Lots of good and very interesting information covered in most of the posts. But, back to the original question, "Do energy foot-pounds matter?"

Well, consider this: The 230-grain .45 ACP cartridge develops about 355 foot pounds of energy, while the 00 buckshot load in a 12-gauge shotgun will give you something in excess of 1,500 foot-pounds of energy.

Okay, do energy foot pounds matter? I really don't have an empirically tested answer for that, but I do know that if "push came to shove" and I had a choice between a .45 ACP and a 12 gauge loaded with 00 buck to stop some whack-o attacking me with a 12-inch machete, I'm pretty sure I know which one of those I'd pick.

__________________
Pack light and cinch tight.

I will attempt to sidestep the FBI Pronouncements/ Caliber Debates for the moment , and cogitate generally :

A - At some level , and in some contexts , everything matters , including energy .

B - Once you reach a reasonably adequate floor level, incremental increases in energy are well down the list of influencing factors .

Of course it matters. If I have to shoot a bad guy I want to see him do a triple somersault AND get blown thru a brick wall just like in the Hollywood movies.

How about "Yes, no & maybe", or "It depends"?

We talking eventual lethality or rapid incapacitation (more specifically meaning the cessation of someone's ability to engage in further volitional action)?

I tend to think that any of the former or current service calibers that can produce the right bullet weight/velocity combination needed to achieve a minimum of least 350ft/lbs will probably be "effective enough", in the right hands and when placed properly. A sufficiency of diameter to crush, cut/avulse critical tissues, structures and organs is important, too.

The calibers that produce only 180-250ft/lbs? (Think various .38SPL, .38SPL +P & .380ACP) How about speculating that shot placement may become more paramount? Flip a coin or roll the dice.

How about the 'gap' in the numbers I used, meaning between 250 - 350ft/lbs? Damned if I know. I just looked at the usual numbers for the common calibers that have seen defensive/service use for many decades.

It's all best guess and situationally dependent.

Below 180ft/lbs, someone may ask? Deadly force is still deadly force, and lethal GSW's are still lethal GSW's. Not too many modern service calibers produce numbers that low, at least not usually until you start to get out beyond 25-50-100+yds.

It's been said that every shooting incident contains enough variables to make any incident virtually unique. That might as well apply to how any particular person experiencing GS Wounding might react on any given day/night.

Someone want to try and predict things just based upon ft-lbs of calculated muzzle energy for relatively 'low powered' service/defensive handguns? Sure, go ahead. Luck to you. While you're at it, don't forget to take into consideration any diminishing ft/lb numbers for every 5 yards a bullet travels from the muzzle.

Me? I like to look at focusing on training and skills development to increase abilities, and then figure out what's needed for sufficiently recurrent practice to maintain skills developed and achieved in training.

Pick something out of the usual defensive/service calibers that suits you. Something you can afford to get in enough training and practice trigger time to really run it safely, controllably and consistently accurately. Even pick something in a nice color finish if it suits you ... and motivates you to use it at a range more often for training refreshers and practice. (Not too pretty, though, so you're not afraid of it acquiring holster wear and the occasional wear mark often experienced in life outside the gun safe.)

If foot-pounds alone mattered to me, I'd be carrying one of .44MAG revolvers in retirement. I'm not.

Different strokes, folks.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

Fastbolt you get my vote for best answer yet. I was trying to get at the same thing but you are much more articulate and easy to understand. Well said.

__________________
John 1:17
NRA Life Benefactor

I don't think people really have a concept of ft-lbs of force. They compare 200 ft-lbs for 1 cartridge to 350 ft-lbs in another and imagine that's a huge amount of force. Both of those are small amounts and going from 200 to 350 isn't a big jump. Here's something to consider. The usual heavy weight boxer's punch is around 1000 ft-lbs which is generated in about 1 ft of travel of his fist.
So getting wrapped around the axle because 1 rd is 200 and another is 350 is like comparing a car that gets 30 mpg to one that gets 30.1 mpg. There just isn't that much difference.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Yes it is. But where do get the momentum?

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

Yes but somebody had to show that M&S work was pure baloney.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

I am in agreement, but I think many here (hopefully not a majority) prefer and obsess over "pure theoretical conjecture" as you put it, and sedentary gunfighting theory over something more practical. They probably need to get out more.

