In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
rethinking the 9mm
buschmaster
Member Posts: 14,229 ✭✭✭
the other day at the range shooting the .40 S&B FMJ 180 grain'ers, that was 985 fps. only 388 ft-lb.
and you know what, I sure wouldn't want to get shot with it.
any mediocre 9mm has that much power. and comparing JHP ammo, the 9mm expands nearly as much as the .40, and it's not out of the question to use .40 cal 135 or 155 grain, while 9mm has 125 and 147 grain. that's in the same ballpark.
full-house .40 may have upwards of 520 ft-lb, but do you really need that much? everything else about a 9mm is awfully close to what the .40 does. weight, expansion, penetration. it does all that with less power.
and, the reason you would have for larger more powerful calibers is to try for a "one-shot stop". is that really a myth? because we all know that some BG's can get hit several times with a .45 and keep rolling, while others have been DRT from a .22. in reality it seems like a crap shoot. unless you positively get your shots on a critical target of the anatomy. in which case 1 is probably good enough, and then it doesn't matter if it was a 45 or a 9mm.
so here's this chart.
all close to the same except the initial disturbance. you would say the 9mm appears to do 1/2 as much in that area.
but wait a minute, that's not a permanent wound channel. not a temporary wound channel either, where the tissue got stretched. handgun bullets don't do that. so what is it?
and if we don't count that, the 9mm seems about as good as any other.
what do you think about this?
and you know what, I sure wouldn't want to get shot with it.
any mediocre 9mm has that much power. and comparing JHP ammo, the 9mm expands nearly as much as the .40, and it's not out of the question to use .40 cal 135 or 155 grain, while 9mm has 125 and 147 grain. that's in the same ballpark.
full-house .40 may have upwards of 520 ft-lb, but do you really need that much? everything else about a 9mm is awfully close to what the .40 does. weight, expansion, penetration. it does all that with less power.
and, the reason you would have for larger more powerful calibers is to try for a "one-shot stop". is that really a myth? because we all know that some BG's can get hit several times with a .45 and keep rolling, while others have been DRT from a .22. in reality it seems like a crap shoot. unless you positively get your shots on a critical target of the anatomy. in which case 1 is probably good enough, and then it doesn't matter if it was a 45 or a 9mm.
so here's this chart.
all close to the same except the initial disturbance. you would say the 9mm appears to do 1/2 as much in that area.
but wait a minute, that's not a permanent wound channel. not a temporary wound channel either, where the tissue got stretched. handgun bullets don't do that. so what is it?
and if we don't count that, the 9mm seems about as good as any other.
what do you think about this?
Comments
Jon
if it really doesn't matter, then the obvious choice would be 9mm. more magazine capacity, lower recoil. right?
I suppose that is true, but the argument will forever live! [:D]
Heck, I don't even know which I myself prefer.
Jon
If I had the big hands for it I'd carry some double-stack fed .45ACP. But I can't get my hands around that sort of beast for a decent grip, so I go smaller.
Which is the point of how I picked a 9mm for a full size gun on the belt. For me the best possible mix of:
1. Largest caliber I shoot well with.
2. In a gun I get a good grip on.
3. With a double stack magazine that ain't half starved when full.
4. That I can afford the ammo to practice with.
For me that added up to the Ruger SR9.
And I never even got into the ballistics, wound channels or terminal characteristics. Because if I cannot carry it well, shoot it well, including one handed, afford the ammo to practice with regularly, it's the wrong or too much gun for me anyway.
give me a 9mm over 40 any day
why? less recoil?
W.D.
if you want to play quick draw im good with that too, Mozambique is your friend, and mine
W.D.
Ask a Peace Officer what they are provided with on the job.
Ask the same Peace Officer what they would prefer as their go to firearm if given the choice.
That is the Professional advice I would, and have sought.
How the .355" bullet compares to the .357" bullet, both weighing 115 grains and having similar velocities, seems that it would be similar in performance. From what I've read the 40 was developed to provide increased frontal mass while keeping penetration to level that could be safely fired in an airplane. I don't know of any plane suffering drastic decompression due to gunshots from either the 38 +P+, 9mm or 40 cal; so as the guy that claimed elephants hid in cherry trees by painting their toenails red said "Have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree?" No?? then it must work.
As far as causing permanent damage to a person, regardless of cartridge what matters is shot placement and sufficient penetration to reach the vital organ in line with that shot placement.
quote:Originally posted by NOAH
give me a 9mm over 40 any day
why? less recoil?
As I said, if you ain't been there, you ain't got nothing to say.
W.D.
If you haven't been hit by them, you have nothing to say.
Oh, wait, that sounds stupid.
Don
Brad Steele
PRAISE THE HARD-BALL GUN
EDIT YES SG I do believe we should train all out military to be better marksman BUT THERE IS ONE HELL OF A LOT of difference between the military and YOU carrying a pistol for self defense How many civilians or for that matter Police
have been found dead with a firearm that was more than a single shot with that firearm empty[?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?][?]
and if you cann't do it with 8 you ain't gonna do it with 16
I'm with 'Perry' on the .45
Too old to live...too young to die...
IN MY NOT SO HUMBLE OPINION anyone who needs more than 7 rounds in a single stack 1911 45ACP needs to spend more time at the range. The only time I have ever heard of a Protracted gun fight was being on the wrong side of a DRUG DEAL gone BAD
PRAISE THE HARD-BALL GUN
While I have long been a 45ACP 1911 person I also have a Sig 227 with 14 round mags cause I read on the internet the end of the world will happen any day and you can't post something on the internet unless it is true so it must be so
There are many more factors than just gel testing or even one person's experience as relevant as that may be to that one person in those situations.
I am 66. In ten years I won't be 56 I will be 76 and simple physics suggest the less energy putting stress on my hand and fingers will at some point be necessary
So, I bought my first 9MM pistol in over 10 years a Beretta PX4 Storm which uses 17 and 20 round mags and have placed it in the Benz as a car gun in place of the Beretta Cougar 8045.
I intend on buying a couple more of the same gun and even a CX4 carbine as I am sure I can shoot 9MM long after 45 becomes questionable.
I went from 308 to 223 ARs with upscale brakes for the same future consideration as well as the political possibilities of grandfathered in weapons.
I will remain a 45 ACP shooter primarily until I feel I have to go 9MM totally and the advances in bullet design for SD gives me every confidence in good 9MM SD ammo
The right way is the way you can put shots on target as shot placement trumps every opinion posted
"Fools learn from their own mistakes. I learn from the mistakes of others"
Otto von Bismarck
There is something to be said for the 9mm!
Disturbance doesn't have a lot to do with it, it's all about absorbed energy. I know a guy who was shot at point blank range, bogy mass center with a 9mm. He was out of the hospital the next day. The only round I have shot humans with is the 230 grain FMJ from a 1911 45ACP, it worked way better than a 55 grain 223 at close proximity. I see no reason to bet my life on an unproven (to me) round. Those of you with first hand experience, are welcome to speak up. If you ain't been there and done that, everything you have to say is BS.
W.D.
what was that first part in the ballistic gelatin? can't be a permanent wound channel. shouldn't be a temporary cavity. (I called it a "disturbance" because I don't know what to call it) it's worth trying to figure out, because it goes about 8-10", and that's the thickness of a torso. if it matters, a .40 or .45 has the advantage. if not, a 9mm may be good enough. that's what I'm trying to figure out.
what do you mean by "absorbed energy"? more trauma caused by a larger wound channel? or does that really translate to more penetration.
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1-fan
anyone willing to stand at the 25 yard line and hold a target to their head speak up
if you could get head shots every time, all you need is 9mm case closed. but that's unrealistic. need to evaluate how effective these cartridges are on badly placed torso shots.
quote:Originally posted by Missouri Mule K30
How long do you want the BG to shoot back at you?
Ask a Peace Officer what they are provided with on the job.
Ask the same Peace Officer what they would prefer as their go to firearm if given the choice.
That is the Professional advice I would, and have sought.
ask 10 cops, get 10 different answers. just like anybody else.
what the police do have going for them, is that police departments spend some effort looking at tests done by professionals in search of the best caliber/ammo combimbination. particularly the FBI ballistics testing, and whatever else they can dig up, which is more than the average Joe is aware of.
on the other hand, they have different requirements. they must penetrate barriers such as car doors, windshields, walls, etc. for example that's why the .357 was developed, because Elmer Kieth observed the Highway Patrol had to deal with thugs in automibiles. the average citizen most often is not faced with that, and the threat is an unprotected soft target. wouldn't a bullet adapted to rapid expansion suit us better? you don't get that with ammo designed to penetrate car doors first.
on the other hand, the .357, whose entire purpose at first was to penetrate car doors and stuff, also turns out to be the best manstopper hands down.
