Which bullet does the 9mm use that .40 S&W and .45 acp can't?

[tipoc]

• "The majority of FBI shooters are both FASTER in shot strings fired and more ACCURATE with shooting a 9mm Luger vs shooting a .40 S&W (similar sized weapons)" From the FBI

This is at the heart of it. The 9mm is a soft shooting round and recoil is minimum. It is less powerful than some other service rounds. This is off set by many due to it's shootability. Other than the 22 L.R. the 9mm is a very good round to begin people shooting with. These are some of the same reasons that it was chosen by the U.S. Military in 1986. It is the most widely used round internationally by armies and law enforcement also for this very reason. We can also add that the cost of ammunition is lower which is always an important factor.

There are more powerful calibers than the 9mm that hit harder and have the potential to create more damage in tissue. We all know that. However that fact is offset by the ability of the shooter to deliver accurate shots at speed. The latter being more important than the power of the cartridge being used.

tipoc

 

[Trey Veston]

Oops. Wrong thread.

 

[rpenmanparker]

• "The majority of FBI shooters are both FASTER in shot strings fired and more ACCURATE with shooting a 9mm Luger vs shooting a .40 S&W (similar sized weapons)" From the FBI

This is at the heart of it. The 9mm is a soft shooting round and recoil is minimum. It is less powerful than some other service rounds. This is off set by many due to it's shootability. Other than the 22 L.R. the 9mm is a very good round to begin people shooting with. These are some of the same reasons that it was chosen by the U.S. Military in 1986. It is the most widely used round internationally by armies and law enforcement also for this very reason. We can also add that the cost of ammunition is lower which is always an important factor.

There are more powerful calibers than the 9mm that hit harder and have the potential to create more damage in tissue. We all know that. However that fact is offset by the ability of the shooter to deliver accurate shots at speed. The latter being more important than the power of the cartridge being used.

tipoc

Very cogent summary. Well said.

 

[Dibbs]

You or I carry perhaps, say, a 1911, or even a FN45, but we're in a different situation than the
FBI. We only have to defend and escape. We only need the mag in the gun.
The extra capacity of the 9MM mags allows the agent to stay on scene, in the fight, longer.
They have to do things we don't. The 9MM is a more efficient cartridge. IMO, the 9MM is more
effective for what they have to do.

 

[tipoc]

The use of the 9mm by Federal agencies in the U.S. is not unanimous. Neither is it unanimous in law enforcement.

ICE and the Depart of Homeland Security make use of the 40 S&W caliber. Earlier this year, March, they ordered another 180 million rounds of Federal 40 caliber Tactical HST. 40 S&W continues to be used by many law enforcement agencies in the U.S.

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ho...aliber-hst-ammunition-contract/#axzz5TSHDufOw

https://www.americanrifleman.org/ar...deral-premium-ammunition-40-cal-hst-contract/

Other agencies use use 357 Sig and some allow for both or a choice for personnel.

https://www.tactical-life.com/lifestyle/military-and-police/dhs-agencies-sig-sauer-p229/

Capacity of the handgun is not always at the top of the list of choices. This is because other criteria out weigh the usefulness of an exttra 2 or 3 rounds. The "other criteria" is power.

The choice by a government agency, or the military, of handgun rounds is most often governed by a number of factors other than effectiveness of the round. Most none of which should influence what individuals choose.

tipoc

 

[MTMilitiaman]

I think you're missing the point. The FBI compiled tens of thousands of use of force accounts from not only their own agency, but from law enforcement agencies around the country. They analyzed this data and then intensely tested and researched. The FBI learned some lessons the hard way in the past and they are pretty good at this process by now, and they've become one of the world's authorities on the matter. So when the FBI says they are going back to 9mm because as near as they can tell, it works as well as anything else, and is available in smaller, more concealable autos that have greater capacity and are easier for their agents to maintain a standard of proficiency with, others may be well advised to listen.

