9mm revolvers ?
- Thread starter RAfiringline
- Start date
Cosmodragoon
New member
All this talk of energy mattering or not... Look. People and animals are obviously not gel. However, they are made of real-world stuff. Looking at how these projectiles behave in other real-world stuff, including everything from standardized media like gel to cleverly constructed meat targets, shows that there are some differences in how they behave and what they can do.
I don't think there is much debate that most modern defensive cartridges do enough damage against hearts, brains, spinal columns, etc., at least within your average human assailant. That's great. Is there anywhere else that an assailant might be shot? Is there anywhere on the body where those differences in destructive capability might make a little difference? Is there any possible scenario in which your real-world defense might rely upon getting a shot into one of those areas on an assailant's body?
Yeah, the chances of an entangled defensive encounter where a thigh, shoulder, hip, etc. is your only possible target might be small. For many of us, our chances of getting into any defensive encounter in which we'd need to defend our lives with a firearm is small. Yet most of the people participating in this thread probably go through the trouble of carrying a firearm daily and doing everything else that goes along with that.
I don't think there is much debate that most modern defensive cartridges do enough damage against hearts, brains, spinal columns, etc., at least within your average human assailant. That's great. Is there anywhere else that an assailant might be shot? Is there anywhere on the body where those differences in destructive capability might make a little difference? Is there any possible scenario in which your real-world defense might rely upon getting a shot into one of those areas on an assailant's body?
Yeah, the chances of an entangled defensive encounter where a thigh, shoulder, hip, etc. is your only possible target might be small. For many of us, our chances of getting into any defensive encounter in which we'd need to defend our lives with a firearm is small. Yet most of the people participating in this thread probably go through the trouble of carrying a firearm daily and doing everything else that goes along with that.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
There are some combat instructors who teach that a hip shot is a good shot. Hitting someone in the hip isn't guaranteed to take them completely out of the fight, but it will remove or significantly degrade their mobility.Cosmodragoon said:
TruthTellers
New member
So you're going to sell the .357's you have for a Walther PPK? Good luck Mr. Bond.
We don't know the dynamics of every single shooting in that study, we can't determine who was the one pulling the trigger and how effective THEY were as shooters, but we can see that .357 had the lowest failure to incapacitate of all the handgun calibers.
and you said I cherry picked...
Cosmodragoon
New member
The hips and pelvic girdle are structurally important. Mechanical damage to these areas could stop an attacker from advancing or allow you to escape. This is an example of the kinds of cases where a little more power could come in handy. At the very least, it wouldn't hurt to have a few more ft-lbs on your side for such a shot.
wild cat mccane
New member
Federal owns/makes: Gold Dot, Hydra/Hydro shok, HST, Speer Bonded (Underwood and Buffalo Bore loads these old bullets). Vista owns Speer, Federal, Federal Premium...basically all the great bullets except XTP and Barnes.
If Federal (which makes HST 38spl, Gold Dot 357, Gold Dot 10mm) is saying the 9mm HST performs better than their previous bullets because it goes deep, while providing full 9mm expansion, while not requiring massive amounts of velocity (ie, like their old Speer Bonded bullet does), post the link where Buffalo Bore bear killer owner says on his own website 9mm will kill bear, I show a scientific article on metplat size doesn't matter on 357 from a big game hunting bullet maker, I present Lucky Gunner using the same gel with 357 vs 9mm with pictures...and you still want to call me wrong?
At this point, I'm okay with you calling me wrong.
The floor of opinion with no evidence is owned by you.
If Federal (which makes HST 38spl, Gold Dot 357, Gold Dot 10mm) is saying the 9mm HST performs better than their previous bullets because it goes deep, while providing full 9mm expansion, while not requiring massive amounts of velocity (ie, like their old Speer Bonded bullet does), post the link where Buffalo Bore bear killer owner says on his own website 9mm will kill bear, I show a scientific article on metplat size doesn't matter on 357 from a big game hunting bullet maker, I present Lucky Gunner using the same gel with 357 vs 9mm with pictures...and you still want to call me wrong?
At this point, I'm okay with you calling me wrong.
The floor of opinion with no evidence is owned by you.
HighValleyRanch
New member
The key here is not "will kill", but did kill
One incident doesn't prove anything other that it can happen.
And Lucky Gunner did not provide any gel testing with Buffalobore.
Why not? after all, compared to his Beretta, the PPK "hits like a brick through a plate glass window"....
it boils down to this, any and every bullet that goes where it needs to go, works. Whether it expands, or not. BUT, getting that bullet there takes a combination of factors and the world isn't a perfect place.
SO, the while the minimum will work, when things are perfect, having more increases the odds of success when things aren't perfect.
9mm revolvers exist, some think they are ideal for some things. I don't think they are useful for anything I do. If you do, fine, get one, or three if you like. but don't ague what works for me isn't good enough, you're just annoying the pig.
And, don't forget the real lesson of the 1986 FBI Miami shootout. A 9mm, fired from a service automatic, failed to instantly stop the bad guy. The lesion isn't that the 9mm failed, it isn't that we have "better" ammo today. the lesson is that the round that met all the approved requirements and standards of the time, failed in a real world situation.
EVERYTHING has failed, and everything has succeeded, so perhaps we shouldn't blindly accept anyone's "tests" as gospel of how things will go in the real world, every time...
110 and 125 gr are hardly the only popular bullet weights for self defense in .357 Magnum. Federal's 130 gr Hydra Shok, Speer's 135 gr Short Barrel Gold Dot, Cor-Bon's 140 gr JHP, Winchester's 145 gr Silvertip, and various 158 gr JHP loadings from every major manufacturer are all popular choices for defensive use.
Also, I'd like to see some documentation that the Remington 125 gr SJHP "eats forcing cones" in S&W 686's and Ruger GP100's. In fact, the only guns I'm aware of that routinely had problems with this loading are olders S&W K-Frames (Models 13, 19, 65, and 66) due to the flat spot in the 6 o'clock position in their forcing cones necessary to clear the yoke. Current productions S&W K-Frames use two-piece barrels with no flat spot and are thus not subject to this failing.
Incorrect. In their product descriptions of all their heavy .357 Magnum ammunition Buffalo bore states the following in bright blue letters:
"This ammo is safe to shoot in ANY all steel 357 revolver - this includes J frames."
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=20
Sorry, but too many of the "explanations" given by the so-called "experts" in the Lucky Gunner video were over-simplified, taken out of context, or just plain wrong. For example, Mr. Laack not only ascribes to the "magic number" of 2200 fps myth (if this were true a .17 HMR would be a superior fight-stopper to a .45-70) but also apparently needs a refresher on Newtonian physics when he states that the extra energy of a .44 Magnum is "obliterated" or "washed away" by tissue elasticity.
Also, if energy doesn't matter, then why does Federal make their ultra-premium-don't-need-high-velocity HST's in both standard pressure and +P versions in both 9mm and .45 ACP? Afterall, the standard pressure versions do quite well in gelatin tests, so why would anybody want the extra blast and recoil of a +P version?
Why then do they offer not only +P but +P+ loadings in their law enforcement lines?
https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/federal/handgun/details.aspx?id=526
https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/federal/handgun/details.aspx?id=675
https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/federal/handgun/details.aspx?id=573
https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammunition/speer/handgun/details.aspx?id=53612
Note that none of the above are part of the regular production ammo lines that Federal or Speer markets to us uneducated masses but only offered in their LEO-only lines.
What exactly are these "old Speer bonded bullets" you keep saying that Buffalo Bore and Underwood are loading? Speer Gold Dots are bonded bullets and the bullets that were loaded in the Underwood .38 Special +P 125 gr Bonded JHP ammo I have looks exactly like Speer Gold Dot .357" 125 gr JHP component bullets and the bullets loaded in Speer Factory .38 Special +P 125 gr Gold Dot ammo.
In fact, in searching the Speer .357" component bullets available from both Graf & Sons and Midway USA, I could not find any "old bonded bullets" only Gold Dot, Deepcurl (which is actually loaded in the Speer Factory 158 gr Gold Dot loading), TMJ, and their generic JHP (which looks nothing like what is loaded in my Underwood ammo).
Look, I'm not arguing that, with premium bullets, a 9mm can't perform very well. However, a cartridge which can use bullets not constrained by what the majority of semi-auto's will reliably feed that can push comparable weight bullets 200-300 fps faster (not counting boutique ammo like Underwood or Buffalo Bore) is going to be able to do things that a 9mm simply cannot do.
For example, my chosen .357 Magnum self-defense ammo is Remington 158 gr SJHP. This loading does typically fragment but still delivers consistent expansion and more than adequate penetration. I view fragmentation as potentially beneficial so long as penetration is adequate. This is because fragmentation can work synergistically with temporary cavitation to increase tissue damage. This phenomenon was noted by Dr. Martin Fackler:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120218212956/http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Fackler_Articles/effects_of_small_arms.pdf
Finally, have you ever considered that perhaps there aren't so many modern, premium bullets available for .357 Magnum because the old ones work quite well as they are? One of the often-overlooked advantages of the .357 Magnum is that it doesn't need premium bullets to perform well. While your HST's or Gold Dots may be impressive, that doesn't do you much good if they're unavailable as they often were during the Great Gun and Ammo Panics of 2009 and 2013. If I'm limited to whatever generic JHP I can happen to find at Walmart in the midst of a big panic buying spell, I'm going to trust the old SJHP .357 Magnum loadings a lot more than I would WWB, American Eagle, or UMC generic 9mm JHP's.
The problem I have with most 9mm revolvers is that they are built on the same frame/cylinder length as a .357, so why carry a 9 (other than ammo cost)?. I'd like to see someone develop a gun specifically for the shorter 9mm cartridge, with a smaller frame and shorter cylinder. Unfortunately, that would probably be cost prohibitive for most manufactures.
That would be nice, but they know don't have to so they won't, and that saves them money.
I'd like to see them go 1/2 way; use the same frame with a shorter cylinder. They could have the barrel/forcing cone extending about 1/2" into the cylinder window which would give the 9mm close to a 2.5" barrel in the same overall size.
It will never happen. Ruger doesn't even put a longer ejector rod on their 3" LCR's (because they don't have to).
seeker_two
New member
S&W did that with one of their .45ACP revolvers....it was ugly as sin. I personally like that little bit of freebore to accelerate the 9mm.
Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
TruthTellers
New member
It does help add a bit of velocity, not as much as rifling in a barrel would, but it doesn't reduce the velocity or accuracy any amount.
Bill DeShivs
New member
Taurus actually did develop a shorter revolver for the 9mm cartridge. The original model 905 was about the same size as their .380 revolver.
I had one, the 905IB (Instant Backup) and it was a piece of junk. Yes, it has a shorter 9mm length frame and cylinder. There's zero advantage to the shorter gun in performance, handling, or concealability.
Loaded length of the 9mm is approximately .4" shorter than the .38 Special.
So, you could make the frame and cylinder about that much shorter, but they don't, there's no point, the demand simply isn't there.
the difference simply isn't enough to matter for most people.
Taurus might have gone somewhere with their shorter frame gun, if it hadn't been considered junk.
So, you could make the frame and cylinder about that much shorter, but they don't, there's no point, the demand simply isn't there.
the difference simply isn't enough to matter for most people.
Taurus might have gone somewhere with their shorter frame gun, if it hadn't been considered junk.
HighValleyRanch
New member
Making the frame .4" shorter might lead to new difficulties concerning the average trigger reach.
I don't see where this would really be a problem, first we're talking .4", and generally speaking, like a short stock, most people can adapt to a shorter reach where a longer one might not be possible.
Plus, that small amount of reach change could simply be managed with a slight design change to the trigger itself, regarding the placement of the curve.