Which 9mm load duplicates the performance of .40 S&W/.45 ACP?

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

@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.

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.

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.

murphydog said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

alwslate said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Dirty Harry Callahan said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Dirty Harry Callahan said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Dirty Harry Callahan said:

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)...

Click to expand...

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.