Page 5 of 26 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 252

Thread: Doubts about 9mm

  1. #41
    Site Supporter Nephrology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Gateway to the West
    Never met a shot person who had a strong opinion on the caliber of the gun that shot them. Most times they were too busy being resuscitated.

  2. #42
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Midwest
    Long Post Warning

    I posted the thoughts below when somebody (a relatively new shooter) was asking about a gunbelt after I noted that perhaps they were spending too much time on hardware issues v software issues.


    "Can you present from your preferred concealed carry system with your preferred platform and hit an 8 inch circle at 3 yards in under 2 seconds, COLD, every time?

    Can you present from your preferred concealed carry system with your preferred platform, and do a FAST Test in under 10 seconds, COLD, every time with no points down?

    Can you present from your preferred concealed carry system with your preferred platform, taking a big step off line and hit an 8 inch circle at 5 yards, with 5 rounds, in under 4 secs., COLD, every time?

    Can you present from your preferred concealed carry system with your preferred platform and hit an 8 inch plate at 10 yrds, at will, COLD, every time with no time constraints?( bang, tink, bang, tink, bang, tink etc.)

    Can you present from your preferred concealed carry system with your preferred platform and shoot a 5 shoot group at 5 yrds that you can cover with a credit card, COLD, every time with no time constraints?

    Have you taken any formal training beyond a CCW class in the last 24 months?"


    I started shooting/carrying .45 ACP because that is the gun my first shooting mentor(s) carried because "they all fall to hardball..." etc.

    I started shooting/carrying 9mm when my client agencies graciously allowed me to train with them as that is what they were using.

    I started shooting/carrying .40 cal when my client agencies moved away from 9mm toward .40 cal.

    Presuming I could carry a standard capacity weapon (15 +1 or 17 + 1) and I had to feed and water it myself, I would go 9mm and not look back. If I was limited to 10 rounds max, I would go back to a 1911 or perhaps pivot to an M&P with Apex Trigger goodies and drive on.

    If I could NOT perform as outlined above and was serious about the uniquely American martial art of pistolcraft, I would stop worrying about secondary hardware issues and go with a 9mm, staying with it until I could perform as outlined above, COLD, ON DEMAND. YMMV Greatly.

  3. #43
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by 0ddl0t View Post
    There is no predicting on what administrators will blame the failures of future events. But the FBI Miami Shootout was not a failure of 9mm. It was a primarily failure of planning/preparation/tactics: The agents, hoping to encounter deadly bank robbers known to use a mini 14 & shotgun, had largely equipped themselves with .38 revolvers. Other agents also had 2 .357s, 3 9mm, & two shotguns. None of the involved agents had smgs, rifles or rifle-rated body armor.

    Way, way, way down the list of failures was the Winchester silvertip for not penetrating that extra 1.5 inches. Other 9mm ammo, including regular ball, would have done so. Still, that silvertip wound was ultimately fatal - it just didn't stop a very motivated assailant immediately.

    Finally, there is no magic bullet. I was just looking over an autopsy from a controversial 2015 police shooting where a psychotic methhead wearing a thick jacket, hoodie, and thermal undershirt was hit over 20 times by .40 Winchester Ranger T at <5 yards. None of the bullets performed that well - more than half failed to fully expand and those that did expand shed jackets & fragments. Had his CNS not been hit, the perp probably would have kept on fighting until blood loss caught up with him.
    Quote Originally Posted by TC215 View Post
    There were MP-5ís, and maybe M-16ís (canít remember), with agents on the surveillance detail. For various reasons, mostly due to Murphyís Law, those agents werenít able to make it to the scene in time to get in the fight.
    Quote Originally Posted by TGS View Post
    Yes sir, both MP5s and M-16s.

    ________________________________


    To be honest, the FBI never fully blamed the event on pistol caliber failures. It was only a contributing factor, the FBI admitted fault where fault is due with regard to tactics and planning. The idea that the FBI only blamed 9mm for that day is a falsehood.

