October 8, 2012, 09:58 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." Last edited by Theohazard; October 9, 2012 at 01:05 AM. |
|
October 8, 2012, 10:16 PM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
|
October 8, 2012, 10:19 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2007
Location: Missouri
Posts: 8,306
|
Quote:
Now if that was a typo that you didn't catch, I'd say you need to try and find a range that rents guns, has both, and try them. I do carry a KAHR CM9, and it shoots very well. I also have a Springfield Armory XD40 Subcompact that is somewhat larger, and heavier chambered in 40 S&W. I am very tolerant of recoil, but do notice a sharper, and more pronounced recoil and more muzzle flip with the larger XD in 40 S&W over the Kahr CM9. I see nothing in the design of the KAHR that would reduce recoil, so I would think that the CM40 would have considerably more recoil than the 9mm version. I haven't shot a CM40, so I don't know for sure. But my CM9 does have more noticed recoil than my larger, and heavier 9mm pistols using the same ammo.
__________________
Cheapshooter's rules of gun ownership #1: NEVER SELL OR TRADE ANYTHING! |
|
October 8, 2012, 11:25 PM | #29 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
Quote:
As far as data goes to "prove" what's better, the hardest and least interpretative data is energy. 9mm, .45ACP and .40S&W all fall in the same energy range if you look at a wide selection of available loadings. The fact that it's so easily debatable one way or the other which (.40, .45, 9mm) is better demonstrates how even their capabilities are. |
||
October 9, 2012, 09:26 AM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
I think the PM40 is just too small for good amounts of practice to be tolerable. Shootability is relative - the 40 bothers some and not others - in a pistol larger than the PM's I don’t think I'm giving up a fair amount of anything with 40. I shoot my Glock 27 more accurately and rapidly than my PM9. |
|
October 9, 2012, 10:07 AM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
|
October 9, 2012, 10:25 AM | #32 | |
Member
Join Date: October 1, 2012
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
BTW, do people usually fight so much on this forum? |
|
October 9, 2012, 10:31 AM | #33 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
|
October 9, 2012, 10:37 AM | #34 |
Member
Join Date: October 1, 2012
Posts: 49
|
Thanks, I'll stay alert.
|
October 9, 2012, 11:01 AM | #35 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2007
Location: Missouri
Posts: 8,306
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Cheapshooter's rules of gun ownership #1: NEVER SELL OR TRADE ANYTHING! |
||
October 9, 2012, 11:45 AM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
|
|
October 9, 2012, 12:27 PM | #37 | |
Member
Join Date: October 1, 2012
Posts: 49
|
Quote:
I'm not afraid of the recoil, (I shoot a .357 GP100 with 125g FMJ's without much of a problem) but if takes too long to regain the site picture, maybe the 9 is best. |
|
October 9, 2012, 12:33 PM | #38 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 4, 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 3,656
|
Quote:
Also the crabby ol' TFL vets need to bicker with the newer members. It's just how it works. Usually its in good fun. That said I'd strongly recommend the Kahr in 9mm. I'm not a huge .40 guy though. but the Kahr in 9mm is quite controllable and has less of a learning curve. I'm not sure how experienced you are in firearms but that's my 2 cents
__________________
E-Shock rounds are engineered to expend maximum energy into soft targets, turning the density mass into an expanding rotational cone of NyTrilium matrix particles, causing neurological collapse to the central nervous system.- Yeah I can do that. I guarantee you will know it if a bicyclist hits your house going 1000 mph. -Smaug |
|
October 9, 2012, 01:23 PM | #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
You have provided absolutely nothing to demonstrate that 9mm, is actually, just as damaging and effective as a 40. Nada. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Until you do... I'll keep looking at the photo that shows the little 9mm wound channel compared to the big wound channels of the 40, 357sig and 45. Go ahead.. keep telling yourself and anyone who will listen about how the milliseconds in 9mm split times really matters much. I'll remained concerned with making my first shot count, you keep worrying about your second, you'll probably need it. FWIW.. I love my little PM9, I think the round matches the pistol very well. |
|
October 9, 2012, 02:58 PM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
There's nothing wrong with you preferring the .40 over the 9mm, but you keep posting that photo over and over again like it actually proves the .40 is far better ballistically. If a round's purpose was to make the largest wound channel in gelatin, then yes, the .40 would be much better than the 9mm. But the purpose of the .40 is to put an attacker down in as few shots as possible. And in actual real-world shootings the .40 has proven to be only slightly more effective shot-for-shot than the 9mm. This is not something I've come up with on my own, this is the consensus of firearms experts the world over.
You can state your preference for the .40 and I won't argue with you. But when you say that photo proves the .40 is far better than the 9mm, or when you say "shootability" isn't an issue because your larger Glock .40 shoots better than your smaller Kahr 9mm, you're just using ridiculous arguments.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
October 9, 2012, 04:49 PM | #41 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
I keep hearing about how 9mm generates the same results as the other calibers, but I see no data, no quotes from these experts. Again.. nothing, nada, zip, zilch. The way some of you carry on about a 9mm being equally effective makes me wonder if any of you have actually shot a 40 at anything but paper? Lastly, "equally effective" or "slightly more effective" doesn’t mean the bad guy died 3 hours later at the hospital from a 9mm vs being dropped on the spot by a 40, 45 or 357sig. The (death) result may eventually be the same amongst all calibers, I want to know about immediate effectiveness. Quote:
Gelatin provides a good baseline of what a round can do to a media that is similar in density to a human. Add a few bones, add some clothing, add anything to impede the bullets progress and the 40, 45 & 357sig really start to shine above and beyond the 9mm. Quote:
I'm saying that the 40 is the way to go in pistols larger than the Kahrs - simple as that - I'm not saying that the 40 is the right pick for all pistols or shooters. I don’t think that a Kahr PM40 is a better choice than a PM9, just the opposite in fact. The PM40 truly is too small (for me) to happily practice with enough to be as sharp as I am with the PM9. Move up a size to the G27, and yes.. 40 is the right choice for me in that size pistol on up. |
|||
October 9, 2012, 05:22 PM | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
I'm paying attention to what you're saying: you're saying the .40 is a much better round as far as terminal ballistics than the 9mm and you keep using that photo to "prove" it.