The point is not that some super ammo is available for the 9mm. The point is that handguns are handguns. The differences between them are so small as to be statistically insignificant, almost un-quantifiable in real-world shootings. Some people like to believe no one has ever been shot twice with the .45 but you have to shoot someone five times with a 9mm just to get their attention. Neither anecdotal nor empirical evidence supports this nonsense. In real life, all handguns are inconsistent and unreliable. In real life, all handguns fail to stop an attacker regardless of how many rounds hit them something like 30% of the time. So the suggestion is that because the large calibers don't have a demonstrable or quantifiable increase in "stopping power" and are really just as ineffective, or nearly so, as the smaller calibers, that you should consider things like capacity. The 9mm gives you more opportunities to save your life and are available in smaller platforms that people are more likely to have on them when they need them.

So basically, the bullets that are available for the 9mm that aren't available for the .45 are the 16th and 17th rounds in the magazine, the ones you are still aiming while the poor sap with the .45 is trying to reload for the second time...

 

[jmr40]

I keep reading in threads all over the internet that 9mm is now just as good as .40 S&W and .45 acp due to "modern bullet design".

9mm has always been just as good as 45. It is just that it took modern bullet designs to convince many shooters. Part of the problem is that until recently USA manufactured 9mm ammo has been quite anemic compared to what the rest of the world was using. Loaded to it's potential it will match 125 gr 357 mag loads from 4" barrels with 124 gr ammo. And having a larger hole simply isn't important. A 45 caliber hole is still a small hole. What matters is shot placement and penetration. If anything a larger diameter bullet limits penetration.

"Everybody", who ever everybody is, has been saying my whole life that 45 is the better round. The problem is that all of the tests, studies, research and data have always said the 2 are near identical. And lots of factors favor the 9mm. Not just cost, recoil, and ammo capacity. The Army was not satisfied with 45 after WW-2 and conducted extensive testing in 1946 and concluded there was no difference in stopping ability between the 2 rounds. But that 9mm offered much better penetration on barriers. One test was shooting steel GI helmets. The 9mm rounds were penetrating the helmets in excess of 100 yards, while 45's were bouncing off beyond 15 yards. Had it not been for budget cuts we would have probably dropped the 1911 and adopted the BHP in the 1940's.

But most folks continued to listen to "Everybody" and believed the 45 was the better round. Until recently at least.

A word about 40 caliber. In the full power 10mm loads there is an increase in performance over 9mm and 45. But any advantage 40 S&W has over 9mm is negligible. There are still a lot of agencies that made the switch to 40 S&W and will continue to use them at least for a while. When you buy guns it is usually 20 years or more before you'll need to buy again. Almost every agency in recent years that has reached the point where they need to trade in for new pistols has gone to 9mm. Our local SO and county PD still carry 40's and keep inventories of 40 ammo. But when these guns are worn out they are going 9mm. The GSP made the change recently and have been pleased.

 

[ATLDave]

A word about 40 caliber. In the full power 10mm loads there is an increase in performance over 9mm and 45.

I don't disagree with you (I have a couple of 10mm's myself and am a big fan of the cartridge), but what do you suppose is the mechanism by which it has increased performance over 9mm or 45?

 

[GunnyUSMC]

I may not know what I am talking about. I'm just an LEO that carried a .40 for sixteen years, but went to the 9mm about two years ago.
First off 9mm bullet design has come a long way in the last 15 years. Back in the day not all bullets expanded like the manufactures wanted you to believe. But then the other caliber bullets have gotten better too.
Now why would so many police departments be going back to the 9mm? Most officers shoot better with the 9mm. The biggest factor here is less recoil. I shoot more then the average officer and can tell you that shooting the 9mm is easier then the 40.
So with officers shooting better with a modern bullet that expand like it should, going to the 9mm was a no brainier.
Now lets not forget the 45. I love the 45 ACP. With the right bullet, it starts out big and gets bigger. But when it comes to a duty gun most full size 45s are big and they hold fewer rounds then the 9mm.
So it's not so much the better caliber but which one offers the best advantages. The 9mm comes out on top with being easier to shoot and higher capacity.

 

[JR24]

I don't think a lot of people realize that the difference between the 9mm and .45 expanded projectiles (HST for this example given the picture above) is a radius of about 1.5mm. Then add in the fact that 9mm, .40, and .45 bullets have been designed to meet the exact same standards regarding minimum AND MAXIMUM penetration depth in test medium, expansion, barrier penetration, etc and it's no wonder that there's no evidence that one performs better than the others.

Also look at how handgun bullets actually cause incapacitation: they either directly hit something electrical like the brain or spinal column (the size of a playing card or your thumb, respectively), the heart (size of your fist), or they make enough holes that blood pressure drops causing unconsciousness. That's it. There's no shockwave or anything like that.

To wrap it all up, the difference is 1.5mm in radius. If you're gonna hit it with a .45, you're gonna hit it with a 9mm, so you should look at all the other factors that reate to ammo choice. Ammo capacity, speed, ammo cost, and hit probabability for a given amount of training time all point to the 9mm.

Pretty much my feeling on it. I've carried .45, .40 and 9mm over the years but I've settled on the 9mm because in what measurable metrics we have it's very close, empirical data seems to indicate its just as effective (or just as ineffective) as the rest "real world", and I shoot it 20-30% faster.

Not that the others are bad or wrong, they are all fine too, just carry what ya like.

 

[Mainsail]

I'm not disputing that 9mm isn't effective for self-defense.

(Though the average American black bear weighs about the same as the average adult American male yet nobody advocates 9mm for bear defense... Hmm...)

There is no handgun that is adequate for bear defense; they don't have the dexterity to grip the handle and their claws get jammed up in the trigger guard.

 

[RETG]

These discussions on 9mm are getting old. From personal experience with over 30 years working for Uncle Sam (35 if you count the military), a 9mm is as effective as a .45 when talking about human beings. Were there times I wish I had a .45, NO. Were there times I wish I had a rifle, YES.

Regardless of caliber, shot placement is the key. Too many people think bigger is always better, when they have not shot at anything, other than a paper target. (One reason why we used the 9mm was the fact it was readily available, darn near everywhere. But never regretted carrying that round and still do in my P30SK.)

In the wild, I will carry a larger caliber cause bears are not human.

I've said all I will say on this subject cause learned long ago, trying to make a point of the effectiveness of a 9mm to a .45 cal lover is about as easy to do as to change Nancy's political views.

See ya....

 

[Odd Job]

So with officers shooting better with a modern bullet that expand like it should, going to the 9mm was a no brainier.
Now lets not forget the 45. I love the 45 ACP. With the right bullet, it starts out big and gets bigger. But when it comes to a duty gun most full size 45s are big and they hold fewer rounds then the 9mm.
So it's not so much the better caliber but which one offers the best advantages. The 9mm comes out on top with being easier to shoot and higher capacity.

That's my understanding of the situation, too.

 

[Kleanbore]

What are these magic bullets that only increase the effectiveness of the 9mm and not other calibers.

What do you mean by that?

Would you agree that the terminal performance of some early 9mm loads left room for improvement int terms of penetration and reliability of expansion?

Do you believe that your "other calibers" required improvement?

Do you believe that such improvement should be useful in self defense?

 

[JR24]

Though the average American black bear weighs about the same as the average adult American male yet nobody advocates 9mm for bear defense... Hmm...

Muscle mass, bone density and heavy fur are so wildly different than thin skinned humans, not to mention body posture of a bipedal human and a bear charging on all four legs.

That argument is, simply, ludicrous.

