TexasCHLforum.com

loadedliberal wrote:i think my 9mm Hornaday Critical defense JHP has plenty of stopping power thank you very much, its no 12 gauge but that might be a little much to conceal

That's what I carry, too! My grandfather saw my carry piece (1911 in 9mm) and said that he thought a smaller gun would have sufficed. I responded with, "I speak softly and carry a big gun."

Anyway, I may eventually get a .45 but as for now we're keeping all of our firearms within the calibers we already own, just for ease of ammo collection and to keep our ammo expenses down. I rarely go anywhere without my husband, we both carry, and I think my ten rounds (and husband's 17 rounds) of 9mm Hornaday Critical Defense is plenty. If not, we each have two extra mags.

SA can sometimes be more valuable than the caliber of gun you carry. If you can avoid a bad situation or catch it early enough, you don't have to fire a round.

Warhammer wrote:

mreavis wrote:The only thing that matters for "knock down" is foot pounds of force. Look up a .40cal, a +p+ 9mm, and a 45 +p. As I agreed with originally, because of the 45s slightly larger size and weight yes it has the highest amount. But its minimal at best.

Ok, the strongest loads (measured in muzzle energy) for each caliber from Buffalo Bore:

9mm Luger (SKU: 24A/20) - 500 ft.lbs
.40 S&W (SKU: 23A/20) - 582 ft. lbs.
.45 ACP (SKU: 45-185/20) - 543 ft. lbs.

So, if foot pounds is the end-all, be-all measurement of a bullet's worth, how again is .40 S&W "the worst round you could get" among these three?

Those numbers are not correct including +p, and +p+. They are much closer together, and from what I have read, aside from hand loaded, the 40 is the lowest compared to the hottest 45, and 9's. Some of the material I read may have been flawed as well, but I can tell you just from 5 minutes on wiki those numbers are not correct for the hotter marketed shells.

....just a very friendly suggestion...... Wiki is NOT the best source for ballistic info.....

My .02 cents....

Peace.

mreavis wrote:

Warhammer wrote:

mreavis wrote:The only thing that matters for "knock down" is foot pounds of force. Look up a .40cal, a +p+ 9mm, and a 45 +p. As I agreed with originally, because of the 45s slightly larger size and weight yes it has the highest amount. But its minimal at best.

Ok, the strongest loads (measured in muzzle energy) for each caliber from Buffalo Bore:

9mm Luger (SKU: 24A/20) - 500 ft.lbs
.40 S&W (SKU: 23A/20) - 582 ft. lbs.
.45 ACP (SKU: 45-185/20) - 543 ft. lbs.

So, if foot pounds is the end-all, be-all measurement of a bullet's worth, how again is .40 S&W "the worst round you could get" among these three?

Those numbers are not correct including +p, and +p+. They are much closer together, and from what I have read, aside from hand loaded, the 40 is the lowest compared to the hottest 45, and 9's. Some of the material I read may have been flawed as well, but I can tell you just from 5 minutes on wiki those numbers are not correct for the hotter marketed shells.

Those are the numbers published by Buffalo Bore for their own loads. Why would they undersell the performance of rounds they are touting as extra-powerful? And yes, those are 9mm +p+, and .45 +p loads. If your research is based on sources like wikipedia, I can understand your confusion. (There's a reason why colleges won't accept Wikipedia as a reference on papers tuened in by their students.) You really sparked my interest in this, so I did some research (more than 5 minutes) based on the manufacturers' own data. Now, that is comparing each manufacturer's hottest (+p or +p+) 9mm, .40 and .45 against themselves (ie: Federal vs. Federal, Winchester vs. Winchester, etc...). I didn't compare across manufacturers, since that would not account for differences in measuring methods. Based on the published data from Buffalo Bore, Winchester, Federal, Cor-Bon, and Remington, your claim just doesn't hold water. Now, if you're comparing off the shelf .40 with handloaded 9mm that has been uploaded to higher pressures, then sure, you can build a 9mm that's more powerful than an off the shelf .40. However, most aren't into handloading wildcat cartidges to dangerous levels for our EDC gun. As I've stated several times, many 9mm handguns can't handle +p ammo, and even fewer can safely handle +p+. Making a judgement on a caliber based on what can be done in very limited circumstances, rather than what is done most of the time is flawed reasoning.

I apologize if the numbers were further apart then I originally suggested. It means very little though. I may, in the typing fury, have said things that suggested one shell is better than the other. I personally do think the 9 and 45 have more options than a 40, and can do about the same max. So why get a 40, but to each there own.

However, where you are going now is past the original point itself. I was never trying to say one of the 9 and the 45 could knock a man down, but the 40 can't. None of them will by pure force, that was the main point I was trying to get across.

