PDA

View Full Version : 9mm v .357 power for Concealed Carry


CDW4ME
July 1, 2010, 07:21 AM
If we compare guns suitable for concealed carry, the 9mm in it's better loads is equal to the .357 mag with one of it's legendary loads.

I'm going to compare guns with approximately the same height & length. A 4'' barrel GP100 or 686 isn't IWB material.

Bullet diameter is the same.

My chronographed velocities (average for 5 shots):
Glock 26 / Winchester Ranger T 124 +P @ 1,162 fps = 372# KE
Glock 26 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,182 fps = 394# KE
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 124 +P @ 1,212 fps = 405# KE
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,238 fps = 433# KE

Ruger Speed Six .357 Mag (2 3/4'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,248 fps / 432# KE.

Sept. 2006 Gun Tests:
Ruger SP101 .357 Mag (2.25'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,195 fps / 396# KE.
S&W model 60 .357 Mag (2.1'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,165 fps / 376# KE.

briandg
July 1, 2010, 07:48 AM
Well, there doesn't seem to be a point in arguing this, you found a need and a circumstance where one is superior to the other in velocity, and it has the added benefit of a magazine.

I think that if you're going to compare +P+ rounds in 9mm to .357 standard rounds, though, you're talking complete bull patties. That's not right. It's a deceptive argument, and you know it.

Buffalo bore, for example, loads a 125 grain bullet rated at 1476 out of a 3" barrel. there's no way that this load will shed 300 fps with less than 1" of barrel shortening. There are other top of the line .357 loadings, as well.

mavracer
July 1, 2010, 08:08 AM
let's compare 180gr loads too while your at it

Sheikyourbootie
July 1, 2010, 10:07 AM
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,238 fps = 433# KE


So if we take a glock 19 with it's 4" pipe and all the "+'s" that can be tacked on to the ammo and compare to my Ruger Service 6 4" barrel which I do carry IWB in a simply rugged holster lets compare.

Buffalo Bore 125gr JHP I chronograph 1590fps

My tiny 340PD I carry 38+p
Buffalo Bore 158gr LHP which chronographs @1000 (rounded up from 999) out of the 1 7/8" pipe

When we tabulate the numbers:
wt Velocity K.E. Momentum in slug-ft/sec
127 1238 431 0.697 (out of the 4" pipe of the G19)
125 1590 701. 0.882 (4" pipe of the Service 6)
158 1000 350 0.701 (38+p out of the diminutive 1 7/8")

In terms of power, you can throw as many pluses in front of and behind the p as you want, and the power just doesn't come close to the .357. And I can carry an 8 shot revolver and it doesn't give me the 15 round capacity and quick reloading of the semi-auto platform.

As far as power, even the 38 special from a 2" barrel holds its own against the 9mm out of a 4" pipe with the KE being within 50 ft-lbs and the momentum exceeding the 9mm round.

The 9mm is not a .357 That doesn't make it bad. That doesn't mean the round is going to bounce off of woman's undies. It's just not a .357

CDW4ME
July 1, 2010, 12:19 PM
In regard to barrel length on the 19, it's got a 4'' barrel including the chamber to the rear of the case.

The Speed Six with a 2 3/4'' barrel, I used in the previous example, is 4 3/8'' from the rear of the cylinder (rear of the case) to the end of the barrel.

I realize we can get Buffalo Bore, 180 gr. bullets ect... for the .357 Mag. The 125gr. Federal load is one of the two loads that have a proven record for being very effective against people (bad guys).

My point is: the 125 grain .357 load that is legendary for stopping power is not much ahead, if at all, of the current "police" 9mm loads fired from comparable size concealable guns.

mavracer
July 1, 2010, 12:35 PM
My point is: the 125 grain .357 load that is legendary for stopping power is not much ahead, if at all, of the current "police" 9mm loads fired from comparable size concealable guns.
problem is the 357s legendary performance is first off legend not fact the only reason Marshal and Sanow got 96% one shot is to throw out all events where more than one shot was fired instead of saying a second shot equals failure and second that legendary performance is out of a 4" tube the 357s performance from a snub is not as stellar obviously.

cougar gt-e
July 1, 2010, 02:01 PM
My point is: the 125 grain .357 load that is legendary for stopping power is not much ahead, if at all, of the current "police" 9mm loads fired from comparable size concealable guns.


Yes and no. The .357 load that was legendary was shot from a gun with much longer barrel and it was worn in an open holster. No thought to conceal. Also many cops of the day carried heavier loads for increased penetration of things like windshields and car doors.


Your point is still taken that if you cripple a .357 with a snubby barrel, it acts like one of the very best a +P+ 9mm loads. Ballistics isn't magic, it's all F=MA. Even a mythical load is subject to the ravages of a shorter barrel giving a lesser overall force.

There are some loadings specifically for short barrel CC guns. It would be interesting to see the same comparison using those loadings in the same guns.

jb

katana8869
July 1, 2010, 02:07 PM
To me, these are very relevant numbers when making that all important choice of "what should I chose for a CCW?" Comparing say a 2 3/4" SP101 and a Glock 26 (I own both.) What advantages do you get balistically from the short barreled .357 over the 9mm? The answer, not a whole heckuvalot.

When you also take into consideration that the SP101 will have MUCH more muzzle blast/flash, heavier recoil, half the ammo capacity and slower reloads (for most shooters) it pales even further. Reliability between the 2 guns is virtually even, so IMO there really is no point in choosing a short barreled .357 over a 9mm auto.

Now if you want to move the discussion to 4" barrels... there is no contest, ballistics show that the .357 is the clear winner against all but the hottest of the hot 9mm's, but a 4" .357 is not what most would want to carry due to the revolvers size and weight. (Again in my opinion.)

So, that takes us back to where we started. I love my SP101. It was my first CCW and I still trust that it would fill the role well, but of the two, my G26 is my 1st choice for a carry weapon.

christcorp
July 1, 2010, 02:14 PM
Energy, velocity, and effectiveness..... sorry, but the 357 magnum takes it over the 9mm any day of the week. If you want to manipulate numbers where you have to use certain ammo for one gun and something else for the other, then you can come up with any numbers you want. That's just rationalizing.

Bottom line: If you trust your capabilities, "Guns don't save people, people save people"; then a 6 shot 357 magnum revolver is the better gun if you are comparing just the two. if you don't trust your capabilities, then you get a 9mm with 15-18 rounds in the magazine. Not that the 357 magnum is the only pistol a person should have, or that it's perfect. But if the context of this thread is that you are only going to have 1 pistol, then the 357 magnum is the better choice. If you're going to have multiple pistols, some for home defense, some for concealed carry self defense, etc.... then it makes sense to have specialized calibers/guns for the situation. These can include 32acp, 380, 9mm makarove, 9mm, 45acp, 357 magnum, etc....Different calibers/guns for different purposes. But if you're trying to rationalize the 9mm over the 357 magnum from some sort of performance perspective,,,,, it can't be done. The 9mm can't equal the 357 magn. Then again, that's one of the best things about a 357 magnum revolver. You can have rounds loaded as low as a 380 or as high as a 41 magnum.

GojuBrian
July 1, 2010, 02:19 PM
Either one will work for cc. Just carry what you are comfortable with. What's the big D? :D

Sheikyourbootie
July 1, 2010, 05:46 PM
Again, you have to throw a lot of pluses to get the 9mm round in full afterburner to get the same size projectile up to a .357 barely running at mid range cruising speed.

Your maxed out +p+++ in 9mm versus a very concealable 4" service 6 loaded to it's full potential.

127 1238 431 0.697 (out of the 4" pipe of the G19)
125 1590 701. 0.882 (4" pipe of the Service 6)

A 9mm muzzle energy of 431 (and struggling to get that) versus a .357 muzzle energy of 701 ft-lbs....not even close in terms of muzzle energy and momentum.

KyJim
July 1, 2010, 05:48 PM
The 9mm cartridge is probably a more efficient round from a short barreled handgun than a .357 magnum due to it's design. It will retain a larger percentage of its velocity.

In typical self-defense loads commonly available, the .357 magnum will beat the 9mm but the 9mm is not that far behind, even in standard pressures using 110, 125 gr. typical loads for .357 mag and 115, 124 gr typical loads in 9mm. Let's compare a couple of loads using a 2 inch barrel for the .357 and a 3 inch barrel for 9mm since they are measured differently (using test barrels).

.357 Mag (2 and 3 in. barrel)
125 gr. Corbon -- 904/1257
125 gr. Corbon DPX -- 1050/1271
125 gr. Federal JHP -- 949/1255

9mm (3 and 4 in.)
115 Corbon DPX -- 1215/1265
124 gr Federal HydraShock -- 988/1061
124 gr. Gold Dot (short barrel) -- 1108/1203

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/results.html. Results will vary by individual guns of course.

Notice the large increase in velocity from a 2 to 3 inch barrel in the .357 mag. I didn't do the math, but you can eyeball it and see there is a smaller percentage of increase in velocity in the 9mm going from 3 to 4 inches than from the 2 in to 3 in with the .357.

