40 cal vs 9mm: Best for Self Defense?

[Garandimal]

Isnt the decade or two of field results the very data used by the FBI to switch to the 9mm?

Nope.

The decade of Progressive policies of the Democrat National Socialist Obammunist regime, including arming and promoting into the field more women and limp-wrist types, and agency budget cuts to offset the increase in Welfare and Illegal Aliens, was used by the FBI to switch to the 9mm.

10% cheaper/15% easier for women/limp-wrists to shoot/20% less energy and effectiveness.

​

"...You be the judge."






GR

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Nope.

The decade of Progressive policies of the Democrat National Socialist Obammunist regime, including arming and promoting into the field more women and limp-wrist types, and agency budget cuts to offset the increase in Welfare and Illegal Aliens, was used by the FBI to switch to the 9mm.

10% cheaper/15% easier for women/limp-wrists to shoot/20% less energy and effectiveness.

​

"...You be the judge."






GR

Keep telling yourself that.

Research into actual shooting events doesn't even show a 20% difference in effectiveness between the .32 ACP and the .357 Magnum. Handguns are handguns. They are all suck pretty much the same.

 

[Huntolive]

"The decade of Progressive policies of the Democrat National Socialist Obammunist regime, including arming and promoting into the field more women and limp-wrist types, and agency budget cuts to offset the increase in Welfare and Illegal Aliens"

Whooo Nelly, I don't even know where to begin to address all the fallacies in that...
Welfare was cut under Democrats, never raised since, and undocumented immigrants contribute a net Gain to our economy and our social security system, not to mention Obama only had 8 years, not 10.

Instead of irrelevant political tirades, let's try to stay on topic.

 

[JR24]

Nope.

The decade of Progressive policies of the Democrat National Socialist Obammunist regime, including arming and promoting into the field more women and limp-wrist types, and agency budget cuts to offset the increase in Welfare and Illegal Aliens, was used by the FBI to switch to the 9mm.

10% cheaper/15% easier for women/limp-wrists to shoot/20% less energy and effectiveness.

​

"...You be the judge."






GR

Uh, ok.

 

[IdaD]

Keep telling yourself that.

Research into actual shooting events doesn't even show a 20% difference in effectiveness between the .32 ACP and the .357 Magnum. Handguns are handguns. They are all suck pretty much the same.

Yep. The advantage of handguns is that they're portable so you can have a firearm on you when you otherwise couldn't carry a long gun when you're out and about. How effective they are is debatable and really depends on how you define effectiveness. They're pretty poor at immediately incapacitating a person barring a CNS hit, but they're all probably pretty good at convincing a threat to stop what he's doing and try to run away. The latter is really more the goal in most citizen involved shootings. A home invasion scenario is probably generally more serious and that's a threat better met with a shotgun or rifle, imo.

 

[SharpDog]

Seriously, when I see threads such as these, I just go back and re-read this:
Terminal Ballistics as viewed in a morgue.htm

^^^ Evidence that 9mm is inferior to a bb

... I've seen folks killed by a bb to the eye and others survive after being hit by several well-placed rounds with a 9mm. ...

Sorry couldn't resist

 

[Trunk Monkey]

Nope.

The decade of Progressive policies of the Democrat National Socialist Obammunist regime, including arming and promoting into the field more women and limp-wrist types, and agency budget cuts to offset the increase in Welfare and Illegal Aliens, was used by the FBI to switch to the 9mm.

10% cheaper/15% easier for women/limp-wrists to shoot/20% less energy and effectiveness.

​

"...You be the judge."






GR

Chuck Norris trembles when Paul Harrell walks by

 

[SharpDog]

Chuck Norris trembles when Paul Harrell walks by

You can always tell when Chuck Norris trembles, it's at least an 8.5 'quake

 

[MTMilitiaman]

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=hSa9SKIx&id=9A0F92C39AC54F1BF06A5C0C562E0166B82C8D84&thid=OIP.hSa9SKIxg7dB0XNmDJpv6QAAAA&mediaurl=http://abesguncave.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/9mm-vs-40-SW-vs-45-ACP-Expansion-300x298.jpg&exph=298&expw=300&q=fbi+announces+it+i+going+back+to+9mm&simid=607995599121942661&selectedIndex=65&ajaxhist=0

A 147 gr 9mm bullet that expands to .62 caliber has a frontal area of .302 sq in. A 180 gr .40 S&W bullet that expands to .68 caliber has a frontal area of .363 sq in. A 230 gr .45 bullet that expands to .74 inch has a frontal area of .43 sq in.

The average human body has a surface area of about 1.8 sq m or about 2790 sq in and an approximate average volume of 66.4 L, or about 4051 cu in.

I find it amusing that some people appear to honestly believe you have to shoot someone five times with a 9mm to get their attention, but going up a mere .061 sq in frontal diameter or 35 gr in bullet weight is going to be so much more effective against a target with an area of over 2700 sq inches.

Compared to the size of your target, the difference in wound volume, mass, and frontal diameter is inconsequential. And that is why real world results really can't distinguish between different calibers and why physicians typically can't tell the caliber of bullet wound they are working on. The fact we debate this stuff for 4 pages is ridiculous.

 

[JR24]

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=hSa9SKIx&id=9A0F92C39AC54F1BF06A5C0C562E0166B82C8D84&thid=OIP.hSa9SKIxg7dB0XNmDJpv6QAAAA&mediaurl=http://abesguncave.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/9mm-vs-40-SW-vs-45-ACP-Expansion-300x298.jpg&exph=298&expw=300&q=fbi+announces+it+i+going+back+to+9mm&simid=607995599121942661&selectedIndex=65&ajaxhist=0

A 147 gr 9mm bullet that expands to .62 caliber has a frontal area of .302 sq in. A 180 gr .40 S&W bullet that expands to .68 caliber has a frontal area of .363 sq in. A 230 gr .45 bullet that expands to .74 inch has a frontal area of .43 sq in.

The average human body has a surface area of about 1.8 sq m or about 2790 sq in and an approximate average volume of 66.4 L, or about 4051 cu in.

I find it amusing that some people appear to honestly believe you have to shoot someone five times with a 9mm to get their attention, but going up a mere .061 sq in frontal diameter or 35 gr in bullet weight is going to be so much more effective against a target with an area of over 2700 sq inches.

Compared to the size of your target, the difference in wound volume, mass, and frontal diameter is inconsequential. And that is why real world results really can't distinguish between different calibers and why physicians typically can't tell the caliber of bullet wound they are working on. The fact we debate this stuff for 4 pages is ridiculous.

Pretty much.

It would make a difference if the rounds in question could not penetrate sufficiently to reach critical areas (assuming good shots), but modern hollowpoints in service calibers all have similar penetration as well.

So, use what you shoot best I always say.

 

[Doc Samson]

The fact we debate this stuff for 4 pages is ridiculous.

I think it's very easy to get caught up in minutiae or stuck on proving a point, particularly if someone has a vested interest in one caliber over another. Despite that, I know that I found many of these types of threads fascinating when I was just getting involved in firearms. I did a lot of reading, checking linked resources, etc. and it was very helpful in helping me recognize that seemingly big differences on paper don't always make that much difference in the real world.

 

[TN Outlaw]

It's fun to discuss paper ballistics and argue the differences even if real world scenerios don't show any real difference.

I have to admit I too enjoy discussing different velocities and frontal area or momentum. All the suddle facts that differ from one round to another. Somebody usually learns something new when we discuss these things, alot times it's me that learns new things. It's fun but..........

I don't believe in a real world shooting that a target the size of a human torso will bare any meaningful or useful "threat stopping" difference in such a way to be distinguishable from a 9x19, 40s&w, or 45acp. I think a good shot will be a good shot and bad a bad. I don't think a 40s&w will turn a bad 9x19 shot into a man stopping shot.

I've heard and read quite a few folks say they carry a 45acp because where a 9x19 may just miss a vital area, the 45acp may actually make contact. That's ok if it makes them feel more confident but there is such a small chance of that teny tiny difference in diameter making THE difference that I place higher priority on other more useful things like shootability, cost, capacity etc.

It's still fun to discuss though.

 

[Zerodefect]

Blah blah blah. Gel, measurements, anecdotal evidence. Same old thing.

