Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

.40sw vs. .45acp question

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by retgarr, Apr 14, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. retgarr

    retgarr Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Messages:
    322
    I'm not looking for speculation or who like what calliber better. What I am trying to find is hard data on muzzle energy of a .45acp vs. a .40sw out of a 3.5" barrel. Recoil has never been a problem for me so I'm not worried about it. I hope someone out there knows where I can find this data!
     
  2. Wayne G.

    Wayne G. Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    385
    Location:
    USA
    Can't help out w/ the 3.5" barrel, but I think you can figure out the kinetic energy at muzzle via the following formula:

    Kinetic energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity^2
     
  3. rcmodel

    rcmodel Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2007
    Messages:
    59,082
    Location:
    Eastern KS
    IMHO: Muzzle energy isn't all it's cracked up to be in a semi-auto pistol.
    None of them have enough energy to make that much differance until you get into the big Magnum revolvers.

    What is important is penetration & bullet performance.
    (And to some extent, recoil, blast, & the ability to control the gun)

    http://www.brassfetcher.com/40 S&W.html

    http://www.brassfetcher.com/45ACP.html

    rcmodel
     
  4. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    its not about what energy the projectile is, what maters is how much energy the projectile transfers to the target.
     
  5. Wayne G.

    Wayne G. Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    385
    Location:
    USA
    Amen!
     
  6. 94GT

    94GT Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Central Ohio
  7. recole

    recole Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    Missouri
    Federal Premium Ballistics Site

    94GT, that's a good site. You're right, it's not all inclusive, but it certainly answers many of the main question s we see over and over again. :)

    Thank
    Ron Cole
     
  8. Pat-inCO

    Pat-inCO Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    591
    Here is a discussion on the FBI tests in late 1980s http://www.thegunzone.com/miami-ammo.html that provide a little insight into your question. In the FBI tests the .45 was four percent less effective than the "FBI 10mm" (now the 40S&W).
     
  9. retgarr

    retgarr Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Messages:
    322
    In that case I am having trouble finding data to compare penetration and expansion comparison of the two rounds out of a 3.5" barrel. I know there are different rounds for each. But I am trying to compare the best of each.
     
  10. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,248
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    That formula is difficult to use when trying to get foot pounds from bullet weight in grains and feet per second.

    Use velocity squared, divided by 450,240, then multiply by bullet weight in grains. This will give you foot pounds of energy.

    Example:

    A 230 gr. bullet at 850 FPS. 850 times 850 = 722,500. 722,500 divided by 450,240 = ~1.6047. 1.6047 times 230 = 369 ft/lbs.
     
  11. boomstik45

    boomstik45 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Messages:
    400
    Location:
    southeast georgia
    Heh....

    Long story short, a .40 will generally do better than a .45 out of a barrel that short, at least if you're looking at mathematical figures on paper. Personally, if the ammo design and platform are up to par, you'll be fine with either. Keep in mind that the .45 is usually truly optimized when coming out of 5" barrel and weighing in at 230 grains. Yes, it's an opinion, but it's a widely held opinion by a lot of folks who know what they're doing. Or so I read and hear...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page