Handgun Caliber Selection Insight
- Thread starter HoboCoastie
- Start date
- Status
No, in keeping with the original subject of the thread, I am saying the 9mm, .40, and .45 ACP perform the same, basically. Any difference is so small, it really isn't much help. I have also previously stated that the .22 LR is not comparable. I have also stated MANY times over that I am speaking of common service/defensive rounds. Obviously, a .22 LR lacks the punch to be reliable, BUT a .22 LR to the heart will do much more severe damage to the body than a .45 ACP to the abdomen. This is why shot placement is king. This is why you read about someone surviving 5 rounds of .357 Mag to the chest and abdomen, while they kill the other person with one round from a .22 LR.
Loosedhorse
member
Why? How can you predict what will happen? Where is your evidence-based Cochrane review that shows it?
So, .22 is not comparable to 9, .40, or .45...but it's better than .357?
Last edited:
Fatelvis
Member
Analogy: You can kill a lion with a 308, but a .416 Rigby will kill it quicker.
"Analogy: You can kill a lion with a 308, but a .416 Rigby will kill it quicker. "
Not in most countries. The .375 H&H is the minimum caliber in MOST African countries for dangerous game. However, the use of machine guns, in .308, AK's, probably account for more animals, due to poaching, and availability.
The failing of .357Sigs' argument is you can make 9mm, 40, and 45 ACP
behave in completely different ways, and, depending on the weapon, have completely different ballistic results.
In other words: Unless you get down to a SPECIFIC combination, of gun, bullet, powder charge etc. and test each one, your arguments are worthless, and a waste of bandwidth.
There is a huge range in velocity using 9mm, and a huge range in penetration
as well. Likewise the .40, and .45 Colt/ACP
Not in most countries. The .375 H&H is the minimum caliber in MOST African countries for dangerous game. However, the use of machine guns, in .308, AK's, probably account for more animals, due to poaching, and availability.
The failing of .357Sigs' argument is you can make 9mm, 40, and 45 ACP
behave in completely different ways, and, depending on the weapon, have completely different ballistic results.
In other words: Unless you get down to a SPECIFIC combination, of gun, bullet, powder charge etc. and test each one, your arguments are worthless, and a waste of bandwidth.
There is a huge range in velocity using 9mm, and a huge range in penetration
as well. Likewise the .40, and .45 Colt/ACP
Loosedhorse
member
Lion may be hunted in RSA, Namibia, TZ, CAR, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Cameroon and Benin (perhaps elsewhere). Of these, the only areas that specify .375 minimum for lion are Botswana, TZ, CAR, and some provinces in RSA. Namibia, however, specifies a 5400 J minimum, and that would rule out .308 (which has trouble making 4000); same for Zim's 4300 J minimum. Cameroon's .354 minimum for "Group 3 Big Game" (which I assume includes lion) also bars .308.
But obviously: the reason that minimums are established (except in Benin, Ethiopia, BF and Moz, where there are none) is that some calibers are predicted to work better on lion than others.
But obviously: the reason that minimums are established (except in Benin, Ethiopia, BF and Moz, where there are none) is that some calibers are predicted to work better on lion than others.
Last edited:
That's what I meant. They look at the gel battery, presumably for lack of other comperable data, and in that they look for a certain amount of penetration, performance through various media, and if they manage all that the larger wound channel is better.
Just "downgrading" due to budget isn't much of an argement against the relative efficacy of rounds. Also if you're going to have a single weapon everyone is supposed to use, than you have to consider that .45s aren't going to fit some people very well with a double stack magazine.
Just becuase they decided to go with the round doesn't mean they decided against the importance of wound diameter.
Put a different way, how many LEOs use non-expanding bullets in their standard duty guns?
Regarding complaining about stopping power, I haven't talked to so many LEOs, but they do list all the felonious fatalities of officers in the US online.
Now, freqently it's somebody dodging a tire shredding device and plowing into a nearby officer or shooting them in the face when they approach a traffic stop.
However there are plenty of instances of them not stopping someone after getting hits and then getting killed themselves.
Again, it seems all practical handgun cartridges have less stopping power than one would like. It's a matter of trade offs.
And again as prosser keeps brining up, the particular bullet and loading make a huge difference. In many ways I think that ought to be the first thing considered. Calibre then would be selected based on what gives you the performance evevelope you're looking for.
THANK YOU.
Each department should look at their situation: demographics, areas that are likely to be problems, nature of the land, and buildings, etc.
My bottom line is this:
My friend picked Sig Sauer P220's and Federal 230 grain Hydrashocks. Why?
Sigs have better springs then glocks, better triggers, and, as a S&W certified gunsmith, he knows sig quality is much higher then glocks.
The round? He's a Col. in the National Guard. On a bi-weekly basis he is reminded of the effectiveness of JMB/war departments combination design in the military 230 grain hardball. He carries a Colt Commander, Stainless Steel, by the way. HE hasn't ignored the literally millions of shootings of people in World War I & II, with .45 ACP.
Through that research, he concluded the .45 230 grain HP load was most likely to stop an attacker quickly, and, that it would be more shootable then the higher pressure cartridges.
We've had two shootings, last time I talked to him, in some absurd number of years. Results? The attackers stopped quickly. The Hydrashocks worked.
Now, we have a rich city. Folks around here think they are the Beverly Hills of NorCal. No issues with ammo expense here.
However, if I was buying for a L.A. police department, I might take a serious look at something like a 155 grain LFN type bullet, at around 1150 fps, out of the .45 ACP. I'd want my guys to practice a lot, and lead bullets are cheap. That round would recoil like a 9mm, and hit like a .45 Colt. On humans, penetration should be adequate, but not excessive.
Plus, it's flat accurate, and penetrates straight.
Second choice: 200 grains, 950 fps. JMB wasn't wrong often, but, I don't have to worry about shooting horses.
Now what would you choose in Hawaii, where the smallest prison guards are 240, and lets not even talk about the inmates...
Or how about Western Samoa?
I will say, once again, it's NOT about caliber. It's about bullet design, velocity, and weight.
Once again:
Wound channel diameter of 1.013" with a bullet with a meplat diameter of .45", and a striking velocity of 900 fps.
Wound channel diameter of 1.013" with a bullet with a meplat diameter of .357", and a striking velocity of 1135 fps.
Each department should look at their situation: demographics, areas that are likely to be problems, nature of the land, and buildings, etc.
My bottom line is this:
My friend picked Sig Sauer P220's and Federal 230 grain Hydrashocks. Why?
Sigs have better springs then glocks, better triggers, and, as a S&W certified gunsmith, he knows sig quality is much higher then glocks.
The round? He's a Col. in the National Guard. On a bi-weekly basis he is reminded of the effectiveness of JMB/war departments combination design in the military 230 grain hardball. He carries a Colt Commander, Stainless Steel, by the way. HE hasn't ignored the literally millions of shootings of people in World War I & II, with .45 ACP.
Through that research, he concluded the .45 230 grain HP load was most likely to stop an attacker quickly, and, that it would be more shootable then the higher pressure cartridges.
We've had two shootings, last time I talked to him, in some absurd number of years. Results? The attackers stopped quickly. The Hydrashocks worked.
Now, we have a rich city. Folks around here think they are the Beverly Hills of NorCal. No issues with ammo expense here.
However, if I was buying for a L.A. police department, I might take a serious look at something like a 155 grain LFN type bullet, at around 1150 fps, out of the .45 ACP. I'd want my guys to practice a lot, and lead bullets are cheap. That round would recoil like a 9mm, and hit like a .45 Colt. On humans, penetration should be adequate, but not excessive.
Plus, it's flat accurate, and penetrates straight.
Second choice: 200 grains, 950 fps. JMB wasn't wrong often, but, I don't have to worry about shooting horses.
Now what would you choose in Hawaii, where the smallest prison guards are 240, and lets not even talk about the inmates...
Or how about Western Samoa?
I will say, once again, it's NOT about caliber. It's about bullet design, velocity, and weight.
Once again:
Wound channel diameter of 1.013" with a bullet with a meplat diameter of .45", and a striking velocity of 900 fps.
Wound channel diameter of 1.013" with a bullet with a meplat diameter of .357", and a striking velocity of 1135 fps.
Last edited:
Fatelvis
Member
I was trying to make a point, not giving out safari tips.
Ok Professor, and we're waiting on your every word.
I disagree....It all boils down to how fast a given bullet hits it's target. The target doesn't care how long your barrel is, what kind of/how much powder you're using, etc. Bigger bullets make bigger holes!
maybe temporary wound channels will be the same, but the crush and permenent channels will favor the .45
Oh, and are you referring to wadcutters? Those are some large meplats!