quote:Originally posted by Ray B
Back in the day, there was a discussion and testing regarding various handgun cartridges. I forget if it was a federal agency that was doing the tests or a private outfit testing for the govt; but I recall the results put the 44 mag, 41 mag and the 357 at the top of the list, but up in the top ten was the 9mm with certain loads. If interested, I can see if I can dig out the report for specifics, but seems it was a 9mm 115 HP at somewhere over 1100 fps. The testing was one of the results used when Washington State went from the M 28 357s loaded with 38 +P+ 115 gr ammo to the 9mm selfloaders. Prior to the change, in the early 80s, there had been 13 documented police shootings with the 38 loads and all 13 were fatal- one was from a hit in the leg, severely damaging the suspects artery resulting in him bleeding to death before medical aid could get it stopped. The one trooper that I personally knew that was involved in a shooting was using the 38 +P+ load. The suspect was cornered by the trooper and some local officers. The suspect chose to start shooting with his handgun so the trooper fired twice. the results were undefined because simultaneous to the trooper shooting, a local officer armed with a 12 ga pump fired at least one magnum 00 buck into the suspect, who was dead when he hit the ground.
How the .355" bullet compares to the .357" bullet, both weighing 115 grains and having similar velocities, seems that it would be similar in performance. From what I've read the 40 was developed to provide increased frontal mass while keeping penetration to level that could be safely fired in an airplane. I don't know of any plane suffering drastic decompression due to gunshots from either the 38 +P+, 9mm or 40 cal; so as the guy that claimed elephants hid in cherry trees by painting their toenails red said "Have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree?" No?? then it must work.
As far as causing permanent damage to a person, regardless of cartridge what matters is shot placement and sufficient penetration to reach the vital organ in line with that shot placement.
9mm, 115 gr, 1100 fps. but there are .40 cal 135 gr at 1350 fps. more power, more diameter. I don't think that particular 9mm is at the top of the heap.
the .40 wasn't designed to have more frontal area or be shot in airplanes. we all know the story of how the FBI wanted to adapt the 10mm but it was too much, so they downloaded it, and S&W ended up just making a smaller cartidge, and that was accepted as filling a niche between 9mm and .45.
as far as what may be used in airplanes, I heard the US Air Marshals, who travel incognito on airplanes to take on hijackers, settled on .357 SIG. ballistically equivalent to .357 Mag, which noted above is the best manstopper and penetrates car doors. they must not be concerned about small holes in the fuselage. slow decompression must be acceptable.
quote:Originally posted by NOAH
YESquote:Originally posted by buschmaster
quote:Originally posted by NOAH
give me a 9mm over 40 any day
why? less recoil?
okay another vote for controllability over possibly more wounding capability.
quote:Originally posted by perry shooter
IN MY NOT SO HUMBLE OPINION anyone who needs more than 7 rounds in a single stack 1911 45ACP needs to spend more time at the range. The only time I have ever heard of a Protracted gun fight was being on the wrong side of a DRUG DEAL gone BAD
PRAISE THE HARD-BALL GUN
yep, I read somewhere that the average gunfight uses 2.3 shots.
most cops want to have at least 2 spare mags if not 3. but their mission is to detain and apprehend BG's where an encounter between a citizen and BG is more likely to result in one or both running the hell away from the gunfight.
but, wouldn't you rather have the capability to survive a protracted gunfight? multiple attackers? riots? I suppose a .45 with 2 or 3 spare mags would be your answer and you have a point.
what I am trying to figure out is whether a 9mm is actually as effective as a .45.
I know that's going to make you start laughing. but read the OP to see why I even started on this silly discussion in the first place. it may be.
quote:Originally posted by Doc
History seems to tell us that men die from being shot with just about all available calibers. Put the bullet in the right place and the results are fairly predictable.
okay another vote for shot placement over possibly more wounding capability.
If I'm in a position where I can though...I will always opt to grab my 1911....better grip means better accuracy, bigger bullet means no less than a .45 hole (there is a reason we try to make small bullets act like big bullets)
there is a reason we try to make small bullets act like big bulletsthat's a good point.
now how about this chart.
P9HST2 = 9mm 147 gr
P40HST1 = .40 180 gr
P45HST1 = .45 230 gr
the .40 is slightly more diameter than the 9mm. not enough to make a difference.
the .45 is a little bigger. is that worth it?
Disturbance doesn't have a lot to do with it, it's all about absorbed energy. I know a guy who was shot at point blank range, bogy mass center with a 9mm. He was out of the hospital the next day. The only round I have shot humans with is the 230 grain FMJ from a 1911 45ACP, it worked way better than a 55 grain 223 at close proximity. I see no reason to bet my life on an unproven (to me) round. Those of you with first hand experience, are welcome to speak up. If you ain't been there and done that, everything you have to say is BS.