If I'm going to carry a 4" pistol, then I choose the most powerful round that works well from that pistol.
1911= .45
Glock Compact = .40
Subcompact =9mm

So for this one, I'm picking a .40. Particularly a Glock 23.4.

......and people, If the real honest answer why you like 9mm, is because it's cheaper to shoot. Then for petes sake, just say so. There's no shame in it. Don't waste time telling us that 9mm is plenty good because of jello and muppets. Who are you trying to convince? Us, or yourselves?

 

[Jeb Stuart]

I do not even read these things on the internet any longer. I would say the best answer is to ask a dead guy. Not that he really cares. Or take two guns, run them side by side and the one you do best with is the correct answer.

 

[SharpDog]

Keep telling yourself that.

Research into actual shooting events doesn't even show a 20% difference in effectiveness between the .32 ACP and the .357 Magnum. Handguns are handguns. They are all suck pretty much the same.

Then why would you ever carry a 10mm auto over a .32 acp ?

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Then why would you ever carry a 10mm auto over a .32 acp ?

The 10mm allows for barrier penetration on things like windshields and auto bodies, and allows me to carry one gun for tweakers and grizzly bears.

 

[JR24]

Blah blah blah. Gel, measurements, anecdotal evidence. Same old thing.

If I'm going to carry a 4" pistol, then I choose the most powerful round that works well from that pistol.
1911= .45
Glock Compact = .40
Subcompact =9mm

So for this one, I'm picking a .40. Particularly a Glock 23.4.

......and people, If the real honest answer why you like 9mm, is because it's cheaper to shoot. Then for petes sake, just say so. There's no shame in it. Don't waste time telling us that 9mm is plenty good because of jello and muppets. Who are you trying to convince? Us, or yourselves?

Well, by your own metric you should using 10mm over .45 and .40.

 

[SharpDog]

The 10mm allows for barrier penetration on things like windshields and auto bodies, and allows me to carry one gun for tweakers and grizzly bears.

Ahhh so it has more power than the .32 acp then. I guess more than 20% more unless those are flimsy barriers or very small bears.

I mean, if a 10 mm is only 20% more effective in humans, then the same applies to bears. Wouldn't you be safer with more .32 acp shots than 10 mm shots ? I would think you could carry a lot more ammo and get off the shots much faster with the lower .32 acp recoil.

 

[readyeddy]

Seriously, when I see threads such as these, I just go back and re-read this:
Terminal Ballistics as viewed in a morgue.htm

I love these threads. Not so much to get an answer to the question, but the information discussed is often fascinating.

 

[Sebastian]

So the question is, where do you draw the line? Of the different pertinent and relevant factors, what are the most important to you? It is a game of balance specific to your intended application of wants and needs right? I suppose I could forgo that weak .380 or 9x19 or .40 for a .44 or .460 or .50ae (etc.) right? People will pooh-pooh one caliber using an argument that could just as easily be applied to their own decision. Forget all the ego and chest thumping and just use what you like. And what might be right for you might not necessarily be right for me. And that's OK.

I like 9x19 for what I perceive as an optimal balance of relevant factors for my own application. Want something else? Cool. Get in where you fit in.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Ahhh so it has more power than the .32 acp then. I guess more than 20% more unless those are flimsy barriers or very small bears.

I mean, if a 10 mm is only 20% more effective in humans, then the same applies to bears. Wouldn't you be safer with more .32 acp shots than 10 mm shots ? I would think you could carry a lot more ammo and get off the shots much faster with the lower .32 acp recoil.

You're over thinking this, dude. Careful, you might hurt yourself.

 

[SharpDog]

You're over thinking this, dude. Careful, you might hurt yourself.

JUst want to know why many folks equivocate 'handguns are all the same, no difference in caliber' and then spend literally Billions of dollars trying to get a more effective caliber. Surely they must realize their money is wasted and all handgun calibers are within 20% of effectiveness?

 

[Walkalong]

Too many more important things to worry about before you get to caliber...........

 

[SharpDog]

 

[mavracer]

Seriously, when I see threads such as these, I just go back and re-read this:
Terminal Ballistics as viewed in a morgue.htm

Problem with that is, again dead isn't the objective and hard to tell when they're on the slab how they acted between the time they were shot and the slab.