What happened to 40 caliber?

[GooseGestapo]

My experience is that the .40 is notably superior and a near equal to the.357mag.
Like the .357mag, it suffers from over penetration with FMJ and over expansion with Uber light bullets (ie: less than 130gr).
Based on my experience with 155gr ammo, it’s equal to the .357mag and preferable due to magazine capacity.
I’ve got 9’s and shoot 9’s because they’re more economical. But if chips are down, give me a .40!

I was able to keep my agency from going 9mm from the .357 till Glock practically gave us the .40’s. The agency recently went 9mm to join the rush of all the other lemmings!
They’ll wish different soon!

I formerly could tell you which agencies were involved in shootings on the Atlanta morning news,
9 shots fired, suspect in intensive care at Grady, APD and 9mm!
Two shots fired, suspect declared dead at scene, .40 S&W....County or State officers. Now it’s just mostly suspects in custody and in guarded condition, no mention of total expenditure of shots. Multiples!
Seems everybody got on the 9mm train.

 

[BJung]

I formerly could tell you which agencies were involved in shootings on the Atlanta morning news, 9 shots fired, suspect in intensive care at Grady, APD and 9mm! Two shots fired, suspect declared dead at scene, .40 S&W..

Was this recent and were the new 9mm and 40 cal bullets used?

 

[Ed4032]

I never joined the 40/10 club because I really don’t want to expand my caliber footprint anymore than it already is. I just don’t see enough advantage to add to what I have.

 

[rdnktrkr]

Another thing I like about 40s&w, With my XXL hands and fat fingers it is easier to reload, almost as easy as 45s. I loaded some 9mm recently and pinched my fingers 2 times, they're still sensitive.

 

[Kleanbore]

'Ive yet to see any conclusive evidence that round for round, a modern 9mm is as effective at wounding as the .357 Sig, .40S&W, or .45acp. I just hear a lot of people claiming that it is.

The evidence comes from trying to distinguish between them. Forensic medical examiners say that they cannot.

That does not mean the 9mm is just as effective terminally, per shot. Neither does lower recoil or higher capacity

"Per shot" effectiveness means little. Given a load with adequate penetration and expansion, it can only be effective if it enters the body in precisely the right place at precisely the right angle, and one may need more than one such perfect hit. The only way to have a reasonable likelihood of making one or more perfect hits is to make several hits timely. With a target moving at 18 inches in a tenth of a second, time is not an abundant commodity, and the rapidity of controlled fire is vey important. That's where lower recoil comes in.

 

[WrongHanded]

The evidence comes from trying to distinguish between them. Forensic medical examiners say that they cannot.

After the fact on a table in a morgue? Do they know which precise cartridge was used for each shooting not just whether it was some 9mm, or some .40, or some .45acp? We all know two different 9mm loads may perform very differently.

"Per shot" effectiveness means little. Given a load with adequate penetration and expansion, it can only be effective if it enters the body in precisely the right place at precisely the right angle, and one may need more than one such perfect hit. The only way to have a reasonable likelihood of making one or more perfect hits is to make several hits timely. With a target moving at 18 inches in a tenth of a second, time is not an abundant commodity, and the rapidity of controlled fire is vey important. That's where lower recoil comes in.

I disagree with the concept that "per shot effectiveness means little", and so do you, otherwise you'd be carrying a .22 and planning to poke tiny little holes in an attackers heart. Each shot is its own event, no matter how closely spaced in time to one another they may be.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Prove it.....

 

[WrongHanded]

View attachment 1103759

Thanks for proving there's a difference between the various cartridges. Also bear in mind that whilst that is a 2 dimensional representation, the actual wounds are in 3 dimensions. Also consider that the potential blood loss from capillaries would be based on the surface area of the wound, rather than the diameter.

 

[Kleanbore]

After the fact on a table in a morgue? Do they know which precise cartridge was used for each shooting not just whether it was some 9mm, or some .40, or some .45acp? We all know two different 9mm loads may perform very differently.

Would it matter? If you question them, why don't you ask some of the persons upon whose observations the conclusions the FBI and the ammunition developers base their conclusions?

. Also consider that the potential blood loss from capillaries would be based on the surface area of the wound, rather than the diameter.

What effect do you believe that "potential blood loss from capillaries" has on effecting a rapid physical stop?

Which do you think would likely be more important, slight differences in individual would channels or the number of would channels?

 

[WrongHanded]

Would it matter? If you question them, why don't you ask some of the persons upon whose observations the conclusions the FBI and the ammunition developers base their conclusions?

Yes. Of course it would matter. Firstly, unless the object of wound examination is for the purposes of distinguishing differences in effects between various cartridges, I can't see how a casual "can't tell the difference" means anything. Accurate analysis of multiple GSWs with known loads is the only way to assess what difference may exist.

Why don't I ask someone who has input into the FBIs determinations in the 1980s? Hmmm. Where would I find such a person, and what level of detail might they be able to offer from memory? Silly idea.

What effect do you believe that "potential blood loss from capillaries" has on effecting a rapid physical stop?

I was really hoping to not have to explain how lungs work. The vascular side (as opposed to the air side) of the lungs is a closed loop that relies on positive pressure (a push) from the smaller right side of the heart, to force blood through the capillary system (where the blood can interact through a cell membrane with the air inside the lung) and back out of the lung to the left side of the heart, to be circulated around the body. If you open that closed circuit, it cannot maintain positive pressure for the return to the heart. Therefore the volume of blood returning to the heart from that lung is reduced. The bigger the hole and the more capillaries destroyed, the bigger the failure. How else do you think blood is able to interact with the air we breathe?

Would it matter? If you question them, why don't you ask some of the persons upon whose observations the conclusions the FBI and the ammunition developers base their conclusions?
What effect do you believe that "potential blood loss from capillaries" has on effecting a rapid physical stop?

Which do you think would likely be more important, slight differences in individual would channels or the number of would channels?

By that logic, if you can fire a .22 faster than anything else (which I'm sure you can), you should carry a .22lr. So why aren't your self defense guns all .22 pistols?

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Thanks for proving there's a difference between the various cartridges. Also bear in mind that whilst that is a 2 dimensional representation, the actual wounds are in 3 dimensions. Also consider that the potential blood loss from capillaries would be based on the surface area of the wound, rather than the diameter.

The differences are trivial.

The fissures in the gelatin depict the temporary cavity, not tissue that is permanently damaged or destroyed.

The permanent cavity is the tissues directly contacted and crushed by the penetrating bullet, and is the only reliable wounding mechanism with defensive handgun bullets.

See: Fackler, Martin L., M.D., "Police Handgun Ammunition Selection", Wound Ballistics Review, V1N3, Winter 92, pp 32-37.

 

[Kleanbore]

Why don't I ask someone who has input into the FBIs determinations in the 1980s?

The human body has not changed, but bullets have. Don't limit yourself. People study handgun wounding performance today.

If you open that closed circuit, it cannot maintain positive pressure for the return to the heart. Therefore the volume of blood returning to the heart from that lung is reduced. The bigger the hole and the more capillaries destroyed, the bigger the failure.

Do you believe that handgun bullets effect that failure rapidly?

By that logic, if you can fire a .22 faster than anything else (which I'm sure you can), you should carry a .22lr. So why aren't your self defense guns all .22 pistols?

That's ridiculous.

 

[WrongHanded]

The differences are trivial.

The fissures in the gelatin depict the temporary cavity, not tissue that is permanently damaged or destroyed.

The permanent cavity is the tissues directly contacted and crushed by the penetrating bullet, and is the only reliable wounding mechanism with defensive handgun bullets.

See: Fackler, Martin L., M.D., "Police Handgun Ammunition Selection", Wound Ballistics Review, V1N3, Winter 92, pp 32-37.

The differences are trivial huh? By what metric exactly have you come to that conclusion?

How can dye reach anywhere in the gel block where damage to the (simulated) tissue has not occured? The answer is, it cannot.

Not interested in re-reading Fackler's old work again.

 

[Kleanbore]

Not interested in re-reading Fackler's old work again.

Your "work" is more supportable?

 

[WrongHanded]

The human body has not changed, but bullets have. Don't limit yourself. People study handgun wounding performance today.

Okay, tell me who and where I can find their work,. You're certain someone is doing it, so you should be able to provide that information. For the good of us all, right?

Do you believe that handgun bullets effect that failure rapidly?

Depending on the amount of damage and the individual, yes. And it would certainly help slow them down whilst you kept trying to find a magic button somewhere in their chest. Hint: there isn't a magic button in the chest.

That's ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous, it's the logical conclusion to the argument that wound diameter doesn't matter, and that only perfect shots in just the right spots matter, so we should favor higher capacity and lower recoil. If you believe wound diameter is unimportant, and that multiple fast hits that poke holes are what matters most, .22lr is the answer. Just step back and look at your arguments.

 

[WrongHanded]

Your "work" is more supportable?

I'm not the one trying to claim that the 9mm is just as effective as other service cartridges that produce bigger wounds.

I'm also not the one who dismissed lungs as vitals. That was Fackler, and it was stupid.

 

[Kleanbore]

Okay, tell me who and where I can find their work,. You're certain someone is doing it, so you should be able to provide that information. For the good of us all, right?

The President of Speer says that t they discuss real-world ammunition performance with medical personnel, with the FBI Training Academy, and with other law enforcement people.

It's not ridiculous, it's the logical conclusion to the argument that wound diameter doesn't matter,

Yes--I should have said that minor differences in wound channel diameters, within the service calibers, do not matter.

I'm not the one trying to claim that the 9mm is just as effective as other service cartridges that produce bigger wounds.

You are among the few who deny it these days.

I'm also not the one who dismissed lungs as vitals. That was Fackler, .

There are others. It's not so much that lungs are not "vitals"--it's just that lung punctures cannot be relied upon to effect immediate physical stops.

and it was stupid.

Your basis for that assertion?

 

[WrongHanded]

There are others. It's not so much that lungs are not "vitals"--it's just that lung punctures cannot be relied upon to effect immediate physical stops.

So you're shooting for the brain then, right? If not, which magic button are you shooting for that will cause an immediate physical stop?

Your basis for that assertion?

Destroy a lung and all the blood pumped to it will not return to the heart to be recirculated to the body and brain. If you don't think that will cause a big drop in blood pressure, I don't know what more to tell you. You must also remember that if one lung is badly damaged and has lost back pressure, more than 50% of the blood pumped from the heart to the lungs will go to that lung. This is a serious reduction in return bloodflow.

And that effect is a pretty nice "consolation prize" to missing the heart and major blood vessels with a particular shot.

Also, as you seem to be a fan of scenarios where an attacker is moving 18" every 10th of a second (or whatever rate of velocity), it seems reasonable to assume their movement is of greatest concern if they are advancing towards you in an attempt to strike with an impact or edged weapon. In this instance, the distance is rapidly closing, which means combat accuracy is more achievable with each successive shot, and therefore the rate of fire can increase whilst maintain the same accuracy level, until you can be slapping the trigger as far as your finger can manage and still be making hits to the thoracic cavity.

In this case, recoil recovery becomes less important with each shot, not more important. And rapid blood loss becomes more important as the attacker closes the distance. Bigger holes and more blood loss earlier would be a good thing, because it takes time to have an effect.

You asked earlier if I'd prefer bigger wounds or more holes. Depends on how much bigger the wounds are, and how many more holes I can get. Considering the distances of most self defense shootings, and the speed with which an attacker can advance, I'm not sure I can shoot a 9mm faster by a great enough degree to make a difference over .40 or .357 Sig or 10mm when it comes to the number of holes. But as I said, we must all figure that out for ourselves.

 

[Kleanbore]

Destroy a lung and all the blood pumped to it will not return to the heart to be recirculated to the body and brain

One bullet hole in the lung does not destroy a lung. Two holes? Most unlikely.

Not too long ago, an officer was attacked by a man advancing slowly with a contact weapon and had to use deadly force while backing away.. Wounds caused the man's lungs to fill with blood, finally stopping him and causing his demise. He was hit twelve times before being stopped.

Bigger holes and more blood loss earlier would be a good thing, because it takes time to have an effect.

Do the math. The rate of flow will not be much greater with a slightly larger bullet.

I'm not sure I can shoot a 9mm faster by a great enough degree to make a difference over .40 or .357 Sig or 10mm when it comes to the number of holes.

Experienced instructors say that most shooters can. One can hear it when people shoot at steel plates. Basic physics.

And forget lungs. One more hit could make hitting a critical body part sufficiently more likely.

 

[WrongHanded]

One bullet hole in the lung does not destroy a lung. Two holes? Most unlikely.

Not too long ago, an officer was attacked by a man advancing slowly with a contact weapon and had to use deadly force while backing away.. Wounds caused the man's lungs to fill with blood, finally stopping him and causing his demise. He was hit twelve times before being stopped.

Do the math. The rate of flow will not be much greater with a slightly larger bullet.

Experienced instructors say that most shooters can. One can hear it when people shoot at steel plates. Basic physics.

And forget lungs. One more hit could make hitting a critical body part sufficiently more likely.

Again, I fear you're missing all the relevant points in the search to feel right.

