Handgun Self-Defense Ammunition - Ballistic Testing Data

[mtdawg169]

Again, I mostly agree. Especially when talking about terminal ballistic performance of specific bullets in particular loads and shot placement. With that said, your post points out the flaw in current studies I spoke about.

"real world studies on handgun mortality"

Mortality is almost irrelevant when considering who wins the fight. It's nothing more than a byproduct of the real goal of a SD round, which is stopping the attack. As many people are fond of pointing out, a 22lr will kill you, but it is a terrible round for SD because it's very inefficient at stopping the attacker. The harder a round hits, the better it is at stopping the attack. That's just plan logical. Current research is having a problem with seeing the forest for the trees.

Would you rather be hit with a Nerf ball thrown at 90 mph or a baseball at 90 mph? The obvious answer is the Nerf ball because it will hurt much less due to the fact it will transfer less energy to you on impact. I'll also point out that the baseball has a good chance of disabling you, at least temporarily, without creating any permanent wound channel at all. Think about that for a second.

OK, so expanding on that line of thinking, let's compare two popular loads:

9mm HST 124gr +P = 396 ft/lbs @ 1200fps

45 HST 230gr = 404 ft/lbs @ 890 fps

Were not talking about nerf vs baseballs. We're talking about croquet vs baseballs. That's not much of a difference. And the smaller one is moving 20-30% faster. Faster = more energy per grain.

The permanent wound cavities are also very similar. With the primary difference being the expanded diameter of the bullet which is roughly 0.75 vs 0.60". It's just not that much difference in a real world scenario. And the energies are surprisingly close, despite having almost twice the mass.

 

[Jackie Graham]

Subscribe
I can't view at work due to blocks.

 

[grabbin' asphalt]

Everyone make sure to find the section with the video and data chart showing the 5 bullets after expansion, that alone in pics is Priceless. You can quickly see the Under achievers and the Over achievers

 

[mtdawg169]

Everyone make sure to find the section with the video and data chart showing the 5 bullets after expansion, that alone in pics is Priceless. You can quickly see the Under achievers and the Over achievers

Agreed.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Bear44]

OK, so expanding on that line of thinking, let's compare two popular loads:

9mm HST 124gr +P = 396 ft/lbs @ 1200fps

45 HST 230gr = 404 ft/lbs @ 890 fps

Were not talking about nerf vs baseballs. We're talking about croquet vs baseballs. That's not much of a difference. And the smaller one is moving 20-30% faster. Faster = more energy per grain.

The permanent wound cavities are also very similar. With the primary difference being the expanded diameter of the bullet which is roughly 0.75 vs 0.60". It's just not that much difference in a real world scenario. And the energies are surprisingly close, despite having almost twice the mass.

You're comparing apples to oranges, brother. Your 9mm is a +p and your 45 is not. A 230 grain 45 ACP +P round produces about 462 ft./lbs @ 950 fps and that is a substantial difference. Lighter weight bullets in a +P 45 round gives you even more energy. There's a 165 grain from Cor-Bon that produces 573 ft./lbs. @ 1150 fps. That's a huge difference. Take the hardest hitting 9mm and compare it to the hardest hitting 45 and the 45 wins hands down.

 

[mtdawg169]

You're comparing apples to oranges, brother. Your 9mm is a +p and you're 45 is not. A 230 grain 45 ACP +P round produces about 462 ft./lbs @ 950 fps and that is a substantial difference. Lighter weight bullets in a +P 45 round gives you even more energy. There's a 165 grain from Cor-Bon that produces 573 ft./lbs. @ 1150 fps. That's a huge difference. Take the hardest hitting 9mm and compare it to the hardest hitting 45 and the 45 wins hands down.

And then you take those loads, shoot them all on a timer and see which one allows more rounds on target, faster. Which one is better then? For you, it might be a wash. For someone else, one or the other might present a distinct difference.

It wasn't my intention to cherry pick anything. I simply compared two popular choices. I don't know many people that use or enjoy +P 45ACP and certainly not corbon +P+. It's usually the standard velocity 230gr, which is why I used it in my example. And then you've got the variables of muzzle rise, muzzle flash in low light, and the list goes on and on. None of these variables exist in a vacuum. And I'm sure we could go round and round with the caliber wars, but that's not my intent. That's all old news and people have chosen their camps. You either think 9mm is a completely acceptable service caliber or you don't. But the science is proven, and the gaps between calibers are 20 years in the past.

Like I said, it's my belief these days that you can shoot whatever you want. Whatever you're comfortable, fast and accurate with. But aside from caliber, it's probably more important that you feed it the right ammo. In relation to this thread, I'd rather have good 380 round compared to some of the bad 9mm's. (okay, that may be an exaggeration) of But, some loads, like Hydrashoks, practically behave like hardball when shot through denim. And that's really the point of all this. It allows people to see a clear representation of how their chosen carry ammo stacks up. Or, if they may need to rethink what they're using for a carry load.

 

[Mr. Goodbar]

No 357sig, fail

 

[Bear44]

And then you take those loads, shoot them all on a timer and see which one allows more rounds on target, faster. Which one is better then? For you, it might be a wash. For someone else, one or the other might present a distinct difference.

It wasn't my intention to cherry pick anything. I simply compared two popular choices. I don't know many people that use or enjoy +P 45ACP and certainly not corbon +P+. It's usually the standard velocity 230gr, which is why I used it in my example. And then you've got the variables of muzzle rise, muzzle flash in low light, and the list goes on and on. None of these variables exist in a vacuum. And I'm sure we could go round and round with the caliber wars, but that's not my intent. That's all old news and people have chosen their camps. You either think 9mm is a completely acceptable service caliber or you don't. But the science is proven, and the gaps between calibers are 20 years in the past.

Like I said, it's my belief these days that you can shoot whatever you want. Whatever you're comfortable, fast and accurate with. But aside from caliber, it's probably more important that you feed it the right ammo. In relation to this thread, I'd rather have good 380 round compared to some of the bad 9mm's. (okay, that may be an exaggeration) of But, some loads, like Hydrashoks, practically behave like hardball when shot through denim. And that's really the point of all this. It allows people to see a clear representation of how their chosen carry ammo stacks up. Or, if they may need to rethink what they're using for a carry load.

My initial response was to the idea that modern 9mm has just as much ability to end an attack as 45 ACP does. In fact, that was the only thing I disagreed with in your post. All of the other factors you mention in this post are completely legitimate... right up to "the gaps between calibers are 20 years in the past.". No, they're not. A 25% difference in performance should not be overlooked.

Everything about user capability concerns is legitimate and an argument against inexperienced shooters using the 45 ACP because of that has merit, but the facts do not support the idea that the 9mm is just as effective as the 45 for SD. This should be a legitimate consideration for anyone selecting a SD round.

There is a phenomenon that often occurs during military training during which the instructors greatly exaggerate the capabilities of the weapons they are instructing. This is meant to increase the confidence of the troops using the weapon. I believe we are very likely seeing the same thing occurring with the selection of the FBI sidearm. The truth is that most LEO are not very proficient with their weapons and do not participate in enough meaningful training with them. Thus the 9mm is easier for them to handle, so it's important they are confidant in the 9mm's performance. Thus, there are selective considerations in the FBI research to get the desired results. This is why energy transfer in not even considered in the most recent studies.

Simple truth. The 45 ACP has more capability as a SD round that the 9mm does. However, it takes a higher skill level to use it effectively in combat.

 

[cmshoot]

I won't use .45ACP +P. I don't think a well-designed 230grn bullet needs it, and the added energy isn't worth the additional snap and recoil, resulting in increased recovery times.

 

[MRH]

Does anyone have an opinion on which ammo would perform best in FMJ? Yes, I know it isn't ideal, but I am curious...I think it would be intriguing to see test results on the subject.