Walt Sherrill
Member
tipoc said:Confusion also begins by switching perspective, or not switching it. If a shooter stops a fight with a gun in 380acp then that gun and caliber are just as good in that situation as any other gun and round...the gun in the hands of a person stopped a fight.
I noticed that while you responded to the first part of the paragraph in your reply, you ignored the rest of that paragraph, and left the implicit questions unanswered. Let me repeat the paragraph, and underline the parts ignored.
Walt Sherrill said:Why switch to something that doesn't do the job in your hands? When the SHTF you want to be able to put the rounds where they are most effective. Use the gun and the rounds that work best for you and don't talk yourself into doing something that just doesn't make sense.
Talking only about round performance while ignoring the shooter's ability to use that performance effectively ignores the other side of what is the same coin and could result in a different type of confusion. What's BEST when comparing performance specs isn't always the same as what's BEST when a tool is put to use in the real world.
If RESULTS -- not performance specs -- are what matters, and you can't shoot the .40 or .45 well, many shooters might find that 9mm rounds are not only "just as good," they may actually be better than the .40/.45/.44 magnum alternatives.
I cited a link to the Gold Dot performance specs earlier -- not because I consider that family of rounds to be the best available, but simply because the Gold Dot data was easily accessed and well presented. I'm sure there are rounds from other ammo makers that perform at least as well or better.
I was surprised, when I looked at the data, that when comparing performance specs alone, some 9mm rounds performed as well as some .40 and .45 rounds, and in a few performance categories, actually outperformed the larger caliber rounds.
Ammo makers have made a lot of advances in the past 10-15 years.
Last edited: