The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 11, 2024, 09:51 PM   #76
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 4,030
So, there you have it. The 380 is just as effective as the 45ACP. Who really believes that? Nobody believes that. We’ll be back to recommending the 38 Long Colt again. Meth head is coming at you with a machete. One round in each pistol - 380, 9mm, 45 ACP. I’m picking up the 45.
603Country is offline  
Old December 11, 2024, 10:58 PM   #77
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,382
45 vs 9mm interesting test

Quote:
Originally Posted by 603Country View Post
Meth head is coming at you with a machete. One round in each pistol - 380, 9mm, 45 ACP. I’m picking up the 45.
I don’t have a single shot pistol at this point in time, so I don’t particularly understand why this comparison matters. That said, you’ve been presented with multiple examples of people surviving and continuing to be a threat after multiple hits of 45 ACP while presumably not on meth. I have no doubt you can find the same for 9mm. If the proverbial meth head with the machete is coming at you (maybe you are traveling back in time to fight Moro tribesmen), I would suggest having more than one round in your magazine.

As for picking the 45, no is saying you can’t or shouldn’t. Some people have come to different conclusions than yourself. It happens. You mentioned above people could keep going at this forever. You seem to be one of those people.
TunnelRat is online now  
Old December 12, 2024, 01:05 AM   #78
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 25,407
Quote:
So, there you have it. The 380 is just as effective as the 45ACP.
Why bother posting that after I specifically said that wasn't the point of my post?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnKSa
I'm not claiming that the .380ACP is better than the .45ACP, I'm just using this as an example to show that the terminal performance differences are so small that they seem to vanish in the real world when you start looking at the outcomes of actual shootings.
Quote:
One round in each pistol - 380, 9mm, 45 ACP. I’m picking up the 45.
In the real world, the differences in terminal performance due to choices between the service pistol calibers are NOT going to save your butt. It's going to be all you that does the saving. You, and maybe some luck.

Don't put your faith in numbers stamped on a gun or on a cartridge box. If you have to pull your gun to save your life, those numbers won't help you one little bit. People want to focus on the numbers because it helps them avoid them being forced to deal with the unpleasant reality that what saves them in the real world is going to be time at the range, skill, situational awareness, maybe their tactics, and probably their ability to perform under stress.

I'm not asking you to believe me. You have the internet at your disposal and this is a common topic--one that is of interest to thousands of people and many large organizations. Go find the evidence to show that there's a practical difference in the outcomes of real-world shootings due to caliber difference--that defenders are stopping attackers faster or surviving more often based on which one of the service pistol calibers they choose.

If there is a practical difference, if caliber terminal performance differences are actually having a detectable effect on the outcome of gunfights, then, well, the effect will be detectable.

People talk about how there are too many other variables that affect shootings and those make it impossible to detect the differences due to caliber. They are exactly right--but the fact is, it doesn't matter WHY it can't be detected. If it can't be detected, then how could it possibly be helping? If it could be shown to be helping, then, by definition, it would be detectable.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 01:23 AM   #79
Shoots Left
Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2024
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by 603Country View Post
. Meth head is coming at you with a machete. One round in each pistol - 380, 9mm, 45 ACP. I’m picking up the 45.
What happened to the bear?
Shoots Left is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 03:19 AM   #80
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,067
Quote:
What happened to the bear?
He's sleeping off his cocaine buzz...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 03:30 AM   #81
Koda94
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,356
The only reason people believe the 45 has more stopping power is because they want to justify their choice over other choices. If it were really true nobody would buy a 9mm. The vast majority would be using 45acp and that is not the case, in fact if I recall the 9mm is the most popular self defense round sold in the US, probably the world. There's a reason for that....
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2
Koda94 is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 11:37 AM   #82
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnKSa View Post
Why bother posting that after I specifically said that wasn't the point of my post?In the real world, the differences in terminal performance due to choices between the service pistol calibers are NOT going to save your butt. It's going to be all you that does the saving. You, and maybe some luck.

