Someone compiled a list of the energy, measured in foot-pounds, generated by various pistol rounds. This is for informational purposes only; I'm not saying any round is "better" than any other (IOW, let's not start a shitstorm about this info).

9mm:
(12) 9mm, 115 gr @ 1155 fps, Momentum = 19.0 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 341ft lbs [15]
(13) 9mm, 124 gr @ 1120 fps, Momentum = 19.8 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 345 ft lbs [16]
(17) 9mm, 147 gr @ 990 fps, Momentum = 20.8 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 320 ft lbs [13]


.40:
(21) 40 S&W, 155 gr @ 1150 fps, Momentum = 25.2 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 455 ft lbs [27]
(26) 40 S&W, 165 gr @ 1110 fps, Momentum = 26.2 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 452 ft lbs [26]
(22) 40 S&W, 180 gr @ 990 fps, Momentum = 25.5 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 392 ft lbs [19]

.45:
(27) 45 ACP, 185 gr @ 1000 fps, Momentum = 26.4 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 411 ft lbs [23]
(29) 45 ACP, 200 gr @ 940 fps, Momentum = 26.9 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 393 ft lbs [20]
(30) 45 ACP, 230 gr @ 850 fps, Momentum = 27.9 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 369 ft lbs [18]


Information posted on THIS SITE

I'm not exactly sure what muzzle energy is supposed to convey with regards to personal defense or any other matter.

.40 FTMFW!

Op i see you strategically left off the true king....  10mm.  

S

An easy way to tell the amount of energy a bullet may have?





Same with momentum.



Or watts.
IIRC I think .30-30 is in the 40 watt range...

It's one if many ways, when compiled together, we can measure performance of a round.

uuhhhh.... more energy = more punch? something like that.

I was looking at a reason to switch to 9mm, thinking that if it moved faster than the .45, it would make up for its smaller size with greater kinetic energy. And with the new polymer-tipped HP design, the 9 would be an ideal carry round.



I also left off the .38, the .357,... that's why I included the link. I think if you polled Arfcom, you would find that at least 87% of members are carrying one of these three: 9mm, .40 or .45.

What I'm getting at is this: what do you expect kinetic energy to do with regard to physical damage by a bullet?

All it does it rate the kinetic energy.  Absolutely no description of how that energy is applied to the target. It has some relevence, but certainly is not full picture.  There are 22-250 and 454 casul loads that are comparable in energy, but how they perform relies on physical properties of the bullet.   These handgun energy values also correlate to recoil....imagine that.

My G20L shoots Underwood 180gr XTPs at 1420 FPS.  806 lb/ft of KE.



 

What about those of us carrying 7.62x38R?

If I recall correctly...the .40SW is a +P type round (chamber pressures match +P pressures in the older .45acp and 9mm rounds) as it's only used in 'modern' guns (newer construction and can handle the increased pressures as opposed to Luger type pistols, older .45acp revolvers, etc.).

A 'fair' comparison is 9mm+P and .45acp+P loads...

Federal Bullets:

Hornady bullets:

O_P I agree with you but at least a few people at Arfcom think this info is "dated".
JIm

no 44 mag FTMFW

 

In this case in conveys how pathetic and weak a typical handgun is.  Only good for fighting your way back to a rifle or shotgun.  Quibbling over 50/lbs or 100/lbs energy is useless.  Find the handgun you shoot best, learn to use it correctly, and keep a rifle or shotgun nearby.

Amateur!:

The numbers are "confusing" to those burning with 9mm hatred.  

Viva le 9mm!      

really, you have four options.



small bullet moving really fast-9mm

medium bullet moving medium velocity-40S&W

huge bullet moving slow-45

large bullet moving really fast-10mm.



10mm is superior in terms of penetration and destruction, but is expensive and I think over penetrates.

I chose 45 because hand casting is easier, and I trust a large bullet to lose momentum after hitting people better than a small bullet. That is personal preference.

