One of the most ignored factors of the 40SW in caliber debates

[ThomasT]

Thanks for the links @1KPerDay . I had forgot about those. I did own a Kahr CM9 and that gun really impressed me with the way it felt, carried and shot. I simply cannot remember why I ever sold it. Stupid I guess.

But I'm not in the market for a new gun right now. The ammo situation is going to have to get better before I buy in to a new caliber. I am pretty much wed to 9mm now. Not so much because its such a great round but simply because I have so much ammo and components to reload for it. My best calibers are my 38/357 mag rounds.

 

[UrbanHermit]

An interesting thought about the service cartridges other than 9mm, is that they were passing the FBI requirements back in the 90's before the new bullet technology became available and got the 9mm passing.

Which means there's a very good chance that if you can't find the HST or G2 Gold Dots you prefer, any commercially available cup and core JHP you find for your .40S&W will probably perform just fine. It might not make quite such a pretty flower in gel, but it'll still perform fine because it always did.

Makes me wonder if the new bullet technology that was applied to 9mm was really applied to the other service cartridges equally. Or if the manufacturers just knocked out some new bullets that worked acceptably and stopped trying to improve upon them because they passed. Perhaps the HST and Gold Dots in .40S&W, 10mm, .357 Sig and .45ACP could have been designed to perform even better than they do, if they'd received the same R&D dedication and attention that the 9mm did to simply pass the tests reliably.

I think the are too many variables in both combat and hunting to meaningfully optimize the performance of hollow points beyond what we see today in service cartridges.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

The 45ACP is the one that has problems with hollow points. Very few loads simultaneously expand quickly and consistently and continue on to provide adequate penetration. That's because, while it uses bullets of similar sectional density as the others, it uses them at less velocity. It can expand, or it can penetrate, but it struggles to do both. The 45ACP would be better off with wide metplat FMJs than with most HPs. Too bad not many ammunition manufacturers offer 45ACP in this configuration. I might consider using the 45ACP again if they offered ammunition with bullets other than round nose and flying ashtray.

Personally, I'm satisfied with any bullet that will penetrate through a pork picnic shoulder, bone and all, make a pretty wound along the way, and do all of this consistently.

I think the "Xtreme defender" bullet created by Lehigh is fundamentally superior to hollow point in every way and will replace hollow point among police and military in my lifetime. I don't carry them because they're too expensive and rare.

 

[C-grunt]

I think a flat nose bullet will cause roughly 100% more blood loss than a RN of the same caliber. Twice as much. That's not exactly based on scientific data, just my opinion based on what I've seen in various tests and on game over the years. A HP might be a little better, but with only one hole, I wonder if vaccum pressure may not interfere with blood loss and promote clotting somewhat. I don't see purely internal bleeding as being all that efficient, you just don't have that much dead air space inside you, except the lungs. I've had severed arteries before and it's incredible how they can just sort of resume functioning as normal as soon as I'm stitched up and the blood has nowhere to go.
.

Wounds through muscle dont bleed that much. Real blood loss comes from arteries, organs, and the larger veins. A slightly larger hole isnt going to double the bleed rate of the wound especially if the hole in the blood vessel already exceeds the max flow rate of the blood vessel. Internal bleeding can easily kill you. In fact, when Im in the ER with gunshot wound victims (torso hits) that's pretty much the first thing they are trying to stop. Ive seen many people killed by gunshot and knife wounds that didnt bleed externally very much at all.

 

[UrbanHermit]

Wounds through muscle dont bleed that much. Real blood loss comes from arteries, organs, and the larger veins. A slightly larger hole isnt going to double the bleed rate of the wound especially if the hole in the blood vessel already exceeds the max flow rate of the blood vessel. Internal bleeding can easily kill you. In fact, when Im in the ER with gunshot wound victims (torso hits) that's pretty much the first thing they are trying to stop. Ive seen many people killed by gunshot and knife wounds that didnt bleed externally very much at all.

The problem is that round nose bullets might just push arteries out of the way. Flat nose bullets are more likely to "cut" them, especially on a marginal hit. "Bleeds twice as much" was admittedly a little simplistic. Maybe it would be more accurate to say "twice as likely to bleed to death", though I can't back that up with proof.

 

[WrongHanded]

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

The 45ACP is the one that has problems with hollow points. Very few loads simultaneously expand quickly and consistently and continue on to provide adequate penetration. That's because, while it uses bullets of similar sectional density as the others, it uses them at less velocity. It can expand, or it can penetrate, but it struggles to do both.

I came to that same conclusion a while ago, and sold off my .45s and gave away my dies. Just not an impressive cartridge for its size, IMO.

 

[UrbanHermit]

I came to that same conclusion a while ago, and sold off my .45s and gave away my dies. Just not an impressive cartridge for its size, IMO.

Best ammo for it is "Win train". The stuff Winchester sells as a training analogue for a hollow point ostensibly loaded to the same ballistics. It's got a nice metplat, like a WFN lead bullet makers sell for hunting.

I would sooner carry the training round than the defensive round.

 

[CodeSection]

........https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

The 45ACP is the one that has problems with hollow points. Very few loads simultaneously expand quickly and consistently and continue on to provide adequate penetration......

I came to that same conclusion a while ago, and sold off my .45s and gave away my dies. Just not an impressive cartridge for its size, IMO.

And here I am wanting to add a P227 to my toolbox in addition to my P229 .40 that I wear daily..... When looking at a 230gr round, it appears Federal 230gr HSTs, Speer 230gr Gold Dots (SB), Winchester 230gr Ranger Ts and Ranger Ts +P all meet the penetration AND expansion needed.

What am I missing?

 

[C-grunt]

The problem is that round nose bullets might just push arteries out of the way. Flat nose bullets are more likely to "cut" them, especially on a marginal hit. "Bleeds twice as much" was admittedly a little simplistic. Maybe it would be more accurate to say "twice as likely to bleed to death", though I can't back that up with proof.

I do agree that the rounded edges can push material out of the way. However they still do create a hole, it's just not full caliber. From what Ive seen Id say the 9mm and 38 Special round nose FMJ create about a 30 caliber hole instead of their full diameter of 35 caliber. Like I said before, the bigger calibers will make bigger holes but Id still take the benefits of 9mm over that. Ive seen enough guys soak up handgun, and even rifle rounds sometimes, and still be mobile that I will take the lower recoil and ammo capacity every day.

On a side note to the previous quoted response... I talked to some tac medics and they say you can lose 20 percent of your blood volume inside the pelvic cavity. The thoracic (chest) and abdominal cavity can both carry enough blood inside of them to be fatal.

 

[WrongHanded]

And here I am wanting to add a P227 to my toolbox in addition to my P229 .40 that I wear daily..... When looking at a 230gr round, it appears Federal 230gr HSTs, Speer 230gr Gold Dots (SB), Winchester 230gr Ranger Ts and Ranger Ts +P all meet the penetration AND expansion needed.

What am I missing?

In my humble opinion, for the size of the gun and the relatively low capacity, the performance just isn't that great. It's not fundamentally bad, it's just not a great balance. I also tend to prefer penetration test results in the 16-18" range because gel isn't living flesh and bone, clothing isn't always 4 layers of close packed denim, and expansion doesn't do much good without penetration (wounding being 3 dimensional). This isn't scientific analysis on my part, just the conclusion I've come to based on factors that are important to me.

Also the P227 was a short lived experiment by Sig that was fairly swiftly abandoned, and I think magazines are now hard to find. So I'd carefully consider that before purchasing.

Edit: Compare like for like with .45ACP and .40S&W on the lucky gunner labs page. Like for like but and and type. For the extra size of the .45, it doesn't always even equal the .40.

 

[UrbanHermit]

And here I am wanting to add a P227 to my toolbox in addition to my P229 .40 that I wear daily..... When looking at a 230gr round, it appears Federal 230gr HSTs, Speer 230gr Gold Dots (SB), Winchester 230gr Ranger Ts and Ranger Ts +P all meet the penetration AND expansion needed.

What am I missing?

Just barely. The 45 has far more failures than any other cartridge of similar energy. The few that make it show long "necks" in the gel, indicating slow expansion. Ideally you'd want the bullet to be fully expanded before it impacts mediums like heart and lung tissue, not after.

Then again, a .45 HP that fails to expand will probably still be pretty effective, and more effective than FMJ due to frontal area.

 

[UrbanHermit]

I do agree that the rounded edges can push material out of the way. However they still do create a hole, it's just not full caliber. From what Ive seen Id say the 9mm and 38 Special round nose FMJ create about a 30 caliber hole instead of their full diameter of 35 caliber. Like I said before, the bigger calibers will make bigger holes but Id still take the benefits of 9mm over that. Ive seen enough guys soak up handgun, and even rifle rounds sometimes, and still be mobile that I will take the lower recoil and ammo capacity every day.

On a side note to the previous quoted response... I talked to some tac medics and they say you can lose 20 percent of your blood volume inside the pelvic cavity. The thoracic (chest) and abdominal cavity can both carry enough blood inside of them to be fatal.

I lost about 20% of my blood volume once and was perfectly fine. Slit my wrist open with a hatchet. Walked out of the woods alone and drove myself to the hospital. Never even felt woozy. The blood was spurting 2 feet in the air and soaked my clothes as though I had gone swimming in them.

 

[CodeSection]

Thanks for the responses...

......Also the P227 was a short lived experiment by Sig that was fairly swiftly abandoned, and I think magazines are now hard to find. So I'd carefully consider that before purchasing.

Edit: Compare like for like with .45ACP and .40S&W on the lucky gunner labs page. Like for like but and and type. For the extra size of the .45, it doesn't always even equal the .40.

I think there were a number of reasons Sig abandoned the P227 and that it had to do more with sales and competition rather than function.....that is what I gathered from various readings.

I was not going to carry like for like, but rather I was going up from .40 180gr to .45 230gr. I just like larger bullets and recoil is not an issue for me.

Just barely. The 45 has far more failures than any other cartridge of similar energy. The few that make it show long "necks" in the gel, indicating slow expansion. Ideally you'd want the bullet to be fully expanded before it impacts mediums like heart and lung tissue, not after.

Thanks for pointing out the "long necks" issue for some. I'll check that out.

 

[UrbanHermit]

In my humble opinion, for the size of the gun and the relatively low capacity, the performance just isn't that great. It's not fundamentally bad, it's just not a great balance. I also tend to prefer penetration test results in the 16-18" range because gel isn't living flesh and bone, clothing isn't always 4 layers of close packed denim, and expansion doesn't do much good without penetration (wounding being 3 dimensional). This isn't scientific analysis on my part, just the conclusion I've come to based on factors that are important to me.

Also the P227 was a short lived experiment by Sig that was fairly swiftly abandoned, and I think magazines are now hard to find. So I'd carefully consider that before purchasing.

Edit: Compare like for like with .45ACP and .40S&W on the lucky gunner labs page. Like for like but and and type. For the extra size of the .45, it doesn't always even equal the .40.

Every double stack 45 fails. The Glock 21 is one of the few commercially successful ones and even it fails, nobody likes it. Too many girly man hands out there.

I have the 10mm one and I can only shoot it well if I use tennis racket grip wrap. Otherwise it's too hard to maintain a proper grip on it. I have above average sized hands. A single stack Glock 10mm/45ACP with at least a 5" barrel (without sacrificing the full length guide rod) would really be something. Just kill off the 1911 once and for all.

 

[WrongHanded]

I think there were a number of reasons Sig abandoned the P227 and that it had to do more with sales and competition rather than function.....that is what I gathered from various readings.

I was not going to carry like for like, but rather I was going up from .40 180gr to .45 230gr. I just like larger bullets and recoil is not an issue for me.

Oh I wasn't suggesting the P227 had any functional problems. It's the traditional metal framed DA/SA design and I'm sure it works just fine. What I meant by experiment was that Sig was trying to compete with higher capacity .45ACP pistols, so they made a double stack version of the time tested P220. But it didn't get the market response they wanted. Same thing with the P224 competing as a subcompact.