Thanks. I've tried to simplify it enough over the years for cops (and some private person classes for several years) so that folks didn't put too much emphasis on such numbers. As ispcapt put it, much more simply, it really isn't all that important for service/defensive calibers and choices.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

What makes the 12ga so devistating is not the ME, its the 8-21/34-24cal caliber pellets hitting the target simulatniously. Reducec vel/ME buck has proven just as effective as higher vel/energy buck.

__________________
NRA Cert. Inst. IDPA CSO

This is correct. While 12 Gauge has some impressive energy behind it, what really makes it so devastating is the sheer number of projectiles hitting the body simultaneously in many different places, thus greatly improving the odds of hitting vital organs, not to mention just plain doing a lot of damage to the target.

Case in point, .410 Shotshells fired from a handgun such as a Bond Arms Derringer or Taurus Judge/S&W Governor, don't generate much energy at all. Even 000 Buck only delivers about as much energy per pellet as .32 ACP when fired from a .410 Handgun, but the number of projectiles still result in a lot of damage because the target is getting hit 4-5 times per shot with .36/9mm caliber lead spheres which each penetrate a good 17" in Ballistics Gel.

This is actually an excellent example of the basis for this thread. If small caliber projectiles which don't deliver very much energy can still be effective, then do Energy Foot-Pounds really matter? And if so, how much do they matter? Are Energy Foot-Pounds even an adequate measure of the effectiveness of a cartridge?

Based on the visual evidence available, it doesn't seem like it's as important as mass, velocity, or momentum.
In fact, it doesn't seem like any single one of these factors means very much on its own, so why do folks so often focus on one thing or the other, citing the mass, weight, energy, or velocity as the sole decisive factor in a cartridge's ballistic performance, while either neglecting or outright ignoring the others.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Well, when you're talking about a .32 or .33 caliber ball hitting something at 1250-1325fps, that's a bit more than the usual .32 pocket pistol.

Then, it wouldn't seem unreasonable for the synergism of being hit by 8-12 balls, simultaneously, to probably result in an immediate wounding, and wider shock to the system, in a different manner than might occur if stringing out the hits separately.

Hard to predict how any particular person may react to GSW, though. People have done surprising things after having their heart blown apart by a 12GA slug, but not so much when the spinal column takes the hit.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

I like to hunt and have shot a lot of 125 to 150 LBS critters with .357s and .44 magnums. I used "hunting loads" and longer tubes. I am a believer in the broadside heart/lung shot. The .44 is much superior in this application. I am not advocating the use of a .44 magnum service revolver. I am not dissing the .357. I am pretty sure a 150 LBS whitetail is easier to stop than a 200 LBS "meth head". I want penetration, expansion and lots of foot/pounds.

Hey, somebody has to put tutu's and sunglasses on dogs,
too.

Right here: Momentum Calculator p = mv

The .44 Rem Mag is an extremely powerful big game cartridge, Load a Model 1894 with 300 grain .44 Rem Mag bullets and keep all shots within the cartridge's max point blank range, and it will kill all North American big game including polar bear.

BTW, I hunt all Rocky Mountain big game with a .270 Win. However, a hunter carrying a .44 Rem Mag and is capable (can stalk his intended game) will fill his tags.

I will not disagree. But we have to remember that a 00 buckshot round's energy is calculated in the aggregate of its individual pellets. To determine energy of each pellet, divide published energy by number of pellets.

I agree that shoulder fired weapons are superior to handguns when fishing in mean critter country. Shouldered fired weapons are impracticable while fishing. I'd rather have a handgun on me than an 12 gauge leaning against a tree.

would you rather git hit by a Buick going 39 mph or a 204 ruger going 3900 fps? more likely to survive the 204 ruger.

Humor me for a sec. Since the Vikings are playing the 49'ers. Let's talk football as an analogy. The 40 yard dash and the bench press are two tests in the NFL combine. The results for an individual player are two different properties that partially describe that player's performance. They're both important, but which is more important? Depends on what you're looking for, right? The dash probably has more weight for a safety or a wide receiver. The bench press for an offensive or defensive lineman.

Same thing with momentum and energy for a moving bullet. A bullet moving through space has some properties that describe different performance aspects of the bullet. Momentum is the ability of an object (the bullet) to resist a change in it's motion. That's why momentum generally relates to penetration. Energy (KE, ME) is how much energy from a bullet's motion can be converted to other forms of damaging energy. For a bullet entering living tissue, that energy from motion gets converted to heat and pressure.

