Is the caliber debate over?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A local big box store advertised 40 mm Blazer on sale in a big newspaper ad. I bought 100000 rounds for my quad 40 mm Bofors I keep in the backyard for squirrels and doves. However, it lacks stopping power and I want to move up to a 57 mm.

Anyway, about the debate - I think the 38, 357, 9mm, 40, 45 ACP debate is over. The revolver calibers will exist for the J frame and LCR pocket gun with good rounds. Service pistols will go 9mm. The 40 will exist because of existing stocks and hang around but lose popularity. The 45 will exist for folks who are nostalgic and special units who think they are magic.

10 mm - resurgence for the kill a bear folks.

A raging debate will be whether 380s will do the job for pocket guns vs. the 38s. I predict articles that say the 380 is useless - just one like that in SWAT. Others will say with modern ammo they are a good option.
 
Glenn I find the newer 50mm Bushmaster cannon that uses steerable smart rounds a far better choice for winged critters and air craft. The ammo is not generally available at the big box stores though.
 
A local big box store advertised 40 mm Blazer on sale in a big newspaper ad. I bought 100000 rounds for my quad 40 mm Bofors I keep in the backyard for squirrels and doves. However, it lacks stopping power and I want to move up to a 57 mm.
Click to expand...

May I suggest the 88mm as a better caliber? I know they are milsurp but the Nazi's used them during WWII to legendary effect. They are also an excellent anti-armor/ anti-personnel round as well. These can be found on line at Century and at gun shops; 10 to a crate for $1000/ a crate.


A raging debate will be whether 380s will do the job for pocket guns vs. the 38s. I predict articles that say the 380 is useless - just one like that in SWAT. Others will say with modern ammo they are a good option.
Click to expand...

The problem here is that some of the modern ammo overlooked the lower velocity of the .380 (Barnes TAC-XPD looking your way....). Careful selection.
 
We can't even decide what criteria we should be using for "stopping power"

Kinetic energy?

Bullet mass?

Bullet diameter?

Some factor above + a min penetration in - now we can't decide what test substance

One shot stops in studied events?
 
Good point - there is no real criteria. To me, it's whether your opponent stops trying to do bad things to you. Whether he or she is DRT or runs away, both work.

As far as the larger calibers, I argued with an old toot who said that he crewed an 88 mm on a BB. I asked if he was on the Tirpitz. I won $5 as I bet him it wasn't a 88 on the Iowa.
 
Yes. Absolutely. The caliber debate is over. If you have a large group of people that you need to arm and they all have to carry the same thing, a 9mm is an acceptable compromise with modern bullet design. Make mine a 10mm. I have no such restrictions.
 
Well Ill still stick with my Glock 20 in 10mm for hunting and carrying outdoors. And for personal defense/carry i'll stick with my .357 Sig. 9mm's are good for targets and I would much prefer a 9mm over a .45 ACP or a .40 cal. anyday of the week. But I'm still not drinking the 9mm kool aid. I love my 10mm and .357 Sig and would absolutely not replace them with a 9mm any day.
 
The U.S. military went to the Berretta for political reasons. The choice had nothing to do with the calibre. Other NATO countries were complaining about the balance of trade in military kit at the same time the U.S. was looking to replace all the worn out 1911A1's in inventory.
There is no such thing as "stopping power". Physics doesn't allow any pistol cartridge to stop anything in its tracks with one shot. The .45 ACP included. And yes there have been serious studies done by qualified people. A net search will turn 'em up.
The 88mm and Swedish 40mm Bofors had different AA purposes. The AT application aside, the 88 was a higher altitude AA gun than the 40. Was a single shot arty piece too. The Bofors was an automatic cannon.
The caliber debate will never end. However, it's only in the gun rags and on the internet anyway. Military doesn't care. Pistols in the military are still status symbols and for use when you've made a serious tactical error and allowed your rifle to go dry or got too far away from it.
 
Good point - there is no real criteria. To me, it's whether your opponent stops trying to do bad things to you. Whether he or she is DRT or runs away, both work.

As far as the larger calibers, I argued with an old toot who said that he crewed an 88 mm on a BB. I asked if he was on the Tirpitz. I won $5 as I bet him it wasn't a 88 on the Iowa.
 
Never will be. IMHO it is much a matter of fashion, taste, in the case of the government, contracting policies, etc. Revolvers went out of fashion, the 38 Special went out of fashion, seen as "old hat", "behind the times", etc. We all "know" the 22LR is not "adequate" for self defense then we get another case one shot stops, defeats of multiple attackers, etc.
trying to use equipment to make up for lack of training. Jeff Cooper was right, it's the combat mindset. Charlie Askins, Jim Cirillo, Bill Jordan, a host of other did just fine with the 38 Special. Hits with Minor Calibers hurt worse than Misses with Majors.
 
Never will it be over. Nor should it be. Different guns for different assignments. Different calibers for different needs. Me, I like the controversy and the discussions over it. I actually learn something each time its brought up. I also think the ammo makers are paying close attention, thus better developmental approaches and improved weaponry overall.
 
If we are not careful in November, we may be talking about knock down power and velocity of throwing a rock. Then we can debate a whole new topic.

P.S. we all know that the 45acp is best or maybe the 40 but I don't know maybe the 9mm. They all work as intended.
 
Last edited:
The apparatchitks, that is government workers and their supervisors, will accept what they are TOLD to accept from on high for whatever reasons the government tells them. Good, bad, truth, lie.

All others can evaluate data as they see fit and arm themselves as they see fit.

It's just that simple.

Deaf
 
The 88mm and Swedish 40mm Bofors had different AA purposes. The AT application aside, the 88 was a higher altitude AA gun than the 40. Was a single shot arty piece too.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ good sir. The 88 is a "semiautomatic" in the truest sense of the word. The shell is automatically ejected but a new one has to be dropped in. It was also consider close/ medium range until the Flak 41 came along and increased the effective range by 50% with a new longer case.

The difference is very much like that of 7.62X39 vs 7.62X63:

88×571 vs 88×855

So you have to ask yourself are you going to shoot a little kids gun like the AK or a big man's gun like the M1 Garand?
 
No, of course it isn't there are threads going on her even now discussing whether the 40 and 45 both are a waste of time because the 9 mm can do everything that those cartridges can do,.
 
which hand?

I have a 9 mm in my left hand, a 45 acp in my right hand, and a .40 cal on my hip, which would you like me to shoot you between the eye with?

I can't make up my mind either.:D
 
I a friend of mine bought a nice Sig pistol. I asked him what caliber and he said 9mm. And of course being a pain in the ass I said to him jokingly "If I want to make someone angry, I'll just insult them"

:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top