Considering you just did all the research, and mine was awhile back, I will for sure take your word for it that they are further apart than I thought. However even the highest end one still won't knock a man down by ruining his center of balance.

Thanks for saying what you did thought, I appreciate being called out on things if the data suggest I'm wrong so I can avoid that in the future. And from what I have looked up it would seem they can get further apart in foot pounds than I had thought. Still won't knock a man down though :)

No problem. A little back and forth is good to keep us all on our toes. Glad to have you on the forum!

Actually, I wasn't one of the guys talking about knock down power or one shot stops. I never get involved in those arguments because I think they are all pretty pointless. I was just pointing out that .40 is a viable choice and, regardless of +p and +p+ loads, almost always outperforms 9mm. In some cases, such as Buffalo Bore's offerings, a .40 can pack more foot pounds of force than a .45 +p. The .40 S&W's niche has always been more power and a larger bullet than 9mm in a package that allows more rounds to be carried than .45. In that capacity, it is a great success. That is why so many LE agencies have switched to it. You get clearly superior performance than 9mm, you only give up 2-3 rounds of capacity (compared to 9mm), and you get a reasonable grip sized in a full sized service weapon. A .45 would sacrifice more rounds of capacity and have a grip that some would say is too large for many (at least too large for enough people that agency-wide implementation would be hindered). Other than the "snappiness" than some people complain about (I've never found it that daunting), there really aren't any good reasons not to use .40. It's opponents usually just fall back on, " if I have a 9mm and a .45, then I have no need for a .40."

Warhammer wrote:No problem. A little back and forth is good to keep us all on our toes. Glad to have you on the forum!

Actually, I wasn't one of the guys talking about knock down power or one shot stops. I never get involved in those arguments because I think they are all pretty pointless. I was just pointing out that .40 is a viable choice and, regardless of +p and +p+ loads, almost always outperforms 9mm. In some cases, such as Buffalo Bore's offerings, a .40 can pack more foot pounds of force than a .45 +p. The .40 S&W's niche has always been more power and a larger bullet than 9mm in a package that allows more rounds to be carried than .45. In that capacity, it is a great success. That is why so many LE agencies have switched to it. You get clearly superior performance than 9mm, you only give up 2-3 rounds of capacity (compared to 9mm), and you get a reasonable grip sized in a full sized service weapon. A .45 would sacrifice more rounds of capacity and have a grip that some would say is too large for many (at least too large for enough people that agency-wide implementation would be hindered). Other than the "snappiness" than some people complain about (I've never found it that daunting), there really aren't any good reasons not to use .40. It's opponents usually just fall back on, " if I have a 9mm and a .45, then I have no need for a .40."

Grips vary more between designs than caliber. But yes the 40 does have a the middle spot on average power for all the rounds. Anyone of them will kill you, it's a lot more about shot placement. Agreed though, nice to have back and forth.

My wife says I'm argumentative. I just say I enjoy a spirited discussion.

First, congrats to OP for being able to get the women in his life to carry. I'm one for three in that department and that's probably more due to the fact that my older daughter is married to an Army Reserves officer who is an Iraq vet (they got their CHLs together) than my influence. My wife and younger daughter haven't been that interested in the entire deal.

Second, towards Thomas. Like others on this forum, I also have an engineering degree and when I first started out I really got into the physics of the caliber wars but then I began to understand what Keith B, Excalibur, my son and son-in-law (who are both infantry vets with multiple combat tours) were saying about the biologic side of things. And the bottom line I got to was this: There is no magic one shot automatic stop bullet in a hand gun one is normally able to conceal.

Anything with the enough muzzle energy will more than likely poke a hole. So the way to win in a gunfight is to poke enough holes where it matters (i.e. Center of Mass, vital organs, causing loss of the will to fight by critically low blood pressure in a hopefully short amount of time). And to do that requires that one is able to hit where they need to hit. In other words, in practical application, shot placement is probably more important than the difference in "power" between .38, 9mm, .40 S&W, .357 SIG or .45 ACP. Plenty of people have been made to stop whatever they were doing with all of the above calibers. And if one misses with any of the above, one's handgun is nothing more than a noisemaker.

So, since shot placement is king, then it must be of paramount importance to be able to hit your target with whatever you carry. If you can get acceptable accuracy (including follow-up shots) with your megablaster 2000 in 1-inch caliber, then great. But for many, larger calibers are more difficult to control, especially on follow-up shots.

I hope this helps explain why there are so many calibers out there. It also probably explains why some really support the caliber they've chosen.

Warhammer wrote:

mreavis wrote:The only thing that matters for "knock down" is foot pounds of force. Look up a .40cal, a +p+ 9mm, and a 45 +p. As I agreed with originally, because of the 45s slightly larger size and weight yes it has the highest amount. But its minimal at best.

