Ballistic discussion 9mm & .40 for duty use

[Jinkster]

Well I'm new here but not new to pistol craft...and while I didn't read through all 26 pages here?...I did take a close look and read of the O.P. and here's my .02 on it...

In the "Bells & Whistles" category it sure looks impressive but here's what my mind catches that doesn't seem to get mentioned...

Of course it's a "Softer Shooting Pistol"...and the way I see it?....the primary reason it is such is because in large part due to a much shorter effective barrel length...which unless you're using a really fast burning powder?....results in a far lower chamber pressures with a much lower powered and softer hitting less effective bullet.

Does it look slick?...yep.

Is it snotty fast and smooth handling?....more than likely.

But I personally wouldn't trust this particular rig to be an efficient man stopper...short barreled 9's aren't exactly known for slamming steel too dirt.

You can push a 17L into major power factor with the right recipe loads...due to it's 6.02" barrel....much like a hot .38super...and the 5.3" barrel of a G34 will yield +P performance and FPS with standard ammo as compared too the G17's 4.48" barrel....then you have your 4" barreled G19's where unless you hit the standing steels high?...they ain't going down with one shot...get shorter than that?....and now your slipping down into light loads out of grandpa's .38 spcl...not exactly a powerhouse where warding off life threatening attacks are concerned...so this may be why it's so "Soft Shooting"...jmho and food for thought.

[Jinkster]

Jinkster: You are quite wrong. G19's have a 4" barrel--there is virtually no difference in terminal performance compared to the G34's these have replaced. In addition, you might want to look around the real world, as G19's have quite effectively stopped a LOT of bad guys...

Okay Doc...I'll bite...but first let's recognize that sticks, stones, baseball bats and all around bad attitudes have stopped a lot of bad guys as well...now with that out of the way?...

are you really going to take the stance that with any given 9mm ammo...a 9mm barrel which is 1.3"s shorter is just as terminally effective as one that's 1.3"s longer?

Because that IS what you're trying to say here right?...and that would be a first for me if you could prove it.

Now that said?...I know there's some awesome deadly loads available for short barreled 9's...but they'd be even more awesome out of a long barreled 9.

Popcorns on...balls in your court...I'm all eye's and ears...to learn how there's virtually no difference in terminal performance between a short barrel and long barrel 9's.

[NerdAlert]

I'm all eye's and ears...to learn how there's virtually no difference in terminal performance between a short barrel and long barrel 9's.

Ok I'm not Doc, but I'll lay it out real quick. First off, terminal performance does not equal velocity or energy. A longer barrel will in fact produce more velocity and energy. That being said, terminal performance in handgun rounds is measured by penetration, expansion, and weight retention. A round designed for a modern service pistol will generally gain about 80 fps from a 4" barrel to a 6" barrel. That is still within the window the rounds are designed for. Generally with modern JHPs when driven to higher velocities will expand more and penetrate less. This does not equate to greater terminal performance as it is tested with modern methods. Modern bonded JHP is just as terminally effective out of a 4" barrel as a 6 inch barrel since 80fps doesn't affect penetration, expansion, or wight retention all that much. Check out tnoutdoors9 in YouTube, he does some pretty standardized testing proving out this sort of stuff. Underwood ammo loads some rounds with gold dot projectiles to much higher velocities than even the gold dot +p stuff, and it does not perform measurably better than the Speer factory loading, in fact in penetrates a little less than the factory loading using the same projectile.

This stuff is well documented in the ammo section regarding handgun wounding mechanisms (permanent cavity, cutting and crushing). "Energy dump" is commonly thought of as a wounding mechanism but handguns don't have the "oomph" for that to be true (excluding rifle caliber handguns and very large magnum revolvers like 500 s&w or .460 s&w). 80 fps in an 9 mm will not make the round a better "man stopper". Only ammo selection and shot placement can do that. Also check out ballistics by the inch for the velocity data with various loading and barrel length.


Sent from my iPhone, I apologize in advance for typos.

"Gustatus similis pullus"

[Saur]

Okay Doc...I'll bite...but first let's recognize that sticks, stones, baseball bats and all around bad attitudes have stopped a lot of bad guys as well...now with that out of the way?...

are you really going to take the stance that with any given 9mm ammo...a 9mm barrel which is 1.3"s shorter is just as terminally effective as one that's 1.3"s longer?

Because that IS what you're trying to say here right?...and that would be a first for me if you could prove it.

Now that said?...I know there's some awesome deadly loads available for short barreled 9's...but they'd be even more awesome out of a long barreled 9.

Popcorns on...balls in your court...I'm all eye's and ears...to learn how there's virtually no difference in terminal performance between a short barrel and long barrel 9's.

Jinkster, DocGKRs already done all that; you can get up to speed in the ammunition subforum. Heres a particular thread you'll find helpful: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....f-Defense-Ammo also here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....formance-Facts

[SLG]

I certainly agree that this is not a "popcorns on" kind of place, but Jinkster, really? You realize that you're trying to argue ballistics with one of the 3 or 4 foremost authorities in the field, right? Maybe a little more reading is in order...maybe a lot more.

edited to add: I just checked Doc's profile page, and it covers some of his qualifications. Just wanted to make sure that there wasn't a perfectly logical explanation...

[Jinkster]

Okay...sorry folks...I didn't realize this was being perceived as anything other than me expressing my off the cuff observations based on what I've seen fly across chronographs in my many years of IPSC competition and reloading and had no clue that so many would take offense at the word "Popcorn".

It's just the way I am...sometimes I step on it and sometimes I step in it but at least I walk (if not run) forward and either teach or learn many things along the way but apparently you all have your preferred products and hero's well established here and nothings open to question or intelligent debate.

I've been a member here for exactly one weekend and have already received a PM from one of your Staffer/Mods suggesting that PF may not be the place for me and at this point?....I tend to agree...please delete my account and I'll do what I can on my end to log out and sign off.

I do thank you folks for squaring me away on rule changes and which classes and equipment might be a best fit for me and my new G34.

Take care and shoot safe...L8R, Bill.

[SLG]

I can't speak for the staff, but if you read my post above and then try reading some more, you may learn a thing or two that IPSC chronos won't teach you (i.e. steel and power factors have little to do with flesh). I don't think you need to leave, but off the cuff observations don't usually equal facts around here, and most of the membership is concerned with facts. Observation alone led people to think the world was flat...

[DocGKR]

NerdAlert pretty much hit the nail on the head. There is very little terminal performance difference (penetration, expansion, weight retention, intermediate barrier capability) seen with common barrier blind duty loads when fired from 9 mm pistols with barrels between 3.5-5.5". There is no need for me to prove it in this thread, as all this has been confirmed by numerous tests conducted by organizations like the IWBA, FBI BRF, JSWB-IPT, CHP, LAPD, SJPD, etc... There is no need for a short barrel load when using 9 mm pistol with barrels in the 3.5-5.5" range--bullet performance will be nearly identical whether fired from a G26, G19, G17, or G34; again numerous tests have already document this fact. Call Speer--their Speer Gold Dot 124 +P Short Barrel Load is IDENTICAL in all respects to the standard Speer Gold Dot 124 +P load; like NO difference at all.

[GJM]

I think many people have wildly different perceptions of terminal ballistics, and are completely horrified at what others think.

If someone's sole understanding of terminal performance was USPSA, they might think Power Factor (velocity X weight) was extremely important, and only two power factors meant anything (the minor and major power factor thresholds).

If another person's only understanding was hunting in the US, based on a review of many state's hunting regulations, they might think caliber alone mattered.

And, if they were hunting dangerous game in certain African countries, might believe caliber alone, starting with .375, was all that mattered.

If they hung around Paulden, AZ in the 80's and 90's, they likely would believe the only thing that mattered was that the caliber be .45 acp. (And them guys are still out there!)

And today, if they internet, they would look to the approved list! A subset of those, being goofballs like me, that only want to use (in lower 48) one load on the List (124+P Gold Dots), because they have proven in my experience to be accurate, reliable and I think the +P will add some additional reliability with a dirty gun, or compromised grip.

Then there are the LE guys I have recently asked if they have a Glock 17, who reply "no .40" with such conviction and hurt look, that you would think I asked if they were transgender.

[SLG]

Then there are the LE guys I have recently asked if they have a Glock 17, who reply "no .40" with such conviction and hurt look, that you would think I asked if they were transgender.

They'll be switching, sooner or later:-)