I hate 40 cal because I feel it has the recoil disadvantages of 10mm without the performance advantages. If I'm going to shoot a snappy caliber, I might as well shoot one capable of dispatching black bears, elk, mountain lions, etc.


 

Awwwww You're the last person I expected to post up that old ass out of date picture showing rounds performing close to the FBI's MINIMUM on 12 inches.
It's such a same and disingenuous poster, especially when you take into account the 12" line is a minimum standard, and the FBI's recommended amount of penetration is closer to 18".
 

That "12 inch" penetration picture really just pisses me off.  All it shows is what happens when you cherry pick results and place them side by side.  And people are dumb enough to fall for it when it gets posted.
"Well golly the picture shows all da bullets go the same distance, so it mush no batter why bullets ya use!".





Data from FBI testing in the 90's.



Norma 170 grain 10mm






     

     

     

     

   

   

     

     

     

     

   

   

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

Test Gun	Barrel Length	Velocity	Bare Gelatin	Clothed Gelatin
Penetration	Expansion	Penetration	Expansion
Colt Delta	5"	1358 fps	16.55"	0.59"	17.00"	0.63"

9mm 147 grain Winchester Ranger Talon JHP










     

     

     

     

   

   

     

     

     

     

   

   

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

Test Gun	Barrel Length	Velocity	Bare Gelatin	Clothed Gelatin
Penetration	Expansion	Penetration	Expansion
Beretta M92FS	5.0"	1017 fps	13.75"	0.66"	15.50"	0.65"

 
   
 
   



     

     

     

     

     

   

   

     

     

     

     

   

   

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

Test Gun	Barrel Length	Velocity	Bare Gelatin	Clothed Gelatin
Penetration	Expansion	Penetration	Expansion
SIG P220	4.25"	1046 fps	10.10"	0.87"	9.50"	0.81"

Guess 10mm is better than .45 if we're going to cherry pick old ass data!


 

Anyone can 'cherry pick' data...and to get someone's attention, you often need to have a good visual.    I've seen the link O_P posted above and have read it in the past...lots of good data.

For me (first and foremost) when someone asks what to use for self defense...I try to figure out what kind of a 'shooter' will they be?

The guy that buys a shotgun for home defense, loads it and puts it in the back of the closet, just in case (and the same 3 rounds are in it when he finally gets rid of it...and never took the plug out that made it legal to hunt with)?
The guy who wants a night stand gun for home defense, maybe shoots a couple of rounds when he gets it and loads it up and never takes it out again?
The girl who's afraid of the ex that's stalking her, but is afraid of guns?
The guy who wants to use the gun to defend his business and treats it like any 'tool'....learns to use it right and takes it out occasionally to keep up the 'maintenance' on it?
The guy who wants to carry because he realizes the world is getting more dangerous and he's the only one who can reliably protect himself and his family...

And, finally the newbie ARF member who's here to learn how to prep for the Zombie Apocalypse.

Each of them has a different 'need' in a firearm.

Once you help them pick out the firearm that's 'right' for them...and considerations include how much practice, what their use will be, and how will they handle recoil...then you get into fine points like Ft Lbs of muzzle energy vs. the proper amount of penetration (without over penetrating).  

A pistol that under-penetrates (or over-penetrates due to lack of expansion) may still be the appropriate pistol for a small-handed, recoil shy female if that's the only one she can handle and shoot accurately and reliably.      I sold some ammo (some .25 Glaser and .32acp) to a guy locally and got to chatting...).   He's a shooter, but due to medical problems with his hands, he can't shoot anything heavier.    But he's still shooting to the best of his ability.

Using Muzzle Energy isn't the a good metric for picking a handgun round.......(my home defense and carry stuff is listed in the link O_P posted however...I can hit reasonably well with the gun that takes it, I can get it in boxes of 50 to practice with, and at the +P loading, it's potent enough).    

