Is Big Bullet Technology Dead?

[5whiskey]

JohnKSa that is as good an explanation of how slight differences in split times can make a real difference in a gunfighft as I've seen. As seen here, many dismiss those differences as unimportant. I don't

Ah, they can make a difference... Possibly. I think the .2 split time is realistic. I can personally do a little better most days, but I know I'm better than the average shooter and probably do at least par for TFL standards. I do not pull .12 split times. I do only count speed as an acco pice fo accuracy. If i cant hit a 8" target at 10 yards 9 of 10 times, consistently, that speed doesnt count. But let's take 14 accurate hits (using his later example of .2 second splits with 9mm vs .24 with .45) of 9mm vs 11 of .45 (assuming capacity isn't an issue). Let's use that for statistical significance. You are shot 14 times with 9mm. Is that any worse or better than with 11 .45acp and its larger wound channel? There's no "scientific proof" way to answer that, BTW. And, fwiw, I'm not as much of a defender of the "almighty" .45, but I also don't worship at the 9mm alter. Both serve you well, and I think .45 DOES have more wounding potential than 9mm. Can I prove it with science? No. No more than you can prove 14 rounds of 9mm is more deadly than 11 rounds of .45.

So the point is caliber wars are pretty stupid. The "soft recoiling" of 9mm is overrated. Im aware 9mm will be faster, but is it significantly faster? Even 9mm worshipers admit there is at least a fair chance that the .45 wound channel will be larger, and that it hits with more momentum, but scientifically we can't prove that its a significant difference. I personally believe there are applications for the larger caliber. I like .45 more in the winter. Why? Well, heavy winter clothing often disrupts the expansion (at least somewhat) of even modern projectiles and I believe starting diameter counts in this case. Coincidentally, its also easier to conceal larger firearms chambered in .45 in heavy winter clothing.

Further I believe the momentum of 230 grains vs 124 grains (with similar k/e) is significant. For an extreme demonstration compare .243 winchester vs 45-70. 243 has MORE k/e, but no one argues that it has more wounding ability than 45-70. The same people who argue that there is no significant difference between 9mm and 45 will tell you .243 is not suitable to elk hunt, but 45-70 will put them down as quick as anything. Let's take .30-06 and 45-70. Most folks will argue that 45-70 has more wounding capacity as a hunting round, despite 30-06's significantly greater k/e. But supposedly momentum matters for hunting cartridgex, but doesn't matter in pistol calibers. It does. Maybe not on the same scale, but it does.

So is .04 seconds less time between shots more important than more momentum and a larger starting diameter? I don't think so. Is capacity and size of platform important? YES! This is the best argument for 9mm, and is personally why I carry a 9mm most of them time. Especially in summer. Where I civilian CCw, I wouldn't care about 10 rounds capacity vs 7, or 15 vs 10. I'm LEO, and capacity is very important to me as Im expected to not just survive, but confront and overcome. I don't have a dog in this fight. In fact, I often wind up defending the caliber I choose NOT to carry most of the time because of capacity when carrying plain clothes and concealing. When carrying service size, I am strangely comfortable with 45 despite the lower capacity and .04 second slower split times.

[5whiskey]

I do not measure my split times. I consider it a waste of time

So using an actual empirical measurement is not useful, but I am to trust your word that 9mm is faster on follow ups based on your careful observations? I've been on a good number of firing lines myself as both student and instructor. Some individuals will be better served by 9mm as .45 recoil is not easy for them to control and they won't take the time or effort to become proficient. For others, proficient shooting comes much more naturally or they are enthused enough to devote the time to become quite proficient. A proficient shooter will notice a strikingly small difference in time between follow up shots between 9mm and 45, should they feel it isnt a waste of time to measure it.

[Hal]

A proficient shooter will notice a strikingly small difference in time between follow up shots between 9mm and 45, should they feel it isnt a waste of time to measure it.

Ok - so - despite not wanting to know, I gather a "split time" refers to the time between one shot and a follow up shot.
I couldn't care less & to be 100% frank, I believe it goes against everything I believe in about defensive shooting.

Call me "ancient school", but, stuff like that didn't even exist back when I learned to shoot. (thank God)!

I learned to make every shot count and to conserve ammunition.
You learn that when all you have is 6 rounds - plus (if you're lucky) another 12 rounds in a dump pack & help is a fair piece away.

For example; My work/shooting partner is a IDPA 5 gun master. His first focus when looking at most guns is competition, my first focus is carry/SD role.

You know my friend, you didn't even need to mention that. I can tell by past discussions we've had here that you and I see eye to eye on a number of things. While my first goal was not carry oriented (Ohio had no legal carry), a lot of revolver basics went into my background.

[CDW4ME]

Originally Posted by Hal

Ok - so - despite not wanting to know, I gather a "split time" refers to the time between one shot and a follow up shot.
I couldn't care less & to be 100% frank, I believe it goes against everything I believe in about defensive shooting.

Call me "ancient school", but, stuff like that didn't even exist back when I learned to shoot. (thank God)!

I learned to make every shot count and to conserve ammunition.
You learn that when all you have is 6 rounds - plus (if you're lucky) another 12 rounds in a dump pack & help is a fair piece away.

This video is worth the 3 minutes.
Substitute a citizen for the officer, ex: citizen being attacked by determined sociopath with impact weapon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d94FG6Thv0A

Split time a factor and conservation of ammo not prioritized.

[101combatvet]

The old debate continues and it all depends on the shooter and shot placement.

[OldMarksman]

So using an actual empirical measurement is not useful, ....

It would not be useful for me. I know that I can shoot controlled shots more rapidly with a gun with less recoil.

I do not know how much more rapidly, but measuring split times would only tell me that for the specific conditions in the experiment.

In the real world, one's rate of fire will vary, depending upon the distance to the attacker as he closes, and as one tries to balance speed and precision to achieve combat accuracy.

The split times measured somewhere with a timer at a given distance when one fires at the signal will have only academic value when it comes to self defense.

...but I am to trust your word that 9mm is faster on follow ups based on your careful observations?

You have much more than my word to go on.

I simply described how my observations taught me something.

Some individuals will be better served by 9mm as .45 recoil is not easy for them to control and they won't take the time or effort to become proficient. For others, proficient shooting comes much more naturally or they are enthused enough to devote the time to become quite proficient.

Rob Pincus addressed that very well: "Physics dictates that the 9mm is going to be a more manageable round (lower recoil) than the .40 S&W out of any particular firearm. So, no matter how much you train and how much you practice, everyone should be able to shoot a string of Combat Accurate 9mm rounds faster than they can fire a string of .40." (Emphasis added).

A proficient shooter will notice a strikingly small difference in time between follow up shots between 9mm and 45, should they feel it isnt a waste of time to measure it.

Or should they measure it--it doesn't matter.

John has shown us with a few simple calculations how the "strikingly small" difference can make a difference.

Rob addressed that, too: " Of course, if you consider a 4×8 sheet of plywood your “combat accurate” area, you’re going to have to go to a relatively long string of fire to be able to measure a difference in time, but if you stick with a probable target size (high center chest) at a plausible distance (10-15’), it shouldn’t be hard to see a difference at a reasonable number of rounds (3-6)."

[Hal]

Substitute a citizen for the officer, ex: citizen being attacked by determined sociopath with impact weapon:

You're kidding right?
I see a guy advance on another guy with a stick, then proceed to end up shooting stick guy.
I'm pretty sure that would net you - - at the very least - - manslaughter charges or aggravated assault charges here in Ohio.

A citizen can't go hunting down trouble like that & then call self defense.

Not cool...

[CDW4ME]

Originally Posted by Hal

You're kidding right?
I see a guy advance on another guy with a stick, then proceed to end up shooting stick guy.
I'm pretty sure that would net you - - at the very least - - manslaughter charges or aggravated assault charges here in Ohio.

A citizen can't go hunting down trouble like that & then call self defense.

Not cool...

Big picture, generalize the main idea:
Sociopath attacking with impact weapon, continues toward defender despite taking rounds.

[OldMarksman]

I see a guy advance on another guy with a stick, then proceed to end up shooting stick guy.

Surely you do not think that that is the relevant message here.

[K_Mac]

Ok - so - despite not wanting to know, I gather a "split time" refers to the time between one shot and a follow up shot.
I couldn't care less & to be 100% frank, I believe it goes against everything I believe in about defensive shooting.

Call me "ancient school", but, stuff like that didn't even exist back when I learned to shoot. (thank God)!

I learned to make every shot count and to conserve ammunition.
You learn that when all you have is 6 rounds - plus (if you're lucky) another 12 rounds in a dump pack & help is a fair piece away.

.

Hal unless "ancient school" means sometime in the 18th century, the idea of being able to shoot fast accurately is nothing new. I imagine even gunfighters and law enforcement in the old West discussed split times, although they may not have used that term! You don't like the video showing how quickly things happen in a life threatening attack, but how many rounds would you have fired before stopping to see if the maniac with the bat was going to stop? How long would that have taken?

[SA1911]

K Mac,

Shooting fast and accurately might translate in to permanent sleep. It ain't your speed and accuracy that will determine your survival. It's a bad guy's proficiency with his weapon that that oughta give you pause for life. Too many bad guys are authentic trained killers who have committed murder and who have received military trained killer training.

