So I was wondering why the military has been using 9mm sidearms? Is there something that the 9mm has over other bigger calibers?
Thanks
Joe
Thanks
Joe
Re: Why 9mm?
Carry more boolits. Cheaper, an "NATO" an a few of our friends seem to like it a lot.
.
Not gospel but jus my guess.
Carry more boolits. Cheaper, an "NATO" an a few of our friends seem to like it a lot.
.
Not gospel but jus my guess.
Re: Why 9mm?
Military: NATO compliance, logistics.
Me: 45acp, because 9mm's may expand, but 45's never shrink
Military: NATO compliance, logistics.
Me: 45acp, because 9mm's may expand, but 45's never shrink
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LongShot94</div><div class="ubbcode-body">with a .9 you can have 20 rounds in a mag, with .45 you can have 8 or 9. </div></div>
I don't think I could get my hand around the mag that holds 20 rounds of .9 rounds (just yanking your chain
)
NATO and higher capacity. Also, greater numbers of females entering the military; supposedly, switching to the 9MM would make the grip smaller. Didn't quite work out that way. IMO, it was mostly politics.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LongShot94</div><div class="ubbcode-body">with a .9 you can have 20 rounds in a mag, with .45 you can have 8 or 9. </div></div>
I don't think I could get my hand around the mag that holds 20 rounds of .9 rounds (just yanking your chain
NATO and higher capacity. Also, greater numbers of females entering the military; supposedly, switching to the 9MM would make the grip smaller. Didn't quite work out that way. IMO, it was mostly politics.
Re: Why 9mm?
Murphy's Law of Combat
Rule 1 : Never forget your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.
Murphy's Law of Combat
Rule 1 : Never forget your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.
Re: Why 9mm?
Thanks for all the info. I was just wondering because I'm looking at getting my first semiauto handgun (I have a couple of revolvers) and am between a 1911, Sig P220, and HK 45 or HK USP. Does anyone have some feedback on these models? And I also wasn't sure what peoples opinions were on the 9mm vs larger calibers for personal defense. 45 ACP is my top choice right now but I don't really know anything about any of the other calibers.
Thanks for all the info. I was just wondering because I'm looking at getting my first semiauto handgun (I have a couple of revolvers) and am between a 1911, Sig P220, and HK 45 or HK USP. Does anyone have some feedback on these models? And I also wasn't sure what peoples opinions were on the 9mm vs larger calibers for personal defense. 45 ACP is my top choice right now but I don't really know anything about any of the other calibers.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">personally... if I were limited to FMJ's I'd go with the 40sw so you have both diameter and "hydrostatic shock"....and mag capacity. </div></div>
Everyone should read some more about the much claimed - little studied,'hydro static wounding' properties of fast moving projectiles. Many see it as little more than bruising around major organs, and not likely to consistantly create sufficient trama on its own. Most all agree that at the velocities of most handguns (to include full house 10mm) it basically doesn't exist.
The big picture - the body isn't jello and the tests don't accurately (or even closely) reflect what happens as a fast moving projectile passes through multiple densities of tissue and bone. Claims made around hydrostatic wounding are largely outdated and dubious. *If* severe and dibilitating wounding properties are consistantly present,they stem from projectiles traveling at supersonic speeds throughout the medium.
Good luck
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">personally... if I were limited to FMJ's I'd go with the 40sw so you have both diameter and "hydrostatic shock"....and mag capacity. </div></div>
Everyone should read some more about the much claimed - little studied,'hydro static wounding' properties of fast moving projectiles. Many see it as little more than bruising around major organs, and not likely to consistantly create sufficient trama on its own. Most all agree that at the velocities of most handguns (to include full house 10mm) it basically doesn't exist.
The big picture - the body isn't jello and the tests don't accurately (or even closely) reflect what happens as a fast moving projectile passes through multiple densities of tissue and bone. Claims made around hydrostatic wounding are largely outdated and dubious. *If* severe and dibilitating wounding properties are consistantly present,they stem from projectiles traveling at supersonic speeds throughout the medium.
Good luck
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stats dont lie. hydro static shock or whatever you want to call it exists. Tell me why 357 mag is so effectiving in stopping? </div></div>
WSM - really not here to argue this - been down this road too many times before and it is a time suck. Instead I am encouraging anyone that is interested in the subject to read more up to date information.
On a similar note - how old is that testing related to .357 mag? Since that data comes from LE - when did most LEOs shift away from wheel guns? Think there have been any changes within the projectile industry since? What's next? You want to talk about one shot stops and cite 10mm by referencing the Kentucky State Hwy Patrol? Outdated data is outdated thinking and limited understanding.
Two last things about 'temporary cavitation' or hydrostatic wounding. For those that are really interested in the subject think about a body of water - if you toss a pebble into it the pebble casts a small disturbance or a wake. If you take that same pebble and use a sling shot to fire it into the water the wake is larger. The greater the velocity, and the greater the mass - the bigger the wake. This is why your HG round at 1050 fps means little if anything compared to the same weight projectile fired from a rifle at 2700 fps.
Secondly, unless the cavitation is sufficient to independently and permanently disarticulate vessels and organs (really unlikely under the best of circumstances) it equates to a scaled severity of bruising of the soft tissue. As the projectile passes the tissue expands, as the project exits the tissue shrinks. The actual 'damage' is minimal in most cases.
Good luck
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The stats dont lie. hydro static shock or whatever you want to call it exists. Tell me why 357 mag is so effectiving in stopping? </div></div>
WSM - really not here to argue this - been down this road too many times before and it is a time suck. Instead I am encouraging anyone that is interested in the subject to read more up to date information.
On a similar note - how old is that testing related to .357 mag? Since that data comes from LE - when did most LEOs shift away from wheel guns? Think there have been any changes within the projectile industry since? What's next? You want to talk about one shot stops and cite 10mm by referencing the Kentucky State Hwy Patrol? Outdated data is outdated thinking and limited understanding.
Two last things about 'temporary cavitation' or hydrostatic wounding. For those that are really interested in the subject think about a body of water - if you toss a pebble into it the pebble casts a small disturbance or a wake. If you take that same pebble and use a sling shot to fire it into the water the wake is larger. The greater the velocity, and the greater the mass - the bigger the wake. This is why your HG round at 1050 fps means little if anything compared to the same weight projectile fired from a rifle at 2700 fps.
Secondly, unless the cavitation is sufficient to independently and permanently disarticulate vessels and organs (really unlikely under the best of circumstances) it equates to a scaled severity of bruising of the soft tissue. As the projectile passes the tissue expands, as the project exits the tissue shrinks. The actual 'damage' is minimal in most cases.
Good luck
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NATO and higher capacity. Also, greater numbers of females entering the military; supposedly, switching to the 9MM would make the grip smaller. Didn't quite work out that way. IMO, it was mostly politics. </div></div>
The grip of the Beretta 92 is one of the fattest there is, WAY fatter than any 1911. It had nothing to do with grip.
Guys, the whole world shoots 9x19. That is why we use it in the military. It's the most popular handgun cartridge in the world.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NATO and higher capacity. Also, greater numbers of females entering the military; supposedly, switching to the 9MM would make the grip smaller. Didn't quite work out that way. IMO, it was mostly politics. </div></div>
The grip of the Beretta 92 is one of the fattest there is, WAY fatter than any 1911. It had nothing to do with grip.
Guys, the whole world shoots 9x19. That is why we use it in the military. It's the most popular handgun cartridge in the world.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The grip of the Beretta 92 is one of the fattest there is, WAY fatter than any 1911. It had nothing to do with grip.</div></div>
Yeah, that's what I meant when I said, "It didn't quite work out that way." Sorry for the subtleness.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The grip of the Beretta 92 is one of the fattest there is, WAY fatter than any 1911. It had nothing to do with grip.</div></div>
Yeah, that's what I meant when I said, "It didn't quite work out that way." Sorry for the subtleness.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">personally... if I were limited to FMJ's I'd go with the 40sw so you have both diameter and "hydrostatic shock"....and mag capacity. </div></div>
Everyone should read some more about the much claimed - little studied,'hydro static wounding' properties of fast moving projectiles. Many see it as little more than bruising around major organs, and not likely to consistantly create sufficient trama on its own. Most all agree that at the velocities of most handguns (to include full house 10mm) it basically doesn't exist.
The big picture - the body isn't jello and the tests don't accurately (or even closely) reflect what happens as a fast moving projectile passes through multiple densities of tissue and bone. Claims made around hydrostatic wounding are largely outdated and dubious. *If* severe and dibilitating wounding properties are consistantly present,they stem from projectiles traveling at supersonic speeds throughout the medium.
Good luck </div></div>
I think I'm on board with this. Blood loss is, I think, the latest word when a major organ isn't hit directly. A .45 makes a nice hole without worrying about HP expansion or the effects of clothing. It may be time well spent to read up on the Philippines a little more than a hundred years ago and why there was a switch to .45 caliber projectiles against the Moros instead of the .38 (9mm) projectiles. The more things change the more they stay the same.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">personally... if I were limited to FMJ's I'd go with the 40sw so you have both diameter and "hydrostatic shock"....and mag capacity. </div></div>
Everyone should read some more about the much claimed - little studied,'hydro static wounding' properties of fast moving projectiles. Many see it as little more than bruising around major organs, and not likely to consistantly create sufficient trama on its own. Most all agree that at the velocities of most handguns (to include full house 10mm) it basically doesn't exist.
The big picture - the body isn't jello and the tests don't accurately (or even closely) reflect what happens as a fast moving projectile passes through multiple densities of tissue and bone. Claims made around hydrostatic wounding are largely outdated and dubious. *If* severe and dibilitating wounding properties are consistantly present,they stem from projectiles traveling at supersonic speeds throughout the medium.
Good luck </div></div>
I think I'm on board with this. Blood loss is, I think, the latest word when a major organ isn't hit directly. A .45 makes a nice hole without worrying about HP expansion or the effects of clothing. It may be time well spent to read up on the Philippines a little more than a hundred years ago and why there was a switch to .45 caliber projectiles against the Moros instead of the .38 (9mm) projectiles. The more things change the more they stay the same.
Re: Why 9mm?
Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and momentum(mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and momentum(mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Me: 45acp, because 9mm's may expand, but 45's never shrink
</div></div>
How can you argue with this logic, I LIKE IT!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Me: 45acp, because 9mm's may expand, but 45's never shrink
How can you argue with this logic, I LIKE IT!
Re: Why 9mm?
Someone much smarter than I once said "I just copy what the USMC armor folks do.... keep shooting till your opponent catches fire or changes shape".
Someone much smarter than I once said "I just copy what the USMC armor folks do.... keep shooting till your opponent catches fire or changes shape".
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> and energy delivered (mass x velocity).
</div></div>
Momentum = M * V
Energy = 1/2 * M * V^2
Knockdown tends to be thought of in terms of Momentum delivered.
I've argued the "which caliber is the best" til my fingers bleed, I'm not getting any more involved than this:
I carry 10mm.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> and energy delivered (mass x velocity).
</div></div>
Momentum = M * V
Energy = 1/2 * M * V^2
Knockdown tends to be thought of in terms of Momentum delivered.
I've argued the "which caliber is the best" til my fingers bleed, I'm not getting any more involved than this:
I carry 10mm.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> and energy delivered (mass x velocity).
</div></div>
Momentum = M * V
Energy = 1/2 * M * V^2
Knockdown tends to be thought of in terms of Momentum delivered.
I've argued the "which caliber is the best" til my fingers bleed, I'm not getting any more involved than this:
I carry 10mm.</div></div>
Sorry. Bohem you are right I meant momentum. It was pretty late when I wrote that. Thanks.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> and energy delivered (mass x velocity).
</div></div>
Momentum = M * V
Energy = 1/2 * M * V^2
Knockdown tends to be thought of in terms of Momentum delivered.
I've argued the "which caliber is the best" til my fingers bleed, I'm not getting any more involved than this:
I carry 10mm.</div></div>
Sorry. Bohem you are right I meant momentum. It was pretty late when I wrote that. Thanks.
Re: Why 9mm?
No problem, I figured it was just a typo of some sort, not meant maliciously.
Cheers
No problem, I figured it was just a typo of some sort, not meant maliciously.
Cheers
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and energy delivered (mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
</div></div>
There is no such thing as "overpenetration." Penetration is the single most important feature of any self defense round. The only reason to limit it is civil liability, not performance.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and energy delivered (mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
</div></div>
There is no such thing as "overpenetration." Penetration is the single most important feature of any self defense round. The only reason to limit it is civil liability, not performance.
Re: Why 9mm?
i am an avid 45 auto enthusiast but the 9mm has something to offer as well. they typically feed better, penetrate body armor better and can be fed at higher capacity requiring fewer mag changes. experiment: take a U.N. helmet out and fire a 45 auto at it then a 9mm. which gets thru? also, i prefer m-9 for humid or wet environs due to the all aluminum construction does not oxidize like the frame of a 1911 might. 2 pennies
i am an avid 45 auto enthusiast but the 9mm has something to offer as well. they typically feed better, penetrate body armor better and can be fed at higher capacity requiring fewer mag changes. experiment: take a U.N. helmet out and fire a 45 auto at it then a 9mm. which gets thru? also, i prefer m-9 for humid or wet environs due to the all aluminum construction does not oxidize like the frame of a 1911 might. 2 pennies
Re: Why 9mm?
The M9 is not all aluminum, the slide is steel. However, the barrels are chrome lined unlike other pistols and that will make for excellent corrosion resistiance as well. I'm a .45 ACP fan but also have several 9mm guns. While the .45 is more effective round for round there are several compact, high capacity 9mm handguns out there that are great. 9mm will do the job if you use the right ammunition.
The M9 is not all aluminum, the slide is steel. However, the barrels are chrome lined unlike other pistols and that will make for excellent corrosion resistiance as well. I'm a .45 ACP fan but also have several 9mm guns. While the .45 is more effective round for round there are several compact, high capacity 9mm handguns out there that are great. 9mm will do the job if you use the right ammunition.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cartman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It may be time well spent to read up on the Philippines a little more than a hundred years ago and why there was a switch to .45 caliber projectiles against the Moros instead of the .38 (9mm) projectiles. The more things change the more they stay the same.</div></div>
I wouldn't base any life or death decision based on data from 100 years ago. Bullets are so much different now than even 20 years ago, copper to lead bonding, weight retained, muzzle velocity, capacity of the guns used, etc etc.
Where even 10 or 15 years ago they used to hope for 85 to 90 percent retained weight after a bullet hit and broke up, now you are seeing 99% weight retained. It doesn't take a 230 grain bullet to push all the way through and have 180 grains in the end. You can shoot 180 grain bullet and have close to or all 180 grains recovered.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cartman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It may be time well spent to read up on the Philippines a little more than a hundred years ago and why there was a switch to .45 caliber projectiles against the Moros instead of the .38 (9mm) projectiles. The more things change the more they stay the same.</div></div>
I wouldn't base any life or death decision based on data from 100 years ago. Bullets are so much different now than even 20 years ago, copper to lead bonding, weight retained, muzzle velocity, capacity of the guns used, etc etc.
Where even 10 or 15 years ago they used to hope for 85 to 90 percent retained weight after a bullet hit and broke up, now you are seeing 99% weight retained. It doesn't take a 230 grain bullet to push all the way through and have 180 grains in the end. You can shoot 180 grain bullet and have close to or all 180 grains recovered.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and momentum (mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
</div></div>
There is no such thing as "overpenetration." Penetration is the single most important feature of any self defense round. The only reason to limit it is civil liability, not performance.</div></div>
I agree with you that penetration is most important. I think that the instructor meant that the bullet went through the body taking with it some of the energy (as an explanation as to why 357 was lower than 45 in terms of first shot stop). I didn't say that I believed that was true. In fact, I don't think bullets go through people very often and I don't think energy transfer is all that important.
There are all manner of this sort of data out there. Some supporting big slow others supporting fast small. Experts for this and that. I don't think anyone really knows, including me. I am just speculating.
I do belief that alot of first shot statistics are high. If you shoot someone I think that most people are first incapacitated by pain and psychological shock. A bullet at handgun velocities doesn't have enough mass or velocity to knock down a man. Even if vital structures are destroyed, well motivated or unaware (that they've been shot) individuals should be able to remain conscious for 10 or 20 seconds. Head shot is the only real immediate unconsciousness maker.
But Non-survivable wounds (not talking first shot drop) is all about penetration and wound channel. Both 45acp and 357 are excellent in the penetration department. 45 maybe a little bigger wound channel (more bleeding). Momentum mean something more than energy, because in my mind, it has more to do with more penetration and less deflection. More big deep holes per unit time means faster bleeding and decreased brain perfusion. Most people can make more on-target holes per unit time with 45 acp than with 357 magnum. Thus I use 45 and not 357.
So why not 9mm? I guess because it lacks mass, therefore may be deflected more and produces a smaller wound channel. But really the following picture (from the motivational picture thread) sums it up nicely:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and momentum (mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
</div></div>
There is no such thing as "overpenetration." Penetration is the single most important feature of any self defense round. The only reason to limit it is civil liability, not performance.</div></div>
I agree with you that penetration is most important. I think that the instructor meant that the bullet went through the body taking with it some of the energy (as an explanation as to why 357 was lower than 45 in terms of first shot stop). I didn't say that I believed that was true. In fact, I don't think bullets go through people very often and I don't think energy transfer is all that important.
There are all manner of this sort of data out there. Some supporting big slow others supporting fast small. Experts for this and that. I don't think anyone really knows, including me. I am just speculating.
I do belief that alot of first shot statistics are high. If you shoot someone I think that most people are first incapacitated by pain and psychological shock. A bullet at handgun velocities doesn't have enough mass or velocity to knock down a man. Even if vital structures are destroyed, well motivated or unaware (that they've been shot) individuals should be able to remain conscious for 10 or 20 seconds. Head shot is the only real immediate unconsciousness maker.
But Non-survivable wounds (not talking first shot drop) is all about penetration and wound channel. Both 45acp and 357 are excellent in the penetration department. 45 maybe a little bigger wound channel (more bleeding). Momentum mean something more than energy, because in my mind, it has more to do with more penetration and less deflection. More big deep holes per unit time means faster bleeding and decreased brain perfusion. Most people can make more on-target holes per unit time with 45 acp than with 357 magnum. Thus I use 45 and not 357.
So why not 9mm? I guess because it lacks mass, therefore may be deflected more and produces a smaller wound channel. But really the following picture (from the motivational picture thread) sums it up nicely:
Re: Why 9mm?
I have seen some data on real world shooting in the past. Like that FBI thing I alluded to in my first post. But not a lot based on a significant amount shootings and those are often conflicting.
Ideally, we could look at such data and come to a clear conclusion. In medicine it is referred to as hard endpoint (take product A and x% die in 1 year). It is not some intermediate measure like how many people get symptom K, which is associated with higher rates of death). Kind of like how far a projectile goes in gel and then what's the average thickness of a human let's extrapolate which is better.
I have seen well designed, double-blind, placebo controlled studies powered to look at hard endpoints be contradicted by other equally well designed studies. Which tells me that either collected data/statistics can be skewed to fit a desired conclusion or are often poorly collected, or no one knows Jack about anything (I favor this one). So why not speculate.
I have seen some data on real world shooting in the past. Like that FBI thing I alluded to in my first post. But not a lot based on a significant amount shootings and those are often conflicting.
Ideally, we could look at such data and come to a clear conclusion. In medicine it is referred to as hard endpoint (take product A and x% die in 1 year). It is not some intermediate measure like how many people get symptom K, which is associated with higher rates of death). Kind of like how far a projectile goes in gel and then what's the average thickness of a human let's extrapolate which is better.
I have seen well designed, double-blind, placebo controlled studies powered to look at hard endpoints be contradicted by other equally well designed studies. Which tells me that either collected data/statistics can be skewed to fit a desired conclusion or are often poorly collected, or no one knows Jack about anything (I favor this one). So why not speculate.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ideally, we could look at such data and come to a clear conclusion. In medicine it is referred to as hard endpoint (take product A and x% die in 1 year).
I have seen well designed, double-blind, placebo controlled studies powered to look at hard endpoints be contradicted by other equally well designed studies. </div></div>
What does this have to do w/this discussion?? There is no such thing as a "hard end point" of A is there? Why? Because "hard end point" can't take into considerations comorbidities, esp. those that effect drug metabolism or contribute to mortality rate, r/o effect of concomitant medications, or the new "pharmacogenetics", not to mention investigator bias (oh, we are double-blinded, right).
These statements have absolutely nothing to do with the 9 vs. 45 vs. .357 discussion! There is no placebo for a lead bullet traveling at high velocity!
I think what your trying to tell your fellow hiders is "I'm a doctor so I must be right on this too" - my guess is you're a surgeon.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ideally, we could look at such data and come to a clear conclusion. In medicine it is referred to as hard endpoint (take product A and x% die in 1 year).
I have seen well designed, double-blind, placebo controlled studies powered to look at hard endpoints be contradicted by other equally well designed studies. </div></div>
What does this have to do w/this discussion?? There is no such thing as a "hard end point" of A is there? Why? Because "hard end point" can't take into considerations comorbidities, esp. those that effect drug metabolism or contribute to mortality rate, r/o effect of concomitant medications, or the new "pharmacogenetics", not to mention investigator bias (oh, we are double-blinded, right).
These statements have absolutely nothing to do with the 9 vs. 45 vs. .357 discussion! There is no placebo for a lead bullet traveling at high velocity!
I think what your trying to tell your fellow hiders is "I'm a doctor so I must be right on this too" - my guess is you're a surgeon.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: UKDslayer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> - my guess is you're a surgeon. </div></div>
Tehehehe
No comments added LOL
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: UKDslayer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> - my guess is you're a surgeon. </div></div>
Tehehehe
No comments added LOL
Re: Why 9mm?
It sneaks in through the night, so very well disguised, almost like a cute little bunny, then rears it's ugly head like the offspring of a tyrannosaurus slash chupacabre, with maybe a hint of 70's pimp.
Oh this is not a "how tight should I torque my rings" thread. It is the most vial and evil thread. You can not; i repeat, you can not defeat the which caliber is better topic. It will drive all who try mad and tear out their souls, leaving them broken down internet warriors, with nothing left but facts and personal experiences that no one will listen too.
Like that old crusty guy at the back of the sailors bar with the wooden leg, I say to you all, beware the topic ye be discussin, for many have disappeared in her deep dark corners, never to return.
It sneaks in through the night, so very well disguised, almost like a cute little bunny, then rears it's ugly head like the offspring of a tyrannosaurus slash chupacabre, with maybe a hint of 70's pimp.
Oh this is not a "how tight should I torque my rings" thread. It is the most vial and evil thread. You can not; i repeat, you can not defeat the which caliber is better topic. It will drive all who try mad and tear out their souls, leaving them broken down internet warriors, with nothing left but facts and personal experiences that no one will listen too.
Like that old crusty guy at the back of the sailors bar with the wooden leg, I say to you all, beware the topic ye be discussin, for many have disappeared in her deep dark corners, never to return.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gilgamesh</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Gilgamesh said:Cavitation effects are at rifle velocities. Pistol calibers probably rely on wound channel size (bleeding) and momentum (mass x velocity). I remember seeing some FBI data about 6 years ago in a class. The numbers listed on your link seem high. I recall being impressed at how low first shot effectiveness was in general with any caliber. I remember 223 at 99% and 308 at 98%. 9mm was in the upper 70s to upper 80s --higher end with +P loads. 124 gr 9mm was particularly poor. 45acp was in the mid 80s to mid90s--higher end with +P loads. 357 caliber was lower, I can't remember the numbers, but I can remember the instructor speculating that it might be related to overpenetration in a human. Also frangible +p 9mm did well if barrier/penetration issue were not involved. This is all from memory mind you.
I use 45 acp.
</div></div>
So why not 9mm? I guess because it lacks mass, therefore may be deflected more and produces a smaller wound channel. But really the following picture (from the motivational picture thread) sums it up nicely:
</div></div>
Don't forget that 9mm is also for Navy SEALS and we all know what a bunch of pansies they are...
Re: Why 9mm?
9mm Ammo is cheap and available everywhere in large quantities . Its cheap enough that I don't really even reload anymore . And tell me deep down in your sould of souls that you would rather have me shoot you through the chest with my dainty little 9mm than my .45 ?
From a guy who has been there , done that and has the bullet holes to prove it came these words of wisdom .... "Best gun to have in a gunfight ? Is a gun ".
9mm Ammo is cheap and available everywhere in large quantities . Its cheap enough that I don't really even reload anymore . And tell me deep down in your sould of souls that you would rather have me shoot you through the chest with my dainty little 9mm than my .45 ?
From a guy who has been there , done that and has the bullet holes to prove it came these words of wisdom .... "Best gun to have in a gunfight ? Is a gun ".
Re: Why 9mm?
Didn't we start this argument back in the '80s? Or was it the '70s?
I think the 9mm cs .45acp is a Zen question. There is no answer.
I carried, and carry, a 1911 .45acp. I have made the argument for it for decades- and have had equally experienced friends make the argument for the 9mm. I read the knockdown theory when it came out. I read Evan Marshal's study on one shot stops. I have read stats on penetration, over-penetration and slow-heavy vs light fast.
A lot of experts have made their cases and so far, 30 years later, still noone agrees.
As far as the FBI they went to .40S&W after the Miami shootout. The 9mm didn't penetrate the car body/windshield- whichever- I don't remember. For some reason I don't remember they decided against .45acp. I may have been carrying capacity/size. You can get a hi-cap .45acp- Para-Ordnance, but it is a REAL handfull. The needs of the FBI are different from the military- and more closely related to what we need a weapon to do.
And the devbate goes on. I am almosy 51 now and I bet you $100.00 that it will still be going when I die.
Carry what YOU are comfortable with. I like the .45acp but I wouldn't volunteer to get shot with any of 'em to prove a point.
Jim
Didn't we start this argument back in the '80s? Or was it the '70s?
I think the 9mm cs .45acp is a Zen question. There is no answer.
I carried, and carry, a 1911 .45acp. I have made the argument for it for decades- and have had equally experienced friends make the argument for the 9mm. I read the knockdown theory when it came out. I read Evan Marshal's study on one shot stops. I have read stats on penetration, over-penetration and slow-heavy vs light fast.
A lot of experts have made their cases and so far, 30 years later, still noone agrees.
As far as the FBI they went to .40S&W after the Miami shootout. The 9mm didn't penetrate the car body/windshield- whichever- I don't remember. For some reason I don't remember they decided against .45acp. I may have been carrying capacity/size. You can get a hi-cap .45acp- Para-Ordnance, but it is a REAL handfull. The needs of the FBI are different from the military- and more closely related to what we need a weapon to do.
And the devbate goes on. I am almosy 51 now and I bet you $100.00 that it will still be going when I die.
Carry what YOU are comfortable with. I like the .45acp but I wouldn't volunteer to get shot with any of 'em to prove a point.
Jim
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't forget that 9mm is also for Navy SEALS and we all know what a bunch of pansies they are... </div></div>
Because 9mm's all they carry, right?
Wrong. 9mm is not "for" SEALs, 9mm is for lightweight sub-machine guns, which many SOF elements carry on DA missions, along with an array of other weapons to make up for 9mm's shortcomings.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't forget that 9mm is also for Navy SEALS and we all know what a bunch of pansies they are... </div></div>
Because 9mm's all they carry, right?
Wrong. 9mm is not "for" SEALs, 9mm is for lightweight sub-machine guns, which many SOF elements carry on DA missions, along with an array of other weapons to make up for 9mm's shortcomings.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> As far as the FBI they went to .40S&W after the Miami shootout. </div></div>
eeehhhhnnnnttt Wrong.
The internet, where someone read some other non knowledgable person's "facts" and repeated them as gospel......just like the 9mm vs .45 ACP debate.
Good luck
And no in advance I am not going to waste my time debating with you when the short and weak came into play. I will suggest that anyone that is interested in the subject review the FBI's Miami shootout, the penitration testing standards that came about as a result and the history, use and phase out of the 10mm in LE.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> As far as the FBI they went to .40S&W after the Miami shootout. </div></div>
eeehhhhnnnnttt Wrong.
The internet, where someone read some other non knowledgable person's "facts" and repeated them as gospel......just like the 9mm vs .45 ACP debate.
Good luck
And no in advance I am not going to waste my time debating with you when the short and weak came into play. I will suggest that anyone that is interested in the subject review the FBI's Miami shootout, the penitration testing standards that came about as a result and the history, use and phase out of the 10mm in LE.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It sneaks in through the night, so very well disguised, almost like a cute little bunny, then rears it's ugly head like the offspring of a tyrannosaurus slash chupacabre, with maybe a hint of 70's pimp.
Oh this is not a "how tight should I torque my rings" thread. It is the most vial and evil thread. You can not; i repeat, you can not defeat the which caliber is better topic. It will drive all who try mad and tear out their souls, leaving them broken down internet warriors, with nothing left but facts and personal experiences that no one will listen too.
Like that old crusty guy, at the back of the sailors bar with the wooden leg I say to you all. Beware the topic ye be discussin, for many have disappeared in her deep dark corners, never to return. </div></div>
QFT
100% Victory
Good luck
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It sneaks in through the night, so very well disguised, almost like a cute little bunny, then rears it's ugly head like the offspring of a tyrannosaurus slash chupacabre, with maybe a hint of 70's pimp.
Oh this is not a "how tight should I torque my rings" thread. It is the most vial and evil thread. You can not; i repeat, you can not defeat the which caliber is better topic. It will drive all who try mad and tear out their souls, leaving them broken down internet warriors, with nothing left but facts and personal experiences that no one will listen too.
Like that old crusty guy, at the back of the sailors bar with the wooden leg I say to you all. Beware the topic ye be discussin, for many have disappeared in her deep dark corners, never to return. </div></div>
QFT
100% Victory
Good luck
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jasonk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cartman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It may be time well spent to read up on the Philippines a little more than a hundred years ago and why there was a switch to .45 caliber projectiles against the Moros instead of the .38 (9mm) projectiles. The more things change the more they stay the same.</div></div>
I wouldn't base any life or death decision based on data from 100 years ago. Bullets are so much different now than even 20 years ago, copper to lead bonding, weight retained, muzzle velocity, capacity of the guns used, etc etc.
Where even 10 or 15 years ago they used to hope for 85 to 90 percent retained weight after a bullet hit and broke up, now you are seeing 99% weight retained. It doesn't take a 230 grain bullet to push all the way through and have 180 grains in the end. You can shoot 180 grain bullet and have close to or all 180 grains recovered. </div></div>
I am not familiar with loss of retained weight ever being an issue with standard velocity FMJ ball handgun bullets. Please provide some data on this as this is news to me.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jasonk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Cartman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It may be time well spent to read up on the Philippines a little more than a hundred years ago and why there was a switch to .45 caliber projectiles against the Moros instead of the .38 (9mm) projectiles. The more things change the more they stay the same.</div></div>
I wouldn't base any life or death decision based on data from 100 years ago. Bullets are so much different now than even 20 years ago, copper to lead bonding, weight retained, muzzle velocity, capacity of the guns used, etc etc.
Where even 10 or 15 years ago they used to hope for 85 to 90 percent retained weight after a bullet hit and broke up, now you are seeing 99% weight retained. It doesn't take a 230 grain bullet to push all the way through and have 180 grains in the end. You can shoot 180 grain bullet and have close to or all 180 grains recovered. </div></div>
I am not familiar with loss of retained weight ever being an issue with standard velocity FMJ ball handgun bullets. Please provide some data on this as this is news to me.
Re: Why 9mm?
300WSM, why don't you provide a link to the real world shooting data you have that accounts for shot placement?
300WSM, why don't you provide a link to the real world shooting data you have that accounts for shot placement?
Re: Why 9mm?
The one thing I don't remember reading about the one-shot-stop theory is how well placed were the shots?
A poorly placed .45acp will not stop someone, where a well placed .22lr might and a 9mm will.
It's like hunting- shot placement is the key. The most accurate powerfull eargesplitten loudenboomer will not drop a deer in it's tracks if gutshot.
As far as me being wrong about the Miami shootout data- well, I've been wrong before. I was going from memory- which is starting to be a losing proposition. That was a long time ago and I didn't pull up the data- I should have before posting, but I was really trying to do more than shoot my mouth off. There have been so damn many contradictory studies in the last 30-40 years that I believe they are all wrong- or partially right.
Lets all just go with a .45 Super or a 9x23 and get it over with.
Jim
The one thing I don't remember reading about the one-shot-stop theory is how well placed were the shots?
A poorly placed .45acp will not stop someone, where a well placed .22lr might and a 9mm will.
It's like hunting- shot placement is the key. The most accurate powerfull eargesplitten loudenboomer will not drop a deer in it's tracks if gutshot.
As far as me being wrong about the Miami shootout data- well, I've been wrong before. I was going from memory- which is starting to be a losing proposition. That was a long time ago and I didn't pull up the data- I should have before posting, but I was really trying to do more than shoot my mouth off. There have been so damn many contradictory studies in the last 30-40 years that I believe they are all wrong- or partially right.
Lets all just go with a .45 Super or a 9x23 and get it over with.
Jim
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: molonlabe</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't forget that 9mm is also for Navy SEALS and we all know what a bunch of pansies they are... </div></div>
Because 9mm's all they carry, right?
Wrong. 9mm is not "for" SEALs, 9mm is for lightweight sub-machine guns, which many SOF elements carry on DA missions, along with an array of other weapons to make up for 9mm's shortcomings. </div></div>
The standard sidearm of the US Navy SEALS is the Sig P226 in 9mm. If it was really for pansies, all SEALS would carry the HK Mk23, yet most carry the P226. I've already read every nonsensical gun shop arguement against the 9mm I've ever heard within this short thread. I carry a 9mm on a daily basis and feel as well armed as when I carry my Glock 20. That's just my $.02.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: molonlabe</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't forget that 9mm is also for Navy SEALS and we all know what a bunch of pansies they are... </div></div>
Because 9mm's all they carry, right?
Wrong. 9mm is not "for" SEALs, 9mm is for lightweight sub-machine guns, which many SOF elements carry on DA missions, along with an array of other weapons to make up for 9mm's shortcomings. </div></div>
The standard sidearm of the US Navy SEALS is the Sig P226 in 9mm. If it was really for pansies, all SEALS would carry the HK Mk23, yet most carry the P226. I've already read every nonsensical gun shop arguement against the 9mm I've ever heard within this short thread. I carry a 9mm on a daily basis and feel as well armed as when I carry my Glock 20. That's just my $.02.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The one thing I don't remember reading about the one-shot-stop theory is how well placed were the shots?
A poorly placed .45acp will not stop someone, where a well placed .22lr might and a 9mm will.
It's like hunting- shot placement is the key. The most accurate powerfull eargesplitten loudenboomer will not drop a deer in it's tracks if gutshot.
</div></div>
And a bright light has been turned on.....
There is a fair amount of anecdotal evidence to suggest that data from the wheel gun era (.357 Mag) is skewed in favor of the marksman – those Coppers knew they had 6 rounds to get’er done and then it was a test of one’s true reloading skills as they scrambled to cover. The general argument put forth is that many of today’s Coppers are of the paper pushing / non-gun mindset, training budgets are light, and LE almost universally carries Hi Cap weapons.
Pepper – sorry to bust your balls a bit on the Miami thing. If you have read the in depth report good for you. I would encourage everyone to read it if they haven’t already, as it is truly worth the read. It is a real world problem solving study that includes the reason for why we train to shoot and manipulate firearms with one hand, why we keep our firearms on our person, why one must have the mindset to stay in the fight against really bad odds, and a study of a particular vehicle / CQB scenario. Maybe the most influential thing to come from it was the penetration testing and the recommendations that still hold today. As a result projectile manufacturers have been designing bonded HP bullets for HGs that function very consistently within the FBI protocol envelope (in jello). In fact, the improvements have rendered the debate over 9mm / 357 Sig / 40 S&W / 10mm / .45 ACP a moot point (in jello). Today I think the real argument really centers on capacity. We are also seeing some interesting developments in projectiles for carbines with ‘barrier blind’ rounds. However, that standard caveat still applies – jello isn’t real.
If anyone is interested I have a power point of a partial FBI brief RE: a 2006 PA LE involved shooting in which the subject received 10+ 40 S&W 180 Gold Dots and 16 5.56mm rounds (55 grn & 75 grn TAP). Five (5) of the 40 S&W rounds to the chest and stomach as well as one (1) to the throat penetrated less than 1”. 13 of the 16 carbine rounds were through and throughs. They wrestled the subject into cuffs despite a shattered hip, humerus, ankle, collapsed lung, and pierced aorta. The subject had smoked pot and was wearing a T shirt and a down jacket. In short, that gun shop counter conversation that determines what is the uber weapon to defend yourself with is neither a panacea nor a substitute for marksmanship.
Good luck
ETA - all the fans of hydrostatic wounding - any thoughts on why that critter didn't magically fall down and die from any of the 16 carbine rounds?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The one thing I don't remember reading about the one-shot-stop theory is how well placed were the shots?
A poorly placed .45acp will not stop someone, where a well placed .22lr might and a 9mm will.
It's like hunting- shot placement is the key. The most accurate powerfull eargesplitten loudenboomer will not drop a deer in it's tracks if gutshot.
</div></div>
And a bright light has been turned on.....
There is a fair amount of anecdotal evidence to suggest that data from the wheel gun era (.357 Mag) is skewed in favor of the marksman – those Coppers knew they had 6 rounds to get’er done and then it was a test of one’s true reloading skills as they scrambled to cover. The general argument put forth is that many of today’s Coppers are of the paper pushing / non-gun mindset, training budgets are light, and LE almost universally carries Hi Cap weapons.
Pepper – sorry to bust your balls a bit on the Miami thing. If you have read the in depth report good for you. I would encourage everyone to read it if they haven’t already, as it is truly worth the read. It is a real world problem solving study that includes the reason for why we train to shoot and manipulate firearms with one hand, why we keep our firearms on our person, why one must have the mindset to stay in the fight against really bad odds, and a study of a particular vehicle / CQB scenario. Maybe the most influential thing to come from it was the penetration testing and the recommendations that still hold today. As a result projectile manufacturers have been designing bonded HP bullets for HGs that function very consistently within the FBI protocol envelope (in jello). In fact, the improvements have rendered the debate over 9mm / 357 Sig / 40 S&W / 10mm / .45 ACP a moot point (in jello). Today I think the real argument really centers on capacity. We are also seeing some interesting developments in projectiles for carbines with ‘barrier blind’ rounds. However, that standard caveat still applies – jello isn’t real.
If anyone is interested I have a power point of a partial FBI brief RE: a 2006 PA LE involved shooting in which the subject received 10+ 40 S&W 180 Gold Dots and 16 5.56mm rounds (55 grn & 75 grn TAP). Five (5) of the 40 S&W rounds to the chest and stomach as well as one (1) to the throat penetrated less than 1”. 13 of the 16 carbine rounds were through and throughs. They wrestled the subject into cuffs despite a shattered hip, humerus, ankle, collapsed lung, and pierced aorta. The subject had smoked pot and was wearing a T shirt and a down jacket. In short, that gun shop counter conversation that determines what is the uber weapon to defend yourself with is neither a panacea nor a substitute for marksmanship.
Good luck
ETA - all the fans of hydrostatic wounding - any thoughts on why that critter didn't magically fall down and die from any of the 16 carbine rounds?
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">all that data is waist up center mass one shot below neck no arms. Link was already given.
The fact of the matter is that all calibers can fail to stop from 25acp to 44mag.
Also it is a FACT that each bullet doesn't perform exactly the same for more reasons than I can list. For example two shots we did through windshield one golden saber shed it's jacket completely and one did not at all.
And if you want to talk about penetration. Small example. With a 4x4 pine we shot several 230gr 45s out of a 5" barrel and NONE of them went through. Out of a 4" barrel 9mm 124 and 147 (we never test 115gr) went through it like butter as did 165gr 180gr 40sw. Not even a full metal jacket round nose could get through it.
45 is great when you don't have to go through anything including a thick jacket or arm but put any barrier and it gets slowed down very easily. I don't know why exactly (have my theories) but every barrier test we have done has shown this.
</div></div>
Oh, it's FACTS you care about? Well then why are you relying on Marshall and Sanow?
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">all that data is waist up center mass one shot below neck no arms. Link was already given.
The fact of the matter is that all calibers can fail to stop from 25acp to 44mag.
Also it is a FACT that each bullet doesn't perform exactly the same for more reasons than I can list. For example two shots we did through windshield one golden saber shed it's jacket completely and one did not at all.
And if you want to talk about penetration. Small example. With a 4x4 pine we shot several 230gr 45s out of a 5" barrel and NONE of them went through. Out of a 4" barrel 9mm 124 and 147 (we never test 115gr) went through it like butter as did 165gr 180gr 40sw. Not even a full metal jacket round nose could get through it.
45 is great when you don't have to go through anything including a thick jacket or arm but put any barrier and it gets slowed down very easily. I don't know why exactly (have my theories) but every barrier test we have done has shown this.
</div></div>
Oh, it's FACTS you care about? Well then why are you relying on Marshall and Sanow?
http://www.firearmstactical.com/marshall-sanow-statistical-analysis.htm
Re: Why 9mm?
Mo_Zam_Beek don't worry about busting 'em. I am 50, have been amrried for 20 years to the same woman, have a 7 year old and an 8 year old- both girls. I have no feelings left to get hurt.
I have also been on the internet boards long enough that I don't get ruffled unless someone posts something really dumb- like using pistol powder in their rifle.
I was a cop waaay back in the '80s. I carried a .45acp Governement model on and off duty.
As for real stopping power? If I knew I would have a good possibility of being in a gunfight- busting a meth lab or serving a felony warrant, I brought out my manstopper.
A round of 12ga #00 buckshot is a pretty good fight stopper.
I was also trained by an old Marine who taught me that a pistol is what you use to fight your way back to the rifle or shotgun you never should have laid down in the first place.
No handgun is a guranteed one-shot stopper. The muzzle energy of the baddest handgun is nothing compared to a rifle- any rifle.
As for why that subject didn't go down? I have seen guys high on drugs take on 5 or 6 big cops. Unless they take a hit in a joint that disables them they may not even know they have been shot.
That also makes me seriously doubt the hydro-static shock theory. Even so high that they don't know they have been shot they should go down if the hydro-shock theory works.
As for a caliber debate I bet this will keep going until the end of time.That may be a good thing since it will push gun makers to keep improving things- bullets, powders too. We are much better off than in the '80s.
Now, instead of a caliber debate we can discuss real stuff. The single action 1911 auto can't be beat.
Keep in mind that John Browning also invented the 9mm Hi-Power.
Jim
Mo_Zam_Beek don't worry about busting 'em. I am 50, have been amrried for 20 years to the same woman, have a 7 year old and an 8 year old- both girls. I have no feelings left to get hurt.
I have also been on the internet boards long enough that I don't get ruffled unless someone posts something really dumb- like using pistol powder in their rifle.
I was a cop waaay back in the '80s. I carried a .45acp Governement model on and off duty.
As for real stopping power? If I knew I would have a good possibility of being in a gunfight- busting a meth lab or serving a felony warrant, I brought out my manstopper.
A round of 12ga #00 buckshot is a pretty good fight stopper.
I was also trained by an old Marine who taught me that a pistol is what you use to fight your way back to the rifle or shotgun you never should have laid down in the first place.
No handgun is a guranteed one-shot stopper. The muzzle energy of the baddest handgun is nothing compared to a rifle- any rifle.
As for why that subject didn't go down? I have seen guys high on drugs take on 5 or 6 big cops. Unless they take a hit in a joint that disables them they may not even know they have been shot.
That also makes me seriously doubt the hydro-static shock theory. Even so high that they don't know they have been shot they should go down if the hydro-shock theory works.
As for a caliber debate I bet this will keep going until the end of time.That may be a good thing since it will push gun makers to keep improving things- bullets, powders too. We are much better off than in the '80s.
Now, instead of a caliber debate we can discuss real stuff. The single action 1911 auto can't be beat.
Keep in mind that John Browning also invented the 9mm Hi-Power.
Jim
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No handgun is a guranteed one-shot stopper. The muzzle energy of the baddest handgun is nothing compared to a rifle- any rifle.
Jim </div></div>
Well that certainly depends. There are plenty of magnum revolvers out there that make 5.56 look anemic, strictly looking at numbers like muzzle energy.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
No handgun is a guranteed one-shot stopper. The muzzle energy of the baddest handgun is nothing compared to a rifle- any rifle.
Jim </div></div>
Well that certainly depends. There are plenty of magnum revolvers out there that make 5.56 look anemic, strictly looking at numbers like muzzle energy.
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh dear God, don't make the 1911 vs. glock debate rear it's ugly head Pepperbelly. </div></div>
Steel versus plastic? If you felt the need to really pistol whip some asshole which do you want in your hand?
Jim
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh dear God, don't make the 1911 vs. glock debate rear it's ugly head Pepperbelly. </div></div>
Steel versus plastic? If you felt the need to really pistol whip some asshole which do you want in your hand?
Jim
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh dear God, don't make the 1911 vs. glock debate rear it's ugly head Pepperbelly. </div></div>
Steel versus plastic? If you felt the need to really pistol whip some asshole which do you want in your hand?
Jim </div></div>
The one that had 15 BBs instead of 7
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh dear God, don't make the 1911 vs. glock debate rear it's ugly head Pepperbelly. </div></div>
Steel versus plastic? If you felt the need to really pistol whip some asshole which do you want in your hand?
Jim </div></div>
The one that had 15 BBs instead of 7
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dmg308</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh dear God, don't make the 1911 vs. glock debate rear it's ugly head Pepperbelly. </div></div>
Steel versus plastic? If you felt the need to really pistol whip some asshole which do you want in your hand?
Jim </div></div>
The one that had 15 BBs instead of 7
</div></div>
It will never end.
I do notice that noone shoots a 9mm in the pistol matches I shoot- NRA Bullseye and falling plates. There is no power factor to make, so I really don't understand that.
Jim
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dmg308</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: victory</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh dear God, don't make the 1911 vs. glock debate rear it's ugly head Pepperbelly. </div></div>
Steel versus plastic? If you felt the need to really pistol whip some asshole which do you want in your hand?
Jim </div></div>
The one that had 15 BBs instead of 7
I do notice that noone shoots a 9mm in the pistol matches I shoot- NRA Bullseye and falling plates. There is no power factor to make, so I really don't understand that.
Jim
Re: Why 9mm?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.
I was also trained by an old Marine who taught me that a pistol is what you use to fight your way back to the rifle or shotgun you never should have laid down in the first place.
</div></div>
If he's the same feller that LL gets together with occassionally and other folks pay foldin money to sit at his feet - I heard him say something to the effect of 'when it really happens you'll want what throws the biggest piece of lead the fastest with the most capacity'......I do recall him speaking fondly about a 12ga as well 'only firearm known with the ability to separate limb from body'..... last time I checked in he was running around some little town in the middle of East Jesus with a mid length .44 mag on the center of his chest.... been a couple years, could be different now - dunno.
Good luck to all
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pepperbelly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.
I was also trained by an old Marine who taught me that a pistol is what you use to fight your way back to the rifle or shotgun you never should have laid down in the first place.
</div></div>
If he's the same feller that LL gets together with occassionally and other folks pay foldin money to sit at his feet - I heard him say something to the effect of 'when it really happens you'll want what throws the biggest piece of lead the fastest with the most capacity'......I do recall him speaking fondly about a 12ga as well 'only firearm known with the ability to separate limb from body'..... last time I checked in he was running around some little town in the middle of East Jesus with a mid length .44 mag on the center of his chest.... been a couple years, could be different now - dunno.
Good luck to all
Similar threads