Last edited:
Loosedhorse
member
Prosser: you've used this PWC calculator before (in another thread), but haven't provided its credentials and verification.
The a priori, intuitive assumption is that a .45 cal bullet produces a .45 cal wound channel. Your formula says it's bigger: why? Expansion of the bullet (even though the ones you specificy appear to be dead-full-wadcutter)? A "shock" injury locally around the leading edge of the bullet?
If so: the bullet slows down after encountering flesh; it is counter-intuitive (again) to believe a non-expanding .45 slug @ 900fps is leaving a 1" permanent wond channel at all, and certainly to believe it does so for its entire length (unless we are supposing that the full wadcutter expands to over 1", better than the best HPs).
One of Martin Fackler's big bugaboos in the early days was that wound channels from handgun bullets were over-estimated clinically, resulting in the common (he says) clinicial practice back them of debriding viable tissue because of the assumption it "must" be devitalized, since it was near the wound channel.
And of course, a .45 slug that expands to .827 diameter should leave a bigger PWC yet, right?
(I mean, I have seen The Quick and The Dead, where sunlight shines through the holes that .45s have shot in gunfighters; is that where the 1.013" figure comes from?
)Not saying you (or whoever came up with this channel calculator) must be wrong, but what is the basis and of the claim, and verification of the model's accuracy?
You also make a big deal about "straight line penetration." When huting a large animal with a precisely placed shot that must travel striaght through a large amount of flesh to reach the heart, that makes sense. But for the imprecisely placed bullets (during a gunfight) in a thin animal (most humans), I'm not sure I see it as a big advantage.
Fatelvis
Member
Amen.
And THAT is why I think the 45 is better...
I don't like relying on expansion. If the hollowpoint on a .45 gets "plugged up", so what?
Loosed, you're right, I never looked at those crazy 1.013" numbers closely!
Perhaps your right. But, I like to err on the side of caution:
.45 LFN's at 1150 fps:
Holes look at LEAST an inch in diameter.
.500 caliber bullet at 950:
That's a 300 win mag cartridge, if you need a size reference.
Appears the guy that created that was a hunter trying to quantify actual results.
I hear a lot of theory, with no observations on the subject here.
Only reason I go with the wound channel calculator is it appears to quantify actual, observed results from hunting.
.45 LFN's at 1150 fps:
Holes look at LEAST an inch in diameter.
.500 caliber bullet at 950:
That's a 300 win mag cartridge, if you need a size reference.
Appears the guy that created that was a hunter trying to quantify actual results.
I hear a lot of theory, with no observations on the subject here.
Only reason I go with the wound channel calculator is it appears to quantify actual, observed results from hunting.
Last edited:
Fatelvis:
You made your point, and I brought up support of it. I was trying to point out that not only are you correct, but most African governments, after a couple hundred years of experience, have put into law your theory, after thousands of lions being killed, and the observations brought back by professional hunters.
Bullet speed at impact, and the length of the perm wound channel are vital parts of the puzzle. Still, a 90 grain .357" bullet at 1350 fps and a .45 Caliber bullet at the same speed are going to have geometrically different results.
The point about the components are they determine how fast the bullet is going on impact. Velocity is determined by a number of components, and they all come together for an end result.
To say they are irrelevant, well, they aren't.
Part of the limitations on service caliber pistols is their ability to reach a desired velocity out of a short barrel. So, one of the key points of discussion in service caliber selection is going to be how they work out of the length barrel you are using.
The irony is the bigger the bullet, and heavier, the more resistance it provides, and the better your chances of getting full velocity out of a short barrel. That is a generalization that I've found to be true in .45 Colt, using 345 grain bullets, and the calibers that use bullets over 345 grains.
One of the reasons I like the .500JRH loads. Out of a 4-5 inch barrel the velocity is nearly the same as out of a 7.5" or even 16" barrel. Holds true for the .500 Linebaugh's as well, and the .475.
You made your point, and I brought up support of it. I was trying to point out that not only are you correct, but most African governments, after a couple hundred years of experience, have put into law your theory, after thousands of lions being killed, and the observations brought back by professional hunters.