 

[tipoc]

One of the things that should be clear to all from this thread, and similar ones, is that the "standard knowledge" or what "everybody knows" these days is that the 9mm is "just as good as", if not better then, well, name the round. That is what folks are told. The belief that "I was told all my life that the 45 acp was the better choice" is not what people have been hearing for well, close a decade now. Longer in many cases. But it has been the "standard knowledge" for several years now predating the FBI's move away from the 40 S&W and back to the 9mm. A move that began 3 years ago!

There are real reasons for the rise of the 9mm. While the improvements in bullet design and the very good options available to shooters of more powerful versions of the old, easy shooting cartridge are a part of it, they are not they only reasons. Lower costing polymer guns that cost less to maintain and feed are also a part of it. It would take time to explain all those other reasons so maybe that's for another time and place.

A major fact in all this is the cost and shootability of the 9mm for more people. It is an easy round to shoot well and to learn on from a wide variety of guns. It passes a major test in selection of a handgun for any given task...Can you shoot the gun accurately and at speed if needed for defense and does the round you choose have enough power to do what you want to do with it in the role you want it to play. The gun that is most effective is one you shoot well with a round in it that you can shoot well. For many people, most actually, it makes that criteria easily...that's why around the globe it is the standard service round for armies and law enforcement.

This change has been coming for some time. Years back more instructors and trainers began to demand that first timers to their classes bring 9mm polymer pistols. Some specified brands (the M&P and Glocks usually). It was easier to teach with the 9mm and similar guns.

More 1911's in 9mm have been selling over the last decade. An important sign. Almost always it's for the same or similar reason, it's fun and easy to shoot 9mm from a 1911. many who choose this also add..."Besides the 9mm is as good as the 45acp." Or "a hit with the 9 is better than a miss with a 45".

When the FBI, or anyone else, explains that they can see no difference in the wound tracks in corpses from one standard service caliber to another it's a piece of knowledge with no specific meaning. It tells you not much at all. That is because it tells you nothing about the specific corpse, it's age, weight, where the person was shot in the body, what the person was doing when they were shot, etc. All things that make a decided difference in the effectiveness of bullet wounds.

When the FBI or others say that they can see no difference in the effectiveness of one round over another in gunfight statistics that's likely true. Especially as no one keeps accurate statistics on that including the FBI.

To believe that the 9mm is as powerful as the 40 S&W in many of the various loads that both are available in, is to deny some reality that we already know. That more ft pounds of energy and/or bullet mass and bullet design make a difference. That's one thing that makes the 9mm more effective than the 380 and what makes many favor the 9mm+P or +P+ over standard velocity 9mm ammo.

Choose a gun that matches the job you want it to do. It should be in a caliber that suits the job. Make sure you can shoot it well for the job you want it to do. Choose a bullet design and load that helps you do that job. For a lot of people it will be a 9mm. But for others, in some guns, it will be a more powerful round and that power provides an edge.

tipoc

 

[Phaedrus/69]

Entertaining and well written reply, but you didn't answer the question.

What are these magic bullets that only increase the effectiveness of the 9mm and not other calibers.

I suppose it's because modern/current bullets are designed to perform in a specific way in calibrated gelatin. Since they're all designed to do the same thing they all perform almost exactly the same. They're all designed to expand X amount while going through a minimum of Y inches and no deeper than Z inches. If they're all designed to the same standard it's not surprising that they'd all work about the same in actual use.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I suppose it's because modern/current bullets are designed to perform in a specific way in calibrated gelatin. Since they're all designed to do the same thing they all perform almost exactly the same. They're all designed to expand X amount while going through a minimum of Y inches and no deeper than Z inches. If they're all designed to the same standard it's not surprising that they'd all work about the same in actual use.

That is an excellent point. The design standard says nothing about cross section of the wound track or shock delivered.

