Printable View
I think that it is worth noting that law enforcement officer/gun writers Bill Jordon and Skeeter Skelton carried 44 spl cal. revolvers back in their active service days. As Elmer Keith, the gun writer who was largely responsible for S&W developing the 44 magnum, pointed out a heavy bullet and a larger wound channel are desirable features in a defensive round. As the title of Bill Jordan's book states, there is "No Second Place Winner" in a gunfight.
jfreak,
Excellent advice. Those of you who aren't pistoleros, pay heed to what he said.
You're right, not only can a bullet expend MORE energy to it's target then it had when it left the muzzle, it delivers YET MORE on a human target then a non human target.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeauxLSU
Are you lying or are you deceived?
Not only physics, but the simplest common sense dictates that what you say is not the case.
For every action there is an equal and opposite action. If the recoil isn't enough to knock you off your feet, then the energy the bullet is expending is not, either.
I found this and thought I post it for food for thought. FBI Ballistics that I just took a few from that we had been discussing here.
Explanation of fields, example
9x19 Win Ranger +P+ |115@1320, 21.7 mv, 444 E|BR 9.6", 0.53", 2.11cu|CL 10.2", 0.65", 3.37cu|avg 2.74, 3.89 re, 0.70
1. 9x19 - caliber
2. Win Ranger +P+ - the name of the load
3. 115@1320 - bullet mass in grains @ muzzle velocity
4. 21.7 mv - bullet momentum in lb*fps
5. 444 E - muzzle energy in ftlbs
6. BR - what follows is the data for bare gelatin
1. 9.6" inches of penetration
2. 0.53", final expanded diameter of bullet
3. 2.11 cu, approximation of wound volume. (this does not take into account the expansion profile as a function of depth, but it should be roughly proportionate to actual wound volume)
7. CL - what follows is the data for clothed gelatin
same fields as the bare gelatin, as defined above
8. avg 2.74 - Average wound volume, clothed and bare gelatin
9. 3.89 re - Free Recoil Energy, assuming a 1.88 lb pistol
10. 0.70 - Average would volume per unit Free Recoil Energy. This is a measure of "bang for buck", and is discussed in the text below the data table.
357SIG CCI/Speer GD
125@1372, 24.5 mv, 522 E
BR 16.1", 0.60", 4.54cu
CL 19.1", 0.54", 4.36cu
avg 4.45, 4.96 re, 0.90
45ACP CCI/Speer GD
230@ 896, 29.4 mv, 409 E
BR 16.0", 0.69", 5.98cu
CL 18.9", 0.59", 5.17cu
avg 5.58, 7.17 re, 0.78
40SW CCI/Speer GD
155@1176, 26.0 mv, 475 E
BR 10.7", 0.84", 5.93cu
CL 18.1", 0.57", 4.62cu
avg 5.27, 5.61 re, 0.94
9x19 CCI/Speer GD
124@1068, 18.9 mv, 314 E
BR 12.6", 0.59", 3.44cu
CL 17.5", 0.51", 3.57cu
avg 3.51, 2.96 re, 1.19
Notice that the avg for the 40 and 45 is relatively close in wound channel and bleeding potential. The expansions are nearly identical and so is penetration. The biggest stand out for me is the wound volume looked at singularly. 4.62 vs. 5.17. The 45 will create a bigger channel to bleed from but is that necessary?
This is what I learned through trial over the years too. It becomes a very personal choice in the long run. Odd things work for different people and you have to find that fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by jfreaksho
My first pistol was a HK USP 40 and I loved it. I didn't know any better though. I started to get more and more as I collected and soon I found I never shot the thing because I liked others more, despite how good I thought it was.
I've gravitated towards what's best for me after testing out many many things. I still think I could refine it even more prefered but other factors have weight like budget concearns.
I've always been a fan of having people learn the basics of all types of firearms, providing choices and examples, and leaving it up to them to pick the final result. It frustrates people who are looking for the "Use this!" type answer but I think it works out better in the long run since they've taken more personal stock in the choice.
Remember that you don't tend to buy houses without seeing them or cars without test driving them. Go look around and get a hands on feel for things even if it is simply looking at them and talking to the dealers.
With regard to stopping power- mythbusters took a 200lbs pig (=200lbs of bone, flesh, etc.) and shot at it from max velocity range (almost point blank) with various guns and only things like a 50cal MG could really know a man backwards. Knock them off balance, maybe, off their feet, no.
Another point I'd like to make, because I personally have no experience shooting at other humans, is from a discussion I had with a police man. Your odds of defending yourself against an assailant are slim at best, nothing like the movies.
To demonstrate this he gave me his holster and (unloaded) side arm, had it on me unlocked and everything so I could get it out as fast as possible, and stood on the other side of the room from me (20ft). His challenge? He had a knife, I had to draw and shoot him before he could stab me. He used a pen as a mock knife. Needless to say he got me twice before I could bring the gun to bear. Now bearing in mind that the holster was essentially a bucket holster (and carries should never be in bucket holsters) and I was ready, how fast do you think you could react in real life? Even if you were trained, he said you have probably 15ft range, inside that you'll have to be lucky.
On top of that, when I asked him, why don't police shoot for like, the legs or arm or something non-lethal? His response was, hitting an arm or leg on a paper target in teh range is as easy as hitting anything else. Try hitting a leg or an arm while someone is running at you/taking cover/trying not to die. Bottom line according to him was if they are attacking you enough to warrant using a gun, you shoot at the torso first, ask questions later.
Moral- if you're drawing a gun on a human you better have a good reason and you better be ready to kill. Cus if they are coming at you you may not have time to get of 4 shots, let alone non-lethal ones...
At the relatively low velocity (compared to high power rifles) of a handgun a larger wound channel is a good thing. Even with a hit in a non vital area the target will bleed out faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by singlewedge
Having shot both the 45 and the 40 I would say the 40 is easier to get back on target. IME the recoil isn't less but the nature of the recoil is different. Also the trajectory of the 40 is far flatter than that of the 45.
Not a consideration at close range but you never know what the circumstances will be if you ever get into a shooting scrape. If and when you do get a pistol and you begin to carry it you'll find weight and bulk to be important considerations.
I'd much rather have my 40 or one of my 44 revolvers in a combat situation but I have a 38 in my pocket.
Momentum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaQuote:
Originally Posted by JokiJo
Quote:
Originally Posted by khaos
Dude ...
Mythbusters ... ?
Seriously ...?
LOL !!