I shot the .38 Super for awhile. I really liked the 140gr bullets at 1300 fps, but unlike the 9mm and .45, it's not a true rimless case. The small rim causes feed issue in a double stack magazine. Velocity is nice, but reliability is non-negotiable.

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:
I shot the .38 Super for awhile. I really liked the 140gr bullets at 1300 fps, but unlike the 9mm and .45, it's not a true rimless case. The small rim causes feed issue in a double stack magazine. Velocity is nice, but reliability is non-negotiable.

Okay, that presents a glitch in the 38 Super, but how about the 357 Sig? Bottle neck pistol cartridges feed great and the Sig certainly has the velocity.

quote:

Bottle neck pistol cartridges feed great and the Sig certainly has the velocity.

I can't disagree with you there. For me, if was going to take the reduced magazine capacity of a .424 diameter case, I'd stick with the parent, the .40 S&W. 155gr bullet at 1250 is pretty respectable.

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:

quote:

Bottle neck pistol cartridges feed great and the Sig certainly has the velocity.

I can't disagree with you there. For me, if was going to take the reduced magazine capacity of a .424 diameter case, I'd stick with the parent, the .40 S&W. 155gr bullet at 1250 is pretty respectable.

Well according to the "experts" who study gunfights it's claimed the 125 grain hollow point out of a 357 magnum has the highest ratio of kills per shot. The 357 Sig matches that velocity with the 125 grain hollow point. That's why it's suppose to be better over a 40 S&W.

quote:

Well according to the "experts" who study gunfights it's claimed the 125 grain hollow point out of a 357 magnum has the highest ratio of kills per shot.

I'm familiar with that study. The overall winner was the Federal 125gr HP's. However, that study was before the FBI shootout in Flordia in the 1986. The high velocity, light constructed bullets didn't perform well around vehicles, and left several agents dead or wounded. It was this particular incident that lead to the developement of the .40 Smith and Wesson.

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:

quote:

Well according to the "experts" who study gunfights it's claimed the 125 grain hollow point out of a 357 magnum has the highest ratio of kills per shot.

I'm familiar with that study. The overall winner was the Federal 125gr HP's. However, that study was before the FBI shootout in Flordia in the 1986. The high velocity, light constructed bullets didn't perform well around vehicles, and left several agents dead or wounded. It was this particular incident that lead to the developement of the .40 Smith and Wesson.

I too remember that shootout and believe the one agent put quite a few 9mm rounds into one of the criminals with no effect.

I believe they should have stuck with the 10mm with the reduced load that Federal made for them and they could have their cake and eat so to say.

Not many bullets will perform perfect through all types of barriers.

Texas DPS Troopers are issued Sigs. in .357 Sig.

While not issued, alot of departments authorize the 357sig round. Mine authorizies the 38super as well!

The "reduced 10mm" loads are just about the same as the 40 S&W. The 40 fits in a 9mm frame. The 10mm needs a frame larger than the 45ACP.

The 45 Gap makes for a smaller grip.

I was just saying with the 10mm the FBI would have the option of various power rounds of different situations.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp745:
Marshal and Sanow are frauds to put it mildly

Bold assertion. Possibly libelous.

Attempting to disprove Marshall's data by using Fuller's curves outside the relevant parameters is disingenuous at best and possibly fraudulent itself.

If Marshall's data is badly gathered, irrelevant or fabricated, say so. And how you know.

Marshall and Sanow testify they attempted to gather anecdotal evidence and analyze it statistically to draw relevant conclusions.

In the opinions of many (yourself included, obviously) they failed.

I don't think they intended to defraud anybody, any more than I believe it is your intention.

Lost Sheep

So that my use of a pen name does not get in the way, my real name is Larry Schuller and I was given the pseudonym by my parents back in the late '60s. I am just a guy with no special experience or publications behind me, but I do think.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:
9 win mag was the hottest 9 that I know of. Like all things marketing decides what succeeds more so than viability.

So then....people buy into that the big 45 is better?

45 Win Mag? Sure why not a full power 10mmm or a full power 10mm mag? The brass is available all you have to do is make a modern gun to fully handle it. Bipeds aren't much of a target unless they're armored up. Except Roo's of course cause they hop while you're shootin at em. Roo's are reall tripeds aren't they ..??

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by Macifej:
9 win mag was the hottest 9 that I know of. Like all things marketing decides what succeeds more so than viability.

So then....people buy into that the big 45 is better?

45 Win Mag? Sure why not a full power 10mmm or a full power 10mm mag? The brass is available all you have to do is make a modern gun to fully handle it. Bipeds aren't much of a target unless they're armored up. Except Roo's of course cause they hop while you're shootin at em. Roo's are reall tripeds aren't they ..??

Well I think the police shy away from a too powerful round because of through penetration and hurting innocent bystanders. The same thing that happen with the 10mm happen with the 41 magnum. Remember when that was supposed to be a new police round? Then they even made reduced power loads for it (just like they did for the 10mm).

quote:

Well I think the police shy away from a too powerful round because of through penetration and hurting innocent bystanders. The same thing that happen with the 10mm happen with the 41 magnum. Remember when that was supposed to be a new police round? Then they even made reduced power loads for it (just like they did for the 10mm).

Since the Police nation wide on average miss about 80% of their shots, it would seems that shooting through a bad guy and injuring an innocent is grossly over hyped.

Small m men and women have a problem with the heavier recoiling weapons and thus have more difficulty qualifing with them. Most are not as gun savy as you might think.

The 41 mag had 2 loadings both with a 210 grain bullets. The 950 FPS load was for LEO and the 1300 plus FPS load was for hunting

quote:

Legally, once that bullet leaves the gun you are responsible for it until it stops so if you kill the bad guy you can still be sued or even charged with manslaughter if the same bullet hits someone else too.

Hmm.

Not in England probably. Here an example of a woman Gail Kinchen being used as a human shield against an armed police response.

The police fired back and killed her. The man using her as a human shield (the appellant) was held to have murdered her.

quote:

Either act could in our judgement, if on the principles we have stated it was held to cause the death of Gail Kinchen, constitute the actus reus of the manslaughter or, if the necessary intent were established, murder of Gail Kinchen by the appellant, even though the shot which killed her was fired not by the appellant but by a police officer.

quote:

Originally posted by Lost Sheep:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp745:
Marshal and Sanow are frauds to put it mildly

Bold assertion. Possibly libelous.

Attempting to disprove Marshall's data by using Fuller's curves outside the relevant parameters is disingenuous at best and possibly fraudulent itself.

If Marshall's data is badly gathered, irrelevant or fabricated, say so. And how you know.

Marshall and Sanow testify they attempted to gather anecdotal evidence and analyze it statistically to draw relevant conclusions.

In the opinions of many (yourself included, obviously) they failed.

I don't think they intended to defraud anybody, any more than I believe it is your intention.

Lost Sheep

So that my use of a pen name does not get in the way, my real name is Larry Schuller and I was given the pseudonym by my parents back in the late '60s. I am just a guy with no special experience or publications behind me, but I do think.

Dr. Martin Fackler, Duncan McPhearson and others in the scientific comunity have written research paper and periodicals that showed the fraudulent claims (work) of Marshal and Sanow


http://www.firearmstactical.co...trikes-out.htm



http://www.firearmstactical.co...crepancies.htm


http://www.firearmstactical.co...istical-analysis.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm


http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm



The links above are a good start as to the uselessness at best and fraudulent at worst work of Marshal & Sanow

quote:

quote:
Legally, once that bullet leaves the gun you are responsible for it until it stops so if you kill the bad guy you can still be sued or even charged with manslaughter if the same bullet hits someone else too.


Hmm.

Not in England probably. Here an example of a woman Gail Kinchen being used as a human shield against an armed police response.

The police fired back and killed her. The man using her as a human shield (the appellant) was held to have murdered her.

In Colorado you would be playing Russian Roulette, depending on the District Attorney that took the case. In Colorado Springs, I would expect all individual that initiated the crime to be charged with Felony Murder. i.e. they committed a crime as someone died as a result.

In Boulder, in either scenerio, shooting through a human shield, or hitting someone behind the badguy, I'd expect the Armed Citizen to be charged, and the badguy to get a medal.

Maybe in the scenarios you fellows are talking about a 9mm would be better cause nobody would get killed.

I've never shot anyone informally, with either a 9mm or a 45 ACP.

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
I've never shot anyone informally, with either a 9mm or a 45 ACP.

A formal shooting is by appointment only

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
I've never shot anyone informally, with either a 9mm or a 45 ACP.

A formal shooting is by appointment only

If anybody has decide that they no longer trust their 9mm for self defense I will give it a good home. I'll also give guns larger than 9mm a good home if you went the other way.

Though I do not advocate a .22 for self defense (I know it gets carried.), I have always agreed with a .22 in hand beats a .44 at home.

very simple energy calculations. 115gr 9mm bullet has to travel twice as fast as my .45 230gr bullet to impart the same energy. That means the 9mm needs to be pushing 1700fps to match the energy of my slow 850fps .45 slug.

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper488:
very simple energy calculations. 115gr 9mm bullet has to travel twice as fast as my .45 230gr bullet to impart the same energy. That means the 9mm needs to be pushing 1700fps to match the energy of my slow 850fps .45 slug.

True, Fortunately, energy is only one variable in the lethality equation.

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper488:
very simple energy calculations. 115gr 9mm bullet has to travel twice as fast as my .45 230gr bullet to impart the same energy. That means the 9mm needs to be pushing 1700fps to match the energy of my slow 850fps .45 slug.

Trying to rate a cartirghes lethality with FPE is flawed

quote:

Trying to rate a cartirghes lethality with FPE is flawed

JWP, in my opinion, you are correct. Momentum is what causes a projectile to break things, and is a better measure of a bullets ability to perform work on a target. When examining momentum figures, you can see why the old black powder rifles were such good Buffalo killers. Of course it's not perfect, and doesn't answer all questions regarding impact physics, but it's a valuable tool the average shooter can use to gain a new understanding of terminal ballistics with out envoking Einstein, Hawkings, and Freud.

quote:

Dr. Martin Fackler, Duncan McPhearson and others in the scientific comunity have written research paper and periodicals that showed the fraudulent claims (work) of Marshal and Sanow


http://www.firearmstactical.co...trikes-out.htm



http://www.firearmstactical.co...crepancies.htm


http://www.firearmstactical.co...istical-analysis.htm

http://www.firearmstactical.com/streetstoppers.htm


http://www.firearmstactical.com/afte.htm



The links above are a good start as to the uselessness at best and fraudulent at worst work of Marshal & Sanow

JWP475,

Thanks for your answer and for the links.

The first two did not work for me, but the others will give me something to study.

Some of the rhetoric seems more entertaining than academic, but I will not let that affect my judgment.

Lost Sheep

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper488:
very simple energy calculations. 115gr 9mm bullet has to travel twice as fast as my .45 230gr bullet to impart the same energy. That means the 9mm needs to be pushing 1700fps to match the energy of my slow 850fps .45 slug.

Simple, and incorrect. That calculation is true of MOMENTUM. EMERGY is proportional to the square of velocity. So a 1700 fps 115 grain slug carries twice the energy of an 850 fps 230 grain slug.

Complicating the matter is the notion of TIME. How quickly the energy or momentum is transferred to the target is important. If the transfer is instant, penetration is zero. (Like wearing a bulletproof vest.) If the transfer takes a long time, penetration is good, but the impact is minimal. Like when you catch an egg in a soft hand without breaking it.

A .45 slug has 60% more frontal area than a 9mm slug. A 9mm slug, by virtue of its greater speed is more likely to expand than the slower 45 claiber slug.

Clearly, terminal ballistics is a complex study. Nothing simple about it.

H.L. Mencken famously noted, "There is always an easy solution to every human problem?-neat, plausible, and wrong." That observation applies here in spades.

Lost Sheep

Since a bullet impact is an inelastic collision, most of the energy is transformed into other forms of energy mostly thermal, so what is the relevance of FPE when rating a cartridges ability to inflick wound trauma?

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Since a bullet impact is an inelastic collision, most of the energy is transformed into other forms of energy mostly thermal, so what is the relevance of FPE when rating a cartridges ability to inflick wound trauma?

The previous post explains why. Thermal energy? No.

Energy transfer? A perfect bullet would transfer all its energy at impact. They don't. Some energy is transfered as a shock wave producing a "temporary" wound channel, some is expended in expansion. Some in the "permanent" wound channel. If the bullet exits the target it is carrying energy on to someplace else.

Bottom line is carry what you can and know how to use it. There is no sense in carrying anything if you blink, flinch, and hit the ground half the time.

quote:

Originally posted by Sam:
Energy transfer? A perfect bullet would transfer all its energy at impact. They don't. Some energy is transfered as a shock wave producing a "temporary" wound channel, some is expended in expansion. Some in the "permanent" wound channel. If the bullet exits the target it is carrying energy on to someplace else.

Bottom line is carry what you can and know how to use it. There is no sense in carrying anything if you blink, flinch, and hit the ground half the time.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Since a bullet impact is an inelastic collision, most of the energy is transformed into other forms of energy mostly thermal, so what is the relevance of FPE when rating a cartridges ability to inflick wound trauma?

Before the wide spread use of electonic chronograph velocity was found using a "ballisitcs pendelum". The pendelum shot shot and the swing arc measured this gave the amount of "momentum transfered" 9notice not energy transfered) With the amount of momentum transfer known and the bullet wieght known then the velocity could be dtermined.

Once the velocity was determined then and only then could the "energy be calculated".

Notice that the swing of the pendelum measures MOMENTUM TRANSFER and that Energy can only be calculated, not measured

FPE energy transfering to the target is simply BS

I think everyone who could potentially use a pistol for offense/defense, should carry what they can shoot best while still having a generally effective stopping round, which rules out most rounds below the 9mm.

OTOH, I think most peoples fear of the "big bad" 45acp round is mostly in their heads. Even in stubby autos the recoil is very reasonable for anyone but possibly the smallest females. I started shooting the .45acp at age 8 and have continued to do so for more than 50 years. I've got nothing against the 9mm, I'd certainly rather have one of those in my hand than a pointy stick if the SHTF. Many of the really serious users of pistols have choosen the .45 CALIBER for well over 125 years now, given a choice.

I just read a blurb in that monthly continous advertisement called "Shooting Times" about the new Hornady "Critical Defense" ammo which certainly looks like a great round that I'm going to try when they become available.

Bottom line, carry what you shoot well and shoot often enough to keep your skills current and the "lethality" will come from shot placement. The only real advantage to carry a 9 is more rounds per magazine, which is important, but shot placement tops misses everytime.

Gatogordo is kind of on the right track.
If the question was asked, "What are the most important things in a gun fight?" I think the order would go something like this:

1. Keep a cool head.
2. Violence of Action
3. Have your gun on you.
4. Carry a reliable gun, that will always go bang.
5. The skills to bring your firearm into action during a stressful encounter.
6. Bullet placement. Make mine center mass, as close to the spine as possible.
7. Bullet construction. Make mine a reliable modern hollow point.
8. A reasonable caliber, 9mm/.38 special+
9. All the rest of the magazine capacity/caliber/momentium/velocity/energy/SD/BC/BS/e=MC2 considerations.

But someting tells me, that if your opponent understands, and has met the first 5 considerations, you don't want to be undergunned.

You forgot one.

Rule Number One:
Violence of Action

Thanks Ryan, it's been fixed.