Don't put your faith in numbers stamped on a gun or on a cartridge box. If you have to pull your gun to save your life, those numbers won't help you one little bit. People want to focus on the numbers because it helps them avoid them being forced to deal with the unpleasant reality that what saves them in the real world is going to be time at the range, skill, situational awareness, maybe their tactics, and probably their ability to perform under stress.

I'm not asking you to believe me. You have the internet at your disposal and this is a common topic--one that is of interest to thousands of people and many large organizations. Go find the evidence to show that there's a practical difference in the outcomes of real-world shootings due to caliber difference--that defenders are stopping attackers faster or surviving more often based on which one of the service pistol calibers they choose.

If there is a practical difference, if caliber terminal performance differences are actually having a detectable effect on the outcome of gunfights, then, well, the effect will be detectable.

People talk about how there are too many other variables that affect shootings and those make it impossible to detect the differences due to caliber. They are exactly right--but the fact is, it doesn't matter WHY it can't be detected. If it can't be detected, then how could it possibly be helping? If it could be shown to be helping, then, by definition, it would be detectable.
Here's the thing about your analysis. Yes, you seem to base it on statistics. But, these stats are not a real test of effectiveness of a singular 45 round vs a singular .380 round in comparable settings. It would be a human-rights violation to conduct such a study on humans. We all know that statistics can be manipulated in a large number of ways, especially when strict, scientific protocols are not used in the testing and gathering of those statistics.

Then, there are millions of tests showing wound channels of 45acp compared to 9mm. While the testing is valid, it only serves to show what each round does to ballistic gelatin - not on a living human body.

So, we have to "guess" at which round is more effective, and more effective in varying circumstances. This is the reason caliber wars never cease.

Even if a particular round (say 10mm) has good penetration, good wound channel and higher capacity - there are going to be people who simply don't shoot it as well as 380 or 9mm. The bottom line is there are too many variables to say that one cartridge is better than all others.

Now, lets talk ballistic lasers - big hole, no recoil, infinite number of "shots"......
Skans is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 12:22 PM   #83
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 25,407
Quote:
But, these stats are not a real test of effectiveness of a singular 45 round vs a singular .380 round in comparable settings.
Right. They're a test of 150 rounds of .380ACP vs 436 rounds of .45ACP in the REAL WORLD. Just like we would have to use them if we were forced into a self-defense shooting.
Quote:
We all know that statistics can be manipulated in a large number of ways, especially when strict, scientific protocols are not used in the testing and gathering of those statistics.
Well, I'll go you one better than that. For all we know, Ellifritz made the numbers up out of thin air.

But, ok. let's say those numbers are manipulated so that the statistics work out a certain way. Where are the data sets where the numbers are manipulated so the statistics work out so that the .45ACP is the clear winner? Where are the data sets where the numbers are manipulated so that there's an obvious difference in shooting outcomes based on differences in terminal performance differences due to caliber? Let's see some of that data and then we can argue about which data set is valid and/or which one has the statistics manipulated and in what ways. I can't find it. Neither can you or you wouldn't be reduced to "hand-waving" type proofs. Neither can anyone else or they would have answered my question and proved I was wrong.

I've been looking for the data for decades, and it's not out there as far as I can tell. I've been challenging others to find it for years and no one can.
Quote:
So, we have to "guess" at which round is more effective, and more effective in varying circumstances.
EXACTLY. What you're missing is that If the evidence were there to show one round is more effective, we wouldn't have to guess. If there's a practical difference in real world effectiveness, then there MUST be evidence to show it. If no one can find any way to show it, how can there be a practical difference? Can a difference that no one can find evidence for really provide a benefit? How could it possibly do that without providing evidence in the process?
Quote:
The bottom line is there are too many variables to say that one cartridge is better than all others.
EXACTLY. What you're missing is that it doesn't matter WHY we can't show one is better than the other. What matters is that we can't. If we can't show one is better than the other, what advantage could it possibly be providing? Can an advantage that no one can prove exists really be an advantage? How could it possibly be?

It's nonsense to say that: "It's helping the defender in real world shootings, but when you look at the outcome of real world shootings the effect is not apparent."

If it is helping, by definition, the effect MUST be apparent. If the effect is not apparent in real world shootings, then, by any reasonable definition of "apparent effect" and "helping" it CAN'T be helping in the real world.

If it's not incapacitating people faster in real world shootings, what's the advantage? If it is, where's the evidence?

If it's not improving the survival rate of defenders in real world shootings, what's the advantage? If it is, where's the evidence?

I wanted an answer to this just as badly as everyone else does. But I wasn't willing to speculate to come up with an answer. I wasn't willing to just arbitrarily decide, based on my personal opinion--I wanted to make my decision based on evidence. I didn't start this out to prove that they were all providing the same basic real-world outcomes, I started out to prove my favorite was better than the others. But I couldn't because I couldn't find any evidence and no one could provide any.

I finally realized that I had the answer I was looking for--it just wasn't the one I thought I would find. If there wasn't any real world evidence, any real world differences couldn't be significant. If the real world differences were significant, there would, by definition, HAVE to be real world evidence.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 02:00 PM   #84
Pumpkin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2020
Location: Seguin Texas
Posts: 766
What caused Evan Marshall and Ed Sano’s statistics in “STOPPING POWER” to loose credibility.

Obviously people have found enough assumptions, errors, etc. to the data that it can’t or isn’t trusted by so many.
Pumpkin is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 02:52 PM   #85
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,067
These kinds of arguments remind me of the story about the engineers and the bumblebee. The engineers studied everything they could, body mass, wing area muscle contraction rate, number of wingbeats per second, every statistic they could find, calculated things out, and pronounced that, mathematically, the bumblebee could not fly.

The bee, not having read the study, flew away....


ALL the studies I've seen, or heard about have some of the same things in common, one of them being the focus on some (or only one) factor, ignoring a host of others, and presenting conclusions as if the chosen factor was the only responsible thing giving the observed result.

When we look at stopping people, things frequently get "blended" into general groups, in order to provide manageable numbers to work with.

One of the things that often gets reduced to essentially one uniform data point is people. People are NOT a uniform, homogenous target medium.

Every hit is different. Every PERSON is different. The differences may be small and insignificant, or they may be large and clearly and important. The attacker can be any where from the extreme of a "terminator" who will not stop until physical damage stops them, to the other end where the attacker stops because they got shot somewhere....

The attacker can be anything from a small person to a huge one, yet in the studies all are the same, either "stopped" or "not stopped"....and the chosen factor of focus is usually the given reason why.

Studies can show general trends, and that can be useful information, but none of them should be considered holy writ, or an immutable law of physics.

Flip a coin. Odds are the same which side will land up. SO, by the math you have a 50/50 chance every time. Now suppose you flip 10 times and get 7 tails. Did you beat the odds?? Is it an anomaly??
Or, is it what a statistician will tell you, "your sample size isn't big enough". ??

I do agree with the idea that if there was a significant difference you should be able to show it, and if you can't, then there probably isn't one.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 12, 2024, 03:13 PM   #86
czgunner
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2006
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnKSa View Post
Why bother posting that after I specifically said that wasn't the point of my post?In the real world, the differences in terminal performance due to choices between the service pistol calibers are NOT going to save your butt. It's going to be all you that does the saving. You, and maybe some luck.



Don't put your faith in numbers stamped on a gun or on a cartridge box. If you have to pull your gun to save your life, those numbers won't help you one little bit. People want to focus on the numbers because it helps them avoid them being forced to deal with the unpleasant reality that what saves them in the real world is going to be time at the range, skill, situational awareness, maybe their tactics, and probably their ability to perform under stress.



I'm not asking you to believe me. You have the internet at your disposal and this is a common topic--one that is of interest to thousands of people and many large organizations. Go find the evidence to show that there's a practical difference in the outcomes of real-world shootings due to caliber difference--that defenders are stopping attackers faster or surviving more often based on which one of the service pistol calibers they choose.



