Hey /k/, I was hoping you could help me understand a statement that I keep seeing around the internet. I keep seeing people say that 9mm has been able to close the gap between it and .40 or .45 due to recent improvements in bullet technology/design. In my opinion, this idea doesn't make any sense; why would the bullet technology be advancing for 9mm but stagnating for .40 or .45? if this technology is applied to these calibers, does the gap return? What are you guys' thoughts on this?
>>29353207
Technology hasn't happened, people just started actually testing ballistics and realizing that handguns suck. 40 and 45 are only better when using ball, with a JHP, it's all the same, anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know the first thing about terminal ballistics.
>>29353207
It means modern bonded JHP's and powder choices, as well as +p rated guns becoming the standard allow 9x19 comperable performance through barriers and tissue. Before it was pretty much .380 tier.
And even now with new guns and things like the extreme penetrator from LD the .380 is becoming a viable option as well.
never be as good as 10mm
>>29353265
Ah yes, the age old question, small fast bullet or heavy slow bullet?
>The answer, of course, is heavy fast bullet
>>29353275
Or you can use a .357
>>29353265
Go shoot a moose or something, you weird fuck. We're talking somewhat humane calibers here.
>>29353252
I get you, but couldn't the things that have improved the 9mm also improve .40 and .45? or do the advancements lend themselves more to the 9mm?
>>29353283
I have a Dan Wesson in .357 and I'm picking up my S&W 65 tomorrow morning.
If I had to choose one caliber for life it would be .357
>>29353292
That leads DIRECTLY to the 10mm and .460 Rowland, it has already been done, there is your answer.
>>29353298
.357 bros.
I use a Rugar Vaquero. It's a single action so it's not for defense, just fun.
>>29353292
It's already a thing, your question is basically "Hey guys, I'm just now learning the basics of calibers"
.40 is a thing because 10mm was too powerful, and nobody used .45 Super because its a low capacity shit show with terrible recoil.
Every time someone tries the wheel rolls back around to 9x19 +p being comparable on human targets with more ammo in the gun.
>>29353207
congrats OP you used your brain unlike the rest of koolaid 9 drinkers.
what internet commandos confuse is the assessment from professionals that 9mm is now adequate, instead of subpar, because of advancements in bullet design. bigger is always better if you can handle it with the same amount of skill
>>29353298
>If I had to choose one caliber for life it would be .357
>10mm > .357
no me
>>29353338
So you carry a .45 Super 1911?
>>29353319
You need a DA .357, pure sex. I paid $350 for mine (the dan wesson a year ago and the S&W last week)
>>29353338
>9mm is now adequate
That's the exact opposite of the professional's statement.
9mm sucks. .45 sucks. .40 sucks.
The advancement of bullet technology has just reached the point where all service caliber pistol rounds suck equally since we are now wringing out the end of the diminishing returns.
When a low power factory loaded .223 round sees more change in energy round to round at 100 meters, arguing over 80 ft-lbs at the muzzle is just arbitrarily deciding who is king retard.
The point is. Someone who carries a 1911 with 8 rounds of .45 is and should feel JUST as armed as someone carrying a 9mm M&P Shield because if either of them had the choice and wasnt retarded theyd choose a rifle to kill someone if they needed to.
>>29353368
yes we know rifle rounds are exponentially more powerful than pistol rounds. the discussion is specifically about pistol rounds, OP is asking about 9 40 and 45 specifically. the problem with 9 before was that the holes it punched were too tiny all the way through. you lost a lot of surface area of tissue damage when using 9 vs a 45. but now jhp can mitigate this and 9 acts like a 45 used to. and yes, as OP astutely observed, now 45 leaves the wound channel of a 69 caliber slug
greater wound channel area = more blood loss = more incapacitance
>>29353350
i carry a 40 concealed and a 44mag open
>>29353403
>blood loss as a primary mechanism for incapacitation
>>29353410
Oh, so you're an idiot.