A good guy's speed accuracy ain't anywhere near as detrimental to life as a bad guy's. If you believe that, and it's gospel, then you gotta believe that the longer you remain in a bad guy's sight picture the more sure your mortician will be that he'll prepare your corpse for wake. God forbid, were you in a gunfight and you took time to align your sights for an accurate shot, you'd be a fool. Get the hell outta a bad guy's sight picture unless death becomes you.

[SA1911]

Here is what I do know:

The only way to survive a gunfight is to not get in one.

If avoidance is not an option, do not get shot!

The 9MM is my minimum for saving my life. However, I do not own a 9MM.

I ain't sure which way I'd go were I in the most life endangering predicament of an imminent gunfight that I could not avoid: a Sig P229 with 13 180 grain Federal HST Tactical rounds with another dozen ready to go inside a couple seconds or a 1911-A1 loaded to the hilt with 9 230 grain Federal HST Tactical rounds with another 8 ready to go inside a couple seconds.

I do know that I'd probably be better off bringing a knife to a gunfight than a revolver.

Good thing this is learning. The real world of gun fighting is a very deadly classroom, one that's best left unopened.

[OldMarksman]

I do know that I'd probably be better off bringing a knife to a gunfight than a revolver.

An attempt at humor?

[K_Mac]

SA 1911 you continue to pound the avoidance drum. If avoidance was always possible there would be no need to carry a weapon of any kind. We are discussing what happens when running or hiding isn't an option.

Most of us also understand that the advantage almost always goes to the attacker. Situational awareness can minimize that, but not always. It is also true that there are many dangerous people who are just looking for the opportunity to hurt others. With this knowledge what do you recommend to the person who is looking to give him/herself the best chance of surviving in a dangerous world?

I have been taught that being able to quickly and accurately put rounds on target in a violent attack gives me the best chance of survival. Being able to do so while moving improves my chances. Most of us who carry a gun understand that if we are in a situation where it is needed we are in real trouble. We don't get to decide where and when trouble will find us. All we can do is prepare as if it will, praying that it won't.

For the record, a revolver in .22lr would be far better than the biggest knife if the stuff hits the fan!

[SA1911]

OldMarksman,

Now that was not cool. You know that it was good humor ;-)

[SA1911]

K_Mac,

There are two prongs to avoidance: avoiding gang infested areas (high crime areas) and knowing when to leave a venue (situational awareness). If I were five star dining and a tatted up banger walked in, I'd pay my bill and leave.

You're 100% right about putting as many rounds as possible on a threat who wants you dead, and getting the heck outta a threat's sight picture.

I cannot emphasize avoidance enough. But if it ain't an option, you cannot get shot, which is why tactics are crucial.

[Hal]

Surely you do not think that that is the relevant message here.

Actually - - yes - - that's exactly what I get from that video.
There is absolutely nothing in that video that pertains to anyone other than LE(which I'm not) or criminal (which I really try to avoid being).

Stick guy is going nuts beating on the doors of a Federal building.
Even the old gray fat (armed ) feds know better than to confront him.

Along comes a lone cop and tries to apprehend stick guy all by himself.

It ends badly for the guy with the bat or club or whatever it is.

#1 - my main job, when I see a guy acting strange and wielding a club is to go the other direction.
#2 - no way, no how am I going to even begin to try to backpedal away from the guy. If anything, my best chance is to step into him and (literally) stick a gun in his ear.(It sucks being disabled and dragging an oxygen tank around, but, it is what it is)

Big picture, generalize the main idea:
Sociopath attacking with impact weapon, continues toward defender despite taking rounds.

Does not apply to this video since it's nothing that an armed citizen should do. - There is no mention at all of what gun was used so it's not even about "big bullets vs small bullets" (the actual topic of the thread) - there's no followup that says when the guy with the bat ceased being a viable threat to life and limb. The guy could very well have been dead on his feet after the first shot.

I'm sorry - all that video shows is a cop backing up and shooting a threat multiple times. In the context of this thread & the audience base of the forum - it's meaningless.

[OldMarksman]

There is absolutely nothing in that video that pertains to anyone other than LE(which I'm not) or criminal (which I really try to avoid being).

I really have to question your abilities for analysis and comprehension.

Stick guy is going nuts beating on the doors of a Federal building. ... Along comes a lone cop and tries to apprehend stick guy all by himself.

Yes, that happened. but it is not at all the part that is relevant to the thread.

It ends badly for the guy with the bat or club or whatever it is.

Yes, just barely, and after the guy attacked the police officer with a contact weapon.

...an officer who, at that point, was defending himself, and it is for that reason alone that he was justified in the use of deadly force.

Does not apply to this video since it's nothing that an armed citizen should do.

The part in which the police officer pursues the criminal does not apply--the citizen is not sworn to enforce the law.

