im thinking about replacing my glock 19 as my ccw. opinions welcome.

hows the ruger lcr in .357mag? that round has a much higher 1 shot stop rate?
Click to expand...
The 125g .357 magnum has a terrific reputation as a fight stopper, but only when fired from a 4" (or longer) barrel.
Firing it from a 2" snub-nose barrel will definitely reduce the velocity, the energy, and the effectiveness of the round.


im thinking about making the switch from glock 19 to ruger lcr .357mag because i want a more powerful round and easier every day carry.
Click to expand...
What about swapping your G19 for a G32?
Same size pistol, only slightly less capacity, and in .357Sig.


i could spend lots of time researching the numbers and types of rounds, brands, ect. and i will. but if anyone has the low down on the best round for one stop shot in .45acp(+p), 10mm, and .357mag. let me know. im really leaning toward the .357mag but i will read all opinions.
Click to expand...
I can't tell you much about the 10mm, but the .45ACP gained its legendary performance when fired from a 5" barrel (the famous 1911).
And the .357 magnum gained its legendary performance when fired from a 4" barrel revolve (like the famous S&W model 27).
Fire either from a shorter barrel and their performance degrades quite a bit.
And neither the .45ACP+P or the .357 magnum are much fun to shoot out of a light-weight small handgun.

Good luck,
Easy
 
Hydrostatic shock requires impact speeds well beyond handgun velocities, somewhere around 1800 fps.

The only possible effect from one handgun round to another in temporary wound cavity. Even this is dubious as to effect, but it is enhanced by velocity.
Click to expand...
I too used to believe this was true, until I X-rayed a woman who had commited suicide with a .38 to the head....

She had shot herself in the right side of the head just above the right ear.
The bullet did not even exit the skull but came to rest against the left side of the skull.
The path of the bullet was clearly evident on the radiographs.
But the amazing thing was that the skull was fractured at both the top and bottom of the cranium, and the right orbit was totally shattered.
The fractured anatomy was not in the path of the bullet at all.

When I was positioning the head to obtain the radiographs the head felt like a bag of broken glass.
And this was from a .38 revolver.

After seeing this firsthand, nobody can convince me that hydrostatic shock is not a factor at handgun velocities.
 
Last edited:
peacefulgary said:
I too used to believe this was true, until I X-rayed a woman who had commited suicide with a .38 to the head....

She had shot herself in the right side of the head just above the right ear.
The bullet did not even exit the skull but came to rest against the left side of the skull.
The path of the bullet was clearly evident on the radiographs.
But the amazing thing was that the skull was fractured at both the top and bottom of the cranium, and the right orbit was totally shattered.
The fractured anatomy was not in the path of the bullet at all.

When I was positioning the head to obtain the radiographs the head felt like a bag of broken glass.
And this was from a .38 revolver.

After seeing this firsthand, nobody can convince me that hydrostatic shock is not a factor at handgun velocities.
Click to expand...

Did you consider the fact that a gun barrel placed against someone's head is going to blast ULTRA-supersonic gases directly into the skull?

We're talking about gases going 5000+ fps.

I submit to you that the combustion gases caused any peripheral damage in your example.

Hydrostatic shock in handgun rounds is a myth, myth, myth, myth.
 
Believe what you want to believe, but I don't buy the "hot gases" theory.

I think the brains and cerebrospinal fluid being rapidly displaced by the temporary wound cavity was what fractured the cranuim at the top and bottom and also what blew out the orbit.
 
Last edited:
peacefulgary said:
Believe what you want to believe, but I don't buy the "hot gases" theory.

I think the brains and cerebrospinal fluid being rapidly displaced by the temporary wound cavity was what fractured the cranuim at the top and bottom and also what blew out the orbit.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, it doesn't seem to happen from a distance. A certain congresswoman can testify to that fact.

You have a singular datapoint that doesn't match most other evidence. The expanding gases provide a more reasonable explanation than hydrostatic shock from the bullet.
 
at what distance on average do handgun fights take place? i know i can google but im sure many of you have the link on hand to what most agree on.

im wondering how many of you practice headshots. the headshot is something i always consider. for ccw class we where so close to the man size target, i did all headshots with a beretta 9mm.
 
cajun47 said:
at what distance on average do handgun fights take place? i know i can google but im sure many of you have the link on hand to what most agree on.

im wondering how many of you practice headshots. the headshot is something i always consider. for ccw class we where so close to the man size target, i did all headshots with a beretta 9mm.
Click to expand...

The Armed Citizen (NRA) analysis indicated "The range of most incidents appears to be short but in excess of touching distance."

I believe something like 7 feet is considered typical.
 
7 feet seems like the distance at my ccw class. i did all headshots with the beretta 9mm but i shot slow and one shot was on the border of the head, still counted but imo would not have been a kill shot.

now don't bite my head off, im thinking out loud, but when i shoot a .22lr handgun i get much tighter groups. when i shoot 8' gators in the head with a .22lr pistol they instantly die 99% of the time, some may need a little pepper with the salt like swamp people say(2 shots).

i know i started off asking if i should go from 9mm to .357mag or 10mm, now im wondering if im better off with a .22lr handgun for ccw if im much better with that? only going for headshots and only if i can find a .22lr handgun thats reliable enough to trust. it would be a .22lr handgun and not .22mag cause i'll always be practicing with .22lr. im talking 500 to 1,000 rounds a week. i use my s&w 22a for plinking right now but for ccw im guessing the s&w airlite 317(?).
 
I think it's a mistake to consider the head to be the primary target. Hitting it when it's stationary and you're not under extreme duress is one thing, hitting it when it's owner is trying to kill you back is a whole 'nother enchilada.