The issue with energy in pistol rounds is somebody (some anonymous "they") figured out that living tissue is resilient enough that the converted heat and pressure from a low velocity pistol round isn't enough to damage the tissue. IMO, momentum and energy get confused because high energy pistol rounds pretty much have high momentum too.

Because bullet design matters, I'm not sure you can tell much just from momentum or energy numbers. It's a whole system - bullet design, mass, and velocity. Pretty sure that's why "they" decided to shoot bullets into ordnance gel and check for penetration and expansion. Kind of a calibrated version of Paul Harrell's meat target.

SF 27, MN 10 - 9 minutes left. Not looking good for the Vikings.

__________________
Vegan by proxy.

I would think it does matter as one part of the round effectiveness. I would think energy spent is energy received which could translate to shock. I think this is why certain energy levels are discussed for large animals at extended ranges. Any round can be effective on a perfectly placed shot but it is the slightly off shots that all measurements of ballistics come into importance.

__________________
Is that a gun No a lifesaver

It is sort of like how much quality of something is better. They used to make a lot of 70mm movies and it had 4 times the visual quality of 35mm film stock. Eventually the quality of 35mm film stock improved such that most people could not tell the difference between 35 and 70 when viewing the finished product. So, more became better - but, not so much better anyone could tell the difference.

I shot a 1911 first time this weekend in .45 ACP. If I was at war I could want that over the Beretta 92FS in 9mm. I was just way more - also immediately made me flinch and blink, but for day to day 9mm works for me and I an shoot it better and quicker, and it holds more rounds. So, were they basing the decision solely on ballistics, or on shootability - and/or some minimum standard of ballistic capability and shootability and capacity, so many variables.

Think about it this way. Ever play racquetball? If your opponent is set up in the back and moving to the rear of the court, hit the ball so it glances off the side wall first, most of the energy will be dissipated so that when it hits the front wall it'll drop; your opponent will never get there before it dies on the floor.

Shooting paper targets and gelatin can tell you a part of the story, from which you can extrapolate a probable outcome in an actual target. But real targets are dynamic, they're moving and have pesky things that can get in the way, like a Humerus, Radius, or Ulna; and there's nothing funny about that. Remember the Miami shootout? 9mm failed but not merely because it was weak, but because it encountered an obstacle in its path, which drained what little energy it had.

If you 'plan for the best-case' and assume your opponent will politely stand still, facing you, arms at his side, then 9mm is adequate. In my opinion.

No, not quite. You have to understand the history of the FBI, their adoption of the 9mm, and what they had figured was the best performance at that time.
Prior to Miami when the FBI was going for the 9mm they had what they called their Computer man model. Like today where the FBI preaches 12"-18" penetration but their formula was different back then. Prior to Miami the FBI was pushing rapid expansion, limited penetration. That was what any LEA needed. To prove their point the FBI had set up a computer program which proved with absolutely no doubt that rapid expansion, limited penetration was the way to go. It was the old RII formula. They were sure that would work. Nearly everyone bought into their theory because, well, the FBI said so and they had the computer man formula to prove it. So when it came time to choose a 9mm round that met their computer man formula that was the W-W 115 gr Silvertip which did exactly what their Computer man program said it would do, rapid expansion, limited penetration.
My dept had been issuing the 9mm almost 20 years before the FBI decided to go to autos and the 9mm and it was our issued round for 32 years. We had a lot more street experience with autos and the 9mm. With the 115 gr Federal BPLE and the W-W JHP+P+ we had excellent results with the 9mm. It is not a weak round. We had also issued the W-W 115 Silvertip for a VERY short time 6 years prior to Miami. We had used the Silvertip in a shooting and quickly learned that the Silvertip performed as designed - rapid expansion, limited penetration. Fortunately for our 2 Troopers neither were injured in their shootout. Within days we pulled the Silvertip from all our Troops. When the FBI started preaching to any dept that would listen to them that the Silvertip was the be all-end all round our range guys loaded up the case file from our shooting where the Silvertip was used and took it to Quantico. Our people showed the FBI that the Silvertip was not what was needed. It opened too quickly and penetrated too shallow. The FBI didn't care. They had their Computer Man formula which proved their point and said we were wrong about the Silvertip. They didn't want to hear it. So 6 years later they learned what we had learned and had warned them about the Silvertip. Unfortunately for them it was a terrible lesson learned the hard way.
So the bottom line is the 9mm didn't fail in Miami because the 9mm is weak. The 9mm Silvertip in Miami performed exactly as it was designed and exactly like the FBI's Computer Man model said it would perform. Rapid expansion, limited penetration.
After Miami the FBI the pendulum swung for the FBI. Instead of rapid expansion, limited penetration the FBI began pushing their theory of penetration penetration and more penetration. That's when they started preaching the W-W 147 gr Subsonic. The Silvertip was no longer the best, it became all about penetration and limited expansion. The problem was the 147 gr Subsonic had very little if any expansion. Actual street results showed most times it acted just like a FMJ, punching a hole with no expansion. Eventually the FBI's pendulum swung back to more center with both expansion and penetration considerations.
As with any round, no matter the caliber, depending on how the bullet is designed it will do exactly as it is designed. The trick is deciding how you want that bullet to perform. Initially the FBI said rapid expansion and that's what they got. Exactly as designed and what their Computer Man said they wanted. It was nothing more than the old computer saying of garbage in-garbage out. Not a lot different than when they then swung to the 147 gr Subsonic. Garbage in-garbage out. They relied too much on theory and very little on actual results.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Yup...same ole same-o, and people still go for it.

