Which Caliber?
- Thread starter TexanGunNut
- Start date
Limnophile
New member
P71,
Except that gel disturbance and width of pressure channel mean effectively nothing in terms of wounding potential for the handgun calibers under discussion. If you are impressed by such irrelevancies, you desparately need to review the handgun wounding and terminal ballistics literature. What is relevant are:
- Depth of penetration; specifically, deep enough to reach vital tissues; and,
- Width of wound channel, where, all else being equal, bigger is better.
This has been known scientific fact for almost three decades now.
Except that gel disturbance and width of pressure channel mean effectively nothing in terms of wounding potential for the handgun calibers under discussion. If you are impressed by such irrelevancies, you desparately need to review the handgun wounding and terminal ballistics literature. What is relevant are:
- Depth of penetration; specifically, deep enough to reach vital tissues; and,
- Width of wound channel, where, all else being equal, bigger is better.
This has been known scientific fact for almost three decades now.
Last edited:
All I am saying is that the more powerful calibers are just that, more powerful. The heavier bullets penetrate deeper in living soft things. Which to me is a huge advantage; and I'd put money down on the base that whichever caliber/load does more "damage" to the gel block indeed creates a bigger/more fatal would channel.
That's it I'm going on YouTube and watching several brassfetcher videos.
Obviously you prefer 9mm and that is fine but to state it does more damage in any loading is just false. Unless of course there is a hard barrier involved in which .40 or .45 failed to even reach the target because they couldn't breach the hard cover. But then there are light weights for the .40 and .45 that have the velocity for hard barriers but will have diminished penetration. Due to lack of momentum and SD
That's it I'm going on YouTube and watching several brassfetcher videos.
Obviously you prefer 9mm and that is fine but to state it does more damage in any loading is just false. Unless of course there is a hard barrier involved in which .40 or .45 failed to even reach the target because they couldn't breach the hard cover. But then there are light weights for the .40 and .45 that have the velocity for hard barriers but will have diminished penetration. Due to lack of momentum and SD
I have to disagree with you here. There are loadings in all the calibers that meet the FBI/IWBA standards for penetration.
http://www.ar15.com/ammo/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/MiscDocuments/HandgunBulletchartaspicturerev3.jpg
For that matter there are 9mm loadings that penetrate more than 40SW and 45ACp, and vice versa. Penetration isn't just a matter of bullet weight and diameter. Saying heavier bullets are a "huge" advantage, is frankly exaggeration imo. We're not talking 5.56 vs. 7.62. The differences in velocity and mass aren't nearly as dramatic. For that matter, excessive penetration isn't desirable either.
And again, this idea of the fatal wound channel is to me overblown. Handguns stink. You need to penetrate to the vital organ or central nervous system and have enough mass to disable either of those in order to truly end a fight with any speed (and the less time the adversary has to shoot at you the better). Having that adversary bleed out slowly over time is not the goal.
I'm sure you know the Miami FBI shootout, which rather famously lead to the development of the 10mm and then the 40SW. What you might not remember was one of the bank robbers (Platt) his lung had 1.3 liters of blood in it when the autopsy was done. The man would have bled to death had he escaped that fatal wound, which was, wait for it, to his spinal chord. Yet during that fight despite bleeding profusely internally and having been shot twelve, that's 12, times he continued to fight and his actions killed two FBI agents and seriously wounded 3 others.
Now you can look at this as, "Well that's just cause of the puny 9mm!" and yes the 9mm loadings of the time weren't particularly good. But look at the ballistics tests that I linked to in terms of depth penetrated and expanded diameter (and every self defense ammunition manufacturer has similar charts available on their own websites if you dig around). The differences aren't huge, they're just not.