If there is a practical difference, if caliber terminal performance differences are actually having a detectable effect on the outcome of gunfights, then, well, the effect will be detectable.



People talk about how there are too many other variables that affect shootings and those make it impossible to detect the differences due to caliber. They are exactly right--but the fact is, it doesn't matter WHY it can't be detected. If it can't be detected, then how could it possibly be helping? If it could be shown to be helping, then, by definition, it would be detectable.
Best post. Service pistol cartridges are marginal at best. They will all "kill", but none of them stop threats reliably enough to not constantly be training to make effective hits.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
czgunner is online now  
Old December 12, 2024, 05:01 PM   #87
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,067
Quote:
but none of them stop threats reliably enough to not constantly be training to make effective hits.
Is there anything in history other than nuclear weapons and MAD that reliably stopped threats without effective hits???

__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 02:32 AM   #88
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 25,407
Quote:
What caused Evan Marshall and Ed Sano’s statistics in “STOPPING POWER” to loose credibility.
Their results angered the Facklerites who set about not just discrediting them and their results but also attacking their integrity. When they were done, M&S were done too. The book is still available, but it’s not really taken seriously any longer. The material criticisms did have basis in fact, although I, personally, tend to believe the issues were due to errors and M&S inexperience in dealing with statistical data sets, more than to an active attempt on their part to support an agenda or mislead.
Quote:
These kinds of arguments remind me of the story about the engineers and the bumblebee. The engineers studied everything they could, body mass, wing area muscle contraction rate, number of wingbeats per second, every statistic they could find, calculated things out, and pronounced that, mathematically, the bumblebee could not fly.
That’s not how the original story goes.

According to the original story (which may or may not be based on an actual occurrence) the result was not a careful mathematical modeling, it was literally, a slapdash calculation done on a napkin, with the implication that the engineer in question may have had a few before attempting the feat. Not surprisingly, given the circumstances, the calculation turned out to be wrong. The story has (in modified form—changed to make it seem like the quick and dirty estimate was actually the result of a properly verified scientific study) become the darling of people who want to dismiss scientific results for one reason or another.
Quote:
When we look at stopping people, things frequently get "blended" into general groups… a statistician will tell you, "your sample size isn't big enough". ??
These are all good arguments for WHY the difference can’t be detected in the real world. The important thing isn’t why—the fact that it can’t be detected is really all we need to know.
Quote:
I do agree with the idea that if there was a significant difference you should be able to show it, and if you can't, then there probably isn't one.
Right. If it’s significant then, by definition, it has to be detectable. If it’s not detectable, it certainly doesn’t meet the definition of significant and, more importantly, it can’t be doing anything for you—if it were doing something for you it would be detectable.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 07:05 AM   #89
Pumpkin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2020
Location: Seguin Texas
Posts: 766
I remember reading a write up in a handgun mag back in the day (I think I still have it somewhere) about their work. Honestly, it seemed believable especially when considering paper ballistics of the rounds in question.

Of course, you also had the opinion of the author of the article to weigh in, good, bad or indifferent. As I remember, this was all at the time the 40 was talking hold and it produced some of the better numbers.

I do seem to remember the 357/125 being rated as one of the most effective at producing, one shot stops.

Amazon still has ONE copy of Stopping Power for…… $50.00
Pumpkin is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 08:43 AM   #90
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 25,407
It was very attractive because the M&S results correlated well with kinetic energy and it was very comforting for people to believe that they could get a useful assessment of a round's street performance with just a simple calculation based on easily measured parameters (mass and velocity). Indeed, many ammo manufacturers supply the kinetic energy numbers so the user doesn't even have to do the measurements or calculation. People love simple answers.

