Evil Monkey
New member
when there is 10mm, which is better than all 3?
says who?
when there is 10mm, which is better than all 3?
Then why not use 10mm?
Why settle for .40, which is practically no better than 9mm or .45, when there is 10mm, which is better than all 3?
The answer is that most people are recoil sensitive.
That's why agencies have decided that .40 may be good for some, but 9mm or .45 is better for most.
Because everyone likes 9mm these days, for good reason.
If you could stretch the 32acp and put it into a 45acp frame pistol, now we're getting somewhere.
Figure a 100gr bullet at a velocity minimum of 1,100fps...
One of the ways to goof up something/anything is, to mix it with politics.
If you could stretch the 32acp and put it into a 45acp frame pistol, now we're getting somewhere.
Figure a 100gr bullet at a velocity minimum of 1,100fps...
what about 10mm? what kind of recoil it has?
Then why not use 10mm?
Why settle for .40, which is practically no better than 9mm or .45, when there is 10mm, which is better than all 3?
Then why not use 10mm?
Why settle for .40, which is practically no better than 9mm or .45, when there is 10mm, which is better than all 3?
^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The 40 is ballistically no better than the 9 or 45 with premium ammo. If you want more, then actually get more, not the appearance of more.
Cause some people like smaller guns.
Cause they don't need the power of the 10mm, again for the size of gun they want.
No, the answer is people don't want the size of gun the 10mm demands.
Deaf
They all pass the threshold of energy and sectional density by a wide margin needed to fully penetrate a human body.
Exactly my point, and since the 9 and 45 were here for decades before the 40 showed up, it's a solution in search of a problem, the answer to a question no one asked............