With boutique loads or in medium to long barrels, the .357 mag. will way outshoot the 9mm.

The point is, however, that if you are an average Joe and are buying typical self-defense loads at a local gunshop or even Walmart, then the 9mm stands up very well to the .357 magnum in the shortest barrel guns (the 9mm has an advantage over the .38 spl. under these circumstances). No reason to complicate things with muzzle flash, width, etc.

Straightshooter629
July 1, 2010, 07:47 PM
You can manipulate all the numbers you choose, but I will take the power of the .357 magnum over the 9mm any day of the week, to say nothing of the simplicity and reliability of a revolver over an autoloader, speaking purely from a SD and CC standpoint, IMHO.

wvshooter
July 1, 2010, 08:14 PM
I prefer 9mm for carry but not because the 9mm round is equal to a 357 magnum round.

Typical 9mm JHP is 124 grains at 1100 to 1200 fps. That's pretty good. It's good enough for me anyway, however the typical 357 is 165 grains traveling at 1300 to 1400 fps. the OP's figures not withstanding.

Why even try to say they are equal.

crghss
July 1, 2010, 08:57 PM
My point is:

And you making this point why?

Legendary? Is this a way of saying I need to use this load for comparison because if I use another then the 357 mag will toast the 9mm? And then I'll be pointless....

christcorp
July 1, 2010, 09:00 PM
I prefer 9mm for carry but not because the 9mm round is equal to a 357 magnum round.

Typical 9mm JHP is 124 grains at 1100 to 1200 fps. That's pretty good. It's good enough for me anyway, however the typical 357 is 165 grains traveling at 1300 to 1400 fps. the OP's figures not withstanding.

Why even try to say they are equal.

Actually, that's not true at all. The TYPICAL 357 magnum round for defensive purposes is the 125 grain or the 158 grain. And without even looking at the "GOOD STUFF" when it comes to ammo; the 125 grain is: 1,450fps 583ft/lbs and the 158 grain is: 1,235fps 535ft/lbs. And that's with basically the cheapest average plinking type ammo out there. The 125 grain in a 357 magnum is considered about the MOST EFFICIENT KICK A$s round there is. Especially if you get some of the good stuff. Me personally, I prefer the 158 grain. Less kick, plus I have a "K" frame. I prefer to reduce flaming on my Model 13. But the 125 grain is definitely a monster. I do have that in my gun for self defense. But I have no problem with 158 grains doing 1400 fps and 700 ft/lbs. You can get that in normal ammo like S&B and some federal. Of course there's Buffalo-Bore and such that really kick butt.

Don't get me wrong. I like the 9mm. I respect the 9mm. And being I have multiple guns/calibers for multiple purposes, the 9mm definitely has a place in my collection. But a 357 magnum, it doesn't even come close. But this is definitely an apples/oranges issue. A 9mm is a caliber that doesn't kick much, you carry a lot of rounds to make up for it's power and shooter discrepancies, and you'll do fine. A 357 magnum revolver will take just about anything out that you shoot with it, including many animals, CAN kick your butt with the right ammo, and is for the experienced shooter. Especially considering that there's only 6 rounds maximum. However, the main advantage of the 357 mag revolver, is that it can be adapter to ANY SHOOTER. It can shoot weak 38spl ammo that is equal to a 380; all the way up to the kick butt 357 mag that is equal just about to the 41 magnum.

But the typical 2 rounds are the 125 and 158 grain.

KyJim
July 1, 2010, 09:48 PM
Actually, that's not true at all. The TYPICAL 357 magnum round for defensive purposes is the 125 grain or the 158 grain. And without even looking at the "GOOD STUFF" when it comes to ammo; the 125 grain is: 1,450fps 583ft/lbs and the 158 grain is: 1,235fps 535ft/lbs. And that's with basically the cheapest average plinking type ammo out there.
Not from a two inch barrel. But nobody is saying the 9mm is a better round. Just that in one specific, narrow circumstance, it's there with .357 magnum.

baldeagl1
July 1, 2010, 09:53 PM
If you want to talk about ballistics, you should go here and read first - Ballistics by the Inch (http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/)

Chesster
July 1, 2010, 10:03 PM
Neither is appropriate for splitting hairs. :D

Teuthis
July 1, 2010, 10:09 PM
Since it seems that a majority of people are opting to buy .380's and 38 snubs CCW, you seem to be arguing about angels on the head of a pin. Neither caliber is necessary as opposed to something less powerful.

redstategunnut
July 1, 2010, 10:15 PM
I think people should carry the type of gun and caliber with which they are comfortable, but if you can't solve your problem with a 9mm then you need to learn to shoot better.

Chesster
July 1, 2010, 10:19 PM
I think people should carry the type of gun and caliber with which they are comfortable, but if you can't solve your problem with a 9mm then you need to learn to shoot better.

Or just leave the gun at home and practice running really fast. :D

SuperRuger
July 2, 2010, 12:51 AM
CDW4ME you just seem bent on comparing apples to oranges insted of apples to apples. Anyone can compare a special load to a regular load to make their case but stick to a heads up comparison. Seriously?.The average factory 147g 9mm has a velocity of 1010 with an ME of 333 ft/lbs. The average 145g 357 mag has a velocity of 1290 and an ME of 535 ft/lbs. 357 wins. If your going to use a 9mm hot load then use a 357 hot load. Either way the 9mm can't compare to the 357 mag and this isn't really news to anyone. That would be like me comparing a 300g 45 colt to a 300g 454 Casull in my SRH Ruger. No comparison. :eek:

SuperRuger
July 2, 2010, 12:56 AM
Heres a good one. What do you call 6 guys armed with 9mm autos versus 1 Bob Mundy with a rusty 45 colt, yep, 6 dead guys. Thought all you semi guys might like that.

l98ster
July 2, 2010, 06:26 AM
Hi everyone,

First off, WELCOME DONNAJ!!! You are officially warmly welcomed!

Second, pertaining to this thread, regardless of the number crunching, velocities, KE..., either one of these loads will put a bad guy on his ass (with the right placement) instantly!!

Its fun to discuss the ballistics and compare loads, but in a real world situation, both of these loads will be extremely effective. In fact, I will go so far as to say the bad guy isnt going to know the difference. Dead is Dead!!!

Personally, I will take a snub .357. Because that is what I have and practice with!! If I had a SC 9mm, I would use and practice with that!!

-George

CDW4ME
July 2, 2010, 07:40 AM
cougar gt-e "Your point is still taken that if you cripple a .357 with a snubby barrel, it acts like one of the very best a +P+ 9mm loads."

Funny way of putting it, but yes. :p

katana8869 To me, these are very relevant numbers when making that all important choice of "what should I chose for a CCW?" Comparing say a 2 3/4" SP101 and a Glock 26 (I own both.) What advantages do you get balistically from the short barreled .357 over the 9mm? The answer, not a whole heckuvalot.

When you also take into consideration that the SP101 will have MUCH more muzzle blast/flash, heavier recoil, half the ammo capacity and slower reloads (for most shooters) it pales even further. Reliability between the 2 guns is virtually even, so IMO there really is no point in choosing a short barreled .357 over a 9mm auto.

Now if you want to move the discussion to 4" barrels... there is no contest, ballistics show that the .357 is the clear winner against all but the hottest of the hot 9mm's, but a 4" .357 is not what most would want to carry due to the revolvers size and weight. (Again in my opinion.)

Bingo! :)


KyJim The point is, however, that if you are an average Joe and are buying typical self-defense loads at a local gunshop or even Walmart, then the 9mm stands up very well to the .357 magnum in the shortest barrel guns

Basically yes. Like your example with Cor-Bon. When the typical .357 is fired from a sub 3'' barrel the 9mm +P from a 4'' barrel is going to be very close.

crghss And you making this point why?

Education. :cool:

Revolver barrels are measured differently than autoloaders. Like I said, If I measure my 2 3/4'' barrel Speed Six the way they do an autoloader it would be 4 3/8''. It is fair to compare an autoloader with a 4'' barrel to a revolver with a 2/4'' barrel due to the difference in how they measure.

I didn't chrono Federal 115 +P+ out of the Glocks, but I have with my wife's Kahr P9. I didn't include the Federal load in my initial comparison since it's 115 gr. and the .357 is 125, but here is the result.

Kahr P9 with Federal 115 gr. +P+ 1,272 fps / 413# KE.

Again the 9mm in it's hottest loads fired from a concealable compact pistol equals a typical .357 from a sub 3'' barrel for KE produced.

If people somehow think they are better protected (based on "stopping power" KE) by a snub .357 loaded with 125 gr. bullets than a 9mm with a high performing load it's just not so.

L_Killkenny
July 2, 2010, 08:36 AM
Ya know, numbers can be made to look just about any way a person wishes. Look a news polls. They can get the results they want just by asking/phrasing a question a certain way. The 9mm is no .357 in any way, shape or form. In your +P vs standard pressure example I'm sure you numbers don't lie. But if one looks at the big picture instead a very small fraction of it, it becomes obvious that the .357 is the clear power winner.

If you like the 9mm fine. You can enjoy it and shoot it and trust your life to it. But to come to a conclusion with your one small example is at best naive and incomplete. At worst dishonest. Same as many news polls.

LK

mavracer
July 2, 2010, 09:07 AM
Again the 9mm in it's hottest loads fired from a concealable compact pistol equals a typical .357 from a sub 3'' barrel for KE produced.
so the 9mm pumped up on steroids is equal to the old worn out 357 with one hand tied behind its back. I wouldn't brag;)

JPINTO
July 2, 2010, 10:09 AM
To all in the handgun forum:

The best laid battle plans go to hell after the first shot is fired !!! Prior to determining the knock down power consider the acquisition of your firearm and the muscle memory to bring your arm to fire ready position under extreme conditions. In an emergency everything is instinctive and I'll bet the average would never get a shot off or even get into the ready position. I have shot in many stressful situations and I can tell you I can't remember ever pulling the trigger, the sound of the round or even checking my target. The rule is "If you deploy your firearm your should be ready to destroy your target".. Understanding the complete ballistics for hunting purposes is great planning however for under stress I'm not so sure.

Happy and Safe 4th of July all - America Home of the Brave / Land of the Free

SuperRuger
July 2, 2010, 10:53 AM
I agree with JPINTO. Happy 4th to all here. Here is a good point to remember. It all comes down to our 2nd amendment rights. Without it none of these discussions here will matter,, ballistics, gun choice, which ones are better, etc, etc. Lets keep up the fight for our God givin rights so we can keep the good things like this forum alive as well. Happy 4th to all again and i sincerly hope that all here will fire there guns at some point on this 4th. Just think, if everyone in the US that believes in their rights to own our guns could somehow fire them all at once at the sametime of the day on the 4th, we could send a loud and resounding BOOM to Washington and let them wonder where that firework came from.:)

COSteve
July 2, 2010, 12:34 PM
Yes, and both a Yugo and Corvette can be driven at 25mph but that doesn't make them the same! To say a 9mm is comparable to a 357mag is just plain stupid. In truth, a 10mm pistol shooting Double Tap's loads is just comparable to a .357mag using Double Tap's loads.

KyJim
July 2, 2010, 07:07 PM
Yes, and both a Yugo and Corvette can be driven at 25mph but that doesn't make them the same! To say a 9mm is comparable to a 357mag is just plain stupid.
http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x223/KyJim_photos/Emoticons%20and%20Such/Bang_Head.gifhttp://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x223/KyJim_photos/Emoticons%20and%20Such/Bang_Head.gifhttp://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x223/KyJim_photos/Emoticons%20and%20Such/Bang_Head.gif

I don't think anyone ever said that! You are grossly exaggerating.

crghss
July 2, 2010, 07:14 PM
Education? Fail to see what I'm supposed to be learning?

It would seem the only lesson is you found a 9mm round that has more energy then a .357 mag round. I bet I can find a .380 round that has more energy then a 9mm round or .40 S&W that has more energy then a 10mm round.

Its like saying lets race my Charger against your Mustang. EXCEPT your Mustang must use a 6 cylinder engine not the 8 cylinder it could come in. Well duh....don't think we need to race now do we.

jmr40
July 2, 2010, 07:42 PM
9mm and 357 mag are 2 different tools suited for 2 different jobs. For longer range work where more accuracy and power can be used a long barreled 357 revolver is the best tool for the job.

In a small short barreled revolver all that extra power is a minus. Increased muzzle blast, noise and recoil that will not be any more effective than lighter loads. Most folks who choose to use a revolver will load with hot 38's or lighter 357 loads anyway. The better 9mm loads will be very close in performance and will actually be better than most hot 38 loads.

I would personally take the 9mm over a 357 revolver, but if sane loads are used in the revolver it is a fine option for those who prefer the revolver. Carrying a 2" 357 loaded for "bear" is a mistake in my opinion.

SuperRuger
July 2, 2010, 08:18 PM
CDW4ME, KyJim, jmr40, arguing with you is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, pretty soon you realize the pig enjoys it. What is a comparison "two things that are used under the same circumstances except for the thing being tested". You can't compare a semi with a 4"barrel to a revolver with a 2.5" barrel, a 9mm hot and a 357 standard. Are you seriously that shallow and hell bent on being right at the cost of appearing totaly clueless and don't hand me that crap about a 4" semi is different than a 4" revolver. Did you begin shooting yesterday. 4" of bullet travel is 4" of bullet travel is 4" of bullet travel. People like you are hilarious and it is entertaining for the rest of us to read what you post but after a certin point in the words of Will Smith,"Damn". Your not even comparing apples to oranges anymore. Your comparing apples to pineapples,coconuts, and honey dew mellons. Boy i hope that makes you feel better.

orionengnr
July 2, 2010, 09:24 PM
We are talking carry handguns here, guys.

As much as I love my K and N-frames, I can only carry one in the winter, when a carry garment is part of the equation.

The rest of the year (and in Texas, that is a large portion of the year), the j-frame in .357 and the Kahr PM9 are comparable in size and weight. This is where this comparison becomes valid.

I have owned and shot a bunch of rounds through each. A Scandium .357 is very unpleasant to shoot...and that is an understatement. My PM9 uses that Ranger +p+ load, so I have some experience with it. A bit snappy, but controllable and powerful..and it carries 6+1, and reloads quickly.

Bottom line for me...the PM9 with that round is the winner. I no longer own a j-frame, and at one point I owned six.

I still carry those revolvers (sometimes) during our oh-so-brief winter. Great revolvers, great rounds, fun to shoot and I shoot them pretty well.

But for me, a 4" K or N-frame is not a practical year-round carry gun, and the j-frame in .357 only works in theory. The PM9 works in the real world, and that load puts it into the "serious" category.

jmr40
July 2, 2010, 09:37 PM
SuperRuger,

Take a chill pill dude. I never said the 9mm was equal to any 357, regardless of barrel length. The point I'm trying to make is that raw power in only 1 consideration. The 357 will always be faster and more powerful. It is just that the excess power is detrimental to performance after a certain point. An accurate, shootable weapon is far more important than raw power.

Dead is dead. At the end of the day the better 9mm rounds work just as well as any handgun round.

Kinda like arguing that your car is sooo much better than mine because yours will go 130 mph and mine will only do 100. While we drive on a road with a 70 mph speed limit. We will still arrive at the same place at the same time.

SuperRuger
July 2, 2010, 10:12 PM
Carry guns?. I guess the SP101 is not a carry gun huh, even though thats what it was designed for. The SP101 in 3" vs. the Beretta PX4 3" which is a fair comparison, your saying that the Beretta will out perform it ballisticaly. Then you don't know as much as you think. Both comparable carry guns. Both 3" even though i will give you the Beretta probably weighs less, unless you are a midget and that little difference makes a difference. This is interesting being you just said that straight up the 357 wins. So therfore in this straight up comparison i guess you just made the argument for us. Why can't you just admit you have gone to the dark side and are a semi man and i am a revolver man. Simple as that. I am glad i am on the winning side. May the force be with you, the 357 force that is.

orionengnr
July 2, 2010, 10:25 PM
No, the SP101 is not a comparable carry gun.

The SP101 is a 25-27 oz IWB/OWB gun. It matches up well with a G19 with a spare mag (five rounds vice...ahh... 30). That is an apples to oranges comparison.

The PM9 and the S&W 340 are lightweight, pocket pistols and an apples to apples comparison. Two sub compact, pocket pistols of equivalent size and weight.

KyJim
July 2, 2010, 10:47 PM
SuperRuger,

Sir, you are relatively new here to the forum and with a low post count. We generally don't call people names directly or indirectly like comparing people to pigs and calling them shallow and hilarious. It's rude and it really cuts into whatever credibility you have.

In addition, you have also seriously misrepresented what I wrote. You said: "You can't compare a semi with a 4"barrel to a revolver with a 2.5" barrel, a 9mm hot and a 357 standard."

I have never done so. I compared a 3 inch 9mm with a 2 inch .357 and that is ALL I compared. Go back and read my post (#12). I pointed out how much of a velocity jump there was from a two inch to three inch barrel in a .357 (about 200 fps). Comparing a 3 inch 9mm and a 2 inch .357 is the limit to where a typical 9mm self-defense load (not a hot load) compares with a typical .357 self-defense load. In case you missed it, go back and re-read the numbers. Here is one example from www.ballisticsbytheinch.com:

.357 magnum (2 in barrel) -- 125 gr. Federal JHP -- 949 fps
9mm (3 in barrel) -- 124 gr Federal HydraShock -- 988 fps

Comparing these barrel lengths is absolutely valid because of the way they are measured and they are typical lengths used for subcompact models of each.

Post 17, I said, "But nobody is saying the 9mm is a better round. Just that in one specific, narrow circumstance, it's there with .357 magnum."

Do you have any real facts to dispute this point or can you only resort to name calling?

amd6547
July 2, 2010, 10:57 PM
Personally, I am a fan of both cartridges.
I carry either S&W Model 19-4 2.5" or a Ruger SP101 3", both loaded with Doubletap Bonded core 125gn JHP.
I have no chronograph, but Doubletap got 1425fps from a 1 7/8" S&W barrel.
I find it to be accurate and easy to shoot.

