Giant
Member
So! Where can one find the gigantic steers mentioned by our 9mm lover? Please! Steak sauce and grill at the ready...
Giant
Giant
45Acp fails and 9mm saves the day in shoot out in Ohio
- Thread starter BHP9
- Start date
- Status
Double Maduro
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,125
Giant,
I'll be right over.
I'll be right over.
meathammer
Member
ROFL, I almost gave my monitor and keyboard a coffee shower. Dave, you should use that quote as your sig line!
cratz2
Member
If he doesn't take it, I'm gonna!
BevrFevr
Member
9mm and .45 are sissy calibers!
They are what you use when you don't have a real gun with you.
-bevr
They are what you use when you don't have a real gun with you.
-bevr
Mike Irwin
Member
Krept,
Not exactly sure what you're asking...
Not exactly sure what you're asking...
[QUOgreater distress and by the sixth or seventh shot showed great distress, shock or exhaustion and usually dropped before the eighth shot. [/QUOTE]
AS we can see there was indeed very little difference if any because the 9mm used up to 6 or 7 shots while the bigger .45 calibers took 4 or 5 shots (none of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45acp.
The people who conducted the tests had a agenda from the begiinning I.E. that the bigger is better and that is proven beyond any doubt whatsoever because they did not shoot to kill I.E. shoot for vital organs.
Years later much more valid tests were conducted on animals far closer to humans in size and survivabiltiy i.e. barnyard pigs. "Pistolero Magazine" went to Mexico to circumvent any animal cruelty laws and shot barn yard pigs in vital areas to kill them not wound them as in the Tompson tests.
So what were the results. The pigs died just as fast when shot with the 9mm as opposed to being shot with the .45.
AS a matter of fact "Pistolero Magazine" observed that the pigs squealed louder and jumped higher when hit by the 9MM as compared to being hit with the slower moving .45.
Precisely my point from the very beginning of all of this. This is where the .45 fails again and again and with not enough penetration you cannot reach vital organs to destroy them. This once again is were the 9mm excells and this is why in Ohio an eye witness (the police officer I spoke with) emphasized the lack of penetration of the .45acp that would have enabled the man with the knife, if he had not been shot with the 9mm to walk away with nothing more than a couple of bad bruises and minor bleeding.
In conclusion I am not going to throw any of my .45 1911's away but I do realize the limitations of this caliber i.e. that if you use soft point bullets (expanding bullets) that your lethality may go way down, not up and that you are better off with this low velocity caliber to use FMJ ammo and even those rounds may just barely make it through the human body as the range increases.
AS we can see there was indeed very little difference if any because the 9mm used up to 6 or 7 shots while the bigger .45 calibers took 4 or 5 shots (none of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45acp.
The people who conducted the tests had a agenda from the begiinning I.E. that the bigger is better and that is proven beyond any doubt whatsoever because they did not shoot to kill I.E. shoot for vital organs.
Years later much more valid tests were conducted on animals far closer to humans in size and survivabiltiy i.e. barnyard pigs. "Pistolero Magazine" went to Mexico to circumvent any animal cruelty laws and shot barn yard pigs in vital areas to kill them not wound them as in the Tompson tests.
So what were the results. The pigs died just as fast when shot with the 9mm as opposed to being shot with the .45.
AS a matter of fact "Pistolero Magazine" observed that the pigs squealed louder and jumped higher when hit by the 9MM as compared to being hit with the slower moving .45.
Precisely my point from the very beginning of all of this. This is where the .45 fails again and again and with not enough penetration you cannot reach vital organs to destroy them. This once again is were the 9mm excells and this is why in Ohio an eye witness (the police officer I spoke with) emphasized the lack of penetration of the .45acp that would have enabled the man with the knife, if he had not been shot with the 9mm to walk away with nothing more than a couple of bad bruises and minor bleeding.
In conclusion I am not going to throw any of my .45 1911's away but I do realize the limitations of this caliber i.e. that if you use soft point bullets (expanding bullets) that your lethality may go way down, not up and that you are better off with this low velocity caliber to use FMJ ammo and even those rounds may just barely make it through the human body as the range increases.
Tamara
Senior Member
I just don't know where to start with this...
(Would anyone here who actually handgun hunts for hogs or whatever actually use 9mm Parabellum in preference over .45 Colt/ACP/Super/Whathaveyou?)
Frohickey
Member
If LEO#1 with the 45ACP fired 2 center-mass and failed to stop the knife-guy, then LEO#1 should be fired. LEO#1 should have done a CNS shot following the COM double-tap.
If LEO#2 with the 38Spc fired 2 center-mass and failed to stop the knife-guy, then LEO#2 should be fired. LEO#2 should have done a CNS shot following the COM double-tap.
If LEO #3 with the 9mm fired 2 center-mass and succeeded in stopping the knife-guy, LEO#1 and LEO#2 should be buying LEO#3 donuts and coffee for life!
If LEO#2 with the 38Spc fired 2 center-mass and failed to stop the knife-guy, then LEO#2 should be fired. LEO#2 should have done a CNS shot following the COM double-tap.
If LEO #3 with the 9mm fired 2 center-mass and succeeded in stopping the knife-guy, LEO#1 and LEO#2 should be buying LEO#3 donuts and coffee for life!
Here again we were talking about the .45acp and the 9mm not other calibers like the .38 super that is a lot faster in velocity.
Why don't more people use it? Because of two reasons. 1. In many states only certain handgun calibers are legal to use and 2. Its the same old story ,most have been led to believe bigger is better so if only two hangun caliber choices were allowed the .45 or 9mm most because of the .45 Myth would naturally choose the .45 over the 9mm.
I can't help but remember reading only recently a book that was written with quotes from all of the old time hunters that resisted switching over from huge diameter black powder cartridges and even switching over from larger more modern but slower centerfire cartridges (450/400) when calibers like the then new 7x57 and 6.5 manlicher cartridges came out. Their higher velocity and smaller diameter were poo-pooed by the big bore boy's but men like William Bell killed over 1,000 elephants with the 7x57 and 6.5 mm mannlicher cartridges.
Even in more modern times big bore boys like Elmer Keith claimed small bullets like the .270 bounced off of wild game but men like Jack O'Conner,( who really knew what they were talking about )killed even Grizzly bears and Elk with the much smaller .270.
Mathmatical reality in regards to the Alice in Wonder Land World of Chuck Taylor
Has anyone done any simple math whe reading such wild stories of getting 170,000 rounds with no parts replacement out of any pistol including the supposed Glock good old Chuck supposedly used.
Simple math witll tell you it would cost even at wholesale prices a whopping $20,400. dollars to shoot up this much ammo. Now lets face it even gun writers don't make this much money and few people realize how small firearms companies really are as compared to the big boys like automobiles and tobbaco. So if you think good old Chuck really did conduct a test, it may have been done, but it was probably done with way , way less rounds than he claimed. Economics prove it beyone a shadow of a doubt.
By the way I have personally seen recoil springs fail in as litte as 2,000 rounds when using ordinary non- plus p ammo i.e. standard velocity factory ammo. In conducting a test of this magnitude even if the spring made it through 10,000 rounds of torture it would have had to bee replaced at least 17 times before the end of the test.
Has anyone done any simple math whe reading such wild stories of getting 170,000 rounds with no parts replacement out of any pistol including the supposed Glock good old Chuck supposedly used.
Simple math witll tell you it would cost even at wholesale prices a whopping $20,400. dollars to shoot up this much ammo. Now lets face it even gun writers don't make this much money and few people realize how small firearms companies really are as compared to the big boys like automobiles and tobbaco. So if you think good old Chuck really did conduct a test, it may have been done, but it was probably done with way , way less rounds than he claimed. Economics prove it beyone a shadow of a doubt.
By the way I have personally seen recoil springs fail in as litte as 2,000 rounds when using ordinary non- plus p ammo i.e. standard velocity factory ammo. In conducting a test of this magnitude even if the spring made it through 10,000 rounds of torture it would have had to bee replaced at least 17 times before the end of the test.
Mike Irwin
Member
It's amazing how quickly someone can change focus when pushed up against incorrect statements...
THIS is your original assertion regarding the Thompson-LaGarde tests...
"Did you know that in the infamous Thompson tests of early in the last century that most experts chose to totally ignore the fact that the .30 Luger did about as well as the .45 acp..."
As I've already shown you, you've completely mischaracterized the tests by asserting that the .30 Luger did about as well as the .45 ACP (which wasn't even there).
So, now, that that errant claim is out in the open, you jump on to something else...
"AS we can see there was indeed very little difference if any because the 9mm used up to 6 or 7 shots while the bigger .45 calibers took 4 or 5 shots (none of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45acp."
No, T&LG didn't find as much difference between the 9mm and the .45s. But that's NOT what you originally claimed now, is it?
Then we have...
"None of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45 ACP.."
You REALLY need to sit down with a good book on ballistics and take a look at the relative performance levels of the rounds tested BEFORE you categorize the .45 ACP as "much weaker."
Finally, you also need to understand something about the .45 Auto round that WAS tested -- it fired a 200-gr. bullet at 900 fps, which gives it almost exactly the same striking energy as the later-adopted .45 ACP military hardball round.
That same bullet weight loading -- 200 grs. at 900 fps -- is also still popular today as a defensive round.
"The people who conducted the tests had a agenda from the begiinning I.E. that the bigger is better and that is proven beyond any doubt whatsoever because they did not shoot to kill I.E. shoot for vital organs."
I'm not certain where you come up with some of these assertions, but there's absolutely NOTHING of record to support that claim about Thompson or LaGarde.
Both men WERE, however, familiar with the field results of the .38 Long Colt in the Philippines, and the results of the .45 Long Colt, which was brought back into service and issued to troops after the failings of the .38 cartridge were noted.
Had T&LG been, simply, "bigger is better" men they wouldn't have gone through the pains of testing the smaller rounds in the first place, but would have simply given over to the assertion that smaller is less capable.
Yet, that's not how they conducted the tests.
The fact that Thompson & LaGarde did NOT shoot the steers in the heart, etc., shows an inherent understanding of the nature of the handgun in military service -- that the majority of the hits that DO hit the adversary in or around the center of mass do NOT strike the heart.
The implication there is that Thompson & LaGarde understood that a strike in the heart would likely provide much faster and surer incapacitation, but that hitting a target roughly the size of a man's fist, in combat conditions, is more LUCK than skill.
In that light, Thompson & LaGarde's tests, including those with human cadavers, tested conditions that would be REALISTICALLY faced by troops armed with handguns -- bullets striking the lungs, stomach, and intestinal regions of the body.
What also isn't noted anywhere in this discussion is that the heart is an amazing organ with, because of it's muscle structure, a large degree of "self-sealing" capability.
Being struck in the heart with a non-expanding bullet, especially a small caliber bullet, is NOT an instant laser-beam of death. Many people have survived substantial lengths of time, sometimes hours, with bullet wounds directly to the heart.
"AS a matter of fact "Pistolero Magazine" observed that the pigs squealed louder and jumped higher when hit by the 9MM as compared to being hit with the slower moving .45.... Precisely my point from the very beginning of all of this."
Now you're contradicting yourself again.
You're saying that velocity has little do with the equasion, seemingly saying that you agree with the Thompson LaGarde tests, then you infer that velocity was the cause of the pigs "jumping higher and squealing louder" when hit with the 9mm, as opposed to the "slower moving .45 ACP."
Quite frankly, you're all over the map here, but as with other posters here, I'm quite skeptical about the "reported" results, but that's of no consequence, being more concerned with your original statement regarding the supposed efficacy of the .30 Luger and your complete mischaracterization of the Thompson LaGarde tests.
But, even so, I'd be very interested in reading Pistolero's testing. Please provide the year and month of the issue.
