Is a 9x18 makarov round more power or as power as a .380?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The 9MM Makarov aka 9mmx18 is smaller than the 9mmx19 but larger than the .380(which is 9mmx17.)

There's a mistake to be made at looking at those numbers though.

If .380 is 9x17, 9mm Mak is 9x18, and 9mm Luger is 9x19, then the assumption many people make is that 9mm Mak is split evenly between .380 and 9mm Luger in power. That's not the case at all.

It'd be kinda like saying a 16oz soda is "in between" a 12 oz and a 2 liter. Just its in between, but it's a lot closer to one than the other. Similarly, 9mm Mak is between .380 and 9mm Luger, but it's a LOT closer to .380 in power than the Luger.
 
Yet it's still better than a .380. At this point in the game, the 9x18 round, to me, is the logical choice over the .380. The ammo choices and availability are there, and the guns that shoot it are of better quality. Yes, they're a little bulkier than heavier than some of the commercial .380 offerings, but you can't argue with military grade hardware. The fact that these designs were not only accepted but stayed in service for decades speaks loads to their quality.
 
No. No charts.

I use the Schwartz terminal ballistic model found in Quantitative Ammunition Selection. (my sig line) All that is required is the bullet's recovered diameter (FMJs and other non-expanding bullets use their initial diameter), retained or initial mass, and the impact velocity. Enter them into the model and it yields the bullet's maximum penetration depth, its permanent wound cavity mass, and its exit velocity (where applicable) in gelatin/soft tissue.

You can also use the MacPherson model, available in his book, Bullet Penetration, although it's not for the "mathematically faint of heart"- lots of calculus and some trigonometry. You'll have to dig through MacPherson's book to hunt the model's equations down (there are four of them) and then you'll have to (re)arrange them correctly. In all fairness, there are graphs at the back of the book that you can use, but they are faint and kind of indistinct which makes any sort of precision nearly impossible. However, there's a lot of good theory in the book.

In QAS, the author dedicates a whole chapter to explaining the model's derivation and lays all of the equations out (there are three of them), complete with their definitions, on one easy to read page- no assembly required. :D The following chapter has quite a few examples that'll show you everything you need to know. There's also a model for bullet penetration against steel sheet later in the book.

Good luck. :)
Thanks M7. Looks like I got some reading to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top