40 SW Better Stopper than 44 mag?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There was a much discussed and disputed study a few years back ( I don't remeber the researchers names, but some here will) that put the .40 as the all around best one shot stop round in real world shootings with the .357 being a near 2nd

.44 mag fell way behind, actually close to or below 9mm.

That may be what your friend is referencing


But like I said it was much disputed.

Bigger hole leak more fluid ( who said that?)
 
It's got nothing to do with what round is used by cops. It's the firearm. .44's and .41's come in firearms that are too big and heavy to lug around all day. The .40 does not. Then there's the recoil and over penetration that comes with a magnum round.
However, to suggest that a .40 S&W hits harder than either magnum is daft. Using Remington factory ammo, at 50 yards, both the magnums have around 600 to 700 ft/lbs of energy. The .40 around 400ft/lbs. The .44 and .40 using a 180 grain bullet, the .41 a 210.
Big bullets going fast will always hit harder than smaller bullets going relatively slowly, but you still have to be able to hit whatever you're shooting at.
 
Last edited:
There's no way you can guarantee that with a .30-06--much less a .44 Magnum.
Click to expand...

You're still thinking FMJ and hardcast lead. I'm talking about PROPER bullets. With HP bullets of the right weight a .30'06 at point blank will basically blow a man in half. Lungs torn apart, heart and other organs ripped up, and the spine blown out the back. Any limbs in the way--gone. It amazes me how much people underestimate rifles. There used to be a picture floating around of what a mere .30/30 could do to a human head, but I wouldn't repost it even if I could find it.

The .44 Magnum is a notch less powerful than rifle rounds, but it's still potent enough to blast a big hole in a human chest and I don't know too many people who can survive with such wounds for very long. Loaded with SWC hardcast, of course, there's not as much damage. But even then if the guy gets away, he's unlikely to live long. As a matter of basic physics, a .40 S&W that falls apart mid way through the torso is going to do a lot less damage.
 
Cosmoline- Are you talking about the close up where the guys top half of his head was pretty much gone? If so, while is was a .30-30, it was also a contact wound, so the expanding gases also contributed to the size of the wound.

I dont have much experience with the .44 magnum except shooting at paper, but from what ive heard from well known ballistic experts, the .44 magnum, even with good JHPs, doesnt do that much more damage than a standard auto pistol caliber roughly its size. It still does, but it wont leave a 4-5 inch hole in someones chest, or "blow their head clean off".

However, I do agree with you on the part about rifles. Ive seen plenty of high powered rifle shots on humans, and they are DEVASTATING.
 
I'm still waiting for the "well known expert" who suggests hunting hogs or deer with a .40 S&W.

chirp chirp chirp


I've said it many times. A MAN IS JUST AN UPRIGHT HOG. LOAD ACCORDINGLY.
 
Were cops before the 1980's just a lot stronger?
Click to expand...
Nope, but in the 50s, they sure hollered for a .357 Magnum in a K-frame (matter of fact, it was a cop who led the charge) and once a K-frame was available, N-frames got mighty scarce in LE holsters. Even in the days of non-expanding bullets, when calibre and weight meant a lot more than they do now, LE opted for K (and later L) framed weapons. The N-frames have been largely dedicated to hunting not LE or carry.

Need I remind you of the fate of the Model 58? You might really want to reconsider your remark.
 
Actually, what Munk says is that for any controlled expansion bullet you care to stuff in a 40 SW, putting a controlled expansion bullet designed for a mag round that can utilize the greater power of that round is going to be more destructive than the 40 SW any day, be the target human, hog, deer, or Alien.

My question was always of ultimate power- best conditions for each, which would you rather be hit with? (besides neither) The 41 and 44 mags have twice the energy of a 40 SW. All things being equal, they are more devastating. This is not to suggest most police would be served well with this amount of power, only that it is obviously a better bet for a one shot stop or CNS hit. A homeowner living in the country is not worried about overpenetration as would be a city cop.

Now, as for munk preferring heavy rounds at moderate velocities, I do. For general purpose. However, that is not what started this discussion from my end. This discussion started between J Shirley and myself in another forum after he suggested the energy from a magnum round was wasted as it would exit and the 40 SW was a better stopper. Some of this no doubt was simple misunderstanding between us- but he said the 240 44 mag was a waste, and when I pressed him on specifics, he would only opine that if he were struck by a 170 41 soft or hp he was screwed- but not so heavier rounds. I think most of us could agree that a 210 41 in a Hornady XTP would be devastating.

For my part, all I ever wanted was basic agreement about the laws of physics- that bigger, heavier, more powerful rounds, bullet construction being relatively equal, would do more damage. It was never a referendum on the Semi Auto vs Revolver.

I started this thread here because it would be in a forum of our peers and more comfortable to Mr Shirley. I told him his arguments left me unconvinced, but perhaps the ballistic experts here could persuade me.

That hasn't happened. I think moderate velocity semi auto rounds are much much more dependant upon bullet contruction and this theory of 'energy dump,' than is a round that has power and bullet weight to spare.

I've never felt undergunned by whatever system or cartridge I was using. If I were to leave the 1911 platform and was looking for a semi auto, I would seriously consider the 40 SW. ( I own a 45 acp and 10mm)

There is a tendancy, or current fad of thinking among gunnies today that the revolver is relegated to a hunting role, and that it is marginal for self defense. As part of that attitude, ideas like 'energy being wasted upon exit' and the bullets being too strongly constucted to stop bad guys are being proported. These ideas are unsound.

Whatever modern bullet construction has done for the semi auto, it has also done for the more powerful revolver, to more devastating results.

I don't believe there is any post by J Shirley in this thread I disagree with. Doubtless, I will say again, most of the difficulty was in people getting their backs up, rather than being in much disagreement.
I just thought the High Road was a good format to iron this out.


munk
 
JC-2, I've seen modern cop duty belts and I do NOT think the weight problem has anything to do with the handgun. The poor guys are loaded down with about ten pounds of crud. And no matter how thick and wide the belt is, the only way to keep the whole mess up is to tighten it--squeezing the lower back and hips. It's slow torture in the name of looking "professional." If the belt could be dumped in favor of a more practical (and tactical) shoulder system the felt weight would drop dramatically. With a belly holster cops could carry .454 Casulls without fatigue
 
bullet construction being relatively equal
Click to expand...

It would be easy to sum up my feelings as: good, quickly expanding bullets are required to truly use the energy edge magnum rounds have in a self-defense situation.

The statement re .40 vs. .41/.44 has to do with bullets designed for deep penetration when compared to bullets designed for self-defense. Even with an inherently more capable platform, bullet construction matters.

The effects of rifle hunting rounds has very little to do with discussion about relative effectiveness of pistol rounds. I am still looking for gel pics of .41 or .44 cast bullets. Typically, handgun rounds that quickly expand do not penetrate as deeply, so when I hear that a handgun round has both expanded to .70 and penetrated 20", I must believe it likely that the expansion started after at least several inches or more of penetration. This may be just fine for hunting, but is less useful (I feel) for self-defense.

John
 
John,
My belief is that more powerful rounds do more damage, bullet construction relatively equal. How anyone can explain away the 41 or 44 mag as unable to deliver the energy is illogical to me. I obviously do not understand this.
Any advance in bullet construction good for semi auto has been good for the mag revolvers as well.

If people wish to believe a 180 gr 40 SW at 400 foot pounds of energy or thereabouts is superior as a man stopper to a mag round of 800 foot pounds or more with a heavier bullet and wider diameter, that is certainly their right to believe that.

This is not hard. I do not understand the resistance to this. Perhaps some of you believe a Browning 50 Cal is also ineffective against a man compared to a 40 SW. Perhaps the 40 SW is magic.

munk
 
I agree with Cosmoline not only on mag stopping power, but also on the weight of modern police gear. The poor saps are weighed down. Even so, I'd opt for carrying a N frame revolver as a cop if I were a forest ranger, back woods sheriff, or Border Patrol.

Any place my department would have my head on a pike if a round went through a wall I'd opt for a semi auto and more shots.

munk
 
This truly is about the stupidest thread I have participated in. So, I'll continue the stupidity.

I would rather be shot with the .40S&W. >>>>>>> Marshall

As would I, and a Nine after that, and a .380 after the Nine, and so on.

I'm afraid I was born with more than a normal share of stupidity so you'll your to forbear my condition in this thread. It's not so bad for the reader; imagine having to live with it 24/7?


munk
 
This is a crazy thread and I hope just a joke.

Anybody that has had any small experience with the two calibers in question would have no doubt about which round would be more destructive. :fire:
 
I think modern philosphy with the semi auto and expanding bullets has gone too far. I think it sells guns and ammo. More people buy these today than revolvers. They want to believe in situational superiority. They have 'excuses' why the revolver's are obsolete and power and though greater, of no consequence in Self Defense situations. This is a perspective that has gone too far.

The modern semi auto is a wonderous compromise of usable power, controllability and repeat shots. That does not mean on a shot for shot basis it can compete with more powerful revolver rounds, any more than a 30/30 is the equal of a .308
It would be like giving the .308 a fmj round and the 30/30 a soft point 170 gr for comparison. Handicapping one round to prove a point proves nothing. A properly loaded Nine is better than an improperly loaded 40, or 41, for that matter.

munk
 
John- The 300 grain XTP expands pretty early in the wound path, like most XTP bullets. I dont know of any gel pictures though.

And the reason for the deep penetration is becuase the bullet weighs 300 grains with just a .429 bullet diameter, and with nearly 1000 FPE, its gonna dig deep no matter how fast it expands.
 
Well, the XTP in general is now a very good round; for several years, my pet load was a .40 155-grain XTP.

The thing is, munk originally claimed that the magnum revolvers were better in some ways for defense because you only had to shoot the aggressor once. :uhoh: He then later indicated he preferred heavy rounds at modest velocities.

I believe the only way one can truly capitalize on the potential extra power of the magnum rounds for self-defense is to use bullets that rapidly expand and/or fragment. I believe if one is using bullets that have little or minimal expansion for the first 9" of penetration depth, one could use an autopistol round that DOES expand and penetrate to a reasonable depth with at least as much effect.

Now, despite what some have posted, I fail to see how anyone can argue with this. If I shoot through a 12" thick torso, what good to me are the last 8" of potential penetration? I can see some possible utility in shooting all the way through, fine- that's another 2"- what about the other 8? If I MEAN for this to be a self-defense load, why didn't I choose a lighter round designed to expand, fired at much higher velocity, that would do twice as much damage for, say 14"?

I have shot deer with both .40 and .41, incidentally, which I would hope counts as "some small experience", as well as owning and liking both. If one reads carefully, I have yet to despute that a magnum round is potentially much "more destructive" than a less powerful one; at the same time, I am certain that an expanding/fragmenting .308 is considerably more damaging on lighter flesh targets than a .300 WM FMJ. Yes, the .300 is inherently more powerful, but if you package it in a way that does not effectively use that power, who cares?

John
 
John prefers the fast splat; I don't. I will go for CNS destruction every time if given a choice.

I have added this qualifier 10 times in two days over two different forums, and will do so again: all I have ever said is that with comparable bullets, the mags are better and more destructive.

If John wants to believe I believe the mag is magic and 'you only have to shoot once' that's fine, but not my opinion, and if ever said, out of context now. I believe there is a far greater probability of a one shot stop with a more powerful revolver cartridge than a weaker semi auto one, held to less SAMMI pressures and less case capacity, and lighter bullets. The discussion then was about Police and Military small wearms requirements vs civilian use. I was a proponent of the perspective that says for many civilian folks, a revolver is actually a wider purpose-use weapon. It is capable of more devastation for self defense, you can load it up and down without changing springs etc, you can even have several types of ammo in the cylinder at one time. How about full house mag followed by Splat?
As one is usually a better shot and more proficient if they stick to one arm, a revolver can be used while afield, while hunting, and at home for self defense. This would allow a lot more familiarity- and that's a good thing in a world where many don't even fire a box of ammo a year. Most civilian encounters are over in one or two shots.


John at the time of that discussion initially was only willing to delegate the revolver for hunting, but after some discussion, to his credit, admitted for many people it just might be a better choice. For my part, I conceded if I was only shooting multiple human targets, and was hampered by penetration legal issues, I'd take a semi auto.

munk
 
If one reads carefully, I have yet to despute that a magnum round is potentially much "more destructive" than a less powerful one; at the same time, I am certain that an expanding/fragmenting .308 is considerably more damaging on lighter flesh targets than a .300 WM FMJ. Yes, the .300 is inherently more powerful, but if you package it in a way that does not effectively use that power, who cares?>>>>>>> J Shirley

This is exactly what you were unwilling to say in the other forum. I commend you for acknowledging it now.


munk
 
I cannot agree, considering my first post said:
If one were going to use a magnum round for SD, a lighter bullet at high speed will usually be more likely to rapidly mushroom and/or fragment, actually using that extra energy it has when compared to typical duty rounds (9mm, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, etc).

John
 
Next time I speak with you about firearms I'll bring my lawyer, thanks. I doubt this is of any consequence now, except to you and I. Anyone who does have an interest in the original thread can go to Bladeforums.com, look under 'manufacturers' and go into the Himalayan Imports forum. The thread is called (it's Spectre's- John's) something like, 'munk's defensive ammo'.

If anyone can tell me after reading it if there is something I could have said or done better, by all means do so.




munk
 
Last edited:
.44's and .41's come in firearms that are too big and heavy to lug around all day.
Click to expand...

Please. I know women who carry N-frames. I carry them from time to time. I never notice myself listing. Not even after fifteen or sixteen hours. I'm not Superman, either.

I believe that semi-automatics are better choices for most people in most self defense situations than revolvers. Please take note of my qualifiers.

I don't believe that there is any handgun caliber and bullet configuration that is a reliable 100% one shot stopper. I can introduce you to a man shot by a policeman with a .357 magnum at a range of three feet. The bullet entered his face just to the left of his nose. He's walking around fine today. Granted, he did stop fighting the cop. But, according to the cop, it was because he didn't want to take the chance of the next shot...it wasn't because he couldn't continue the fight. I know a woman who was shot in the forehead just above her left eye with a .38 Special years ago. Light cause her to have severe headaches. I've seen the CT of a man's brain who shot himself in the brain with a 9mm three days before. There were bullet fragements from the base of his brain to the occiput. He got off of the stretcher and onto the table of the CT machine under his own power. I was there. I've seen a woman walk into the ED after being shot in the face. CT showed the bullet nestled up next to her carotid artery. I've never seen a rifle wound with a hunting bullet on a human. I've never seen a rifle hit with a hunting bullet on a deer's thorax or a hog's thorax that I believe that a human could survive or be a threat after sustaining. Not even if it happened directly outside of a trauma center. When I read of someone surviving a center fire rifle wound to the chest; I immediately know one thing: FMJ.

Personally, the role of my handgun is to fight back to the rifle that I so foolishly left in my vehicle. When I get my rifle into action, I'll be cursing myself for not buying that Browning 1919 belt-fed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Any Short Barrel Velocity Data?
Replies
6
Views
767
Lovesbeer99
L
L
  • Locked
My Opinion On Some of The Common CCW Handgun Calibers
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
Spats McGee
Spats McGee
L
  • Locked
My Personal Handgun Caliber Dogma
2 3 4 5
Replies
115
Views
5K
Autodidactic
Autodidactic
O
  • Locked
Does the .40 S&W Just Need More Time?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
175
Views
9K
buzz_knox
B
T
  • Locked
what's the deal on .40 SW?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
163
Views
6K
Gordon
Gordon
Back
Top