Ok, the strongest loads (measured in muzzle energy) for each caliber from Buffalo Bore:

9mm Luger (SKU: 24A/20) - 500 ft.lbs
.40 S&W (SKU: 23A/20) - 582 ft. lbs.
.45 ACP (SKU: 45-185/20) - 543 ft. lbs.

Just go all the way and get a Pfeifer-Zeliska .600NE.

Keith B wrote:
And, to stay totally on topic, I am glad she was carrying. Good for her. Wish I could get my wife to carry.

Me too. She works night shift at a local hospital with worthless security. They have one guy on at night (unarmed)and use him as a janitor.

Keith B wrote:I want to clear something up for Thomas since he is a new gun owner and wanting to learn. Stopping power is a fairly undefined term when it comes to defensive shooting (not to be confused with 'knock down' power which is total hooey.)

There are basically three ways that a bullet striking an individual will stop them; a central nervous system hit, bleeding out or giving up.

With a central nervous system hit, the body will immediately look to shut down and the person will usually collapse or be unable to control their system and continue their attack.

Second, if the bullet doesn't strike the central nervous system, then you have to wait for the wound to bleed out so the attacker looses enough blood they can no longer function and stop their attack. This will vary greatly depending on where the bullet entered the body and if it strikes a major vessel or not. The bigger the hole, the more blood loss usually, but again it depends on the location of the hit.

The third is the attacker realizes they have been shot and mentally decides to quit attacking and retreats or surrenders.

A shot to the center of mass of the body has a greater chance of you scoring a hit and hitting a vital organ or the central nervous system. A shot to the head will be even more effective usually, but harder to hit. A handgun caliber with more muzzle energy and mass transfered to the attacker can be a benefit (heavier round and/or faster velocity) to create more shock to the system. It can also help in penetration of outer clothing, and will be better going through fat and bone.

Bottom line, any handgun caliber can do the job with the proper shot placement, even a .22. But a larger diameter, heavier, faster round will usually have a better chance at causing one of the three issues above to occur, therefore stopping your attacker.

Hope that helps a little.

And, to stay totally on topic, I am glad she was carrying. Good for her. Wish I could get my wife to carry.

That has to be the absolutely best explanation I have ever seen. I have a couple of friends who have asked this type of question, and I'm going to print this out to show them the next time the subject comes up.

Thomas wrote:Thank you for your awesome explanation Keith B

Keith B is a pretty good all around hand.

USA1 wrote:

priusron wrote:He let her go with no ticket and she immediately called me to let me know.

She should have received a citation for carrying a .380 in a .45 zone.

...that's the way it is!!! Those who care usually try to steer those they care about in a good direction...sometimes it's not taken that way...but that's what makes us OOFs...

bilgerat57 wrote:

Keith B wrote:I want to clear something up for Thomas since he is a new gun owner and wanting to learn. Stopping power is a fairly undefined term when it comes to defensive shooting (not to be confused with 'knock down' power which is total hooey.)

There are basically three ways that a bullet striking an individual will stop them; a central nervous system hit, bleeding out or giving up.

With a central nervous system hit, the body will immediately look to shut down and the person will usually collapse or be unable to control their system and continue their attack.

Second, if the bullet doesn't strike the central nervous system, then you have to wait for the wound to bleed out so the attacker looses enough blood they can no longer function and stop their attack. This will vary greatly depending on where the bullet entered the body and if it strikes a major vessel or not. The bigger the hole, the more blood loss usually, but again it depends on the location of the hit.

The third is the attacker realizes they have been shot and mentally decides to quit attacking and retreats or surrenders.

A shot to the center of mass of the body has a greater chance of you scoring a hit and hitting a vital organ or the central nervous system. A shot to the head will be even more effective usually, but harder to hit. A handgun caliber with more muzzle energy and mass transfered to the attacker can be a benefit (heavier round and/or faster velocity) to create more shock to the system. It can also help in penetration of outer clothing, and will be better going through fat and bone.

Bottom line, any handgun caliber can do the job with the proper shot placement, even a .22. But a larger diameter, heavier, faster round will usually have a better chance at causing one of the three issues above to occur, therefore stopping your attacker.

Hope that helps a little.

And, to stay totally on topic, I am glad she was carrying. Good for her. Wish I could get my wife to carry.

That has to be the absolutely best explanation I have ever seen. I have a couple of friends who have asked this type of question, and I'm going to print this out to show them the next time the subject comes up.

There is one other method that I failed to mention. Should a bullet take out a bone and incapacitate your attacker (leg bones, pelvis broken to cause them to collapse, etc.) then they will not be able to advance on you. However, they may still be able to continue the attack if they have a gun and can shoot. So, as Clint Smith will tell you, in a defensive shooting situation, you better be moving if there is shooting going on, and hopefully you can get away from the threat.