User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:37:50 PM EDT
[#1]
40 FTMFW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:45:08 PM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:50:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Google ballistic gel testing and you will see all modern defensive HP's are designed to penetrate 12-15". Then look at the expanded diameter, and you'll see a small difference between the calibers which will be argued as inconsequential. However, diameter is not an appropriate measure because bullets are not a line, they are a circle, so you need to apply pi r^2 to get relevant differences in expanded surface area. Most people forget the last part. The results are there is not that much difference (at least that is the common mantra) therefore, it is more sensible to carry the smaller round giving the shooter more available rounds and lower recoil for faster follow up shots. But the whole debate centers around anti-personel type bullets. If you want to talk predator defense, or barrier penetration, then there are other factors.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:51:24 PM EDT
[#4]
Either way you go, a properly placed shot will do the job, not the caliber.
40 in the shoulder vs 9mm center mass in the chest- who's gonna drop first? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:53:44 PM EDT
[#5]
^ Agreed with both of you. Debating a guy at work that won't let go of the belief that a "45ACP is a one hit show stopper" and there's no need for more ammo. I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, and shot placement is key, that sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:55:46 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
40 FTMFW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This! And to the OP, we dont care about stupid facts or studies! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/16/2014 11:56:54 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:00:36 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Fired from within 21 feet IIRC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:02:07 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fired from within 21 feet IIRC. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Fired from within 21 feet IIRC. I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:04:50 AM EDT
[#10]
I like this guy's vids...sounds like he has some practical real world experience...mostly I just like his no bullshit approach to presenting his point. This video is an interesting comparison between different calibers. I found it entertaining and educational...even if he does ramble a little here and there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:05:42 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Fired from within 21 feet IIRC. I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. I believe you are right at 7 feet. The 7 yrds I believe was more relevant to LEO gunfights than SD shootings |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:06:52 AM EDT
[#12]
You forgot 10mm
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:07:37 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. You can prepare for averages... and get royally fucked 50% of the time. It's not the odds, it's the stakes. Pass the ammo, please. As for wounding potential between 9/40/45 using modern JHP ammo... they all suck nearly equally. Larger expanded diameters often equal less penetration depth. If you look at the numbers, 9mm often penetrates MORE than .45 ACP. In some circumstances, larger calibers make sense. For most folks, and most circumstances, they don't. The leading terminal ballistics expert is currently carrying 9mm Glocks or M&P pistols... after spending most of his life carrying .45 ACP 1911's. OP: you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Don't waste too much time trying to convince him he's wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:09:14 AM EDT
[#14]
I like the long gun graphic with buckshot added in...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:11:11 AM EDT
[#15]
A one shot stoppage with a 10mm would very likely be a one shot stoppage with a .38Spcl if all things were the same in placement
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:12:29 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Fired from within 21 feet IIRC. I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. You may well be correct and I tend to think that you are. I tried looking it up on the googles but Kept turning up forum discussions on it with the same answers we have here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:13:05 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can prepare for averages... and get royally fucked 50% of the time. It's not the odds, it's the stakes. Pass the ammo, please. As for wounding potential between 9/40/45 using modern JHP ammo... they all suck nearly equally. Larger expanded diameters often equal less penetration depth. If you look at the numbers, 9mm often penetrates MORE than .45 ACP. In some circumstances, larger calibers make sense. For most folks, and most circumstances, they don't. The leading terminal ballistics expert is currently carrying 9mm Glocks or M&P pistols... after spending most of his life carrying .45 ACP 1911's. OP: you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Don't waste too much time trying to convince him he's wrong. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. You can prepare for averages... and get royally fucked 50% of the time. It's not the odds, it's the stakes. Pass the ammo, please. As for wounding potential between 9/40/45 using modern JHP ammo... they all suck nearly equally. Larger expanded diameters often equal less penetration depth. If you look at the numbers, 9mm often penetrates MORE than .45 ACP. In some circumstances, larger calibers make sense. For most folks, and most circumstances, they don't. The leading terminal ballistics expert is currently carrying 9mm Glocks or M&P pistols... after spending most of his life carrying .45 ACP 1911's. OP: you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Don't waste too much time trying to convince him he's wrong. We're bored and we work 12's overnight. We have time to talk.
That was how I understood it too. And I carry a 9mm M&P, both full, compact, and Shield. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:47:18 AM EDT
[#18]
Scribed, and in for the reading.
Ordered my P-09 for carry and put my 1912 in my bedside table. For personal defense outside the home, I would rather have more ammo at my disposal, especially when it seems the smaller, faster bullets have equal penetration ability and a negligible loss in wound channel diameter. But I'm a layman and try not to stop learning new stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:24:38 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can prepare for averages... and get royally fucked 50% of the time. It's not the odds, it's the stakes. Pass the ammo, please. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. You can prepare for averages... and get royally fucked 50% of the time. It's not the odds, it's the stakes. Pass the ammo, please. Dude, I carry forty rounds of .40, my reply was to counter his statement regarding most gunfights requiring a reload. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:26:41 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Dude, I carry forty rounds of .40, my reply was to counter his statement regarding most gunfights requiring a reload. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. You can prepare for averages... and get royally fucked 50% of the time. It's not the odds, it's the stakes. Pass the ammo, please. Dude, I carry forty rounds of .40, my reply was to counter his statement regarding most gunfights requiring a reload. Not quite how I worded that |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:33:38 AM EDT
[#21]
Close enough after forty ounces of OE.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:43:24 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Fired from within 21 feet IIRC. I think it's actually 7 feet, not 7 yards. 40 FTMFW 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:50:17 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
^ Agreed with both of you. Debating a guy at work that won't let go of the belief that a "45ACP is a one hit show stopper" and there's no need for more ammo. I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, and shot placement is key, that sort of thing. for an example to back your argument go to http://www.policemag.com/ and search for "Skokie" apparently, sometimes "average gunfight" is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:04:51 AM EDT
[#24]
With FMJ ball ammo, caliber choice can make a difference. It's why .45ACP was invented in the first place (over ineffect .38 special, which is a slow 9mm basically). With modern defense projectiles, the difference is very minor between the three. I suspect this has to do with basically all the rounds designed to penetrate to about the same depth, and expand to deliver about the same level of energy release. I once commented that it's worth nothing all three cartridges also all have very similar powder charges, and with bullets that deliver all that energy dump in a similar manner between the three, that was something.
The shit-storm that started was entertaining.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:10:34 AM EDT
[#25]
.38 Long Colt
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:34:54 AM EDT
[#26]
I like 10mm
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:41:10 AM EDT
[#27]
in for another I can pee higher on the tree then you.. edit to remove that darned "s" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:43:58 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 2:52:06 AM EDT
[#29]
I did the math on this once with the largest expanding ammo for 9, .40, and .45
HST's, golden sabre, whatever. the difference in potential displaced volume for a mag dump from a full size glock of each caliber was negligible |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 5:48:40 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That picture is dumb, old, and does not showcase the fact that there is a TON of variation with performance for different choices of rounds. Quote HistoryQuoted:
That picture is dumb, old, and does not showcase the fact that there is a TON of variation with performance for different choices of rounds. Sadly I'm short on cash to buy ordnance gel and a diverse selection of similar pistols in various calibers, otherwise I would make a penetration diagram of the current state of the art rounds. Would you be up for it instead? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 6:06:28 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Google ballistic gel testing and you will see all modern defensive HP's are designed to penetrate 12-15". Then look at the expanded diameter, and you'll see a small difference between the calibers which will be argued as inconsequential. However, diameter is not an appropriate measure because bullets are not a line, they are a circle, so you need to apply pi r^2 to get relevant differences in expanded surface area. Most people forget the last part. The results are there is not that much difference (at least that is the common mantra) therefore, it is more sensible to carry the smaller round giving the shooter more available rounds and lower recoil for faster follow up shots. But the whole debate centers around anti-personel type bullets. If you want to talk predator defense, or barrier penetration, then there are other factors. That's what I've read too. There isn't much difference with the 3 most popular calibers using modern JHP. Between the three, I'll carry 9mm. May as well have more ammo with faster follow up shots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 6:10:36 AM EDT
[#32]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 6:11:15 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've argued that it isn't rare for the first guy to have to reload to lose the gunfight, The average round count in a gunfight is three rounds. Which is a meaningless statistic, since it covers shooting all FBI analyzed shooting engagements, the majority of which involve the firing of one round, followed by one party surrendering or fleeing. Almost every two-way shooting I have ever worked went to empty guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 6:13:30 AM EDT
[#34]
There was recently a local one shot stop in the news. Home invasion IIRC. Round was a 22lr to the chest. Doesn't mean I will start to carry one, but there are a lot of nuances in a gunfight.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 6:43:47 AM EDT
[#35]
With modern JHP rounds I am going to assume there is not a huge difference. With FMJ though bigger and slower is better
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 7:07:22 AM EDT
[#36]
Load your clipazines up with this ammo and it won't matter what caliber it is.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 7:15:20 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then look at the expanded diameter, and you'll see a small difference between the calibers which will be argued as inconsequential. However, diameter is not an appropriate measure because bullets are not a line, they are a circle, so you need to apply pi r^2 to get relevant differences in expanded surface area. Most people forget the last part. IMO, they don't forget the last part, they don't factor it in because it is inconsequential. A bigger hole does nothing if it does not strike a blood vessel, the heart, or the CNS. The surface area has little to do with this as much as the diameter. We are trying to cut blood vessels, not necessarily poke holes. A larger projectile may cut slightly more, or if you are by literally hundredths of an inch may strike an artery that the 9mm would miss. In the majority of gunfights, these small increases are large prices to pay for the lesser capacity and higher recoil of a .45. Consider that a broadhead has almost no surface area, but considerable diameter, and still manages to wound effectively. (The same principle empowers HST and other "Talon" HPs to expand to greater diameters while still maintaining deep penetration.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 10:47:00 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sadly I'm short on cash to buy ordnance gel and a diverse selection of similar pistols in various calibers, otherwise I would make a penetration diagram of the current state of the art rounds. Would you be up for it instead? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That picture is dumb, old, and does not showcase the fact that there is a TON of variation with performance for different choices of rounds. Sadly I'm short on cash to buy ordnance gel and a diverse selection of similar pistols in various calibers, otherwise I would make a penetration diagram of the current state of the art rounds. Would you be up for it instead? A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:03:05 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Google ballistic gel testing and you will see all modern defensive HP's are designed to penetrate 12-15". Then look at the expanded diameter, and you'll see a small difference between the calibers which will be argued as inconsequential. However, diameter is not an appropriate measure because bullets are not a line, they are a circle, so you need to apply pi r^2 to get relevant differences in expanded surface area. Most people forget the last part. The results are there is not that much difference (at least that is the common mantra) therefore, it is more sensible to carry the smaller round giving the shooter more available rounds and lower recoil for faster follow up shots. But the whole debate centers around anti-personel type bullets. If you want to talk predator defense, or barrier penetration, then there are other factors. Holy shit! I can't believe I just read that in Arfcom GD! Bravo sir! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:09:55 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A write-up by DocGKR Who used to post here, but was run off by fuckery in the tech forums... He got ran off from TOS as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:12:43 AM EDT
[#41]
Bigger hole is better hole.
45>40>9 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:17:01 AM EDT
[#42]
Yep, pretty much believed that these rounds are relatively similar with modern ammo, and shot placement not caliber, will likely be the deciding factor in effectiveness.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:18:05 AM EDT
[#43]
The 9mm v 45 debate is a stalemate. I carry a 9mm. You carry a .45 and claim its better. Only one way to find you! Let me shoot you with my 9mm. Then you can shoot me with your .45 after
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:22:04 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote Historyhaha nice |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:25:01 AM EDT
[#45]
Obviously OP's buddy has the inside track to the .45 ACP's "kockdown power" (2nd only to the 12 Ga. shotgun) and has insider info on the conspiracy of the .40/9mm cartel to supress that critical info.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 11:30:45 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote Historyawwwww yissss |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:09:22 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
whatever. A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That picture is dumb, old, and does not showcase the fact that there is a TON of variation with performance for different choices of rounds. Sadly I'm short on cash to buy ordnance gel and a diverse selection of similar pistols in various calibers, otherwise I would make a penetration diagram of the current state of the art rounds. Would you be up for it instead? A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. Winning on the dyno does not mean you will win at the track. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:17:38 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Winning on the dyno does not mean you will win at the track. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That picture is dumb, old, and does not showcase the fact that there is a TON of variation with performance for different choices of rounds. Sadly I'm short on cash to buy ordnance gel and a diverse selection of similar pistols in various calibers, otherwise I would make a penetration diagram of the current state of the art rounds. Would you be up for it instead? A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. Winning on the dyno does not mean you will win at the track. this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 3:35:26 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
whatever. A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sadly I'm short on cash to buy ordnance gel and a diverse selection of similar pistols in various calibers, otherwise I would make a penetration diagram of the current state of the art rounds. Would you be up for it instead? A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. Wat? No, seriously, I've done gel testing before and would gladly do it again, but I am the poors right now. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 11:36:43 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: whatever. A picture with no bullet data, no max penetration depth or expansion, brand information, test preparation and calibration data no nothing... just a line that indicates 12"... The entire point of gel testing is for collection and comparison of hard data, and that picture gives none of it. You can get defensive all you want to. It's a shitty picture that gives no relevant data. IF you bother to find the source of that picture, you'll find all the data you are asking for. So... Whatever. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
