< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry  (Read 10262 times)

Offline bullit

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 2143
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #20 on: December 07, 2012, 10:02:59 AM »
Great information if you are ever attacked by a gelatin block.......

Offline wusker

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: Lincoln, Ne
  • Posts: 143
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #21 on: December 07, 2012, 11:36:09 AM »
The caliber is the least important part of this decision. I was just wondering why the Walther? I prefer to spend my money on American made products have you looked at the S&W M&P 9 compact. It carries more rounds and is about 100 bucks cheaper, great ergonomics, and they have tons of mods for the trigger reset and travel. I was just cuious as to what drove you to that gun.

Offline unfy

  • Lead Benefactor
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Location: TN (was La Vista, NE)
  • Posts: 1830
  • !!! SCIENCE !!!
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2012, 01:59:06 PM »
PPS 9mm retail suggrsted at $599, M&P 9mm compact is $719.  The m&p compact can carry 4 or 5 more depending on magazine options etc. 

M&P is also up to 20% wider (0.2 inches).   The M&P is 0.3 inches longer but 0.1 inches shorter (height).  Lastly, M&P weighs over 2 ounces more (if this is good or bad is up to you).

It's possible he also held both and his hand / eyes preferred the PPS ?

I know, for me, glocks are at the bottom of the list, the different XD's above them, followed by a mix of diff stuff from different folks, and sigs/s&w revolvers/colts/decent 1911's being towards the top of the list.  And this is only by ergonomics and what my hands like for comfort and eyes like for sight picture.

To avoid flame wars - glocks and xd's and such are fine pistols, my hands and eyes just prefer something different.
hoppe's #9 is not the end all be all woman catching pheramone people make it out to be ... cause i smell of it 2 or 3 times a week but remain single  >:D

Offline lneuke

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Location: Waverly
  • Posts: 124
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #23 on: December 07, 2012, 02:20:09 PM »
I've had good experiences with both my PPQ and my P99.  Walther makes some good firearms...I enjoy the larger sized 9mm handguns though, as opposed to the Sub-Compacts.

Offline tatejo

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 25
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #24 on: December 07, 2012, 05:27:25 PM »
As for Walther.... Much prefer them over the M&P becasue of the size. The width really is what won me over, when putting it into a holster just felt much better. I have been considering the Shield though as they are pretty similar to the Walther, just can't find one available.

I have very small hands too so the PPS is a great fit.

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2012, 02:11:01 PM »
IIRC, that photo on gelatin results was from an FBI study after the Miami shoot out in which two FBI agents were killed and 5 wounded, out of 8 agents, because they were under gunned.   The FBI eventually settled on 10mm weapons but after several complaints about size and recoil they reverted to 9mm.    The series of tests the FBI undertook were used to establish a standard that dictated that a small arms round must pass through  at least 12" of gelatin but no more than 14".    The upper limit, I understand, was to give manufacturers  of weapons and ammo for government agencies a standard  they  could manufacture against.   Of course,  if one wants to carry a weapon known for sheer knock down power then the Desert Eagle 0.50 caliber should be their choice..   ;D    Concealing would be a big problem.  (When I was in grad school one of my classmates, after seeing a Dirty Harry move, IIRC, went out and bought a .44 magnum revolver.  He fired it one handed on the range and the recoil of his first shot broke his wrist. )

Since my  need for personal protection has arisen I've  spent considerable time researching my options.    I settled on 9mm because of availability, cost of ammo, and penetration testing, which fit between 12" and 14".   I ruled out a 10mm because I didn't want a heavy recoil to subconsciousness affects on my aim by pulling or flinching.   I first decided on a Ruger LC9, but after watching some video reviews on it I saw it being compared to the Beretta Nano and the Glock 26.    I decided on  the Nano after watching Hitchcock45 reviews on youtube:     
He was remarkably accurate with it out to 50 yards and a little less so at 70-80 yards.   He put 4 out 6 rounds into a turkey sized target at 80 yards.   I saw another  video where a fellow put 3 out  of  6 rounds into a man target at 100 yards. 

I picked it up on Tuesday and have been dry firing it.  I call it the poor man's Glock 26. I've seen reports after 1,000, 2000 and 3,000 rounds of fire, which show it to be a highly reliable when using 124gr or heavier bullets.   I'm going to use 147gr FMJ, primarily for its penetrating power since only the 10mm generates enough hydrostatic shock to cause significant cavitation.

I notice that the length of my trigger finger is such that pulling the trigger causes the front sight to drift to the left.   I will have to test various grips to see which one causes the least drift, but so far the harder I grip it with two hands the more stable the front sight is.    I like the way  it disassembles.  It doesn't have a safety on the side, but it has one on the trigger which prevents it from firing if the weapon is dropped and inertia attempts to pull the trigger.  A lady in Waverly, NE shot herself this last week when she set down to retie her shoe laces and her pistol fell  out of her pocket, hit the ground and discharged into her leg.  Lucky lady.  It could  have gone into her abdominal or thoracic cavity, or through  her jaw and through the floor of her brain cavity.     Don't know if she had a CCP.   If not, her luck won't be as great.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 02:25:38 PM by GreyGeek »

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #26 on: December 08, 2012, 09:40:20 PM »
Here's another pic for the caliber wars ....



Just to make sure, people DO realize this is a photoshopped joke picture, right?

Just checking...
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #27 on: December 08, 2012, 09:53:38 PM »
IIRC, that photo on gelatin results was from an FBI study after the Miami shoot out in which two FBI agents were killed and 5 wounded, out of 8 agents, because they were under gunned.

Which just goes to show that the FBI, also, attempts to find hardware solutions to software issues.

Quote
   A lady in Waverly, NE shot herself this last week when she set down to retie her shoe laces and her pistol fell  out of her pocket, hit the ground and discharged into her leg. 


I wonder what pistol this was?  Considering that almost every modern pistol has a drop safety such that there is no chance the firearm will discharge without the trigger being pulled, AND that it hit her in the leg (which is a common target for a self-inflicted ND), it makes me wonder.

Any link to a news article about that?  I can't seem to find one.

Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline Nebraska12

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jul 2012
  • Posts: 31
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #28 on: December 08, 2012, 10:25:09 PM »
I currently carry a 9mm....but I would also carry my .40......and will eventually carry a .45. Rinse, Rotate, and Repeat. Others have already covered it here, the caliber doesn't matter nearly as much as your proficiency with the firearm of your choosing. Find what you like, and practice, practice, then practice some more.

Whatever you choose....we are expecting pictures! Good luck with your search.
'Fortes Fortuna Juvat'[/SIZE][/I]

Offline unfy

  • Lead Benefactor
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Location: TN (was La Vista, NE)
  • Posts: 1830
  • !!! SCIENCE !!!
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #29 on: December 08, 2012, 11:03:50 PM »
Just to make sure, people DO realize this is a photoshopped joke picture, right?

you mean mushroom clouds in gelatin are a lie??!!??! :P
hoppe's #9 is not the end all be all woman catching pheramone people make it out to be ... cause i smell of it 2 or 3 times a week but remain single  >:D

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #30 on: December 09, 2012, 08:24:41 AM »
That photo may be a photo-shopped combination of several ballistic tests like  this one:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/9mm%20US%20M882.jpg
but it is a fair comparison.  All  of these gelatin test depend on the formula for the gelatin, which is now thoroughly standardized, but there is no guarantee that a particular study used standardized gelatin over some formula which enhances their study goals.


Fackler, Martin L., M.D.: "FBI 1993 Wound Ballistics Seminar: Efficacy of Heavier Bullets Affirmed."  Wound Ballistics Review, 1(4): 8-9; 1994.    Fackler presents findings from the 1993 FBI Wound Ballistics Seminar. The following is a short extract:
Quote
"The Firearms Training Unit of the FBI held a Wound Ballistics Seminar from 19 through 22 January 1993 at the FBI Academy.

"Thirty-seven forensic pathologists, trauma surgeons, law enforcement trainers, firearms examiners, and ordnance engineers met to discuss handgun bullet effects and bullet testing. This group unanimously affirmed the principles set down by the FBI workshop of 1987: primarily among these was that a bullet must possess the capacity to penetrate deeply enough to reach and disrupt vital body structures if it is to stand any chance of performing reliably in the variety of circumstances a law enforcement officer might meet in a gunfight. Since the 1987 workshop, most law enforcement agencies have adopted the more deeply penetrating heavier bullets. At the 1993 symposium, trainers from five large departments (California Highway Patrol, Indianapolis PD, San Diego PD, Louisiana State Police, and Amarillo PD) reported data showing excellent performance from bullets chosen using the FBI penetration criterion. Several of these trainers had polled their counterparts in other departments and found that their highly favorable observations and impressions of the heavier bullets were widely shared.

"The findings of this symposium are especially timely since it appears that three gunwriters have recently attempted to trump up a 'controversy' by claiming that the heavier subsonic bullets used by the majority of law enforcement agencies have been turning in a poor record in 'street' shootings. The story of how several senior trainers exposed this attempted fraud by these gunwriter/bullet salesmen was the subject of IWBA Bulletin No. 1, which accompanied the third issue of the Wound Ballistics Review."

The last two paragraphs of page 11 of the 1987 FBI report sums it up pretty well:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf
but I won't post them because  of Digital  Rights Management restrictions so you'll just have to go to that web page  and scroll down to pg 11.


Newgard, Ken, M.D.: "The Physiological Effects of Handgun Bullets: The Mechanisms of Wounding and Incapacitation."  Wound Ballistics Review, 1(3): 12-17; 1992.    This article examines the physiological mechanisms of the human body to provide a medical answer to the question: How many times is it necessary to shoot an assailant before he is incapacitated?

Newgard reviews the physiological mechanisms of gunshot wound trauma incapacitation:

"The only method of reliably stopping a human with a handgun is to decrease the functioning capability of the central nervous system (CNS) and specifically, the brain and cervical spinal cord. There are two ways to accomplish this goal: 1) direct trauma to the CNS tissue resulting in tissue destruction and 2) lack of oxygen to the brain caused by bleeding and loss of blood pressure."

Newgard discusses the body's blood loss sensory and compensatory mechanisms (venous constriction, increased cardiac output and vascular fluid transfer), and the degree in which these mechanisms respond to, and compensate for, hemorrhagic shock. He reviews clinical tests of human tolerance for blood loss, which "demonstrate that adequate blood pressure can be maintained with minimal symptoms until a 20% blood deficit was reached." Newgard provides the following example:

"For an average 70 kg (155 lb.)* male the cardiac output will be 5.5 liters (~1.4 gallons) per minute. His blood volume will be 60 ml per kg (0.92 fl. oz. per lb.) or 4200 ml (~1.1 gallons). Assuming his cardiac output can double under stress (as his heart beats faster and with greater force). his aortic blood flow can reach 11 liters (~2.8 gallons) per minute. If one assumes a wound that totally severs the thoracic aorta, then it would take 4.6 seconds to lose 20% of his blood volume from one point of injury. This is the minimum time in which a person could lose 20% of his blood volume.... This analysis does not account for oxygen contained in the blood already perfusing the brain, that will keep the brain functioning for an even longer period of time.

"Most wounds will not bleed at this rate because: 1) bullets usually do not transect (completely sever) blood vessels, 2) as blood pressure falls, the bleeding slows, 3) surrounding tissue acts as a barrier to blood loss, 4) the bullet may only penetrate smaller blood vessels, 5) bullets can disrupt tissue without hitting any major blood vessels resulting in a slow ooze rather than rapid bleeding, and 6) the above mentioned compensatory mechanisms.
"

Newgard investigates the survival times of persons who received fatal gunshot wounds to determine if the person who was shot had enough time to shoot back. He concludes:

"Instantaneous incapacitation is not possible with non central nervous system wounds and does not always occur with central nervous system wounds. The intrinsic physiologic compensatory mechanisms of humans makes it difficult to inhibit a determined, aggressive person's activities until he has lost enough blood to cause hemorrhagic shock. The body's compensatory mechanisms designed to save a person's life after sustaining a bleeding wound, allow a person to continue to be a threat after receiving an eventually fatal wound, thus necessitating more rounds being fired in order to incapacitate or stop the assailant."

These facts are why I am selecting a 147gr FMJ instead of a FHP, and if I ever get in an  unavoidable shoot out my plan is to fire two quick shots to the center of mass,  the easiest place to hit because it is the biggest target, and then duck for cover from which I can  continue to shoot with minimum exposure until  the assailant falls or leaves the area.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2012, 08:30:18 AM by GreyGeek »

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #31 on: December 09, 2012, 08:31:33 AM »
Oh, I forgot..   Here is an interesting video  by a doctor who discusses gun shot wounds.

Offline GreyGeek

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Dec 2012
  • Posts: 1687
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #32 on: December 09, 2012, 08:35:58 AM »
And then there is this video  about the 9mm, for grins and giggles:

Offline JTH

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2300
  • Shooter
    • Precision Response Training
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #33 on: December 09, 2012, 07:10:53 PM »
That photo may be a photo-shopped combination of several ballistic tests like  this one:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/9mm%20US%20M882.jpg
but it is a fair comparison.  All  of these gelatin test depend on the formula for the gelatin, which is now thoroughly standardized, but there is no guarantee that a particular study used standardized gelatin over some formula which enhances their study goals.

Rather missing the point, I think.

It is a photoshopped joke picture because the 10mm section of it has an added atomic mushroom cloud.

That makes it a little less than useful, for comparison purposes.

Quote
These facts are why I am selecting a 147gr FMJ instead of a FHP, and if I ever get in an  unavoidable shoot out my plan is to fire two quick shots to the center of mass,  the easiest place to hit because it is the biggest target, and then duck for cover from which I can  continue to shoot with minimum exposure until  the assailant falls or leaves the area.

That's an interesting choice----considering the well-known propensity of 9mm FMJ to make tiny holes on entry, proceed through, and make tiny holes on exit, without much in the way of direct consequence.  (Military folks who have used 9mm can back that up, unfortunately.) 

9mm JHP (of which there are 147gr choices), on the other hand, seems to have (within statistical reason) a similar level of effectiveness compared to .40s&w and .45acp, and also contains the heavy projectile that you suggested as optimal.  And if I recall correctly, the gelatin tests for 9mm JHP in selected types gave appropriate penetration per FBI tests.

So---why FMJ instead of JHP?
Precision Response Training
http://precisionresponsetraining.com

Offline abbafandr

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: Omaha
  • Posts: 891
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #34 on: December 09, 2012, 07:41:50 PM »
I would never use FMJ  rounds for self defense ammo.  Much ink has been spilled by more coherent writers about the lack of stopping power in 9mm FMJ.  Actually FMJ in anything is a poor choice.  Since you own the bullet, the collateral damage of an over penetrating piece of ammo is not something to be desired.

Offline Lorimor

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: Platte County
  • Posts: 1077
  • Relay 2
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #35 on: December 09, 2012, 09:16:15 PM »
And FMJ projectiles are more likely to ricochet as well.  Bullet technology has come far, especially in the last twenty years.  Take advantage of it.
"It is better to avoid than to run; better to run than to de-escalate; better to de-escalate than to fight; better to fight than to die. The very essence of self-defense is a thin list of things that might get you out alive when you are already screwed." – Rory Miller

Offline bullit

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2009
  • Posts: 2143
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2012, 06:41:53 AM »
Thus why NYPD finally came to its senses and now carries those evil flesh tearing, cop-killing, "dumb dumb" bullets....too many wounded passerbys

Offline lunchbox

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 61
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #37 on: December 10, 2012, 07:13:07 AM »
Hold on a minute! You guys are saying that people carry guns other than a 1911? I don’t believe it.

Offline LazyAce

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 34
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #38 on: December 10, 2012, 07:40:25 AM »
Just buy one of each size and two holsters--rh & lh and wear both so you can choose which one you want to pull out if need be.
LIFE`S SHORT---RIDE HARD

Offline OnTheFly

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Lincoln, NE
  • Posts: 2617
  • NFOA member #364
Re: 40 or 9mm for Concealed Carry
« Reply #39 on: December 11, 2012, 12:51:20 AM »
The website I got these photos from is gone, but I chose the Federal HST from what I saw in this persons research.

9mm Comparison


Federal HST 147gr


Fly

Si vis pacem, para bellum