.40 S&W vs. +P 9mm

[481]

The 124gr XTP is also an example why bullet design/construction is a more important consideration in ammunition selection than making a blanket assumption about energy/momentum. While the standard pressure 124gr XTP doesn't have the energy numbers of other 9/40 choices, it still delivers ~14+" of penetration and its a reliable expander.

Good post, 2z1.

Any assumption regarding the performance of a bullet based solely upon a one-dimensional number (like kinetic energy, velocity, or momentum) is bound to result in a flawed assessment of the terminal ballistics involved. Unfortunately, such overly-simplistic approaches find favor with the vast majority of folks for a wide variety of reasons.

Simple numbers (like KE) sell.

 

[1SOW]

I really wish people would stop using that image. The 147gr 9mm was NOT fired from a handgun, as was likely fired from an MP5. And, regardless, there's not a reference to what bullet was used;

Why is that?
Actually, the illustration is pretty good. It's one very small part of the overall discussion.
A poster asked about caliber comparison's so I showed this illustration.
While it's a little "dated", this data is not bogus. Check it out. http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm
In the multi-page discussion, current (for a few years ago) each popular bullet's expansion and penetration is tested and shown.

 

[wally]

The one dimension that is critical is shot placement. With a well placed shot even a .22 is sufficient as two accidentally very well places shots will attest with true one shot drops in the Reagan assignation attempt, whereas a poorly place shot left Reagan not even knowing he was hit until he saw the blood, although it came damn close to killing him a half-hour later.

IMHO use the heaviest round you can shoot well and worry more about your shot placement skills than the ammo you carry.

 

[Skylerbone]

I'm not what I'd consider recoil sensitive. I've fired 400 rounds of .45ACP in a single sitting, 600 40 S&W in another, 200 .357 Mag. and 150 30-06 Springfield in others. I still get fatigued at some point and performance slips but none of it is torturous.

With that out of the way, I load 9mm at the velocities required to reliably expand the specific bullet and not much more. Reducing recoil and recovery time allows faster follow-up shots because if there is a magic bullet from a handgun caliber I believe it's number five or six. Don't mean poor shooting is better in volume, rather four rounds of 9mm on target is better than one round of wundersize.

I don't care about the caliber, I care about the ammo. I don't bother with *+P+++* loads, they don't knock attackers backward and they don't make bigger holes.

 

[56hawk]

Good post, 2z1.

Any assumption regarding the performance of a bullet based solely upon a one-dimensional number (like kinetic energy, velocity, or momentum) is bound to result in a flawed assessment of the terminal ballistics involved. Unfortunately, such overly-simplistic approaches find favor with the vast majority of folks for a wide variety of reasons.

Simple numbers (like KE) sell.

Or penetration depth in ballistic gel. That's the one I am finding the most annoying lately.

 

[481]

Or penetration depth in ballistic gel. That's the one I am finding the most annoying lately.

There's much more to be learned from testing in calibrated ordnance gelatin than just determining the bullet's penetration depth- there's maximum, minimum and average expanded diameter, length, retained weight, volume (and mass within) of the wound cavity, yaw cycle, etc.

 

[56hawk]

There's much more to be learned from testing in calibrated ordnance gelatin than just determining the bullet's penetration depth- there's maximum, minimum and average expanded diameter, length, retained weight, volume (and mass within) of the wound cavity, yaw cycle, etc.

Exactly my point.

 

[2zulu1]

Good post, 2z1.

Any assumption regarding the performance of a bullet based solely upon a one-dimensional number (like kinetic energy, velocity, or momentum) is bound to result in a flawed assessment of the terminal ballistics involved. Unfortunately, such overly-simplistic approaches find favor with the vast majority of folks for a wide variety of reasons.

Simple numbers (like KE) sell.

We're fortunate to know that 124gr XTPs perform very well on culling feral goats in Australia, as does the 125gr Gold Dot. IIRC, some of those goats were in the 200# range and I don't remember any of the XTPs clogging.

Hornady ammunition doesn't have the energy numbers of the boutique ammo manufacturers, but they make a quality product that performs well in the field. Noticed a feral dog pack roaming out back the other day, but I didn't have a clean shot, maybe next time.

 

[481]

Exactly my point.

Oh, OK. I get it.

The way this was worded-

Or penetration depth in ballistic gel. That's the one I am finding the most annoying lately.

-made me think that you found gelatin test results to be annoying which confused me a little since you have in the recent past seemed to appreciate the merits of the methodology from what I read of you. Evidently, I misunderstood you.

 

[56hawk]

-made me think that you found gelatin test results to be annoying which confused me a little since you have in the recent past seemed to appreciate the merits of the methodology from what I read of you. Evidently, I misunderstood you.

Sorry for being vague in that post. I was referring to several posts on this thread as well as others where only penetration depth was mentioned. I think gelatin tests are a very useful tool in choosing ammunition, but can be interpreted in different ways. For example Brass Fetcher calculates KE transfer from their high speed video.

Anyway, as it applies to this thread:

The 124gr XTP is also an example why bullet design/construction is a more important consideration in ammunition selection than making a blanket assumption about energy/momentum. While the standard pressure 124gr XTP doesn't have the energy numbers of other 9/40 choices, it still delivers ~14+" of penetration and its a reliable expander.

I do not a all disagree that bullet design is one of the most important factors. However given the choice between two equally well designed bullets I will take the one with the more energy. For example if you look at the picture of the gelatin tests posted earlier in this thread, they all penetrated to approximately the same depth. However it's pretty obvious that the 9mm did less damage than the other rounds.

 

[CZ57]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2zulu1
The 124gr XTP is also an example why bullet design/construction is a more important consideration in ammunition selection than making a blanket assumption about energy/momentum. While the standard pressure 124gr XTP doesn't have the energy numbers of other 9/40 choices, it still delivers ~14+" of penetration and its a reliable expander.


Good post, 2z1.

Any assumption regarding the performance of a bullet based solely upon a one-dimensional number (like kinetic energy, velocity, or momentum) is bound to result in a flawed assessment of the terminal ballistics involved. Unfortunately, such overly-simplistic approaches find favor with the vast majority of folks for a wide variety of reasons.

Simple numbers (like KE) sell.

Speaking of ASSUMPTIONS Maybe you 2 guys would like to show everyone where such an assumption was made? Both of you assume you have a point to argue with, yet that point was never made. In my post I was referring to common defense loads (per the OP) in 9mm and .40 S&W where premium defense bullets are used and in comparing light/medium/heavy in 9mm compared to the .40 S&W. In the context of this statement I said momentum and energy favor the .40 S&W in all 3 weight categories, simple as that. It appears that you both like to argue ANYTHING that is in the slightest disagreement with your favorite gurus, even when apparently there's nothing to argue with.

2zulu1 made a statement about the effectiveness of the Hornady 124 gr. XTP at standard pressure and then went into show and tell mode with handloaded bullets being fired at velocities typical of +P factory loads rather than standard pressure. And BTW, consult the first two V-V loading guides and you'll see that the pressure rating they used was 36,300 PSI CIP for their handloads, I already stated that V-V reduced pressure in later guides. So we are to assume that the 124 gr. Hornady load works because he said so, yet offered nothing conclusive to base the statement on. If anything, the XTP is known for it's rather tough jacket and not usually expanding as well as newer designs so 14" of penetration seems about par for the course since its expansion is unimpressive. Try this, name one LE agency that even uses the standard pressure Hornady 124 gr. XTP. And since you're both so enamored with doc Roberts and his approved ammo list, maybe you can explain how he overlooked it. To date, no Hornady load has even passed the FBI testing protocol. Hornady claims that their 135 gr. +P Critical Duty load will, but it is yet untested by either the FBI or doc Roberts.

Then we come to this statement posted by 481.

That velocity (1032 fps) is well within the capacity of the 9mm cartridge for 147 gr JHPs - in fact, my Glock 19 routinely launches standard pressure Hornady 147 gr XTPs and Federal 147 gr HydraShoks at speeds well in excess of that figure.

Well in excess? REALLY? The Hornady 147 gr. XTP has a factory rated muzzle velocity of 975 FPS and the Hydra-Shok comes in at an even 1000 FPS. Most shooters that have been at it for any length of time or who actually chronograph ammunition are completely aware, that if anything, the ammomakers are usually a bit on the optimistic side with their factory velocity ratings. So how does your G19 achieve velocities "WELL IN EXCESS" of 1032 FPS? Is it that magical polygonal bore thingy?

Are you guys just looking to get another thread locked down?

56hawk stated it pretty effectively:

For example if you look at the picture of the gelatin tests posted earlier in this thread, they all penetrated to approximately the same depth. However it's pretty obvious that the 9mm did less damage than the other rounds.

 

[hardheart]

Doesn't look like any of them did a whole lot of damage past five-six inches. Past that, they looked to have poked holes all likely to be within one-tenth of an inch diameter.

 

[3twelves]

.40 cal. is the best cal.

 

[Skylerbone]

I swear some of you have never killed a living thing. Week after week after month after year this incessant caliber war but only with my brand of hollow point at X velocity...go hunt something already.

I've seen deer 200+ lbs. that staggered a few feet and died before I could walk 40 yds. to retrieve them. I've seen 100 lb. deer with similar shot placement make a 100 yd. sprint and crawl through brush only to need a second bullet some 20 minutes later. We're talking about 50 cal. projectiles, some in excess of 300 grains.

Here's a 250 gr. TC that failed to exit but reliably expanded with 100 grains of powder behind it. Double lung, sprinted, hid in the corn, point blank second shot to the head finished it off. Lucky he wasn't shooting back. The animal was small enough I hoisted it over my shoulder and walked it to the truck.

Where are all the charts listing the reliable one-shot stoppages for SD encounters using any of these calibers or magic bullets? Last I knew 9mm was THE choice of LE before 40 S&W was thought up, .45 ACP was all you could want for until 10mm came along. Strange that these amazing calibers have magazines available.

 

[481]

We're fortunate to know that 124gr XTPs perform very well on culling feral goats in Australia, as does the 125gr Gold Dot. IIRC, some of those goats were in the 200# range and I don't remember any of the XTPs clogging.

I'll say. Those were some pretty cool tests. I wonder if POI has shot any more of them. He sure seemed to have the availabilty.

Hornady ammunition doesn't have the energy numbers of the boutique ammo manufacturers, but they make a quality product that performs well in the field. Noticed a feral dog pack roaming out back the other day, but I didn't have a clean shot, maybe next time.

Yeah, I've used 'em on a few deer with satisfactory results. Perhaps conditions will permit you to test one (or more) on those feral canines.

 

[hardheart]

I swear some of you have never killed a living thing. Week after week after month after year this incessant caliber war but only with my brand of hollow point at X velocity...go hunt something already.

I've seen deer 200+ lbs. that staggered a few feet and died before I could walk 40 yds. to retrieve them. I've seen 100 lb. deer with similar shot placement make a 100 yd. sprint and crawl through brush only to need a second bullet some 20 minutes later. We're talking about 50 cal. projectiles, some in excess of 300 grains.

Here's a 250 gr. TC that failed to exit but reliably expanded with 100 grains of powder behind it. Double lung, sprinted, hid in the corn, point blank second shot to the head finished it off. Lucky he wasn't shooting back. The animal was small enough I hoisted it over my shoulder and walked it to the truck.

Where are all the charts listing the reliable one-shot stoppages for SD encounters using any of these calibers or magic bullets? Last I knew 9mm was THE choice of LE before 40 S&W was thought up, .45 ACP was all you could want for until 10mm came along. Strange that these amazing calibers have magazines available.

According to the Courtney's, a 115 grain 357 SIG will drop a deer in 4.96 seconds. They shot 5 of them, so it has to be true. They also said the 147 grain takes twice as long, and is because the heavier/slower bullet doesn't work as well, not because they had 1" shot groups with the 115 and 6" with the 147 load.

 

[BamAlmighty]

Shot placement... why does everyone assume you're going to hit bullseye every time? In a stressful active shooter situation where the target can move, take cover, and shoot back you're nowhere near as good as you THINK you are. This isn't hunting, whatever you will be defending from won't be standing still and will be returning fire.

 

[2zulu1]

Shot placement... why does everyone assume you're going to hit bullseye every time? In a stressful active shooter situation where the target can move, take cover, and shoot back you're nowhere near as good as you THINK you are. This isn't hunting, whatever you will be defending from won't be standing still and will be returning fire.

Actually, it can be a moment of absolute clarity.

 

[Skylerbone]

And that is why regardless of caliber I reduce the velocity of the load to match the bullets minimum requirements for expansion. AKA second shot recovery. And third if needed. And fourth if needed.

 

[Walkalong]

Enough arguing.

Mind set, preparedness, shot placement, these are some of my favorite things.....