W.D.
so what your saying is you personally shot someone with a .45 and that alone makes you the foremost ballistics expert, and only person on the board that can hit their target, and anyone else's opinion or ability null and void ?
No one is proposing that because it is so entirely impractical. Doesn't matter if the wound channel and terminal ballistics on the bad guy are so enormous, you cannot expect many people to carry the thing around all the time.
So it's the same old point - What's the biggest caliber you can manage to carry and shoot well all the time?
My two Mossbergs will do far more damage at self defense distances than any 1911. But I can't carry them and don't really want to. They are kept handy for different scenarios than just being out and about doing daily tasks:
This Ruger Blackhawk, 7.5" barrel in .45 Colt was an inheritance. A positive knee-knocker in the belt rig it came with. Fun to shoot, not practical to my needs. Gave it to a brother with more interest in the gun's history and who would hunt with it:
This is a good .45, but too big for a short guy like me to be toting all over the place. I keep it handy at home and haul it out to practice with in the desert. Even so, I still want to pick a holster for it, haven't done that yet.
In practical terms of what I can shoot well and carry when and where I tend to go, these are the three that work for me. A 9mm, a .38 Special and a .380.
Now then if only I was eight feet tall and somebody made a good concealment holster for this puppy ... with a sheath on the end of it!
IN MY NOT SO HUMBLE OPINION anyone who needs more than 7 rounds in a single stack 1911 45ACP needs to spend more time at the range. The only time I have ever heard of a Protracted gun fight was being on the wrong side of a DRUG DEAL gone BAD
PRAISE THE HARD-BALL GUN
in saint Louis and other big cities there have been several assaults and murders by gangs of up to 20, and not all in the hood, I myself am not chancing the what I feel is faulty logic that you fire one shot and they will all run away
just last month in my home town a few dozen baggy pants took public transportation to a annual church carnival, there was a stabbing and a shooting the first night, stabbing was from a group of 7 attacking a 16 year old white kid, until he stabbed one, shooting occurred a block away where random shots where fired into the parking lot of cars at a grocery store I visit frequently
I think way too many here idealize the perfect shoot out with a single assailant to where they have the upper hand and come out on top, maybe its just the life I have lived and area I grew up in but I believe that being over prepared beats finding out your under prepared at the god forbid moment you need it
multiple attackers (out of 20, how many of those have a gun? you can bet a few)
bad shot placement
miss a lot (stats for police about 80% missed shots)
starting to sound like high capacity matters a lot.
if the difference in ammo is marginal, then you would choose high capacity; the strategy would be that if you are in a position to put your shot on target, then shoot twice. (you would do that with the larger caliber anyway) till then you have more ammo for potshots or suppressive fire.
Two hits with a .45 trump a miss with a 9mm.
So does that mean that a 9mm will invariably miss?
Or does a .45 always hit?
May as well just say that any number of hits with what you have beats any number of misses with what you do not have.
quote:Originally posted by cce1302
Two hits with a .45 trump a miss with a 9mm.
So does that mean that a 9mm will invariably miss?
Or does a .45 always hit?
May as well just say that any number of hits with what you have beats any number of misses with what you do not have.
It's a near cousin of "the .45 you have with you is better than the 9mm you leave in your nightstand."
Basically just getting ahead of the "a hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .44" and "the .22 you have with you is better than the .44 you leave in the safe."
As though there is some inherent flaw in a larger caliber that will cause a shooter to miss when he would have hit with a smaller caliber, or cause him to leave a larger caliber in the safe when he would have carried a smaller caliber.
Most all will work to varying degrees. Some are a trade off and I've retired them from personal use due to shortcomings.
My criteria is 100% or as close to as possible reliability in functioning a weapon.
Penetration. That pretty much knocks out the .45 and .40 as standard rounds seldom will penetrate an old Cadillac door.
The nine millimeter is a good round. It penetrates well, but some of my weapons are very finicky and require a hot load by todays standards.
The .380, or 9mm Kurtz, is my preferred carry round since it's 100% reliable in my weapons and doesn't require a locked breech pistol, thus lighter and less bulky.
My favorite full power load is the 7.63 Mauser, or the more modern 7.62 X 25, basically the same round although the Russian round evolved into the more powerful round after WWII.
The Mauser round was the high speed pistol champ of the world until 1935 when it was superseded by the .357 Magnum round.
Being a bottle necked cartridge, I have found it to be 100% reliable in a standard Tokarev pistol and it will penetrate through BOTH sides of a Cadillac. It also makes a fair carbine round in a PPsh-41.
There is another cartridge that I figured would do good, but didn't find much favor with the shooting public, the .357 Sig.
