9mm vs 40cal, cont'd
Hate to drone on about this locked topic, but I typed up this response and tried to post it, only to find the topic locked. Hate to see my "work" to to waste:
quote:Originally posted by quickmajik
If I wanted more then a 9mm can offer, I would not half ass it. 45acp, 357sig, 357mag or 10mm. The 40smith is a compromise between the 9mm and the 45, if you can handle the recoil and dont mind a few less rounds of capacity go with 45 over a 40. Even the 45 has been known not to be a 1 shot stop in some cases.. but as long as you make a center of mass upper torso shot all is well with any of the three 9x19mm,40sw, or 45acp. Unless you are unlucky...[;)]
Ultimately, its all a compromise between power and recoil, power and capacity, and expense. You pay your money, you make your choice.
As a very minor point, performance-wise light weight 40SW rounds are ballistically similar to 357 SIG rounds. Consequently, I think the practical advantage of the 357 SIG over 40SW is debatable, and may be largely hype. In fact, the cartridge was deliberately named and marketed using the "357" label to cash in on the superior reputation of the 357 magnum, a gun that still has superior ballistics compared to the 357 SIG. In practice, converting between .40SW and 357 Sig is often pretty easy in the same gun, so ultimately you are still making a fundamental choice between 9mm vs 40SW/357SIG.
Comparing 9mm to .45ACP or .357 magnum is certainly reasonable, but its not quite "fair" as the two latter rounds in particular are usually run in different platform guns than 9mm/40SW, and getting outside the scope of the original question.
But more to the point, there is NO pistol round that is capable of a 100% one shot "stop", not the .45ACP, not the .357 magnum, not the .44 magnum, etc.
It doesn't exist, and the laws of physics ensure that it can't.
The kind of power necessary to ensure that much tissue destruction is unmanageable in a hand-held gun. There is a reason why rifles are much bigger and heavier than pistols. Also, the bigger the pistol, the more costly a miss is going to be, in terms of extra noise, extra recoil (eg slowing down followup shots), extra dollar cost of rounds, and signficantly increased risk of injury to things OTHER than the intended target.
On the other hand, critical injury likelihood is actually proportionate to the SQUARE of the number of hits. In other words, two torso hits aren't twice as likely to stop someone. . .they're closer to FOUR times as likely.
As already mentioned, one hit with a 9mm beats any number of misses with a .40SW, but I'll take it a step further.
TWO hits with a 9mm are almost certainly going to beat ONE hit with a .40SW. (This is why many recommend "double taps").
While capacity isn't a good substitute for marksmanship, its probably the best *poor* substitute!
quote:Originally posted by quickmajik
If I wanted more then a 9mm can offer, I would not half ass it. 45acp, 357sig, 357mag or 10mm. The 40smith is a compromise between the 9mm and the 45, if you can handle the recoil and dont mind a few less rounds of capacity go with 45 over a 40. Even the 45 has been known not to be a 1 shot stop in some cases.. but as long as you make a center of mass upper torso shot all is well with any of the three 9x19mm,40sw, or 45acp. Unless you are unlucky...[;)]
Ultimately, its all a compromise between power and recoil, power and capacity, and expense. You pay your money, you make your choice.
As a very minor point, performance-wise light weight 40SW rounds are ballistically similar to 357 SIG rounds. Consequently, I think the practical advantage of the 357 SIG over 40SW is debatable, and may be largely hype. In fact, the cartridge was deliberately named and marketed using the "357" label to cash in on the superior reputation of the 357 magnum, a gun that still has superior ballistics compared to the 357 SIG. In practice, converting between .40SW and 357 Sig is often pretty easy in the same gun, so ultimately you are still making a fundamental choice between 9mm vs 40SW/357SIG.
Comparing 9mm to .45ACP or .357 magnum is certainly reasonable, but its not quite "fair" as the two latter rounds in particular are usually run in different platform guns than 9mm/40SW, and getting outside the scope of the original question.
