I have been an enthusiastic student of external ballistics for many years. I am currently evaluating and adapting my handgun choices, and, once again, am deep into looking at the performance of various handgun rounds.
I put together a graph in Excel where I have plotted the bullet weight vs. the velocity of popular handgun rounds. I find it is useful for seeing in a graphic format how the various rounds compare. From it I have put together some general ideas, if not conclusions.
This may backfire, inviting more argument than it solves. We will never agree, for instance, whether heavy and slow (ala .45 Auto) or small and fast (.357) is more effective; I myself don’t know, although I know both are better than light and slow.
What seemed to make sense to me, however, was that any particular cartridge can be expected to have roughly the same amount of useful stopping power, in whatever weight/velocity combo you prefer. For instance, in .357 Magnum, you can get load of 125 g @ 1500 fps, or 158 @ 1250. People can argue all day long about which they’d prefer, but hopefully agree that both are in the same basic range of effectiveness.
So assuming we can agree on that premise, I plotted them on a graph, along with representative velocity/weight plots for all other popular rounds. And if you look at the graph, you’ll see that the curve for the plots of the heavy/slow end of the .357 overlap with the light/fast end of the .40 range, which in it’s heavy/slow range overlaps the high/fast range of 45 Auto. Which leads me to conclude that reasonable people might agree that the three rounds are roughly similar in effectiveness. This should make a lot more sense if you look at the actual graph and the curves I have drawn on it.
So from this graph I am putting together some general guidelines for my own education and study, if nothing else. Here they are:
1. As mentioned above, 357, 40, and 45 Auto are all in the same range of very effective defense rounds. From there, the only real jump up is to the big 41 and 44 Mags. (I am old-school enough that I don’t embrace 454 Casull, etc. If you can’t find it at WalMart in a pinch, I’m not interested.)
2. There is a definite step down to the next most effective group, the 9s, with a couple 38 +Ps nipping at their heels. I consider this class of cartridge also to be a very effective defense round, mainly because I consider 38 Special to be very effective (go ahead and sneer, but most US law enforcement did just fine with it for many decades), and 9 is definitely a step up in performance.
3. I was surprised to see that 38 Special is a kissing cousin to the 380 Auto, which, due to my admitted respect for the 38 mentioned above, makes the 380 more respectable in my eyes than it was originally.
4. The come the 32s, all on a similar curve (except the oddball Federal, which is up there with 9). And 32 Auto definitely looks the best of the rest of the 32s. 32s were always kind of an orphan round to me. But I’m starting to come around on it, especially for “pocket” guns. I figure it’s the round that James Bond was forced to upgrade to from his crummy but beloved 25. Yes, I know James Bond is fiction, but the gun was recommended to the author Ian Fleming by a renowned gun expert. It was standard police issue for many European police and military forces. And ballistically it doesn’t look too terrible.
5. And then we have the 22 and 25. If you look at the general shape of the curves for the other rounds, you see that they are another big step down, but just about identical to each other in effectiveness using my method.
I used specs for common off-the-shelf ammo, mostly Remington and Federal, mostly because their on-line ballistics charts were easiest to navigate. I also wanted to eliminate any exotic loadings that aren’t mainstream. Again, does it pass the WalMart test? I usually tried to pick an effective defense bullet, like a Hydrashok or other good jacketed hollow point, rather than ball, or wadcutter, or something else.
So maybe this will be helpful, or maybe it will just get everyone angry. We’ll see!
Best,
David
I put together a graph in Excel where I have plotted the bullet weight vs. the velocity of popular handgun rounds. I find it is useful for seeing in a graphic format how the various rounds compare. From it I have put together some general ideas, if not conclusions.
This may backfire, inviting more argument than it solves. We will never agree, for instance, whether heavy and slow (ala .45 Auto) or small and fast (.357) is more effective; I myself don’t know, although I know both are better than light and slow.
What seemed to make sense to me, however, was that any particular cartridge can be expected to have roughly the same amount of useful stopping power, in whatever weight/velocity combo you prefer. For instance, in .357 Magnum, you can get load of 125 g @ 1500 fps, or 158 @ 1250. People can argue all day long about which they’d prefer, but hopefully agree that both are in the same basic range of effectiveness.
So assuming we can agree on that premise, I plotted them on a graph, along with representative velocity/weight plots for all other popular rounds. And if you look at the graph, you’ll see that the curve for the plots of the heavy/slow end of the .357 overlap with the light/fast end of the .40 range, which in it’s heavy/slow range overlaps the high/fast range of 45 Auto. Which leads me to conclude that reasonable people might agree that the three rounds are roughly similar in effectiveness. This should make a lot more sense if you look at the actual graph and the curves I have drawn on it.
So from this graph I am putting together some general guidelines for my own education and study, if nothing else. Here they are:
1. As mentioned above, 357, 40, and 45 Auto are all in the same range of very effective defense rounds. From there, the only real jump up is to the big 41 and 44 Mags. (I am old-school enough that I don’t embrace 454 Casull, etc. If you can’t find it at WalMart in a pinch, I’m not interested.)
2. There is a definite step down to the next most effective group, the 9s, with a couple 38 +Ps nipping at their heels. I consider this class of cartridge also to be a very effective defense round, mainly because I consider 38 Special to be very effective (go ahead and sneer, but most US law enforcement did just fine with it for many decades), and 9 is definitely a step up in performance.
3. I was surprised to see that 38 Special is a kissing cousin to the 380 Auto, which, due to my admitted respect for the 38 mentioned above, makes the 380 more respectable in my eyes than it was originally.
4. The come the 32s, all on a similar curve (except the oddball Federal, which is up there with 9). And 32 Auto definitely looks the best of the rest of the 32s. 32s were always kind of an orphan round to me. But I’m starting to come around on it, especially for “pocket” guns. I figure it’s the round that James Bond was forced to upgrade to from his crummy but beloved 25. Yes, I know James Bond is fiction, but the gun was recommended to the author Ian Fleming by a renowned gun expert. It was standard police issue for many European police and military forces. And ballistically it doesn’t look too terrible.
5. And then we have the 22 and 25. If you look at the general shape of the curves for the other rounds, you see that they are another big step down, but just about identical to each other in effectiveness using my method.
I used specs for common off-the-shelf ammo, mostly Remington and Federal, mostly because their on-line ballistics charts were easiest to navigate. I also wanted to eliminate any exotic loadings that aren’t mainstream. Again, does it pass the WalMart test? I usually tried to pick an effective defense bullet, like a Hydrashok or other good jacketed hollow point, rather than ball, or wadcutter, or something else.
So maybe this will be helpful, or maybe it will just get everyone angry. We’ll see!
Best,
David
