NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Firearms Training and Education => Topic started by: tatejo on December 04, 2012, 08:18:28 PM
-
I am looking between the Walther PPS 9mm or 40. I am just curious what everyone's preferred caliber is for concealed carry. I believe the only advantage to the 9mm is that is can hold one more in the clip. Feel free to give any other suggestions and such....
thanks
-
Concealed carry is a fun juggling act.
Stopping power of the round if misplaced on target, rounds in the magazine, size of the weapon.
Then there's also how well the shooter can control a given round for time / accuracy on subsequent shots if necessary etc.
Size of the weapon: this thing is gonna be on your person nearly all the time (hopefully). Pick a weapon / holster combo that you'll be comfortable with. Crossbreed holsters make nearly anything comfortable hehe. I am kinda sniffing around for a smaller carry gun, personally. I'd like something in a single stack, but haven't really found one that screams 'take me home'.
Rounds in the magazine is a fun question. I personally want at least 6. My current carry gun is 12+1. I don't carry a second magazine although am seriously debating adding it to my belt. To me it's a fun line of 'have and not need' vs 'need and not have' vs 'how much junk am i carrying around?'.
Most people can control a 9MM just fine. 40's tend to have a good bit more of a snap in their recoil. With practice, either should be fine. A heavier gun (particularly a heavier slide like the solid hunk-o-metal that are Sig's) make 40's much more buttery.
I personally won't carry anything smaller than a .40/357. This puts me at 357mag, 357sig, 40, 45acp for my typical carry choices. I just don't like the 9mm or 38special. Personal preference as both of those rounds (9/38spc) have stopped many a person... I just want more oomf personally.
I'm avoiding 10mm cause of over-penetration concerns (similarly, a 357mag/357sig bullet weight choice has to be done carefully for similar considerations).
-
9mm is going to be a little bit cheaper to shoot/practice with. That's why I originally went it with and haven't changed. I think your JHP and other self defense ammo in 9mm is effective and comparable in stopping power to other popular calibers. I would also rather have 1-2 more round(s) capacity if given the choice. As far as shooting I think .40 S&W is noticeably more "snappy", but if you carry it I don't think it would be a problem if that's what you practice with/are used to.
-
(http://frontiernet.net/~netim/joke.jpg)
-
Thanks Lorimor! I saw that cartoon years ago and have been looking for it ever since!
Right click > save
-
Oh boy. Well, at least you didn't start a "9mm vs .45acp" Holy War. :)
Here's my take. (Feel free to ignore it.) Given an intelligent choice of modern JHP bullet shot from a reliable firearm, bearing in mind the fact that a pistol is an extremely poor choice to stop an attacker--there isn't really any difference between them at all.
Seriously, there isn't.
I'm not arguing that a .40s&w isn't a larger bullet, that may (or may not, depending on your load choice) have more power/momentum/energy/whatever calculation you like----however, in terms of terminal performance for citizens carrying for self-defense, there really isn't any difference. (I'm going to ignore barrier penetration/lack thereof discussions for this, since most citizen self-defense shootings don't include those issues.)
So---what do you shoot better?
What will you practice with consistently? (What can you afford to practice with consistently?) What can you carry consistently? (What will you carry consistently?)
Most citizen shootings end in either the bad guy running away without a shot being fired, or a "psychological stop," meaning that the bad guy isn't actually physically incapacitated, but instead stops because mentally they have had enough. As such, technically speaking, a .22 from a revolver can actually work quite well in a majority of such situations. (Interestingly enough, lots of "armed citizen" stories have .22s in them.)
That isn't to say that I think people should carry .22s. (Though it is better than a pointy stick.) I personally don't like the idea of carrying anything less than a 9mm (no, I don't like .380s or .32s, and the new Bond movie annoys me greatly) because with a 9mm it is certainly possible (though not easy) to achieve a physiological stop. With less than 9mm it is still possible, but much more difficult to do---and MUCH more difficult to do quickly.
With that being said, ANY handgun isn't very good at achieving a quick physiological stop. And the differences between said stop with a 9mm, .40s&w, and a .45acp is----minimal.
With every single one, it is about shot placement. With good shot placement, all three work just about the same. And if you don't have appropriate shot placement, then yet again---all three work about the same (meaning: not very well).
A good discussion of this resides at:
http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm (http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm)
Note: I don't always agree with DocGKR, nor do I always agree with Fackler. (There are some research issues I think they gloss over here and there.) That being said, I believe that the information presented in this link is pretty much spot-on with regard to:
1) equality between calibers,
2) choice of high-quality JHP,
3) the list of "best-choice" JHPs given, and
4) how most things that people worry about really don't make any difference.
My thoughts regarding ammo choice is that lots of LEOs carry Ranger-T, Federal HST, and Gold Dot ammunition. You can get those in .40s&w or 9mm---and they really do work about the same across all three versions of JHP and across the two calibers.
So---for YOUR choice: which gun will you practice with more and carry more, and most importantly, which gun gives you the best results for fast precise shot placement?
My personal choice is a basic G17: 9mm glock, 17+1 capacity. (Or a G19, which is my summer gun, with a 15+1 capacity.) I could use a G22 instead (same gun, same frame, 40s&w, couple less rounds), but my followup shots aren't quite as fast (which is very minor, because the difference is tiny) and it is a lot more expensive to practice with and shoot (which is major, because practicing hitting exactly what you need is far more important than any almost-nonexistent difference in performance).
Which one will you get good with? Go with whatever that one is. And if you don't reload, 9mm is going to be a LOT cheaper than the other choice. (Even if you reload, 9mm will still be cheaper.)
By the way: Yes, 40 recoils more. But that really shouldn't be a big deal unless 1) you are attempting to shoot it out of a pocket pistol, or 2) you have incredibly tiny hands. My wife loves to shoot her .40s. (Significantly more than she loves to shoot her 9mms.)
-
+1 with jthapkido's post....being a long time 1911 guy i.e. .45 ACP for years, I've carried a Glock 19 (124gr +p Speer GD) or Glock 23 (180 gr Win PDX) daily for the past 4-5 years (yes I mocked the plastic until shooting and owning one and one day my friend Lorimer too will see the light). Interestingly this week I began carrying the new FNH FNS9 (again with the Speer) just to be different. All that being said, one of my reasons personally for my choices in caliber these days for you conspiracy theorists/doomsdayers out there......has been the concept of "battle field" pick up or availability of ammo. In short, the world goes caput and dead LEOs around as an example. A majority today will most likely be carrying .40 S&W or 9x19 Luger... or my local WM, Scheels, Cabelas will likely be well stocked....same for my long gun choices (.223, .308, 30-06, 12 and 20 ga). Ain't a lot of 9x18 Makorav or Macaroni or Kurz or .385 Double Gauge Whisper JD Jones Express ammo out there. You just have a club at that point.
-
Another +1 on Tom's post.
Sums everything up nicely.
-
Jth nailed it. Handguns stink as a man stopper. If I knew I was going to be in a gun fight I would bring a 12 gauge or an ar15. Well, actually, I would stay home but that's beside the point.
There's a study I've seen before that shows almost no difference between handgun rounds. They looked at self defense shootings using everything from .22 to .45 and they all took basically the same number of shots to end the fight. As Jth said that is probably a case of the bad guy saying "Holy Crap! That hurts!" and quitting.
My biggest beef with .380 is the reliability of the pistols chambered in it. Blowback pistols tend to not be very reliable. That said, I have a blowback Cz 82 in 9mm Mak that is utterly reliable and the most accurate handgun I own, so I do carry it occasionally.
-
My biggest beef with .380 is the reliability of the pistols chambered in it.
+10000, Learned this the hard way with a Walther PK380 that decided to **** the bed during my CHP course. I completed the course of fire, although it was singe-shot style. Could have done it just as fast with a derringer. The next day I took it back in and got a Ruger LC9 that I have been very happy with.
I'm a bit of an oddity though, as I do not feel comfortable regularly carrying anything without a "toggle" safety. That is just my rule, I do not wish to preach it to other people. Do what you are comfortable with.
-
(yes I mocked the plastic until shooting and owning one and one day my friend Lorimer too will see the light).
Indeed, one of these days, Lorimor will learn better. :)
-
I'm in agreement with those who are in agreement with Tom. Caliber is almost irrelevant ... with the exception of 10mm. 10mm trumps everything! :-)
Seriously, get a gun in a caliber that you can shoot well and practice shooting active, real-life scenarios. Shot placement trumps caliber (except 10mm) every day of the week.
-
Jth nailed it. Handguns stink as a man stopper. If I knew I was going to be in a gun fight I would bring a 12 gauge or an ar15. Well, actually, I would stay home but that's beside the point.
Exactly, handguns are only good for close fighting and concealment. Other than that, they are a strong deterrent, rather than a man stopper. That's why the caliber debate (as far as wound ballistics) for the most part is a waste of time.
My biggest beef with .380 is the reliability of the pistols chambered in it. Blowback pistols tend to not be very reliable. That said, I have a blowback Cz 82 in 9mm Mak that is utterly reliable and the most accurate handgun I own, so I do carry it occasionally.
I have a .380 Makarov IJ70 which is very similar to the Cz82, and I cannot get that thing to malfunction for the life of me. It still ejects even if I limp-wrist the crap out of it, and it'll eat any type of cheapo ammo you can put in it...too bad the ergonomics suck on the Mak
-
Wait.... there's a consensus ? Here ? How did that happen ?
DAN!!!! HAVE YOU BEEN EDITING POSTS!!! j/k
-
I have 2 9mm pistols I carry. Glock 17 is one. I have a pocket one that is very concealable and more practical a lot of the time. Hornady Critical Defense is ammo of choice.
If you can't present and hit something vital with it quickly it doesn't matter what you carry. I've read a lot of accounts where just presenting the pistol (or revolver) seems to discourage the would be assailant. I think they would prefer their marks to be unarmed.
-
Heck, at this moment I happen to be carrying a 5 shot J Frame revolver in .38 +P. Capacity stinks, but it's tiny and easy to conceal, and unlike most tiny autoloaders it's utterly reliable. Surprisingly accurate, too.
Unlike a lot of other people I tend to tailor my carry gun to what I'm wearing that day and what kind of activity. I like my little .38 for when I'm wearing clothes that don't conceal well or if I'm doing something activity like running. It's so light I don't even notice it. Now, when I'm wearing bulkier clothes I like my full size CZ75 SP-01 Phantom. 19rd mags rule. :D
-
I have a .380 Makarov IJ70 which is very similar to the Cz82, and I cannot get that thing to malfunction for the life of me. It still ejects even if I limp-wrist the crap out of it, and it'll eat any type of cheapo ammo you can put in it...too bad the ergonomics suck on the Mak
I have one of those too, bought it 20 years ago because it was dirt cheap. You are right it always goes bang.
The first day I got it, I was double handing it a little too high, and that little devil bit me harder than a rattlesnake.
Never did that again...Greg58
-
:) Tom Hanks didn't blow up that tank with a 9mm fellas. :)
I am somewhat, moderately, sorta open minded about this. I have to admit, there is a poly 9mm in my vault now. I will not divulge the brand though (but no holsters for it.)
It is kinda fun being the only steel framed .45 guy in classes. And punching great big neatly cut holes in paper with 200 SWC's.
-
Thanks Lorimor! I saw that cartoon years ago and have been looking for it ever since!
Right click > save
I loved it as soon as I saw it and immediately stole it. It's my favorite thing to post if I feel like a caliber war is about to erupt.
-
Here's another pic for the caliber wars ....
(http://i734.photobucket.com/albums/ww344/Jhatmaker24/10mm-1.jpg)
-
Great information if you are ever attacked by a gelatin block.......
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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: Beretta Nano (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXxpkM7q_2E#ws)
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.
-
Here's another pic for the caliber wars ....
(http://i734.photobucket.com/albums/ww344/Jhatmaker24/10mm-1.jpg)
Just to make sure, people DO realize this is a photoshopped joke picture, right?
Just checking...
-
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.
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.
-
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.
-
Just to make sure, people DO realize this is a photoshopped joke picture, right?
you mean mushroom clouds in gelatin are a lie??!!??! :P
-
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 (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:
"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 (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.
-
Oh, I forgot.. Here is an interesting video by a doctor who discusses gun shot wounds.
9mm vs .45 vs Rifle A Dr's View of Gunshot Wounds (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tku8YI68-JA#ws)
-
And then there is this video about the 9mm, for grins and giggles:
WILL A 9MM REALLY PROTECT YOU?? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXC_9WoK270#ws)
-
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 (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.
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
Thus why NYPD finally came to its senses and now carries those evil flesh tearing, cop-killing, "dumb dumb" bullets....too many wounded passerbys
-
Hold on a minute! You guys are saying that people carry guns other than a 1911? I don’t believe it.
-
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.
-
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
(http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l484/OnTheFly64/SamplesS_UpRight-1.jpg)
Federal HST 147gr
(http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l484/OnTheFly64/P9HST2S_Comp.jpg)
Fly
-
I knew I had seen that jpg of the gelatin tracks of several bullets before, and I found it. The original (without the bogus 10mm mushroom cloud) is on the next to last page of this report
http://mdtstraining.com/Wound_Ballistics_101.pdf (http://mdtstraining.com/Wound_Ballistics_101.pdf)
It is, essential, a verbatim copy of the 1989 FBI Ballistics report, with the graphics at the end added.
It concludes:
FBI: Conclusions
Physiologically, no caliber or bullet is certain to incapacitate any individual unless the brain is hit. Psychologically, some individuals can be incapacitated by minor or small caliber wounds. Those individuals who are stimulated by fear, adrenaline, drugs, alcohol, and/or sheer will and survival determination may not be incapacitated even if mortally wounded.
The will to survive and to fight despite horrific damage to the body is commonplace on the battlefield, and on the street. Barring a hit to the brain, the only way to force incapacitation is to cause sufficient blood loss that the subject can no longer function, and that takes time. Even if the heart is instantly destroyed, there is sufficient oxygen in the brain to support full and complete voluntary action for 10-15 seconds.
Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth. The critical element is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding. Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the
participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, "too little penetration will get you killed." Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable. Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet.
-
Gelatin and bullet samples all need a some scale, compare all sidearm rounds to rifle calibers and the differences shrink considerably. IMO, GTFO and shot placement are the best policy with CCW calibers.
-
Without wading too far into the debate as jthhapkido pretty much nailed everything. If you can shoot it well and you'll carry it. It's a win.
I also carry a Glock 17 9mm because I shot better groups with it than I did with the comparable .40 at the rental range. Helps that it's cheaper to feed too. I'm sure with training I could make the .40 work but I kind of prefer shooting both 9mm and 45 ACP to it.
I use 147 gr JHP Winchester PDX1 at the moment as my defense load but have carried Hornady's Critical Defense as well.
I tried the .380 thing for a while as a summer carry, a Taurus TCP was impulse bought on sale while buying ammo. It's probably getting traded out for a G26 (the baby glock 9mm) or that damned shiny XDS 45 (Hitchcock45's video may have sold me buying new holsters) the next time I get ambushed by a deal on one of them. While I got it to run pretty well, it was concealable in swim trunks, and I would rather have it than nothing it'd be hard for me to put faith in it for much.
.40 for me kind of feels like that in-between ammo I never asked for and don't need.
-
Gelatin and bullet samples all need a some scale, compare all sidearm rounds to rifle calibers and the differences shrink considerably. IMO, GTFO and shot placement are the best policy with CCW calibers.
Exactly. If you can't hit it you won't hurt it.
-
Exactly. If you can't hit it you won't hurt it.
Agreed.
I'm still curious if you can point me to a news article or information about:
" 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."
...which you said a couple of days ago. I still can't find any mention of that anywhere.
You also said:
"These facts are why I am selecting a 147gr FMJ instead of a FHP (sic)"
I'm still not sure why that is. I realize you talked about penetration, but modern 9mm JHP has adequate penetration based on the tests you gave. (And the links I provided.) In addition, your discussion talked about wounds and internal bleeding, and FMJs are well-known to NOT cause anything like the internal bleeding/damage of JHPs.
Plus, JHPs (modern ones, at least) reliably expand, and which gives you the "larger hole" mentioned in your last study excerpt.
So---why FMJ?
-
I first saw the story on TV. It is about a gun falling out of the pocket of a woman who was talking a walk near waverly. She sat down to tie her shoe laces when it fell out and the impact of hitting the ground caused the trigger to jerk, firing the weapon.
http://www.lincolnonlinenews.com/pages/14943713.php (http://www.lincolnonlinenews.com/pages/14943713.php)
As far as 147gr FMJ's, I'd shoot heavier rounds IF I could find them (and afford them). It's about penetration power. If it is winter, or the perp is wearing heavy clothing or layers of leather (home made armor), or is even moderately obese and your bullet blows upon the surface, or shortly under it, it may never hit vital organs. As far as heavier bullets hitting bystanders in the background, if you haven't taken that into consideration BEFORE you decide to shoot it doesn't matter which round you are using. In the excitement you could graze or miss the perp and hit someone standing behind him. And, I've investigated several shootings and homicides for law enforcement and basically people don't die from cavatation wounds caused by hand gun hollow points. They die by bleeding to death. The deeper the hole the more bleeding. Death is only instant when they are hit in the brain or brain stem. High velocity rife rounds are another matter. An HP round fired from a rifle will most definitely create a huge and lethal cavatation wound.
BTW, did you know that it is against the Geneva convention to use HP rounds in warfare? And that the US Army recently ordered 4.5 million rounds of HP ammo. If they can't use it against the enemy then who is left? Citizens?
-
I first saw the story about a gun falling out of the pocket of a woman who was talking a walk near waverly. She sat down to tie her shoe laces when it fell out and the impact of hitting the ground caused the trigger to jerk, firing the weapon.
http://www.lincolnonlinenews.com/pages/14943713.php (http://www.lincolnonlinenews.com/pages/14943713.php)
As far as 147gr FMJ's, I'd shoot heavier rounds IF I could find them (and afford them). It's about penetration power. If it is winter, or the perp is wearing heavy clothing or layers of leather (home made armor), or is even moderately obese and your bullet blows upon the surface, or shortly under it, it may never hit vital organs. As far as heavier bullets hitting bystanders in the background, if you haven't taken that into consideration BEFORE you decide to shoot it doesn't matter which round you are using. In the excitement you could graze or miss the perp and hit someone standing behind him. And, I've investigated several shootings and homicides for law enforcement and basically people don't die from cavatation wounds caused by hand gun hollow points. They die by bleeding to death. The deeper the hole the more bleeding. Death is only instant when they are hit in the brain or brain stem. High velocity rife rounds are another matter. An HP round fired from a rifle will most definitely create a huge and lethal cavatation wound.
BTW, did you know that it is against the Geneva convention to use HP rounds in warfare? And that the US Army recently ordered 4.5 million rounds of HP ammo. If they can't use it against the enemy then who is left? Citizens?
Until I see the majority of major law enforcement agencies migrate away from JHP's (for other than PC reasons), I think I'll stick with the various agencies' decisions, their research and their results.
-
BTW, did you know that it is against the Geneva convention to use HP rounds in warfare? And that the US Army recently ordered 4.5 million rounds of HP ammo. If they can't use it against the enemy then who is left? Citizens?
It's not against the Geneva Convention. The Hague Peace Conference forbids the use of projectiles designed to cause unnecessary suffering.
And I'm pretty sure you're thinking of the recent orders by various Federal law enforcement agencies of hollow point ammunition. The exact same stuff they use for duty weapons right now.
FMJ is just a poor choice for self defense. Modern hollow point 9mm ammunition is designed to penetrate sufficiently deep to meet FBI standards, without making the ice pick in & out holes of FMJ. FMJ will not cause more bleeding than hollow point. If FMJ was the best choice both federal and local law enforcement would be using it.
-
I first saw the story about a gun falling out of the pocket of a woman who was talking a walk near waverly. She sat down to tie her shoe laces when it fell out and the impact of hitting the ground caused the trigger to jerk, firing the weapon.
http://www.lincolnonlinenews.com/pages/14943713.php (http://www.lincolnonlinenews.com/pages/14943713.php)
Hm. You seem to have some data/information that isn't in that particular story. Particularly since the story says "at her home".
And I'd be curious to see what gun goes off without the trigger being pulled.
As far as 147gr FMJ's, I'd shoot heavier rounds IF I could find them (and afford them). It's about penetration power. If it is winter, or the perp is wearing heavy clothing or layers of leather (home made armor), or is even moderately obese and your bullet blows upon the surface, or shortly under it, it may never hit vital organs.
JHPs tend to react like FMJ if the opening is plugged---matter of fact, that is what denim tests are for (when they put denim layers over the gelatin). It isn't to see if the bullet stops (which it won't) it is to see if the JHP will still expand upon reaching the gelatin or instead act like a FMJ.
My question wasn't about 147s. It was about why FMJs instead of JHPs.
As far as heavier bullets hitting bystanders in the background, if you haven't taken that into consideration BEFORE you decide to shoot it doesn't matter which round you are using. In the excitement you could graze or miss the perp and hit someone standing behind him. And, I've investigated several shootings and homicides for law enforcement and basically people don't die from cavatation wounds caused by hand gun hollow points. They die by bleeding to death. The deeper the hole the more bleeding. Death is only instant when they are hit in the brain or brain stem. High velocity rife rounds are another matter. An HP round fired from a rifle will most definitely create a huge and lethal cavatation wound.
Actually, "the deeper the hole the more bleeding" isn't necessarily true, as research into JHPs has shown when compared to FMJs that punch all the way through. As many people in the military can attest, 9mm FMJ tends to punch little holes all the way through, and does not incapacitate quickly. It is certainly true that NO handgun round incapacitates quickly unless directly to the CNS. However, it is also true that JHP rounds do significantly more damage than FMJ, especially in smaller/faster bullets such as 9mm, and that if you don't hit the CNS, JHP will at least stop the attacker faster than FMJ.
I didn't mention cavitation, because you are correct, with handgun rounds there effectively isn't any worth speaking of, because the elastic effect is too minor, and the tissue just stretches.
None of this changes the fact that JHPs still are shown to be significantly more effective than FMJs, which is why no one but the military uses them.
BTW, did you know that it is against the Geneva convention to use HP rounds in warfare? And that the US Army recently ordered 4.5 million rounds of HP ammo. If they can't use it against the enemy then who is left? Citizens?
Someone else has already made the correction for this statement, so I'll leave it alone.
I still don't understand why FMJ instead of JHP (plenty of 147gr JHP out there---Ranger-T and Federal HST come immediately to mind), and the comments about the women shooting herself just seem odd to me, as you are saying things that weren't in the report, and it's a rare gun that "goes off by itself".
-
Unless she dropped an old revolver without a transfer bar and it hit directly on the hammer, or a single action autoloader with a stupidly light trigger and the safety off, that gun didn't go off when it hit the ground. Either she tried to catch it on the way down and grabbed the trigger, the trigger snagged on something when it fell, or she was messing around with it and shot herself. Modern handguns don't just fire when they're dropped.
Edited...I posted my other comment in the wrong thread.
-
Channel 8 news, where I heard about it, said she was "on a walk near her home" and set down to tie a loose shoe lace. A .22 caliber weapon, which she carried around "for protection", fell out of her pocket, struck the ground and discharged, hitting her in the calf. I didn't see any records on the Lancaster county sheriff's daily call for her being charged with anything. At her age, 68, maybe they felt getting shot was punishment enough?
-
I always wonder, perhaps because I'm a devout cynic, that if the majority of these self-inflicted wounds, blamed on "dropped guns" or "I was just cleaning my gun" were actually caused by stupid and/or careless handling of the firearm?
It's a lot easier to blame gravity or the gun design than to admit we were doing something stupid with it.
-
I always wonder, perhaps because I'm a devout cynic, that if the majority of these self-inflicted wounds, blamed on "dropped guns" or "I was just cleaning my gun" were actually caused by stupid and/or careless handling of the firearm?
It's a lot easier to blame gravity or the gun design than to admit we were doing something stupid with it.
I think that's exactly what it is.
-
Great information if you are ever attacked by a gelatin block.......
This has happened to me....*sigh*...I dare not talk about it...... :(
-
This has happened to me....*sigh*...I dare not talk about it...... :(
I always hate it when that happens. ::)
-
The caliber is the least important part of this decision.
.....until it comes to paying for practice ammo.
Some calibers are ridiculously expensive.....