion will vary as expreeser evolves and ages. Your outcome will vary from original posters. Opinion void in Illinois and Wisconsin. Be sure to discuss the effects of any gunshot wound with your healthcare provider.

 

[stinger 327]

What the heck is your point? I said mass and velocity count equally when calculating momentum. If you multiply the mass by 2000 and only divide the velocity by 45.45, of course you'll end up with more momentum, just like I said. 44 times more momentum.

Now let's look at meaningful examples. These are the fastest loads on Hogdon's reloading center for the bullet weight. I am comparing the most popular weight for SD loads, IMO:

45 ACP: 230 gr bullet, 908 fps.
40 SW: 180 gr bullet 1159 fps.

45 ACP energy: 421 ft-lbs
40 SW energy: 537 ft-lbs

45 ACP momentum index: 230x908 = 208,840
40 SW momentum index: 180x1159 =208,620

45 ACP test barrel: 5"
40 SW test barrel: 4"

So yeah, the 45 ACP load has a whopping TENTH (of one percent) MORE MOMENTUM! Sure, the 40SW bullet has a little more kinetic energy. But it's just a piddling 28% more. That can't possibly make up for the 0.1% lower momentum. Afterall, the 45 ACP is like a frikkin FREIGHT TRAIN @ 75mph!

Looking at these numbers, you'd think 40SW should recoil like a pussycat, and 45 should be a handcannon. The fact that 40SW doesn't have significantly less recoil than the 45, like it's supposed to, obviously makes it a terrible SD cartridge. (I'm still pissed to this day that my 9mm recoils more than my .38. Can you believe that!?)

So bottom line: you add 50-70% more firepower in a smaller, lighter gun with cheaper ammo, but which has only 99.9% of the momentum and 28% greater kinetic energy, and the results are clear. It's just an answer to a question no one asked, and it's sorely, sorely lacking. My vagina hurts just thinking about the snappy recoil on that underpowered "short and weak" round.

I thought the .40 would be in between a 9mm and .45 ACP but it has much more recoil and muzzle flip than both. It might even be worse than the .357 magnum.

 

[GLOOB]

It might even be worse than the .357 magnum.

Interesting you would say that. Because 40sw out of a 4" auto barrel will stomp all over .357 out of a 2" revolver barrel (nearly equal breech-to-muzzle distance). And to be fair, out of a 24 oz gun, the .357 will have significantly more recoil to most shooters (albeit, largely due to the nature of a semi-auto vs revolver, weight being equal).

 

[stinger 327]

Interesting you would say that. Because 40sw out of a 4" auto barrel will stomp all over .357 out of a 2" revolver barrel (nearly equal breech-to-muzzle distance). And to be fair, out of a 24 oz gun, the .357 will have significantly more recoil to most shooters (albeit, largely due to the nature of a semi-auto vs revolver, weight being equal).

In this case the .357 revolver is heavier in ounces than the .40. But still the .40 has sharper recoil / muzzle flip. It jumps up towards the sky.

 

[MachIVshooter]

So yeah, the 45 ACP load has a whopping TENTH (of one percent) MORE MOMENTUM! Sure, the 40SW bullet has a little more kinetic energy. But it's just a piddling 28% more. That can't possibly make up for the 0.1% lower momentum.

For one, you need to find loads with indentical energy for the purpose of this examination. Secondly, momentum calculations are a bit more complex than this "momentum index" you've found. I'll refer you to wiki on that one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum

But, for argument's sake, lets use your momentum index, but this time with the same energy levels, because we need a common denominator (BTW, 1160 FPS with a 180 from a 4" tube is really optimistic for the .40. That rivals some of my loads tested in a 4006 that were over maximum). Anyway, onward:

45 ACP: 230 gr bullet, 975 fps.
40 SW: 180 gr bullet 1100 fps.

45 ACP energy: 485 ft-lbs
40 SW energy: 484 ft-lbs

45 ACP momentum index: 230x975 = 224,250
40 SW momentum index: 180x1100 =198,000

Now, even using this ridiculously oversimplified formula, the heavier .451" pill garners a 13.5% increase with the same kinetic energy.

For the purpose of this thread, let's also remember that .45 +P exists, .40 +P does not. If you want to use the max .40 loads, let's compare them with a max .45 load (+P) for a modern gun, like my 240 Gr. JHC's at 1,060 FPS.

Afterall, the 45 ACP is like a frikkin FREIGHT TRAIN @ 75mph!

Not what I was implying. Use of extreme examples for the purpose of concept illustration.

 

[GLOOB]

For one, you need to find loads with indentical energy for the purpose of this examination.

What examination are you trying to do? I was comparing 40 to 45 in terms of both energy and momentum. Why make them equal when 40 is indisputably capable of making much higher kinetic energy with the lower bullet weights? I thought I was being fair to use the heaviest and most popular bullet weight in each caliber.

I don't understand why you would compare 2 loads with identical energy levels. It's obvious the heavier bullet will have more momentum.

