testtest

Does the Cartridge Still Matter?

Bassbob said:
Yeah dead is dead, but how much damage were they able to do before the threat was effectively stopped? Sure, you can kill deer with a .22, but how far do you feel like tracking them? You can kill humans with a .380, but how many shots to the chest will it take to stop them from getting to you or shooting you before they expire ? What if they're on Ice or PCP ?

There's a reason LE, military and every instructor worth listening to trains for multiple shots to the upper chest.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Every class I’ve taken in the past including those taken just recently for the current licensing I have all the instructors were adamant about continuing to shoot until the threat is stopped.
 
Keystone19250 said:
Agreed. Every class I’ve taken in the past including those taken just recently for the current licensing I have all the instructors were adamant about continuing to shoot until the threat is stopped.
Click to expand...
And if we are to lend any credence to Paul's video up there then the .40 is superior to the 9mm. Logically then .45 is superior to the 9mm. Dependent on ammunition of course, but it's not like there's magic ammo for the 9mm that isn't available for other calibers. All things being equal then, clearly .45 and .40 are superior in stopping power to the 9mm. You could argue that speed and accuracy are diminished with the .45 compared to the 9mm. A problem that can likely be overcome by training.
 
I see a lot of interesting and well-informed comments along with a few that show that a few posters don't get the nuances of defensive shooting or shooting for hunting.

Modern bullet design has merely shifted the optimal bullet weight range down a bit. The "best" bullet weight continues to be the lightest that give adequate chances of incapacitation given a hit in the vital zone.

By adequate, we need to remember that a few seconds must elapse for faint/collapse even if the carotid artery and jugular veins are severed. As the expanded bullet size increases, the chances of severing significant blood vessels increase but the rate of increase decreases with expanded bullet size.

When we consider that the 45 hardball round was considered good for defensive shooting and that a modern 9mm bullet cuts a larger wound channel, we have an "aha" moment. Both are big enough that going bigger does not significantly increase the chances of quick incapacitation. BUT most shooters are more likely to HIT the vital zone when using a 9mm or a 380. The hit and wound channel argument thus favors the smaller bullet.

That is one of the reasons that smaller calibers with today's bullets are gaining interest. Nonetheless the 22 is not particularly interesting unless the shooter is not able to handle the recoil of a 39 or 9mm.
 
Disagree. All things being equal a .45 will increase the chances of quicker incapacitation. That fact is unarguable. The difference is whether or not you can quickly put accurate shots where they count.

I think it's like anything else. People believe what they want to believe. They want to believe that little .380 they stick in their pocket is just as effective as a full size 9mm or .45. And they are wrong.
 
Recusant said:
It all comes down that old rhetorical question. Which one would you rather be shot with?
Click to expand...
Amen, Rec… you hit on the acid test.

I once asked several people (not all together or same time) a rhetorical ques “would you volunteer to be in an experiment whereby I get to shoot you center mass at 15ft” (and went on to describe their reward and vast medical support that would be right there; i won’t go into all that) and near the end I asked “which bullet would you want me to use when it’s your turn?” I then showed them - side by side - a real 9mm and a .45 , both FMJ, and a Hydroshok 9.

All got to hold all 3 and look all they wanted.
Not one chose the .45… not even the gunners among ‘em.

[ silly experiment, and totally non scientific…. but kinda telling:) ]
 
Bassbob said:
Disagree. All things being equal a .45 will increase the chances of quicker incapacitation. That fact is unarguable. The difference is whether or not you can quickly put accurate shots where they count.

I think it's like anything else. People believe what they want to believe. They want to believe that little .380 they stick in their pocket is just as effective as a full size 9mm or .45. And they are wrong.
Click to expand...
The point is "will the 45 increase the chances of fast incapacitation enough to offset ability to hit?"

For some of us, yes. We put the time and effort to become proficient with the 45.

For most of us, we are hard pressed to shoot more than a few hundred rounds each year. That is not enough to become proficient with the heavy recoil. So, the 380, 38, or 9mm become a better choice because one is more likely to get the needed hit.
 
JASmith said:
The point is "will the 45 increase the chances of fast incapacitation enough to offset ability to hit?"

For some of us, yes. We put the time and effort to become proficient with the 45.

For most of us, we are hard pressed to shoot more than a few hundred rounds each year. That is not enough to become proficient with the heavy recoil. So, the 380, 38, or 9mm become a better choice because one is more likely to get the needed hit.
Click to expand...
…which kinda puts you back to using a .22
 
Another consideration is what is practical to carry concealed. Most of the time, there’s no way I can get away with toting even a 4” 1911 in .45. And they’re heavy. My Hellcat is great to carry concealed, but there are times my SA 911 in .380 is a better option.

One other point. Comparing the 9mm & .40, I think they’re close enough in capacity to consider the .40 over the 9mm. But the .45 is half the capacity of these other options. You want 15-17 rounds of 9mm or .40 - or 8 of .45?
 
It matters to some, not so much to others.
I thought about posting a picture of someone beating a horse and then decided not to.
I carry a .380 when I wear shorts and a 9mm when I wear pants.
Pick your poison and don't worry what others do.
In times of ammo shortages, do you want to limit yourself to one caliber and/or gun?
 
After I had my surgery I couldn’t wear jeans, I had to wear sweats, my regular edc wouldn’t work, so I picked up a Ruger LCP in .380 so I could pocket carry. I did feel underpowered with a .380, but after I did some reading and research of this round using todays modern ammo, I decided I shouldn’t worry about being underpowered at all, so I guess with todays ammo, cartridge really doesn’t matter as @Talyn said shot placement is the key.
 
well i like Paul Harrell, and he has very good videos.

however, i do not believe that any of us are going to shoot the perp from the side, thru all that.

hopefully if we need to shoot to stop the threat, it's full on face to face.

yes, layers clothing still makes a difference but the bullet will not be traveling the long distance from the side, arm, side of ribs, to heart...

i dunno.....i just hope i DON'T have to shoot anyone, but glad i CAN if i have to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top