I also didn't mean compare weight for weight. I meant HST vs HST, and Gold Dot vs Gold Dot. In the heavy standard weights for the cartridge, 180gr and 230gr. The .45 just isn't that great.

 

[Bruce D Pease]

S & W used to do that. My model 4053 is a single stack DAO …8 rd magazine… safety is between your ears… I’d have no problem relying on it if necessary… once I finish a new holster I’ll carry it again.

 

[CodeSection]

Oh I wasn't suggesting the P227 had any functional problems. It's the traditional metal framed DA/SA design and I'm sure it works just fine. What I meant by experiment was that Sig was trying to compete with higher capacity .45ACP pistols, so they made a double stack version of the time tested P220. But it didn't get the market response they wanted. Same thing with the P224 competing as a subcompact.

I also didn't mean compare weight for weight. I meant HST vs HST, and Gold Dot vs Gold Dot. In the heavy standard weights for the cartridge, 180gr and 230gr. The .45 just isn't that great.

Gotcha. Yep, competing against one's own product line as well as trying to catch up to competitors has its costs. I just happen to like the double stack as I have very large hands.....

I was comparing the 180gr vs 230gr for penetration and expansion. So, again, I may be missing something but I was comparing:

.40 180gr Federal HST (my current carry in my P229 and XDSC) with an average depth of 18.5", an average expansion of .72" , and an average muzzle velocity of 964 to;

.45 230gr Federal HST with an average depth of 14", an average expansion of .85", and an average muzzle velocity of 822
.45 230gr Winchester 230gr Ranger-T with an average depth of 14.5", an average expansion of 1.00", and an average muzzle velocity of 900

With the .40 Federal 180gr and .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr, it appears the muzzle velocity is similar in both, the depth for both is within the FBI standard, but the .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr has more expansion (roughly 39% more) over the .40 Federal 180gr. Isn't that a measurable significant amount and benefit?

Help me understand......

 

[UrbanHermit]

Gotcha. Yep, competing against one's own product line as well as trying to catch up to competitors has its costs. I just happen to like the double stack as I have very large hands.....

I was comparing the 180gr vs 230gr for penetration and expansion. So, again, I may be missing something but I was comparing:

.40 180gr Federal HST (my current carry in my P229 and XDSC) with an average depth of 18.5", an average expansion of .72" , and an average muzzle velocity of 964 to;

.45 230gr Federal HST with an average depth of 14", an average expansion of .85", and an average muzzle velocity of 822
.45 230gr Winchester 230gr Ranger-T with an average depth of 14.5", an average expansion of 1.00", and an average muzzle velocity of 900

With the .40 Federal 180gr and .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr, it appears the muzzle velocity is similar in both, the depth for both is within the FBI standard, but the .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr has more expansion (roughly 39% more) over the .40 Federal 180gr. Isn't that a measurable significant amount and benefit?

Help me understand......

Yeah, if you look hard enough you can find some 45 HPs that actually work. Or at least you could before Corona.

 

[WrongHanded]

Gotcha. Yep, competing against one's own product line as well as trying to catch up to competitors has its costs. I just happen to like the double stack as I have very large hands.....

I was comparing the 180gr vs 230gr for penetration and expansion. So, again, I may be missing something but I was comparing:

.40 180gr Federal HST (my current carry in my P229 and XDSC) with an average depth of 18.5", an average expansion of .72" , and an average muzzle velocity of 964 to;

.45 230gr Federal HST with an average depth of 14", an average expansion of .85", and an average muzzle velocity of 822
.45 230gr Winchester 230gr Ranger-T with an average depth of 14.5", an average expansion of 1.00", and an average muzzle velocity of 900

With the .40 Federal 180gr and .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr, it appears the muzzle velocity is similar in both, the depth for both is within the FBI standard, but the .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr has more expansion (roughly 39% more) over the .40 Federal 180gr. Isn't that a measurable significant amount and benefit?

Help me understand......

The Winchester Ranger-T 230gr is an outlier for the cartridge. The expansion is impressive, but the penetration is not deep enough for my personal liking. Just because it penetrates 14.5" in clear gel or ballistic gel, does not mean it will go nearly that far in a person. Not well balanced enough, in my opinion. And to be perfectly honest, after watching Paul Harrell's meat target videos, I'd say a bullet that punches completely through and is stopped by a T-shirt or a couple layers of fleece is superior because exit wounds are usually bigger than entrance wounds, and bleed more.

But ignoring that one loading, what are you seeing about .45ACP defensive loads that are so superior to .40S&W that the extra size of the gun and reduction in capacity is worth it?

 

[CodeSection]

The Winchester Ranger-T 230gr is an outlier for the cartridge. The expansion is impressive, but the penetration is not deep enough for my personal liking. Just because it penetrates 14.5" in clear gel or ballistic gel, does not mean it will go nearly that far in a person. Not well balanced enough, in my opinion. And to be perfectly honest, after watching Paul Harrell's meat target videos, I'd say a bullet that punches completely through and is stopped by a T-shirt or a couple layers of fleece is superior because exit wounds are usually bigger than entrance wounds, and bleed more.

But ignoring that one loading, what are you seeing about .45ACP defensive loads that are so superior to .40S&W that the extra size of the gun and reduction in capacity is worth it?

I actually came to a different conclusion after watching videos involving meat targets. So, that is what started my research.

In my case, I would only buy and use the .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr since the expansion is so much more (.28" more or roughly 39% more). So, my EDC involves my P229 .40 with an extra mag plus a P365 bug, or depending upon what I'm wearing, my XDSC .40 with two extra mags plus my P365 bug. Whichever is not worn is in a saddlebag briefcase that I carry daily. Thus, capacity and the round count will not be an issue.

Since I am considering using the XDSC in another capacity, I was initially considering another P229 .40, but I like the larger 230gr round with the Win Ranger-T.

As a side note, decades a buddy of mine offered me his off-duty Colt Double Eagle Officer's Model. I should have bought it then since I was very accurate with it, but didn't because of the low capacity. Today, in my situation, the P227's capacity vs that one larger round seems reasonable and like a good choice.

Knowing a little more of my situation, does that make more sense?

ETA: Here is one of PH's videos and the meat test starts at 16:31. In this test he compares a .40 180gr to a .45 185gr. In the video he is comparing like rounds and not the 180gr vs a 230gr round.

 

[WrongHanded]

I actually came to a different conclusion after watching videos involving meat targets. So, that is what started my research.

In my case, I would only buy and use the .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr since the expansion is so much more (.28" more or roughly 39% more). So, my EDC involves my P229 .40 with an extra mag plus a P365 bug, or depending upon what I'm wearing, my XDSC .40 with two extra mags plus my P365 bug. Whichever is not worn is in a saddlebag briefcase that I carry daily. Thus, capacity and the round count will not be an issue.

Since I am considering using the XDSC in another capacity, I was initially considering another P229 .40, but I like the larger 230gr round with the Win Ranger-T.

As a side note, decades a buddy of mine offered me his off-duty Colt Double Eagle Officer's Model. I should have bought it then since I was very accurate with it, but didn't because of the low capacity. Today, in my situation, the P227's capacity vs that one larger round seems reasonable and like a good choice.

Knowing a little more of my situation, does that make more sense?

ETA: Here is one of PH's videos and the meat test starts at 16:31. In this test he compares a .40 180gr to a .45 185gr. In the video he is comparing like rounds and not the 180gr vs a 230gr round.

So you want a handgun chambered .45ACP specifically to carry one particular brand, design, and weight of ammo? No, that doesn't make much sense to me. But if it's what you want to do, you go ahead and do it.

And yes, I've seen that particular by video. I see nothing there to convince me the .45 is worth carrying over the .40, which is again part of why I decided to sell my .45s and dies.

 

[Rexster]

The flat point of FMJ .40 S&W ammo was most certainly not ignored, back when this cartridge was developed and released. This was especially applicable for those who were not allowed to use/carry JHP ammo. I was an early fan of the .40 S&W, so was paying attention.

Today, I mostly carry revolvers, and have some defensive .38 Special and .45 Colt ammo, that has full wadcutter bullets, and some 180-grain .357 Magnum ammo, with wide flat nosed bullets.

 

[Hartkopf]

I was ok with the 45 ACP until I realized how much slower my first shot on target was. I shot the G21 as well as the G22 but the draw and first shot, the most important shot IMO, was noticeably slower. And I above average hands with a vise grip. Presentation was still too slow so now I carry the 40 with HSTs or GoldDots.

I also agree with WrongHanded about the penetration of the 40 over the 45. In clear gel I want 18 inches. And the extra capacity and quicker draw of the G22 seals the deal.

 

[JR24]

I was ok with the 45 ACP until I realized how much slower my first shot on target was. I shot the G21 as well as the G22 but the draw and first shot, the most important shot IMO, was noticeably slower. And I above average hands with a vise grip. Presentation was still too slow so now I carry the 40 with HSTs or GoldDots.

I also agree with WrongHanded about the penetration of the 40 over the 45. In clear gel I want 18 inches. And the extra capacity and quicker draw of the G22 seals the deal.

Interesting, I can’t say I’ve ever noticed a difference on first shot time if using the same sized gun (I.e. Glock 17 vs 21, or 23 v 30, etc). Sure, something like a Glock 19 vs a 5” 1911 from concealment I do notice a slower time getting on target.

 

[Jim Watson]

One reason for the flat point of .40 S&W bullets is the requirement to keep the OAL down to fit a 9mm length action. A lot of USPSA Limited shooters use roundnose bullets at OAL approaching the .45 for reliable feeding in 2011 actions.

When the USAF led the charge to 9mm in the 1980s, they were in cahoots with Hornady for a truncated cone FMJ to increase "stopping power." When the Army got involved and it became clear that we were going to 9mm for all services, meaning that we would also be expected to supply our "allies" again, they had to start compromising on that to ensure feeding in every 9mm in the world. There was a short run of "round nose flat point" bullets but they gave up and went to the pointy roundnose that the Germans gave us ca 1915. Original 9mm P had truncated cone bullets but the flat was small.

Hornady sold truncated cone bullets, both 9mm and .45, commercially for a while but have regressed to conventional roundnose. They still make 10mm/.40 flat point for OAL limits.
Jeff Cooper liked the .45 truncated cone, saying it penetrated straighter and deeper than roundnose. You can see that in the Luckygunner tests, a hollow point that does not expand and behaves like a flat point just goes on and on through their gelatin.
This shows up in several brands of great big bore rifle ammo, flat pointed safari rifle bullets for straight line penetration through a lot of buffalo meat. In an earlier day, John Taylor said the .470 Nitro was somewhat handicapped by its tapered ogive that did not penetrate as straight as a hemispherical nose bullet.

 

[UrbanHermit]

I actually came to a different conclusion after watching videos involving meat targets. So, that is what started my research.

In my case, I would only buy and use the .45 Win Ranger-T 230gr since the expansion is so much more (.28" more or roughly 39% more). So, my EDC involves my P229 .40 with an extra mag plus a P365 bug, or depending upon what I'm wearing, my XDSC .40 with two extra mags plus my P365 bug. Whichever is not worn is in a saddlebag briefcase that I carry daily. Thus, capacity and the round count will not be an issue.

Since I am considering using the XDSC in another capacity, I was initially considering another P229 .40, but I like the larger 230gr round with the Win Ranger-T.

As a side note, decades a buddy of mine offered me his off-duty Colt Double Eagle Officer's Model. I should have bought it then since I was very accurate with it, but didn't because of the low capacity. Today, in my situation, the P227's capacity vs that one larger round seems reasonable and like a good choice.

Knowing a little more of my situation, does that make more sense?

ETA: Here is one of PH's videos and the meat test starts at 16:31. In this test he compares a .40 180gr to a .45 185gr. In the video he is comparing like rounds and not the 180gr vs a 230gr round.

You are complicating your life just to achieve some marginal, hypothetical advantage that you'll just change your mind about in a year. Same thing happens to me, somewhat less frequently as I get older.