In retrospect, it was too good to be true. As everyone keeps saying, there are just too many variables that heavily affect the outcome of shootings in the real world for there to be a simple way to determine which service pistol caliber is best. In fact, those variables affect the outcome so heavily that effect from caliber terminal performance differences are swamped by the other factors and it doesn't even show when people are trying hard to find it.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 11:00 AM   #91
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 4,030
I do apologize for being difficult on this. We, most of us, just disagree. But, in the interest of dragging this out a bit further, let’s bring the 44 Mag and the 454 Casull into this. Do they have more stopping power than a 9mm? To bring the bear back into this, would you rather have a 9mm on your hip or a 454 Casull if the bear showed interest in you as a food group? Admittedly, the 454 wasn’t part of the original conversation, but it is a 45 caliber cartridge, which to some of you isn’t any more effective than a 9mm.
603Country is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 11:39 AM   #92
Koda94
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 1,356
IMO when it comes to bear, or any dangerous game, you need something that penetrates more. Its a way different "target medium" than a human torso to be considered part of the discussion.
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2
Koda94 is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 11:46 AM   #93
wild cat mccane
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 3,775
Federal/Gold Dot public information and Lucky Gunner with standardized media disagree. Youtubers are nothing in the world of standardized testing.

https://le.vistaoutdoor.com/ammuniti...n/default.aspx

You've got almost equal expansion and penetration in the HST 9mm as the 45 +P HST 45...That "almost" qualifier stands against HUGE costs for carrying a 45.
__________________
My wife is a pulmonologist (respiratory Dr) and epidemiologist. If you have any questions on COVID, please reach out to me in PM.
wild cat mccane is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 12:29 PM   #94
Sharkbite
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,787
Quote:
To bring the bear back into this, would you rather have a 9mm on your hip or a 454 Casull if the bear showed interest in you as a food group?
Ahhh so…if the only criteria for choosing a Self-defense caliber is shot for shot “power”, why dont we all carry 44mag, 454Casull, 460 or 500S&w?

Those all have by any standard of measurement more “power” then either 9mm or 45acp.

The reasons are some of the same that weigh against 45acp over 9mm.
More recoil making follow up shots slower
Less capacity on tap in the gun
Bigger guns
More weight
Higher ammo cost = less training = less competency

I’ll say it again…this is not a debate about 1shot effectiveness. Thats silly. The difference is so SMALL it cant be defined. Even though people have been trying for 100+ years to do so.

When looking at the whole picture there IS a clear winner. 9mm checks more defensive use needs then 45acp. Or you can chose to carry a single shot Contender in 45-70…enjoy.
Sharkbite is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 04:04 PM   #95
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,067
Quote:
You've got almost equal expansion and penetration in the HST 9mm as the 45 +P HST 45...That "almost" qualifier stands against HUGE costs for carrying a 45
Just curious, and slightly off topic, what would that HUGE cost be???
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 06:41 PM   #96
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 25,407
Quote:
We, most of us, just disagree. But, in the interest of dragging this out a bit further, let’s bring the 44 Mag and the 454 Casull into this.
You'll notice I keep trying to specify I'm talking about comparing service pistol calibers. People THINK that's a wide variety of performance difference, but in reality, they all fall into a pretty narrow range. That's because they are meant to be carried for hours at a time which limits the weight and size. They need to be "usable" by a wide variety of people which limits recoil. The combination of size/weight and recoil limitations, in turn places limits on bullet weight and velocity.

The result is you have a handful of calibers that are all fall into a pretty narrow performance range.

As far as what to carry for a bear attack, the answer is:
  • Carry what you actually will carry so it's available any time you need it--if it's so heavy and large that you leave it behind sometimes then it's useless.
  • Carry so that it's easily available to you under any reasonable circumstances--if you put it in a backpack because it's too large and heavy to carry in a more conventional manner then you may not be able to get to it when you need it.
  • Carry something you can use easily and effectively so if you have to operate it while holding off a bear with one hand or after being injured you can accomplish that goal.
  • Carry something that will provide enough penetration with the ammunition you are going to use to have a chance of reaching the vitals.
  • Make sure you practice with it and understand its limitations. If you are going to carry an autopistol, think about issues like shooting with the muzzle in contact and how to deal with the predictable results of that kind of interference with the action. Think about how fast you will be able to get off accurate shots since it's unlikely you'll be able to resolve a bear attack with just a single shot from a handgun. Think about needing to access and operate the firearm with either hand.

