This is sure to stir up some shit but here it goes. For the folks who follow this stuff, here is the top 10 self defense rounds for pistols. These were compiled by Ed Sannow and Evan Marshal using actual police shootings. Well here it goes.
10. .40 S&W 180gr. Hydra-Shok
9. .41 Magnum 175gr. SilverTip
8. .357 Sig 125gr. Rainer JHP
7. .44 Magnum 210gr. SilverTip
6. .40 S&W 135gr. CorBon JHP
5. 9mm 115gr. +P+ Federal
4. .45 ACP 185gr. +P  Golden Sabre
3  .45 ACP 230gr. Hydra-Shok
2. .357 Magnum 125gr. JHP Federal
1..40 S&W 155gr. Hydra-Shok

Just a note here. It was in the authors opinion that the medium weight 40's were the best all around defense cartridge out there.

It is like music to my ears.

Bah, 45acp will kick anythings ass, day or night, I don't need facts, I have my feelings!

Good.  .40 S&W 155gr. Hydra-Shok are what I carry anyway.

USPC40

-------------------------------------------------
NRA Life Member - www.nra.org
GOA Life Member - www.gunowners.org
SAF Member - www.saf.org
SAS Supporter - www.sas-aim.org

No, .40 was deveolped because they couldnt shoot 10mm  .40 is to 10mm as .38 special is to .357 mag.  Why shoot .40, when you can have 10mm?  You can always download 10mm to .40 specs but you cant magnumize .40 to 10mm.

Don't be jealous. Just think what the .40 will be like after 80 or 90 years to work on perfecting it. Oh wait, it seems that it is the best already.

1911 in .45 or a S&W in .357 magnum.

For someone not owning a .45 or 10mm Ide rather have one of them than my trimmed 10mm. But oh well I know I can sell my G23 anyday to people thinking like this to buy my 10mm or .45 acp. Or maybe my wife will keep it and shoot it when I do upgrade.

My rankings would be....
old school 10mm
.45 acp
then maybe a magnum cartridge or .40 s&w

You know that Sannow and Marshal have been ridiculed by virtually every statistics expert and competent scientist who has examined their work.  You should read some of the things that Dr. Martin Fackler has written about them.  I value the opinion of the Army's coronor a bit more than two ex-cops who decided to make up some stories for gun rags.  Suffice it to say that I don't place much stock in the value of  their data.

My favorite thing on that list is the .40 cal being more effective than a .44 magnum.  Its interesting how a round which is smaller, less powerful and has less penetration is more lethal........  As Dr. Fackler pointed out in regards to this phenomenom, "if you are shot in the same place with a .44 magnum, the .44 magnum will create a bigger hole....."  Words to live by.

Marshall and Sannow used to have a complete "study," in which they listed the effectiveness of all types of firearm wounds.  In the old study, 9mm+p+ was listed as being more effective than 12 guage slugs.  This sort of data speaks for itself.

By the way, .45's rule.


-SouthernShark

Why don't they compile
data from all
shootings????

One large department
where all of the
officers are using the same
ammunition
is enough to
fudge up this data.

well as usual everybody is still overlooking the 41 mag.

.41 mag is GREAT!!!!!  Just not many guns made for it, or many loads (compared to other cartridges).  More powerful than a .357, but less kick and blast than a .41 magnum.  Great hunting cartridge.  But for self defense, I'd prefer the 10mm to the .41 anyday.   More rounds and less kick.  Now, if it were .357 sig compared to .357 mag, I'd have to take .357 mag.  .357 mag is kind of my minimum caliber power threshold.  9mm only if you can have capacity over 14 rounds. (glock 17 or some kind of subgun/carbine).  

Now, these are just my opinions, so dont take them personally

A .44mag can be equal to a .22LR, the only difference is the shooter.  Shot placement and consistency will always outrule caliber, tips, and ballistic capabilities.  A veteran with a .22 target pistol will beat a novice with .357 Hydra-Shoks in a firefight everytime.

I have heard the pro's and con's on the issue of wether or not Marshall and Sannow work was credible or not. To be honest I just posted it to see what the die-hard 45's would say. I figured they would rail against it. The article the information was taken from stated that it was a conclusion drawn from actual police shootings. This is the reason you don't see some of the other calibers because they are not normally carried by LEO's.

Let's be honest here. We all know that the 10mm has more power then the 9,40,45,and 357. If you want knock down power the full house 10mm is the only reasonable choice. If it were that important then we would all be carrying .454 Casuals'.

The 9mm+P+, .40, .45, and .357 Sig or Magnum are all about equal in the top loads. This being the case then one has to then draw up what gun will fit them best. The only reason the 45's work so well is because they are out of a 5" gun. If you carry a more compact 45 then you are giving up the supposed superior fire power of the 45.