I'm not critizising the gel per se; I'm saying the fact that you're willing to use that as "proof" of the .40's huge superiority in actual gunfights is ridiculous. Just like your example of your larger Glock .40 shooting better than your smaller Kahr 9mm is also ridiculous. I'll say this yet again: I'm not arguing the .40 is the exact same as the 9mm; I'm arguing that they're a lot closer than you think as far as their real-world effectness. I work with a guy who is a firearms expert, trainer, and IPSC shooter who regularly trains with and is personal friends with Massad Ayoob, and he puts it best when he talks about the 9mm vs the .40 vs the .45; he says, "They all pretty much suck, so pick the one where you can put the most rounds on target accurately and as quickly as possible."
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." Last edited by Theohazard; October 9, 2012 at 07:02 PM. |
October 9, 2012, 06:32 PM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
|
|
October 9, 2012, 08:38 PM | #44 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
And no, its not ridiculous, its an example of both rounds being well-matched to their pistols. I do shoot the 40 G27 faster and more accurately than the 9mm PM9 - its mostly a factor of the larger gun, shorter trigger, and overall design, not the round in any way. And it’s a clear example of how a pistol of certain physical size and weight (varies by user) can manage the 40 as well or better than a smaller 9mm pistol. In other words - for me, the PM40 isnt a good match of round and pistol. Which was the OP's main question in this thread after all. Quote:
You sound silly, as if you've never shot a 40. The 40 and 45 have basically the same energy, the 40 has more in some cases. Have you ever heard someone say that the 9mm and 45 fall into the same energy range? Go try to sell that 9mm-has-the-same-energy nonsense to the 1911 crowd... Boo Hiss. Quote:
Proof-positive your not paying attention and just waiting for your turn to talk (argue) instead of genuinely conversing. Quote:
Really..can we be done with this? I think we can all agree that the PM9 is probably right pick, instead of the PM40. |
||||
October 9, 2012, 08:47 PM | #45 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Thrillsville ,Tx
Posts: 904
|
I have a PM9, its a pretty sweet shooter, but i dont if the .40 would be quite as sweet. Plus if you like to shoot alot, the cheaper 9mm ammo is a plus.
__________________
beretta cx4 storm .40 caliber sig P290 Kahr PM9 Glock 26 Bushmaster AR15 |
October 9, 2012, 09:17 PM | #46 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
|||
October 9, 2012, 09:43 PM | #47 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
If you meant "have you fired a .40? The increase in felt recoil and muzzle flip clearly indicate to me that there is more muzzle energy!" felt recoil and muzzle flip are the function of a lot of things and the primary determinant in them isn't energy. Quote:
I'm sure in real life you're a perfectly nice guy, but on the internet you use willful ignorance and garden variety ignorance to craft your arguments. It's hard to have a productive discussion with someone like that. If I had to compare it to anything else, it's hard to debate the importance of the calculus underpinnings of multilinear regression when you're a trained stastician and the person you're talking to can with difficulty do some algebra - you know some of the language and you've got an opinion, but it's an opinion based on what you don't know that you don't know.. Last edited by 10mmAuto; October 9, 2012 at 10:06 PM. |
||
October 9, 2012, 10:27 PM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2004
Posts: 5,173
|
The .40 may have a small advantage in power, but you can put more 9mm rounds in the same sized pistol...with the result being essentially a tossup...shooter's choice.
If you do some searching, the Kahr PM9 is at the ragged edge of firearm design. Most of their 9mms work...in the same sized frame, many of the .40s do not. There is a practical limit for everything. Quote:
.9mm would be somewhere around .032, thirty-two thousandths of an inch. Slightly larger than the needle the nurse uses to take your blood or give you a flu shot. Probably not very effective as an anti-personnel round. |
|
October 10, 2012, 01:02 AM | #49 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
I've understood every word and concept from you - I dont agree - therefore you proclaim yourself an elevated thinker. Blah... It starts at post 14, think about that smart guy. |
|
October 10, 2012, 01:17 AM | #50 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 2010
Posts: 598
|
Quote:
For example, your insinuation that you can accurately gauge energy levels of .40 relative to 9mm by the feel of shooting it and therefor conclude .40 is substantially more powerful than 9mm because it has much more muzzle flip/recoil is the most asinine thing I've heard about firearms recently - and I'm in the military, where you hear brilliant stuff from 11B junior enlisted like .50BMG near misses tear limbs off. Telling me they're not in the same energy range when it is well documented on the internet that they are was just.... -_-. If you're curious how I came to the conclusion I initially touched on, PM but when you consider what I outlined in the body of my post it's clear you're willfully ignorant of the topic at hand and also not well informed on small arms. Last edited by 10mmAuto; October 10, 2012 at 01:32 AM. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|