Rampant_Colt
July 2, 2010, 11:33 PM
apples -vs- oranges

Muzzle energy has nothing to do with handgun stopping power.. Uninformed people need to stop choosing ammo simply based on muzzle energy. Stopping power is defined as 'where you hit the bad guy, and how many times you can hit them'. Penetration and bullet expansion are also part of the equation. It's a lot more complicated than that. Overall bullet performance depends on many variablesâ–¬bullet design the most

I could also argue that bullet designs for the .357 Magnum have remained relatively stagnant while new, state-of-the-art bullet developments for 9mm ammunition are an on-going effort.
Using duty loads, the wimpy 9mm will achieve the same levels of penetration and expansion as the mighty .357 Mag without the recoil, blast and drama, whilst having more ammunition on tap. So what do you prefer, a revolver, or autoloader? apples n oranges..


In other news


Double Tap uses greatly exaggerated velocity figures to entice the energy/velocity crowd into buying their ammunition.. Owned by Marketing 101
1425 fps from a 2" barrel LoL :rolleyes:

azsixshooter
July 3, 2010, 12:46 AM
When I lived in AZ I carried my 4" 686 a lot. I loaded it with hot 125 grn SJWCHP's in Phx city limits (carried it concealed for at least 2 years). If I was out in the desert I changed that to a snake shot followed up with 5 125 grn hot loads. If I was pred calling where there might be bears or bowhunting/camping/etc. up on the rim or in the mtns I loaded up with Buff Bore Heavys with a speedloader of 125 gr hot loads and a speedloader of Heavys on my belt. I never worried too much about cougars, I think the 125's would be more than adequate. I never heard they were hard to kill. I always felt pretty good with my .357 Mag and I still love shooting her.

I've since picked up a SAXD9 and I carry 124 gr +P Federal HST's. 1 in the pipe, 16 in the mag and another 16 in a spare mag or three. I feel really good with her too and she's so much fun to shoot. Plenty of juice, but at an affordable price.

I don't know, you can argue all day long about whatever whatever, but if you can put the biscuit in the basket then shot placement is king and penetration is queen. I don't think there's much a .357 Mag can do to the CNS that a nice, modern 9x19 can't if both are placed equally well. I mean, neutralized is still neutralized right? And correct me if I'm wrong, but if you miss and hit an attacker in the arm or something is the .357 mag gonna magically put him on the ground? Or the .500 S&W for that matter? Granted, I would HATE to take a .500 to the anywhere. I just mean, shoot what you can afford to shoot a lot, get surgical with it and as long as it penetrates sufficiently you're golden.

Dannix
July 3, 2010, 03:34 AM
I'm new here, but I find this topic pretty funny.

Why? Just get an aftermarket barrel for your Glocks in 9x21. That's a 200fps increase for 147grains at SAAMI-spec pressures (same bullet, same barrel length). Keep your factory 9x19 for when you want to plink. Remember, If you like a caliber but want it moving faster, chose a different cartridge. :)


Muzzle energy has nothing to do with handgun stopping power.. Uninformed people need to stop choosing ammo simply based on muzzle energy.
+1 for truth. As for terminal performance, placement is king indeed, but sectional density and metaplat are a factor as well.

Double Tap -- 125gn is good for 1400fps in a SAAMI-spec .357 load -- in a 4" barrel. This is with non-Vihtavuori powder though. Vihtavuori has a .357Mag 125gn max load at 1772fps. :eek: Vihtavuori fails to list pressures, but I would bet Double Tap is using N110.

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 06:06 AM
.357 magnum (2 in barrel) -- 125 gr. Federal JHP -- 949 fps
9mm (3 in barrel) -- 124 gr Federal HydraShock -- 988 fps

Comparing these barrel lengths is absolutely valid because of the way they are measured and they are typical lengths used for subcompact models of each.

from balistics by the inch


One note: in every case with the T/C Encore the length of the barrel was measured from the end of the barrel back to the breech face. This is how semi-auto pistols are measured, but revolvers are measured as the length of the barrel in front of the cylinder gap. Take this into consideration when comparing calibers using our numbers.
your 2" 357 example in reality would be a revolver with a 1/4" barrel

CDW4ME
July 3, 2010, 08:06 AM
SuperRuger "CDW4ME, KyJim, jmr40, arguing with you is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, pretty soon you realize the pig enjoys it. What is a comparison "two things that are used under the same circumstances except for the thing being tested". You can't compare a semi with a 4"barrel to a revolver with a 2.5" barrel, a 9mm hot and a 357 standard".

I don't like having mud thrown at me. ;)

The thread title is power for concealed carry. I didn't get specific on size. If I lay the Glock 19 on top of the Speed Six they are about the same size. Most folks do not carry a 4'' barrel .357 like a GP100 or S&W 686 concealed; I know there are exceptions.

The thead seemed straightforward to me. The 9mm +P and +P+ loadings are comparable in power to the best .357 load if the size of the gun is typical for concealed carry. Against people, the 125 gr. .357 load I selected is considered one of the best. I not only included my chrono results, I referenced Gun Tests where they used similar size revolvers and the 125 gr. Federal load.

I didn't try to have a revolver v. semi-auto thread. I could have compared 2nd shot times between the Glock 19 and the Speed Six, but that would be a waste of ammo.

I also did not include the chrono results from a Ruger SP101 I owned a few years ago since I used 110 gr. ammo in it. But since we have started deviating from the original concept I might as well include it now.

SP101: Winchester 110gr. JHP @ 1,208 fps / 356# KE.

Neither did I include my Taurus 617. It's ported ;), but what the heck :)

Taurus 617: Federal 125 gr. .357 magnum JHP @ 1,143 fps / 363# KE.

Did I include only a "small fraction" at first? Yes. I included my data where the .357 was the most powerful.

amd6547
July 3, 2010, 09:06 AM
Regarding the Glock 19,....In the past, I carried a Glock 23 concealed....Not difficult, but I find a 3" SP101 or 2.5" Model 19 much easiear to carry.
My 9mm load of choice is the Ranger +P+ 127gn load. I shoot this in a Beretta 92FS and a Browning HiPower (both of which I have CCW'd).
My own un-scientific phone book tests have the DoubleTap 357mag 125gn Bondedcore penetrating quite a bit further than the Ranger 9mm.
I feel well armed with either load...While I like the 9mm just fine, I really like the versatility of the 357 mag, and find they suit most of my carry needs.
We each make the choices that suit us, and what you carry is fine, for you. But a 9mm is not a 357mag.

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 09:22 AM
The thead seemed straightforward to me.
sure if you leave out a few details.
The 9mm +P and +P+ loadings are comparable in power to the best .357 (25 years ago) load if the size of the gun is typical for concealed carry. Against people, the 125 gr. .357 load I selected is considered one of the best(out of a 4" revolver).
I understand that my speed six loaded with 125gr Golden Sabers has no power advantage over my HK p7 loaded with 124gr +p golddots they are also about even in the blast flash and recoil dept. and while in a pure social enviorment I prefer the HK.however you must understand the 9mm is maxed out and the 357 is just getting started in a more rural setting, where both 2 and 4 legged threats exist, I would much prefer my speed six loaded with 158/180gr bullets.
I don't like having mud thrown at me.
and I wish you'd quit trying to pee on my leg and convince me it's raining.;)

KyJim
July 3, 2010, 09:59 AM
your 2" 357 example in reality would be a revolver with a 1/4" barrel

Even comparing a 3 inch barrel .357 to a 3 inch 9mm, you get similar results. Of course, this doesn't get into velocity loss of a revolver due to cylinder gap. And, if you do start getting into +P 9mm (which is a very common defense load) or +P+ (not so common), you kick it up even more.

But, I really don't see the need to endlessly debate this.

BTW, thanks for the civil discussion.

SuperRuger
July 3, 2010, 10:10 AM
If you don't like mud slinging then don't incite it by being rediculous in your loaded tests. Now apparently the number of posts indicates ones inteligence which means if Mr. Linebaugh wanted to join this site, on his first post he is considered an idiot. I also find it amusing that KyJim indicated the major difference in the 2" to 3" barrel and then gave his 9mm comparison the advantage of the 3". Sounds like a democrat trying to get elected. However this has gotten out of hand, INCLUDING ME, so i will leave it at the simple fact that the 9mm is in no way comparable to the 357 in my few posts opinion.

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 10:51 AM
Even comparing a 3 inch barrel .357 to a 3 inch 9mm, you get similar results. Of course, this doesn't get into velocity loss of a revolver due to cylinder gap. And, if you do start getting into +P 9mm (which is a very common defense load) or +P+ (not so common), you kick it up even more.
The same 357 load gains over 300fps when going from a 2" to a 3".
As to cylinder gap thats only worth 5% and even my M&P340 is well over 3" from the back of the chamber to the muzzle.
also the 9mm load you used was already +p.

absolute0
July 3, 2010, 10:54 AM
Uuuuughhh...Krusty wants down now

http://gripofhysteria.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/krusty14_gif.jpg

CDW4ME
July 3, 2010, 02:22 PM
I'll add some additional data, since my choice of ammo wasn't sufficient for some.

