• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Sidearms & Scatterguns 9MM Wins - Thanks FBI

Dark Horse said:
Lol, no you said it. You made all the comparisons to advocate the 147 gr 9mm as being just as effective on game as the 180 gr 40/10mm and then admitted you carried a 10mm. I was comfortable with my reasons for carrying a 10mm but apparently your argument in favor of the 9 is only for the sake of arguing.

If you feel handgun caliber doesn't matter much then let's all adopt the .380...after all it's a 9mm short.
Click to expand...

WRONG. I never lumped the 10 in with the 40. You did that. The 10mm has a lot more juice than the 40 when hand loaded or when used with good ammo. As for why not to carry a .380 I already answered that one. I have had to actually kill 5 bear in my live. How many have you shot? One thing I do know from those experiences is where you hit them mattered a lot more than what I shot them with.
Pat
 
shurt said:
You are correct by saying simunitions doesn't kill you when getting shot in the literal meaning but for training purposes we look at where the paint bullet struck the officer to determine if it would have been a fatal wound. Those officers who are able to stay calm enough to fire multiple accurate rounds will win the simunition scenario compared to the officer who fires wildly with no front sight focus and trigger control. Simunitions = very good training.
Click to expand...


We found that most of the hits on officers would not be likely to have caused a fatal or debilitating wound. This was explained to many of the officers, and hopefully will encourage them to stay in the fight.

As for the debate on caliber, that is something that will never be finished. Shot placement and rounds on the target are what concern me. If I don't feel that I can be proficient with it, I won't carry it.
 
355sigfan said:
Seriously that is your argument. Not a very well thought out one and easy to counter. The .32 and .380 do not meet minimum penetration standards with expanding bullets and with FMJ bullets they leave very narrow small wound channels. The difference between a .380 and a 9mm is huge. The difference between a .40 and a 9mm is slight. Also most .380's and .32's kick more because they are blow back operated with a few exceptions. Conversley why don't all big bore fans up grade to a 50AE, 45 super, 460 Roland, etc if more is always better. The truth is in all things there is a balance. Most of the big bore fans arguments mike make sense if we were limited to single shot pistols. But we aren't.
Pat
Click to expand...

So let me make sure I understand your reasoning. A .380 FMJ leaves a narrower wound channel than a 9mm? Not sure how that's possible since they are both the same diameter bullet.

You also stated that if you were limited to FMJ's then the bigger bore would be the way to go. Hmmm...so a .40 caliber FMJ does significantly more damage than a .355 caliber FMJ (given the fact that FMJ's crush the least amount of tissue to begin with) to justify less rds, more recoil, and accelerated wear, but the difference in permanent crush cavity when using JHP's does not support the larger caliber?

Looks like sound logic.
 
Dark Horse said:
So let me make sure I understand your reasoning. A .380 FMJ leaves a narrower wound channel than a 9mm? Not sure how that's possible since they are both the same diameter bullet.

You also stated that if you were limited to FMJ's then the bigger bore would be the way to go. Hmmm...so a .40 caliber FMJ does significantly more damage than a .355 caliber FMJ (given the fact that FMJ's crush the least amount of tissue to begin with) to justify less rds, more recoil, and accelerated wear, but the difference in permanent crush cavity when using JHP's does not support the larger caliber?

Looks like sound logic.
Click to expand...

Looks like you took some things out of context or simply did not take the time to fully read what I posted.
1. FMJ's are recommended in pocket pistol calibers like the .380 and below because they lack enough momentum to drive a hollow point that expands past 12 inches. No where did I say to use 9mm FMJ's.
2. I did not say a .40 caliber FMJ had significantly more damage than a 9mm FMJ. My point was the military is stuck with FMJ loads which are poor stoppers in any handgun caliber hence their desire to move up to a .45 ACP . (not .40sw by the way)
Pat
 
SatCong said:
Now the military wants to get rid of the 9mm side-arm.
Click to expand...

The military has been going back and forth between .36/.38/9mm and .44 and .45 caliber handguns for 170 years. As much as people want to cite the "effectiveness" of the .44 and .45 caliber handguns and cartridges and the "ineffectiveness" of .36/.38/9mm, I can find just as many first hand accounts of people being shot once with .36/.38/9mm handguns and dropping DRT and people being shot multiple time with .44's and .45 and continuing to fight or running away with no apparent effect. Truth is all handguns suck for fighting and are only carried for emergency purposes or because it is more socially acceptable then a long gun or easier to carry then a long gun or any possible combination of the three.
 
"The only purpose for a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should have never laid down.”"

Carry what your comfortable with...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr. Z
I don't care what the FBI currently decides meets its needs. 10mm, .40, 9mm... it'll change as the wind blows... they can justify anything "scientifically".

I run what I like and what works for me. That is currently 9mm HST 147
 
  • Like
Reactions: abizdafuzz
Don't care what the lowest common demoninator of the FBI thinks. I own and shoot multiple 9s, 40s, and 10mms. In a carry gun, I can shoot 40s as fast and accurate as 9mms. I don't shoot people, but I have first hand exposure to game shot with all three of the above rounds and to me there is a pronounced difference in effect. So I default to 40. In scenarios where a full steel gun is carry able, I can and do carry a 10mm 1911 or 1911 Commander. I don't care what the FBI tests say, observations on deer, there is no comparison between 10mm and 9/40. And I can shoot a steel 10 with a composite 9/40.
 
They can all be adequate with shot placement, so my theory is have a gun suitable for carry with similar operation in every caliber so that if ammo becomes short again like a few years ago you can always find something. Pretty much everything is easy enough to shoot fast and accurate with practice (up to about the 10mm) but then again I like some of the x frames.
 
Ive carried 9,40, and 45 professionally, ive also seen people shot with all three and both survive and be killed by all three. Ultimately shot placement is more critical in my boat, but i also dont carry a 22, ive personally gone back to 9mm in large part because i can reload so much cheaper, and at he same tine can also get 147 grn HST rounds which are argueably nearly as effective as 165 grn 40 cal rounds, especially with good hits.
 
Just a note here about shot placement, no one has mentioned the fact that the person you're up against will probably be wearing armor. At least if it's a premeditated action.
 
I know this is kind of an old thread but I'll throw my $.02 in.

Modern ammo has advanced a long way in the last several years and I think a lot of good companies make good ammo. To me the entire caliber argument comes down to two things, cost and shot placement. A gun you don't practice with is of little use. So if a gun is too expensive to shoot regularly, then it'll be of little use in the oh shit moment. Everyone has a different budget so if you can afford to shoot a .45 ACP, and you're accurate with it, awesome. That doesn't mean it's vastly better or worse than a 9mm.

I think it boils down to people are too prideful after making a choice. Person"X" choose a Glock 9mm wants to try and justify that decision to person "Y" who just bought the Kimber 45ACP.

As for the government choices. You simply have to look at vehicles. I saw the military rotate through each of the "Big Three" every few years. It's more about keeping congressional districts happy than which is a better value for the money. I'd be willing to bet, some of that is trickling over into the ammo makers areas too.
 
Really don't care what gov't agencies shoot for reasons that typically don't matter to me. In a steel framed gun (1911 Commander) I carry 10mm because I can control it, shoot it well, and terminal performance is on a whole 'nother level than 9, 40, 45. I've seen game shot with all and I'm not even willing to debate. There is the 9, 40, 45, and then there is the 357, 10, 41, 44, two different levels. In my mind not open to debate.

If I'm not carrying a 10 I'm carrying a 40. Happy if the 9 works for you, I've done extensive testing and I am either very slow with a 9 or very fast with a 40. Either way, the 40 comes out on top for me.
 
Ha, I had forgotten about Cobracutter. These threads are really a blast from the past. How are people finding them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: EddieNFL and Bender
great find...

Studies of “stopping power” are irrelevant because no one has ever been able to define how much power, force, or kinetic energy, in and of itself, is required to effectively stop a violent and determined adversary quickly, and even the largest of handgun calibers are not capable of delivering such force. Handgun stopping power is simply a myth. Studies of so‐called “one shot stops” being used as a tool to define the effectiveness of one handgun cartridge, as opposed to another, are irrelevant due to the inability to account for psychological influences and due to the lack of reporting specific shot placement. In short, extensive studies have been done over the years to “prove” a certain cartridge is better than another by using grossly flawed methodology and or bias as a precursor to manipulating statistics



now the question- When will the military adopt modern ammo to go with modern firearms??
 
10mm or bust! don’t be a pussy!!!

this one is fun. in all seriousness over the years i certainly went back to the 9mm at first tentatively and then with enthusiasm.

Rob01 said:
Feel like I opened Guns and Ammo magazine from the mid 90's. .40 vs 9mm? Really? LOL All we need is some .45 ACP or bust guys in here and we will be all set.
Click to expand...
 
My posting isn't completely a non-sequitur. Development of propellants and bullet construction over the past 35-40 years has made the 9mm an adequate cartridge for defensive purposes. There are many adequate cartridges.

Many years ago when the FBI came out with their first recommendations for what made an effective bullet for defensive work, the general conclusion was that the bullet had to be about 40 caliber, weigh at least 180 grains, and be going around 1000 fps. I thought about that, and thought about the 44 spcl, 45 Colt, 44-40, 44 Russian, and many older cartridges, and imagined some really old fart saying "Hell son, we knew what worked and didn't work for handgun cartridges back in 1885...where the hell have you been?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Pistol cartridge info
Replies
13
Views
350
John?
J
RKM556
Two triggers down in new impact 737R action. Is it me? Are there more reliable triggers?
Replies
83
Views
3K
Rio Precision Gunworks
Rio Precision Gunworks
Topstrap
Topstraps Longrange Rimfire Challenge 2024 Match Information
Replies
0
Views
103
Topstrap
Topstrap
Pocket
make me a pro shooter, help needed lol
Replies
43
Views
2K
oneshot.onehit
oneshot.onehit
A
New Guy Suppressor Tips
Replies
12
Views
1K
Bluedog82
Bluedog82
Top Bottom
Back