October 10, 2012, 01:38 AM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Hey, your words are getting bigger and bigger... lol.
(in case you didnt notice, I stopped talking guns with you [pointless] a post or two back) |
October 10, 2012, 01:44 AM | #52 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
|
|
October 10, 2012, 01:53 AM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Its not cornered, its bordom, and you have some kind of reading problem, I'm tired of repeating myself to you. You miss the details and dont absorb.
You lost track of the topic a long time ago. Yep, withdrawing - completely bored of squabbling with you. Drone on if you like. |
October 10, 2012, 06:01 AM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 1, 2011
Location: Nassau County NY
Posts: 378
|
40 cal. vs. 9mm
In the Kahr platform, I'd go with the 9mm. I have the P9 and it's pleasant to shoot whereas I find the .40 has a bit of snap to the recoil. I agree with the other posters that the .40 holds too little advantage over the 9mm to warrant the increased expense and recoil.
Also, if you're a CCW or primarily concerned with home defense, your needs are much different than that of law enforcement. You shouldn't be engaging barricaded gunmen, shooting through car doors or auto-glass or engaging felons much beyond arm's length.
__________________
Int'l Assoc. of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors |
October 10, 2012, 11:40 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
I think Dashunde and 10mmAuto should both volunteer to be shot by a 9mm and a .40S&W.
It's the only way to prove their arguments once and for all. If they turn down this test, they are both admitting that each round is equally effective at getting the job done. What say you, guys? |
October 10, 2012, 01:09 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
If I had to be shot with either, I'd certainly pick the 9mm, anyone who says 40 is.. well, nuts.
I'll add to your idea... turn the perspective around... who here would want to go up against a bad guy who has a 40 in his hand? (instead of a 9) Not me. |
October 10, 2012, 01:28 PM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
You sir, are either very stupid.... or very stupid. |
|
October 10, 2012, 01:40 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
lol... let me put a little more emphisis on the words "If I had to be shot".
|
October 10, 2012, 03:37 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2010
Posts: 4,862
|
Quote:
|
|
October 10, 2012, 07:12 PM | #60 |
Member
Join Date: October 1, 2012
Posts: 49
|
Ok, I get the idea. Thanks!
|
October 10, 2012, 07:37 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 9, 2006
Posts: 666
|
To commit the sin of staying on topic .... I have had a p9 and a pm9 for a few years and it is mild recoil wise to my perception . In fact its such a nice little pistol that i just traded into a second pm9 . I have no experience with the pm40 but have shot both the p45 and pm45 . for what its worth the pm45 seemed to have less recoil and muzzle climb than the p45 . I don't think i would want a pm40 but then i am not a .40 S&W fan ( personal preferences not any ballistic reason ) .
|
October 10, 2012, 09:44 PM | #62 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
Quote:
I've been on this board since April and I've read a lot of posts in a lot of threads, but I've never seen as much willful ignorance than I've seen from this one person in this one thread.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." Last edited by Theohazard; October 10, 2012 at 10:01 PM. |
||
October 10, 2012, 10:00 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,037
|
Oh heck, you ain't seen nuthin' yet.
Wait 'til we start arguing whether Ford or Chevy makes the better huntin' truck...
__________________
Treat everyone you meet with dignity and respect....but have a plan to kill them just in case. |
October 10, 2012, 10:03 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Well, that's a easy one: Ford. And there's no way anyone can deny that!
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
October 11, 2012, 08:26 AM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
Its simple - IF I were to be shot at, I'd much rather it be with a 9mm instead of a 40. Common sense. Please, try not to extrapolate too much from the obvious concept of wishing to avoid the larger bullet. Its clear to me that the willful ignorance points in your direction. |
|
October 11, 2012, 08:35 AM | #66 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 13, 2008
Location: Hermit's Peak
Posts: 623
|
Is the original source of that photo even known, and if so is it actually trustworthy? Anyone can put together a good-looking photo.
Even if it came right from the FBI test labs, basing your opinion on one photo is not very smart. Yes, ballistic gel can show you something. But it has been said time and again by expert sources that it is not directly comparable to human tissue. When many of those same expert sources also relate real-world info from the field indicating there is negligible difference between calibers, not taking this into account is willful ignorance. |
October 11, 2012, 08:47 AM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
My point on this subject from the beginning is this...
The 40 has more potential to inflict more damage, therefore I prefer it in a pistol large enough to shoot it well. That does not include the PM40. There is no ingorance, willful or otherwise, in that basic fact. |
October 11, 2012, 08:56 AM | #68 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 13, 2008
Location: Hermit's Peak
Posts: 623
|
Does potential really matter though, if the end result shows no significant difference?
Just so I don't miss contributing on-topic material to the thread, as a new PM9 owner I am very pleased with my purchase. One reason I would not consider the .40 is because of the possible necessity of my wife needing to shoot it. She most certainly cannot shoot the .40 as well as the 9, and that is very important to me. |
October 11, 2012, 09:17 AM | #69 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm starting to think you're just trolling us at this point...
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
||
October 11, 2012, 09:32 AM | #70 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
Stop putting words in my mouth or trying to twist what I say to make your arguement. |
|
October 11, 2012, 09:58 AM | #71 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
I'll take the 40's ballistic advantage over the 9mm's shot speed advantage. But like I said, theres a limit to how small of a pistol I'm willing to run 40 through before the advantage sways greatly towards 9mm - the PM9 and 40 are good examples of that. Conversely, I'll take the Glock 27 over the Glock 26, as I feel the 27 can be shot very well/rapidly with a little more practice - which is fun anyway. |
|
October 11, 2012, 10:15 AM | #72 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
I should have guessed what was coming when 10mm posted this at the beginning of the thread: Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
||
October 11, 2012, 03:43 PM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
|
|
October 11, 2012, 04:20 PM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 5, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,247
|
What a couple of three year olds.
Lock it |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|