The 9mm vs 45 ACP Debate: A Visual Aid...
- Thread starter Joshua 2415
- Start date
Wasn't the argument always about a temporary wound cavity? While I understand handguns (again we are not talking the .460) do not have enough speed or energy for hydrostatic shock to be depended on for physiologically stopping an attacker can a solid argument not be made that more energy effectively distributed to a target is more likely to cause a psychological stop or even create physical (medical?) shock?
OldMarksman
Staff
No. The importance of the temporary cavity has been discounted, but that is not the issue at hand.
Not in the realm of service handguns.
Unfortunately, the medical science does NOT support that idea. "Energy dump" at handgun impact velocities is a fallacy. The ENTIRE stopping ability of the bullet is limited to tissue impacted and structures destroyed.
The fact is, dispite what is shown on TV, most people when shot with a handgun show NO reaction to being shot.
When we start using Rifles and impact velocity is 2-3 times that of handguns, we DO see cavity damage LARGER then bullet diameter.
It doesn't disprove it either
And yot often they do react, and it depends on what is damaged and how much it's damaged.
I've seen extensive damage outside of expanded bullet diameter many times well below the 2000fps threshold that everybody wants to draw a line in the sand at. 2000 isn't a magic number hydrostatic shock/remote wounding can certianly have effects at 1400-1500 just like sometimes at 3000fps it doesn't.
Mike_Fontenot
New member
I don't think the 10mm and .44mag are included in these "medical expert" opinions ... very few emergency-room doctors, and/or coroners, have ever seen a 10mm or .44mag wound in humans. But some of the information I've seen from hunters who have some experience shooting roughly human-sized game animals at close range with 10mm and .44mag handguns indicate massive tissue damage far beyond the diameter of the expanded bullets. My 180gr .44mag Underwoods are spec-ed at 1700 f/s near the muzzle, which is probably as fast as some hunting rifles at several hundred yards. Even heavier full-spec .44mag rounds are close to mach 2, and likewise for the lighter 10mm full-spec rounds.
No but there are plenty from the old technology 9mm +p+ and 357 mag that show fragmantation and plenty of damage outside the wound tract.
In order for the 2000 FPS myth to be true there would be no difference between a 850 fps 158gr 38 special and a 1400 fps 158gr 357 magnum. Anybody who's actually put them in live tissue can tell you how true that is.
Urey was already keenly aware that the average LEO couldn't shoot full tilt boogie 357s when HWFE was written, they also never considered using full power 10mm for that same reason (another oft parroted myth).
And i dont know any "Tactical experts" saying those are good calibers to use for self defense against Human attackers.
Full house 44mag (outside the Dirty Harry movies) is not a good choice. Too much recoil. Expensive to shoot (low training).
Hot loaded 10mm is much the same. Most 10mm defensive ammo is loaded to about 40s&w levels. That gives much the same effect on tgt as any of the other common and accecpted "Duty/Defensive" calibers.
There is no free lunch. Power levels into the 44mag level are counterproductive to good shooting
OldMarksman
Staff
They found the 9 MM loads of the time inadequate, and they selected the next-most-powerful auto round available at the time that had good capability for penetrating armor. that happened to by Col. Cooper's 10 MM.
The advantages of higher recoil and faster controlled fire led to the development and issuance of the lighter "FBI load".
The industry then developed the shorter, but ballistically equivalent, .40 S&W--which could be clambered in much more manageable firearms than the 10 MM. Superior in terms of terminal ballistics to the 9 MM loads of the time, the .40 was adopted by the FBI and by the vast majority of police forces in this country.
Significant advances in ammunition technology have very significantly reduced the gap in terminal ballistics between the 9 and the .40. Combined with the obvious advantages of faster controlled fire, those advances led the FBI, most police departments, and the majority of tactical trainers to replace their .40 S&W pistols with 9 MM firearms.
They have bought together and summarized most of the body of expertise extant today.
You can question them all you want, but it would be more useful to come up with an objective analysis with supportable conclusions.
Most who have attempted to do that have reached the same answer.
Oh I accepted (even if I failed to acknowledge it) early on in this conversation that your conclusion was at least mostly right and that the 9MM was likely the most suitable round for the vast majority of people carrying an auto pistol. I have rejected the portion of the conclusion (not necessarily made by you) that wants to declare the debate over.
I have also found that, even while I accept the conclusion, the argument is flawed. There is a lot of card stacking involved in reaching the conclusion and caveats. Using the 9MM as the benchmark for lowest power acceptable (or whatever measurable factor), then declaring it and all calibers more powerful (or bigger, or whatever) functionally equivalent, and then noting recoil as a negative basically demands one conclude the 9MM to be the choice. I find the argument flawed in that the benchmark is one of the choices rather than an independent factor (penetration, power, expansion) or even series of numbers.
I have also found that, even while I accept the conclusion, the argument is flawed. There is a lot of card stacking involved in reaching the conclusion and caveats. Using the 9MM as the benchmark for lowest power acceptable (or whatever measurable factor), then declaring it and all calibers more powerful (or bigger, or whatever) functionally equivalent, and then noting recoil as a negative basically demands one conclude the 9MM to be the choice. I find the argument flawed in that the benchmark is one of the choices rather than an independent factor (penetration, power, expansion) or even series of numbers.
While I respect the part Col. Cooper played I liked his benchmarks more than what came out. The 10MM kept getting "added to" from his 400ft lbs of energy, 10MM, 200 grain benchmark that he was aiming for as a design (going be memory). Those involved kept making it more powerful. I love the 10MM for what it was by the .40 displaced a lot of 9MM and it was basically what he had originally noted they should be aiming for.
The 10MM we got was not what Col. Cooper had in mind originally.
I love the 10MM for what it is capable of (I keep one as a woods gun). I respect the following the .40 was able to garner. If the designers of the 10MM had stuck to his vision we would be discussing the 10MM and the .40 would have never happened.
Terminal ballistics and bullet technology is an evolutionary process
The FBI went from Smith Model 13's loaded with 158gn SWCHP 38spl ammo to authorizing 9mm pistols using the Win Silvertip (a 2nd gen hollowpoint).
That bullet design tended to expand very early and not give the penetration we now know is needed.
In the aftermath of the Miami shootout, that bullet was blamed for not stopping the badguy soon enough. That started their search for a DEEPER penetrating round. The 10mm load at that time was a full power loading made by Norma. It was a 200gn bullet at 1200fps.
I had the "pleasure" of shooting an original Bren ten and full power loads at Gunsite back in the day. I walked away saying "no thanks, i'll stick with my 1911 and a good JHP load". Recoil was STOUT
That stout recoil is what made the FBI look at a "lite" load. The wide range of size of their agents and the respective shooting abilities (or lack thereof) showed the full house 10mm to be too much to control well.
With the lite loads, somebody figured out that the same thing could be done in a smaller package....the 40s&w was born
As bullet design has continued to advance, we now have "controlled expansion" designs. Bullets that still expand and LIMIT penetration (over FMJ designs) BUT drive deep enough to meet the standard of 12-18" in calibrated gel.
The FBI has done the most exhaustive study of current bullet designs and the reality of human targets currently in existence. As we continue to advance our knowledge and metallurgy and bullet construction evolves, there may well be better options down the road.
Right now, a good quality JHP bullet out of any of the "service calibers" works just as good as any other.
With the lower recoil impulse, increased capacity (in same sized guns), lower per round cost (more training per $) and equal to the Nth degree wounding capability....the 9mm has become my personal choice in defensive pistol calibers. Im not alone in this choice. MOST professional trainers, agree.
The FBI went from Smith Model 13's loaded with 158gn SWCHP 38spl ammo to authorizing 9mm pistols using the Win Silvertip (a 2nd gen hollowpoint).
That bullet design tended to expand very early and not give the penetration we now know is needed.
In the aftermath of the Miami shootout, that bullet was blamed for not stopping the badguy soon enough. That started their search for a DEEPER penetrating round. The 10mm load at that time was a full power loading made by Norma. It was a 200gn bullet at 1200fps.
I had the "pleasure" of shooting an original Bren ten and full power loads at Gunsite back in the day. I walked away saying "no thanks, i'll stick with my 1911 and a good JHP load". Recoil was STOUT
That stout recoil is what made the FBI look at a "lite" load. The wide range of size of their agents and the respective shooting abilities (or lack thereof) showed the full house 10mm to be too much to control well.
With the lite loads, somebody figured out that the same thing could be done in a smaller package....the 40s&w was born
As bullet design has continued to advance, we now have "controlled expansion" designs. Bullets that still expand and LIMIT penetration (over FMJ designs) BUT drive deep enough to meet the standard of 12-18" in calibrated gel.
The FBI has done the most exhaustive study of current bullet designs and the reality of human targets currently in existence. As we continue to advance our knowledge and metallurgy and bullet construction evolves, there may well be better options down the road.
Right now, a good quality JHP bullet out of any of the "service calibers" works just as good as any other.
With the lower recoil impulse, increased capacity (in same sized guns), lower per round cost (more training per $) and equal to the Nth degree wounding capability....the 9mm has become my personal choice in defensive pistol calibers. Im not alone in this choice. MOST professional trainers, agree.
OldMarksman
Staff
My conclusion?
Well, what Rob Pincus pointed out was that "no matter how much you train and how much you practice, everyone should be able to shoot a string of Combat Accurate 9mm rounds faster than they can fire a string of .40." Emphasis added. That does encompass more than the "vast majority of people".
And it is very basic physics.
Howzat?
I have absolutely no idea of what you are trying to say.
OldMarksman
Staff
Post #194 expands and elucidates upon Post #191 quite nicely.
Mike_Fontenot
New member
I may be wrong, but my impression from what I read was that the specs that the FBI put out (which were the Cooper ballistics, I think) WERE delivered by S&W, and that the FBI decided during their trials that it was too hard to handle (at least at the desired firing rate). They then requested a downloaded version, and Smith decided they could meet that in a shorter case, and the .40S&W was born. Then, AFTER that, the Swiss (via the Norma company) pushed the 10mm above the ORIGINAL spec, and that's the way Underwood, DoubleTap, and BuffaloBore are still loading it. Most other ammo manufacturers started loading their 10mm ammo to little if any above .40S&W+P levels.
I personally LIKE the Norma level, but I don't like or try to shoot fast, and I use a relaxed grip and flexed joints so that the heavy recoil isn't transferred to the rest of my body ... much more pleasant. The relaxed grip and flexed joints even make full-spec .44mag pleasant to shoot, at least in my S&W69 67oz gun with the X500 grips.
Last edited:
They started under loading 10MM then realized the under loaded power level could fit in a shorter case and be made in guns with a frame size similar to 9MM. This shorter case was more desirable because of this. Hence .40 which was basically Col Cooper's original design targets
I'd like to say I read every page, but I didn't.
I understand the 9mm is the choice do to price, ease of shooting, modern bullet technology, experts and the FBI.
My question/ramble: When the bullet technology improves and the .380 is adequate will we all switch to it? It isn't cheaper at this time, but it could be someday.
For now I'll stick with my Glock 29 and try harder.
I understand the 9mm is the choice do to price, ease of shooting, modern bullet technology, experts and the FBI.
My question/ramble: When the bullet technology improves and the .380 is adequate will we all switch to it? It isn't cheaper at this time, but it could be someday.
For now I'll stick with my Glock 29 and try harder.