(BTW, 1160 FPS with a 180 from a 4" tube is really optimistic for the .40.

After reviewing 2 other online manufacturer sources, I concur. Longshot specs are much higher than the hottest loads from the other manufacturers. But likewise, I did not find a single 230 gr 45 load from either source that makes 975fps, which you use in your arbitrary energy-equal example. Ramshot was close, listing 1 load at 964. Alliant's fastest listed load is 916. And Hogdon's is 908.

momentum calculations are a bit more complex than this "momentum index" you've found.

even using this ridiculously oversimplified formula,

No, they're not more complex. Momentum has a vector. Which is w/e direction you point the gun. That doesn't matter. And I didn't find it. I just created it. The only thing my momentum index does not contain is units. I just dropped that because it was not a standard unit, and it doesn't matter, anyway. Just like Wiki says, Momentum = Mass x Velocity. My index is perfectly fine for direct comparisons between the two. There's nothing "ridiculous" about it, unless you don't understand how to use a simple mathematical formula. In fact, my index is really just momentum measured in grain-feet per second. And it doesn't matter what units you measure it in, because not one of us has any sense of what that translates to in reality, except by comparison to something else. Percent difference is what I was getting at.

If you want to use the max .40 loads, let's compare them with a max .45 load (+P) for a modern gun, like my 240 Gr. JHC's at 1,060 FPS.

If your load has been pressure tested to conform to SAAMI +P standards, then I would compare them against Hogdon's 40 data. If not, then I would ask Clark for some of his 40 loads for comparison. But seriously, if +P info were readily available to me, I would have included it.

Now, I agree that 45ACP +P will edge out 40. But not by a lot. But the people complaining about 40 being snappy are shooting regular old 45ACP practice rounds out of a heavier gun and wondering why 40SW rounds with considerable higher energy and only slightly lower momentum fired out of a smaller gun with shorter slide travel has more kick. Even more ridiculous is the assumption that 40 should kick somewhere in the middle between 9mm and 45. Comparing Hodgon's highest momentum loading in luger (147gr at 1004 fps), the 40 has 41% more momentum. If we review, the 45 had 0.1% more momentum than the 40. So yeah, it should be somewhere between the two, alright. Somewhere much closer to 45.

Look at Speer's data for its Blazer loads, just as an example. Their 40SW is on par with the 45 in all bullet weights. The 180 gr load has 9.5% more energy and only 7.5% less momentum. The 155 gr load has 30% more energy and only 6.5% less momentum. Their 9mm loads aren't even on the same continent. And the Blazer 230 gr 45 isn't exactly weak, at 845 fps (out of a 1" longer test barrel, once again), considering the number of reloaders and competitors that love their 45 slugs loaded over Bullseye and Tightgroup, wimping along at 770fps.

Parting thought: if momentum is so important, why do ammunition manufacturers list only kinetic energy?

 

[MachIVshooter]

I don't understand why you would compare 2 loads with identical energy levels. It's obvious the heavier bullet will have more momentum.

Because that's my entire premise.

I'm not disputing that the .40 is a perfectly capable cartridge, or that there's a hair's breadth of separation (if any) between .40 and .45 for terminal effectiveness. But we do like to split hairs on this forum. It'd be boring if we didn't.

Of course, none of our discourse changes the fact that the higher velocity, higher pressure .40 generates a sharper recoil impulse, regardless of the gun. Do I find it obnoxious or intolerable? Not at all. But then, my preferred handgun is 10mm, loaded slightly beyond what BB and DT will do (180 @ 1,406). To some, however, that sharp kick is bothersome, and the gentler shove of the .45 is preferable.

I will concede that some of my 185 gr. +P .45 loads generating upwards of 550 FPE are a departure from that wisdom, and do smack the palm harder. After all, that load is very similar to top end .40 S&W loads in terms of bullet weight, veocity and powder charge.

If not, then I would ask Clark for some of his 40 loads for comparison.

Even I don't push things as far as Clark

 

[Whiskey11]

Personally, when comparing the SD capability of a particular round I tend to look at the SD ammo used.

I personally carry an XD.45 Tac and have it loaded with Hornady's TAP FPD 230gr HP's. The .45 Hornady TAP is a +P round and their website says this about the velocity and energy:

MV: 950 FPS
Muzzle Energy: 461 lb*ft

50ft Velocity: 908 FPS
50ft Energy: 421 lb*ft

100ft Velocity: 872 FPS
100ft Energy: 388 lb*ft

There is also the 200gr +p HP from Hornady

MV: 1055 FPS
ME: 494 lb*ft

50ft V: 982 FPS
50ft E: 428 lb*ft

100ft V: 926 FPS
100ft E: 380 lb*ft

There is a good chance that when I cycle these 230gr HP's through I will switch to the 200 gr for the slightly higher ME. You'll also notice that these rounds are practically identical at 50 and 100ft in terms of energy.

Hornady's .40S&W TAP FPD line has both a 155gr and 180 gr XTP HP.

