40 caliber
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Why is the 40 considered the worst of both worlds? I get that it has the limited round capacity of the 45, but what is the downside it shares with 9mm?
well yeah
.40 is a bit snappier so people step down to the 9mm. It also has more firearm options than the .40. Bulk ammo buys are another consideration.
A benefit is in most cases you can buy a barrel and if it needs it a mag swap and your .40 can fire 357 sig... But that is a bit of a range toy aspect than defensive carry.
>>29987153
Many people think the 45's benefits in how big a hole it makes someone is negligible compared to the 9mm. When you take magazine capacity and recoil into account these people choose the 9mm every time.
The difference between the 40 and the 9 in hole size is even less and you have to deal with more recoil and less capacity again (though not as dramatic a difference).
If you have to have more power (hate using that word), you wont really notice it until you get to 10mm/357 when compared to the 9mm
>>29987153
its just not got that much more STOPPING POWAH than 9mm to make it worth the recoil and capacity
>>29987245
>Many people think the 45's benefits in how big a hole it makes someone is negligible compared to the 9mm
Where did you learn to write?
.40 makes some nasty wounds in ballistic gel test
Don't own a 40 but when I was first no guns the way I saw it was, 40 is best of both worlds because it has more power behind it then a 9mm plus a lil bigger, and it has more capacity then a .45
Someone correct me if I'm wrong cuz now I wanna sell my 19 for a 23
>>29987153
>Accelerated wear to the gun
>Fewer rounds per magazine than an equally sized 9mm
>marginal ballistic improvement, still just a pistol caliber
>Higher felt recoil
>Generally more expensive
>Glock meme
>More guns chambered in 9mm than .40
>It's falling out of favor with agencies that made it popular in the first place
The only people that want it are the ones who fell for the stupid hype, or are wanna be copfags. Either way, absolutely halal.
Best loads are only like 100 joules more than 9mm's best loads and you get limited capacity and sharper recoil. 10mm is better than both .40 and .45. It's the same general diameter as a .40 but delivers more force, and is smaller than .45 (allowing more capacity) while still having more joules than .45 can possibly offer, thanks to how slow .45 is. The only reason to consider either .40 or .45 over 10mm is availability.
>>29987311
Everything u said was true but
>marginal ballistic improvement still just a pistol caliber
The thing is anon no one can possibly cc a ak47 or ar15 not even the ak pistols or ar15 pistols.
So one of the pistol calibers have to be king of all pistol calibers reasonably speaking of 9/40/45.
>>29987311
Father still has his S&W 4006 that was issued to him from his occupation as a correctional officer. I dig I it. Would take my 9 over it any day. But if you need to put holes in a baddy. It'll get the job done just as well as any other bullet imo
>>29987348
DO YOU EVEN OBREZ FAGGOT
>>29987153
Louder, harder recoiling and harder on the gun itself than 9mm but not as big/heavy or low pressure as .45. Wouldn't be my first, second or even fifth choice personally.
There's a video somewhere of a cop trapped in his car and tries to shoot out his windshield with a 9. All the bullets deflect and he just starts bashing it with his pistol instead. I'll try finding the link...
>>29987326
Which if what you say is true (never shot a 10mm but still not denying your claims) why wouldn't there be more of a demand for it?
>>29987311
The wear and tear is relative because if you end up going with a higher grain bullet for 9mm to match 40 ballistics, you get similar wear just as fast.
>>29987365
>the bullets just deflect
Yeah, this doesn't happen. If such a video even exists, what's happening is that the bullets put holes in the window, but the window didn't just shatter, because they're designed to not shatter and send shards of glass everywhere. After weakening it with bullet holes, he tried to hammer out the window.
9mm would not "deflect" from a point blank shot perpendicular to a car window.
>>29987378
There aren't many guns chambered in it, and not many people even know about it who aren't huge into guns.
Look up the load sheets for 10mm buffalo bore loads and compare them to the big three pistol calibers. It's easy to see.
>>29987262
Skool, bro
Gimme a break, I'm only on a couple hours of sleep and I'm writing with my phone so proof reading is annoying. The message I thought was clear enough
>>29987153
If got big hands and strong wrists, then there's no downside to .40 for defence. Shit, I'm a manlet and I a full-size m&p 40 with no issue. Its a mild increase in punch for a mild increase in recoil. Not a great range round, but eh, trade offs.
>>29987153
40 is a bit tougher to shoot than either 9mm or .45 because it has 9mm pressure (35k psi) but with a much heavier bullet. This makes it more difficult to shoot than either a 9 or a .45 (which has around 20k psi)
.45 has the best handling characteristics of the three (for me) because recoil feels slower and gentler, which I believe follows from the volume of the barrel and the low pressure.
The weaknesses of .45 are trajectory, speed, and capacity.
The weakness of .40 is its handling characteristics. The weakness of 9mm is its terminal effect, which is negligibly inferior (in my technically unqualified opinion) to that of .40, which has almost the same frontal area as 9mm and can over penetrate.
>>29987428
If I had to pick one, it'd be a .45 due to the insane load versatility from 75 grain to 230 grain.
>>29987451
Source for versatility of .45
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45auto2.html
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=382BkpHcvNo
>>29987153
>but what is the downside it shares with 9mm
Handgun rounds above 9mm yet below the big revolver rounds are about equally shitty in terms of "stoppan powah" so you are effectively trading a few bullets for fractions of centimeter better chance hitting something CNS and a an extra touch of bullet weight if barrier penetration is a consideration.
I cc a glock 27 because I grew up shooting one so stuck with the devil I knew. It's not a bad round but 9mm is good enough.
>>29987378
Not terribly popular, people complain about .40 recoil and 10mm is snappier than that.
>>29987511
>10mm equally shitty in terms of stopping power
>.357 magnum performance
>shitty
>>29987526
Meant that in terms of 9mm, .40, .45.
Respect to .357, we're it not for a bit of tinnitus in the right ear from shooting a snub nose one with no earpro once it would be my cc of choice.
Anyone here have experience with .357 sig?
I own a .40, and this is what's meant by "worst of both worlds":
>recoil similar to .45; i.e., lots of fucking aim-spoiling recoil
>not much more effective than 9mm
Just get the fucking 9mm and train to be an accurate shot, and use ammunition suitable for whatever you're shooting at. Blacks are especially susceptible to Hornady Home Defense.
>>29987153
I dont think is a bad caliber, but id prefer a g26 to a 27 for capacity and recoil.
BUT, between a g19 and a 23... dunno. Might get the 23.
>>29987562
>Anyone here have experience with .357 sig?
I own a .40S&W P2000, a .357sig P226, and I used to own a Beretta 92 compact in 9mm. I've shot them all pretty well (500 rounds+ each)
Something that became really apparent while practicing drawing and firing on a steel target was that the sig has some fucking authority to it. It barks, it jumps, and it makes the target bounce, especially with Sig Sauer brand ammo, which is loaded hotter than other commercial, but not as well as stuff like Underwood.
As far as a self defense situation goes, it's perfectly shootable, but i'm not sure what benefits there are to using the round over a more widespread one besides making DAMN sure whatever you're shooting at knows you're shooting at it.
>>29987153
In a true compromise both sides leave unhappy.
>>29987426
I think the rebuttal would be that if you can shoot .40 well, you can shoot 9mm better.
>>29987428
What about when we are talking about .40 S&W rounds at 180 grain at 950 fps or +p hollow points at 155 at 1200 fps? I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm legitimately curious. I use the 180 gr rounds for target shooting and the +p for my self defense ammo out of a USP Compact .40 S&W.
My dad just bought a USP Compact in 9mm, and I'm thinking about trading my .40 for a 9. I love the USP (it was an emotional buy that I got at cost). It's my first gun that I bought myself, so I'm not sure if I can bring myself to sell it unless the difference is clear.
my ammo supplier (GA Arms) most comparable rounds in 9mm would be:
run of the mill FMJ 9mm115gr 1150 fps
NATO FMJ124gr1150 fps
heavy FMJ147gr 950 fps
+P heavy JHP147gr1050 fps
+P+ light JHP115gr1300 fps
again the numbers for 40 are (all from GAA except buffalo):
run of the mill FMJ .40 S&W165gr 1050 fps
heavy FMJ180gr 950 fps
+P light JHP155gr 1200 fps
+P+ light JHP155gr 1300 fps
+P medium JHP165gr 1100 fps
+P "buffalo bore"180gr1300 fps
I'm autistic enough to make that chart but not autistic enough to know the math to calculate that into joules. I found the buffalo bore round when I was making this chart, but it costs 1.20 a round, so not exactly affordable.
>>29987741
my chart got fucked here's a picture of it.
In this comparison, .40 delivers 50 grains more lead at similar velocities to 9mm. I don't know how big of a deal this is, but in this particular comparison, .40 packs more heat.
I only have a .40, but I understand that there are many more ammo choices for 9mm than there are for .40. GA Arms might not have the fanciest, newest, wiz-bang calibers (they didn't have the buffalo bore caliber for .40), so there could be better 9mm options I don't know about.
>>29987326
>protip
>10mm is .40(inches)
>>29987295
>lol I could get shot by .22lr all day long
Is there a caliber that doesn't make a nasty wound in ballistic gel?
>>29987311
I spent all day with a cop last time I worked a polling place. He was a pretty cool guy.
Someone asked him what his issue was, it was some kind of .40
Then they asked him what his personal carry was, Glock 17. Two reasons if I recall correctly:
#Hits on center of mass > muh stopping power
and Glock because of simplicity of construction.
>>29987879
>>protip
>>10mm is .40(inches) YES
>.40 =10x23
>10mm Auto=10x25mm
>>29987153
>Why is the 40 considered the worst of both worlds? I get that it has the limited round capacity of the 45, but what is the downside it shares with 9mm?
ITT: pic related
>>29987304
So no ones gonna correct me?
>>29987879
What did I say in my post, that your post is contrary to?
>>29988394
That was a 10mm
.40 would have just pissed the moose off
>>29987304
Don't sell your 19. If you want to dabble in .40 get a usp.
>>29988414
no no, it was confirmed as a glock 23 chambered in .40S&W but nice try
>>29987567
*tips fedora*
Race is a social construct.
>>29987153
>>29987348
>>29987326
>>29987817
>>29988333
>>29988394
So, I got pretty autistic and wrote a program to calculate kinetic energy with a given bullet weight in grains and a velocity in feet per second.
I updated my chart to include kinetic energy in joules for some common 9mm Luger and .40 S&W loads.
I found .40 was more powerful in every category with the exception of the NATO FMJ round, which I found surprising. Since people are asking, I can go ahead and run some common .45 ACP loads.
If I'm really bored, I might add in a function that calculates how many joules per dollar you get (aka bang for your buck. If you had x amount of money to spend, what ammo would you buy to do the most total damage.
Another thing I found interesting is that the bullet velocity makes a much bigger difference in power than bullet mass, since the velocity is squared in the formula, ie, 165gr 40 hits harder than 180gr 40
>>29987153
.45 super btfos 9mm +p+
>>29988801
Add 10mm, but be warned, your program may not be able to handle such large numbers
>>29988801
>>29988825
bullshit it does. I got the math to say it doesn't.
A 9mm +P+ round with a mass of 115 gr traveling at 1300 fps hits at 5850 joules.
A regular .45 ACP round that is 185 gr traveling at 900 fps only hits at 4511 joules.
Even if you get a 230 gr round traveling at 810 fps, you still only hit at 4542 joules.
.45 ACP is a chode round.
>edit mistake, i accidentally put 40sw for one of the 9mm spots in the last chart, fixed it here.
Also, shit wasn't expecting .40 Short and Weak to do so well. Not selling mine, holy shit.
.40 S&W is still good for minimum power factor loads for competition, and works well out of carbines
>>29989081
.45 super not .45 acp, same dimensions with a higher pressure rating.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45super.html
>>29988997
I added it. I've been using only GA arms so far because it's easier for me to use then running down shit all over the internet. I feel like these can't be the best 10mm loads, because they are using the same bullets as a 40. I guess that it makes sense for 10mm to use 165gr and 180 gr, but I was expecting more.