>>29353403
And unless the pistol round hits something vital all the expansion in the world is just a nasty nonlethal or debilotating hole.
That's why service pistol rounds STILL sucked equally back in the ole days. They all had enough power to penetrate and crush what they hit, but that's it.
Even having a larger outer diameter did not increase wound size as linearly as increasing the diameter of the round itself because human tissue is PLIABLE and able to stretch around the path of the bullet.
I defy you to find a shootout solved by the outer 2.4mm of a .45 nicking an artery and ending the gunfight.
>>29353415
did i say that? you dumb shit
>>29353207
When you think ballistics you have to think of a gun as a delivery system for the bullet. You get X1-X2 mass moving at Y1-Y2 velocity.
Bullet innovation comes down to what you can do within those parameters. The answer used to be... not much. You had a lead core with maybe a metal jacket to help hold it together, boosting penetration slightly. Here it made sense to have calibers like .45 where there were actual ballistic gains to be had by just amping up mass at the expense of velocity, since it would at least not over-penetrate and therefore expend more of the energy onto the target.
This was better than 9mm which could go faster, but that speed didn't help as much as it could when it came to putting a dude down. It was more useful from the standpoint of more rounds per magazine/less recoil between shots.
Now that we have modern HP ammunition that expands reliably, it goes a long way towards addressing the over-penetration issue that lighter calibers like 9mm used to have. Likewise, these advancements have had significant gains for the higher calibers like .45, but the difference there isn't as big as it was for 9mm. Now that it has closed this gap somewhat, the difference between the ballistic performance of a good 9mm JHP and a .45 or .40 JHP is there, but it's insignificant compared to the combat advantage offered by the increased magazine capacity and decreased recoil of 9mm.Therefore, 9mm has made a major comeback in recent years as caliber of choice for most tactical applications.
>>29353433
i dont think anyone keeps statistics like that but there are plenty of stories of a small caliber round barely missing a main artery which could have otherwise been a fatal hit to a victim. but you should be relying on your aim not the bullet to do the work
>>29353207
The thing is that there's pretty much no "stoppin' powah" difference between them, automatic pistol rounds are basically a compromise that sacrifices power for size. You don't start seeing a noticeable difference in terminal ballistics until you move into magnum rounds out of 4-5" barreled revolvers
>>29353286
Hahaha, underated post!
>>29353207
Shot placement is king, penetration is queen.... everything else is angels dancing on the head of a pin for any caliber. All booolits are fatal..
>>29353483
>no evidence but I think there are anecdotes to the contrary.
Pistols suck. No one that took a pistol round to the chest and lived (74% survival rate being shot in the heart) ever said, "thank god they werent using a slightly wider caliber."
ER surgeons cannot distinguish caliber of weapon by fucking poking around and cutting open bullet wounds.
>>29353640
>surgeons cannot distinguish
Yes they fucking can you dumb fuck.
>>29353480
Pretty much this. Here's a TL;DR version for you:
>Advancements in bullet technology helped smaller calibers like 9mm a lot, but didn't change bigger ones like .45 much.
>Bigger calibers are still "better", but by a much smaller margin.
>That small margin is far outweighed by other advantages of smaller caliber, like magazine capacity.
>Example: 10% better performance, or 100% increased capacity.
>>29353869
>yes they can
>laughingsurgeons
No they cant, get your fuddlore off /k/ and go do something useful like unload all your mags so the springs dont wear out.
>>29353403
>45 leaves the wound channel of a 69 caliber slug
This is what .45fags ACTUALLY believe.
>>29353403
>incapacitance
>>29353207
What has the best ft-lbs in the otherwise same gun with all advantages the round can muster?
>.45 ACP
>9mm
>.40 SW
If you had something like a hi-point for instance, and capacity was not much different between calibers (or for the sake of my question, not different at all) what caliber would you want?
Again, I ain't talking military ball but I also ain't talking about anything BUT ft-lbs with the best round a caliber has to offer.