But once any perp attacks anyone with a weapon , it becomes purely a matter of self defense. An armed citizen would most certainly be justified in the use of deadly force at that point.

The fact that the perp was attacking a police officer who had tried to prevent him from committing a crime has by this time become completely irrelevant. The reason for the violent attack no longer matters at all.

There is no mention at all of what gun was used so it's not even about "big bullets vs small bullets" (the actual topic of the thread)....

It is , however, about the defender having the ability to fire controlled shots very rapidly. That pertains to recoil, which does relate to the topic of the thread.

...there's no followup that says when the guy with the bat ceased being a viable threat to life and limb.

That is always the case; it might be investigated in forensic analysis, or not. It doesn't matter. The video shows very clearly that the officer had an objective reason to believe, based on what he could know at the time, that his actions were necessary, lawful, and proper.

I'm sorry - all that video shows is a cop backing up and shooting a threat multiple times.

As CDW4ME posted, "substitute a citizen for the officer, ex: citizen being attacked by determined sociopath with impact weapon".

If you have not yet wondered how your "I learned to make every shot count and to conserve ammunition" concept would have worked under a similar attack", you need to think about it.

It's not clear whether you are seriously confused or are being deliberately obtuse.

BUT: I would strongly recommended that you avail yourself of some good defensive pistol training and a good course in use of force law.

[Hal]

But once any perp attacks anyone with a weapon , it becomes purely a matter of self defense. An armed citizen would most certainly be justified in the use of deadly force at that point.

Ha! In your dreams!
You advance on that guy and then you shoot him & I can almost guarantee you that your life from that point on is going to be in lived in the confines of a cell.

And rightly so.

You - at that point - have become the aggressor and you - at that point - are 100% in the wrong.

The man with the club - at the point you advance on him with a deadly weapon - has every right to defend himself.

BUT: I would strongly recommended that you avail yourself of some good defensive pistol training and a good course in use of force law.

Well - I would advise you to do the same before handing out potentially criminal advice to people.

Yep --

Right here:

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/F...ws-Manual-(PDF)

Page 17 of the manual. It's clear that if a non-LEO acted like the LEO in the video, they are - - going to get charged with a crime.

But hey, they always have the defense that - a a moderator on a gun forum said it was ok right?

[OldMarksman]

You advance on that guy and then you shoot him & I can almost guarantee you that your life from that point on is going to be in lived in the confines of a cell.

Close, but no cigar.

One who has instigated a confrontation, or who has engaged in mutual combat, will not be able to justify the use of deadly force--unless he has clearly indicated the intent to withdraw. At that point things change. But that's off topic.

The man with the club - at the point you advance on him with a deadly weapon - has every right to defend himself.

That may be, but his having been engaged in burglary could color that significantly.

But he cannot lawfully to come after you with the club as you retreat. Chasing someone with a weapon does not constitute lawful self defense.

And by the way, a police officer backing away has no more right to employ deadly force than would you or I, once someone starts coming at him with a weapon.

But you continue to miss the point completely.

And that point is that if someone rushes someone with a contact weapon, it may be --it will likely be--necessary to fire a number of controlled shots very rapidly to stop him.

One does not choose to try to "conserve ammunition" under such circumstances.

Illustrating that was CDW4ME's entire purpose in providing the link to the video.

Your link is dead.

[K_Mac]

Hal the video shows that a bad guy with a contact weapon can close on a target in a hurry. That it was a police officer is not relevant.

Had the officer not arrived when he did the next target could have been another citizen. Do you really think it would have taken advancing on, or threatening this guy to cause him to attack? Do you really think minding your own business makes you safe from a random act of violence?The question is what would you do if this guy is running at you preparing to beat you with a bat? Unless you are a superhero sticking your gun in his ear is probably not going to work, so what is your plan to keep this guy from possibly beating you to death? What if you are with a loved one who is unable to protect him/herself? Do you use your gun? How many rounds will you fire? How long will that take?

[OldMarksman]

Hal the video shows that a bad guy with a contact weapon can close on a target in a hurry. That it was a police officer is not relevant.....?The question is what would you do if this guy is running at you preparing to beat you with a bat?

Right.

[Nanuk]

I learned to make every shot count and to conserve ammunition.
You learn that when all you have is 6 rounds - plus (if you're lucky) another 12 rounds in a dump pack & help is a fair piece away.

You miss-understand. When I am doing .24 splits I am putting a 2" group @ 10 yards. It is not hosing away without care for accuracy.

[Double Naught Spy]

That is always impressive for shooting stationary, non-threating targets in ideal circumstances.

[mavracer]

It would not be useful for me. I know that I can shoot controlled shots more rapidly with a gun with less recoil.

And yet you demand empirical evidence that bigger bullets work better at stopping threats, lol