• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

First time handgun

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

Mostly because it's a cross bred shyte rocket. :)

I like it, sort of a slightly more super .38 Super.
 

John

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2008
Messages
62
Location
, ,
imported post

Bravo_Sierra wrote:
Two famous Rap "artist," Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls were shot and killed on the Las Vegas strip with 9mm pistols.

9mm is just fine.
Tupac Shakur Murder
A dozen or more shots, four of them hitting Shakur, one lucky richocet into his lung, which killed him. At that rate, a .22 would do just fine, as well.


Biggie Smalls Murder
A dozen or more shots, four of them hitting Mr. Wallace (Smalls) in the chest -- of course, how could you miss?!. He still did not die immediately.


I am not saying that the 9mm isn't a good round, but using these two cases to prove the effectiveness of the 9mm round is probably not a good idea to anyone armed with Google.
 

John

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2008
Messages
62
Location
, ,
imported post

Weak 9mm wrote:
You can read all the articles in the world, but the facts are simple: there just isn't a significant difference in 9mm and .40S&W with good ammo. The penetration and expansion are both quite similar. Penetration may be a bit higher with the .40S&W, simply because it will fire heavier rounds, but it's nothing major. Expansion on the otherhand is so close it's essentially identical. Neither of them are particularly powerful really.

Don't get too caught up on "this caliber is better than that caliber is better than that caliber." Get good ammo within your caliber; this means taking a look at actual tests involving ballistic gelatin with and without various barriers. As long as you've got good ammo, the 9mm is just fine, as is the .40S&W, as is the .45ACP. The .357mag is certainly a step up in power from the other three, but it's also a step up in recoil and often a significant step down in capacity. Generally, if you're considering a .357 you usually aren't looking at the others because you're looking at revolvers, and vice versa. I do plan on owning a .357 myself, so I'm not saying it's bad in any way, and I do agree that in terms of power it's a step up from the other three.

The key is to take a look at the actual performance of many different rounds in each caliber in ballistic gelatin. I think that once you look at the real evidence, rather than taking some magazine article's word for it, you might be surprised by what you find regarding the 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP.
Law Enforcement agencies all across California thought that there was a significant enough difference between the 9mm and the .40 that they switched over to it from the 9mm. I have to believe there was a reason they spent all of that money.
 

Bravo_Sierra

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
912
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
imported post

John wrote:
Bravo_Sierra wrote:
Two famous Rap "artist," Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls were shot and killed on the Las Vegas strip with 9mm pistols.

9mm is just fine.
Tupac Shakur Murder
A dozen or more shots, four of them hitting Shakur, one lucky richocet into his lung, which killed him. At that rate, a .22 would do just fine, as well.


Biggie Smalls Murder
A dozen or more shots, four of them hitting Mr. Wallace (Smalls) in the chest -- of course, how could you miss?!. He still did not die immediately.


I am not saying that the 9mm isn't a good round, but using these two cases to prove the effectiveness of the 9mm round is probably not a good idea to anyone armed with Google.
32 people were killed at Virgina Tech with a Glock 19(9mm) and a .22 target pistol.. keep googling...
 

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

Law Enforcement agencies all across California thought that there was a significant enough difference between the 9mm and the .40 that they switched over to it from the 9mm. I have to believe there was a reason they spent all of that money.
Until you show me the evidence, I'll stick to believing the real world performance numbers. Do you really think I don't know that many police departments switched to the .40S&W?

My question to you then is this:

Can you actually show me the big difference? I can show you plenty of evidence that seems to indicate otherwise. I look at this data A LOT. If all you've got is, "they switched," then that's really not much at all is it? The military switched from the .45ACP to the 9mm. That doesn't mean the 9mm is more powerful.

If you're actually interested in seeing real data, rather than inferring something from someone elses actions, go to Federal's website. Click on law enforcement on the left. Then at the top of the law enforcement section click on wound ballistics. The second conference down will do. Check out a few of them while you're in there. Look at the tests of Federal's HST in 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP. In fact, that round seems to show the biggest difference in performance between the 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP that I've ever seen. Most rounds do not achieve that large of a difference in performance between those three calibers.

They're managing to get a 9mm to expand upwards of .8" in some cases while penetrating 12"-13". Sure the .40S&W may penetrate 1" further, but the expansion is identical, and I would hope it penetrates a bit furthur considering the increased mass of the bullet. The .45ACP reaches an unbelievable 1+" expanded btw!! This round is one of the few that seems to take full advantage of the .45ACP's larger starting diameter. But the .40S&W and the 9mm are so close it's ridiculous. I can't see why you think it's so much more powerful when you have no real evidence to show this. I don't think an extra inch of penetration matters all that much when you're already penetrating 12" to 13". If you think it means the .40S&W is massively outperforming the 9mm then that's fine. I'm not saying the .40S&W is garbage, but to think the 9mm is so much weaker when you have no real evidence to support it is terrible. You're simply spreading misinformation.

http://www.brassfetcher.com will also show you the differences in performance, it's small. I'm not just pulling this out of my ass, or concluding it in some roundabout way. The data simply doesn't support your claims.
 

expvideo

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
1,487
Location
Lynnwood, WA, ,
imported post

GoodOmens wrote:
Ehh I bought a P30 .... I'll let you guys know how it is when it arrives. Should have a chance to shoot it next week.
I'm so jealous! I want that gun so bad, but I can't afford it.
 

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

Yeah I wouldn't mind an H&K 9mm myself. I can't find the P30 for sale anywhere online though. Are they hard to find right now?

I'll probably end up with another glock anyway, I'll need a G26 after I get my CC permit, lol. I do like that little P2000 subcompact, at least on paper. I've never held or fired one though, so I have no idea how much I'd actually like it.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Weak 9mm wrote:
Law Enforcement agencies all across California thought that there was a significant enough difference between the 9mm and the .40 that they switched over to it from the 9mm. I have to believe there was a reason they spent all of that money.
Until you show me the evidence, I'll stick to believing the real world performance numbers. Do you really think I don't know that many police departments switched to the .40S&W?

My question to you then is this:

Can you actually show me the big difference?
Look up the 1986 Miami Shootout and the FBI ballistic testing that followed in it's aftermath which events led eventually to the development of the .40 caliber cartridge when the 10mm proved too much gun for too many agents. All of that is available online. It will explain the cartridge/caliber performance at the time and what drove the development.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
imported post

Weak 9mm wrote:
Mostly because it's a cross bred shyte rocket. :)

I like it, sort of a slightly more super .38 Super.
I just read an article on the 38 super. Highly favorable, and some modern loads give almost .357 Sig performance, supposedly. The average is loaded to +P standards and is slightly better than a 9mm loaded with Corbons. Velocity seems about 100fps better than a 9mm in same frame with 9mm in +P loads like the new Winchester round. Too bad the ammo is so expensive relative to 9mm--or even .45ACP.
 

John

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2008
Messages
62
Location
, ,
imported post

Bravo_Sierra wrote:
John wrote:
Bravo_Sierra wrote:
Two famous Rap "artist," Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls were shot and killed on the Las Vegas strip with 9mm pistols.

9mm is just fine.
Tupac Shakur Murder
A dozen or more shots, four of them hitting Shakur, one lucky richocet into his lung, which killed him. At that rate, a .22 would do just fine, as well.


Biggie Smalls Murder
A dozen or more shots, four of them hitting Mr. Wallace (Smalls) in the chest -- of course, how could you miss?!. He still did not die immediately.


I am not saying that the 9mm isn't a good round, but using these two cases to prove the effectiveness of the 9mm round is probably not a good idea to anyone armed with Google.
32 people were killed at Virgina Tech with a Glock 19(9mm) and a .22 target pistol.. keep googling...

Again, I'm not saying that the 9mm isn't a good round. I was saying that the Shakur and Wallace cases were not highlight-worthy for it.
 

John

Regular Member
Joined
May 15, 2008
Messages
62
Location
, ,
imported post

Weak 9mm wrote:
Law Enforcement agencies all across California thought that there was a significant enough difference between the 9mm and the .40 that they switched over to it from the 9mm. I have to believe there was a reason they spent all of that money.
Until you show me the evidence, I'll stick to believing the real world performance numbers. Do you really think I don't know that many police departments switched to the .40S&W?

My question to you then is this:

Can you actually show me the big difference? I can show you plenty of evidence that seems to indicate otherwise. I look at this data A LOT. If all you've got is, "they switched," then that's really not much at all is it? The military switched from the .45ACP to the 9mm. That doesn't mean the 9mm is more powerful.

If you're actually interested in seeing real data, rather than inferring something from someone elses actions, go to Federal's website. Click on law enforcement on the left. Then at the top of the law enforcement section click on wound ballistics. The second conference down will do. Check out a few of them while you're in there. Look at the tests of Federal's HST in 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP. In fact, that round seems to show the biggest difference in performance between the 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP that I've ever seen. Most rounds do not achieve that large of a difference in performance between those three calibers.

They're managing to get a 9mm to expand upwards of .8" in some cases while penetrating 12"-13". Sure the .40S&W may penetrate 1" further, but the expansion is identical, and I would hope it penetrates a bit furthur considering the increased mass of the bullet. The .45ACP reaches an unbelievable 1+" expanded btw!! This round is one of the few that seems to take full advantage of the .45ACP's larger starting diameter. But the .40S&W and the 9mm are so close it's ridiculous. I can't see why you think it's so much more powerful when you have no real evidence to show this. I don't think an extra inch of penetration matters all that much when you're already penetrating 12" to 13". If you think it means the .40S&W is massively outperforming the 9mm then that's fine. I'm not saying the .40S&W is garbage, but to think the 9mm is so much weaker when you have no real evidence to support it is terrible. You're simply spreading misinformation.

http://www.brassfetcher.com will also show you the differences in performance, it's small. I'm not just pulling this out of my ass, or concluding it in some roundabout way. The data simply doesn't support your claims.

I only own and have ever owned firearms in .45ACP and .357Mag. I don't pretend to know why they switched, but there HAS to be a reason, doesn't there?

As far as the military is concerned, you know darn well that they switched over to the 9mm to carry more ammo and to match NATO. There is no dispute there. Switching from one round to another is not always about power.

We can, however, conclude that neither of those two causes were behind the switch from 9mm to .40, nor could it be because the .40 is cheaper and more plentiful.

Of course, we can always go with the government made the switch, because they thought .40 sounded better than 9mm and liked the idea of spending all that money for nothing, but...

Anyway, I am not saying anything other than that CA LEOs switched to the .40S&W and there has to be a reason for it. We can rule out just about everything other than, "Glock gave us free guns" and "it has better overall performance over the 9mm". I cannot say with any degree of certainty what the truth is cause I don't really care all that much.
 

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

Look up the 1986 Miami Shootout and the FBI ballistic testing that followed in it's aftermath which events led eventually to the development of the .40 caliber cartridge when the 10mm proved too much gun for too many agents. All of that is available online. It will explain the cartridge/caliber performance at the time and what drove the development.
I'm not sure what this has to do with today's 9mm ammo, being that this was 22 years ago. If it's the one involving the 115gr winchester's then I've already read about it.

If you think I don't know why the .40 short and weak exists then you've also underestimated the amount of research I've done. I keep telling you guys, I'm not pulling this out of my ass. You refer me to something from 22 years ago, without even linking it. Today's 9mm ammunition is perfectly fine, and until you show me a link that demonstrates the .40S&W massively outperforming the 9mm I'm going to continue to believe what I've seen. I'm not just assuming, or infering it based on a single incident. How is 12"-13" of penetration at .8" not acceptable? Why do you think 14" at .8" is going to be significantly better? None of the real questions I asked have been addressed.


Anyway, I am not saying anything other than that CA LEOs switched to the .40S&W and there has to be a reason for it. We can rule out just about everything other than, "Glock gave us free guns" and "it has better overall performance over the 9mm". I cannot say with any degree of certainty what the truth is cause I don't really care all that much.
Again, you're infering and assuming things. If you actually look at data, there is virtually no difference in performance. It's that simple. You can believe that you need something with an extra inch of penetration, and that's fine. You certainly won't be poorly served by the more powerful calibers that you're carrying, and I'm not saying the "best" caliber is the 9mm. All I'm saying is that the "massive" difference people love to talk about but can never provide evidence for is actually very small. You're wrong about the 9mm being significantly weaker than a .40S&W, until you show me otherwise at least.

I guess folks are assuming I haven't actually ever bothered to look at anything other than a 9mm, and that must be why I like it. This is far from the case. I LOVE to look at performance data and ballistics testing of all kinds of ammuniton, from pistol to rifle to shotgun ammo. I also LOVE to test ammunition myself. I absolutely love high powered firearms.

I'm just telling you there is not much of a difference because all of the evidence points to that. I don't disagree that 22 years ago there might have been a bigger difference between the different calibers. Today you can purchase 9mm ammunition moving at over 1400fps and making over 500ft-lb of muzzle energy. That is just fine, and when it penetrates 12"-13" while expanding to .7"-.8" that is more than adequate. When you look at the .40S&W, there is very little difference in the performance. Again, I am open to having you prove me wrong, but I'd like to see the real data.


I just read an article on the 38 super. Highly favorable, and some modern loads give almost .357 Sig performance, supposedly. The average is loaded to +P standards and is slightly better than a 9mm loaded with Corbons. Velocity seems about 100fps better than a 9mm in same frame with 9mm in +P loads like the new Winchester round. Too bad the ammo is so expensive relative to 9mm--or even .45ACP.
It's such a cool round! I'd like to own a 1911 type handgun chambered in it. Have you looked at the 9x23mm Winchester? It's a very hot 9mm cartridge that can supposedly be used in guns chambered for .38 Super. You'd probably want to make sure it was in very good shape and strong. I think it's recommended that you change the extractor too, but I've heard it will work even without changing it. From what I understand it's usually used in competition, but it's extremely hot ammo. Corbon's 9x23mm 100gr Pow'Rball reaches a blistering 1600fps from a 5" barrel.
 

KodiakISGOOD

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
353
Location
Springfield, Va, , USA
imported post

what about the cross bred red headed one legged stepchild shyte rocket? :lol: I like what you call it and with your permission may i adopt that name?

What caliber do you carry, Jason?
Uh...the one of the cross bred shyte rocket variety!


happy carrying,


jason
 

KodiakISGOOD

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
353
Location
Springfield, Va, , USA
imported post

Weak 9mm wrote:
just read an article on the 38 super. Highly favorable, and some modern loads give almost .357 Sig performance, supposedly. The average is loaded to +P standards and is slightly better than a 9mm loaded with Corbons. Velocity seems about 100fps better than a 9mm in same frame with 9mm in +P loads like the new Winchester round. Too bad the ammo is so expensive relative to 9mm--or even .45ACP.
It's such a cool round! I'd like to own a 1911 type handgun chambered in it. Have you looked at the 9x23mm Winchester? It's a very hot 9mm cartridge that can supposedly be used in guns chambered for .38 Super. You'd probably want to make sure it was in very good shape and strong. I think it's recommended that you change the extractor too, but I've heard it will work even without changing it. From what I understand it's usually used in competition, but it's extremely hot ammo. Corbon's 9x23mm 100gr Pow'Rball reaches a blistering 1600fps from a 5" barrel.
what about 9x25 dillon?

http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=21_24&products_id=47
 

Weak 9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Messages
806
Location
USA
imported post

Yep, I've seen it before and I do like it. It's getting into the rifle velocities. The only thing keeping me from it is the fact that it's rare and somewhat expensive. I wouldn't mind converting a G20 to use it though. It is truly blistering for a handgun!

Come to think of it, it's pretty much a .357 Sig Super, lol. Perhaps it's what the .357 Sig would have been from the beginning, had they not made the .40S&W.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Weak 9mm wrote:
Look up the 1986 Miami Shootout and the FBI ballistic testing that followed in it's aftermath which events led eventually to the development of the .40 caliber cartridge when the 10mm proved too much gun for too many agents. All of that is available online. It will explain the cartridge/caliber performance at the time and what drove the development.
I'm not sure what this has to do with today's 9mm ammo, being that this was 22 years ago. If it's the one involving the 115gr winchester's then I've already read about it.

If you think I don't know why the .40 short and weak exists then you've also underestimated the amount of research I've done. I keep telling you guys, I'm not pulling this out of my ass. You refer me to something from 22 years ago, without even linking it. Today's 9mm ammunition is perfectly fine, and until you show me a link that demonstrates the .40S&W massively outperforming the 9mm I'm going to continue to believe what I've seen.
Man you get defensive sometimes. Relax, you weren't being attacked. I left your comments and the prior comments in what I qouted because I was addressing the topic and both of the responses in general. If I were just responding to you I would have deleted the prior post in the quote.

The comments were about CA switching to .40 cal and you responded that it doesn't have much of an advantage. I responded directing attention to the reason that the .40 cal even exists which answers the question as to why they switched and gives the historical context of why the 9mm wasn't sufficient. Note I said the caliber performance at the time.

Just like you have on this forum repeated the historic "fast and slow needs a 5" barrel" meme, which is not longer true for many modern cartridges, others comment on the ".40 is better than 9mm" meme which is for the most part also no longer true for a typical SD user.

Going back 22 years, 9mm ammo tended to either over penetrated people (ball ammo) or under penetrated hard obstacles (then available SD ammo). There were numerous instances of 9mm SD rounds ricocheting off windshields or other barriers or not penetrating heavy clothing deep enough reported to/by the FBI. This led to the FBI going to the the 10mm, but then issues with personnel handling the 10mm, led to the "10mm lite/FBI 10mm" until the .40 was developed as a compromise round which was adopted by the FBI. Many LE depts followed suit.

Most experts seem to agree that, clinically, the most effective common SD pistol calibers are .357, .45, .40 in that order. 10mm, .41AE, .44Mag etc are not usually included in such lists as they are not in that "common" category as I understand things. There is great debate still over that "ranking". Modern ammunition and the spread of firearm ownership makes that "ranking" even less viable as placement of a good SD round is more important to an SD handgun owner than caliber.

To sum up, there are a lot of ideas and beliefs about firearms and ammunition which have their roots in the history of the development of certain calibers, types of firearms and historic capabilities of various calibers. There is also a big difference in performance characteristics of ball/FMJ ammo and various SD ammos. If someone makes a comment based on historic fact (the reason for switching from .38 special and 9mm to .40 for example), the answer must be couched in terms of the historic context. That is one part of the answer and is different from the facts of current ballistic ability of the most modern SD ammunition available in various calibers. If both sides of the issue are not addressed within their individual contexts, then the reader asking the question is left with cognitive dissonance as the answer on the surface contradicts obvious realities.
 
Top