155gr:
MV: 1180
ME: 479

50ft V: 1061
50ft E: 387

100ft V: 980
100ft E: 331

180gr:
MV: 950
ME: 361

50ft V: 903
50ft E: 326

100ft V: 862
100ft E 297

What does this mean? Well, comparing at least Hornady's line of personal defense ammo, the difference between the best of .45 and .40 is minimal at best at the ranges that the average SD situation will require.

Talking about 494 lb*ft vs 479 lb*ft at the muzzle (which is a better comparison than out to 50 ft). At longer ranges the .45 obviously carries it's weight and velocity better than a .40S&W.

I don't compare reloading specs because I don't reload for SD ammo, I reload for plinking ammo.

From at least Hornady's data, there would be very little discernible difference between .45 and .40. I chose .45 because it was easy to reload for, not because "it am bestest SD round" and I like the recoil impulse of the .45 better than the .40. And in the XD at least, I carry one more round in .45 than .40 (yeah I was confused as well) per magazine.

 

[Skylerbone]

I guess we've lost sight of the OP's question entirely at this point.

If you think either caliber is a hand cannon and uncontrollable by you then you shouldn't shoot it. If you're looking for the economical option choose the 40 S&W, if not the .45 ACP.

If the pistol is meant to be used for SD/HD consider 20 yards and under your meaningful distance and disregard the rubbish. Buy the 5" M&P in 40 and call it a day.

 

[stinger 327]

Yet it seems to be that .40 S & W caliber is the choice now of most police departments. Why is this?

 

[stinger 327]

Personally, when comparing the SD capability of a particular round I tend to look at the SD ammo used.

I personally carry an XD.45 Tac and have it loaded with Hornady's TAP FPD 230gr HP's. The .45 Hornady TAP is a +P round and their website says this about the velocity and energy:

MV: 950 FPS
Muzzle Energy: 461 lb*ft

50ft Velocity: 908 FPS
50ft Energy: 421 lb*ft

100ft Velocity: 872 FPS
100ft Energy: 388 lb*ft

There is also the 200gr +p HP from Hornady

MV: 1055 FPS
ME: 494 lb*ft

50ft V: 982 FPS
50ft E: 428 lb*ft

100ft V: 926 FPS
100ft E: 380 lb*ft

There is a good chance that when I cycle these 230gr HP's through I will switch to the 200 gr for the slightly higher ME. You'll also notice that these rounds are practically identical at 50 and 100ft in terms of energy.

Hornady's .40S&W TAP FPD line has both a 155gr and 180 gr XTP HP.

155gr:
MV: 1180
ME: 479

50ft V: 1061
50ft E: 387

100ft V: 980
100ft E: 331

180gr:
MV: 950
ME: 361

50ft V: 903
50ft E: 326

100ft V: 862
100ft E 297

What does this mean? Well, comparing at least Hornady's line of personal defense ammo, the difference between the best of .45 and .40 is minimal at best at the ranges that the average SD situation will require.

Talking about 494 lb*ft vs 479 lb*ft at the muzzle (which is a better comparison than out to 50 ft). At longer ranges the .45 obviously carries it's weight and velocity better than a .40S&W.

I don't compare reloading specs because I don't reload for SD ammo, I reload for plinking ammo.

From at least Hornady's data, there would be very little discernible difference between .45 and .40. I chose .45 because it was easy to reload for, not because "it am bestest SD round" and I like the recoil impulse of the .45 better than the .40. And in the XD at least, I carry one more round in .45 than .40 (yeah I was confused as well) per magazine.

The Hornady CD is always sold out. Hard to get. What's the difference between the CD and the TAP in Hornady?

 

[Whiskey11]

Stinger 237, I'm not sure what the difference is, I would check their webpage for more info on the differences.

 

[Skylerbone]

TAP is meant for shooting through barriers (car doors, glass) Critical Defense for shooting through people (HP with special non-clogging tip).

 

[adrianbaxter1807]

I'd go with .45, bigger wound. Faster drop in Blood Pressure
*Remember This
If the Central Nervous System is disrupted, you have instant incapacitation

 

[amprecon]

Well, I for one jumped on the .40s&w bandwagon, sniffed around then jumped off. Found the nearest .45acp bandwagon hopped on it again and it's been happy trails ever since

I had a G23 and found it too snappy after awhile of shooting at the range, not near as accurate or comfortable to shoot as my G21 either. Now my G19's, I should've kept them, very handy nice shootn' guns.

 

[stinger 327]

Well, I for one jumped on the .40s&w bandwagon, sniffed around then jumped off. Found the nearest .45acp bandwagon hopped on it again and it's been happy trails ever since

I had a G23 and found it too snappy after awhile of shooting at the range, not near as accurate or comfortable to shoot as my G21 either. Now my G19's, I should've kept them, very handy nice shootn' guns.

Yes I agree most definitely the G-23 has alot more snap recoil than the G-21. Not pleasant to shoot G-23 at all. I prefer my G-21 better but I'll still keep the G-23 for extra added protection.