AFARR

dupe

I don't put too much stock in kinetic energy, but many of us who carry the 9mm carry the Speer 124 grain +P Gold Dot.  This round chrono's at 1,249 FPS from my Sig P226. Speer's published data is:

Speer Gold Dot Ammunition 9mm Luger +P 124 Grain
Muzzle Velocity: 1220 fps
Muzzle Energy: 410 ft. lbs.

In gel tests I've seen, this round consistently expands to .6"+ and penetrates past 12".  Most premium SD hollow point rounds in 9mm, .40, .357 Sig, and .45 ACP will do this.  I say carry whatever you want, I couldn't care less what round other people choose to carry. Unless I'm hiking in the wilderness, I personally stay with a 9mm G19, P226, P228, or similar.  In the woods, I carry a 10mm G20, 7.62mm AK, 12 gauge 870, or some variant of an AR15.

Needs to be updated for 10mm











 

quoted for posterity.



 

If I may quote the original poster of this thread, who is possessed of inexhaustible wisdom:


I think the information is interesting, but NEVER said that it was the last word.

Now, go eat a can of beans, blast the sand out, and go read a book or something.

Fah-ten, bud shot, an ma' Judge is ah I needs
 

So I guess me asking you to even make a half-assed attempt to explain what you apparently believe equates to sand in my ass?

I wish they would simulate bone in gel tests. Smaller bullets get finicky through denser bone than gel.  Slow and heavy wins.

At least for pistol calibers.

There is a lot of bone on the torso, clavicle and ribs can take away oomph on smaller lighter rounds. Heavy bullets keep on truck 'n.

Coroners viewpoint on pistol ammo.

Which is why I carry .41 magnum!

Well, most of the data indicate that pistol calibers poke holes.  Stopping a determined aggressor means poking a hole in the right place.  For me, that means capacity rather than caliber.  Most seem to be equally poor or great at killing humans depending on shot placement.  And in a hurried situation, that means a lot of shots.  Someone is not going to bleed out on the way across the room.  They will stop because they cannot move, through either an inability for the blood to power the tissues or the nerves to tell the body what to do.  And to a non-knowable extent, the psychological reaction to being shot.  I wouldn't bet on the latter...

Given this, the choice seems to be the 9/38/357/40/45 that you can pour as many shots into aimed fire in as short an amount of time as possible.  The 10mm presents an interesting quandary in that it is quite a bit more cartridge than it's buddies, it's pretty controllable and available in a high capicity handgun.  But is one 10mm better than 2 of the others?  Given the recovery time between shots and the fricken pumpkin sized fireball that comes out of the end of my 10mm?  It's not the handgun that is resting on my nightstand, that's for sure.

And you sir win the internets tonight.

IIRC Gel while a homogenous mix, when calibrated and adjusted correctly, gives very similar penetration results to actual gunshot wounds.  





Also, that website is a good read, I I enjoyed it, but I also think the guy was discredited a bit, don't remember the whole story but I know a lot of people poo poo it.



 

(34) 10mm Auto, 155 gr @ 1410 fps, Momentum = 31.2 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 684 ft lbs [36]
(35) 10mm Auto, 180 gr @ 1240 fps, Momentum = 31.9 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 615 ft lbs [34]
(36) 10mm Auto, 200 gr @ 1050 fps, Momentum = 32.9 lb-f/s - Muzzle Energy = 587 ft lbs [33]

I'll be sure to consult this chart the next time I'm in fear of being attacked by steel plates and bowling pins.

That is nice on paper and such, but for shooting people and critters shot pacement matters.

Well within reason, that is. I have seen dead people with a .22 to the chest or head no problem.

Then the guy shot 4 times or so with a .45 and pissed and crying for help, all leg shots.

Skinny lady, shot with .380, headshot was glancing tore away skin, chest shot under arm about 6 inches below armpit, she barley made it. Surgeon earned his money that day. Little known fact that was about 20 years ago, saw her at a car wreck in summer of 2011. When I was talking to her she said that she took some psych meds because she never got over the domestic abuse relationship and shooting she had been in. Moved her hair back so I could see her scar, I said "I know you, you were also shot here (pointing at chest) and it was at #$#$%^^^."

"Yeah that is me, you remember," we continued to talk, she was not hurt in the wreck, then gave me a hug and thank you

Lots of arm, leg, gut shots, most live, most can/could continue to fight. Shot placement matters good placement either dead or out of fight.

Yes rifles do a lot more damage than pistols.

Any decent caliber to a vital area is GTG

If you have not figured out I am a FF, I also went to Paramedic school and did my internship for that in the North End of Portland OR, during the late 80's and thier gang wars.

This.

As far as the data contained in those tables is concerned, rather than muzzle energry, the much more interesting - and relevant - values listed are the ones for momentum.

Muzzle energy is a poor way to measure defensive handgun round performance.  They all suck.  Accept this and carry something you will carry and can hit accurately and effectively with.  They all poke roughly the same size holes if you pick the right ammo.

Nothing until bone is hit.

Larger, heavier bullets tend to carry more momentum, as evidenced in the numbers in the OP.

I only deal in TKDP or Tactical Knock Down Power. After reading Sanow's work and doing some research myself (in conjunction with S. Bulmer) there is no value in the so called "gel shots" or whatever artificial test you may do. Here is some science to you: H Y D R O S T A T I C SHOCK!!! Lighter weight secondary projectiles can achieve this when reaching critical deprogramming velocity. This would make a secondary weapon primary capable by virtue of its knockdown power and additive capabilities of armor piercing. There is no ballistic gel bad guy so it doesn't work in the lab. A ham roast is best, by far. NAVY SEALAT and Marine MARCOM may have requested similar ammunition but that cannot be confirmed.

Did I say useless, or did I say minimum standard? You can create an argument there if you want to, but you're making mountains out of molehills.  My argument is that that poster is outdated, and inappropriately used to "prove" that all the service rounds penetrate the same and that it "doesn't matter" what you carry.  





Here's an interesting link though, that talks about the 12 inch minimum...    (You left yourself open for it)



http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm





"While some people question the 12" penetration limit, it is not subject
to discussion in this article. The FBI is deemed to be more
knowledgeable than most, and it is backed up my Dr. Martin Fackler and
others who have spent their life discussing the subject. Duncan
McPherson, in his book "Bullet Penetration: Modeling the Dynamics and
the Incapacitation Resulting from Wound Trauma" actually argues that
15" is not an unrealistic requirement a bullet should obtain. He does
point out, however, that 11.5" of penetration shouldn't completely
disqualify a bullet from being acceptable either. While 12" should be a
minimum requirement, 18" is the approximate maximum desired penetration
depth. Beyond that, and the bullet is likely to exit the intended
target and retain enough energy to cause others harm if a person should
be in the line of fire.
Obviously you should never take the shot if you're not sure of what's
beyond your target and rely on your ammunition to do your job of being
prudent."
Of course, we both know that 12-18" window comes from the FBI handgun wounding factors.
 

Thank goodness, finally someone "in the know"!
I agree 100%, it's why I only carry extreme shock, and RBCD brand ammo.



 

It shows that 6 rounds at specific weights and velocities (but  does not say the bullet type) will preform similar, nothing more.   Definitely not "most" as there are PLENTY of rounds that do NOT meet that 12" line, and plenty that penetrate much more, in all calibers.
My favorite part of that picture, is how all the bullets came to rest sideways so you can see how much they expanded, and how some of the wound tracks on the right of the blue line apparently change size vs the left (most evident in the .357 sig).
 

I'm going to try and derail the op's thread again.  

What the hell is hydrostatic shock?  Shock is dynamic.  
What the hell is critical deprogramming velcoity?  Velocity is a vector of direction and magnitude and I don't know how to program it.

In reality velocity has very little to do with terminal ballistics.  Acceleration, changes in acceleration, and the forces/pressures created that matter. Velocity is just very easy to measure and comprehend.