The point is not how many shots of what will destroy a lung, as the placement of the shot is a factor. A person may attempt multiple shots in rapid succession and miss the heart every time, but hit the lungs every time. They may also hit the heart. In either case larger holes would be preferable. Always. Bigger holes means faster blood loss, which may mean fewer shots are needed.

If most people can shoot a 9mm appreciably faster than other more damaging cartridges at close range, they should consider a 9mm. That does not make it better. Just better for them. But I question what the difference would be in split times when the attacker is closing from 10 feet to 0 feet. Much easier to make fast hits with any cartridge at those distances. Which is where a melee attacker will be trying to get.

So no, I won't forget lungs. They are part of the vitals in the thoracic cavity. They are most certainly vital, and they are far more likely to be hit than the heart. Why would anyone ever exclude the potential blood loss possible from lung shots. Makes no sense at all.

 

[Kleanbore]

Just better for them.

Physics is physics.

Bigger holes means faster blood loss, which may mean fewer shots are needed....
Why would anyone ever exclude the potential blood loss possible from lung shots. Makes no sense at all.

I would not rely upon blood loss from handgun wounds to stop an attacker timely in a Tueller scenario. Severed nerves, severed tendons, broken bones, spinal injury, pain, fear...and maybe, with luck, a CNS hit.

 

[WrongHanded]

Physics is physics.

I would not rely upon blood loss from handgun wounds to stop an attacker timely in a Tueller scenario. Severed nerves, severed tendons, broken bones, spinal injury, pain, fear...and maybe, with luck, a CNS hit.

Okay then. So what are you aiming for? Which body part are you attempting to hit that will stop an attack immediately?

Edited to add: how would a bullet that causes more wounding damage not be beneficial for hitting those targets?

 

[Shawn Dodson]

How can dye reach anywhere in the gel block where damage to the (simulated) tissue has not occured? The answer is, it cannot.

The fissures in the gelatin depict the temporary cavity, not tissue that is permanently damaged or destroyed.

When comparing well designed duty handgun ammunition, there are minimal differences in penetration depths and temporary cavity effects, as noted below in the gel shots by Doug Carr:

As you increase bullet size and mass from 9 mm/357 Sig, to .40 S&W, to .45 ACP, more tissue is crushed, resulting in a larger permanent cavity. In addition, the larger bullets often offer better performance through intermediate barriers. For some, the incremental advantages of the larger calibers are offset by weapon platform characteristics. As is quite obvious from the photo above, NONE of the common service pistol calibers generate temporary cavities of sufficient magnitude to cause significant tissue damage. Anyone interested in this topic should read and periodically re-read, “Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness” by Urey Patrick of the FBI FTU, as this remains the single best discussion of the wound ballistic requirements of handguns used for self-defense.

-- Roberts, Gary K: "Service Caliber Handgun Duty and Self-Defense Ammo"​

 

[WrongHanded]

The fissures in the gelatin depict the temporary cavity, not tissue that is permanently damaged or destroyed.

When comparing well designed duty handgun ammunition, there are minimal differences in penetration depths and temporary cavity effects, as noted below in the gel shots by Doug Carr:

As you increase bullet size and mass from 9 mm/357 Sig, to .40 S&W, to .45 ACP, more tissue is crushed, resulting in a larger permanent cavity. In addition, the larger bullets often offer better performance through intermediate barriers. For some, the incremental advantages of the larger calibers are offset by weapon platform characteristics. As is quite obvious from the photo above, NONE of the common service pistol calibers generate temporary cavities of sufficient magnitude to cause significant tissue damage. Anyone interested in this topic should read and periodically re-read, “Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness” by Urey Patrick of the FBI FTU, as this remains the single best discussion of the wound ballistic requirements of handguns used for self-defense.

-- Roberts, Gary K: "Service Caliber Handgun Duty and Self-Defense Ammo"​

That's not true. I've seen the slow motion capture of dozens of temporary cavities. Many are larger than the gel blocks themselves. That dye does not represent the temporary cavity. It represents all the places where the gel has torn. A tear is not temporary, it is permanent.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Not too long ago, an officer was attacked by a man advancing slowly with a contact weapon and had to use deadly force while backing away.. Wounds caused the man's lungs to fill with blood, finally stopping him and causing his demise. He was hit twelve times before being stopped.

The 12th shot disrupted his spinal cord and he immediately collapsed to the pavement. When he hit the ground paralyzed he started gasping for air as his lungs collapsed.

He was a determined attacker, apparently irrational and completely oblivious to being shot over and over again. Trade places with the cop and put an old school lug wrench or machete in his hand instead of a branch.

What you hit is more important than what you hit with.

Video of incident.