Since Winter has been getting increasingly cold in my region each year, I've been looking into "calibering up" as some folks call it for the season with a new pistol chambered in either .40 S&W or .45 ACP, but it seems everywhere I go and anywhere the subject is raised, there's always at least a few folks arguing that there's no reason to carry a .40 or a .45 over a 9mm because they're equally effective.

This sentiment has become increasingly common over the years ever since the FBI switched from .40 to 9mm after reaching the same conclusion through testing.
However, as far as I know, the FBI has never divulged what specific 9mm load(s) equate to which load(s) in .40/.45, nor does anybody who repeats the sentiment ever seem to specify.

I've seen too many ammo tests performed on a wide array of media and read too many reports to take a blanket statement like 9mm being equal to .40/.45 at face value.
A standard pressure 115gr 9mm doesn't perform the same as a 230gr .45 ACP for example, ergo there must be a specific 9mm load which closes the gap, or otherwise some 9mm load which equates to another specific load in .40 S&W and .45 ACP, but what load is it?

Honestly, if I can carry a 9mm load that can go toe-to-toe with a .40 or a .45, then obviously I'd love to know what it is because it could save me a lot of money, but I'm skeptical that such a load even exists, so could someone more knowledgeable enlighten me to the specifications of this illusive 9mm Luger load which replicates the performance of larger caliber cartridges?

UPDATE - 09/29/2019 (2 Months Later)
Although this thread died over a month ago, I just felt like posting a little update. By pure chance I happened upon a Smith & Wesson Sigma SW40VE sitting in the case at my LGS like new in box for $199, so after a bit of research I jumped on it and put it on layaway. I would have bought it straight up if I had that much on me at the time, but just as well, it's still surprisingly humid in my area for late September, so I wouldn't be carrying it immediately regardless. So yeah, the subject is officially closed on my end since fate has settled the matter for me, but thanks to everyone who humored me by taking the time to respond to this thread.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Switch to the .357 SIG and your problem will be solved or I have seen the FBI ammo report and they are shooting 9mm Hornady critical duty in their new Glocks. I know an agent and have handled his gun and have seen the new ammo and box so this is verified information.

__________________
S&W factory revolver armorer

While yes the FBI did run their tests and determined 9mm is best for their purposes that is mostly because its cheap(er) than other offerings....and its easier to teach "new" people on 9mm than 40/357SIG.

That said, yes there are some VERY good 9mm offerings these days.

Id you want something with good penetration, I would look at Buffalo Bore, Underwood is another good company that makes hot rounds.

What you are asking though, doesnt really have a set answer....Cause you can get .40 ballistics out of a +p+ 9mm......but you can also up the .40/45 and get higher ballistics as well so Im assuming we are talking baseline, off the shelf.

I would take a look at the 2 brands I mentioned and see if they have anything to your liking as they have a wide variety.

With that in mind, if you do decide on a +p+ round.....of course be sure your firearm can handle it.

As cold as it gets and as accommodating my winter attire may be, I don't plan on carrying a Beretta 92FS or a SIG P226, but something more along the lines of a S&W M&P (Shield) or a Ruger LC9s/Security 9, which I doubt are up to the task of shooting +P+ loads.
Besides, if +P+ loads are required to replicate standard pressure .40 S&W or .45 ACP loads, then I'd sooner just get a .40 or a .45 and not have to worry about the ammo damaging the gun or otherwise wearing it out at highly accelerated rate.

That being said, I would still like to hear from some more folks, especially those who carry 9mm due to its asserted equality to .40s, complete with the specific loads, including the bullet weight, powder load, and estimated pressure, (if you handload) as well as the firearm such ammo is carried within.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I carry Federal 147gr HST standard pressure year-round in my carry gun, a Beretta PX4 Compact (3.27" barrel, FYI) and my home defense gun, a Beretta 92FS. Where I currently live, the winters typically don't get super cold, but high temps can get below freezing at times and bundling up is common. From what I've read, LE agencies that use the same load in areas that get pretty cold, including St. Louis and an agency in Minnesota (I can't remember which agency, but I want to say Minneapolis or Rochester), are satisfied with it's performance.

Then there's the Speer 124gr GDHP +P used by NYPD that's gotten good results, and it can get quite cold there. I'd say this is probably a good choice for someone who wants a little more energy for penetrating heavy winter clothing, but doesn't want too much recoil. I've only shot this in my PX4 Compact, but the recoil was not an issue.

I can't remember what load Chicago uses, but I want to say it's a 147gr load. I could be wrong, though.

My general philosophy still holds, in that I prefer bullets that are medium-to-heavy weight for caliber, so I'd be satisfied with just about any modern JHP 9mm load in the 124-147gr range, standard pressure or +P.

Also, I wouldn't say the 9mm is "equal" to .40 or .45, but I would say that based on actual shootings, any advantage the bigger calibers have over 9mm are so small as to be insignificant. For that reason, I would agree that all the service calibers perform about the same. So pick the one you like. A good, modern JHP that's reliable in your gun and that you can shoot well should perform as designed/desired, regardless of caliber.

Just my opinion.

Just a side note, shooting +P+ rounds wont damage most guns....especially not the ones you mentioned if you shoot in moderation.

If you fire lets say 100-200 a year of your carry ammo....you likely wont damage the gun.....Now if you feel you need to shoot 1,000s of rounds of the carry ammo then yes you could damage the gun.

I know a lot of guys who practice minimally with a carry round, practice a lot with cheap range stuff and carry the good ammo.

All depends on preference.

Agreed. +P or even +P+ likely won't cause any kind of catastrophic failure, but will cause accelerated wear. At the same time, you'd have to shoot A LOT of +P/+P+ ammo to notice such wear. Best precaution would be changing out recoil springs more frequently. That would probably go a long way towards mitigating such issues.

Of course, there are plenty of good self defense loads in standard pressure that I don't think it's necessary for most people to go to higher pressure loads, unless that's just their personal preference. Nothing wrong with that.

@ContinentalOp
Thanks, that's just the sort of response I'm looking for.

@fmflorida
The owners manuals included with most firearms says otherwise. In fact, I've never seen a single owner's manual for any firearm which doesn't warn against the use of +P+ ammo, citing the lack of control standards and the fact that their firearms weren't designed to handle pressures which exceed SAAMI specifications.
I know that there are a lot of folks who shoot +P+ ammo out of such firearms regardless of warnings/advisories by the manufacturer against doing so with anecdotal evidence to suggest that it's safe to do so, but personally I am not comfortable doing so.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Nothing wrong with being prudent when it comes to handheld explosions.

I don't give a lot of credibility to the FBI, or other federal, state, county, or local law enforcement agencies that have their hardware and ammo decisions made by budget-driven bureaucrats.

I wouldn't want to be shot with a 9mm any more than I would a .40 S&W or .45 ACP round. That said, I carry a 3953 during warm weather months and a 4053 during cold weather months. My decision only needs to feel right for me.

If U R worried about having adequate penetration go with a .45 Federal Train and protect round., the .45 is a HP that replicates a profile more in line w standard ball...that and a Glock 30 give U 11 rounds on tap.

Well..

.380
9mm
.40
.45

Debate rolls on. That being said:

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/sel...llistic-tests/

Scroll down, each chart is interactive and can be sorted by 5 shot average depth, 5 shot average expansion diameter, and 5 shot average muzzle velocity.

You will see the results from the testing are very interesting and may be eye-opening for some.

There are some factors obviously which keep 9mm separate from .40 and .45, etc.. however, the data points used show the performance gap may not be as large as many people believe.

Is A Carhartt Jacket Bulletproof? video by ShootingTheBull410

Except for more and heavier clothing allowing you to more easily conceal a larger pistol, up-gunning for winter is unnecessary.

You can check out a list of ammunition in 9mm, .40, and .45 that can be trusted to penetrate adequately and expand significantly at Service Caliber Handgun Duty and Self-Defense Ammo.

This is a pretty easy question; the answer is already mentioned above, which is the 147 HST. The longer heavier bullet tends to track in a straight line better than the lighter shorter ones; it also penetrates barriers like auto glass better--again the longer bullet deflects less. Presumably is the same regarding bone. It opens beautifully no matter how much clothing it shoots through, and has an excellent track record. To me, easy choice.

