Which bullet does the 9mm use that .40 S&W and .45 acp can't?

Status
Not open for further replies.
GunnyUSMC said:
Everyone has an opinion, but not everyone has experience.
Click to expand...
I have extensive experience hunting. Like I said. Vitals, CNS and flesh. We all need the same basic things above. And all mammals react to damage of these in the same matter.

I have a few military friends. 3 army and 2 marines. They all say if I can hit my target go with 45. So I'll agree with them. They also did not like the 5.56 and opted to get their hands on a good ak or 308 rifle when or if they could while over seas. A specific one I remember is the constant argument on who got the m1a variant.



I wont go into detail but I have hear a couple scenarios of failure to incapacitate.

I would like to have served but a foot condition which has left me with 1 surgery so far was absolutely a no go.

I dont doubt your experience and I'm glad it has worked well for you. I'm just confident I will not need more than 8 rounds. In that aspect I carry a full size 1911 loaded with 45 super and I know it will out perform any 9mm or 40sw per trigger pull. If I run into 10 bad guys I guess I'm screwed. Or if I miss a few shots with 4 bad guys. But in all reality I doubt I ever have to mess with more than 3 bad guys. Or for that matter even 1. Each to his own.
 
Your friends must be "old timers." Resistance to change is a powerful thing. To some people, more powerful than actual performance.

All of the younger soldiers that I know today are well satisfied with both the 5.56 and the 9MM.
 
BigBore45 said:
The general consensus was bigger allowed for shot placement error. Which is what I'd expect in a defensive situation.
Click to expand...


If the placement error is .1" or less between the .45 and the 9mm, that'd be true.

If it's more than .1", its a dubious claim with too many variables to be considered anywhere close to absolute.
 
danez71 said:
If the placement error is .1" or less between the .45 and the 9mm, that'd be true.

If it's more than .1", its a dubious claim with too many variables to be considered anywhere close to absolute.
Click to expand...
Well here you are looking in a 2 dimensional spectrum. So I guess. .1 seems a bit negative and without expansion aswell. Plus .1 would result in a significant amount of energy transfer quicker. Also leaving out cavity expansion and material debris. .1 of a rib bone would most definitely extrapolate wound channel characteristics.
 
cheygriz said:
Your friends must be "old timers." Resistance to change is a powerful thing. To some people, more powerful than actual performance.

All of the younger soldiers that I know today are well satisfied with both the 5.56 and the 9MM.
Click to expand...
Mid 30"s. However do the younger guys have experience with the others?
 
GunnyUSMC said:
It seems to me that you have on experience in shooting at humans. And most likely have never seen one shot. It’s much different then shooting game.
One of my coworkers has been in four shootings. He has shot three people. The three people he shot start shooting at him first and he returned fire and ended the fight with Speer Gold Dot JHP 9mm. The other shooting he was in he didn’t get off a round. As he pulled up in front of a house to check an alarm call, the burglar was coming out the front door with a flat screen TV. The burglar dropped the TV and put six rounds of 40 S&W into his windshield from 20 yds. The only thing that saved his life that day was the steering wheel that stopped two rounds.
But I have found that people that have never been in combat or a LEO, seem to know more about what guns and calibers work best.
Out of the ten evidence guns I proceeded in the last three days six of them had extended magazines. The bad guys are much better armed today then they were 15 years ago.
For those of you that have never seen combat, been a LEO, or been in a shooting, don’t think that I look down on you, because I don’t. I chose my way of life. You just sleep better at night. Putting ones self in harms way to protect others is not for everyone.
Click to expand...

Gunny some of us who have "only" been shot at one time THANK YOU and everyone who server VERY VERY MUCH.

Unlike some, I don't pretend to be an expert. I only know what I've learned and what I've tried, and of course what I did to survive a shooting.

Thankfully I've never shot and anyone and I hope to never be around a gun pointed at anyone again. That said, if I should ever be in a situation where I need a gun, I hope and pray that I am not in a "gun free zone" or a Commie state where I can't carry and defend myself and others.

I look at the use of my firearms as a hobby and as a means of enjoyment and of course as a way to protect myself and others.

What I do know from experience having been shot at is that it sucks. That for most civilians fear takes over and the flight instinct is the first thing they react to. I'll admit I was guilty of listening to the "experts" and taking cover. Then my decades of martial arts training kicked in and I went into defensive mode. The thoughts then became how to to keep the gunman from killing me and others. Being unarmed the options we're limited. But that's a long story.

What I will say is those without any training be it law enforcement, military and/or martial arts cowered, while only a few of us fought back and kept people from being killed.

So I'm with you in that experience is something that is best in a bad situation. But GOOD training IMHO is the next best thing to have. And by that I mean "training like you fight" type training that makes you think when conditions stink and you don't have time to think.
 