    The idea that the main, perhaps singular cause for the outcome of the shootout was the ineffectiveness of 9mm is something I think that is pedaled by people in the gun community.....in particular gun manufacturers trying to make sales during a country-wide police rearmament bonanza.



    but you are.
    Re: Miami - Yes there were Agents on the area surveillance with Heavy Body Armor as well as an MP5 and an M16. They were not near the area where the suspects were spotted - on a bathroom break as I recall. John Hearne could say for sure. Murphys law definetly applies here.

    At least two of the Agents present, the ones with the S&W 9mm pistols, were FBI SWAT. However, at the time the administrative procedures for checking out MP5s and M16s were enough of a PITA that the two SWAT Agents chose not to do so. Suffice to say that today take home long guns are common and that is one issue which should not be a factor today.

    This was not a planned take down. It was an area surveillance with a take down as one possible contingency. Even today with all sorts of "low Vis" and "Covert" long gun cases and hard armor there is a limit to how geared up you can be and still be inconspicuous enough to be effective in conducting surveillance. 30 years the limitations were far greater.

    All of this had a bigger influence on the outcome of the Miami shooting than terminal ballistics.
    Last edited by HCM; 11-19-2019 at 07:41 PM.

  4. #44
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Nephrology View Post
    Never met a shot person who had a strong opinion on the caliber of the gun that shot them. Most times they were too busy being resuscitated.
    Says the ER Doc......

    Speaking of Docs, I recall Doc GKR talking about how he would happily carry 9mm FMJ if someone gave him enough practice ammo ....and something about Shot Placement being more important than caliber or bullet type ....

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    Advances in ammunition technology over the last 20 years have greatly decreased the gap between 9mm and .45 ACP. The FBI has entirely switched to 9mm again. One of the main reasons was that the major service calibers all did pretty much the same thing, so why carry fewer rounds that recoiled more?
    Don't these same advances in ammunition technology apply to the larger calibers as well, maintaining that gap in performance?

  6. #46
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by GlorifiedMailman View Post
    What about .45ís increased wound channel as compared to 9mm? In the Law Enforcement Bulletin released by the FBI in November of 1989, they seemed to put some importance on the volume of tissue/gel displaced by the projectile. The 10mm and .45 produced much larger wound volumes than the 147gr 9mm load. Now I realize that these were all much more inferior projectiles than what we have today, but isnít it still true that, with two otherwise identical well-designed loadings in both 9mm and .45, the .45 would still create a larger wound channel than the 9mm?

    It seems to be something that LE doesnít put as much emphasis on wound volume anymore. Has it just shown to be irrelevant in incapacitation? I realize the body is a essentially a hydraulic sponge as was pointed out, but all else being equal does the increased wound cavity provided by the .45 matter?
    No, it doesn't. 1989 was 30 years ago. The study of terminal ballistics and the design of anti personnel bullets have come a long way since then.

    I like .45 and own several, illogical as it is but I carry a 9mm at work by choice and have for some time.

    Bullet performance being similar,or equal, I can shoot 9mm faster and it gives me more opportunities in the form of bullets before I have to reload. A particularly attractive feature if there is more than one bad guy. In articulating the logic behind his move to a Glock 35, and subsequently a G17, Tom Givens referred to the 1911s and revolvers he carried for decade as 1 to 2 bad guy guns and noted bad guys now often come in 3s (or more).

    The late American Rifleman writer Finn Aagard, a former professional hunter in his native Africa opined that "shot placement is 90% of killing power."

    Along those lines my personal theory on the .45 acp's reputation as a "man stopper" is based on the superior ergonomics and "shootability" of the 1911 not superior terminal performance of the 45 acp round.

    45 acp is no more or less effective than comparable service calibers.Most people suck shooting handguns. The 1911 has good ergonomics, a short light trigger and the trigger moves in a track rather than a pivot mitigating lateral errors.

    Compared to most anything else available prior to the 1970s and 1980s the 1911 was the easiest gun to make good hits with under stress and time pressure. This translated into more hits and better shot placement, the real impetus behind the "legendary" performance of the .45.
    Last edited by HCM; 11-19-2019 at 10:09 PM.

  7. #47
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by GlorifiedMailman View Post
    Don't these same advances in ammunition technology apply to the larger calibers as well, maintaining that gap in performance?
    No. There are diminishing returns.

    The new technology greatly improved 9mm, slightly improved .45 - basically bringing both on par with .40 S&W. .40 performance has stayed flat.

    The real advance in ammunition technology was not expansion or bigger wound channels, though expansion has become more reliable. It's barrier blind ammunition that gives "Goldilocks" performance - that 12' to 18' of penetration needed to reach the vital structures in the human body that cause incapacitation without exiting the body. What Kyle DeFoor refers to as "timers" (significant blood loss) and "switches" (Brain, brain stem, etc)

    The performance of the 9mm Silver tip in Miami clearly shows this. The issue was failure to adequately penetrate and reach the heart after passing through an intermediate barrier (arm), not failure to create a large enough wound channel.

    Modern barrier blind ammunition performs in this "sweet spot" even when it passes through intermediate barriers, whether vehicles, drywall, or bones. Too much penetration and the bullet punches a hole without dumping it's kinetic energy and now you have to worry about what it will hit next. Too little penetration and you create superficial wounds that do not reach the structures needed to incapacitate as seen in Miami.

    .45 ACP is actually a poor performer on intermediate barriers, even with modern ammunition, because of the large frontal area of the bullet.

    Prior to barrier blind bullets, 9mm rounds were usually either somewhat anemic 147 grain JHP's that were too slow to expand or penetrate reliably or fast light 115 grain bullets that either over expanded, limiting penetration when they hit flesh, or broke up when they hit intermediate barriers leaving the smaller pieces insufficient mass to penetrate adequately.

    Prior to barrier blind bullets .40 and 45 had the mass to stay in one piece after passing through intermediate barriers, if the .45 made it through. .40 S&W was actually a "sweet spot" prior to barrier blind bullets as it had better penetration through intermediate barriers than .45 acp but still had enough mass to stay in one piece and adequately penetrate after passing through barriers.

    Even with modern bullet technology few agencies using 9mm are carrying 115 grain. Most LE agencies carrying 9mm are carrying 124 or 147 grain +P or +P+ loads. A faster heavier bullet that stays in one piece after passing through barriers and penetrates adequately even when it expands in soft tissue.

    As a youngster I started my career with a Ruger .357 revolver and could not wait to swap it out for a SIG P-220 with "by God" .45 caliber 185 grain JHP. When was that you might ask? Well, to quote Bob Valdez in Valdez is coming "Before I know better.


    El Segundo : [after capturing Valdez] Like tobacco?

    Bob Valdez : [quietly] No.

    El Segundo : [after pausing and nervously clearing his throat] Tell me something... Who are you?

    Bob Valdez : I told you once before - Bob Valdez.

    El Segundo : [referring to Valdez's earlier marksmanship against his men] You know something, Bob Valdez, you hit one, I think, 700-800 yards.

    Bob Valdez : [with certitude] Closer to a thousand.

    El Segundo : What was it? Sharps?

    Bob Valdez : [nods] My own load.

    El Segundo : You ever hunt buffalo?

    Bob Valdez : Apache.

    El Segundo : I knew it. When?

    Bob Valdez : Before I know better.
    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067921...ters/nm0000044
    Last edited by HCM; 11-19-2019 at 10:13 PM.

  8. #48
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Quote Originally Posted by Navin Johnson View Post
    Really?
    To whom is your thoughtful query directed?

  9. #49
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    @HCM - somehow your posts remind me that I need to own a Super 38 1911 again.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Robinson View Post
    To whom is your thoughtful query directed?
    I notice my response came right after one of your posts and it was not directed at you as I did not quote you.

    This is one of those bandwidth wasting threads that honest people are trying to help somebody who looks like they're trying to see how many replies they can get to a thread or how long they can keep it going.

    In today's world with the information out there it is idiotic to discuss the slight variances in service caliber ammunition.

    Therefore anyone doing that is just baiting or hasn't done any research. Again a waste of bandwidth.

    With any luck at all this thread will descend into pressure spikes and defence of clear gel.

    This is the type of discussion that drives the SMEs away instead of helping us.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •