Caliber wars redux

[Manatee]

It's an honest question. More civilian ballistic vests are on the street. It's more than a de minimis risk that the aggressor will have one.

What would be your caliber choice with the increasing chances that the bad guy is an armored bad guy?

And if you have a 338 Lapua handgun as your CCW, you're a better man than me Hough.

 

[HoughMade]

Seriously, after the Aurora, Colorado thing, I though about this and started to take a look at whether the 5.7x28 could be useful in this circumstance. I have concluded it could be....but not with any of the commercial loads that are available to the general public. Hotted up with a good bullet, though.....

But I would look at any low frontal area, high sectional density, higher velocity round for this purpose.

 

[Hohn]

9 for me. It's what I know.
I liken it to Electricity.
The more Volts you have,
the less Amps you'll need.
Cause the eventuality in this debate is Power for Capacity.

Interesting analogy, but I think this is different. Mathematically, Volts * amps= watts, so the voltage and current ARE equal factors.

But I don't think it's true that handgun ammo works the same way, where 1) there are only two factors and 2) they matter equally.

Handgun selection and ammo selection is WAY more complex than that.


If it was only about penetration, we all carry hardcast or FMJs. If it was only about the size of the hole, then maybe a .45 is tops. If it was only about ammo capacity, we'd all carry some FNs with those cute little overpriced 5.7s. Or G17s with 33 rounders, who knows.

The real argument isn't over caliber-- it's about criteria-- MEASURES. Once you settle on your particular combination with weights of the different factors, then the questions tend to answer themselves.

Some combination of recoil, penetration, expansion, reliability, concealability, etc will cause you choose a particular gun and ammo. The weighting of these combinations is infinite, and and scoring scheme could result in a particular choice.


For me, the question was what is the most power I can command with reasonable accuracy at an acceptable rate of fire at home defense ranges? For me, the obvious answer then became a 10mm G20 because I don't carry it, it's stays secured for HD duty. For a carry gun, I'd probably go with a G19 or G23 or M&P9C.

 

[Hohn]

It's an honest question. More civilian ballistic vests are on the street. It's more than a de minimis risk that the aggressor will have one.

What would be your caliber choice with the increasing chances that the bad guy is an armored bad guy?

And if you have a 338 Lapua handgun as your CCW, you're a better man than me Hough.

Caliber choice then become whatever you are most accurate with-- head shots, y'know.

 

[Manatee]

yah, that's my thinking 2 CM and then 2 HS. And if I'm aware of the danger, shotgun.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Bullet placement is EVERYTHING, "stopping power" is just a measure of the bullets energy and means NOTHING if you miss the target or hit it in an ineffective place.

Sort of. If 'bullet placement' was all that mattered we could all save a ton of money and carry .22 shorts. Since you don't get to hand place your bullets and there's no guarantee of a straight flight through the body even a good hit may be meaningless. You can shoot someone right in the center of the chest but due to angle, ammo selection, intermediate barriers, and/or pure dumb luck it can ride a rib around and never do any significant damage. Ditto head shots. A near contact shot in the back of the head with a .25 ACP wasn't enough to put down an IPD officer, who was able to return fire and after a brief shootout kill his attacker.

 

[Hohn]

Sort of. If 'bullet placement' was all that mattered we could all save a ton of money and carry .22 shorts. Since you don't get to hand place your bullets and there's no guarantee of a straight flight through the body even a good hit may be meaningless. You can shoot someone right in the center of the chest but due to angle, ammo selection, intermediate barriers, and/or pure dumb luck it can ride a rib around and never do any significant damage. Ditto head shots. A near contact shot in the back of the head with a .25 ACP wasn't enough to put down an IPD officer, who was able to return fire and after a brief shootout kill his attacker.

Wow-- is there a stronger case to be made for carrying at least something with sufficient power to penetrate a skull? Contact shots can be especially lethal (gas impingement).

Brassfetcher has a video showing the impact of contact shot on ballistic gel. It will blow your mind how big a difference it makes vs even a couple inches of distance.

 

[45fan]

While I do favor my 45s, I do carry a 9mm, 38 Spl, or .380. depending on what I feel like that day. Anyone who doubts the effectiveness of the 9mm with modern ammunition should start reading the papers and watching the news. There have been more than a few one stop shots with a 9mm in the last year or so that were not head shots.

If put in the right place, none of the choices that I use on a regular basis leave me feeling under-gunned. If I ever feel that I need to have something with more thump, I will change things up and carry the .357, or my 45 Colt, with a warm Ruger only load.

 

[9mmfan]

My username tells you what I carry, but wow not this again......

 

[rbMPSH12]

Interesting story: Someone recently posted a news story on INGO about a cop in Chicago who shot a BG 14 times with .45 and he still didn't go down. Took three head shots to take him down. The cop then switched to 9mm and started carrying something like 150 rounds on him at all times. For me, personally, it comes down to accuracy. I haven't shot .45, but I've shot my 9mm Shield, G17, G19 etc... and my dad's G22 (.40), and I shoot the 9mm Shield, even with +P ammo, much better than the G22. I didn't like the .40...the recoil really hurt my follow up shots. Question for those who shoot .45: is .45 recoil more than .40, or is it comparable?

 

[AngryRooster]

Interesting story: Someone recently posted a news story on INGO about a cop in Chicago who shot a BG 14 times with .45 and he still didn't go down. Took three head shots to take him down. The cop then switched to 9mm and started carrying something like 150 rounds on him at all times. For me, personally, it comes down to accuracy. I haven't shot .45, but I've shot my 9mm Shield, G17, G19 etc... and my dad's G22 (.40), and I shoot the 9mm Shield, even with +P ammo, much better than the G22. I didn't like the .40...the recoil really hurt my follow up shots. Question for those who shoot .45: is .45 recoil more than .40, or is it comparable?

It's hard to describe if you haven't shot a 45 before. It's more of a push than a snap. Kind of like holding an empty gun in front of you while someone smacks it from underneath with their hand vs with a 2x4. To me the 45 is more pleasant to shoot than the full pressure 40. The medium pressure 40 is about like a 9mm+P. The design of the gun has quite a bit to do with it as well. The width of the grip soaks up a lot of the recoil. Take a Glock 30 vs a Glock 36. Both in 45 however most will agree the 36 feels like it recoils more because of the narrower grip.

 

[U.S. Patriot]

Something people fail to ignore is bullet design. Technology has come a long way. Stopping power is a myth, and nothing more. Fact is, handguns are not the best tool for self defense. However, how many people walk around with a rifle or shotgun stuffed down their pants? The human anatomy plays more on how affective bullets are at stopping a threat. You can do all the math you want.

 

[Jordan]

Stopping power to me is a term only relevant when it comes to hunting. Against a boar or a bear I will put confidence in the hardest hitting, largest caliber I can handle. In terms of defense against humans I am more concerned with being able to hit consistently and rapidly. Ammo availability is also a consideration in a self defense weapon so I have chosen common rounds intended for that purpose and in use by the military and law enforcement. Niche, obscure, or under-supported rounds need not apply.

I am most consistently accurate at speed with .45acp. I am decent enough with 9mm. My two EDCs are a 9mm and a .45acp and intended for concealed carry. The 9mm gains 1 extra round; 7 compared to 6. As well the 9mm is equipped with a light/laser combo. These two pluses equalize (to me anyway) the inherent accuracy advantage I have with .45acp. Therefore I am comfortable and confident with either.

Ultimately, I will always prefer .45acp based entirely on my preference for its shooting characteristics.

In a SHTF scenario where the expectation is violence and concealment no longer is a priority I put my faith in a 15 round .45acp tactical pistol. Which then is only tertiary to a 5.56 carbine and a 12ga pump.

 

[45fan]

Interesting story: Someone recently posted a news story on INGO about a cop in Chicago who shot a BG 14 times with .45 and he still didn't go down. Took three head shots to take him down. The cop then switched to 9mm and started carrying something like 150 rounds on him at all times. For me, personally, it comes down to accuracy. I haven't shot .45, but I've shot my 9mm Shield, G17, G19 etc... and my dad's G22 (.40), and I shoot the 9mm Shield, even with +P ammo, much better than the G22. I didn't like the .40...the recoil really hurt my follow up shots. Question for those who shoot .45: is .45 recoil more than .40, or is it comparable?

The closest I can come to an apples to apples comparison of the 9mm vs 45 for recoil would be the Hi-Power and 1911 government model. I shoot a "mild" +P remington load in the 9mm, and the carry choice in the 45 is a Federal +P load that is pretty warm compared to standard 45 acp loads. Neither is something that is especially difficult to control, and for me, neither present issue with accurate follow up shots. The 9mm seems to be snappier, but with less recoil, where the 45 in my opinion isnt as snappy, but the recoil energy might be a marginal bit more. The only way to really know the difference is to shoot both, and make a decision for yourself. Lots of different options in ammo are out there for the different calibers, and each one will be slightly different than the others. I have shot the 40 on a few occasions, though both guns were Glocks, and as such lighter than the steel frame guns that I prefer. Neither were too much to handle, and with a comparable in weight handgun I doubt the difference would be enough to seriously effect follow up shots.

 

[JLL101]

Clearly those who discount stopping power in the evaluation of ammo have not done their homework. All serious studies using real life shootings as the basis for their stopping power effectiveness define stopping power as one of the critical gauges of the effectiveness of a round. The goal in a shooting event is to stop the bad guy from continuing the fight. You may kill a bad guy but if he lives long enough, he may be able to kill you too. Stopping power is a simple concept to understand. The verbiage is exactly the meaning of the term. To restate - you want to stop the bad guy as quickly and timely as possible before they can do harm to you. Documents such as Handgun Stopping Power by Marshall and Sanow (while now somewhat outdated - but still useful for general concepts - by the continual evolving of our available ammo) use real case studies to evaluate the effectiveness of a round in stopping the bad guy. Their documented statistical tables of real world gun fights clearly demonstrate which rounds have that ability.

 

[Hohn]

It's hard to describe if you haven't shot a 45 before. It's more of a push than a snap. Kind of like holding an empty gun in front of you while someone smacks it from underneath with their hand vs with a 2x4. To me the 45 is more pleasant to shoot than the full pressure 40. The medium pressure 40 is about like a 9mm+P. The design of the gun has quite a bit to do with it as well. The width of the grip soaks up a lot of the recoil. Take a Glock 30 vs a Glock 36. Both in 45 however most will agree the 36 feels like it recoils more because of the narrower grip.

I feel compelled to correct the repetition of the great "high pressure" myth about the .40. The full SAAMI pressure is 35000 psi for BOTH the 9mm (non +p) and the .40.

The .40 IS NOT A HIGHER PRESSURE LOADING THAN THE 9mm. 9mm +p is higher pressure than .40, since there's no such thing as a +p .40 round.

Both are much higher pressure than a .45.


Even "full pressure" 10mm at 37,500psi is less than +p 9mm at 38,500 psi.

Compared to a +p 9mm, there's only a single "high pressure' autoloading pistol caliber, and that's a .357 SIG at 40,000 psi.

 

[Plisken]

Its all about shot placement. Practice so you can put them where they need to go to stop an attack.

 

[Hohn]

Clearly those who discount stopping power in the evaluation of ammo have not done their homework. All serious studies using real life shootings as the basis for their stopping power effectiveness define stopping power as one of the critical gauges of the effectiveness of a round. The goal in a shooting event is to stop the bad guy from continuing the fight. You may kill a bad guy but if he lives long enough, he may be able to kill you too. Stopping power is a simple concept to understand. The verbiage is exactly the meaning of the term. To restate - you want to stop the bad guy as quickly and timely as possible before they can do harm to you. Documents such as Handgun Stopping Power by Marshall and Sanow (while now somewhat outdated - but still useful for general concepts - by the continual evolving of our available ammo) use real case studies to evaluate the effectiveness of a round in stopping the bad guy. Their documented statistical tables of real world gun fights clearly demonstrate which rounds have that ability.

Documents such as Handgun Stopping Power by Marshall and Sanow use real case studies cherry picked by the authors and result in pseudoscientic crap being passed off as something that is meaningful for purposes of evaluating terminal ballistics.

FIFY

With all due respect, the entire purpose of lab testing is to get rid of the hundreds of uncontrolled variables that exist in "the real world." With so many variables, you'd have to have an impossibly large sample size and STILL wouldn't have high confidence in what difference the caliber made. No one who seriously studies wound ballistics gives any merit at all to Marshall and Sanow. No one at IWBA. No one at FBI. Fackler doesn't. Roberts doesn't. You're free to believe what you wish, but M&S are not respected in their field.

Pistol calibers don't have "stopping power" over one another in a practical sense-- I'll ignore anything smaller than .380 since I don't think anyone who really cares about actual self-defense carries anything smaller than .380. The problem is that they are still pistols.

My mighty G20 is a pretty stout handgun, but does it have "stopping power"? Nope. I might blow a guy's arm nearly off, but will that automatically stop him? Will it "stop" him more than a .380 right into the nasal triangle? If it's so powerful that I can't get followup shots on target, is it as lethal?

Any caliber with sufficient power to penetrate can have "stopping power." Three accurate shots of .380 FMJ to the heart or head will have way more "stopping power" than any hotter load that's not placed as well.

Handgun power is a question of sufficiency. Does the loading have enough power to penetrate to vital tissues and destroy their proper function quickly enough to incapacitate? If it does, then it's powerful enough. More power isn't necessarily more lethal, even given identical bullet designs and such. There is no magic caliber or magic JHP that is always best.

As bullet designs continue to evolve and improve, the 'best' caliber or load is always evolving with it. I happen to think that a 147gr HST in 9mm is about the best balance of lethality and controllability as exists on the market today.

That doesn't make me right. Certainly, there may be some conceivable circumstance where I would be right. But there are other circumstances where I'd be way wrong, too.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Its all about shot placement. Practice so you can put them where they need to go to stop an attack.

Again, it isn't. I've had cases with fatal butt shots and non-fatal head shots. I've had cases with through-and-through chest wounds with the victim able to run several blocks and call 911. I've seen a woman shot in the center of the chest, have the bullet ride around the rib and exit the back, and she was able to stay onscene long enough to identify her shooter.

Shot placement matters, and it matters a lot. To say its "all" is far from the truth.

 

[Wysko]

How a 9mm stops the same as a.45 ? Bullet designs have improved over the years. A well placed high quality 9mm will kill the bad guy just as dead a well placed high quality .45,.40, 10mm or even a700 nitro express. With the newer bullet designs a .45 may be just so much overkill. FMJ is another story. The bigger bullet making a bigger hole will be the winner of the fight more often than not.