If you have some +p+ load you like to use, I'll add it in.
>>29989229
.45 super just redeemed 45 ACP.
I picked the one with the highest muzzle velocity at a 4 inch barrel which happened to be double tap JHP
185gr at 1328 fps equals 9821 joules. Highest one on the list so far.
>>29989268
>>29989081
You do realize that's mostly wasted energy right. The round will go through your target, and /might/ incapacitate them. You're better off just shooting them more with easier follow up shots than praying for the rare one hit takedown. It happens sure, but not often enough I'd gamble my life on it.
>>29989081
.45 super can push 230 grain bullet 1100 fps. Most .45 autos can handle it with a heavier recoil spring.
>>29989413
Spring is one thing but what about the extra pressure?
>>29989081
You joules fags are hilarious.
Shoot what you like to shoot, people. lol.
>>29989413
that's actually less energy.
The formula is (1/2*mass)*(velocity^2), so more than anything you want a fast projectile coming out of the front.
230 gr at 110 fps is 8377 joules. Once you get into the realm of 45 supers, I would suggest getting the fastest round available, even if it is a little lighter.
>>29989390
You have a legitimate point. The more shots you can get on target, the better. It may very well be the case that 147gr / 950 fps 9mm might be the best ammo on that list, because it will be the easiest one to control.
If you want penetration into your target, I would personally go with .40 or 10mm. If I could get it, I would want .45 ACP super .
If you want control, I would say use 9mm followed by .45. FWIW, we are getting into subjective territory.
>>29989538
At the end of the day, any of these rounds are lethal to a human sized target.
>>29989081
>4542 joules
Dude, a 7,62 NATO runs around 2000+ joules. You made a wrong calculation somewhere.
>>29989572
>At the end of the day, any of these rounds are lethal to a human sized target.
yep.
If you feel the need to have 15+ rounds of self defense ammo, buy a 9mm no questions.
If you feel comfortable with less ammo, carry whatever the fuck you want.
Thinking an extra 1000 joules or an extra 5 rounds is going to be the difference between life and death is silly in the real world.
>>29989459
.45 super conversions is just a recoil spring swap, and if using glock then it is recommended you switch to a barrel with better chamber support.
>>29989390
Lighter loads for edc
Heavy loads for innawoods
I carry polycase ARX for edc, then switch to underwood when on a hike
>>29987304
"Power" means essentially shit all and the difference in "power" between 9mm and .40 is negligible. Go for 9mm because capacity is way, way more important than "power."
>>29989620
I would also recommend putting in stronger magazine springs as the slide will cycle faster, giving the magazine less time to present the next round.
>>29987153
For the most part, a handgun caliber is a handgun caliber. 45 isn't going to kill someone more dead than 9mm would. That being said, you're probably never going to fire more than 3 shots in self defense anyways, so who gives a shit really?
>>29987526
Factory 357 loads = around the same energy as 10m. That being said, you can hand load 357 to be hot as snot and waaaaaaaaaaaay out perform 10mm.
Original 357 loads were obnoxiously hotter then the are today. Hand load something with 44 magnum energies and slap that shit into a ruger or something and you'd be totally set.
>>29989582
ah shit goddamn, let me double check with 7.62 nato
> 147gr at 2733 comes out at 33,000 joules
yeah I think I accidentally a decimal place, office space style.
well, relative ratios should still be fine, just have to move everything over an order of magnitude
yeah, wikipedia says 3,304 J for a 7.62 * 39 mm NATO cartridge. So yeah, everything still stands, just chop a number off the end.
This list should be less wrong.
sad face.
>>29989600
update:
i accidentally a decimal place, should be an extra hundred joules.
>>29989889
It's ok senpai we forgib you.
>>29989880
Holy shit I love my .40s so much more now!
