Discussion in 'Handguns: General Discussion' started by WoodchuckAssassin, Nov 8, 2020.
Im sorry .. but alot of manufacturers produce amazing performing 40 S&W JHP .. is various weights
I always lean toward 40 S&W as a carry option
Both in semiautomatic and revolvers
Living in Maine, Longest I keep my carry ammo in the pistol/rifles is 1 year. I have had failures with dead primers with premium self defense ammo. Not sure if it was getting it wet, the hot/cold temp changes thru out the day, or oil seeping into the round. But it has happened more then one. And refreshing the ammo seems logical to me.
The flip side of your argument is that if the FBI had been using ball (fmj) instead of hollow points, then they might have killed some innocent bystanders with over penetrating rounds and the bad guys might have gotten away or killed more agents since they would not have been as incapacitated by the ball rounds has shown would be the case with hollow points, as experience with many agencies in many gunfights over the years. Now, the FBI still carries hollow point ammo as does virtually every other law enforcement agency.
No agency that has a choice of fmj or jhp that I know of has chosen fmj.
That's fine , if it is supported by empirical evidence.
Can you think of any agency, aside from the military and organizations controlled by the military that use ball?
Various law enforcement agencies have put a lot of effort into finding the "BEST" round as there is no perfect round. My agency, like the FBI, went back to the 9m.m. We started out with a high velocity .40 caliber round that worked well, but had a lot of recoil, bright flash and compared to other .40 caliber ammo, a loud bang.
We had good results with the 9m.m. pistols that we could privately purchase and use back in the revolver days, before we went to the .40 caliber. We used +P+ ammo and it worked the same as our 110 grain jhp .357 rounds.
We only went to the .40 caliber to get the same stopping power as our old .357 magnum revolvers, as some divisions issued the 125 grain .357 ammo and they wanted to match that performance and get a 12 shooter (our BERETTA 96's held 11 + 1 rounds).
The problem is that there is no free lunch. You do not get .357 magnum performance without either an advanced bullet or high velocity that also includes stronger recoil. We had to use large guns to get the performance we wanted and the ammo still beat up the guns and left us needing new ones after a decade of use.
The last .40 caliber load we had was the 180 grain FEDERAL HST, which ranks up with the Gold Dot and Golden Sabre for effectiveness, but it took over 20 years to get there.
I think the fact that no one, including the military has adopted a fmj .40 caliber load speaks for itself as far as data.
So do i.
TL;DR so apologies if this information has already been offered earlier in this thread, but NYPD is a good case-study of why the use of FMJ is best avoided for the purpose of self-defense.
From Mas Ayoob's article here: https://gundigest.com/gear-ammo/reloading/massad-ayoob-the-dangers-of-over-penetrating-bullets
NYPD's documentation of at least 17 FMJs striking other (innocent) people after passing through a human body is pretty conclusive evidence that FMJs pose more incidental risk than the use of JHPs since they've seen lessened occurrence after the adoption of JHPs.
Depends on what you are defending yourself from.
If two-legged without fur; if small four-legged them I'll go with the JHP. (My daily carry even though I walk among the cats and coyotes all the time).
If large two-or four-legged with fur, I'll actually load HC-FN (Hard Cast-Flat Nose); however, if not available (not likely) I would go with a FMJ. (Primarily where I go....bear).
One thing to keep in mind is the tests recommending 12"-18" penetration is that penetration is into ballistic gel. It isn't EXACTLY the same as a human body, but since we can't experimentally shoot humans, we have to find an alternative. It's close, and with so many years of testing, we have developed what appears to be a reasonable correlation, meaning it's able to be replicated and the data extrapolated out and used as a guide for defensive ammo to be used with reasonable performance against humans. In one shooting I'm very familiar with, 115JHP +P 9mm fired from contact, front-to-rear remained in the body, passed through a winter jacket and a flannel shirt, one lodged in the spine and the other two stopped just short of exiting. I don't know what performance they would have done in gel.
Just for comparisons sake, what are the numbers of bystanders and officers hit by hollowpoints that have penetrated a human target?
I dont have actual numbers but from personal experience hollow points that do exit the body (on a solid torso or head hit) show significantly less penetration than FMJs. It's actually not super uncommon to find the bullet nearby as they many times dont have enough velocity to penetrate other barriers. It's common to find them lodged in drywall or lying below a dent in the wall.
We had a shooting today at work where the victim was shot with an unknown 40 caliber hollow point. Entrance was the right side and the exit was the front left low chest. The hollow point was found laying on the sidewalk near the victim. On the other hand I remember a suicide a few years back where a guy shot himself in the head with a snub nosed 38 Special. The round completely penetrated his head, went through two separate interior walls, and then cracked the tile in the bathroom shower stall. The FMJ was a bit blunted on the front but remained intact.
If you are interested in the number of bystanders struck by JHPs that have passed through suspects (there have been very few), since NYPD began using JHPs, NYPD publishes annual analyses of their OISs for public review.
—you can find several.
It's funny how it's morphed into that even though HWFE states 12" minimum and up to 18" is preferred.
How can you hit anything if your gun doesn't
Well the definition is to "NOT" have the desired effect.
So saying FMJ is ineffective is significantly different than saying FMJ is less effective.
And as with most things gun related absolutes seldom are absolute.
I looked through the 94 pages, and didn't find the info I was looking for, especially not as it was presented for full metal jackets. There was an incident where officers discharged their weapons and an officer was hit, but the report didn't indicate whether the bullet had penetrated the target or not. The reason I asked was because the stats you showed indicated that bystanders were more likely to get hit by rounds that missed the target, rather than those which penetrated the target, which leads me to believe that not all penetrations were from COM hits, and likely were the result of peripheral hits. Just because a fmj penetrated the target and hit a bystander, does not mean that a hollowpoint would have been stopped, I mean it could have penetrated a hand prior to striking the bystander, and switching to a hollowpoint won't fix that. The car incident where the hostage was hit by an "overpenetration" could have been a COM and through the seat then into the hostage, or she could have been hit by a bullet that grazed the target's arm.
My personal situation is such that I'm not overly concerned with overpenetration, but I carry hollowpoints, I just like to understand the conclusions drawn from the data.
"Acceptable" and "preferred" are two different concepts.
The acceptable range is 12" to 18" per the FBI and per Urey Patrick's paper.
Urey Patrick's opinion as stated in his paper, was that the top end of that range was preferred, but that's an additional bit of information; it doesn't alter the fact that 12" to 18" is the acceptable range.
Sure and you're more than welcome to prefer to just be acceptable. But it would seem that the FBI still prefers the upper end choosing heavy for caliber Winchester 147 9mm and 180 40 S&W.
1. You will not find any statements about what about what I prefer in anything I've stated on this thread.
2. Even if I had made a statement of preference, it would not change the fact that the two concepts are different.
You start by attempting to equate the concepts of 'preference' and 'acceptable' and then progress to deflecting from that problematic statement by trying to put words in my mouth. Those tactics are neither productive, nor polite.
Yes I am absolutely trying to put words in your mouth so to speak. Only stating the acceptable 12-18" and leaving out what is preferred puts a premium on the 12" minimum as gets thrown about here.
There are literally 100s of posts on THR that only reference the 12" minimum.
It's unacceptable to put words in other people's mouths. It is impolite, tends to stir up trouble, and when the incorrectly stated position is answered as if it is accurately stated it creates a logical fallacy called the strawman fallacy.
Stating the acceptable penetration range is accurate.
It would have been fine for you to add to that accurate statement of fact by noting that the FBI prefers the penetration be more towards the end of that range (and ideally supporting that with some kind of evidence--e.g. the current duty load and how it performs relative to other 9mm loadings that meet the FBI standard, a recent statement by an FBI official, etc.) and/or by voicing your personal opinion on the topic, but that's not what you did.
You chose instead to pretend that the 12" to 18" penetration range was something new--a morphing of the original standard. That is quite obviously inaccurate. It is not new, it is not a change from the original standard.
1. That's not what I did. I provided the full range.
2. Even if I had only provided the minimum acceptable penetration figure and stated that it was the minimum acceptable, that still would have been accurate, just a less complete statement of the standard. There are all kinds of things that are left out of the standard in any statement about it that is less than several pages long.
3. "...posts on THR..." and "...as gets thrown about here..." imply that the 12" minimum is something unique or original to THR. It is neither. It is the minimum acceptable penetration figure from the highly publicized FBI standard that has been in place for decades.
Current 9mm duty ammo for FBI is 135 grain Critical Duty +p, not 147 grain ammo.
Now who's putting words in someones mouth?
It would appear both may have a contract. Either way the FBI DEMANDS more than the minimum of 12".
I did use the word "imply", but fair enough. What did you actually mean?
There are a lot of YouTube video creators who have used the term "The Butter Zone" to somehow indicate that 14" to 16" is the ideal penetration. Unfortunately even ShootingTheBull 410 has used that term.
From the HWFE:
If the FBI Ammunition Selection Criteria has a "Butter Zone" for penetration it would be between 17.99 inches and 18.00 inches.
Separate names with a comma.