"One Shot Stop" chart...?

Frank Ettin said:
That's an interesting study, but you might want to re-think putting aside your .45.
Click to expand...
It certainly does confirm that larger bullets generally have a larger chance of creating a one-shot stop.

However, my biggest takeaway from it was the following data:

Average # of Rounds to Incapacitation:
2.45 - 9mm
2.36 - .40 S&W
2.08 - .45 ACP

In other words, chances are good that you'll need to shoot at least twice with all of those calibers. The question for me becomes, "Which of those rounds do I shoot best when I'm shooting fast?"
 
You can read this kind of stuff until you want to poke your eyeballs out...

Here's the bottom line:

It's not the ammo, it's the accuracy.

A well placed .22LR at close range will kill somebody.
A 44 magnum at close range that misses will only make a very loud noise.

Shot placement. Shot placement. Shot placement.

Get good with whatever ammo load you are carrying and you'll be way ahead of anyone who obsesses over ammo more than they do over practicing to be accurate under stress.
 
Amsdorf said:
...A well placed .22LR at close range will kill somebody....
Click to expand...
Yes, but will it reliably stop someone who wants to do you harm? That's your real goal.

In fact, sometimes a well placed .357 Magnum isn't enough. LAPD Officer Stacy Lim was shot in the chest with a .357 Magnum and still ran down her attacker, returned fire, killed him, survived, and ultimately was able to return to duty.

She was off duty and heading home after a softball game and a brief stop at the station to check her work assignment. According to the article I linked to:
... The bullet ravaged her upper body when it nicked the lower portion of her heart, damaged her liver, destroyed her spleen, and exited through the center of her back, still with enough energy to penetrate her vehicle door, where it was later found....
Click to expand...

Amsdorf said:
...It's not the ammo, it's the accuracy...
Click to expand...
Wrong. It's both.

Except for psychological stops (I don't like getting shot so I'll stop) alluded to in post 37, to physiologically stop someone requires tissue damage: significant trauma to the CNS, the breaking of major skeletal support structures or incapacitation from significant blood loss.

At the velocity/energy levels of most handgun cartridges, any tissue damage will come only from direct contact between the bullet and the tissue. So a handgun bullet passing through a blood rich organ will damage the tissue it actually touches as it passes through, and a larger caliber bullet penetrating more deeply will damage more tissue than a smaller caliber bullet penetrating less -- thus causing more rapid blood loss.

So yes, shot placement is important, but a small caliber bullet not penetrating very deeply will, even when well placed, still be producing only a modest amount of tissue damage compared with something larger. So --

  • More holes are better than fewer holes.
  • Larger holes are better than smaller holes.
  • Holes in the right places are better than holes in the wrong places.
  • Holes that are deep enough are better than holes that aren't.
  • There are no magic bullets.
Everything has a price. The increased convenience of a lighter, smaller caliber, less powerful handgun for self defense comes at the cost of less reliable efficacy. And the more reliable efficacy of a large caliber, more powerful handgun for self defense comes at the cost of less convenience.

One can make his choice, decide what's important to him and what he's willing to give up to get. But one should not delude himself into believing that a .22 will be just as good as a .45 or even 9mm for self defense.
 
Frank Ettin said:
Everything has a price. The increased convenience of a lighter, smaller caliber, less powerful handgun for self defense comes at the cost of less reliable efficacy. And the more reliable efficacy of a large caliber, more powerful handgun for self defense comes at the cost of less convenience.
Click to expand...
Is it real-world or "practical" efficacy, though? 9x19 JHP has come a long, long way; other than something like, say, shooting through a windshield (and even the bonded stuff does that well), I just haven't seen any terminal ballistics data that convinces me a .45 provides enough appreciable difference to make stepping up to it a requirement.

Beyond that, I can understand why high-speed low-drag types employ the .45, but for the low-speed high-drag shooter like myself, who doesn't reload, who, while not having to work a corner to afford a range trip or anything, does appreciate that 9mm's cheaper to practice with than .45, and who simply shoots 9mm quickly better than he does .45, I just don't see the upside.
 
Most service calibers are going to perform to nearly the same standard. High energy rounds such as the 10mm, 357 Sig and the various magnums "may" give you a significant advantage but may not depending one your proficiency with them.

The real answer is if you want to carry a 9mm carry a 9mm, but master the weapon. You must be able to run it without conscious thought. You must be able to make decisive hits while moving off the X. It takes training and practice to do that.

I have 3 Glocks that I use, 2 came in 40 and one in 357 Sig. I convert the 27 and 23 to 9mm and 357 Sig as it suits my needs and carry the 357 Sig. For a gun I am going to want in a fight its a hi-cap. You may feel fine with 5, but not I.

Your tactics and proficiency are more important than caliber or platform. Every situation is different, that is another compromise and your carry system must encompass as many variables as possible to ensure success.
 
9x19 JHP has come a long, long way; other than something like, say, shooting through a windshield (and even the bonded stuff does that well), I just haven't seen any terminal ballistics data that convinces me a .45 provides enough appreciable difference to make stepping up to it a requirement.
Click to expand...

I agree. I carry a 9mm or a 380. I have respect for the 45, but I also don't think it is as great IN COMPARISON to a 9mm as people would have you believe. Remember, you don't have to carry FMJs and you shouldn't and that is where IMO much of the "the 45 is much better" talk comes from. I feel safe with a 15 rd gun with 9mm +P rounds.

A well placed .22LR at close range will kill somebody.
A 44 magnum at close range that misses will only make a very loud noise.
Click to expand...

Amsdorf, I know you meant this only as an example. This is not directed at you. I want to bring up something here though regarding this example. I personally think the 44 magnum to be a poor SD choice for many reasons. One would think on the surface that the 44 magnum would be a better man stopper (assuming you hit the person) than say a 357 mag. I've always said that I don't believe that, because frankly, the 44 mag is just too powerful. I am referring to the concept of terminal ballistics, where a human, does not have enough tissue, size, etc to use up very much of the 44 mag's energy (assuming the typical SD range). The 44 mag would be like the cliche hot knife through butter whereas a 357 for example, would use nearly all, if not all, of its energy, and would expand more IMO than a 44 mag on a person. The 44 mag would IMO over penetrate / slow to expand because of its greater energy whereas a 357 will expand more and penetrate less which makes it superior for this application, IMO. I know different loads could change this some but between the 44 mag not expanding as much because of its superior energy, and the possibility of great collateral damage, I think the 44 mag is somewhat a poor choice for SD. Notice that the chart (who knows how accurate it really is) Frank Ettin posted reflects a higher percentage of 1 shot stops with a 357 magnum than a 44 magnum. For all of its energy, the 44 magnum didn't do better than many common pistol cartridges which I think supports my assertion. These chart results could be potentially because people aren't as accurate with the 44 mag but there is no way to know now.
 
The chart results can be off because we have no idea what type bullets were used in any of the loads also.


I agree with your point about loads. Use heavy, non, or slow expanding bullets in the 357, and lighter, faster, fast expanding bullets in the 44, and I'd bet that the results would be opposite what they now show. Bullet type makes a difference in the results.

The discussion is interesting, but for me, people are down the list for my use or reasons for having a pistol around. I'm out in the hills far more than in a town. I carry 44's and 45 Colts. I use the same guns wherever I go, just dont use the heavy loads when not in the hills. I've shot enough game with them I have a good idea how they'll work on whatever else I may need to shoot. May not be "best", but I'm used to them and shoot them well. I also really really dont like the muzzle blast of a 357.
 
Last edited:
There's a difference between stopping a threat, and killing. many times a threat will be stopped without a dead body hitting the ground. It is up to the determination of the threat.

Shot placement, multiple COM/CNS hits, and persistance are all preferred reguardless of caliber.

I like the 9mm with the capability of faster recoil recovery and follow-up shots. I think three 9mm holes in a target trump 2-45 holes in the same time frame.
 
Last edited:
buck460XVR: said:
Any info provided by Chuck Hawks should be taken with a grain of salt........
Click to expand...

More like a dump truck full of salt- most of his 'site is stuck in the 1990s! :)
 
This "one-shot stopping power" holy grail thing might be just a mirage. It is one of those things that would be nice to know, if it existed.

How many here have had professional training in defensive handguns?

Of those, how many have been taught to shoot once and only once?

In the two places where I have been trained the training is/was (assuming a single threat): Shoot twice to center of mass, assess, and proceed as necessary.

A handgun is a compromise, that is hopefully "good enough" to get the job done. That job is to incapacitate an imminent threat of great bodily harm or death as quickly as possible.

It is not about lethality.
It is about stopping the threat.

It is irrelevant whether the threat dies sometime in the distant future. Merely firing a handgun is legally using deadly force in most jurisdictions. It is relevant whether the threat is able to bring its attack to you and do you great harm.
 
Oh My.....the horse must have got up and ran a lap or two. :p

The things that happen when one disappears for a couple or three days of hunting.

Guess we'll need to have a discourse on the subject for those who are a little young to remember the flame war!:eek:
 
cajun47 said:
looks like glaser blue and magsafe are about the best in most.
Click to expand...
Where does it look like they are the best in most? And in most what?

They actually have a lousy reputation for penetration, and adequate penetration is one of the most important attributes in a defensive cartridge.
 
I choose the weapons platform which I can shoot the most accurate and reliably. Then I pick the caliber.
 
I'd say this chart is wildly optimistic about the ability of any handgun round to produce a "one shot stop" whatever that is.

But I'm just another guy on the internet with an opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I read a "stopping power" article recently, that focused on the people who were shot, rather than on the cartridge that stopped them. That is, the numbers focused on what proportion of people were stopped with a single shot, what proportion with two shots, THEN looked at the cartridges used. It was interesting, in that of those stopped with one round, it didn't really matter what hit them. Most people are stopped if shot once. Only when more than one round was required did caliber/cartridge start to make a difference. I'll see if I can find it . . .
 
Exactly, and I think it's "unfair" to remove psychological stops from the numbers. If someone stops what they're doing, because they've been shot (in the thumb, with a .22), then that's a one-stop shot.
 
when your ears are blown out, your eyes dazzled by flashes, target is moving, and you are ducking bullets/blows, you'll miss the entire man, half of the time, at 10 yds, and miss the chest half the time, at 10 FEET, just like everyone else does.
Click to expand...

more flee at shots fired that miss. Many flee at any sort of a hit, even a '"mere" .22l, so it's actually pretty rare for you to have to repeatedly hit him in the chest with powerful loads.
Click to expand...

Really? And you base your hypothesis on what exactly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top