That said, a 22 would probably be fine. Read the Armed Citizen analysis. It's eye-opening. Very, very thought provoking.

In that regard, I've often wondered about the FN5.7 as a carry gun. If they made a sub-compact model it would be very tempting to me.

As is, my current line-up for preferred carry cartridge is: 10mm, 357sig, 9mm, 45acp, 40SW. Why? Because that's the order I like them. :)

If you load your own, there are some other cartridges I'd put in there, like 400Corbon and 45Super.
 
ruger lcr .357mag because i want a more powerful round and easier every day carry.
Click to expand...

Canjun,

Have a look at the ballistic tables here first. This is for the .357 out of a short barrel.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

It's not going to have much more velocity than your hot 9mm...but, I can
see were a small revolver would be a much better carry choice. I would rather
carry the revolver too. Just be warned of the extreme flash and bang with all
that powder not burning in that short barrel. Your going to lose a lot of the
"magnum" in the short barrel.

Speaking as a former .357 snubby owner :D
 
sooooo......i'm being told that there is no such thing as a person being physically moved back at all in any way by using a larger heavier object to hit them with.....

so if thats the case then what happens if you take a light 16oz hammer(115grn 9mm) and get a nice fast swing into somebodys chest

NOW take a 32 oz hammer(230 grn 45acp) and swing into the same area

The object with the larger mass and larger diameter will cause more trauma and the extra weight will cause it to "follow thru" pushing the body back more


its the same idea as a passenger car and a full size work truck hitting same objects at like speeds... it dont take a genius to figure out which is going to cause more damage!!!!
 
so if thats the case then what happens if you take a light 16oz hammer(115grn 9mm) and get a nice fast swing into somebodys chest

NOW take a 32 oz hammer(230 grn 45acp) and swing into the same area
Click to expand...

But the fact is you're not swinging a hammer. You're firing handgun bullets that are going to pierce the target.
 
the principal is the same whether there is penetration or not.....you can pierce a mans skull with a hammer as you can crash a moving vehicle thru a wall
 
triumph666 said:
the principal is the same whether there is penetration or not.....you can pierce a mans skull with a hammer as you can crash a moving vehicle thru a wall
Click to expand...


I don't mean to sound like a jerk but this principal is well-established, indisputable fact... People do not get knocked down by bullets. Period. It's not debatable. It is proven. Physics proves it. Video demonstration prove it. Many people who have been shot can verify it first hand.

There are videos that aptly demonstrate the fact. Search YouTube. There is a video of a guy wearing a bullet proof vest who stands on one foot and takes a rifle round (.308, I think) point blank in the chest. He hardly wiggles.

Bullets do NOT knock people down. They do not.

It's a silly argument in regards to rifle bullets which often carry 10x or more momentum that do handgun rounds. It's down right ridiculous to make the argument with handgun rounds.
 
triumph666 said:
the principal is the same whether there is penetration or not.....you can pierce a mans skull with a hammer as you can crash a moving vehicle thru a wall
Click to expand...

The laws of physics say that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, when fired from a non-reciprocating firearm such as a revolver, the target will feel the same blunt force trauma as you feel in your hands as recoil. The difference is penetration.
 
Last edited:
The energy is imparted to the target. I have seen many troopers knocked down by impacts on their bp vests (and many not knocked down). The energy of the bullet doesn't move the body, actually, but the energy does affect the nervous system to affect organs and muscle reaction making it APPEAR to be the bullet force knocking the man over. Fortunately, the trooper can usually function after getting up.
 
Jim Page: good point and one that is often overlooked. Front Sight the NV training organization, points out in one of their lectures on gun and caliber selection that only shots to the central cerebral core (centered head shots) and the heart or upper spine are instantly incapacitating. All others will allow "the dead man's ten seconds", the time in which shock and blood loss will incapacitate. And in that critical ten seconds, he can do immense damage.

For that reason, and from the good guys perspective, they preach, "stay in the fight...get hits...and keep the gun working...you can still protect your family, even after you are hit". From the bad guys perspective...he can continue to shoot, following a good controlled pair to the upper chest. To combat that, "Shoot, assess, then clear the area for add'l threats...if the BG is still doing his thing, finish the fight with a deliberate shot to the central cerebral core".

Nobody wants to think about these simple truths, but they are relevant and should be a part of our training regimen. You will fight as you train.

Knock down from a single hand gun shot is a reality only in Hollywood, or the result of an incredibly lucky shot... given the dynamics of a gunfight.

Rod
 
Nanuk said:
Buy a Lone wolf BBL for you 19 and some 40 mags....You now have a 40.
Click to expand...

Can you go up in caliber with a bbl conversion? I know I can use a 19 bbl in my 23 but can a 23 bbl be used in a 19? Just curious.

Anyway. My best advice is to find what is most comfortable to you. If you feel safe and confident with a 5/6 shot wheel gun then go for it. Just weigh out the pros vs cons.


The .357 is a monster round. I enjoy shooting my grandfather's for a short amount of time then is gets a little rough. Heavy trigger and massive recoil in such a light frame. That's coming from a guy who only has .40's.

If your interested in a new round and new gun, you should take a look at Springfield's XDm line in .40s&w. Its a medium round that packs alot of energy but also has high capacity in most guns. Springfield offers XDm in a 3.8 bbl which is very concealable and the 9mm holds 19+1. Hard to beat.

After everything is said and done, you still need to be confident in your ability with your firearm. Practice is your friend.

On a side note, I would be absolutely happy with your 19. Very very dependable. Hardly needs any maintenance. Will last forever. My father has one that has thousands on top of thousands of rounds down the tube and has never replaced a single part. He has probably had that gun 20years. They are that good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top