With Todays Modern Ammo...............

[Colonel]

Please allow me to preface this posting that I do not purport to be an expect on ammo ballistics. But I am informed and observant to the obvious.
I keep hearing and reading: "That with todays ammo, 9mm ammo is just as effective as .40 cal and .45 ACP" because the FBI says so. Really, the FBI? A bastion of credibility? Again, REALLY?
If a LIE is said often enough and long enough, I guess it becomes true?
IMHO; the FBI came up with this justification in a politically correct report because woman and small men could not qualify with the .40 cal, and this was an easy out. Even if one knew nothing about ammo or ballistics, line the 3 cartridge up side by side and say with a straight face that they are "All have the same effectiveness". It is said that "todays bullet technology" makes the 9mm equal in performance to .40's and .45's, but that same technology advanced .40's and .45 ACP performance as well. Didn't it?
I for one, just don't believe this FBI report, and believe it's a LIE to fit a narrative under a certain devious and decepive political administration.
I keep reading this LIE over and over on this forum, (and others) and by many posters that have a LEO badge as an identifier. I would think that they would know better and not fall for the LIE? I cringe every-time I read a post that repeats this LIE. How can so many be so guidable? All one has to do is review history, gun battles, and the results. It was not to long ago, that the 9mm was deemed to an ineffective performer based on many shootouts, but now it's the KING because the FBI said so and "modern bullet technology"? COME ON! I am not getting sucked in.
Long live the .40 cal, .45 ACP and .357 Sig.

 

[Nevada Ed]

Oh;
You are one of those, BIGGER is better guys.............

and have a battery on your shoulder !

 

[Brasso4]

The .357sig is a 9mm, it's just going 150 fps faster. Big whoop.

 

[Alk8944]

Colonel,

If you had access to the earliest articles about the decision of the FBI to revert to the 9mm you would discover that the excuses of women having a hard time qualifying with the .40 S&W are just that, BS Excuses! The real reason often cited was cost of ammunition and firearms maintenance. In short, MONEY! Ammunition effectiveness had nothing to do with it.

 

[iPac]

Long live the .40 cal, .45 ACP and .357 Sig.

I do agree with you that modern bullet technology has advanced ALL bullets, and due to this the larger calibers will still perform better when compared to same design smaller caliber bullets.

However, your "long live" comment gave me quite the chuckle. You do realize that besides 45ACP, the other two could still be considered "infants" compared to all the other calibers that have been being used successfully for the past 100+ years.

I like to take the middle of the road and go with good old 357mag. In a defense situation, more isn't always better. If not 357mag, then either 38spl or 9mm, and yes, because better bullet technology makes them more effective. I will not argue that they are better ballistics wise compared to larger calibers, as I don't consider that pertinent. Getting the job done is pertinent, and I'm confident they will.

Trying to argue caliber is useless, and getting worked up over someone else's viewpoints on them is too. Everyone has their own favorites. I just worry about myself. It sounds like you have your favorites, so why worry about someone else's opinions.

 

[D Brown]

I think someone concluded a long time ago that bullet placement and determination were possibly the two most important factors in gunfight survival. Don't recall exactly who that was...

Of course, if you happen to have a 12 gauge in your pocket, all bets are off!

 

[jupiter1]

I think someone concluded a long time ago that bullet placement and determination were possibly the two most important factors in gunfight survival. Don't recall exactly who that was...

That's the bottom line. I quit believing that there is a measureable difference in 'effectiveness' of service handgun cartridges. In 100 plus years, no science has been produced that settles the argument. All we have are unreliable anecdotes. Other than their physical dimensions, they are all basically low powered cartridges. They are not 100% problem solvers. One should be prepared for unexpected results.

 

[chief38]

As an agency the FBI has probably changed "official handguns" more times than any agency i know of. Back a few years ago the American Rifleman Magazine listed all of them and my head was spinning! I don't remember the exact count, but it was a LOT!

I suppose there are many reasons like female agents with smaller hands and frames. Less practice time on the Ranges these days, less instruction, more and faster ballistic advancements, dress code changes, etc all contribute to the many changes too. I would imagine Politics and who is heading up the Agency also has something to add into the mix.

The bottom line is that they don;t have the same "budget restrictions" that local LE Agencys have to contend with and they usually get the Gov't to cut the check, whereas local LE Agency's probably need more and better justification for spending more of the taxpayers hard earned money.

 

[Lee's Landing Billy]

Placement and penetration....repeat 1,000 times.

 

[rwsmith]

I never expect it to surpass....

I never expected it to top certain calibers, but improvements in bullet design does make formerly feeble rounds into more potent and reliable weapon, often in a smaller package. Some of the newer powders add to performance.

 

[Brasky]

Sorry but you put zero thought in your post and it sounds like it was written by a first grader who didn't get what they wanted at the store.

Go watch ballistics tests over and over, especially with Federals HST loading. Does 45 expand wider than 40? Well yeah. Does 40 expand wider than 9? Well yeah. But the difference in expansion and penetration is so minimal that the benefits of carrying less ammo or a larger firearm negate the benefits of 40 and 45. That and the softer recoil allows ANY shooter, even experienced, faster follow up shots.

I own firearms in 9, 40, and 45 and see the benefits of all but I still choose 9mm to carry. Federal HST is the equalizer when it comes to hollow points

 

[Arik]

Lining up cartridges is quite scientific. I mean 38 and 357 are almost identical in size so they must have almost identical performance?
32 long Colt has more case capacity and almost the same size as the 9mm so it must be just as effective if not more.
Makes sense! Why are we using 7.62NATO or even 3006? When you line it up against a 45-70 you can clearly see the superiority of the 45-70.

Yes REALLY! The story of little women and small men is just that.....A story. The size of the guns in 9 and 40 are the same.

Yes their effectiveness is about the same. The object being shot can't tell the difference between 350ft-lbs and 420ft-lbs.

Take Federal HST. A popular and excellent performance ammunition. ENERGY
Muzzle​. 25 Y
9mm 364 330
40sw 408. 384
45acp 404. 389

The energy transfer and damage to the body is about the same. No one is going to tell a difference in 50fps.


Looking at things and making assumptions is definitely more scientific then research!
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[16thVACav]

It is said that "todays bullet technology" makes the 9mm equal in performance to .40's and .45's, but that same technology advanced .40's and .45 ACP performance as well. Didn't it?

Please - no more telephone calls - we have a winner!

 

[Topsarge]

Please allow me to preface this posting that I do not purport to be an expect on ammo ballistics. But I am informed and observant to the obvious.
I keep hearing and reading: "That with todays ammo, 9mm ammo is just as effective as .40 cal and .45 ACP" because the FBI says so. Really, the FBI? A bastion of credibility? Again, REALLY?
If a LIE is said often enough and long enough, I guess it becomes true?
IMHO; the FBI came up with this justification in a politically correct report because woman and small men could not qualify with the .40 cal, and this was an easy out. Even if one knew nothing about ammo or ballistics, line the 3 cartridge up side by side and say with a straight face that they are "All have the same effectiveness". It is said that "todays bullet technology" makes the 9mm equal in performance to .40's and .45's, but that same technology advanced .40's and .45 ACP performance as well. Didn't it?
I for one, just don't believe this FBI report, and believe it's a LIE to fit a narrative under a certain devious and decepive political administration.
I keep reading this LIE over and over on this forum, (and others) and by many posters that have a LEO badge as an identifier. I would think that they would know better and not fall for the LIE? I cringe every-time I read a post that repeats this LIE. How can so many be so guidable? All one has to do is review history, gun battles, and the results. It was not to long ago, that the 9mm was deemed to an ineffective performer based on many shootouts, but now it's the KING because the FBI said so and "modern bullet technology"? COME ON! I am not getting sucked in.
Long live the .40 cal, .45 ACP and .357 Sig.

I've got to agree with you on this. Yes, today's technology made the 9 much better than it was. However, ammo manufacturers are not fools. They put that same tech into the 40, 45 and other calibers. So everyone is happy. Except the FBI of course. To be politically correct they went back to the 9. After what happened with Comey in the last year, I have very little faith in the FBI. That being said, I own several handguns and none of them are 9s. I'm not knocking them, but why would I carry a 9 when I can carry a 40, or 45? I'm a retired LEO and FBI (when they had a better rep) trained and certified firearms instructor and SWAT. If i I ran a PD they would most likely be carrying a 45 or maybe a 40. Just my opinion on the subject, so please, all of you 9 lovers out there, don't get insulted. There is nothing wrong with a 9, I would just rather carry a 45.

 

[American1776]

From what I've seen, modern 9mm, .40, and .45acp do similar stuff in the flesh stimulant gel.

I think where you'll see a measurable difference when you compare those 3 service calibers with full power .357 magnum, .41 and .44 magnum.

A 158 gr. 357 magnum going 1,400 ft/s cannot be touched by 9 or 40. A 210 gr. 41 magnum doing an honest 1,300 ft/s is another world compared to 9, 40 or 45.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Old line........

"It's not how big your bullet is....... it's where you place it!"
Or something like that.......



I had plenty of 9mm and .45s when the .40 "Short & Weak" was introduced.......... then we got the .357 Sig an inbred 9/40 offspring........


hooo.... hummmmmmmmm.................. still have plenty of 9mm and .45s.


"move along nothing to see here!!!!!!"

They are all minor caliber when compared to a 5.56, .308 or even themselves; out of a carbine length barrel !!!!!

 

[eahicks]

You have to think too, more and more people (myself included) are carrying smaller, shorter barrel guns now. And many of these expanding ammo do not expand fully or at all due to terminal velocity not being reached. So yeah, there could very well be one type of 9mm that does expand well, and beyond what another brand of .45 might expand. So, actually there could be some 9 and .40 that perform better than a lot of 45, since it is usually a little slower. But it does punch a bigger hole in the paper, and that's really all about 99% of ever will see as proof.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fredj338]

Bullet tech has made the 9mm very viable as a SD round. The same as a 40 or 45, no, but close enough to not be afraid to carry 9mm. I am a 45 guy, but the more I shoot 9mm in competition the more I see the benefit of landing more hits, more accurately & in shorter time frame. Not giving up my 1911 anytime soon, but don't mind carrying my G26 either with good JHP.
Since I live in a 10+1 state, I am not giving up much if anything to larger calibers. I tend to let the platform dictate the caliber & use good JHP ammo. If I were stuck in say NJ with no JHP, then 45 LRN or better, LFP would be my choice all day, regardless of capacity.

 

[dougb1946]

Dead is dead. Dead with a 9mm=dead with a .45. Thats all the farther that scale goes. 9mm is about 30% cheaper to buy than .45 at my local sources, which means I can shoot it more for the same dollars. Placement means more than size, and practice means better placement. That makes 9mm better, for me. YMMV, but I get two more rounds in my 9mm than the same gun in .45 before reloading, I have a 9mm so .45 means nothing to me.
It takes about 80 ft/lbs of energy to kill a human. Both 9 and .45 shoot at over 300 ft/lbs, Both are pistols. If you have serious concerns, you need a rifle or shotgun with slugs, and even there, a miss is a miss.
If you have serious concerns, you can get a 45-70 single action revolver. Lots of foot-pounds of energy but the wheels or tripod are extra

 

[kthom]

Won't none of 'em do the job if they don't hit the target at all or in the right place! If all theses changes were not made because of money issues, then tell me why qualifictions are down to one a year plus fewer rounds fired in the one? I don't disagree that some loads are better than others. But any load that will do the job is good enough if the shooter is good enough to put it where it needs to go. The best load/caliber is worthless if the best you can do with it is mostly miss!!