Ballistics of common handgun calibers - not the usual train of thought

[anothernewb]

Looking up the ballistics of the common argued calibers. 45 acp VS 9mm VS 40 S&W it seems they all run around 400 lb/ft of energy.

Whether they do that with mass or velocity I find irrelevant.

what I find myself asking is WHY the same energy? what drove that similarity?

is it a function of the physics of bullet limitations. metallurgy seems to throw that one out. gunpowder limitations? the prevalence of overcharged rounds throw that one out.

I think one could easily drive a 230 grain 45 to much higher velocities, as with .40 and 9. upping the relative masses of those slightly also works.

A relatively minor increase in the mass of the chambers could handle the increased load pressures. supported chambers should protect the brass.

at the risk of altering a generation of calibers, the brass could also be made slightly thicker to compensate too.

So things come down to newton's third law or reactions.

Is there some essential thing I'm missing with a practical upper limit on recoil energy that drove the similarities?

I know they make the 10mm and the 454 casull etc...

I wonder what would happen to the 45. Could chamber pressures could be pushed to 30k psi would that result in a 45 that's just too uncomfortable to handle?. I'm not saying push it into 460 territory, but a 230 grain moving at 1,000 fps should be a significant jump in energy.

Anyway, I'm just musing, i know the practical application of implementing a change in the calibers are about zero. Just trying to get a handle on things. The caliber war arguments make me laugh often. each has their favorites and fanboys.

but what's the limitation of slightly altering an aspect of one of these calibers - would it end the debate once and for all?

maybe a compromise...A double stack 42.5 caliber 190 gr round moving at 1100fps in a frame heavy like a 1911 to provide the same felt recoil.....lol

 

[mahansm]

I think it's because it's a comfortable level of recoil that can be easily mastered by most shooters. For something close to what you suggested, look at the 10mm. This was adopted and then rejected by the FBI but is still around.

To me, there's just something right and satisfying about the .45 ACP round fired from a good 1911. (No 9mm/.40/.45 wars, please. I shoot and enjoy all of them.)

Of course, I also enjoy the .22 LR and the .500 S&W.

 

[burrhead]

A 230gr 45 Super will get you into 1,000-1,100 fps territory. Except for hunting, I don't really see the point. For gaming or defense the old 850 fps seems to have been working for a long time while providing minimal recoil. But that's just me.

 

[anothernewb]

I was wondering if felt recoil was the driving force myself. all the rounds have similar penetration, similar energy. just found myself musing over things. it's the very similarity of the rounds that sparks the most debate.

 

[Newcatwalt]

I've shot and reloaded for just about every automatic pistol caliber ever made from .25 ACP to .455 Webley Automatic. If you can think of it I've probably shot it and/or reloaded for it. After a lifetime of experience and experimentation I've settle on the 9mm Parabellum as my caliber of choice. Say what you will about it's effectiveness but I really like it for many many reasons. In fact I've found the single stack 9mm Sig P239 pistol to be my first choice in self defense. It's absolutely reliable and very accurate in a compact size. If I was "going to war" I'd probably go with a higher capacity pistol but I don't see myself doing that any time soon. To paraphrase a saying from Front Sight - "any gun will do if you will". Pretty much my thoughts on the matter....

 

[javjacob]

they are loaded different but the 45acp is also a very slow moving round so that brings it down even though its a much larger caliber. I think the only round slower than the 45acp is the 38 special but the 38 special was originally a black powder round so it has an excuse.
for the best out of the 3 I would pick the 40S&W. when it comes to 45acp vs 9mm I would pick 9mm because the ammo is 1/3rd the price.

 

[Sam1911]

I think you're surmising the correct answers.

1) There's some level of energy that is optimal for "most" users to handle. 9mm, .45ACP, .40S&W, etc. all are in that same range. From .45 Colt down to .380 or so, in the range of guns those cartridges are most commonly chambered in, the felt recoil and shot recovery time are generally acceptable for defensive shooting work.

(Heavy recoiling hunting handguns exceed this range, but so do both the average proficiency of hunters choosing handguns in their ability to manage that energy, and the time for recovery from the shot. Not to many "El Prez" or "Mozambique" drills on game animals.)

2) They do the job and don't need to be vastly more energetic. Most of the energy and penetrative capacity of a .44 Mag, .45Super, .454 Casull, or even the lowly 10mm is pretty much wasted on most human targets, such as one might use a service sidearm to combat. After you've blown through both sides of a bad guy, the remaining energy is more of a liability (to a degree) than any kind of benefit. Coupled with the detriments of larger guns to handle them, lower capacities, larger and heavier ammo. All loss, no gain.

 

[javjacob]

not all true. the faster a bullet is moving the more damage it does to the target. compare a 357mag to a 45acp, the 45 is a lot bigger but the 357mag will do more tissue damage.

 

[Sam1911]

Ok. That's one way to think of it. But there have been millions of pages written about whether that all really matters one iota in the big picture. In the end? Probably not.