I think people need this to be a black or white thing. It's not Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge. It's not red light, green light. It's not chocolate or vanilla. It ain't and never will be. It will always be shades of gray. Virtually anything 'can' work and work well. Conversely, anything 'can' fail and do so miserably. It's all a matter of odds. All we can do is make decisions on what to use/carry based on our own judgement and assessment of our own needs tempered by our ability and limitations. IMHO, a bullet which makes a bigger hole simply increases your odds of stopping a threat more quickly. Whether the argument is bullets or cartridges, a bigger hole does not guarantee better results over a smaller one in any given situation. It simply increases your odds and decreases the chance of failure but the chance of failure is always there.

Same applies to hunting.

That said, I don't think any information gleaned from military use with FMJ is even relevant.
 
I remember when I was issued my first bullet proof vest a little over 18 years ago. It was rated to stop up to 44 mag with the insert. We were told that 80% of people shot with handguns survived and the vest gave us an extra 10%. I always thought that was funny.
I am on my 4th vest now and have a vest with hard plates in the trunk of my car. We are getting ready to get a new vest with lightweight ceramic plates that will stop up to 308.
Hokie_PhD You are right. When fear kicks in or the situation becomes highly stressed, there is little time to think and your training kicks in. So train like your fighting.
CraigC You are right also, the odds have a lot to do with it. I pretty sure that you have hunted dangerous game. It ain't like hunting deer is it. There is something about knowing that what you are hunting can kill you too.
 
Drail said:
There are no "magic bullets" - only marketing. Shot placement is far more important than "magic bullets".
Click to expand...

I just load ball and lead for 9mm and 45 acp, wadcutters for 38. That's all I have on hand. I do however buy better bullets for my rifles.

Rifles, now that's some serious bidness there.:D
 
bearcreek said:
I'm skeptical that that's even possible. Depends what you mean by "effective" I guess.
Click to expand...
Effective as in being "just as good" as 9mm or .40, but being fast enough to punch through Lvl 3a body armor.

I think that new 7.5 FK BRNO could do it, but the guys that designed that round made sure to make it so long it can't fit in Glock 20/21 magazines. If Glock was smart, they'd design a pistol around the cartridge, hook up with Federal or Winchester on mass producing the ammo, and sell the 7.5 chambered Glock to police. Fear monger the cops into thinking their wimpy 9's aren't enough to get them back home safe and sound to their pretty wives and precious children and Glock can make another 250 million bucks.
 
cheygriz said:
Some do. At least enough experience to know that there is little value in lugging around a big heavy M-14 with only 100 rounds of big heavy ammo in the heat of the day when an M-4 is every bit as effective.
Click to expand...
See I was told the 7.62 (.308 win)would penetrate most mud huts in the little villages as the 5.56 would not. Also hear a few of where the 5.56 took 3 to 4 hits to stop them from fighting as never the case with .308. Like I said. Just what I've heard. From First hand experience. Either way. Each has their own opinions.
 
TTv2 said:
Effective as in being "just as good" as 9mm or .40, but being fast enough to punch through Lvl 3a body armor.
Click to expand...
My point was that I'm not sure it's possible to have a pistol round that will penetrate soft armor but will still expand reliably in flesh. They already have 9mm rounds that will penetrate soft armor. Don't need a new caliber for that.
 
Hokie_PhD said:
What I do know from experience having been shot at is that it sucks.
Click to expand...
That should be your signature line.

Generally Speaking:
Given the same capacity, I will always carry a gun that shoots a bigger bullet. But how often does the gun size remain constant? Never of course if ammo count is the same. My situation is that if I'm likely to run into a critter, or one or two tweekers like in the woods, I'll carry a lower capacity, but more powerful gun. If I'm in the city, and have a higher chance of meeting a few folks in a group who want trouble, I carry a gun with smaller, but more bullets with the idea that I may have more targets.

I'm trying to repel and stop an attack, not kill anyone, but accept that killing may be the outcome. If a 9mm isn't enough to stop someone from trying to kill or hurt me in that situation, I accept the risk that I may have to fight hand to hand. I am blessed with a large stature. Everything is a trade off in some way. Choose your favored strategy and sleep content that others will not necessarily choose the same. Their choices have no relevance on your own. Validation comes from use, not conjecture. It's all a gamble.
 
People who say the 9mm is just as good are simply trying to justify their choice of caliber, nothing else. The 9mm, if you can't tell, has become highly popular and even had a female who works behind the counter at a gun store in Lexington say the 9mm hits just as hard as the others. So since that's obviously not true, the only thing that makes sense to me is people are trying to justify their choice by making them all equal, which is garbage. The modern bullets argument is silly, but I suppose the intent there is to imply that the 9mm has caught up to the .40/.45, which itself implies equality, which isn't true.

Another aspect to it, I think, is that we've been told or at least we've heard people say that handguns suck. Well, they don't suck but since that implies that they all suck, one could say that because they all suck, they all suck equally, thus 9mm is as good as anything else. Just a thought.
 
SDGlock23 said:
People who say the 9mm is just as good are simply trying to justify their choice of caliber, nothing else. The 9mm, if you can't tell, has become highly popular and even had a female who works behind the counter at a gun store in Lexington say the 9mm hits just as hard as the others. So since that's obviously not true, the only thing that makes sense to me is people are trying to justify their choice by making them all equal, which is garbage. The modern bullets argument is silly, but I suppose the intent there is to imply that the 9mm has caught up to the .40/.45, which itself implies equality, which isn't true.

Another aspect to it, I think, is that we've been told or at least we've heard people say that handguns suck. Well, they don't suck but since that implies that they all suck, one could say that because they all suck, they all suck equally, thus 9mm is as good as anything else. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Wait, you had a woman tell you something about guns? Well, I sure hope you straightened her out! And the 9mm is popular, you say? Thanks for the heads up! I will warn my kin not to be deceived!
 
SDGlock23 said:
People who say the 9mm is just as good are simply trying to justify their choice of caliber, nothing else. The 9mm, if you can't tell, has become highly popular and even had a female who works behind the counter at a gun store in Lexington say the 9mm hits just as hard as the others. So since that's obviously not true, the only thing that makes sense to me is people are trying to justify their choice by making them all equal, which is garbage. The modern bullets argument is silly, but I suppose the intent there is to imply that the 9mm has caught up to the .40/.45, which itself implies equality, which isn't true.

Another aspect to it, I think, is that we've been told or at least we've heard people say that handguns suck. Well, they don't suck but since that implies that they all suck, one could say that because they all suck, they all suck equally, thus 9mm is as good as anything else. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Is this based on facts or just your opinion?
Back in the day a Mod. 10 was standard for most Police issue. Then the 357 Magnum hit the market. The next thing you know most LEOs are packing revolvers in 357 Magnum. Then they learn that in high stress situation most officers can’t hit their target. So they start shooting 38 or 38 plus P in their 357 revolvers.
Now days if a LEO is carried a revolver, he would be out gunned by 80% of the criminals.
But I have learned over the years that a lot of people don’t know as much as they think they do. Kind of like the guy that thinks he could have done a better job in a shooting because he is such a great shot on the range. The only problem is he has never had to return fire while bullets are coming at him.
I hope that all those without real experience remain that way and live a full happy life.
 
Last edited:
GunnyUSMC said:
Is this based on facts or just your opinion?
Back in the day a Mod. 10 was standard for most Police issue. Then the 357 Magnum hit the market. The next thing you know most LEOs are packing revolvers in 357 Magnum. Then they learn that in high stress situation most officers can’t hit their target. So they start shooting 38 or 38 plus P in their 357 revolvers.
Now days if a LEO is carried a revolver, hr would be out gunned by 80% of the criminals.
But I have learned over the years that a lot of people don’t know as much as they think they do. Kind of like the guy that thinks he could have done a better job in a shooting because he is such a great shot on the range. The only problem is he has never had to return fire while bullets are coming at him.
I hope that all those without real experience remain that way and live a full happy life.
Click to expand...
Amen!
 
cheygriz said:
Your friends must be "old timers." Resistance to change is a powerful thing. To some people, more powerful than actual performance.

All of the younger soldiers that I know today are well satisfied with both the 5.56 and the 9MM.
Click to expand...

All the ones I know, and it's quite a few in my pretty military family, old new and current seem to be perfectly happy with the 5.56 and 9mm.

As for the point on hand. Far as I can tell in medical data is the difference is a few hundredths of an inch in expansion and adequate penetration, as secondary factors in pistol ammo dont seem to make a difference.

From what I can tell 9mm penetration is fine and I shoot it faster and more accurate at speed than I do my .45 or .40. Plus it carries more rounds.

So, I'm happy with my 9mm. I'd be happy with a .45 or .40 too if they were my only options.

As for game vs humans as a measuring stick? I've shot multiple whitetail, under 200 lbs, in perfect "boiler room" broadside shots with my .30-06, lung lung heart and in one case shattered shoulder where the deer still managed to run hundreds of yards before bleeding out. I am doubting too many humans can take 180 grains of '06 crossways and keep fighting like that. Long story short, I dont think wild animals compare to humans well enough to judge.
 
GunnyUSMC said:
I hope that all those without real experience remain that way and live a full happy life.
Click to expand...

Amen! I hope I will spend the rest of my life having to "admit" in these kinds of discussions that I've never shot anyone nor been shot by anyone. It is my desire to stay strictly "armchair" if possible. All those who voluntarily chose to give up armchair status in the service of something noble have my thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Which Handgun Caliber(s) Do You Think Would Be the Last To Go Extinct? The First?
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
CapnMac
CapnMac
O
  • Locked
Does the .40 S&W Just Need More Time?
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
175
Views
9K
buzz_knox
B
C
  • Locked
.45 ACP and 9mm for defense while hiking
2
Replies
28
Views
12K
harley
H
N
  • Locked
Is .40 S&W on the way out?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
5K
Jkwas
J
lsudave
  • Locked
Spinoff- which preferred caliber for ____ gun?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
JR24
JR24
Back
Top