But even if you do carry a 5" gun the 45 is more difficult in the full powered loads to shoot. As Campy mentioned he doesn't get the time to practice with his pistol as he would like. Most gun owners don't practice with their pistols anywhere near as often as they should. This being the case you will probably need to shoot more than the supposed "one shot stop" bullet and have quick follow-up shots. This is an area that the 45 is lacking in. Well the full powered loads anyway. Not the mouse fart competition loads you see all these race-gunners using to do all this super shooting with.

I think all of us know that only an idiot would bring a pistol to a gun fight anyway. A person needs to use what pistol they are comfortable with. But basing ones decision on myth's and tradition and not on current information does not always lead to the best choice. IMO

Quoted: I think all of us know that only an idiot would bring a pistol to a gun fight anyway. A person needs to use what pistol they are comfortable with. But basing ones decision on myth's and tradition and not on current information does not always lead to the best choice. IMO]

Dude get yourself a Highpoint.  The myth and tradition is that they suck.  But according to Marshall and Sannow they are 99.95 percent effective, even if they shoot you in the toe.

There is a lot of myth and tradition around the .45.  Its the American saga.  You can bet on America, or against it. Its your call.

Let me repeat my bazooka analogy for these guys.

If there is one incident where a guy was shot with a Bazooka, but it did not detonate and was somehow deflected then the Bazooka gets a Zero. If that was the only Bazooka shooting in America then the Bazooka is Zero percent effective.  hmmmm....  If there was one person in America killed or dropped by 1 shot from a .32 ACP, then the .32 ACP would be more effective than a Bazooka. I guess it would be ok to be shot with a Bazooka then..... Its less dangerous than a .32 ACP.......

Also their data is just plain wrong. Where do they come up with 99 percent effective anyway? Does this really mean that 99 percent of the people shot with 1 .40 cal round are totally disabled? I don't buy that for a second.

According to them you could be shot in the toe with a .40 cal and be disabled 99 percent of the time.  What garbage... These boys were playing an early beta of Counterstrike, or taking too much Acid when they made up their study.

-SS

Let me stick it over here to. Just so everybody understands.

SS, Your call to patriotism is very nice. I am feeling all warm and fuzzy inside.

I will agree that there research models can seem a little wacky. Like I said I just put it out there to see what you guys thought.

Just to let you know I am just busting balls here. I would feel just as confident with a 45 if I had to have one. I just happen to prefer the 40 myself. I hope I haven't gotten you to cranky.

I will say that a fully loaded G22 is just to.

..and I'll say unloading a .45 is
even er.

Any other cheapskates here recycle
their IPSC targets????
I use brown postal wrapping paper and
elmers glue.

Of all the rounds I have tested over the years, and it is a lot of rounds through a lot of different guns, the 165 gr. Golden Sabre has given me the best and most consistent performance. It's my #1 choice in a .40. I have followed Ed and Evans work for quite a few years now. In comparing it to my own findings and what we found when I was still working at the Sheriff's office, sometimes my results have been inline with theirs and at others it hasnt. Evan the vaunted 125 gr. .357 mag can fail. I have a dash camera video of a SC State trooper that showes him shooting a guy 5 times in the chest at ranges from point blank to about 5 ft with a .357 with 125's and the guy killed the trooper with one shot from a NAA .22 and lived to go to trial. I just feel there are too many factors, both tangible and non-tangible that come into play to be able to accuratley say what rounds will work and what wont, or to definitevly say that one is x amount better than another. My theory is to use their findings as a reference, get what you like, and test it yourself to make sure it works in your gun.

If you can shoot a .45 platform as well as a .40S&W I see no reason to use the .40.  With today's hicap mag ban you're getting a 2 maybe 3 round capacity advantage at best.

The .40 is a good round, but better than .45.  Hardly.  In the end, shot placement, penetration and the biggest damn hole you can put in the guy still is the best way to go.

GardenWeasel I think you need to keep practicing.

Mute, the only thing the 45 has, is it is a bigger round. The loadings make them so similiar that you would be served by both of them. The problem starts when the 45 is put into the guns under 5". They start to lose their benefit when they start dropping barrel lengths. The 40's are standard in 4" guns. This allows for a more concealabe package to start with. If you are thinking tactical purposes, then you should of brought a rifle.

Actually, I don't think the .45acp round will start losing its "advantage" until were talking about Officer's length barrels (3.5") or shorter.

While there certainly is a wider choice of smaller pistols chambered in .40, the 1911 platform which tends to be the gun most .45 lovers choose have a thinner frame and slide and can also give concealment advantages.

