9 vs 40 - a compelling case with some interesting test results.
- Thread starter Claven2
- Start date
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Well it's important to know if the bear is on the moon or not to answer that question you know.
I love when the basic breakdown equals = the experts said .40SW is better.... then the same experts said 9mm is more effective.... and the ballistics experts on the internet argue that the experts said "X" and "Y" ... and therefore the same experts are wrong and right but everyone is wrong? and right? wait... now I am confused.
By the way, just because something is "better" doesn't mean that in practicality it is better.
By the way, just because something is "better" doesn't mean that in practicality it is better.
First of all, I am more inclined to accept the scientific merit of the FBI Protocol versus some Youtuber's meat and oranges man. Contrary to what many would believe, it actually has been designed to correlate with results from real-world shootings, particularly the 4 layer denim portion of the test.
Second, the Federal Personal Defense loads are not something I would carry into harm's way, as they are an obsolete design. Additionally, the choice of 115 grain 9mm and 180 grain .40 S&W is going to portray each in the worst and best possible light, respectively. 115 grain 9mm JHPs generally either under-penetrate or fail to expand and 180 grain .40 generally works best for most bullet designs. Any of the loads from the list here will provide acceptable terminal performance:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4337-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Duty-and-Self-Defense-Ammo
The poster of the above is Dr Gary K. Roberts, who is probably the foremost expert on wound ballistics.
Below are typical service pistol wound profiles for comparison:
Yup classic CGN. Let's ignore scientific tests done by a large federal agency and also done by ammo manufacturers that can be repeated with similar results over a guy shooting bags of meat and oranges.
Big JD-From the hills
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Saskatchewan.
My experience is with varmints and the jr carbine in .40 and 9mm. Yeah factory over the shelf bulk ammo, .40 s&w simply because of the large meplat vs the round nose 9mm.
First of all, I am more inclined to accept the scientific merit of the FBI Protocol versus some Youtuber's meat and oranges man. Contrary to what many would believe, it actually has been designed to correlate with results from real-world shootings, particularly the 4 layer denim portion of the test.
Second, the Federal Personal Defense loads are not something I would carry into harm's way, as they are an obsolete design. Additionally, the choice of 115 grain 9mm and 180 grain .40 S&W is going to portray each in the worst and best possible light, respectively. 115 grain 9mm JHPs generally either under-penetrate or fail to expand and 180 grain .40 generally works best for most bullet designs. Any of the loads from the list here will provide acceptable terminal performance:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4337-Service-Caliber-Handgun-Duty-and-Self-Defense-Ammo
The poster of the above is Dr Gary K. Roberts, who is probably the foremost expert on wound ballistics.
Below are typical service pistol wound profiles for comparison:
Forgive me for stating the obvious, but the disruptive wound channels of ALL the other rounds, and in particular the .40, are much larger in diameter and penetrated slightly deeper than the equivalent 9mm loads. How does this show 9mm performs identically? It clearly does not.
Temporary cavitation doesn't count towards terminal effect with service pistol calibres; only the premanent cavity consisting of tissue crushed by contact with the bullet.
Temporary cavity can be a factor with rifles, where tissue stretch is sufficient to cause tearing.
It looks to me like the actual permanent cavities are slightly larger for .40 and .45 compared to 9mm. The difference in penetration is no more than an inch or two, using the line at 12" for scale. All of the rounds penetrate at least 12", which is adequate per FBi standards. The point is not that they all have identical wound ballistics, but that the difference is not great enough to offset the trade-offs of the larger calibres.
.40 S&W kinda sorta made sense when it was introduced in 1990, when none of the 9mm loads on the market met FBI requirements, but subsequent improvements in bullet design have rendered it unnecessary.
Temporary cavitation doesn't count towards terminal effect with service pistol calibres; only the premanent cavity consisting of tissue crushed by contact with the bullet.
Temporary cavity can be a factor with rifles, where tissue stretch is sufficient to cause tearing.
It looks to me like the actual permanent cavities are slightly larger for .40 and .45 compared to 9mm. The difference in penetration is no more than an inch or two, using the line at 12" for scale. All of the rounds penetrate at least 12", which is adequate per FBi standards. The point is not that they all have identical wound ballistics, but that the difference is not great enough to offset the trade-offs of the larger calibres.
.40 S&W kinda sorta made sense when it was introduced in 1990, when none of the 9mm loads on the market met FBI requirements, but subsequent improvements in bullet design have rendered it unnecessary.
More trama = more shock = more likely dead or incapacitated.
Developments were made in all calibers, and just as 9 has gotten more powerful, so has the 40. If you want the more powerful caliber, you'll take 40.
Becaause the difference in "performance" is not enough to offset the ease of shooting 9 and the cost of ammo. Who will be more proficient? Someone who spends the same cost of ammo but gets to shoot 1000 rounds of 9mm or the person who shoots 500 rounds of 40.
easyrider604
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Greater Vancouver, BC
Forum for the eternal conflict between the 9 and the 45....
I do not like conflict, so I give opportunity to the 9, 45, 40, 38spl, 357mag and the lowly ubiquitous 22LR.
Love them all. Stock up on lead, powder and primers and lots of .22LR.
I do not like conflict, so I give opportunity to the 9, 45, 40, 38spl, 357mag and the lowly ubiquitous 22LR.
Love them all. Stock up on lead, powder and primers and lots of .22LR.
The only shock that is a factor in incapacitation from handgun wounds is from blood loss. Service calibre handguns simply cannot produce enough temporary cavitation to damage elastic tissue.
https://archive.org/stream/fbi-handgun-wounding-factors-and-effectiveness/fbi-handgun-wounding-factors-and-effectiveness_djvu.txt
If I want the more powerful calibre, I'll take a rifle!
Just to add nothing to the conversation which is really about nothing so I will be on topic - It is rumoured the Israeli Mossad used the Beretta 71 for their choice of handguns for their terminal work. That would make the .22LR the deadliest pistol of the bunch... I guess.
Take care
Bob
Take care
Bob