The 147 gr JHP was actually a Navy SEAL affair--they wanted
head-shot accuracy from MP5's @ 100 yards, and Olin kept
bumping bullet weights up till the dispersion met the criterion.
Never meant for expansion, was a match-bullet type JHP. It
worked well for the specific performance trait it was developed
for (kinda like the Silvertip, how bout that?)

The less-than-forthcoming Winchester sales guys then fronted
the product to domestic LE community as "this is what the SEALs use".
The results of that debacle are known. 9mm
abandoned in droves, .40 S&W adopted...

Probably worked pretty good on gelatin, tho.

I don't always carry a 9mm, but when I do....



Underwood specs says 465 ft lbs

I guess it's probably enough for light work...


.

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

Yep, and that's precisely why this thread exists. It's just so difficult to figure out what statistics actually matter anymore when there are so many statistics floating around and there's always somebody who writes out a thesis on how it's super important, complete with all sorts of jargon, buzzwords, and rhetoric thrown in that it might as well be; "[Insert Statistic Here] is the single most decisive factor in a gunfight because blah blah blah sectional density blah blah blah ballistic coefficient blah blah blah knockdown power blah blah blah whiz-bang yak yak yak."

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Actually the 147 gr Subsonic was developed to work better in suppressors because, well, it is subsonic. A bullet traveling super-sonic will have a crack sound down range because it is traveling faster than the speed of sound. So the Subsonic round was developed. And to get better performance at a slower speed they needed to bump up the bullet weight which resulted in the 147 gr.
None of it was magical. They just needed a subsonic round to work good with suppressors.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Shot placement is what is effective.
I am not so sure that anything the FBI decides is worth emulating.

They are saying that it is just as effective because they need a message other than the bean counter thinks we can save thousands by spending millions.

Yes, energy matters, to what extent, I don’t know. But if you make perfect hits, 25 acp will do.
But energy matters. Anyone ever throw rocks? What did you learn. Bigger is better, faster is better, bigger and faster is best.

Also never reload 9mm and 45acp on the same day. The little things are just so tiny.

For the record, I do like, shoot and sometimes carry 9mm as a 4th choice.

Thanks, great analysis. Nevertheless, the 9mm round that stopped just short of the bad guy's heart lost energy after it hit an arm bone. A round with more energy would likely have made it and done the job.

So what advantage does a round with low energy (like 9mm or .380) get me?
- More rounds in the mag? Sure, but I'm just a regular guy doing regular stuff, and I have never found an account of a citizen self defense shooting that required a reload (which I have anyway).
- Faster follow-up shots? True again, but does the time difference for follow-up shots between my shooting 9mm and .357Sig matter? I don't think so. Yeah, 9mm f/u shots are faster, but not that much faster. (Note that in the recent church shooting the bad guy went down with one .357 Sig round- no f/u shot was taken)

Now if there was a reason I couldn't carry .45acp, .40S&W, or .357Sig, then sure, 9mm is the next best choice. Personally I'm more comfortable with the six .45s (HSTs) in my little XDs than I would be with 12 9mm in a P365. Even more so I trust the 14 .357s in my P320 which is what I carry the majority (like 90%) of the time.

In the end you do your own reasoning and carry what you trust. Just make sure your reasoning is sound.

Whew. At least I answered my own question about foot-lbs vs pounds-feet, which is the way I learned it:

Foot-pound or pound-foot are synonymous, and represent the arithmetic product of pound (force) and foot (length).

The pound (force) is the weight of one pound (mass) at the Earth's surface (somewhat imprecise because Earth's gravity field varies depending on your location, and the effective weight of an object will be influenced by the centrifugal force due to Earth's rotation, again dependent on location).

As a unit of energy, it is the energy of applying a one pound force over a distance of one foot. It is equivalent to raising a one-pound mass one foot in height, well... because.

As a unit of torque, it is the torque resulting from a one pound tangent force applied at a distance of one foot from the axis of rotation.

I sympathize with the OP for not getting what seems like a simple answer to a simple question. But I hear the question as, instead, "of the information I can readily acquire for comparing ammunition, is foot/pounds a valid parameter for choosing"?

If this is truly a fair way to rephrase the question, then of course the answer w/b 'yes, it is a valid, relative measure of the impact of the bullet on the target; because it measures force and power and we don't get another measure anyway".

I say this because I've my Cartridges of the World open in front of me. I opened it randomly at the center of the book and I'm offered the .500 Belted Magnum, the .50 McMillan, the .50 McMurdo, the .505/530 Woodleigh. The book gives only velocity and energy measures, using specified bullets and powder charges. So the two parameters tell me what combo to choose to develop varying energy.

I assume/expect, and this is where the OP question comes in, that both of these measures matter, or they wouldn't be measured! According to the tables they are not linearly related, although they obviously are related; so bullet mass has been considered and the charge only to explain how the two measures were accomplished.

So: .500 BM max energy shown is 5,745 (ft/lbs). The .50 McM shows 19,545. The 50 McMu shows 12,473. The .505 (overleaf) shows a max of 9,215. So I expect one would choose the one with the largest energy for hunting such game; perhaps for elephant but not for rabbit. So energy matters or one wouldn't have to choose not to hunt rabbit with 12,473 ft lbs :-).

I'm an holstorian not a ballistics man or a gunfighter; but it might help to know that one Geoffrey Boothroyd persuaded Ian Fleming to switch the fictional James Bond at least partly on the basis of energy from the .25 a.c.p. vs the .32 a.c.p. Of course there are many more factors; but who wouldn't want to expend the most energy on the opponent that can be expended if, like Mass Ayoob has pointed out, the objective in defense is not to kill, but to stop. We call it stopping power, a combination of all the factors of bullet weight/shape/velocity; the tables call it simply 'energy'.

__________________
Red Nichols The Holstorian

Tell me about the holster. It's more interesting (to me)
than foot pounds.

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

You're still not understanding how it works. You should get yourself an energy calculator before you start making the assumptions you're making. The facts on energy are not what you're assuming.
The bullet at Miami, the Silvertip, didn't penetrate deeper because that's the way the bullet was designed to perform. Limited penetration. It had nothing to do with because it was a 9mm or because of what you are assuming is energy. Bullet design was the limited factor. That is why the 115 Silvertip at the time fell out of favor because it was designed for limited penetration. A bullet designed for penetration at the same velocity as the Silvertip penetrates further, even tho energy is equal, because of bullet design.
If you are just wanting to compare energy then the .45 with a 230 gr typically loaded round at 850 fps is even lower energy than the typical 9mm defensive round out there. A 230 gr .45 at 850 fps has about 370 ftlbs of energy. The 115 gr 9mm at 1300 fps, which is a very common loading, has 430 ftlbs of energy. A 147 gr 9mm at 1000 fps energy is 395 ftlbs. The 124 gr bullets loaded at the typical velocities found in defensive bullets also exceed the energy of the .45 in 230 gr bullets. The rd that Keith44spl shows in his picture with the Model 39 will have 465 fllbs.
Actually, make your decision on facts and not erroneous assumptions based on your belief of what is low energy. Because the facts are depending on the typical defensive loadings the 9mm energy levels are every bit equal to and often exceed the energy levels of what you think you're getting from .45. Which the charts then makes the .45 actually a low energy round.
Go back and reread Fastbolt's post #54 and my post #56. If you think there's a big difference between energy levels with any of the typical defensive loads in any caliber then you really aren't understanding what those ftlb numbers mean. The ftlbs generated by any of them the differences aren't significant. Energy levels of 200 to 400 ftlbs is not much. A boxer's punch has 4 to 5 times more energy.

__________________
183rd FBINA

Wow a boxer's punch has 4 to 5 times more energy than a bullet!..maybe i will switch out my revolver in my pocket to brass knuckles! light and easy to carry to and i won't have to worry about bullet pull either

I hear you, on suppressors & supersonic crack.

Sorry, I had to...

In the 147 OSM, however, the weight increase was solution to
the accuracy/dispersion problem, not downrange supersonic
crack. The H-K MP5 SD vented barrel takes care of that with
several holes in the barrel just forward of the chamber
(that vent into rear section of the suppressor body) that
reduces muzzle velocity of most ammo to subsonic.

I believe there were 2 reasons why the FBI returned to 9mm; larger capacity, and cost. As one police Sargent told me once, "I don't know anyone who having been in a gun battle, wanted lesser capacity magazines".

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

You seem to be under the assumption that energy is the only thing I'm factoring- something I never said. I use the energy figure as a reference- 550 to 600 Ft/Lbs is a starting point- not the ending point.

Now, I don't have at my disposal all the facts regarding all the police shootings, only the ones I read about- primarily through the news. What I've seen since the police 9mm craze is a lot more bad guys soaking up a lot more bullets, and being released from the hospital after a short stay. The coroner doesn't seem to be as busy as he was when the police carried .357mag, 45acp, or 40s&w. That's just one more thing I factor in.

But as above; what are the advantages of carrying a weaker round?

Phil,
Just some generic leather paddle holster that was taken in trade.
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

Once upon a time....

Myself and another pistolero were setting up some full size pepper poppers targets.
They were set 'hard' and we were attempting to adjust them for an average amount of resistance.

Long story short, as a test, I was gonna shoot em with W-W white box 45 acp 230gr FMJs.
My 3" Defender would just 'Ring' em purty good.
A Commander length 45 would rock em a bit.
But, a full size Gov't model would achieve a knock down....go figger.

.

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

I thought it kinda resembled some of Seventrees
and/or Ken Nulls holsters.

__________________
In Omnia Paratus

Muzzle Energy (ME) is just one more method of categorizing ammunition capability. It was repeated for many years and by many experts that "defensive" ammunition must have a minimum ME of 400 ft/lbs to be effective. If you use the short formula, you'll see that the #1 "man-stopper" of the 70's and 80's, the 125 grain JHP in .357 magnum at a muzzle velocity of 1200 fps had a ME of 400 ft/lbs.

There is no medical science that confirms that 400 ft/lbs is a magic number. Certainly higher levels of ME, with the proper bullet configuration, will deliver greater force to the target, but there is no empirical data to show that 500, 600, or even 1000 ft/lbs of ME will cause cessation of aggressive activity faster than ammunition with lower ME.

There is also the issue of how much ME is too much. Although ispcapt is correct de-bunking the myth regarding the differences between felt recoil in the 9mm vs. the .40 S&W vs. the .45ACP and the ability of most shooters to handle the recoil, the same cannot be said about large caliber specialty cartridges. How many "average" shooters can handle the ME of a .500 S&W? The factory 300-400 grain HP loadings for the .500 S&W all generate in excess of 2,800 ft/lbs of ME. Clearly, this level of ME would cause most projectiles to exit the target with sufficient energy remaining to cause significant (fatal) damage to other objects.

ME by itself is important, but it must be combined with bullet design and shot placement to get the true capability of any cartridge.

Never much cared about kinetic energy or other arithmetic stuff. I practiced with my much beloved 696 to put a bullet where it would do the most good. If I ever had to shoot someone, I highly doubt that they would care about the arithmetic stuff.

Energy foot-pounds haven't mattered to me the fifty plus years I've been carrying and shooting so I'd have to say, no for me personally.

It's a Galco, Phil :-). Notice the shape of the injection molded paddle that is peeking out from behind the holster.

__________________
Red Nichols The Holstorian

Personally, I would have answered that with; "Yeah, well how many do you know who wanted larger caliber bullets?"

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

In my personal opinion I think it does. The replies already have stated excellent points. For what its worth, I've always considered two things of importance; first is shot placement and second is the amount of energy dumped into the body. I've read the "Forensic Analysis of the April 11th, 1986, FBI Firefight" by Dr. French Anderson. If you can get a used copy its worth it. The forensic analysis performed was done 10 years after the shoot out. The FBI and many LE organizations had already moved to different calibers than what was used that day. This is where the Winchester SilverTip go their bad rap. If you look at what the report said, this round penetrated basically sideways through an arm and then into to chest. The arm wound was lethal according to science but he kept fighting. The .38 Spl FBI load didn't penetrate cars, glass or people very well A couple of the handguns were .357 Mag but the FBI refused to let agents carry this ammo. The OO buck didn't do much of a job either. There were many fatal hits to the bad guys who didn't die right away. So, in my opinion science is just that and not reality. If you haven't read Ed Mirales' book he wrote about his life before and after this event, you should. He said he lost all faith in OO buck and always loaded his duty shotgun with slugs. If you've read anything on the Blackhawk Down event, you've probably heard our warfighters saying they hit the "skinnies" multiple times with green tip ammo but they didn't go down. Small hole going in and small hole coming out. Minimal energy dump and the bad guys were on drugs. No so with the bad guys in the FBI shootout. They were drug free but sheer will kept them in the fight.

So my long winded opinion is that shot placement counts most, then energy transfer, then damage to the body. If your hit a glancing blow by a car going slowing versus getting hit head on by the same car, your chances of survival is with the glancing blow. Just my opinion.

I think that people need to accept the fact that pretty much anything short of destructive devices like grenade launchers isn't going to reliably result in a one-shot-stop.

Yes, Psychological Stops (i.e. voluntary cessation of hostility due to fear, pain, or a change in priorities) are a thing, and often times folks do underestimate their potential, but they aren't assured, nor is basically anything short of hitting someone in extremely small/narrow precise locations, or blasting them to pieces.

Also, I'm not so sure that a bullet dumping all it's energy inside of a target is as effective as it's cracked up to be. I mean, temporary stretch cavities are just that, temporary, resulting in no additional structural damage, ergo since handgun cartridges are currently incapable of producing sufficient energy to cause remote wounding effects, nor are ultra high velocity bullets like 5.7x28. Now if bullets which produce larger stretch cavities are more painful, then at least that's something because it may increase the odds of a psychological stop, but otherwise, I prefer more penetration because it begets deeper wounds, and thus more tissue damage.

That's why at the present time I gravitate towards .40 S&W. It just seems to strike a good balance between all relevant factors. Mass, Weight, Velocity, Energy, and Momentum all come together to provide a bullet which expands to a good diameter and penetrates deep without significant risk of overpenetration resulting in collateral damage. I understand that it isn't for everyone and by no means do I hold it to lofty, unrealistic ideological expectations of being "the best" as if such a thing exists or even could exist in a world of persistent scientific advancement, but it seems like a good choice for me at this time.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

When you actually get into the science of ballistics, not internet hyperbole, anecdotes and male egos, you see that the FBI is on track. It also helps when you have actual experience shooting two-legged wildlife rather than interwebz cred. Regarding energy in foot pounds: yes, it does make a difference. However, no handgun round produces the level of FPE required to make it relevant *in that context*.

I suspect part of the FBI's decision to switch back to the 9mm had to do with training costs as well. Less material consumed to make 9mm = less expensive training for the same volume of shooting, especially when amortized over millions of rounds.

This seems to be the answer the 9mm/380 group likes to trot out whenever this issue comes up. The difference between handgun caliber energy figures doesn't make much damage difference.

To their credit, it's true.

But it's only true in ideal situations. Shooting a block of gel, or a target that's behaving like a block of gel, and the damage difference is nil.

But do we plan for ideal situations?

Put that block of gel behind a windshield, bone, or most any other obstacle and the differences become more apparent. While primarily a concern for LE or military, a private citizen planning for 'less than ideal' isn't unreasonable.