babaylan
Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2024
- Messages
- 143
Not really to relitigate an argument that many people feel is debatable or even questionable, but what I was saying is really just my personal opinion, and opinions can reasonably vary on this subject.the ONLY thing that really matters is PLACEMENT
Yes, I agree that shot placement is a critical factor—after all, a miss doesn't affect the target, at all—but *all other things being equal*, every study of historical shooting data I have seen suggests that .380 ACP and .38 Special (non +P) have marginal effectiveness, that .38 Special +P and 9 mm Parabellum (non +P) are merely sufficent, with anything stronger—9 mm +P, .40 S&W, .44 Special, .45 ACP, and .357 Mag—being that much more effective.
However, shot placement is NOT "the only thing that really matters" in a self-defensive scenario. Other factors *do* matter, and some of the reasons why I favor larger, slower projectiles is what happens when you miss and what happens when you fire indoors in the dark. Again, *all other things being equal*, a slower bullet is going to produce less muzzle blast, less recoil, less flash, and less report, and be less likely to overpenetrate through building walls. *All other things being equal*, a larger, heavier bullet will transfer proportionately more momentum on impact than a smaller, lighter bullet, because of its greater mass and the fact that it is going to interact with more material when it strikes, leading to less propensity for overpenentration.
I'm not really trying to convince anyone. I'm just giving my interpretation of the data I've read and how Physics works. In my opinion, for .30 SC to be reliably effective, it necessarily needs to be a supersonic load, and that is contrary to my preferences because of the reasons I outline here.