THIS is your original assertion regarding the Thompson-LaGarde tests...
"Did you know that in the infamous Thompson tests of early in the last century that most experts chose to totally ignore the fact that the .30 Luger did about as well as the .45 acp..."
As I've already shown you, you've completely mischaracterized the tests by asserting that the .30 Luger did about as well as the .45 ACP (which wasn't even there).
So, now, that that errant claim is out in the open, you jump on to something else...
"AS we can see there was indeed very little difference if any because the 9mm used up to 6 or 7 shots while the bigger .45 calibers took 4 or 5 shots (none of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45acp."
No, T&LG didn't find as much difference between the 9mm and the .45s. But that's NOT what you originally claimed now, is it?
Then we have...
"None of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45 ACP.."
You REALLY need to sit down with a good book on ballistics and take a look at the relative performance levels of the rounds tested BEFORE you categorize the .45 ACP as "much weaker."
Finally, you also need to understand something about the .45 Auto round that WAS tested -- it fired a 200-gr. bullet at 900 fps, which gives it almost exactly the same striking energy as the later-adopted .45 ACP military hardball round.
That same bullet weight loading -- 200 grs. at 900 fps -- is also still popular today as a defensive round.
"The people who conducted the tests had a agenda from the begiinning I.E. that the bigger is better and that is proven beyond any doubt whatsoever because they did not shoot to kill I.E. shoot for vital organs."
I'm not certain where you come up with some of these assertions, but there's absolutely NOTHING of record to support that claim about Thompson or LaGarde.
Both men WERE, however, familiar with the field results of the .38 Long Colt in the Philippines, and the results of the .45 Long Colt, which was brought back into service and issued to troops after the failings of the .38 cartridge were noted.
Had T&LG been, simply, "bigger is better" men they wouldn't have gone through the pains of testing the smaller rounds in the first place, but would have simply given over to the assertion that smaller is less capable.
Yet, that's not how they conducted the tests.
The fact that Thompson & LaGarde did NOT shoot the steers in the heart, etc., shows an inherent understanding of the nature of the handgun in military service -- that the majority of the hits that DO hit the adversary in or around the center of mass do NOT strike the heart.
The implication there is that Thompson & LaGarde understood that a strike in the heart would likely provide much faster and surer incapacitation, but that hitting a target roughly the size of a man's fist, in combat conditions, is more LUCK than skill.
In that light, Thompson & LaGarde's tests, including those with human cadavers, tested conditions that would be REALISTICALLY faced by troops armed with handguns -- bullets striking the lungs, stomach, and intestinal regions of the body.
What also isn't noted anywhere in this discussion is that the heart is an amazing organ with, because of it's muscle structure, a large degree of "self-sealing" capability.
Being struck in the heart with a non-expanding bullet, especially a small caliber bullet, is NOT an instant laser-beam of death. Many people have survived substantial lengths of time, sometimes hours, with bullet wounds directly to the heart.
"AS a matter of fact "Pistolero Magazine" observed that the pigs squealed louder and jumped higher when hit by the 9MM as compared to being hit with the slower moving .45.... Precisely my point from the very beginning of all of this."
Now you're contradicting yourself again.
You're saying that velocity has little do with the equasion, seemingly saying that you agree with the Thompson LaGarde tests, then you infer that velocity was the cause of the pigs "jumping higher and squealing louder" when hit with the 9mm, as opposed to the "slower moving .45 ACP."
Quite frankly, you're all over the map here, but as with other posters here, I'm quite skeptical about the "reported" results, but that's of no consequence, being more concerned with your original statement regarding the supposed efficacy of the .30 Luger and your complete mischaracterization of the Thompson LaGarde tests.
But, even so, I'd be very interested in reading Pistolero's testing. Please provide the year and month of the issue.
Mike Irwin
Member
Glock pistols with over 200,000 rounds with no parts replacements?
Quite a few of them out there, including a Glock 17 used in the rental case at Blue Ridge Arsenal in Chantilly, Virginia, in the middle1990s.