One way to wrap your head around the bigger picture there is to look at trends in the real world. If the .357 magnum's energy and "tissue damage" capability were in the top few factors of what compels folks to choose a defensive sidearm, then those guns would be quite popular. Now, they ARE popular, but other factors have FAR, far, far outpaced those to the point that practically no force, department, agency, company or other official entity, nor the vast majority of private individuals choosing defensive weapons, choose them.

Apparently "shootability," lighter weight, higher capacity, faster recovery time, greater ease of reloading, smaller bulk of ammo and containers, and other factors which favor 9mm or .40S&W (most predominately) sidearms matter considerably more to most users than any perceived on-paper wounding potential increase they'd obtain by using a .357.

 

[burrhead]

" ..the 38 special was originally a black powder round so it has an excuse."

The 38 special was never a black powder cartridge. Myth.

 

[SDGlock23]

I wonder what would happen to the 45. Could chamber pressures could be pushed to 30k psi would that result in a 45 that's just too uncomfortable to handle?. I'm not saying push it into 460 territory, but a 230 grain moving at 1,000 fps should be a significant jump in energy.

Anyway, I'm just musing, i know the practical application of implementing a change in the calibers are about zero. Just trying to get a handle on things. The caliber war arguments make me laugh often. each has their favorites and fanboys.

but what's the limitation of slightly altering an aspect of one of these calibers - would it end the debate once and for all?

maybe a compromise...A double stack 42.5 caliber 190 gr round moving at 1100fps in a frame heavy like a 1911 to provide the same felt recoil.....lol

As a reloader, you can get the .45 ACP to shoot a 230gr JHP to 1,000 fps, I've done it even using book data so that's not a big deal and you don't need 30K PSI to pull it off.

One of my favorites is the .45 Super, it can be loaded to 460 Rowland levels of performance (in the right gun...) and anywhere in between, and the same setup can shoot .45 ACP. I use my Gen4 Glock 21 to shoot 250-300gr bullets in the .45 Super with between 850-900+ ft-lbs. However, those loads are for hunting using .45 Colt designed bullets. Try running .45 ACP designed bullets that fast and you've got trouble, the bullets aren't meant for those kinds of energy.

But as a whole, don't put too much stock in energy. Yes you need it to a point, but there's a point where more doesn't really equal better. Kind of a strange example, but I've seen a deer hit with a .50 BMG take off running and one shot with a .45 ACP drop like a brick. Of course there's a huge energy difference, but the extra THOUSANDS of ft-lbs didn't plow the deer over, yet a bullet with roughly 400-450 ft-lbs worked like a charm.

The point I guess is that extra energy is good, but only when the bullet is designed for the task at hand.

 

[javjacob]

the 38 special was introduced in 1898.

Upon its introduction, the .38 Special was originally loaded with black powder, but the cartridge's popularity caused manufacturers to offer smokeless powder loadings within a year of its introduction.

 

[Schwing]

I can't seem to find the chart I am referring to here but I remember seeing one that listed ACTUAL shooting statistics from police etc. It listed calibers and the % of effective take downs on the first shot for each. I remember that, between .380 and .45, there was about a 5% difference between them all. Basically, .45 was around 98% effective taking down the target with the first shot (accounting for proper shot placement) and .380 was around 93%. 9MM was in the middle somewhere.

The claim was that, in the standard shooting scenario (3 feet, 3 shots, 3 seconds), that the caliber becomes much less relevant than most of us seem to think.

I am going to see if I can find the chart and post a link.

 

[Schwing]

@Sam1911

"Now, they ARE popular, but other factors have FAR, far, far outpaced those to the point that practically no force, department, agency, company or other official entity, nor the vast majority of private individuals choosing defensive weapons, choose them."

I had to chuckle when I read this because I was just reading an article a few weeks back about how the .357 is the caliber that the armed I.R.S. agents mostly carry... It has kind of stuck in my craw as to why...

 

[javjacob]

I believe the chart you are referring to had the 45 as 92% or 94% and the highest was the 357mag at 96%

im sure somebody will find it

 

[Sam1911]

I had to chuckle when I read this because I was just reading an article a few weeks back about how the .357 is the caliber that the armed I.R.S. agents mostly carry... It has kind of stuck in my craw as to why...

That would be very interesting to see. I'm unaware of any federal agency that still issues revolvers, though I'm sure there must be some somewhere.

 

[burrhead]

javjacob, mea culpa. I've looked around a little more and you are correct. My apologies.

 

[rcmodel]

what drove that similarity?

1. Gun design.
Almost all modern semi-autos were derived from John Browning short-recoil locked breech design.

There is a limit to how much energy that design can handle on a continuous, high volume basis and stay together without high maintenance & higher replacement costs..
Unless slide weight & recoil spring strength is increased to unmanageable levels for the average person.

2. Controllable recoil.
The military insisted that the .45 ACP should match the power of the .45 Colt it was replacing. Stopping cavalry horses was as much a consideration then as stopping the riders. Browning designed the 1911 to do that in a portable package the average solder could comfortably carry and control.

