FBI Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness study,

[OTB]

Originally Posted by Amorok

So carrying .45 Hornady taps or Speer Gold Dots is a waste of money, I should just switch to a .32? Thanks for the info, now I'll save money AND get killed.

That's the problem with only reading part of someone's post.....you miss the important stuff.


Ball ammo is FMJ round nose......it has completely different shooting and wounding characteristics than JHP ammo.

The original point of the post (if you go back to the biginning) is a twenty-year old study on relative effectiveness. There is no doubt that a .45 Silvertip is superior in every way to a .32 Silvertip...that' snot my point..


...not everybody can carry a full size auto or wheelgun; those with small frames, petite hands, or who are flinch prone to large caliber recoil/noise or live in warmer climes (pretty hard to hide that Ruger in your bikini drawers, but easy to put that Seecamp .32 in a small handbag). My point was, that based on relative stopping power, that .32 packed with Gold Dots is an adaquate weapon, unless I know I am going in harm's way, in which case I'll opt for all the firepower I can get my hands on.

Read tho whole post before you catch attitude.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Rider

Everyone should own a Mark 19 grenade launcher.

Claymore perimeter. Take them out on the lawn.

[Amorok]

First of all, who uses FMJ as their primary carry round? I mean, does anybody here carry hardball in the spout? If so, why? And as for ammunition advances, I'm not saying there haven't been any. But lately it seems like smaller rounds are what everyone recommends. Everyone keeps touting tiny slugs and weird chambering (45 GAP, WTF?) and saying that those kinds of things have replaced older rounds, most notably the .45 ACP and the .357 magnum. I can't count how many times I've been told that I'm a dinosaur, that I'm out of touch, that I need to get rid of my outdated rounds and switch to one of the new fads. There's a reason why .25 ACP has gone away and .32 is hard to find unless you order it, while .45 ACP, .357 magnum, .38 and all its variants, and the venerable .44 have been around for so long - they work, and they've proven themselves superior. You don't need to fix something that ain't broke, and that's why those platforms are still popular. As for the 9mm, I'll get to it in a minute.

Going to a smaller round might suit to purpose, but it depends what your purpose is. To use an analogy, a small, hybrid car will still get me where I'm going and use less gas. But if I need to burn a quarter mile, then no matter how gas efficient or cheap a three cylinder Metro is, it isn't going to do the job. You need that big block V8, and no matter how you dress up a little four banger it'll never have the same power and get the job done like the muscle car will. In the car world the saying is "there's no replacement for displacement." Well, with rounds I'm always going to subscribe to "Bigger and hotter is better." You can talk about those little rounds, and some of them are cool, but they aren't going to get as reliable of an effect as the tried and true rounds that have been so useful in the past.
As for the popularity of the 9mm, the reason 9mm is such a big deal boil down to three main points, none of which have anything to do with how effective the round is. They reasons are these:
1) It’s cheap. Fine, and if you want to plink a cheap round I guess, but then why not go with a 22lr? You can practice your form with no recoil and then move up to a real round for carry. And cheap does not help you in ballistics. The round still doesn’t give good knock-down power, and you can die with a full wallet. Plus, the platforms are expensive because of demand.
2) Lower recoil. Again, it’s a round without enough power. 22lr has the least recoil of any round I’ve ever shot and nobody is advocating the ballistic virtues of that gun. Sure, more people have been killed with it but a lot of those statistics have to with people who don’t have access to another weapon, not because of the virtue of the round. A lot of people get shot with them, but there are more of them in circulation. And I’m willing to bet the survival rate is higher with that small of a caliber. Recoil can be adjusted just as much by the platform as the round. I have a Coonan .357 magnum automatic that kicks less than a Beretta 92FS. I’ve done the Pepsi challenge and offered it out, this isn’t just me talking out of my ass. The gun is heavy and soaks up the recoil, also, it’s constructed for that. You can always get a spring kit for your gun and carry a stout round with less felt recoil, but idiots don’t understand that, they’ll just buy a crappy small round then crow about how great it is.
3) Cops use them. 9mm and now 40 S&W are popular because a lot of law enforcement agencies use them. This means that the rounds are produced in huge amounts and every company has an impressive variety of platforms to fire them, because the round is prevalent and they always hope for the LE contract. The problem with this is, cops don’t know shit about shooting. They barely qualify most of the time, and most of them look at their weapon as another piece of equipment, not something associated with a proficiency that needs development. Also, cops have to issue weapons to the standard of their worst shooter. A lot of cops just can’t handle a decent round, so they issue something substandard to give the crappy shots a fighting chance, and all the cops I know carry something other than department issue, usually either a .45 or a .40. One guy I know carries the answer to this issue, but I’ll mention that in a minute.
So what you are trying to sell me on is a cheap, underpowered round that is popular because people who can’t shoot for shit use it. No thanks. The answer to this debate IMO is the 10mm. Good power and hot, big enough to make an impact but still small enough to carry a lot of them. The problem with that is there are only a couple of platforms for it and the rounds are pricey. I’ve written Colt, Kimber, SIG, HK, and pretty much everyone else besides Glock suggesting that they offer a 10mm over the last few years, we’ll see.

As for me throwing hollow points in when you were talking about FMJ, I knew what I was doing, the point you were making was dumb and I didn’t want to point it out that overtly, but since you want to push the issue there you go. It was a stupid point and I was hoping you either weren’t serious or wouldn’t force me to shine any light on it. To use analogy again, in the middle of talking about engine sizes it’s as if you blurted out that a Celica would be faster than my V8 corvette if you put a rocket engine on it. Well yes, Timmy, it might, but that’s asinine and you should stop talking.
As for catching attitude, I did read your whole post, it was long and I didn’t agree with you. I have responded with a long post you probably won’t agree with. Don’t assume I didn’t finish your post, you were just wrong. Sorry Dad, didn’t mean to get uppity, let me grab that belt. You sound like you might be a cop, if not maybe you should think about it, you certainly have the smug and arrogant part down.

[OTB]

Again...I was making general commentary on the ORIGINAL post re relative merits of calibers. The fact of the matter is, I agree with you on 99% of your last post (especially the smug and arrogant parts). Me, I'm a big fan of the 44 Special (I have an old Bulldog that is my fav).

That is all.

[the chi]

A- I really need the scratch head smiley here...WHO rec. that someone carry a smaller round? As far as I've been able to tell, we are all just going back and forth regarding merits of each and technology...I havent seen anyone say USE THIS CUZ ITS BETTER... Ima thinking you might be a lil jumpy on this topic and maybe reading/seeing more than you are sposed too, this is the interwebs, don make it complicated!!

Personally, if/when I get around to carrying something, it'll be small. Not because I want to, because I would far more prefer at least a .45, but because I am a tiny person and I cant conceivably hide something that large on my person, unless its wintertime. So, if I'm stuck with a smaller gun, Im gonna get the most lethal ammo I can to do the most damage, cuz while I WILL hit you 8 times out of 10, id prefer to not have to shoot someone that many times if 3-4 hits will do it!! *sigh* I wish I was bigger...

[Rider]

Originally Posted by The Chi

A- I really need the scratch head smiley here...WHO rec. that someone carry a smaller round? As far as I've been able to tell, we are all just going back and forth regarding merits of each and technology...I havent seen anyone say USE THIS CUZ ITS BETTER... Ima thinking you might be a lil jumpy on this topic and maybe reading/seeing more than you are sposed too, this is the interwebs, don make it complicated!!

Personally, if/when I get around to carrying something, it'll be small. Not because I want to, because I would far more prefer at least a .45, but because I am a tiny person and I cant conceivably hide something that large on my person, unless its wintertime. So, if I'm stuck with a smaller gun, Im gonna get the most lethal ammo I can to do the most damage, cuz while I WILL hit you 8 times out of 10, id prefer to not have to shoot someone that many times if 3-4 hits will do it!! *sigh* I wish I was bigger...

.357 Sig is a great compromise. I'm going to convert my .40 S&W to this caliber. The FBI and CIA use it and there must be a reason.

[Amorok]

Originally Posted by The Chi

...Ima thinking you might be a lil jumpy on this topic and maybe reading/seeing more than you are sposed too,...

Mmm, very possible.

Originally Posted by The Chi

...Personally, if/when I get around to carrying something, it'll be small. Not because I want to, because I would far more prefer at least a .45, but because I am a tiny person and I cant conceivably hide something that large on my person, unless its wintertime....

Honey, I'm 5'6" and 170 at my fattest, and I manage to conceal a full-size HK USP .45 with two 12rnd reloads. It can be done. Remember, you can carry a purse.

Originally Posted by The Chi

...*sigh* I wish I was bigger...

Yeah, me too. Not as bad as Ulu does though.

Originally Posted by OTB

...Me, I'm a big fan of the 44 Special (I have an old Bulldog that is my fav)....

Fucking LOVE the Bulldogs, even with the problems people had with them they were cheap and mine was reliable. I'd buy one but I haven't seen one in a while, they got hard to find. Supposedly Charter 2000 is making them again, and have improved them too! The front sight is solid to the gun now, and it's a one peice barrell pinned to the frame, so none of the fooling with the shroud (if yours has one, not all of them did.)
You might have just helped me pick my next gun purchase. Charter Bulldog Pug FTW!

[fnfalman]

Amorok,

You made some very cogent points but at the same time you tout the .45Auto but downplay the 9mm? You also talk about how time had proven this round and that round, lest you forget the 9mm has been introduced before the .45 Auto. Speaking of which the .45Auto has about the same kinetic energy as the 9mm Parabellum - which isn't much. The .45ACP is a pissant round that isn't any more powerful than the 9mm or the .40SW. The only round that distinguishes itself is the 10mm and the factories don't even load them at full bore any more, so now it's just another pissant caliber.

PS OTB's preference for the .44 Special is well founded. It's an entirely serviceable round that has about the same oomph as the standardly accepted defense/combat rounds like the 9mm, .357 SIG, .357 Mag, .40SW, 10mm and .45Auto, .45 Long Colt.

[No Worries]

A long time ago I was taught in the Army that the small 5.56mm caliber of the M16 tumbled, not mushroomed in flesh. They also said that small bullets at high velocity were better at creating casualties. They were trying to make us confident because we were going up against the 7.62mm caliber of the AK47. But I didn't care about size. I cared about quantity and placement.

[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by No Worries

A long time ago I was taught in the Army that the small 5.56mm caliber of the M16 tumbled, not mushroomed in flesh. They also said that small bullets at high velocity were better at creating casualties. They were trying to make us confident because we were going up against the 7.62mm caliber of the AK47. But I didn't care about size. I cared about quantity and placement.

Remember how those basic soldiering manuals would list the US vs Soviet smallarms effective ranges and no matter what, the US smallarms would automatically get the advantage?