anothernewb
Member
Looking up the ballistics of the common argued calibers. 45 acp VS 9mm VS 40 S&W it seems they all run around 400 lb/ft of energy.
Whether they do that with mass or velocity I find irrelevant.
what I find myself asking is WHY the same energy? what drove that similarity?
is it a function of the physics of bullet limitations. metallurgy seems to throw that one out. gunpowder limitations? the prevalence of overcharged rounds throw that one out.
I think one could easily drive a 230 grain 45 to much higher velocities, as with .40 and 9. upping the relative masses of those slightly also works.
A relatively minor increase in the mass of the chambers could handle the increased load pressures. supported chambers should protect the brass.
at the risk of altering a generation of calibers, the brass could also be made slightly thicker to compensate too.
So things come down to newton's third law or reactions.
Is there some essential thing I'm missing with a practical upper limit on recoil energy that drove the similarities?
I know they make the 10mm and the 454 casull etc...
I wonder what would happen to the 45. Could chamber pressures could be pushed to 30k psi would that result in a 45 that's just too uncomfortable to handle?. I'm not saying push it into 460 territory, but a 230 grain moving at 1,000 fps should be a significant jump in energy.
Anyway, I'm just musing, i know the practical application of implementing a change in the calibers are about zero. Just trying to get a handle on things. The caliber war arguments make me laugh often. each has their favorites and fanboys.
but what's the limitation of slightly altering an aspect of one of these calibers - would it end the debate once and for all?
maybe a compromise...A double stack 42.5 caliber 190 gr round moving at 1100fps in a frame heavy like a 1911 to provide the same felt recoil.....lol
Whether they do that with mass or velocity I find irrelevant.
what I find myself asking is WHY the same energy? what drove that similarity?
is it a function of the physics of bullet limitations. metallurgy seems to throw that one out. gunpowder limitations? the prevalence of overcharged rounds throw that one out.
I think one could easily drive a 230 grain 45 to much higher velocities, as with .40 and 9. upping the relative masses of those slightly also works.
A relatively minor increase in the mass of the chambers could handle the increased load pressures. supported chambers should protect the brass.
at the risk of altering a generation of calibers, the brass could also be made slightly thicker to compensate too.
So things come down to newton's third law or reactions.
Is there some essential thing I'm missing with a practical upper limit on recoil energy that drove the similarities?
I know they make the 10mm and the 454 casull etc...
I wonder what would happen to the 45. Could chamber pressures could be pushed to 30k psi would that result in a 45 that's just too uncomfortable to handle?. I'm not saying push it into 460 territory, but a 230 grain moving at 1,000 fps should be a significant jump in energy.
Anyway, I'm just musing, i know the practical application of implementing a change in the calibers are about zero. Just trying to get a handle on things. The caliber war arguments make me laugh often. each has their favorites and fanboys.
but what's the limitation of slightly altering an aspect of one of these calibers - would it end the debate once and for all?
maybe a compromise...A double stack 42.5 caliber 190 gr round moving at 1100fps in a frame heavy like a 1911 to provide the same felt recoil.....lol
Last edited: