Quote:
Originally Posted by alwslate
It's hard to believe that anyone who is a serious handgunner
still wants to argue the supposed vast superiority of the 230
FMJ .45 at the lumbering velocity of 830 fps over a warm 124
gr 9mm at 1200 fps. Numerous tests, including real world
shooting results indicate that there is little difference between
the two. So you hear and read all the time "where people say"
fill in the blank space here. Where you're mistaken here is in
the quality of your reading material. What isn't nonsense? The
9mm is the NATO handgun round and is likely to be so for
some time to come. Shot placement and penetration trumps
bullet dia 100% of the time. Shoot what you like and shoot
well.
|
I thought that I made a pretty good case in spite of the pulpy gun magazines that I read. 'True Detective' is a main source of any ideas that I may have. It is highly criticizes the 9mm NATO round.
Sorry, but I like to think and experiment. I was a mechanical designer in a research laboratory. Curiosity, questioning and experimenting are part of my nature. My reloading experience has been mostly experimental. Even if it flops, at least I will be able to say that I found out.
I never said that changes in the bullet would render shot placement less important. My idea has extra weight for adequate penetration as well as making a wound channel that is close to .6" diameter.
And yeah, NATO use a 9mm 124 gr. round all of my 9mm are loaded with it. I'm not arguing with its effectiveness, just wondering if it could be made even more effective, at least for close up work.