Don't you think it's telling that you keep having to create unusual or extreme situations and comparisons in order to try to support your point? (What if there was a bear and you had only one shot?, What if you were charged by a drugged up fanatic who was covered in tight wrappings and carrying a sword <Moro> to control blood loss and had only one shot?, What if you were attacked by a Meth head with a machete and had only one shot?, What about comparing one of the most powerful handgun hunting calibers available against a service pistol caliber for bear attack effectiveness?)

I think it's interesting that when pressed to support the assertion that all the service pistol calibers perform the same on the street, people immediately begin trying to come up with examples that go outside of the caliber range under discussion, or creating scenarios that are unlikely and/or extreme. Then again, I guess what else can they do given that there's no real-world evidence for their position?
Quote:
Just curious, and slightly off topic, what would that HUGE cost be???
I don't think it's off topic. I also don't think the costs are huge, but there are always costs and benefits (advantages and disadvantages) to picking one thing over another.

In this case, here are some things (not a complete list) that should be considered when deciding what to carry and what to load it with. Provided in no particular order.
  • Capacity
  • "Shootability" <how fast and accurately a gun can be shot>.
  • Carry friendliness <how easily a gun can be carried and how comfortable will it be for long term carry>
  • Concealability is a factor for many carriers
  • Performance <The ammunition should expand significantly and still penetrate deeply enough to reach the vitals from reasonable angles and in reasonable circumstances.>
  • Reliability
  • Practice costs
  • Accessory availability
  • Personal confidence in the firearm/caliber choice
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 10:38 PM   #97
603Country
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2011
Location: Thornton, Texas
Posts: 4,030
All I ever meant to say was that I thought the 45 ACP had more stopping power than a 9mm, and that if I only had one shot to disable an attacker, I’d go for the larger bullet. I don’t have a 45 caliber handgun, but have a couple of 9mm. Where I live, there are no bears, no Moro’s, and I don’t know about meth heads. I said what I believe. Most of you seem to disagree, and that’s fine. Neither of us can prove their respective cases. We are all left with personal opinions.
603Country is offline  
Old December 13, 2024, 11:33 PM   #98
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 30,067
What I consider to be slightly off topic is that while the OP asked about the performance of certain 9mm and .45ACP AMMO, we are getting all wrapped up in the physical pros and cons of the GUNS, and what is and isn't best in features for carry.

Quote:
Capacity
"Shootability" <how fast and accurately a gun can be shot>.
Carry friendliness <how easily a gun can be carried and how comfortable will it be for long term carry>
Concealability is a factor for many carriers
Performance <The ammunition should expand significantly and still penetrate deeply enough to reach the vitals from reasonable angles and in reasonable circumstances.>
Reliability
Practice costs
Accessory availability
Personal confidence in the firearm/caliber choice
Everything on this list except performance is a function of the firearm or the shooter, and while they are worthwhile topics for discussion about carry guns and self defense guns, they go way beyond comparing ammo performance alone, which was what the OP was about.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old December 14, 2024, 06:33 AM   #99
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 25,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP
Just curious, and slightly off topic, what would that HUGE cost be???
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP
Everything on this list except performance is a function of the firearm or the shooter, and while they are worthwhile topics for discussion about carry guns and self defense guns, they go way beyond comparing ammo performance alone, which was what the OP was about.
So only slightly off topic and ok to ask the question, but "way beyond" the topic and not ok not to answer the question.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 14, 2024, 12:53 PM   #100
Pumpkin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2020
Location: Seguin Texas
Posts: 766
If apparent performance gains of one caliber over another are hard to quantify (and I agree mostly) how do we determine which load for a given caliber is the best?

Are the claimed differences between, slow poke wad cutters, standard FMJ/expanding loads or +P loads with controlled expansion bullets definitive enough to claim superiority of one over another?

Or are ammo companies marketing new, improved projectiles for the sake of stimulating sales by showing superior performance on blocks of gel and paper ballistics?
Pumpkin is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2024 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.08200 seconds with 9 queries