Gun Tests Magazine April 1999:
Taurus 617: Federal 180 JHP 1,023 fps / 418# KE
S&W 686: Federal 180 JHP 1,042 fps / 434# KE

Gun Tests Magazine Jan. 2002:
S&W 686: Winchester 110 JHP 1,231 fps / 370# KE
Taurus 617: Winchester 110 JHP 1,206 fps / 356# KE

S&W 686: PMC 158 gr. JHP 1,068 fps / 400# KE
Taurus 617: PMC 158 gr. JHP 1,075 fps / 406# KE

Gun Tests Magazine March 2002:
Taurus 617: Black Hills 125 JHP 1,160 fps / 374# KE
S&W 386PD: Black Hills 125 JHP 1,199 fps / 399# KE
S&W 386Sc (3.1'') Black Hills JHP 1,285 fps / 459# KE

There you have it, different ammo, different bullet weights... same conclusion I started with. I'm glad I kept a few old copies of Gun Tests. :)

pythagorean
July 3, 2010, 02:24 PM
You are using a Glock auto here. I automatically go for the .357 revolver every time.
Every time. Nothing beats the 125 gr SJHP .357 from Remington ammunition to this date. Nothing.

jmr40
July 3, 2010, 03:26 PM
SuperRuger,

I have as many revolvers as autos. I'm also smart enough to know which tool is correct for which job. Your lack of firearms knowledge is quite apparent. When you mature enough, come back and join in the discussions with us grownups.

Rampant_Colt
July 3, 2010, 04:49 PM
You are using a Glock auto here. I automatically go for the .357 revolver every time.
Every time. Nothing beats the 125 gr SJHP .357 from Remington ammunition to this date. Nothing.
Nothing? :rolleyes:

Sheikyourbootie
July 3, 2010, 04:49 PM
I'll add some additional data, since my choice of ammo wasn't sufficient for some.

Gun Tests Magazine April 1999:
Taurus 617: Federal 180 JHP 1,023 fps / 418# KE
S&W 686: Federal 180 JHP 1,042 fps / 434# KE

Gun Tests Magazine Jan. 2002:
S&W 686: Winchester 110 JHP 1,231 fps / 370# KE
Taurus 617: Winchester 110 JHP 1,206 fps / 356# KE

S&W 686: PMC 158 gr. JHP 1,068 fps / 400# KE
Taurus 617: PMC 158 gr. JHP 1,075 fps / 406# KE

Gun Tests Magazine March 2002:
Taurus 617: Black Hills 125 JHP 1,160 fps / 374# KE
S&W 386PD: Black Hills 125 JHP 1,199 fps / 399# KE
S&W 386Sc (3.1'') Black Hills JHP 1,285 fps / 459# KE

There you have it, different ammo, different bullet weights... same FALSE conclusion I started with. I'm glad I kept a few old copies of Gun Tests.

There, fixed it for you. You are cherry picking your ammo choices to support a false conclusion. The 9mm, is not, never has been, and never will be on a par with top end .357 magnum loads with respect to kinetic energy, momentum, and flexibility in terms of bullet weight and style of bullets.

In all fairness, the .357 will never match the 9mm in therms of magazine capacity, and ease of quick reloads.....357 Desert Eagle notwithstanding (weighing in excess of 4# wouldn't count as a concealed weapon and only 9+1 at that)

The Kahr PM9 I carried (until my wife decided she wanted that as her ccw) would spit a 124 grain +p+ round at around 1200fps while my 340PD spits the standard remington R357M1 125gr SJHP at around 1250. (I ended up choosing the 158 grain 38+p Buffalo Bore because I can shoot it faster and I'm more accurate with it than the 125gr sjhp)

For me to take this one isolated situation of my Kahr and my 340PD with these 2 specific ammo choices and saying the 9mm is just as powerful as the .357 in "concealable guns" is patently false and ridiculous.

My 4" service 6 is concealed IWB much of the time, and OWB when I can wear a long shirt untucked....it spits the Buffalo Bore 125 grain at 1590fps.....the Remington R357M1 at 1470 fps. Much more velocity, kinetic energy and momentum than any 9mm. The price I pay for carrying the revolver is WAY fewer rounds, and much slower reloads than the 9mm.

If you want the best of both worlds get the G20 or 29 (if you can conceal it) in 10mm. Now you are talking meeting and sometimes exceeding .357 performance in a semi-auto platform that is high capacity and asswhoopingly powerful.

CDW4ME
July 3, 2010, 05:58 PM
Sheikyourbootie "You are cherry picking your ammo choices to support a false conclusion. The 9mm, is not, never has been, and never will be on a par with top end .357 magnum loads with respect to kinetic energy, momentum, and flexibility in terms of bullet weight and style of bullets."

I go get several published reports that include various .357 bullet weights by different makers, but I'm "cherry picking" ammo? :confused:

I cherry picked the 9mm loads using just +P or +P+ loads, I never claimed regular 9mm loads were in the ballpark. I really do not see why this is causing such confusion / debate .

My results:
Glock 26 / Winchester Ranger T 124 +P @ 1,162 fps = 372# KE
Glock 26 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,182 fps = 394# KE
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 124 +P @ 1,212 fps = 405# KE
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,238 fps = 433# KE

Published test with various ammo:
Gun Tests Magazine April 1999:
Taurus 617: Federal 180 JHP 1,023 fps / 418# KE
S&W 686: Federal 180 JHP 1,042 fps / 434# KE

Gun Tests Magazine Jan. 2002:
S&W 686: Winchester 110 JHP 1,231 fps / 370# KE
Taurus 617: Winchester 110 JHP 1,206 fps / 356# KE

S&W 686: PMC 158 gr. JHP 1,068 fps / 400# KE
Taurus 617: PMC 158 gr. JHP 1,075 fps / 406# KE

Gun Tests Magazine March 2002:
Taurus 617: Black Hills 125 JHP 1,160 fps / 374# KE
S&W 386PD: Black Hills 125 JHP 1,199 fps / 399# KE
S&W 386Sc (3.1'') Black Hills JHP 1,285 fps / 459# KE

Summary: 9mm +P and +P+ loads are equal in power to typical .357 loads fired from compact pistols.

I thought some people might find this data interesting / informative. (Free education ;))

Sheikyourbootie
July 3, 2010, 06:12 PM
Once again, here is the data. Simple math. Consider it free education, if you can learn.

wt M.V. K.E. Momentum
127 1238 431 0.697 (out of the 4" pipe of your G19) (taking your word on this data)
125 1590 701. 0.882 (4" pipe of the Service 6) Chronographed
158 1000 350 0.701 (38+p out of the diminutive 1 7/8" 340pd) Chronographed

You can put all the plus in front of and behind the p you want. 9mm is in the same class as the 38+p

Your best loading in 9mm only has 61% of the kinetic energy of the .357 and 79% of the momentum.

Sorry, but simple math contradicts your "data". A little free education for ya;)

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 06:12 PM
I'll add some additional data, since my choice of ammo wasn't sufficient for some.

how about these
Buffalo Bore 357 mags
1. 3 inch S&W J frame


c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1398 fps=686fpe
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1476 fps=604fpe

and Remington umc 9mm from a 4"

Wt 124gr 147gr
Vel Muzzle 1100fps 990fps
Energy Muzz 339fpe 320fpe

looks to me like a 357 is about twice as powerful from a carry size weapon.

crghss
July 3, 2010, 06:17 PM
Free education? Still fail to to see what I was edumacated on. There is a bullet out there in 9mm that has more energy then another bullet in .357 mag. Yeah so, don't know why I or anyone else really needed to know this but ok if it makes you feel better. We now know

There is also a .380 ACP bullet out that has more energy then a 9mm. And there is a .38 special bullet out there that more energy then 9mm. Why would anyone need to be educated on this? Really? Please help me out here.

MTS840
July 3, 2010, 06:30 PM
May the force be with you, the 357 force that is.

All calibers can fail. Even the vaunted .357 Magnum.

http://www.odmp.org/officer/420-trooper-mark-hunter-coates?printview=1


http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm

In November 1992, South Carolina Highway Patrolman Mark Coates shot an attacker four times in the torso with his 4 inch Smith & Wesson .357 Magnum revolver. His attacker, an obese adult male who weighed almost 300 pounds, absorbed the hits and shortly thereafter returned fire with one shot from a single-action North American Arms .22 caliber mini-revolver. Coates was fatally wounded when the tiny bullet perforated his left upper arm and penetrated his chest through the armhole of his vest where the bullet cut a major artery. Coates, who was standing next to the passenger-side front fender of the assailant's car when he was hit by the fatal bullet, was very quickly incapacitated.

The slaying was recorded by the video camera mounted in Coates' cruiser. For our law enforcement readers, a copy of the video was obtained by Calibre Press a few months after the shooting, and is shown at their Street Survival seminar. Frames from the video are published on page 238 of the Calibre Press book, Tactics for Criminal Patrol. (The Coates shooting is also presented in detail on pages 239-240.)

After Coates was hit, he immediately ran several feet, scrambling around the front of the assailant's car while simultaneously radioing dispatch that he'd been shot. As he neared the driver's-side front fender he suddenly collapsed onto the pavement.

Trooper Coates fired four 145 grain Winchester Silvertip .357 Magnum bullets directly into his assailant's heavy abdomen, achieving solid hits with each. These particular bullets penetrate deeper than 125 grain JHPs, however none ruptured any vital cardiovascular structures. During the initial ground struggle, Coates was shot twice, but his vest protected him. After fighting off his attacker, Coates quickly climbed to his feet and emptied his revolver. At that particular moment the assailant was still lying on the ground. The combination of the assailant's obesity and the unusual angle at which the bullets entered his body worked to the disadvantage of Trooper Coates.

The Coates shooting exemplifies the fable of energy transfer, especially when encountering a determined attacker. The .357 Magnum cartridge is regarded by many as the ultimate manstopper; a true one-shot stop wonder. The Winchester 145 grain .357 Magnum cartridge is given a one-shot stopping power rating of 86 percent by Marshall and Sanow. According to this rating system, a single hit ANYWHERE in the torso is supposed to be highly effective in stopping an attacker, regardless of whether or not the bullet destroys vital tissue. But on this night, it failed FOUR TIMES! The assailant easily absorbed four bullets in his body, each delivering over 450 foot pounds of kinetic energy. This is equivalent to being hit four times by a baseball going approximately 210 miles per hour.

None of Coates' powerful .357 Magnum bullets were effective, but the bad guy's weak .22 caliber bullet was. The .357 Magnum bullets dumped all their energy into the attacker, whereas the single .22 caliber bullet disrupted vital tissue. The assailant survived the shooting, was convicted of murdering Coates and was sentenced to life in prison.

The OP was entirely correct in his assessment of the two calibers.

In the smaller, short barreled guns he mentioned, the 9mm loads he posted are fully the equal of the most famous defensive load in .357 Magnum.

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 06:32 PM
There is also a .380 ACP bullet out the that has more energy then a 9mm. And there is a .38 special bullet out there that more energy then 9mm. Why would anyone need to be educated on this? Really? Please help me out here.
I think it means if I get in the ring with a 68 year old Mohammed Ali and tie one hand behind his back and fight him to a draw I can claim the title of the greatest boxer ever:rolleyes:

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 06:54 PM
In the smaller, short barreled guns he mentioned, the 9mm loads he posted are fully the equal of the most famous defensive load in .357 Magnum.

Wrong the most famous defensive load in .357 Magnum the 125gr earned it's reputation in a 4" barrel.
the 125gr from a snub does not equal the performance from a 4".
therefore no 9mm +P, +P+ or ++PPP+P++PP++ is equal to the the most famous defensive load in .357 Magnum.

MTS840
July 3, 2010, 07:11 PM
Summary: 9mm +P and +P+ loads are equal in power to typical .357 loads fired from compact pistols.

Notice the word "compact." He even names the barrel length in his OP.

Sept. 2006 Gun Tests:
Ruger SP101 .357 Mag (2.25'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,195 fps / 396# KE.
S&W model 60 .357 Mag (2.1'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,165 fps / 376# KE

roaddog28
July 3, 2010, 07:18 PM
Hi,

I have a Ruger GP100 4 inch that I was using with Black Hills 125gr hollow points and clocking well over 1500 fps. I have 9 mm pistols and even with all the +Ps in front and back of the 9 mm does not come close. I take my 357s any day. No comparisons.

roaddog28

CDW4ME
July 3, 2010, 08:09 PM
Concealed carry ballistic comparison class 101 pay attention! :D

This is not about 4'' barrel .357 revolvers. (Me banging head against wall) :barf:

Thankfully, I have the March 2005 issue of Gun Tests where they test high performing 9mm ammo, so you do not have to believe the data I chronographed. :)

Federal 115 gr. +P+ @ 1,294 fps / 427# KE
Remington 115 gr. +P+ @ 1,290 fps / 425# KE
Winchester 127 gr. +P+ @ 1,199 fps / 405# KE

Now, I have 3 different 9mm loads (by different makers) that equal the short barrel .357 for KE. WOO HOO, Oh yea!

Now, I'm not going to cut & paste any results I've already put on this thread again for people to ignore (again), but those additional 9mm +P+ loads are equal to the .357 loads I previously posted.

My point is proven, and validated, class dismissed. :p
This mud is kind of fun once you get used to it.:rolleyes:

MTS840
July 3, 2010, 08:15 PM
I have a Ruger GP100 4 inch that I was using with Black Hills 125gr hollow points and clocking well over 1500 fps.

This is all very nice, but the OP never compared the 9mm with hotter .357 Magnum loads, a 4" revolver barrel or any other distraction in his original post. In fact, he specifically ruled out the 4" barrel!

He posted specific 9mm loads, specific guns and velocity figures he obtained against a popular .357 Magnum load fired in snub nosed revolvers!

So why is he getting all the grief? This information is not exactly new material.

9mm v .357 power for Concealed Carry
If we compare guns suitable for concealed carry, the 9mm in it's better loads is equal to the .357 mag with one of it's legendary loads.

I'm going to compare guns with approximately the same height & length. A 4'' barrel GP100 or 686 isn't IWB material.

Bullet diameter is the same.

My chronographed velocities (average for 5 shots):
Glock 26 / Winchester Ranger T 124 +P @ 1,162 fps = 372# KE
Glock 26 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,182 fps = 394# KE
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 124 +P @ 1,212 fps = 405# KE
Glock 19 / Winchester Ranger T 127 +P+ @ 1,238 fps = 433# KE

Ruger Speed Six .357 Mag (2 3/4'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,248 fps / 432# KE.

Sept. 2006 Gun Tests:
Ruger SP101 .357 Mag (2.25'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,195 fps / 396# KE.
S&W model 60 .357 Mag (2.1'' barrel) Federal 125 JHP @ 1,165 fps / 376# KE.


So what is incorrect or misleading about this data?

KyJim
July 3, 2010, 08:16 PM
If you don't like mud slinging then don't incite it by being rediculous in your loaded tests. Now apparently the number of posts indicates ones inteligence which means if Mr. Linebaugh wanted to join this site, on his first post he is considered an idiot. I also find it amusing that KyJim indicated the major difference in the 2" to 3" barrel and then gave his 9mm comparison the advantage of the 3". Sounds like a democrat trying to get elected. However this has gotten out of hand, INCLUDING ME, so i will leave it at the simple fact that the 9mm is in no way comparable to the 357 in my few posts opinion.
No, the reference to the number of posts was regarding the personal insults and that you had apparently not been here long enough to know better. Am I correct?

Intelligence can be measured many ways, but spelled only one -- unless, of course, you use a rediculous spelling.

As for me, I've said all I'm going to say in this thread. Go in peace.

mavracer
July 3, 2010, 09:02 PM
So what is incorrect or misleading about this data?
this
the .357 mag with one of it's legendary loads.
because it's legendary out of a 4" not from a snub.


Concealed carry ballistic comparison class 101 pay attention!
1. 3 inch S&W J frame


c. Item 19C/20-158gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1398 fps=686fpe
d. Item 19D/20-125gr. Jacketed Hollow Point = 1476 fps=604fpe

600 is more than 400 every day all day now sit back in your chair there's more for you to learn

Dannix
July 3, 2010, 10:54 PM
Orignally Posted by mavracer
therefore no 9mm +P, +P+ or ++PPP+P++PP++ is equal to the the most famous defensive load in .357 Magnum.
Let's be specific here. 9x19. There are hotter 9mm auto calibers out there, as I posted on page 2, and we're talking drop in options.

the357plan
July 4, 2010, 02:45 AM
I think this thread was just started for an argument. Otherwise, why would you make the statement:

If we compare guns suitable for concealed carry, the 9mm in it's better loads is equal to the .357 mag with one of it's legendary loads.

Then choose to ignore ballistics for 3" barrel 357s. I've carried my 3" SP101 since CCH began in Texas. It conceals very easy.

A lot of what I read indicated the Remington was the preferred load. Anyway, out of my 3" SP101, the Remington 125 HP clocks 1330 fps and generates 491 ft-lb ME. I haven't found any 9 mm in that ball park. But when I carry, the gap is stretched even further because the gun is stoked with Buffalo Bore or Double Tap. And whether you believe it or not, those two are a good bit hotter than the typical 357 ammo.

When I want to step down to the 9mm level, I'll switch to my 1 7/8" barrel 340 M&P stoked with some form of a hot 38 +p. If you want to say the Federal 125 HP out of a 1 7/8" barrel is equivalent to a hot 9 mm +p, so what!!! Using that 1 7/8" barrel, I have the versatility to span the range from slightly above a 380 ACP to well above a 9 mm +p (using Double Tap or Buffalo Bore).

Back to my original point. I think this thread was started for the sake of argument. I'm not the only one who conceals a 3" 357 magnum. And at that length, it starts showing its colors real well.

CDW4ME
July 4, 2010, 07:26 AM
the357plan "Anyway, out of my 3" SP101, the Remington 125 HP clocks 1330 fps and generates 491 ft-lb ME. I haven't found any 9 mm in that ball park. But when I carry, the gap is stretched even further because the gun is stoked with Buffalo Bore or Double Tap. And whether you believe it or not, those two are a good bit hotter than the typical 357 ammo".

I never said the hot 9mm was the equal of all .357 loads available.

Even with your 3'' barrel and the Remington 125 grain .357 Mag producing 491# of KE, the Glock 19 with the 127 gr. +P+ and 433# KE is within 12% of your KE.

I have found and provided four different .357 loads and four different 9mm loads that produce comparable power from "concealable" guns. Four of each is enough to substantiate my original comments.

Glock Autopistols 1996 magazine.
These loads were fired from a G19:
Cor-Bon 115 +P 1,268 fps / 410# KE
Cor-Bon 124 +P 1,217 fps / 408# KE

These 9mm +P loads are as powerful as the previous .357 loads I've provided.

the357plan
July 4, 2010, 01:31 PM
These 9mm +P loads are as powerful as the previous .357 loads I've provided.

Well, while your at it, don't just stop at the 357... People (including me) do carry and conceal short barreled 41s, 44s and etc.. Your 9 mm +P loads also generates as much ME as this 44 Mag load out of a 2" barrel:

Speer 200 gr. Gold Dot Short-bbl HP @ 833 fps = 308 ft lbs. (Ballistics by the inch)

So go ahead and equate all you want. I would take this 44 load (and all of my 357 loads) over your 9 mm loads any day.

Again, I think this thread was started just for the sake of argument.

HighExpert
July 4, 2010, 01:42 PM
Which one can you hit with quickly and reliably..One good hit is worth more than 50 hispeed misses.

CarbineCaleb
July 4, 2010, 02:04 PM
Well, I think this is a good point to make - that a .357 Magnum shot from a gun of comparable overall length is not that much over a hot 9mm+P. But the .357 still is more powerful.

Here's some numbers from Double Tap:
9mm+P, 147gr, 1120fps from a Glock G19; OAL= 6.85", cap=15 shots
.357 Magnum, 158gr, 1245fps from a S&W J-frame; OAL=6.63", cap=5 shots

Of course the .357 still has the edge there in power - it's pushing a bullet that's 10gr heavier also 125fps faster, but the 9mm has triple the capacity, and I'll bet those 147gr 9mm+P DT loads will exit most people.

There's enough there for zealots of either cartridge to claim superiority *lol*.

COSteve
July 4, 2010, 02:15 PM
Yes, and both a Yugo and Corvette can be driven at 25mph but that doesn't make them the same! To say a 9mm is comparable to a 357mag is just plain stupid.

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x223/KyJim_photos/Emoticons%20and%20Such/Bang_Head.gif http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x223/KyJim_photos/Emoticons%20and%20Such/Bang_Head.gif http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x223/KyJim_photos/Emoticons%20and%20Such/Bang_Head.gif
I don't think anyone ever said that! You are grossly exaggerating. The original poster has defined a concealed carry weapon size that excludes most models specifically designed for that purpose! His sole attempt seems to be to sooth his concern about his choice of a CCW. Most of the rest of the replies have been sucked into the fallacy of his basic premise; that for CCW, a bbl of 4" is too long.

The fact is that most CCW weapons have a bbl of 4-4.5" and they work just fine. That's because concealability of a semi-auto pistol is predominately the result of the size of the grip, not the length of the slide and barrel.

That is why a Glock 19 or 23 conceals just as well as a Glock 26 or 27 with an extended mag baseplate installed for your little finger. Outfitted that way they (26/27) have effectively the same length grip as the 19/23.

So...... the OP's basic premise (CCW pieces must have 2-2.5" barrels) is wrong, silly to adopt, and I believe selected specifically to skew his data to prove a point. Because his premise is wrong, it follows that his data selection is wrong, and that means that his conclusion is basically meaningless.

In addition, ballistically the 9mm was designed for a 4" or longer barrel and when compared to a 357mag or for that matter a 40s&w or 10mm in comparable barrel length, it's performance isn't in the same class. You can compare underpowered 357mag to hot 9mm all you want but the facts are the facts.

If you're that concerned with your choice in CCW platform, try another caliber. Don't fabricate a lame concoction of data to try to convenience us that your apple is really an orange.

MTS840
July 4, 2010, 03:56 PM
If you're that concerned with your choice in CCW platform, try another caliber. Don't fabricate a lame concoction of data to try to convenience us that your apple is really an orange.

Translation: "You don't know what you should be carrying, so carry a revolver with a longer barrel so we can prove a .357 Magnum is really superior."

lol....How DARE you carry a .357 Magnum load in your snubbie .357!

SuperRuger
July 4, 2010, 07:08 PM
I'm guessing there is a pretty good reason why most law enforcement got away from the 9mm.

coltaholic
July 4, 2010, 07:17 PM
this says it all!

SuperRuger
July 4, 2010, 07:30 PM
Thats just funny.

Jimmy10mm
July 4, 2010, 07:36 PM
Reading this thread I was thinking of the famous photo , used to be famous, of Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald with a 2"bbl S&W 38 special and killing him with the one shot. I was just 15 years old and did see it on TV when it happened.

Some years ago I had occasion to talk with a plain clothes detective on the local police force. Naturally the conversation went to my asking what he preferred to carry. His choice was a Sig in 40 cal. His partner carried a Sig in 380. I was surprised at that and said that I had always read that a 380 doesn't have stopping power. He smiled and told me that his partner had killed a perpetrator with a 380 a couple of weeks before.

OTOH, I remember when then heavyweight boxing contender Cleveland Williams was shot in the stomach 5 times with a 44 magnum by a Texas Highway Patrolman and survived. Not sure but I assume it had a 4" bbl. Forgive me for going off topic in the calibers but stopping power is such a fascinating topic with so many knowns and unknowns.

SuperRuger
July 4, 2010, 08:10 PM
Good point Jimmy, I guess there will always be the exception to the rule and with bullet performance there will always be the exception. Thers just to many variables.

nefprotector
July 4, 2010, 08:55 PM
While I LOVE my 5 shot .357 mag. I'd rather have 15 rounds of HOT 125 gr +P+ Corbons at hand. So the 9mm is my choice.

katana8869
July 4, 2010, 10:17 PM
The best part of caliber wars is watching to see which side runs out of arguments first and gets their pink and frillys in a wad. :)

COSteve
July 5, 2010, 12:22 AM
Quote:
If you're that concerned with your choice in CCW platform, try another caliber. Don't fabricate a lame concoction of data to try to convenience us that your apple is really an orange.


Translation: "You don't know what you should be carrying, so carry a revolver with a longer barrel so we can prove a .357 Magnum is really superior."

lol....How DARE you carry a .357 Magnum load in your snubbie .357! In fact, I carry a Glock 23 with 180grn Speer Gold Dots as my CCW weapon. My only 357mag is an Uberti SAA that I play with at the range so your stupid comment goes for naught. Oh well, nothing gained.

I'm just arguing the facts of the issue, not my preference. The bulk of the comments on this thread are meaningless as they are defending or attacking a bogus basic premise.

I have no use for an underpowered 9mm or an over recoiling 357mag for a CCW piece. If my G23 isn't a large enough pistol, I'll resort to my custom G20L, 6" slide 10mm that produces 165grn velocities of 1,503fps and ME of 827lb/ft, however, those are just to fight my way to my rifles.

OkieCruffler
July 5, 2010, 01:29 AM
What an entertaining read. What never escapes me is how folks are always trying to make their choice look like something it's not. The 22 folks want you to believe it's equal to the 32, the 22mag want you to believe it's a 380, the 380 a 9mm, the 9mm a 35, the 10mm a 44mag. If you're confident in what you're carrying why do you get so worked up about it? FWIW, my wife carries a 357 snubby 2" that runs a 125gr bullet at 1480fps. Myself, I don't care for the 125 so I run the same pistol with a 158gr. You can say a nine will run at those numbers if you want, you can call a bull a chicken but I ain't eating no eggs at your table.

TMNT
July 5, 2010, 12:54 PM
hahaha now he is over at The High Road with the same thread. I guess you guys drove him out of his own thread lol.

Cool_Hand
July 5, 2010, 03:55 PM
Lets keep it simple and go back to newtons laws of motion

"for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"

Ballistics asside, shoot a .357 magnum and a 9mm in a gun of equal weight. Just by felt recoil alone that should tell you which is going to have more stopping power.

Keep telling yourself your 9mm is just as powerful as a .357, if it makes you feel better than so be it..but your dead wrong

stolivar
July 5, 2010, 08:38 PM
Is the original post was trying to compare p+ or +p+ to a standard remington 125 load.

If you compare standard to standard or hot to hot loads, there is no relative comparisons to be made.....

and on the post of the officer shot with the 22. he died because the 22 was lodged in an artery.... not from disruptive tissue damage... and because the perp was shot in the gut.......


steve

oboe
July 5, 2010, 09:02 PM
"For every reaction, there is an equal and opposite reaction." The recoil you feel is the same as the force the bullet applies to the perpetrator. "Knock down power" is a dead end road.