Even then, 8 out of 10 new recruits were convinced the recoil of the .45 ACP was going to tear their arm off the first time that had to shoot it in training.

3. Muzzle blast.
For a solder or LEO, going around wearing hearing protection 24/7 is just not in the cards.
Your very high pressure big bores are just plain painful to shoot without hearing protection in place.

So, IMO, the 400 ft/lb limit & 21,000 - 35,000 PSI was found to be the upper limit for a handy, reasonable weight, controllable handgun the average man could master that would still get the job done.
For the three reasons mentioned.

For a little history lesson.
There were very powerful semi-auto pistols invented back then.
But they were rejected by the military because of objectionable recoil, excessive muzzle blast, and mechanical complexity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Automatic_Pistol

rc

 

[beatledog7]

I think the OP's analysis is spot on--there's not a lot of real difference in the mythical stopping power of the most commonly used rounds. So carry what you can manage whenever you can.

In the end, being armed is better than not being armed; putting a couple of .25 caliber bullets from a pocket gun in the right place always beats a clean miss with anything else.

 

[TestPilot]

Guns can handle more power.

It's the human element.

Think about the FBI going to 10mm then reducing the power.

Sure, some people have no problem with 10mm recoil. But, that's not the norm.

Think about all the people who complain about 40S&W recoil.

In most polls, 9mm pistols are more popular than any 40S&W or 45ACP.

 

[anothernewb]

Muzzle blast never occurred to me. certainly no one confuses the muzzle blast of a .357 with a .45

Now that I think of it, 45 9 and 40 all sound just about as loud. they each have distinctive sounds, but I think the overall decibels are pretty darn close. although from my experience shooting all 3 of them, the 45 might be just slightly softer.

never put together the connection between browning's designs and the similarity of all the locked breech actions. it's a duh now that it was pointed out though. thanks for the info!


I heard alot about the .40 recoil. I shot 45 and 9 for a long time beofre I got one and honestly, I didn't see what people were griping about. felt pretty similar to me.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

Quote:
I had to chuckle when I read this because I was just reading an article a few weeks back about how the .357 is the caliber that the armed I.R.S. agents mostly carry... It has kind of stuck in my craw as to why...
That would be very interesting to see. I'm unaware of any federal agency that still issues revolvers, though I'm sure there must be some somewhere.

That's the .357 SIG, not the .357 Magnum.

 

[Riomouse911]

With the exception of the .40, which was the answer to the FBI 10mm load in a smaller package, the rounds you described are 100+ years old. The ballistics they sported then were fantastic compared to the crummy .38 revolvers the Army used in the Philippines and the .32's popular in Europe in the early 1900's. Since the guns they were designed for were drawn up by hand and made into firing prototypes to test (unlike todays CAD designed arms), the limits they had to discover for the round, as well as the sidearms firing them, were found by trial and error. Without having been there to watch it myself, I will guess that the numbers they ultimately came up with are the ones found to be the best combination for the guns designed in conjunction with the round.

What is now accepted as a reasonable limit of power for anti-personnel use (400 ft lbs +/-), effectiveness (high one-shot-stops), portability (officers' 1911, LC9-Kel Tec 9mm, etc), and shootability (recoil) is a result of the 100 years of R&D that has gone into the latest JHP rounds we use today.

I, too have a .45 Super (along with other high-powered revolvers) and controlling the Super in fast-repeat-shots scenarios with high octane loads is not easy compared to standard .45 ACP (or even +P) loads through the same 6" 1911. To a beginner, inexperienced, or apathetic shooter; the blast and recoil of even the .45 or 9mm +P ammo can be a real detriment to good shooting (and fun for the shooter). Ya gots to hit the target to affect the target.

(I am a firm believer that good shot placement is 90-95% of the one-shot-stop numbers. Put any one of the listed rounds in the crooks' wheelhouse, and the results will be positive.)

 

[tommy.duncan]

Bullet weight/type

Velocity

Energy

135 gr (9 g) JHP 1,400 ft/s (430 m/s) 588 ft·lbf (797 J)
150 gr (10 g) JHP 1,310 ft/s (400 m/s) 572 ft·lbf (776 J)
165 gr (11 g) JHP 1,250 ft/s (380 m/s) 573 ft·lbf (777 J)

These are the ballistic numbers for the 400 Cor Bon.

 

[hardluk1]

My latest 40sw load is from underwood. there 155gr xtp out of a 4" barreled kahr tp40 averages 1302fps . It will make 1292fps from a 3 1/2 cw40. But it is still shy of my old hunting load from my 357 mag. 170gr speer sp at 1450fps or 180gr at 1400fps.

Now there nothing wrong with heavy and slow but fast does add to the damage when the right bullet is used. Use a bonded bullet if your going to push the cartridge design limits.

Also the 45 super is a fine choice if hunting but many handguns designed for the 45 acp may not be up to shooting them , atleast for very long.