The idea that a more powerful handgun caliber was the solution to all this has been fairly accepted today by most instructors for private and law enforcement purposes as an attempt to avoid blaming the dead agents. Engaging well trained adversaries with a semiautomatic rifle and a shotgun when all you have are pistols and two men with shotguns is why that fight went that way (and the agents chose to stop that vehicle at that time, they weren't forced into the situation and there were other agents with submachineguns and rifles working the area). Don't bring a pistol to a rifle fight, because again handguns stink. Unless you have a shot such as in that fight that damaged the central nervous system or a major organ that causes a rapid bleed out, you're just putting holes in a person that might stay up a long time. And I think at this point ballistics tests show that any of the major calibers can penetrate to the required depth to make those critically damaging shots.
People get hung up on this idea. That because the 40SW penetrates maybe somewhat more or expands maybe somewhat more (and again, different loadings have different results) that it's undeniably better. The debate here is really whether that difference in "power" translates to a real world gain in terminal effect, and I honestly can't see how that difference is argued to be significant with the testing done in recent years. Does that mean I think 40SW stinks? No. I've seen its effect on auto glass and certain barriers first hand and I can see why people might to go that route. But against a human body I think saying any difference among the primary handgun calibers is "huge" can't be backed up.
Last edited:
marine6680
New member
We are basically acknowledging the fact that 40 and 45 have higher energies than 9mm.
But we are arguing that all testing and evidence gained from real world use, points to the fact that the additional energy of 40 and 45 do not improve their terminal performance over 9mm.
Basically... 40 and 45 are better... Only on paper.
At least with modern hollow point bullet designs and loads.
And yes momentum is the key to deep reliable/consistent penetration of hollow point ammo, but you can not directly compare the raw numbers from 9mm and 45 (or 40) as there are other factors at play.
Frontal surface area, and increased surface area in general, are greater in larger rounds, and that makes the numbers not directly comparable. Because drag forces are increased, which counters the additional momentum.
To compare, you must do controlled testing in test media. And those tests show that on average, between the different calibers and different manufacturers bullets and loads... Total penetration is very similar.
You can tell me all day long that 40 or 45 has more power/energy than 9mm... And I will agree, and point out that it makes not one lick of difference in the real world.
Look...I used to be a big big proponent of the 40sw... After I got back into shooting several years ago after about 6 years absent. The very first firearm I bought was a CZ 75 in 40sw... That was and still is a great gun. It sits in my safe to this day.
I next bought a 9mm, as my fiancé had trouble shooting the 40. This lead to a bit of a crisis in my thinking, as I wanted her to be able to use her pistol for defense if need be, and I thought of 9mm as being woefully inadequate.
So I started using the Internet to research for 9mm loads that performed the best, and to research the hobby in general, and talk to others in the community... I found sources of reliable and verifiable information.
And all that information told me that if I used modern loads from respected manufacturers... That 9mm was not only effective, but just as effective as 40. Plus it had many other advantages over 40.
My third pistol was a 9mm... And my 4th... 5th... 6th... 7th was a 1911 in 45... My 8th... Ok I snuck a couple 22lr and a 357 revolver in there too... 9th...... Etc
Point is, when faced with the evidence, I was forced to swallow my pride and acknowledge my incorrect attitudes. It stung to overturn years of belief, but I did, and it was for the best.
But we are arguing that all testing and evidence gained from real world use, points to the fact that the additional energy of 40 and 45 do not improve their terminal performance over 9mm.
Basically... 40 and 45 are better... Only on paper.
At least with modern hollow point bullet designs and loads.
And yes momentum is the key to deep reliable/consistent penetration of hollow point ammo, but you can not directly compare the raw numbers from 9mm and 45 (or 40) as there are other factors at play.
Frontal surface area, and increased surface area in general, are greater in larger rounds, and that makes the numbers not directly comparable. Because drag forces are increased, which counters the additional momentum.
To compare, you must do controlled testing in test media. And those tests show that on average, between the different calibers and different manufacturers bullets and loads... Total penetration is very similar.
You can tell me all day long that 40 or 45 has more power/energy than 9mm... And I will agree, and point out that it makes not one lick of difference in the real world.
Look...I used to be a big big proponent of the 40sw... After I got back into shooting several years ago after about 6 years absent. The very first firearm I bought was a CZ 75 in 40sw... That was and still is a great gun. It sits in my safe to this day.
I next bought a 9mm, as my fiancé had trouble shooting the 40. This lead to a bit of a crisis in my thinking, as I wanted her to be able to use her pistol for defense if need be, and I thought of 9mm as being woefully inadequate.
So I started using the Internet to research for 9mm loads that performed the best, and to research the hobby in general, and talk to others in the community... I found sources of reliable and verifiable information.
And all that information told me that if I used modern loads from respected manufacturers... That 9mm was not only effective, but just as effective as 40. Plus it had many other advantages over 40.
My third pistol was a 9mm... And my 4th... 5th... 6th... 7th was a 1911 in 45... My 8th... Ok I snuck a couple 22lr and a 357 revolver in there too... 9th...... Etc
Point is, when faced with the evidence, I was forced to swallow my pride and acknowledge my incorrect attitudes. It stung to overturn years of belief, but I did, and it was for the best.
It seems like a lot of you guys think primarily for carrying and defense from people. I like to think beyond that. I am young and poor and have only two handguns. Both full size duty type guns. One a .45 and one a .40. I tend to think more toward the overall general use of a weapon as I am limited to what I can have. To me, the extra power is a bigger advantage than a few extra rounds in the mag or lower recoil. I do not have arhtritis or sensitive wrists. If and when I have to flee the city and live off of the land and I run out of rifle rounds, and for example am down to fmj ammo, and need to hunt for meat and spot either a large whitetail/black bear/elk, I would rather have the larger diameter and weight and flat point of the .40, or the gun great mass and diameter of the .45 to bring such a beast down. I'm sure 9mm could kill the same critters but i think if a heart shot was taken, the larger slightly more powerful cartridges would result in a quicker death. The 9mm with its light weight may not punch as deep into the tissue, and the pointed nose will cause a small cavity as it just pushes tissue out of the way and after the bullet pass through the tissue just closes back up. In this situation a JHP may not even penetrate sufficiently. An exit wound is good. Drops blood pressure faster. Even in hardcast wide flat nose projectiles in +p or upper loadings I believe the larger calibers will kill better
testuser79
New member
Just a few quick points...
- If all we concerned ourselves with was penetration in ballistic gelatin, then .380 FMJ would be the choice. Same diameter as 9mm, less recoil, less weight and will penetrate over 20 inches of gelatin. Expansion and the ability to break bones and penetrate dense muscle do matter...
- Pick a platform that fits your needs in a caliber you can control. A heavy platform makes hard kicking calibers easier to control, but isn't easy to carry. Double stacked platforms in .45 and 10mm platforms are not always easiest to grip and control.
- Don't stress about capacity: address platform and ability to control the pistol first. For police, about 20% of their rounds will find the target. The difference between a 10 round mag (2 hits) and a 15 round mag (3 hits), isn't as large as we make it out to be.
- The original poster is correct, none of the service cartridges are versatility enough for hunting (although .45 Super would be an exception), but this depends on the state and the game. That's why the 10mm is gaining ground in autoloaders. Otherwise, .357 and .44 are still top choices.
- Many of us have lived our entire lives in open carry states. Most of us believe concealed carry is usually the best choice. Open carry is nice in case a pistol accidentally becomes revealed, transporting weapons or in the field to name a few. Going around town while open carrying is more likely to intimidate the law abiding and not necessarily the criminal element, unless you have the authority of the law like a police officer.
- If all we concerned ourselves with was penetration in ballistic gelatin, then .380 FMJ would be the choice. Same diameter as 9mm, less recoil, less weight and will penetrate over 20 inches of gelatin. Expansion and the ability to break bones and penetrate dense muscle do matter...
- Pick a platform that fits your needs in a caliber you can control. A heavy platform makes hard kicking calibers easier to control, but isn't easy to carry. Double stacked platforms in .45 and 10mm platforms are not always easiest to grip and control.
- Don't stress about capacity: address platform and ability to control the pistol first. For police, about 20% of their rounds will find the target. The difference between a 10 round mag (2 hits) and a 15 round mag (3 hits), isn't as large as we make it out to be.
- The original poster is correct, none of the service cartridges are versatility enough for hunting (although .45 Super would be an exception), but this depends on the state and the game. That's why the 10mm is gaining ground in autoloaders. Otherwise, .357 and .44 are still top choices.
- Many of us have lived our entire lives in open carry states. Most of us believe concealed carry is usually the best choice. Open carry is nice in case a pistol accidentally becomes revealed, transporting weapons or in the field to name a few. Going around town while open carrying is more likely to intimidate the law abiding and not necessarily the criminal element, unless you have the authority of the law like a police officer.
Last edited:
marine6680
New member
Pilot... General range and/or defensive use are the main goals for most people here. If they are looking for hunting they say so.
And if you are limited to one or two pistols, and you are concerned about things beyond the range or general defense, then I can see the bigger rounds being more attractive option.
I am just a firm believer in not trying to get a single firearm to accomplish many roles, especially if they are not suited to the role in the first place. Also I believe one should focus on the most likely situations and prepare for that, and then start looking at the fringe cases.
To the other poster... Many carry FMJ in 380 for that reason. Good hollow point ammo in 380 that penetrates to good depth without over penetration is pretty much a unicorn at this point. That is why rounds those the ARX and Lehieh are gaining traction.
And if you are limited to one or two pistols, and you are concerned about things beyond the range or general defense, then I can see the bigger rounds being more attractive option.
I am just a firm believer in not trying to get a single firearm to accomplish many roles, especially if they are not suited to the role in the first place. Also I believe one should focus on the most likely situations and prepare for that, and then start looking at the fringe cases.
To the other poster... Many carry FMJ in 380 for that reason. Good hollow point ammo in 380 that penetrates to good depth without over penetration is pretty much a unicorn at this point. That is why rounds those the ARX and Lehieh are gaining traction.
Personal biase
I may be biased by retired cops complaining how 9mm couldn't take a BG down in the 80's. I still have trouble believe in the "wonder 9s". I like the 45 acp and like how it rolls in my hand during recoil. But I carry a 40 for the best trade off between power and capacity.
I may be biased by retired cops complaining how 9mm couldn't take a BG down in the 80's. I still have trouble believe in the "wonder 9s". I like the 45 acp and like how it rolls in my hand during recoil. But I carry a 40 for the best trade off between power and capacity.
I'd be interested in seeing the data that proves these two points. That's not my understanding of handgun round effectiveness based on 50+ years of military and civilian use. I'd suggest that for any military or CC use, not to mention use of a handgun in the hunting fields; that you should select the largest caliber that you can shoot effectively.
I understand that military and LEO organizations are limited in what they can issue based on personnel hand size and strength, training and weapon procurement costs as well as PC limitations, but as civilians we can and should pick our weapons based on our personal needs and physical characteristics. A .45 suits me fine for CC use, it may not be your cup of tea, and I fully understand that it's underpowered in the game fields, but to deny that it's equaled by a 9mm in actual street or trench fighting is a mistake, in my opinion.
The boutique current crop of SD bullets have helped level the playing field, but only if used by the smaller calibers...if their employed in the .45, it's a whole new game and the .45's still the winner.
Best Regards, YMMV, Rod
Dude, if you realize how effective and versatile the 10mm AUTO is, then just get one.
With the Glock 20 or 29 specifically, you can get extra aftermarket barrels that drop right into both guns, chambered in .40S&W, .357Sig-let, or even the 9x25 Dillon.
Why buy extra guns, mags and holsters in .40 or .357 Sig? I can understand having at least one semi-auto in 9mm, or even a classic 1911 in .45acp, but beyond that just get a 10mm for everything else: home defense, ccw, targets, plinking, etc.
If you want a dedicated "outdoors" 10mm, whether for hunting or for protection against 2- or 4-legged predators in the boonies and backwoods, I'd just get the Glock 40 MOS and be done with it.
David L. Smith
New member
There are a lot of good replies above - so, I won't elaborate. But, I'd recommend 9mm (cheap ammo, and better quality in recent years). For a hunting pistol, even as a "back-up", I always have thought that a 6" or 8" barrel revolver was the best bet. Shoot it single-action normally, or double-action when that hog, or bear, is closing fast! For hunting, "bigger is better", but hard to beat a heavy .357 round.
testuser79
New member
A different point than what I was trying to make, but it's true. I can remember reading articles 20 years ago on the merits of .32 and .380 FMJ over hollowpoint designs. Maybe some of the older members on the board read the same opinions 30 or 40 years ago?
The current arguments the FBI is making seem like retreads we've heard before, just applied to new bullet designs.
The problem we won't discuss is why we're putting the cart before the horse. We all pick ultralight guns for comfort of carry and then supply them with powerful, hard recoiling rounds. That's the recipe for a gun that's hard to shoot and low qualification scores.
Select the caliber, then select the platform that best fits the amount of power you need. If you're carrying a 25 ounce pistol, then that's probably better suited to a 9mm. It's going to take more practice to fire a .45 ACP from a plastic pistol, than someone with a 45 ounce handgun. If form factor is the most important, then select the platform first, but understand that you may be limited by your caliber choice or you'll need to spend a lot more time practicing.
Last edited:
And that's your call. I would only suggest you read some documented cases as to why more rounds and less recoil might be more important than extra "power".
I would bet many of using 9mm don't have that issue either (though some do). It's interesting to me that in many circles carrying 9mm is wussy or "PC" when all that's needed to be "manly" is a few hundredths of an inch and/or slightly more velocity.
This is why I have rifles. A passable hunting rifle can be had for very little money these days. I get you're on a limited budget, but if the scenario you described is honestly a concern to you than I would strongly suggest the purchase of a rifle. Pretty much any centerfire rifle caliber will have dramatically better terminal performance than any handgun round. They're not in the same league.
Any testing I've seen shows FMJ options typically pass through a person as well as smaller game such as the deer that live around me. Now if you live in big game country then it may well be different, but to be honest if all I have is a pistol I'm not personally going for big game. And again, even in fmj we're talking 0.1" difference in diameter and less. Is that better? Yes I won't deny that. I just wonder how much of a difference it will make in speed of taking down game if again you didn't hit the CNS or vital organ. That example I gave of Platt fighting with blood pouring into his chest cavity isn't just relatable to people. Preferably you don't want to chase wounded game all over the place, especially in a scenario when you had to flee the city and live in the forest and exposing yourself as little as possible is critical.
Will Beararms
New member
Oh boy another bad mouth the .40 and defend the honor of 9mm adequacy thread. There's nothing marginal about the .40 and it's almost as economical as the 9mm and in many cases these days the same price as the 9mm. The .40 gets hammered on the interweb but I still see a ton of professionals carrying it. The .40 is a hard hitting round and that's why many like me trust it. I am not one to follow the pack anyway. For deep concealment, I still use a S&W 442. My hands are too big to be comfortable with the micro 9's and micro .380's out there.
Pick what you are comfortable with and get to know it. Get plenty of ammo and keep spare parts on hand and go in confidence.
Pick what you are comfortable with and get to know it. Get plenty of ammo and keep spare parts on hand and go in confidence.
Brilliant...couldn't have said it better. Kudos, my friend.
Low recoil = 9mm even in a poly framed light weight. But totally inadequate for outdoor/woods use when the chips are down. Multiple shots with a 115 to 147 gr bullet won't make up for the lack of power. If you/we need a gun that's capable of defensive use against all comers, and it's got to be a handgun, then bigger is better and that means a big bore revolver with a weight that approaches 50 oz. loaded...YMMV Rod
If you mean furry critters that want to kill you, then I suggest a rifle or a shotgun for the woods. Even 44 magnum is not going to come close to the performance you can get from either of those. I see a tendency among people to look at handguns as the do all and I get that they're convenient to carry. But there's a reason handguns are way down the list of militaries only worried about killing two legged attackers, much less bear or other large predators. If you want "power", then step up the game.