Its use was tracked, along with the number of rounds purchased to be shot through it.
Before it was stolen and ended up in DC Police Evidence, it fired over 250,000 rounds with NO parts replacements at all.
NONE.
As for why Bell chose the 6.5 MS and other cartridges like it for hunting elephant, I don't know if I should say, or if I should let you guess...
Quite a few of them out there, including a Glock 17 used in the rental case at Blue Ridge Arsenal in Chantilly, Virginia, in the middle1990s.
Its use was tracked, along with the number of rounds purchased to be shot through it.
Before it was stolen and ended up in DC Police Evidence, it fired over 250,000 rounds with NO parts replacements at all.
NONE.
As for why Bell chose the 6.5 MS and other cartridges like it for hunting elephant, I don't know if I should say, or if I should let you guess...
Wrong Mike I was quoting a gun writer that looked at the entire test not just a quickie selective biased short review of it.
I'm not certain where you come up with some of these assertions, but there's absolutely NOTHING of record to support that claim about Thompson or LaGarde.
If you cannot see this simple fact I just cannot explain it in any simplier terms. I am not trying to flame you , I am really amazed that you cannot see this.
Once again people see only what they wish to see. They also conveniently ignored the fact that the full power 30 caliber military rifles also failed to stop these warriors. Now how do we explain this. Should we have went back to the 45/70 and dropped the .30 caliber military rifle. According to the big bore boys philosophy this is exactly what we should have done.
Nope not at all. Once again and once again. Velocity coupled with smaller diameter are proven to penetrate deeper as proven by both P.O. Ackely in shooting ferral Mules and by shooting through armor plate with nothing more than a high velocity .22 centerfire (220 swifte)when the slower and bigger and even steel penetrator .30 caliber bullets failed to do the job).and therefore penetration to the vital areas will kill and is necessary to kill because without penetration no matter how big a bullet you use if you do not reach the vital organ it does you no good. Precicely why the .45 failed in Ohio.
By the way I will let you know what issue of Pistolero the pig story was in because it was so facinating and proved once and for all the Myth of the .45 was just that, only a myth.
Double Maduro
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,125
BHP9,
You said,
"AS we can see there was indeed very little difference if any because the 9mm used up to 6 or 7 shots while the bigger .45 calibers took 4 or 5 shots (none of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45acp."
Assuming your figures are correct, the .45 was at best amost twice as effective - 4 shots to 7 and at worst about 25% more effective.
Don't know about you but I like the advantage. Almost twice as effective is not an insignificant advantage.
You said,
"AS we can see there was indeed very little difference if any because the 9mm used up to 6 or 7 shots while the bigger .45 calibers took 4 or 5 shots (none of the .45 calibers were the later developed and much weaker and lighter .45acp."
Assuming your figures are correct, the .45 was at best amost twice as effective - 4 shots to 7 and at worst about 25% more effective.
Don't know about you but I like the advantage. Almost twice as effective is not an insignificant advantage.
BHP9 - Back to the original story. Which Ohio police force was involved? Did the encounter have a multiple municipality call to apprehend the knife wielder? It is a rare police dept. that allows its officers to carry different weapons as their main weapon. Does that particular police dept. have a "firing chip (FC)" rule of engagement? Officer #1 fired his .45, it didn't work, pass the FC to #2 who tries his .38 Spcl revolver, pass the FC to #3 who fires only one round of 9mm. What was the knife wielder doing in the meantime?
Double Maduro
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,125
bhp9,
I think the increased trauma from the bigger hole and the extra energy would have slowed him down more.
By the way, why don't you answer the questions posed by Mal H, myself and others about where this happened and in which paper it was reported?
If you can't provide proof, be man enough to admit it.
Until I have proof that this really occured I am going to treat it as an urban myth and ignore it, and you.
I think the increased trauma from the bigger hole and the extra energy would have slowed him down more.
By the way, why don't you answer the questions posed by Mal H, myself and others about where this happened and in which paper it was reported?
If you can't provide proof, be man enough to admit it.
Until I have proof that this really occured I am going to treat it as an urban myth and ignore it, and you.
This came from a Massillon , Ohio Police officer. Since he is on the Massillon force and he himself was there I natuarally assume it took place in the Canton/ Massillon area. This was my understanding of the converstation that took place only a few days ago. He was on duty at a gun show that I was attending and I am relating to you the story that he told me.
Food for thought from a retired Aerospace Enginneer.
At the recent gun show I attended I got a chance to talk to an engineer that spent 40 some years testing things with the most advanced equipment available in the world.
This is what he told me during our conversation that covered many subjects including guns.
He told me that you should believe or trust nothing no matter what higher authority it comes from or from how famous the individual or source may be. EXAMPLE: Chuck Taylor or the Tompson Tests. He said that they as engineers were taught to conduct their own testing before any other tests results by other engineers were even considered or looked at.
I think that too many people take as gospel anything that is handed to them on a platter by the "Powers that be".
No one but no one has all the answers but my soul purpose of these posts was to get people to think and evalutate other points of view on a very controversial subject of handgun calibers and stopping power. And perhaps you too may conduct your own tests and come to your own conclusions. But never assume that old stories must be true simply because they are old or because they have come from "The exalted ones that sit on high".
At the recent gun show I attended I got a chance to talk to an engineer that spent 40 some years testing things with the most advanced equipment available in the world.
This is what he told me during our conversation that covered many subjects including guns.
He told me that you should believe or trust nothing no matter what higher authority it comes from or from how famous the individual or source may be. EXAMPLE: Chuck Taylor or the Tompson Tests. He said that they as engineers were taught to conduct their own testing before any other tests results by other engineers were even considered or looked at.
I think that too many people take as gospel anything that is handed to them on a platter by the "Powers that be".
No one but no one has all the answers but my soul purpose of these posts was to get people to think and evalutate other points of view on a very controversial subject of handgun calibers and stopping power. And perhaps you too may conduct your own tests and come to your own conclusions. But never assume that old stories must be true simply because they are old or because they have come from "The exalted ones that sit on high".
cratz2
Member
Discussing the findings of the T-L testing is nice academic discussion for those of us that have actually read them but it has no bearing on todays choices. And anyone that indicates that the 45ACP came out on top is politely dismissed from the conversation, thank you very much. I can't take a very strong stance on either side as I've long been a 45ACP guy and recently switched to the 9mm as a primary carry piece.
Truth be told, I think the 9x23 is nearly the ideal cartridge for defensive use and for playing. Basically a 357 Magnum which is proven very effective, you can put a whole bunch of rounds in a small magazine such as Glock 19/23 sized gun would have. Much less recoil than the 45ACP, if you're the sort to use ported guns, they work very well with the cartridge. Lots to recommend them, very little to say against them.
I've said it before and I'llk say it again - use the right loads that match your needs and anything 9mm and up should be roughly equally effective. Most testing has a 3% margin of error and the best loads of 9mm, 38 Super, 40S&W and 45ACP are within 3% according to most testing meaning they're pretty equal. But you have to him something important.
These threads infuriate me no end. I don't see how some of you guys stay civil with as much inane regurgitation as comes out of some folks mouths.
Truth be told, I think the 9x23 is nearly the ideal cartridge for defensive use and for playing. Basically a 357 Magnum which is proven very effective, you can put a whole bunch of rounds in a small magazine such as Glock 19/23 sized gun would have. Much less recoil than the 45ACP, if you're the sort to use ported guns, they work very well with the cartridge. Lots to recommend them, very little to say against them.
I've said it before and I'llk say it again - use the right loads that match your needs and anything 9mm and up should be roughly equally effective. Most testing has a 3% margin of error and the best loads of 9mm, 38 Super, 40S&W and 45ACP are within 3% according to most testing meaning they're pretty equal. But you have to him something important.
These threads infuriate me no end. I don't see how some of you guys stay civil with as much inane regurgitation as comes out of some folks mouths.
- Status