From my personal preferences, I'd rather have a Colt Combat Commander in .45 than a Glock 36, but I'd rather have a Glock 36 than a Glock 30 and prefer those over a 23 or 28.

Quoted: Actually, I don't think the .45acp round will start losing its "advantage" until were talking about Officer's length barrels (3.5") or shorter.

My point exactly.

While there certainly is a wider choice of smaller pistols chambered in .40, the 1911 platform which tends to be the gun most .45 lovers choose have a thinner frame and slide and can also give concealment advantages.

Yes the thinner slide helps but the big push seems to be in the smaller sized guns now a days.

From my personal preferences, I'd rather have a Colt Combat Commander in .45 than a Glock 36, but I'd rather have a Glock 36 than a Glock 30 and prefer those over a 23 or 28.

I didn't think there was another gun then a Glock.

Yes the thinner slide helps but the big push seems to be in the smaller sized guns now a days.

Yes, but that doesn't mean those are better choices.

I didn't think there was another gun then a Glock.

Man, I give up.  This is hopeless!  :D

Ok I guess I will get down, for now anyway!

It rates a 9mm 115gr +P+ as superior to a CorBon .40 S&W 135gr load- the velocities of these two rounds are comparable
(the .40 is slightly higher I believe), and the .40 is a larger diameter, and heavier.  That list is pretty flawed IMHO.

Gee, how many times have I heard this debate.

The info is based on statistical data, and we as gunowners know what statistics can do to reality.

I do believe at this point in time, the 40 S&W is predominant round used by LEO, correct me if I am wrong.

The 357 125jhp was the big dog on the block for many years, primarily because it was the the prolific round in LEO use.

Because humans many and varied, can absorb
all kinds of damage before shutting down, caliber/design nor energy is a consistent
indicator of leathality or the ability to stop.

The FBI Miami shootout is a good place to
read about humans absorbing damage.

My rule of thumb is carry the largest caliber weapon (expanding design projo)that is practical, and that I can use proficiently.

Shot placement is more important than caliber/design, so practice, practice, practice.

Waterdog




 

Ok I guess it is time to get back up.

The .40 RULES because it is a 40. What else is there to say. It is the best self defense round. It will out perform any other caliber. It is economical. It is well balanced. Shit if you cook while wearing one the food tastes better. And last but not least. It will fit any other catagory because if you drink a 40 then everything will be great.

Unfortunately my pistol wont fire the little 40's.  Whenever I try to chamber one it just launches right out of the barrel and falls to the floor.  Damnest thing!

Guys, read this page on why 180 gr. in .40 is a bad idea.  http://www.greent.com/40Page/ammo/40/180gr.htm  I personally like my Glock 20 with 15+1 rounds!  A close second is my SigPro 357Sig/.40 S&W.

My very first handgun was a .40. I have shot more 180 .40's than anything else (.40 wise)with no problems whatsoever. Our Sheriff's Office (3000 + employees) has been using Glock 22's with 180's for years now with no problems. Thats a lot of 180's downrange and no KB's or any other problems.

Quoted: Guys, read this page on why 180 gr. in .40 is a bad idea.  www.greent.com/40Page/ammo/40/180gr.htm  I personally like my Glock 20 with 15+1 rounds!  A close second is my SigPro 357Sig/.40 S&W.

First let me say that I don't mind the 180gr. loads at all. They are just as reliable as any of the other 40's I have tried. I don't prefer them for self defense though.

For self defense I always have chosen the mid-weight bullets since they were introduced. They give the best compromise between velocity, power, accuracy, and penetration.

As far as this over pressure statement. I wont ever understand how this folks will say that the 40 cant handle the increased pressure. The 40 is rated at the 9mm standard. If a 9mm can handle +P+ ammo then a 40 built on the identical platfrom will be able to also. I know that no one is selling +P+ rated 40 because there has been no agreement by the industry on this matter. If someone is selling ammo marked +P then it is higher pressure then the standard but I doubt dangerous to say the least.

I can tell you from my own experiences of hand loading 40 ammo that they do hold up well. I load up some extremely hot 155gr. Gold Dots and have no problem whatsoever.

If you like 180's then keep using them. I am planning on getting some more Wolf 180's at the next show. But I still say that the 155's are the way to go for self defense.IMO

For a smaller profile CHL gun I'd rather have a .40 S&W.  Is there even a point to having a .45 that isn't a full size?  I just don't see the point in it.

I'm about to buy a Kimber for my wife, and then a HK USP for myself, both in .45ACP.  However, my CHL rig will still be my Glock 27 with Pearce +1 grip extensions in a Kydex holster or Pager Pal.

You guys carry what you like, and I'll do the same.  As long as we all survive our day to day lives, I think we've done OK.

God Bless Texas