 

[HPCadm17]

It would be interesting to see ballistics tests on simulated human torsos, complete with accurate skeletal structure, organs and flesh in the proper locations with accurate variations in tissue density. Perform a study over the course of a year during which we would have randomly selected LEOs of average marksmanship unload thousands of rounds of the most widely selected projectiles from each service caliber, from various distances, various lighting levels, and all weather conditions, into hundreds of these simulated torsos, and publish the results. But, that still probably wouldn't be conclusive. My thinking is that you can never account for every variable.

If I try to justify my own caliber choice over another, I can't. I've tried, but I simply cannot say it's better or worse than any other. I have no real-world experience with terminal ballistics on a human body, and have very limited experience as a shooter anyway. I just standardize on what I've had from the beginning, and if it gets too expensive, or there's a lack of new offerings for it, I'll switch. I just hope I can live the rest of my life never having to employ it against another human being.

 

[GunnyUSMC]

When asked what iis the best round for self defense, my answer is, the largest caliber that you can handle proficiently. But you also have to look at it in another light. If you can't hit your target or you run out of ammo, you'er not going to win the fight.

 

[300Whspr]

My rationale for carrying 40S&W over the .355 Luger is that a marginal hit with the .40S&W has higher potential to be more effective at stopping the fight than the exact same marginal hit with the .355 Luger.

I know that my odds of making a marginal hit during a confrontation (no matter what the shot number in the string...) are higher than making a perfectly placed hit, no matter what the caliber.

The odds of making any hit are highest on your first shot, and with the odds dictating that any shot has a higher chance of being a marginal hit than a perfectly placed hit, I want the caliber that gives the most potential effectiveness.

Comprimise is a law of life, and ALL calibers are comprimise calibers. Any gain in one aspect causes a penalty in another.

I just like the balance of performance that the .40S&W offers over the .355 Luger. Or the .45ACP for that matter as well. But if we were limited to a single shot, of the three, give me the .45ACP every time.

Would I feel undergunned with the .355 Luger? Not really. Well, honestly, maybe just a little bit. But the .355 Luger is certainly orders of magnitude better than a handful of rocks. And, I FEEL more confident IN the .40 than the .355, and that's what counts.

 

[300Whspr]

It would be interesting to see ballistics tests on simulated human torsos, complete with accurate skeletal structure, organs and flesh in the proper locations with accurate variations in tissue density. Perform a study over the course of a year during which we would have randomly selected LEOs of average marksmanship unload thousands of rounds of the most widely selected projectiles from each service caliber, from various distances, various lighting levels, and all weather conditions, into hundreds of these simulated torsos, and publish the results. But, that still probably wouldn't be conclusive. My thinking is that you can never account for every variable.

If I try to justify my own caliber choice over another, I can't. I've tried, but I simply cannot say it's better or worse than any other. I have no real-world experience with terminal ballistics on a human body, and have very limited experience as a shooter anyway. I just standardize on what I've had from the beginning, and if it gets too expensive, or there's a lack of new offerings for it, I'll switch. I just hope I can live the rest of my life never having to employ it against another human being.

Here are the best comparisons that I've ever seen to date-- Maybe you have already seen them, maybe you haven't:

.40S&W vs. 9mm



40S&W vs. 45ACP

 

[cheygriz]

I really think that "calibre wars" are caused by people actually believing the ridiculous tripe pumped out by the "keyboard commandos" who write supercilious nonsense for the gun (advertising) magazines.

 

[Zerodefect]

If you want more power than 9mm, go with a .40 or .357 sig. It's as simple as that. Ya'll are over analyzing it.

Do I feel better carrying my Glock 23 over my Glock 43. Yep, I'm sure about that. But sometimes my 34 is nice as well.

Each round does have a niche. 9mm is cheap and lite recoil. .40 is similar, just more powerful, and better at barriers. .357 is a 9mm with a ton more zing and better at sheet metal barriers.. And .45 stops and expands like no other, but may or may not suffer at some barriers (like wood).

 

[LRDGCO]

The defensiveness of the 9mm and 308 Win partisans never ceases to amaze.