It’s funny that when people claim the 9mm equal to the .40 and .45, they never seem to mention the .357 SIG.

Why? The .357 SIG was designed to duplicate the stopping power of the legendary, devastating 125 grain .357 magnum hollow point. Regarded as the most effective anti-personnel handgun round in human history, New adopters of the semi-auto pistol pined for the same effectiveness.

The .357 SIG delivered.

Bottom line, it is THE single best manstopper and Law Enforcement cartridge available. Buy one and never look back. Forget about 9mm, 40, and 45.

Hasn't the "this v. that" been done to death already?

1. Carry what you want.

2. Get good with it.

It's really as simple as that.

I didn't mention .357 Sig because the OP didn't, but I group it in with the rest of the service calibers, including .38 Special and .357 Magnum. Again, there may be some advantage to the extra power, but not enough to say it's head-and-shoulders above the rest.

I will say that .357 Sig does have a couple of advantages unrelated to its terminal effectiveness against attackers. One, it's a very flat-shooting round, so if you think you could potentially need to make a long-range shot, it might be worth considering. Two, it does very well with barrier penetration, i.e. car doors and such, so if you think that might be necessary, it might be worth considering. IIRC, these were the reasons it was adopted by Texas DPS before they switched to 9mm, I believe. And I want to say these were also part of the reasoning it was adopted by the US Secret Service and the Federal Air Marshal Service, but I could be wrong.

But as I said before, when it comes to guns in the service calibers, picking a good, modern JHP that's reliable in your gun and that you can shoot well is going to be more important than the caliber itself.

If that one magical 9mm load existed then we could do away with all the 45acp's and 40 S&W's and all the different 9mm loadings .
Everyone would carry the 9mm magic load .

But the truth is , it doesn't exist .

Carry whatever you can shoot well with , solid hits in vital places win the day .... misses don't count for squat .

Personally I tend to favor rounds that start with a 4 but I can do good work with a 38 special if I have to .
It's not what you shoot but how well you shoot in a gunfight .
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

NONE..........

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I've thought about those sort of things before and have come to this conclusion through trial and error. The firearm I carry has to be accurate and controllable with enough energy to get the job done.

In "my" opinion +p 9mm or +p .38 ammo with good shot placement is capable of dealing with most encounters short of large four legged critters.

In smaller frame handguns .357, .40 and 45s are difficult to control in follow up shots and some just hurt to shoot.

My EDC is a 9mm Shield loaded with +p. I've shot the Shields in .40 and .45 I find them hard to control in rapid fire. Snubby .357s are just obnoxious to fire regularly.

For home defense or field carry were a larger framed gun is used just about any caliber will work as long as you can control the recoil.

Deleted...thought he was looking for friendly advice on good 9mm ammo and failed to see it was actually caliber debate.

__________________
I see dead people

@Boogs
I've gone over that testing before and check back on it every so often to see if any new rounds have been tested. While it is an interesting line of testing, it's strictly a Balistics Gel Test which can only tell you so much. It's definitely interesting as well as a helpful source for those seeking a good carry load, but it doesn't really answer my question.

@V0OBWxZS16
I'm a fan of ShootingtheBull410 and have been subscribed to his YouTube Channel for years, so I've already seen that video.

That being said, you seem to have misunderstood me. I'm not looking to caliber up because I'm worried about Winter clothing preventing expansion or somehow functioning as a bulletproof vest, I'm just looking to caliber up because my Winter attire makes it easy to conceal larger, more powerful firearms, so I figure that if I can easily carry something more powerful, then why not do so?
However, if there is any truth whatsoever to the assertion that 9mm Luger can be equal in effectiveness/performance compared to larger diameter bullets, then obviously it wouldn't be worth the expense to "upgrade" to a cartridge which offers nothing yet has heavier recoil and more ammo capacity.

What I'm really hoping for is some feedback from the folks who carry 9mm Luger over .40 S&W or .45 ACP, citing the 9mm Luger's asserted equality.
Honestly, I see the argument made constantly by at least a few people whenever the .40 S&W or .45 ACP is mentioned that there's no reason to carry either because 9mm Luger is equally effective yet boasts higher magazine capacity as well as less felt recoil, so I want some of the folks who make such statements to reveal to me precisely which 9mm loads equal .40/.45, yet have less recoil.

