FMJ for Self Defense?

[CraigC]

A good sight picture and trigger press will get you identical results with either platform.

I reckon there ain't much difference if your choices are between bad and terrible.

 

[BSA1]

is the first I've heard of what exactly you wanted to know and I am happy to provide an answer-

Regardless of caliber, I prefer a "heavy-for-caliber" JHP, preferably a premium design.

Better?

481 gotcha! I understand now where you are coming from. Like I said before I think we agree more than we disagree.

I mostly agree with your choices except in smaller calibers. A friend and I have a Tastes Great, Less Filling debate in the .380. He likes JHP's and I prefer FMJ for better penetration. That said in a worse case situation if the JHP fails to expand it just acts like a FMJ.

Now if we could just get prison inmates to volunteer for being shot...

 

[481]

BSA,

Yep, seems we agree on most stuff. I never addressed the "smaller calibers" per se, but when I go below the self-imposed "floor" of 9mm/.38 Spcl, I also go for the .380 = FMJ in SD roles. Sorry if I seemed guarded, but as you well know, it is not unusual for someone to get "torn up" over their preferences on this topic. My preferences are mine and, as such, not subject to debate.

Although we agree on the "volunteer thing", I don't know how valid such a pursuit would be. Such a study would require a population of several hundreds of thousands to even begin to compensate for the seemingly infinite variances present in the anatomy and that does not even begin to address how we'd determine what constitutes a "success" and a "failure".

 

[BSA1]

 

[ccsniper]

didn't read most of the posts, in fact I only looked at posts by members with less than a hundred posts, and you know what? Nearly all of them said .45, most of those with more post count said 9mm. This to me says youngins on the forum prefer the MASS DESTRUCTION of the .45 as opposed to the NEVER KILLED ANYBODY 9mm .

 

[The Man With No Name]

didn't read most of the posts, in fact I only looked at posts by members with less than a hundred posts, and you know what? Nearly all of them said .45, most of those with more post count said 9mm. This to me says youngins on the forum prefer the MASS DESTRUCTION of the .45 as opposed to the NEVER KILLED ANYBODY 9mm .

Some of the youngins have decades of experience and have seen a variety of people shot with a variety of calibers though. Some of those with high post counts have never seen any of that. And vice versa. I think this falls under the flawed data, bad math, bad science categories.

Seriously though if this had been a 22lr vs 45acp thread what would the overwhelming response have been? Yet people really want to rationalize why the small diameter difference of 9mm vs 45acp doesn't matter when it really does in the end. It may not make one underpowered and the other an instant manslayer but given the restriction of fmj non-hollowpoint ammo why would anyone pick the smaller round other than platform issues or the fact they did not feel they were as accurate with one round or the other.

 

[tomrkba]

I would choose 45 ACP if all I had was FMJ ammunition because the permanent wound channel has a larger diameter than that of 9x19mm FMJ.

 

[ccsniper]

I would choose 45 ACP if all I had was FMJ ammunition because the permanent wound channel has a larger diameter than that of 9x19mm FMJ.
__________________

If you look at the gel in the pick, the 9mm actually left a larger wound channel.

 

[allaroundhunter]

If you look at the gel in the pick, the 9mm actually left a larger wound channel.

That is how it would appear from the angle that we were looking at. You don't know that for sure.

Sent from my HTC One X

 

[tomrkba]

It appears that the 9x19mm bullet tumbled. Was that the case?

As usual, there are a hundred variables that affect terminal ballistics and shooting gelatin only gives us an indication of performance. I'd like to see some actual wound data, but I doubt it's available.

An acquaintance of mine once stated that he never had anyone NOT fall down after being shot in the face three times with 9x19mm FMJ. Other anecdotes expressed similar results from 45 ACP FMJ.

In the absence of JHP ammunition, my inclination is use bigger bullets. I'd prefer flat points over round nose, again for better crush damage.

 

[RevolvingGarbage]

It does appear that 9x19 tears gelatin more, based on the photo provided.

Does that mean 9mm FMJ is a better stopper? Does it even mean 9mm does more physical damage to a human?

For my money, I would bet on the larger heavier round. It's not a scientific observation, just supposition.

 

[Trent]

3 pages of posts and no one has asked the most OBVIOUS of the questions.

WHICH ONE DO YOU SHOOT BETTER?

I find with 9mm, I'm FAR faster and more accurate than with a 45. But I have scrawny arms and wrists - I'm a computer programmer / network engineer, not a lumberjack. Some people can rattle off 45 ACP and shrug of the recoil like it's nothing.

But fact is fact, I shoot 9mm over TWICE as fast - accurately - as I do 45.

I still love to shoot 45's and keep one next to my bed, but in my CAR, where I'm more likely going to need to shoot one handed (in the unlikely event if I ever have to), I keep a 9mm.

 

[coalman]

.45acp

 

[ccsniper]

That is how it would appear from the angle that we were looking at. You don't know that for sure.

But given the evidence in the picture provided the 9mm did more damage.