I never had one, but it seemed to have a lot going for it.
Anyone have expericence with it?
Two hits with a .45 trump a miss with a 9mm.
I never had one, but it seemed to have a lot going for it.
Anyone have expericence with it?
great round, would not want to be shot with one
with that being said, I don't like it for shooting, to much recoil for follow up shots, its a very quick and sharp hit, but my worse pet peeve is its SO DANG LOUD , on an indoor range its worse than a .44 magnum, it pierces through earplugs even with headphones over them, I will leave an indoor or outdoor range when someone's shooting that round
so to me as a carry round its a no go, I wouldn't want to have to shoot one without hearing protection under any circumstances
I've carried several calibers in my life and used them on various targets, both living and inanimate.
Most all will work to varying degrees. Some are a trade off and I've retired them from personal use due to shortcomings.
My criteria is 100% or as close to as possible reliability in functioning a weapon.
Penetration. That pretty much knocks out the .45 and .40 as standard rounds seldom will penetrate an old Cadillac door.
The nine millimeter is a good round. It penetrates well, but some of my weapons are very finicky and require a hot load by todays standards.
The .380, or 9mm Kurtz, is my preferred carry round since it's 100% reliable in my weapons and doesn't require a locked breech pistol, thus lighter and less bulky.
My favorite full power load is the 7.63 Mauser, or the more modern 7.62 X 25, basically the same round although the Russian round evolved into the more powerful round after WWII.
The Mauser round was the high speed pistol champ of the world until 1935 when it was superseded by the .357 Magnum round.
Being a bottle necked cartridge, I have found it to be 100% reliable in a standard Tokarev pistol and it will penetrate through BOTH sides of a Cadillac. It also makes a fair carbine round in a PPsh-41.
There is another cartridge that I figured would do good, but didn't find much favor with the shooting public, the .357 Sig.
I never had one, but it seemed to have a lot going for it.
Anyone have expericence with it?
Sounds like a scientific test. You don't trust the .40 S&W and .45 ACP because "standard rounds seldom will penetrate an old Cadillac door." so you choose the 380 ACP instead.
All good points. But not how I picked the gun I carry.
If I had the big hands for it I'd carry some double-stack fed .45ACP. But I can't get my hands around that sort of beast for a decent grip, so I go smaller.
Which is the point of how I picked a 9mm for a full size gun on the belt. For me the best possible mix of:
1. Largest caliber I shoot well with.
2. In a gun I get a good grip on.
3. With a double stack magazine that ain't half starved when full.
4. That I can afford the ammo to practice with.
For me that added up to the Ruger SR9.
And I never even got into the ballistics, wound channels or terminal characteristics. Because if I cannot carry it well, shoot it well, including one handed, afford the ammo to practice with regularly, it's the wrong or too much gun for me anyway.
Logic
quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
I've carried several calibers in my life and used them on various targets, both living and inanimate.
Most all will work to varying degrees. Some are a trade off and I've retired them from personal use due to shortcomings.
My criteria is 100% or as close to as possible reliability in functioning a weapon.
Penetration. That pretty much knocks out the .45 and .40 as standard rounds seldom will penetrate an old Cadillac door.
The nine millimeter is a good round. It penetrates well, but some of my weapons are very finicky and require a hot load by todays standards.
The .380, or 9mm Kurtz, is my preferred carry round since it's 100% reliable in my weapons and doesn't require a locked breech pistol, thus lighter and less bulky.
My favorite full power load is the 7.63 Mauser, or the more modern 7.62 X 25, basically the same round although the Russian round evolved into the more powerful round after WWII.
The Mauser round was the high speed pistol champ of the world until 1935 when it was superseded by the .357 Magnum round.
Being a bottle necked cartridge, I have found it to be 100% reliable in a standard Tokarev pistol and it will penetrate through BOTH sides of a Cadillac. It also makes a fair carbine round in a PPsh-41.
There is another cartridge that I figured would do good, but didn't find much favor with the shooting public, the .357 Sig.
I never had one, but it seemed to have a lot going for it.
Anyone have expericence with it?
Sounds like a scientific test. You don't trust the .40 S&W and .45 ACP because "standard rounds seldom will penetrate an old Cadillac door." so you choose the 380 ACP instead.
Yeah, some things are a trade off. I carried a Colt Officers Model .45 for awhile. Never could get it to function anywhere close to 100% plus it was heavy.
The .380 I've used in a Walther and now a Beretta. It will penetrate a Cadie door just fine. Out to fifty yards, it will do about the same as a standard 9mm round.