But more to the point, there is NO pistol round that is capable of a 100% one shot "stop", not the .45ACP, not the .357 magnum, not the .44 magnum, etc.
It doesn't exist, and the laws of physics ensure that it can't.
The kind of power necessary to ensure that much tissue destruction is unmanageable in a hand-held gun. There is a reason why rifles are much bigger and heavier than pistols. Also, the bigger the pistol, the more costly a miss is going to be, in terms of extra noise, extra recoil (eg slowing down followup shots), extra dollar cost of rounds, and signficantly increased risk of injury to things OTHER than the intended target.
On the other hand, critical injury likelihood is actually proportionate to the SQUARE of the number of hits. In other words, two torso hits aren't twice as likely to stop someone. . .they're closer to FOUR times as likely.
As already mentioned, one hit with a 9mm beats any number of misses with a .40SW, but I'll take it a step further.
TWO hits with a 9mm are almost certainly going to beat ONE hit with a .40SW. (This is why many recommend "double taps").
While capacity isn't a good substitute for marksmanship, its probably the best *poor* substitute!
0
-
It bees nice to find more folks on the Forum what noe gud inglish.
"It doesn't exist, and the laws of physics ensure that it can't.
'
Thank you.
Doug0 -
I'm not sure why this is even being debated.
If you can hit with what you're shooting, you're ahead of the person who can't.
Bigger is better unless you're talking about hungry grizzly bears or meteors about to hit the Earth.
Therefore, hit with big - how big "big" is remains up to the individual and no amount of ballistics data or mathematical projections will change that fact.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
It bees nice to find more folks on the Forum what noe gud inglish.
"It doesn't exist, and the laws of physics ensure that it can't.
'
Thank you.
Doug
Doug,
Where did THAT come from?
I'll leave out the invective ([;)]), but I think my English is fine. "Ensure" isn't just a tasty beverage, its a pretty common word:
quote:en?sure (n-shr)
tr.v. en?sured, en?sur?ing, en?sures
To make sure or certain; insure:
quote:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ensure
Main Entry:
en?sure Listen to the pronunciation of ensure
Pronunciation:
\in-#712;shu#775;r\
Function:
transitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
en?sured; en?sur?ing
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French ensurer, alteration of assurer - more at assure
Date:
1660
: to make sure, certain, or safe : guarantee
synonyms ensure , insure , assure , secure mean to make a thing or person sure. ensure , insure, and assure are interchangeable in many contexts where they indicate the making certain or inevitable of an outcome, but ensure may imply a virtual guarantee <the government has ensured the safety of the refugees>, while insure sometimes stresses the taking of necessary measures beforehand <careful planning should insure the success of the party>, and assure distinctively implies the removal of doubt and suspense from a person's mind <I assure you that no harm will be done>. secure implies action taken to guard against attack or loss <sent reinforcements to secure their position>.
Getting away from this petty nonsense. .
quote:ElMuertoMonkey.
Bigger is better unless you're talking about hungry grizzly bears or meteors about to hit the Earth.
Therefore, hit with big - how big "big" is remains up to the individual and no amount of ballistics data or mathematical projections will change that fact.
Sure, I agree with that last bit. Ultimately the skill and comfort level of the shooter are among the most important things to consider when picking a round.
But I really don't think that bigger is *always* better. Not everyone should be driving around in a Hummer. Likewise, its certainly possible to go TOO big in a handgun.
For example, 1970s cop movies aside, there are reasons why no police or military carry the equivalent of .44 magnum rounds. The guns are huge and heavy, the noise is deafening, the cost of rounds is too high, hard recoil prevents fast follow-up shots, and missed shots present an increased danger to the surroundings.
The point is, for some people a .40 *might* be too big. For others, it isn't big enough!0 -
I like reading this and its nice to know other people think faster than they can type. That's my excuse. 0 -
sounds like you're on the right track, i asked a glock armorer if the slide assemblies for a glock 22 and a glock 17 are interchangable, reluctently he said they are.
glock frowns on it because everything is has a serial number.
dont know what you're looking for but there are options0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
5 comments