I suspect that there is no such round and that it's merely a case of folks who carry 9mm parroting a blanket statement made by the FBI to support their choose in cartridge, perhaps as a form of self-assurance in the face of unnecessary doubt, but just in case there really is a particular 9mm loading which can duplicate the performance of a .40 or a .45 without exceeding SAAMI Specifications, even if it is merely in comparison to moderate (reduced recoil) loads, then I would like to know what it is.
Basically, I'm encouraging the folks who feel the need to sound off everytime anyone brings up carrying a .40 or a .45 about how they would be better served carrying a 9mm which is "every bit as effective" to share exactly which 9mm load accomplishes this, just in case such a load is being employed by law enforcement or something and the folks who make such bold assertions are policemen or soldiers who can backup their statements with facts based on firsthand experience.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Mike, SC Hunter got it right. None! If you want a larger caliber handgun then get a larger caliber handgun. My analogy; If you want to go "mudding" then get a 4x4 pickup truck if you want to go fast get a Ferrari. If you want to start a caliber war ask Which 9mm load duplicates the performance of .40 S&W/.45 ACP?

Solve the problem by "double tap or triple tap".

I'm somewhat hesitant to enter the thread but I guess I'll never learn. Not LE or former military, and I've never had to shoot anyone, but am I off-base in stating that this discussion is splitting hairs? Am I wrong in assuming that all of the mentioned calibers have the potential to be 100% effective if the shooter does his part with shot placement, while at the same time they are handgun rounds and also have the potential to be 100% ineffective by their nature?

Surprised (a little ) by no one asking - how do you define "performance"?

You seem to be asking about penetration through heavy clothing so that is one answer - either ball ammo or a controlled expansion round like Critical Duty.

Or if you define performance as muzzle energy; there are 9 mm rounds that will get close to or equal some .40 or .45 rounds.

Or effectiveness? As mentioned above, an expanding round with a documented record of performance when properly placed. Ineffective shots probably won't be made effective by an extra 0.045 to 0.09" of bullet diameter.

Choose wisely and practice regularly.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Ugh, I don't understand why it is that one cannot simply ask a question about anything caliber-related without folks getting all defensive, putting words in each-others mouths, and throwing around accusations that the TC is deliberately attempting to start a caliber war.

Honestly...

• where did I ever say that 9mm Luger wasn't adequate for self-defense?
• When did I say that .40 or .45 were better than 9mm?
• How did I ever say anything whatsoever to indicate that my intentions were anything other than seeking an answer to a question raised by a persistent sentiment I have seen asserted incessantly whenever somebody mentions carrying anything more than 9mm?

Oh right, I didn't.

Seriously, you're getting upset over a nonexistent caliber war fueled completely by your own imagination.

I have nothing against 9mm and the whole point of this thread was me basically looking for an excuse to save money by not upgrading to .40 or .45, ready to accept any example whatsoever of when or where a 9mm can equal just about any .40 or .45 load, but unfortunately the thread is getting derailed by folks who are apparently so insecure that any question whatsoever about the 9mm seeking anything resembling evidence to support the persistent claims of it yielding equal performance compared to other cartridges is immediately misinterpreted as an attempt to start a caliber war.

Honestly, my number one choice for Winter carry is probably a Ruger LC9s because I shot my brother's awhile ago and loved it, so this whole thread was basically me seeking reassurance as well as perhaps getting an actual straight answer to a question that has been on my mind lately, but if anything all of these non-answers and wild accusations which are just oozing with insecurity on the subject are pushing me in the opposite direction!

So how about you all just settle down and stop being so unreasonable defensive over a simple question? I don't care if 9mm can't actually match .40 or .45, nor would I ever consider it to be inadequate for failure to do so. I just want to know what (if any) 9mm loads come close to equaling .40 or .45! It's not a pass or fail situation, it's just a simple question. RELAX.

Basically any and all relevant information. Velocity, Energy Foot-Pounds, Penetration and Expansion in a variety of different test mediums/barriers including FBI/IWBA specified Ballistics Gel Testing, not to mention just good old-fashioned reports of results.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

To me, bigger gun under winter clothing means subcompact to compact 9mm. Since I like Glocks, as an example, replace 43 with 48.
I believe the ER docs, a hole is a hole until caliber is replaced by gauge or the bullet is moving at mach 2+. So I carry umc 124 gr fmj.

The US Government has a lot of resources to test guns and ammo. They
seem to think that the 9mm Nato 124 gr FMJ round is equal to or better
than the .45 acp 230 gr FMJ round for use against heavily clothed human
targets. No need for us to try to over think this issue.

Great thread guy's!
One of my favorites is 357 Sig, which is just a + p + hot 9 mm.
357 Sig guns tend to be be beefier than a 9 mm. Wear and tear also shows on these but at least the weapon has been beefed up.
A beefier gun is easier to control with a powerful round but also heavier and more difficult to carry. We all know this rule. Think Sig p-239.
I agree that 9 mm offerings are quite effective. But if I got to pick a gun before meeting a 300lb bad guy I would probably pick up the calibers.
Smith & Wesson of the day sure sold a lot of large caliber magnum weapons to law enforcement. I own a model 57 that was carried by law enforcement locally.
So back on topic, for a small lightweight concealable weapon, 9 mm has its positives.

I do not want to start a war, but I feel strongly that they moved to 9 mm to standardize and make it easier for smaller individuals to shoot the weapon.
A lot of women have been moved into the forces and some cannot control the larger calibers. Again, standardization.
9 mm is an excellent round, I have many of these! But I do not consider them bear Stoppers. Just my opinion and like all opinions ...😊

Oh that reminds me, on the subject of .357 SIG. It's a cool round, but sadly it seems like it never really caught on, pretty much nobody makes new firearms chambered in the cartridge anymore, (not even SIG) and they're strangely expensive considering that it is to my understanding that they're identical to their .40 S&W counterpart save for the barrel, so it's just not a cartridge I want to get into right now.

Maybe someday I'll buy a M&P40 then get a conversion barrel, but at the current time it's just not what I'm looking for.

Just in case there's any confusion on the subject, the question of the thread is what 9mm Luger loads can equal a .40 S&W or .45 ACP. I'm well aware that there are other cartridges with bullets which are 9mm in diameter which are capable of equaling or even exceeding the performance of a .40/.45 like .38 Super or .357 SIG, but that's not what I'm looking for.

The whole point of trying to find a 9mm Luger load which can duplicate the performance of .40 S&W or .45 ACP is so that I can spare myself the expense of purchasing a new firearm and ammo in a whole other size/price range.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

Murphydog was dead on in his comment. Other than measured muzzle energy or percentage expansion, you cannot really "duplicate" performance because there are too many other variables, not least of which is the target.

9mm is known good penetrator even in JHP form, too good for those nervous about what they consider over-penetration. Whether the FBI protocol is a good analog for heavy winter clothing in your area only you can decide. The luckygunner site has a large stack of tests with ballistic gel using typical carry guns in a variety of calibers. It's also worth checking out Paul Harrell's youtube videos where he attempts to replicate a realistic target using a variety of materials to represent human tissue and bones.

__________________
Release the Kraken

I appreciate what you're saying!
As stated above in other posters comments, I also have my 9 m m loaded with the federal HST rounds. I may not consider it equal to some other calibers available but if you want to stick to 9 mm this is a great round. I would love to see some post-mortem examples of these rounds that have been mentioned but they never seem to get posted, So we have to go with gel test!
For reference, I brought in 3 5 7 Sig because so many people were mentioning 9 mm + p +. Same diameter.
As for buying the weapon itself, prices have been down because of the move to 9 m m. Actually 40 cal right now is in a huge dip and you can get premium weapons cheap.
I have also seen a huge increase in 9 mm premium ammo prices in the last six months. Last prices I saw on federal HST had jumped to $47 / 50 round on one of the online discount sites, up almost twenty bucks. Currently I can buy premium 40, 45, and 357 Sig for Less.
I stick to the Sig Sauer profile for memory response on the weapons. My revolvers are Smith & Wesson.
The Sig models I own are 238, 938, 239, 229, 226, 220, sp2009, SP2022.
I may have forgot something, but I am old! :-)
( just remembered, p224)

And for reference, from my FD days, the only gunshots I saw were 45 caliber and 357 Magnum, both one round fatal.

Just as a point of interest, back up near the start someone mentioned +P+ 9mm. Maybe ten years ago I had some and ran it across a chronograph. Wasn't as fast as a Cor-Bon +P round of the same bullet weight. IIRC, not a significant difference from +P of the same brand.

Please recall that back in the hay day of +P+, they needed to drive bullets faster than standard velocities to get expansion. There might have been just a smidgen of salesmanship there too. With the current designs, they get expansion at lower velocities. Typically, the greater the expansion, the less penetration.

It's your money, but frankly I wouldn't bother with +P+. OTOH, with +P you can generally figure you're at least getting the velocities claimed for standard velocity. At least from major manufacturers.

If you are LE, contact the FBI firearms division and ask them to share the data they generated. Most folks have only read the justification memo and haven't seen the actual data that drove the switch. I don't believe that they said the calibers performed the same.

If you aren't LE, you'll have to look for secondary sources.

You can go to the Vista outdoor LE page and see test data that should emulate what the FBI found.
://le.vistaoutdoor.com/wound_ballistics/load_comparison/load_comparison.aspx
Assuming the FBI used calibrated ballistic gel and their own test protocols.

Using the website's load comparison tool, it shows that a 9mm 147 grain GDHP at 990 fps penetrated to 14.93 inch after going through the heavy clothing medium. A 230 grain .45 ACP GDHP at 890 FPS penetrated 13.60 inches and a .40 cal 180 gr GDHP at 1025 penetrated to 13.06. Both the .45 and .40 expanded to a larger diameter than the 9mm. The other mediums like wall board, steel, plywood and bare gel produced different results. Given the OP's question, I believe the Heavy clothing test is the most pertinent, unless folks like to wear plywood and steel jackets for the winter time.

However, I would point out that both Buford Boone, Pat Rogers and Dr Gary Roberts have all said that shot placement and the ability to get effective hits is significantly more important than caliber or bullet design. Having treated GSWs on three separate occasions I tend to agree with them. I'd tell to spend your time, energy and effort getting better with what you have then adding guns, calibers, etc. Should you find yourself in a situation where your target is not reacting to body shots, go for a face shot or aim for exposed skin or eyes.

Many knowledgeable top notch shooters and trainers have gone to the .9mm claiming that with modern carry ammo there is a marginal difference in performance. Several have also stated that the ER docs can't tell the difference between the three when looking at the wounds that they deal with. Those supporting the .9mm say that capacity and the ability to get back on target for repeat shots with the .9mm more than makes up for the marginal difference in the wounding effect of the larger caliber. In my heart of hearts, I still want to believe the bigger is better philosophy. I own and carry a Shield 9mm, a CZ P10-C 9mm as well as two other model's of CZ in 9mm as well as a BHP. I carried a 1911 .45 for probably 25 or my 36+years in LE and still feel that it is a superior round in a HTP type configuration. I do not own a .40 and feel that if I can't get it done with the other two, then I don't need to add a .40 to the mix.

Modern handgun rounds are as good as they can be, which is lousy compared to rifle rounds. Shoot what you’re confident with.

Actually, SIG currently makes four models of semi-auto handguns chambered in .357 SIG: P226, P229, P320, and 1911. They also make .357 SIG conversion kits for P320s.

Back to your original question. Since the FBI doesn't release the details of their ammo tests, the best data we have access to are provided by people who do their own systematic testing, like Lucky Gunner, ShootingTheBull410, and Dr. Roberts (all referenced previously).

Right now if I was looking to upgrade my self-defense 9mm rounds, I'd start by trying Federal Micro HST 150g, and Winchester Ranger T-Series 147g. In the Lucky Gunner testing, both rounds did an excellent job of penetration, and expanded to more than twice their original diameters, approximating or bettering many .40 and .45 SD rounds. I'd then determine how well they'd function in my gun. If they cycled with 100% reliability through at least 100 consecutive rounds, I'd choose the one that shot the most accurately for me. Cost would NOT be a consideration in my final selection, because cheaping out on my self defense is false economy, IMHO.

Finally, one issue pertaining to the comparability of 9mm to heavier rounds that I have not seen addressed above, is the impact on the target. While penetration and expansion data are useful, they don't necessarily mean that bullets of differing calibers with the same penetration/expansion characteristics will have the same effect on the target. I learned this in a discussion with one of the range officers at my range. He is a former big-city homicide detective who was in charge of investigating officer-involved shootings. Based on many interviews asking the involved officers how the bad guys reacted when hit, he found that three rounds in particular were consistently the most effective at stunning the targets and disrupting their actions. These were the .45 acp, the .357 mag, and the .357 SIG. The 9mm round had a much weaker effect, usually causing the bad guys to flinch and then continue what they were doing. Based on this real-world info, I've given up carrying 9mm, and only carry and practice with .357 Sig and .45acp.

But as everyone says, shot placement is King, so shoot what you shoot best.

__________________
What, me worry?

...but the most important one is getting good hits on critical areas. And they expect a pistol to do the job of a carbine or rifle so they bounce back and forth between pistol calibers worrying about terminal ballistics and which pistol caliber performs like a long gun with a good sight system.

Criminals don't stand there like a standard target, they take cover. And to stop them you need to be able to pick shots and put them right where they count. Not in arms and legs.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

All the FBI testing cares about is penetration/expansion in ballistic gel going through layers of denim.
Pass or fail
Doesn't matter what caliber it is.
As with the Military, its all a cost, weight analysis. Get more shots with 9mm can carry more ammo, cost less

556 vs 30-06 or 308

Shoot the caliber that you shoot best
Watch this video, and maybe it will clear things up

One of the best videos on bullet testing

Papa Bear, Mama Bear, Baby Bear

38 special, to small
357 to violent not enough rounds

9mm to wimpy
10mm to violent
45 acp to big, not enough rounds

40 SW to snappy


Back to 9mm

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Ah, I did misunderstand you on that point.

Why not carry a bigger gun in a bigger caliber?
Because you can carry a bigger gun in the same caliber.

It really is impossible to say anything without it being a "caliber war" type statement. So...
The 9mm is NOT EQUAL to the .40 or .45. The 9mm is a BETTER PERFORMER because the slight loss in terminal damage potential is significantly outweighed by its other advantages (recoil, magazine capacity, training cost, etc.)

Bigger holes are better.

This reminds me of vegetarians trying to make a veggie burger or vegetarian bacon. You will never quite get it to the original.

I wouldnt try to make my 380 into a 9.
I wouldnt try to make my 9 into a 40.
I wouldnt try to make my.. oh hell you understand.

I think people get too hung up on what the FBI does and says...

Pick the gun/caliber that you shoot best, but quality ammo and go practice as much as possible. I love 9mm and with Buffalo Bore ammo I never feel underguned. And should I need anything bigger I reach for my .30-30

__________________
Jorge

I'm glad to see the rest of the universe has caught up with me, by going to the 9mm...
After all, I've been carrying it since before there was a 10mm, or even a 40.
However, I couldn't resist the cheap police surplus 40's, and bought a like new G22 Gen4, complete with night sights, for a very cheap price.
I find the recoil of 40s&w negligible, and I feel pretty well armed with 15 180gn HST's at 1000fps.

"Compared to a 9mm, the .357 Sig has a decreased magazine capacity, more recoil, as well as greater muzzle blast and flash, yet at best it offers no gain in bullet penetration and expansion characteristics. What is the point of this cartridge?”

- Dr.Gary Roberts(DocGKR)/

In the 40's the 38 Super was King of the hill until the 357 came out.

Yes, the little 9mm is a nice weapon but.........
most like a little 3" barrel for less weight for all day carry.....
but we all know the 5" or longer barrel will get maximum fps & energy from a SD loading.

A 5" 9, 40 or 45 cal. pistol can start out at 33 ounces unloaded
and go up to three pounds ......
which is hard to keep in place when moving at more than a walk.

Get er done.

If we are going to have a winter caliber discussion, we would be remiss to not invite .44 magnum to the party huh?

Performance wise, .44 magnum is a clear cut above all the calibers mentioned thus far. Yes, N frames are huge, but you are wearing a winter coat right?

__________________
Ban this man,
'89