It's like real estate. The three most important factors are location, location and location.

You know how the Bible is really old and people still read it? You know how the U. S. Constitution is old and [at least some] people still read it?

Here's something old, but not even that old! Some people still read it! Here it is: http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

oboe
July 5, 2010, 09:07 PM
. . . and this: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs3.htm#The%20Myth%20of%20Energy%20Transfer

Gonzo_308
July 5, 2010, 09:58 PM
You know, a Corvette with a flat tire in a blizzard is alot slower than a Honda CVCC with a head of steam on the highway in July.

Ergo, the Honda is a higher performance vehicle than the 'vette.

I just proved it.

Sheikyourbootie
July 8, 2010, 06:21 PM
You know, a Corvette with a flat tire in a blizzard is alot slower than a Honda CVCC with a head of steam on the highway in July.

Ergo, the Honda is a higher performance vehicle than the 'vette.

I just proved it.

I wonder if the OP has found another forum to drive his Honda CVCC ++p++ to?

Looks like this pesky little thing called math keeps blowing holes in his conclusions.;)

nefprotector
July 8, 2010, 07:39 PM
Have you tried the 125 grain Cor Bon?

brabham78
July 8, 2010, 10:33 PM
A while back I did some testing on a limited assortment 9mm , .38 Special (and +P), and .357 Magnum, fired from several different handguns. All results are from an average of 5 shots. All test were conducted on the same day under the same conditions. Distance from gun to chronograph was 12ft. I don't claim to be a ballistics expert, but I have spend my career working in the field of experimental testing (Experimental Engineering Test Technician), and I'm now retired. You'll see that I threw in a few modest "target" FMJ grounds as a kind of baseline to compare the others too.

This obviously is not a comprehensive test of every brand of ammunition, but with a seeming endless bickering on the forums about 9mm vs .357 Magnum - vs .38 Special (and +P), and which one is the best, I just wanted to test some of the ammo (and guns) that I had on hand, and see if I could answer that question to my own satisfaction, and I did. With the right ammo, any of these three calibers are plenty potent, and in the debate about which is better, a compact-to-mid sized 9mm vs snub-nose .357 Mag revolver? I'm positive that if any poor soul were to be shot by both, he wouldn't be able to tell them apart. :) Neither stand out as the "best", they are both excellent. The .38 +P PoweR'Ball put in a very nice showing too.

9mm

CZ D Compact PCR 9mm (3.9" barrel)
Win. 9mm 115gr FMJ (target ammo) 1097 fps - 307 ft/lbs
Federal Hydra Shok 9mm+P 124gr. 1058 fps - 308 ft/lbs
Cor Bon 9mm+P 115gr JHP 1197 fps - 366 ft/lbs
Cor Bon PowR/Ball 9mm+P 100gr 1360 fps - 411 ft/lbs
Cor Bon DPX 9mm+P 115gr 1227 fps - 384 ft/lbs

Sig P239 (3.6" barrel)
Win. 9mm 115gr FMJ (target ammo) 1043 fps - 278 ft/lbs
Federal Hydra Shok 9mm+P 124gr. 1025 fps - 289 ft/lbs
Cor Bon 9mm+P 115gr JHP 1186 fps - 359 ft/lbs
Cor Bon PowR/Ball 9mm+P 100gr 1319 fps -386 ft/lbs
Cor Bon DPX 9mm+P 115gr 1172 fps - 351 ft/lbs

Ruger SR9 (4.14" barrel)
Win. 9mm 115gr FMJ (target ammo) 1185 fps - 301 ft/lbs
Federal Hydra Shok 9mm+P 124gr. 1054 fps - 306 ft/lbs
Cor Bon 9mm+P 115gr JHP 1234 fps - 389 ft/lbs
Cor Bon PowR/Ball 9mm+P 100gr 1370 fps - 417 ft/lbs
Cor Bon DPX 9mm+P 115gr 1181 fps - 356 ft/lbs
............................................................................

.38 Special (and +P)
.357 Magnum

S&W 340 M&P (1 7/8" barrel)
Win. .38 Spl. 130gr (target ammo) 766 fps - 169 ft/lbs
Federal Hydra Shok .38 Spl.+P 147gr 817 fps - 218 ft/lbs
Cor Bon PowR'Ball .38 Spl.+P 100gr 1193 fps - 316 ft/lbs
Cor Bon DPX .357 Mag 125gr 1109 fps - 341 ft/lbs

Ruger SP101 (2 1/4" barrel)
Win. .38 Spl. 130gr (target ammo) 767 fps - 170 ft/lbs
Federal Hydra Shok .38 Spl.+P 147gr 894 fps - 261 ft/lbs
Cor Bon PowR'Ball .38 Spl.+P 100gr 1221 fps - 331 ft/lbs
Cor Bon DPX .357 Mag 125gr 1182 fps - 388 ft/lbs

COSteve
July 8, 2010, 11:35 PM
Once again, brabham78's posted velocities are like comparing apples and grapes because of the arbitrarily barrel lengths selected. As I stated above, concealability isn't a function of barrel/slide length but rather one of grip size and length.

Therefore this comparison is nonsense as the 9mms have a nominal 4" barrel (the length the 9mm cartridge was designed for) while the 38spl and 357mag's barrels are half that long (much shorter than the cartridge was designed for).

brabham78
July 9, 2010, 12:46 AM
Quote: 'Once again, brabham78's posted velocities are like comparing apples and grapes because of the arbitrarily barrel lengths selected. As I stated above, concealability isn't a function of barrel/slide length but rather one of grip size and length.

Therefore this comparison is nonsense as the 9mms have a nominal 4" barrel (the length the 9mm cartridge was designed for) while the 38spl and 357mag's barrels are half that long (much shorter than the cartridge was designed for). "

........................................

COSteve, I think I made it clear that I did not consider this to be a comprehensive test of guns and calibers. I clearly stated that I was testing what I had on hand, and the reason I had these on hand, is because these my carry guns, and I was trying to satisfy my own curiosity as to how they compare. I carry a little of everything, and as a matter of fact, I'm a fan of the .357 Mag round. It is my primary carry gun. But out of my guns, as dissimilar as they are, the 9mm and .357 Magnum have very similar performance, and that is what I was trying to determine, strictly for my own information. I posted it on a whim, just in case someone might like to see it too. I hope a few people might have found it worth a look-see. I guess it didn't meet your high standards, and I apologize. I've noticed your area of interest lies in debating barrel lengths and grip sizes, and in making sure no on is cheating in that regard.


And by the way, how is your ballistic testing coming along? I'm looking forward to seeing your results.

COSteve
July 9, 2010, 10:01 AM
I don't give a rat's patootie about either the 9mm or 357mag as a concealed carry piece so I don't have a dog in this fight. For me, the 9mm is too small and weak and the 357mag's platform (revolver) isn't my thing. I carry a G23 (40) CCW and a G20L (10mm) hunting. My HD gun is a 45acp.

I'm merely stating that the OP's original basis for his comparison is bogus. His dictates that a 357mag carry weapon is only concealable with a 2" barrel which is nonsense. Many, if not most, 357mag revolvers actually carried have 4" barrels and therefore his conclusion as to similarity of CCW performance between the two calibers is also nonsense.

Exaggerated example to demonstrate the point:

If I fired a 30-06 out of a 2" barrel it's performance will be severely degraded, possibly down to below that of a 9mm's (because of the slower burning powder in a rifle round). If I then stated that a hot 9mm was the equal to a mild 30-06, I would be laughed off the site.

Look, anyone can rig a comparison to achieve a pre-ordained result if they work at it. That's where the saying, "Liars figure and figures lie." comes from. However, the facts are still the facts and bogus comparisons do more to demonstrate the poster's attempt to conceal the truth rather than reveal it.

nefprotector
July 9, 2010, 11:14 AM
great comparisons! See thats why I choose the Corbon and the 9mm. Have you tried Buffalo Bore? WOW!!!!!!!!

MTS840
July 10, 2010, 02:19 PM
Back in the 1990s, I qualified with my 2.25" .357 Magnum Ruger SP-101 and Remington 125 gr. JHPs. I was able to qualify, but the recoil and muzzle flash was horrendous.

When I found that a hot 9mm load from my S&W 5906 had nearly as much muzzle energy and more than double the capacity, I dropped the .357 and never looked back.

It was much more comfortable to shoot and it did not have nearly as much recoil and muzzle blast as the snubbie. Follow up shots were much faster, to say the least.

I did the same research and came to the same conclusion as the OP did.

In those particular cases, a hot 9mm trumped a popular .357 snubbie every time.

Who cares if you can drop a deer at 100 yards with a 4" .357? That was never even part of the discussion!

Bulldawg55
July 22, 2010, 08:58 PM
Wow, no new posts here! Hopefully everyone is out practicing with which ever round or rounds you feel most comfortable with since the only numbers that mean anything are the number of good hits!