 

[allaroundhunter]

But given the evidence in the picture provided the 9mm did more damage.

Except knowing that a single test proves nothing, means that you should not draw conclusions such as that from the evidence given in that picture. If I was shown 50 pictures like that out of a sample size of, say, 60, then maybe we are getting somewhere.

And again, I would like to see the other angles as well. It is entirely possible that the .45 yawed on a different axis that cannot be seen from the angle shown in the picture.

Sent from my HTC One X

 

[Ken Rainey]

Well, if considering the two rounds for personal civilian defensive use only, then I'd pick the 230 grain .45 ACP FMJ due to it's better ability to penetrate straighter thru bone instead of being deflected by it ... and, in doing so, will actually lose enough energy to not be as much of a threat if it does exit. Either bullet may over penetrate if only flesh and muscle are hit but the 9mm will carry on the farthest...

If used for military purposes, I'd opt for the 124 grain (full throttle) 9mm FMJs (in a Glock 17) for the better penetration and at longer distances...

Thing is, there is no telling what a civilian defensive bullet may have to go thru to get where it needs to be to do some good ... some circumstances may be optimal for a 9mm FMJ (or hollowpoint) and some may not ... there is just no telling which might be best ... however, the slow, heavy 230 grain FMJ .45 is gonna be a pretty good all around defensive bullet that'll have a good chance of doing what needs to be done - maybe not the best, but certainly not the worst...

I could use either one...but would prefer the 230 FMJ (in a 1911) ...

It's always gonna be shot placement with adequate penetration that is needed...

 

[Inebriated]

Two things stop fights; doing everything you can to avoid them, and damage to vital structures (Aorta, brain stem, spinal cord, various arteries, etc). If you manage to hit vital structures, you're getting the same results, no matter the bullet's construction. The only thing that matters to me is penetration. FMJ allows you to penetrate deeper, to assist in shots where the target is at an angle (putting more obstacles in front of the vitals) or if the bullet hits bone. If I could, I would carry FMJ. But the issue is that we can't have a bullet completely pass through, with a lawyer riding on the back. So I personally would like to be reasonably confident that the bullet would stay in the target. I don't care about the extra diameter of an expanded bullet, or a marginally larger wound channel... none of it really makes a big difference when hitting vitals, and certainly not when missing them.

 

[Manco]

If you look at the gel in the pick, the 9mm actually left a larger wound channel.

You have to keep in mind, though, that gelatin is not flesh. In particular, temporary cavitation that looks devastating in gelatin may not have any noticeable effect on flesh at all, short of centerfire rifle kinetic energy levels. It's like stretching a rubber band within its elastic limits--no real harm is done with the kind of energy that 9mm can muster, no matter what the gelatin may seem to indicate.

 

[CraigC]

If I could, I would carry FMJ.

I would not carry FMJ unless I absolutely had no other choice and it has nothing to do with overpenetration.

I don't care about the extra diameter of an expanded bullet, or a marginally larger wound channel... none of it really makes a big difference when hitting vitals, and certainly not when missing them.

I think you'll find that in the real world, "marginally" is not the word for it.

 

[CraigC]

I wouldn't want to be shot with a 1200fps .177cal pellet rifle but that doesn't make it a good fight stopper.

 

[Inebriated]

So tell me what difference that .2-3" extra diameter makes in "the real world".

 

[tomrkba]

There is much to it, but from what I have read, the flesh in front of the bullet is crushed. This tear is permanent and is the primary source of bleeding. The diameter is affected by bullet shape and FMJ round nose creates a channel diameter smaller than the outer diameter of the bullet (something like .3-.35" for 45 and .2-.25" for 9mm--but I have to go find the averages).

Temporary cavity size is not relevant in low velocity handgun bullets in terms of incapacitation. Start here to start drawing your own conclusions:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm


Look around here for many articles:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

 

[481]

There is much to it, but from what I have read, the flesh in front of the bullet is crushed. This tear is permanent and is the primary source of bleeding. The diameter is affected by bullet shape and FMJ round nose creates a channel diameter smaller than the outer diameter of the bullet (something like .3-.35" for 45 and .2-.25" for 9mm--but I have to go find the averages).

Temporary cavity size is not relevant in low velocity handgun bullets in terms of incapacitation. Start here to start drawing your own conclusions:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm


Look around here for many articles:

http://www.firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

For FMJs of the round nose variety, just multiply the bullet diameter by 0.688292 (taken from the book in my sig line) to get the diameter of the permament cavity.

0.452 x 0.688292 = 0.311", 0.40 x 0.688292 = 0.275" and 0.355 x 0.688292 = 0.244"

 

[flatlander937]

I'd be interested to see different weight bullets of 45ACP vs 9mm.....

115gr and 147gr 9mm
165gr, 180gr, and 230gr .45

And how they all relate wound channel and penetration-wise.

 

[tomrkba]

In addition to what flatlander said, I'd also like to see what truncated cone and SWC's do.