>>29989950
thanks :)
>>29990021
If you have a gun rated for +P+, this round will fuck your shit up:
http://www.georgia-arms.com/new-40-smith-wesson-155gr-speer-bonded-unicore-hollow-point-p/
(they are out of it boo. I carry +p 155gr and that will still fuck your shit up)
wear earplugs though bc goddamn
>>29990101
Can the USP fullsize handle it?
>>29989880
>.40 180 gr 1300 fps
nope.
>>29989268
Look at Underwoods loadings for 10mm
>115gr Xtreme Defender @ 1700fps
>135gr JHP @ 1600fps
>155 JHP @1500fps
>180 FMJ @1300fps
After that its 200gr @1275 and 220gr HC @1200fps.
But you get to a point of diminishing return, where the bullet weight is high and the speed is slower to the point of the same amount of energy is imparted as a lighter grain round.
Oh and there's no such thing as +p 10mm.
It's not a thing, regardless of what some companies might market it as.
>>29987262
How do you forget that at any given time, at least 1/4 to 1/3 of /k/ is hammered?
>>29990110
wikipedia seems to think so but this forum post makes me not feel so confident, using ammo mentioned:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121935
maybe just +p is fine. the owners manual for the compact says that +p is fine, but will cause your gun to wear faster.
>>29990229
http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/product_info.php/pName/20rds-40-sw-p-buffalo-bore-180gr-jhp-ammo
yeah, i misread the box. that one needs to change. they have 165 at 1300 and 180 at 1100. my mistake. will change.
>>29990301
okay, i'll run the numbers for you. Hot damn, looks fucking serious even before I put them in.
115gr Xtreme Defender @ 1700fps 1000 J
135gr JHP @ 1600fps 1040 J
155 JHP @1500fps 1050 J
180 FMJ @1300fps 916 J
adding them to the doc now they beat everything
>>29990301
10mm is like 40 S&W's dad
>>29990578
Add in some 7.62x25 loads
>>29990616
any one in particular? what are you carrying?
>>29990616
I just grabbed some rando rounds.
Looks like the weaker one is weak, the stronger ones are in between 40 & 10mm.
I guess this is a good round to carry if you live in the soviet block. It's a bit weird because it is so light but freaking fast. It's not quite a carbine round, but it's different. light and fast.
>>29990578
>10mm is like 40 S&W's dad
It literally is.
Without 10mm the .40s&w likely wouldn't exist.
>>29990939
I'm not carrying but the Tok is a sleeper. Maybe .357 sig next? try to get buffalo for the tok and sig if they make it.
>>29990939
holy fuck that 7.62 tok looks pretty nasty. Does anyone remember the thread not long ago the ude shot himself in the foot with his tok?
>>29989822
>Original 357 loads were obnoxiously hotter then the are today.
Why did that ever change? Stoopin powah in a revolver or carbine round is great.
>>29989654
>>29989572
These are both valid. The situations in which you want pen, and velocity are much more applicable for animals and shooting through cover unhindered.
As for the point of EDC consistent shots, I was surprised to find that .380's come out the best in actual cases of quickly stopping a target. (Police reports and whatnot) though I'm not going to say it's hands down better than 9, as there's obviously more 9mm data to go off of than .380, but the cases of .380 look quite promising.
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power
>>29991308
http://www.georgia-arms.com/new-380-acp-90gr-speer-bonded-unicore-hollow-point/
that hollow point comes in at 90gr @ 950 fps, which is about 244 joules. I've never shot a .380 but I bet they are easy to control.
I like the take home of that article, which is basically the gun that you train with is the gun that you are best with.
I thought about selling my .40 earlier in this thread, definitely not. I'm happy with how I can shoot it, I like shooting it, and it does give me piece of mind that a .40 can fuck shit up. I'm also happy to know whatever caliber you choose is a good choice.
You don't have to carry a .44 magnum to be effective. It wouldn't hurt to have a couple of rifles, though.
>bump
>>29991455
>happy to know whatever caliber you choose is a good choice.
>You don't have to carry a .44 magnum to be effective. It wouldn't hurt to have a couple of rifles, though.
This really should be the point of this entire thread.
From what I've seen of self defense videos and combat footage: People shot by handguns (encompassing 9mm to 10mm) look like they got stung by a bee unless it hit something important. People hit by rifles drop like a marionette with the strings cut.
Just a matter of energy and its transfer. And longarms have a hell of a lot more energy.
Bump for the cause
>>29992160
>>29993977
what is the cause? I am mathematical anon. You want more calibers?
> bump
>>29987153
i love my .40, it was my fifth caliber to get though.
>plz no bully my vp
>>29987153
Because .40 is a compromise for the limp-wristed faggots in the FBI who can't handle 10mm in its true, unmolested, form.
>>29987304
Capacity is king. None of the big 3 handgun calibers are statistically likely to kill in one shot.
Let's take 3 guns and 3 scenarios. Your 9mm has 18 rounds, the .40 has 14, and the .45 has 10. The scenarios assume you have missed a few shots due to stress or the attacker taking cover, it takes you 3 shots to hit the attacker in each scenario.
One attacker
>You hit him once with the .45
Big ouch hole but didn't hit vitals, now his method of incapacitation is bleeding out. This is gonna take about 3 minutes. You have 7 rounds left in this gunfight.
>You hit him once with the .40, same story but he will die in 3.5 minutes, you have 11 rounds left.
>You manage to hit him twice with 9mm due to its low recoil properties. He will die of blood loss in 2 minutes. For the sake of being unbiased let's say you did only hit him once, you still have 4 minutes and 15 shots left. This is really going to help with the next scenarios.
Next scenario: two attackers
>same premise except let's say you did hit attacker 1 in a vital area. Do you want 7 rounds, 11 rounds, or 15 rounds? Next scenario...
3 attackers
>Let's assume it took you 3 shots to hit the second guy and you hit vitals. Do you want 4 rounds, 8 rounds, or 12 rounds?
3 attackers is not an exaggeration imo, and I understand people are going to jump on me and say WELL TRAIN BETTER SO YOU CAN HIT HIM IN ONE SHOT. To that person I say you haven't read a lot of actual shooting stories, even ones involving professionals. If you can't handle a real adrenaline dump and miss vitals, or worse that person takes cover, you're going to be in a gunfight, not a 1-3 foot away mugging-type self defense scenario. That's why personally I choose more rounds rather than less. Now if you're talking magnum calibers then yes you may kill the dude in one shot, but in the case of normal handgun rounds, blood loss IS NOT supposed to be the method of incapacitation. You have to hit vitals, and more rounds to do so is always better.
>>29987153
It's just 10mm fags crying about how they missed their chance at relevance. (inb4 a dozen MUH 10MM replies)
Basically, it's got the power of a specialty 9mm+P bullet while being cheaper than the specialty bullet, and also holding usually one less bullet than a typical 9mm gun (while still being able to be doublestacked, unlike .45)
So, basically, because you are able to push the 9mm round to its very limit and get a performance similar to standard .40, all the 10mm fags go "LEL ITS FUCKING 9MM BITCH BABY GLASS WRISTS JUST USE A 10MM PLEASE WE NEED MARKET DEMAND SO THAT MY CALIBER WILL BECOME RELEVANT PLEASE BUY MY FAVORITE CALIBER"
But, of course, that's *Expensive* specialty +P 9mm ammo, which is more expensive than standard .40.
>tl;dr its the 10mm fags crying and memespouting from the shadows about women in the workplace, for some reason
>>29996832
Those scenarios all point towards a hi capacity semi auto for sure. But what about being in a Zim zam scenario where you have an ambush by a single attacker and it is all up close? Here you would almost want a revolver of some sort, since you could press the gun to the attacker's body and fire (Zim's semi auto jammed after first round because it was pressed against the body). Granted, you might be more likely to hit vitals here.
This scenario seems more probably than what you have described where there are multiple attackers and you have enough time and distance to engage all three like you're in vats mode on fallout or something.
And I'm no hater either, I carry a glock 19 and sometimes a usp9. But I do worry about the effectiveness of a semi auto in a hand to hand fight or in a scenario where I'm down and being attacked from above.
>>29987262
>what are typos
this isn't a term paper for english grammar ya know
>>29987311
you mean haram*
>>29996905
He hit a vital area, put that ape down real quick. Wouldn't have mattered if he had a 9, 40, or 45.
I agree with you on the revolver thing but the advantages of a semi auto far outweigh that. Zims gun was designed to be concealable and convenient, a revolver is a bit fatter, the ammo isn't as easily carried, and it's harder to reload.
>>29996974
Yeah he definitely had an optimal shot using Niggsbane.
Still though, If i was in that situation and the first shot jammed my semi and didn't stop the attack, i wouldn't give two shits about how concealable or easy to reload my gun was.
>>29988394
I own and shoot 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP pistols.
Though I can feel the difference, it is completely negligible for me.
My choice of 'prefered' caliber is based on its common availability & cost, but mostly round count for standard flush-fit mags in common pistols.
For example: My P226 in takes flush fitting MecGar Mags that hold 18 rounds of 9mm. I believe the 92FS takes flush fit mags that hold 17 rounds of 9mm?
Meanwhile, my XD40 only holds 12 rounds of .40SW. And my 1911 holds 6,7 or 8 rounds of .45acp depending on model and magazine manufacture.
I just dont see a good reason for reducing the number of rounds I have for what seems like marginal differences in terminal ballistics.
Or for that matter, for a given amount of bulk and weight in ammo carrying capacity (extra ammo/mags) how many extra rounds of 9mm i can carry compared to .40sw or .45acp.
As far as shooting paper, I enjoy and can accurately shoot with all 3 different calibers. If i had to choose just one, as an all purpose round, I'd take the 9mm.
>>29996818
Watch all the edges on that keyboard, internet tough guy.
>>29996832
When a high velocity projectile hits a body of liquid, the liquid acts like a piston without a cylinder. This phenomenon is referred to as hydrostatic shock. You can also look up the water hammer effect if you want to use something similar to open a wine bottle without an opener.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock
You typically don't get this with handgun rounds unless they are large bore, high energy, or hollow points. Basically, the more energy you can put on target, the more likely you are to get hydrostatic shock.
This is what produces what's called a "temporary wound cavity". The permanent wound cavity being the gaping hole. The temporary wound cavity is the force of the liquid in the body rapidly expanding against vital organs.
A powerful .40 S&W load with a hollow point is enough to produce the hydrostatic shock effect. It's got the most energy out of the big 3 handgun cartridges. You generally only get this with a rifle, which is again why ideally your sidearm should just buy you time to get to a rifle.
>article on .40 S&W hydrostatic shock and temporary wound cavitation
>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1572346107002255
Autopsies have found fatal brain hemorrhaging in subjects that have been shot in the chest. Still, you can't rely on hydrostatic shock. There are many variables involved with hydrostatic shock, and you still have to get good hits.
Even if you hit someone with a .44 mag you can't rely on hydrostatic shock. Still, I'd rather have a rifle.
>>29987153
>capacity of a .45
15+1 in a normal compact double stack. It's marginally bigger than a 9mm. Everything is capped at 10 if you live in a fascist state anyway.
>>29997302
Have you ever fired 10mm before?
>>29996859
But practice ammo for 9mm is still cheaper than standard .40, which means I only have to pay for the expensive stuff for carrying
what I want to know is the following:
Super cheap 9mm FMJ vs super cheap 40 S&W FMJ.
Which wins and why? I think that is much more revealing and a better "naked" test of the calibers.
>>29991455
Basically this.
What I read about .40 in police reports turned me off of them, as well as coroner reports.
Also I have a big pride boner for 10mm and .40 just seemed like an afront to the cartridge.
I ultimately went with 9mm instead of .357 sig because the ammo was SIGnificantly cheaper, thus more practice.
My next piece will be a .380 after reading more coroner reports, and personal experience with even my 9 subcompact being too heavy for carry under skirts and such.
Everyone is a snowflake in the handgun world, they each need to get what's the best fit in their own eyes, so they'll feel more comfortable with practicing and carrying more often.
