Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 6/2/2010 6:53:01 PM EDT
All right I have been a .40 cal guy for a LOOOONG time. I personally am not a fan of 9mm I can respect it but still not a fan. You know what they say opinions are like assholes.....  
but when did the 9mm make a major comeback. I know the whole easier controlability leads to the ability to get more rounds on target etc. But when?

So without starting a Flame War someone give me the latest thoughts on 9mm and why/when it started making a comeback.


Seriously I'm not makeing any digs or trying to be a smartass, I wanna know.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 7:02:17 PM EDT
I don't think 9mm ever left.

IMO, I have not seen any tests indicating that any of the common autopistol service calibers are significantly better or worse than the others WRT terminal ballistics.  I think that the age/technology/properties of the projectile make a larger difference.  For example, a .40S&W Black Talon will be inferior to a modern 9mm Federal HST.  

I don't like the .40 for a few reasons:
1) Too much muzzle flip compared to 9mm or even .45 ACP.  That is, it's "snappy."  
2) Reduced mag capacity compared to 9mm
3) Cost.  9mm is cheaper for me to practice with.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 8:51:02 PM EDT



Originally Posted By strat81:


I don't think 9mm ever left.



IMO, I have not seen any tests indicating that any of the common autopistol service calibers are significantly better or worse than the others WRT terminal ballistics.  I think that the age/technology/properties of the projectile make a larger difference.  For example, a .40S&W Black Talon will be inferior to a modern 9mm Federal HST.  



I don't like the .40 for a few reasons:

1) Too much muzzle flip compared to 9mm or even .45 ACP.  That is, it's "snappy."  

2) Reduced mag capacity compared to 9mm

3) Cost.  9mm is cheaper for me to practice with.


Big +1.



I hate the .40 because it's smaller than a .45, holds fewer rounds than 9mm, and has more recoil than both.



I was a big .45 caliber fan because I learned to shoot on a 1911, and the bullet looks so much bigger than the 9mm. However, I started researching terminal ballistics and discovered that there is almost no difference between the common service pistol cartridges using quality, modern ammunition. Coroners can't even tell the difference between 9mm, .40, and .45 caliber wounds. The only ballistic advantage I found with .45 was better bone penetration due to the increased mass. However, I believe the advantages of much faster followup shots and higher magazine capacity out way the slight increase in bone penetration (at least for me––YMMV). I'm a firm believer in carrying whichever service caliber you shoot best.



Here's a good place to start poking around. Read everything by Dr Gary Roberts (DocGKR).



 
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 8:54:50 PM EDT
I think its a couple of things.



1) cost, as far as practice goes 9mm is cheaper than 40 and 45




2) capacity, the 40 holds less and if you are going to hold less might as well be a big bullet, al la 45




3) the progress that ballistic technology has made. We can now have the capacity of the 9mm and the ability to do serious damage.
Link Posted: 6/2/2010 9:07:53 PM EDT
This is why
Link Posted: 6/3/2010 3:39:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Nowski87:
I think its a couple of things.

1. Cost
3) the progress that ballistic technology has made. We can now have the capacity of the 9mm and the ability to do serious damage.


I agree with this.  Defensive ammo technology has improved enough to the point where the most common calibers (9, .40, .45) are all pretty much equal.  Add in the cheaper cost of practice rounds and the 9 is a very attractive option.
Link Posted: 6/3/2010 8:32:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Nowski87:
[/div][div]2) capacity, the 40 holds less and if you are going to hold less might as well be a big bullet, al la 45[/div][div]


One thing I'd add to this is that while capacities have been increasing for .45 caliber pistols, for me, most double stack .45s are too big for my hands.  For example, the Glock 21 and 21SF aren't comfortable for me.


Link Posted: 6/3/2010 9:11:37 AM EDT
Cause 23 rounds of 124gr +P rock.

Also with as much as I shoot, 9mm blows .40 out of the water cost wise.

All my pistols are 9mm with the exception of my .22s and 1911.
Link Posted: 6/3/2010 9:30:10 AM EDT
The 9mm took a hit in popularity after Clinton ban and it's 10 round magazines.

The 9mm has been making a comeback since the ban was repealed and we can buy 15,17 even 19 round 9mm's.
Link Posted: 6/3/2010 8:17:11 PM EDT
Years ago I used to hate 9mm and was a .45 fan for a long time.  Then I got some professional training.  The instructors were pretty much in agreement that in a gun fight ALL pistol calibers suck.  All you are doing is trying to poke holes in a hydrolic cylinder until in runs out of fluid pressure, having said that the more holes the better.  They were insistent that all the major calibers are so close in terminal effectiveness that it doesn't matter what you choose what matters is where you hit.  If you take a .45 slug and miss vitals you will survive and if you take a 9mm to the heart you will die.  After reviewing countless gun fights they had determined that choice of caliber was not even an issue in determining the outcome, but shot placement and number of rounds on target was.  They strongly stressed shot placement and capacity over caliber.
Link Posted: 6/4/2010 4:39:16 AM EDT
Tech has improved. Older people are still living with the thoughts that big calibers, black talons and hydrashocks are the best rounds.



We're out of the eighties..... we can make the 9mm rounds do a lot of things in terms of defense.
Link Posted: 6/4/2010 2:26:22 PM EDT
Lot's of good insight here guys thanks. I may be able to see the other side of the equasion now.
Link Posted: 6/4/2010 5:18:43 PM EDT
I think cost is the big thing.

Ammo has gotten significantly more expensive. Last time I went shopping, it was $15/box for 9mm, $17/box for 40, and $23/box for 45.
Link Posted: 6/4/2010 5:41:38 PM EDT
when ammo prices skyrocketed and the only caliber affordable to the non reloader was 9mm yes there was a resurgence in popularity.
Just to bust on you a little how can you be a 40 fan for a long time when the caliber hasn't been around but 20 years?!
Link Posted: 6/4/2010 5:48:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By nvhunter:
This is why
http://www.unholyshouse.com/xdm19+1.jpg


+1 on the XDm  Sweet piece of pistol.  Has basically twice the mag capacity of my old G26 and I can still afford to shoot it.

Indy
Link Posted: 6/5/2010 4:17:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By captain127:
when ammo prices skyrocketed and the only caliber affordable to the non reloader was 9mm yes there was a resurgence in popularity.
Just to bust on you a little how can you be a 40 fan for a long time when the caliber hasn't been around but 20 years?!



When a person is 37 y/o 20 years is a looong time. lol I''m not talking a milenia here. LOL
Top Top