Bullet speed at impact, and the length of the perm wound channel are vital parts of the puzzle. Still, a 90 grain .357" bullet at 1350 fps and a .45 Caliber bullet at the same speed are going to have geometrically different results.
The point about the components are they determine how fast the bullet is going on impact. Velocity is determined by a number of components, and they all come together for an end result.
To say they are irrelevant, well, they aren't.
Part of the limitations on service caliber pistols is their ability to reach a desired velocity out of a short barrel. So, one of the key points of discussion in service caliber selection is going to be how they work out of the length barrel you are using.
The irony is the bigger the bullet, and heavier, the more resistance it provides, and the better your chances of getting full velocity out of a short barrel. That is a generalization that I've found to be true in .45 Colt, using 345 grain bullets, and the calibers that use bullets over 345 grains.
One of the reasons I like the .500JRH loads. Out of a 4-5 inch barrel the velocity is nearly the same as out of a 7.5" or even 16" barrel. Holds true for the .500 Linebaugh's as well, and the .475.
Loosedhorse
member
And that's fine; as you know (as from the discussion of Taylor's KO) I am not one to discount hunters' experiences.
But the question comes up (as it does for TKO): how generalizable is the calculator? How much of the bigger than cailber exit wound is due to temporary wound cavity (overlapping the far skin) vs. tumbling of the bullet vs. secondary missiles (like rib pieces, in the photograph you show), or the bursting of a fluid-filled cavity (as in, is the large hole in the heart due to it being hit when the vetricle was filled; would the hole be the same with the ventricle empty?).
The problem with through-and-through wounds (from a research perspective) is that the bullets are usually not recovered; so that deformation/angulation etc. cannot be determined. And anecdotes are of course like photos: we tend to take the most pictures of our most impressive successes (or most impressive failures), with the average stuff not making as much of an impression.
(There's the additional consideration of how appropriate high-recoil, through-and-through, heavy-bullet hunting loads are for SD scenarios, but we've already mentioned that.)
Last edited:
Funny, but in another forum there is a discussion about is the .45 Colt, with heavy bullets, like 325's, adequate for brown bear?
The conclusion is somewhere along the line of yes, hunting wise, but stopping wise, you better be a darn good shot.
I don't find recoil objectionable with heavy loads of H110, and up to 260 grain bullets. After that, you better have custom grips that fit your hands just right when you pull the trigger.
While we are on the subject, how about the clearly superior site picture, and, the incredible triggers that are on single actions, and 1911's?
Shouldn't they be considered in the overall package?
As I have stated before, SD, and what you should use, is determined by percentages and situations. If you think you are going to an area where you are concerned with your shots going through, and hitting someone else,
go light, fast, and perhaps expanding. Or, lighter, faster, and a flatter profile bullet. Both limit penetration.
If your house sits on top of a ridge, with nothing but bears, mountain lions, and meth heads, your choice might be different.
The conclusion is somewhere along the line of yes, hunting wise, but stopping wise, you better be a darn good shot.
I don't find recoil objectionable with heavy loads of H110, and up to 260 grain bullets. After that, you better have custom grips that fit your hands just right when you pull the trigger.
While we are on the subject, how about the clearly superior site picture, and, the incredible triggers that are on single actions, and 1911's?
Shouldn't they be considered in the overall package?
As I have stated before, SD, and what you should use, is determined by percentages and situations. If you think you are going to an area where you are concerned with your shots going through, and hitting someone else,
go light, fast, and perhaps expanding. Or, lighter, faster, and a flatter profile bullet. Both limit penetration.
If your house sits on top of a ridge, with nothing but bears, mountain lions, and meth heads, your choice might be different.
See the red text from my response.
Bottom line...you are using the same inaccurate, unproven theories most people resort to in these debates. Anecdotal information, unverified second and third-hand stories, physical theories that work what tested in a controlled experiment against a predictable medium...
On the other hand, evidence-based medicine looks at what comes into the ER daily in this country, what forensic pathologists determine, and what actually is observed in the field...the stuff that has actually meant life and death...
Bottom line...you are using the same inaccurate, unproven theories most people resort to in these debates. Anecdotal information, unverified second and third-hand stories, physical theories that work what tested in a controlled experiment against a predictable medium...
On the other hand, evidence-based medicine looks at what comes into the ER daily in this country, what forensic pathologists determine, and what actually is observed in the field...the stuff that has actually meant life and death...
Fatelvis
Member
What? They're both 30 caliber......the aught six is a bit faster. I don't get what you're saying?
Loosedhorse
member
An inaccurate comparison. Will a .30-378 Weatherby Magnum 200 gr Partition kill it quicker? Probably so.
The round under discussion (by me) was a .22 short. My comment was meant to illustrate the oddness of the statements made that .45, .40, and 9 apparently cannot be distingusihed because flesh is such a non-scientific and inconsistent medium; but it is still possible to say that .22LR is "not comparable" (reason not stated); even though .22s sometimes kill persons, and .357s sometimes don't.
Confused? Me, too. Sorry that my original statement wasn't clearer--but I am limited by my material.
Last edited:
For those claiming permanent cavity is the answer, then why do not all LEAs use the .45 ACP? Why did some LEAs, like TX DPS, dump the larger round and go to one of smaller diameter? Since the 357 SIG makes a smaller wound cavity, why does TX DPS claim to have better street results than their old .45s? Why do the same "conclusions" get drawn when one moves from the .45 to .9mm, or .40 S&W?
mitchell11
Member
buying a gun for self defence
It really dosent matter at close range you will react to the threat at that moment and not remember half of what happend.
It really dosent matter at close range you will react to the threat at that moment and not remember half of what happend.
You made the quote based on my statement about the 9, 40, and 45. These rounds are very similar in their ballistics, much like the .30-06 and .308...a true analogy. The two you chose are worlds apart....much like a .44 mag vs. a .380. Not in the same class.
Loosedhorse
member
Six of the 49 state police departments in this country use .45 ACP. Five more use the .45 GAP.
You'd have to ask them, but I'd guess that those that don't use .45 have reasons related to grip size, ammo cost, capacity, recoil, or other economics.
As in: trade-offs. What this thread has been discussing.
Ah, so you have appointed yourself the decider of what "similar ballistics" are, and what "true analogies" are. With no basis but your say-so.
Well, some of us will still decide that .45, .40, and 9 are not so similar as to be indistinguishable. And that the .308/.416 analogy (or the .308/30-378 one) was pretty darn good.
Last edited:
My understanding is that the origional .357 was selected in large part because they wanted a round that was still effective after punching a car door.
Wide and slow 45s just aren't as good at that particular task, and police might value the 357 sigs capability in that regard.
However in my state there are retreat laws and getting a CC permit is about impossible. So while I guess one could conceivably come up with a scenario where I'd be shooting into a car door, it'd be a pretty convoluted one, so it doesn't factor into my selection process.
However that sort of consideration of capability is what I'd really like to be able to do in regards to other factors.
Which is where the medical data you keep talking about would be wonderfully valuable if you could just remember where you got it from (or maybe dig out one of your old presentations if you cited something?)
The only medical evidence I've been able to find is what I've posted in this thread, and it consists of:
-Forum postings by a guy who claims to do autopsies and that routinely goes over to look over the shoulder and read the write ups of the medical examiner, so he's seen a lot of gunshot wounds.
His claim was that he had seen many instances of 9mm bullets either deflecting after hitting a bone, or breaking up after hitting a bone (and then failing to penetrate to vitals). He claimed that .45s did not seem to do that.
Posser I believe it was, found a link to some group doing ballistics tests with simulated bone over gelatin where bullets did alright, which might simulate a straight on sterum shot. However a bullet could open up after passing through a pectoral muscle and hitting a rib after opening up might be entirely different.
-I found that report regarding one of the shootings you'd posted. It included x-rays and autoposy pictures, and seemed to show a .40 round hitting the sternum and then deflicting upwards away from vitals, and then others that seemed to peter out before they reached vitals and the one that failed to break bone.
So that's what I've got, along with enough stories to know that handguns are not reliable stoppers as a general rule.
On the LEOs. Again, while they may select different calibres (and I suspect it's due to their smaller individuals not being able to handle the larger guns), I believe the one common denominator is that they all select a cartridge within their calibre that comes with an expanding bullet desined to create a large and reliable wound channel.
FMJ or penetrator rounds would give superious performance in some situations, and/or be cheaper. But none of them use those to my knowledge.
The military does, but that's because of the geneva conventions as well as the likelyhood of fighting opponents in body armor.
Fatelvis
Member
That's enough reason to use a 45 for me!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
