Quote:
|
I'm not sure what you are getting at.
|
People who say they study "caliber difference" usually focus almost exclusive on only one "caliber difference". They study the actual terminal effect of the bullet and ignore all of the other differences that caliber makes.
Problem is that terminal effect (the difference that a bullet in one caliber makes in effectively stopping a real-world attack vs. an identically placed bullet in a different caliber in a more or less identical real-world attack) is very difficult to quantify, or even detect for generally similar calibers. As the disparity in caliber changes dramatically, it starts to become possible to make some very general observations, but looking at real world shootings demonstrates that even widely disparate calibers can have apparently identical effectiveness in terms of successful self-defense uses.
Here are some examples.
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alte...stopping-power
Does anyone really think that differences in terminal effect can explain why in this study, it took on average, fewer .22LR rounds to incapacitate someone than .45ACP rounds?
What that should tell us is that while terminal effect differences that show up in simple measurements and testing may provide some interesting information, even when looking at hundreds of shootings, it's very difficult to take that information and make useful observations about how much faster or more effectively caliber A will stop someone compared to caliber B.
But people will still focus exclusively on terminal effect, ignoring other differences that can be easily demonstrated to actually have really practical effects in the real world. Things like ease of carry, ease of use, recoil recovery/shootability, practice costs, capacity, etc...