What Nanuk says is clear and correct.
This discussion has not been about caliber. It's about power, bullet design and whether they make a difference.
Three years ago the FBI began the transition from the 40 S&W to the 9mm. That change is not complete it seems as they still order some 40 S&W ammo. Overall it was a wise move and overdue. Overdue because it's been at least a decade that 9mm ammo that meets the FBI's protocol for defensive use has been available. For duty use it seems that the FBI uses heavier +P jhp bullets which can be seen in the articles below...
https://www.bluesheepdog.com/2018/05/31/f-b-i-selects-winchester-9mm-ammunition/
https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/the-story-behind-the-fbi-new-duty-load/325989
Why would they go with a more powerful load of the 9mm and a heavier bullet? Because they are more likely to meet their criteria for bullet performance.
I don't see any evidence that the FBI did a serious review of the effects of bullet performance with different loads of bullets or of different calibers with thousands of shootings. I don't see that they tried to prove what is useless even if it could be proven. What they are saying is that well placed shots with any service caliber round will have better results than poorly placed shots.
Their selection of bullets for duty use also tells us another part of the story. That is what parameters of performance they have found useful for them based on their experience and expectations. They lean towards the more powerful and heavier loads of the 9mm with bullets that meet their performance criteria.
The U.S. Army reached the same conclusions a long time ago. When they recently adopted the Sig to replace the M9 they also added newer performence requirements on the 9mm ammo they use. They use not only ball ammo but jhp ammo as well.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2019/4/23/m1152-m1153-the-army-s-new-9-mm-luger-loads/
So the Army's "Special Purpose" jhp ammo is a 147 gr. bullet at +P+ pressures.
These are all powerful loads of the 9mm. All good choices in 9mm.
Greg Ellifitz makes useful points in his essay. That 2 rounds in the back of the head with a 25 are as potent as two in the back of the head from a 45, with the added benefit of there being less mess to clean up. That shot placement matters.
But experience also tells us that more energy, bullet weight and bullet design make a profound difference in the likelihood of increasing terminal performance. This is why more powerful calibers than the 9mm, like the 40 and 45 or the 10, won't disappear. But this is also only one factor in selection of a carry or defense handgun. But where possible...more power, good bullet in a gun fitted to the job that a person can shoot well.
tipoc
This discussion has not been about caliber. It's about power, bullet design and whether they make a difference.
Three years ago the FBI began the transition from the 40 S&W to the 9mm. That change is not complete it seems as they still order some 40 S&W ammo. Overall it was a wise move and overdue. Overdue because it's been at least a decade that 9mm ammo that meets the FBI's protocol for defensive use has been available. For duty use it seems that the FBI uses heavier +P jhp bullets which can be seen in the articles below...
https://www.bluesheepdog.com/2018/05/31/f-b-i-selects-winchester-9mm-ammunition/
https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/the-story-behind-the-fbi-new-duty-load/325989
Why would they go with a more powerful load of the 9mm and a heavier bullet? Because they are more likely to meet their criteria for bullet performance.
Step 1. Review all the evidence that shows that the .40S&W stops fights faster and with fewer shots than the 9mm. There have been thousands of shootings with both calibers over the past few decades, that's more than enough to show any difference unless it's so small that it's meaningless.
The FBI couldn't find the evidence. The LE organizations that are changing away from .40S&W couldn't find the evidence. Nobody else has come out with such evidence or is claiming that they have such evidence or is providing real world data that shows these organizations are mistaken or uninformed.
I don't see any evidence that the FBI did a serious review of the effects of bullet performance with different loads of bullets or of different calibers with thousands of shootings. I don't see that they tried to prove what is useless even if it could be proven. What they are saying is that well placed shots with any service caliber round will have better results than poorly placed shots.
Their selection of bullets for duty use also tells us another part of the story. That is what parameters of performance they have found useful for them based on their experience and expectations. They lean towards the more powerful and heavier loads of the 9mm with bullets that meet their performance criteria.
The U.S. Army reached the same conclusions a long time ago. When they recently adopted the Sig to replace the M9 they also added newer performence requirements on the 9mm ammo they use. They use not only ball ammo but jhp ammo as well.
The M1152 employs a 115-gr. full-metal-jacket, flat-nose (FMJ-FN) bullet. The M1153’s 147-gr. jacketed-hollow-point bullet bears a familial resemblance to the company’s law enforcement Ranger T-Series, but it was “designed to maximize performance based on the government specification set out in the RFP,” Glen Weeks, director of government contracts & specialty products for Winchester Ammunition, told me during an interview. The powder used is not a special propellant. Weeks said it is a “propellant we have experience with and use in other products.” The pressures for the M1152 and M1153 are 39,700 p.s.i.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2019/4/23/m1152-m1153-the-army-s-new-9-mm-luger-loads/
So the Army's "Special Purpose" jhp ammo is a 147 gr. bullet at +P+ pressures.
In our tests in 1985, XM882 propelled a 124-gr. round-nose FMJ out of the 5" barrel of an M9 at an average of 1273 f.p.s., delivering 446 ft.-lbs. of energy at 15 ft. Using an Oehler Model 43 and firing the new ammunition out of a 4.7"-barreled P320-M17, M1152 with the 115-gr. bullet was at 1326 f.p.s. and 449 ft.-lbs. of energy, while the M1153 clocked 962 f.p.s. with 302 ft.-lbs., both at 15 ft.
These are all powerful loads of the 9mm. All good choices in 9mm.
Greg Ellifitz makes useful points in his essay. That 2 rounds in the back of the head with a 25 are as potent as two in the back of the head from a 45, with the added benefit of there being less mess to clean up. That shot placement matters.
But experience also tells us that more energy, bullet weight and bullet design make a profound difference in the likelihood of increasing terminal performance. This is why more powerful calibers than the 9mm, like the 40 and 45 or the 10, won't disappear. But this is also only one factor in selection of a carry or defense handgun. But where possible...more power, good bullet in a gun fitted to the job that a person can shoot well.
tipoc
Last edited: