Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: zahc on May 23, 2016, 02:24:48 PM

Title: 9 or 40
Post by: zahc on May 23, 2016, 02:24:48 PM
My main social handgun is a M&P9c 9mm. I'm happy with it. It's reliable. It's a breeze to shoot and my wife's favorite handgun of mine to shoot. I'm accurate with it. It rusted, but I don't care.

I sometimes want something less brickish for hot-weather activities. I'm considering either a Shield/XDS. I bought a PF9 and it's fine but I'm pretty inaccurate with it and the recoil is so bad my wife won't touch it and I don't like shooting it either. So I just don't feel well-armed with it so I still carry my M&P9c.

When I bought the M&P I was in college and ammo cost was a factor in getting 9mm instead of .40. Now I have much less time to shoot to the point that ammo cost is not a factor. That, plus the fact that the guns hold less, says I should go .40 or even  .45 to compensate. But with the smaller gun, the recoil will be that much worse and it might be my PF9 all over again with inaccuracy and flinching. So I'm thinking about getting it in 9mm again but my Dad is like ".40 is a serious round and 9mm is a pea shooter, and with the shorter barrel, its gonna be even wimpier."

Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on May 23, 2016, 02:31:33 PM
Basically, what I gather from those who actually know ballistic details, with the defensive rounds avalible, both will do the job just fine. It basically just comes down to which recoil you like (I'm a bozo, I actually prefer .40)

FWIW, my Dad used to be all about .40... In the 90's, when there actually was a difference. These days, he's largely gone back to either 9 or .45's.
Tell your Dad that you'd prefer higher capacity to 40 Short and Whimpy. Watch him get mad.  >:D
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: BobR on May 23, 2016, 02:43:11 PM
Quote
Tell your Dad that you'd prefer higher capacity to 40 Short and Whimpy Slow and Weak.

FTFY


aka as 10mm lite   ;)


bob
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lupinus on May 23, 2016, 02:48:31 PM
Personally I rode the 40 train for awhile and am now in one of those ammo for a gun I don't have scenarios since I sold or traded off my 40 cal guns and all defensive handguns are 9mm.

So if I want a step up it'll be 45. IMO the advantage to 40 is negligible enough to not matter. Nothing wrong with it it just doesn't have much if any in my opinion.

That said I've also been in the market for something smaller to carry around than my normal glock 19, and just in time for consideration S&W has debuted a 45acp shield. So I'll be holding off a bit till they come to market and others can be Guinea pigs.


Sent from my iPhone. Freaking autocorrect.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lee n. field on May 23, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
My main social handgun is a M&P9c 9mm. I'm happy with it. It's reliable. It's a breeze to shoot and my wife's favorite handgun of mine to shoot. I'm accurate with it. It rusted, but I don't care.

I sometimes want something less brickish for hot-weather activities. I'm considering either a Shield/XDS. I bought a PF9 and it's fine but I'm pretty inaccurate with it and the recoil is so bad my wife won't touch it and I don't like shooting it either. So I just don't feel well-armed with it so I still carry my M&P9c.

When I bought the M&P I was in college and ammo cost was a factor in getting 9mm instead of .40. Now I have much less time to shoot to the point that ammo cost is not a factor. That, plus the fact that the guns hold less, says I should go .40 or even  .45 to compensate. But with the smaller gun, the recoil will be that much worse and it might be my PF9 all over again with inaccuracy and flinching. So I'm thinking about getting it in 9mm again but my Dad is like ".40 is a serious round and 9mm is a pea shooter, and with the shorter barrel, its gonna be even wimpier."
B


Pick one.

I shot an XDS40 a few weeks ago.  It wasn't too bad.  Current Internet herd mind consensus tends to favor a 9mm "hail of lead" strategy, and whine about how hard .40 is to shoot.  Your personal mileage may very well vary.  Folks will argue the differences endlessly.   Will having 15 rounds of 9 on tap make a difference, if 12 rounds of .40 wouldn't?  Whatever.  I'm tired of it.  And I shoot my .40s plenty fast.

Summertime lately, I've started carrying again my XD.40 Subcompact.  The summertime "vibrant social scene" is ramping up. Same hight and length, fatter and heavier  than my XDS.  And easier to shoot well.  9 round short magazine, 12 round regular.  Beats 7 and 9, in the XDS.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: roo_ster on May 23, 2016, 02:59:36 PM
I own subcompacts in 9mm, .40S&W, and .45ACP.  Of the three, .40S&W is by far the nastiest to shoot out of a little pistol.  Were I to buy a new itty bitty pistol, I would look at 9mm or .380ACP.  A small frame revo in .38spl loaded with tgt wadcutters is also an option that won't recoil like a beast.

The KT PF9 is a very light & small package.  Anything in that neighborhood size or mass wise is going to kick.  My neighbor's was tolerable (for me) with 115-124 non+P, but got nasty with 147gr or +P.  I just don't think you will find something that size in 9mm or larger that your wife will tolerate.  The SIG P938 is in the neighborhood, weight-wise, but is a lot easier to shoot well.  Still kicks.  The SIG P238 is the .380ACP version.  Might even have to go .32ACP to get something tha small your wife will tolerate.  I had to (KT P32).

I know you are not looking for a brick, but the Glock 43 single stack 9mm might be a step in the right direction.  Glocks do have a noticeable (to me) effect that dampens felt recoil.  Same applies to the S&W Shield. 

Good luck, but the physics of the situation darned near dictate the results.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Angel Eyes on May 23, 2016, 03:06:51 PM
Get a .40 and a 9mm conversion barrel.  Best of both worlds.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 23, 2016, 03:08:15 PM
A 9 vs .40 debate on APS?

AWESOME!!!!



 ;/
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Angel Eyes on May 23, 2016, 03:25:31 PM
A 9 vs .40 debate on APS?

AWESOME!!!!



 ;/

Yes, when I saw the thread title, my first thought was:

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi949.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad335%2Fjustpolitics%2FmorePOLITICS%2FAwJeezNotThisSheetAgain1.jpg&hash=f9dc887a04cc14b4bfd101363e23c6d3d0b0f122)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: French G. on May 23, 2016, 03:28:49 PM
A 9 vs .40 debate on APS?

AWESOME!!!!
 ;/

Proof that the community standards are slipping.  In true gun fora fashion I reply that the only correct choices are 10mm or .45.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Tuco on May 23, 2016, 03:37:19 PM
.40 S&W is a dying, soon to be obsolete, chambering.  
May as well go,with a .41 avenger.
And while I'm in troll mode,
10mm is best mm.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 23, 2016, 03:56:27 PM
Not a fan of the .40, but that's just my opinion...I do like 9mms however. I also like .45s.
I either saw it here or on the book of face just recently that S&W is coming out with a .45 Shield- same capacity as the 9mm.

Oddly enough, I'm really tempted to go the other way- from a M&P shield to a M&P9C or Glock 19, and just use a J-frame for my summer speedo gun.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: wmenorr67 on May 23, 2016, 04:06:34 PM
40 of Ole E please
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: AJ Dual on May 23, 2016, 04:14:49 PM
40 of Ole E please

*ahem* That's "fotay"...
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Hawkmoon on May 23, 2016, 04:18:07 PM
*ahem* That's "fotay"...

Only if it's in a Glock being used by an "undercover" DEA agent to teach gun safety to grammar school kids.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: grampster on May 23, 2016, 04:18:29 PM
If you are like me, deadly accurate and speedy too, even in the sideways mode, the .22MM is the only weapon. :rofl:
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on May 23, 2016, 04:29:24 PM
Pick one.

I shot an XDS40 a few weeks ago.  It wasn't too bad.  Current Internet herd mind consensus tends to favor a 9mm "hail of lead" strategy, and whine about how hard .40 is to shoot.  Your personal mileage may very well vary.  Folks will argue the differences endlessly.   Will having 15 rounds of 9 on tap make a difference, if 12 rounds of .40 wouldn't?  Whatever.  I'm tired of it.  And I shoot my .40s plenty fast.

Summertime lately, I've started carrying again my XD.40 Subcompact.  The summertime "vibrant social scene" is ramping up. Same hight and length, fatter and heavier  than my XDS.  And easier to shoot well.  9 round short magazine, 12 round regular.  Beats 7 and 9, in the XDS.


lee, just face it. We are the .40 weirdos. Let them have their 9mm and leave all the .40 S&W for us.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 23, 2016, 04:32:20 PM
I just picked up an XD Mod 2 3.3 in 45 ACP.  I love it.  Very light recoil even with the compact magazines.  IWB holster on the way as it will be my new carry gun.

I just find it odd that you refer to an M&P 9c as a brick.  Might as well go with a good 380 if you really want something light and easy to handle.  I would NOT recommend the KT PF9.  I heard some of Rugers SR9 models have very good triggers.  I am not sure about some of the other compact 9 mm pistols.  The XDS or Shield are probably the only ones still affordable.  I just heard an FFL I know tell me his cost for an XDS is a little over $400.  


As for 40, I have migrated away from it.  I still have a few guns that shoot it, but I won't buy anything else in that caliber.  I just don't like the recoil.  I either use 9mm or 45 ACP now.  The recoil isn't real bad, I just prefer shooting 9mm or 45 at the range. 
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 23, 2016, 04:34:14 PM
If you are like me, deadly accurate and speedy too, even in the sideways mode, the .22MM is the only weapon. :rofl:

If your goal is snake defense, I would agree.  The 22 mag shot shells are great.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 23, 2016, 04:36:51 PM
Quote
I would NOT recommend the KT PF9.

I heard used ones really appreciate in value.  >:D
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 23, 2016, 04:37:56 PM
I either saw it here or on the book of face just recently that S&W is coming out with a .45 Shield- same capacity as the 9mm.


If I remember correctly, the .45 has a lower capacity (though a higher capacity of awesome). I don't know what the 9mm version carries, but I recall distinctly that the .45 holds 6 in the flush magazine, and 7 in the longer version.


zahc, in my inexpert opinion, you may as well stick with the point-nine-millimeter. You and your wife are both used to it. Having the best (most effective, most accurate) self-defense cartridge is probably more crucial than adding an extra millimeter. This advice is worth the price.

Also:
http://www.handgunsmag.com/shot-show-2016/first-look-federal-hst-9mm-micro/
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 23, 2016, 04:48:25 PM

If I remember correctly, the .45 has a lower capacity (though a higher capacity of awesome). I don't know what the 9mm version carries, but I recall distinctly that the .45 holds 6 in the flush magazine, and 7 in the longer version.


zahc, in my inexpert opinion, you may as well stick with the point-nine-millimeter. You and your wife are both used to it. Having the best (most effective, most accurate) self-defense cartridge is probably more crucial than adding an extra millimeter. This advice is worth the price.

Also:
http://www.handgunsmag.com/shot-show-2016/first-look-federal-hst-9mm-micro/

You are right 7&8 rd for the M&P 9mm. Then again, I always carry mine with the flush mags, I also might be the last person on earth who carries a 1911 with 7-rd mags too..
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Jamisjockey on May 23, 2016, 04:49:28 PM
Friends of mine picked up a S&W .40 after shooting my .45.  His wife hated it so much she made him sell it, they have since bought multiple versions of the 9mm and are quite content.
I'm not a fan of the .40 recoil.  Seems snappy compared to the 9mm and .45.  
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: bedlamite on May 23, 2016, 04:52:31 PM
I still shoot the 40 because it easily makes USPSA major and has a higher capacity than 45. If that wasn't in the picture, I'd probably switch to 9mm.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: zahc on May 23, 2016, 05:13:49 PM
The 9c is a good gun and not too big but it's more the width-to-height ratio that makes it brickish than just the width. Maybe a better holster would help but why pass up the urge to buy a new gun? I actually would prefer if the Shield was just as long and tall as the 9c but just had the thinness.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 23, 2016, 05:18:28 PM
I also might be the last person on earth who carries a 1911 with 7-rd mags too..


I do. I think Hawkmoon does.

You obviously don't hang out much on the 1911 fora.  ;)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 23, 2016, 05:26:46 PM

I do. I think Hawkmoon does.

You obviously don't hang out much on the 1911 fora.  ;)

Nope, don't have time for too much internetting anymore.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 23, 2016, 05:32:15 PM
Find yourself a range that rents said guns.

Try them.

Pick the one you shoot the best. If you can shoot it well, and can hit with it, it doesn't matter if it's a .40 or a 9 or whatever.

Don't listen to the 'tards who bleat about "9mm pea shooter, .40 short and wimpy, .45 reaper of souls, progeny of God's beloved JMB!" Basically Guns & Ammo reading kool-ade drinking douchenozzles.

Whatever you pick, practice with it. A lot. To make sure that it both functions as intended AND you're able to place your bullets where they need to go. Practice with your chosen carry ammo, not just hard ball or whatever cheapest.

And, again, don't listen to the bleating 'tard kool-ade drinking douchenozzles who thing the size of your junk is directly reflected by the cartridge you choose for personal defense.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 23, 2016, 05:33:21 PM
Oh, and just for the record?

My chosen carry gun is most often a Smith & Wesson Centennial J frame in .38 Special.

5 rounds.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 23, 2016, 05:38:00 PM
Oh, and just for the record?

My chosen carry gun is most often a Smith & Wesson Centennial J frame in .38 Special.

5 rounds.

Quote
And, again, don't listen to the bleating 'tard kool-ade drinking douchenozzles who thing the size of your junk is directly reflected by the cartridge you choose for personal defense

So you are saying that its actually an inverse proportional relationship?  ???

Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 23, 2016, 06:37:16 PM
I would agree with shooting the guns if you can.  IMO, there can be a big difference between how a gun feels in the store versus how it feels shooting.  If you are only going to buy one, make sure it is the right one.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: T.O.M. on May 23, 2016, 07:13:14 PM
I've talked with several Shield owners.  The 9mm is  the .40 not so much.  I've got a .40, a SIG P239, which is way over on the large end of compact handguns.  The reason it's a .40 and not a 9mm is because that's what my buddy was trading away. 

My opinion, stick with the 9mm.  Common caliber for your working guns makes everything simpler and cheaper.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Hawkmoon on May 23, 2016, 07:38:52 PM
9
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: roo_ster on May 23, 2016, 07:50:50 PM

If I remember correctly, the .45 has a lower capacity (though a higher capacity of awesome). I don't know what the 9mm version carries, but I recall distinctly that the .45 holds 6 in the flush magazine, and 7 in the longer version.


zahc, in my inexpert opinion, you may as well stick with the point-nine-millimeter. You and your wife are both used to it. Having the best (most effective, most accurate) self-defense cartridge is probably more crucial than adding an extra millimeter. This advice is worth the price.

Also:
http://www.handgunsmag.com/shot-show-2016/first-look-federal-hst-9mm-micro/

That 9mm micro loading looks interesting.  Ought to try it in my wife's 3.5" bbl 1911 in 9mm.  Looks like they are trying to move into .38spl heavy bullet territory: 150gr@900fps.

Also, the bullet looks an awful lot like the old Starfire projectile, which was supposedly designed by the same guy who designed hte Hyda-Shok post/hollowpoint.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Hawkmoon on May 23, 2016, 08:08:37 PM
I do. I think Hawkmoon does.

I do, except when I'm carrying an Officers ACP, which has 6-round mags.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: HeroHog on May 23, 2016, 08:26:50 PM
I'm quite happy with my 9s. I currently have 3, S&W Model 59, GLOCK 19 and SUB-2000. Our other carry gun is dad's Model 10-8 S&W .38 SPL. We have a .44 but it's not a practical carry gun...

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fherohog.com%2Fimages%2Fguns%2F44Navy.jpg&hash=7c5ae2c53c5180c401c6390dcf22e4fa645f2fb1)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 23, 2016, 09:07:28 PM
So you are saying that its actually an inverse proportional relationship?  ???



Nah.

I'm saying you're a douchenozzle.

:rofl:
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 23, 2016, 09:13:00 PM
A few weeks ago I got my first .40, a Smith 410. Couldn't pass it up -- $300 and change OTD, and it's in very lightly used shape.

Still haven't found time to shoot it. I've shot other .40s -- HK, Glock, a High Power (that was subsequently recalled because of a very bad tendency for some of the first ones to, well, explode), an early HK UPS, and a few shots out of an HK P7M10. They didn't make many of those, and they were not particularly pleasant to fire.

I've never been all that enamored with the concept of the .40, and probably still wouldn't have one were it not for the good price on the Smith I found, but I don't discount its effectiveness or power.

I did have for a number of years a 10mm CZ, but I ended up selling it to a friend. I just wasn't all that hep on it, either.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Andiron on May 23, 2016, 09:33:47 PM


Good luck, but the physics of the situation darned near dictate the results.

I'll just leave this here...
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fitz on May 23, 2016, 10:08:41 PM
all guns are beautiful

all guns matter

#AllGunsMatter
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Scout26 on May 23, 2016, 11:22:41 PM
Welcome to APS !!!

It has been 859 0 Days since our last at fault Caliber War.


Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 24, 2016, 07:21:54 AM
9 vs .40 vs .45

Caliber doesn't matter. Keep shooting until you get the results you want.

For example: https://www.policeone.com/police-heroes/articles/6199620-Why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: wmenorr67 on May 24, 2016, 07:30:02 AM
I have the S&W M&P .40C.  Love it....but that is my preference.  I also love my Ruger P series 45.

Looking at my next pistol purchase to be a S&W Bodyguard.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: T.O.M. on May 24, 2016, 08:54:08 AM
9 vs .40 vs .45

Caliber doesn't matter. Keep shooting until you get the results you want.

For example: https://www.policeone.com/police-heroes/articles/6199620-Why-one-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/

That's a hell of a story, which kind of kills the caliber debate.  Like you said, shoot until the threat ends.  Period.

(When I went on search warrants as a prosecutor, I carried a Glock 19, a pair of spare Glock 19 mags, and a pair of Glock 17 mags with the +2 adapters.  I never wanted to be holding a pistol with the slide locked back praying for a miracle.) 
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fitz on May 24, 2016, 09:00:03 AM
"Basic load" for an AR pattern rifle is 7 full mags.

In combat, I carried 13 on my body, and many more in a small bag in the truck.

And the amount of HE-DP I carried? Whew!
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Grebnaws on May 24, 2016, 09:28:32 AM
Recoil is definitely not an issue with my xds in 9mm. Girlfriend approved. It is very soft shooter for a subcompact 9mm. I compared it to a walther pps, kahr cm9, ruger lc9, and s&w shield. It feels considerably smaller than a double stack pistol under the belt and has a bit more heft than the S&W shield and quite a bit more than the pf9. They are much less expensive than they used to be and I would buy another if anything happened to this one. If you're considering a 9mm you should try one of these out, I have as much confidence in federal hst 147gr +p as anything else.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 24, 2016, 10:03:40 AM
Nah.

I'm saying you're a douchenozzle.

:rofl:

Coming from the King of the Douchnozzles, I'll take that as a compliment.  :-*
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 24, 2016, 12:31:46 PM
Some guy did a statistical analysis of police and civilian shootings.  Injuries due to 9mm, 40, and 45 were an order of magnitude worse than injuries with smaller calibers.  They saw no effective difference between the 3 main calibers as far as deaths/serious injury/stopping the attacker. 

I don't remember who did the study.  I heard an interview on GunTalk.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 24, 2016, 12:37:32 PM
Coming from the King of the Douchnozzles, I'll take that as a compliment.  :-*


Yeah, just another poser jealous of my nobility....
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lee n. field on May 24, 2016, 12:51:38 PM
Some guy did a statistical analysis of police and civilian shootings.  Injuries due to 9mm, 40, and 45 were an order of magnitude worse than injuries with smaller calibers.  They saw no effective difference between the 3 main calibers as far as deaths/serious injury/stopping the attacker. 

I don't remember who did the study.  I heard an interview on GunTalk.

I think it might have been Greg Elefitz (sp?).  IIRC, the big divide was .380 and up, being markedly more effective than anything smaller.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 24, 2016, 01:32:06 PM
Some guy did a statistical analysis of police and civilian shootings.  Injuries due to 9mm, 40, and 45 were an order of magnitude worse than injuries with smaller calibers.  They saw no effective difference between the 3 main calibers as far as deaths/serious injury/stopping the attacker. 

I don't remember who did the study.
  I heard an interview on GunTalk.

Obviously, some guy with lace on his panties.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 24, 2016, 01:48:35 PM
I'm surprised at you people.

Don't know know that shooting someone with a 9mm actually HEALS them?

A .40 might hurt them a little...

But a .45?

A .45 hits with such force that it sucks all of the body's contents, organs, fat, bones, etc., out and just leaves a skin bag lying on the ground.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: wmenorr67 on May 24, 2016, 01:49:52 PM
I'm surprised at you people.

Don't know know that shooting someone with a 9mm actually HEALS them?

A .40 might hurt them a little...

But a .45?

A .45 hits with such force that it sucks all of the body's contents, organs, fat, bones, etc., out and just leaves a skin bag lying on the ground.

No, no, no, that is a 50.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 24, 2016, 01:50:32 PM
Some guy did a statistical analysis of police and civilian shootings.  Injuries due to 9mm, 40, and 45 were an order of magnitude worse than injuries with smaller calibers.  They saw no effective difference between the 3 main calibers as far as deaths/serious injury/stopping the attacker. 

I don't remember who did the study.  I heard an interview on GunTalk.

Looking at them objectively, there is maybe 100-150 ft-lbs energy  difference between all of them? Far less difference between them then the difference if one were to step up to a .44 magnum or a rifle cartridge.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: brimic on May 24, 2016, 01:51:43 PM
No, no, no, that is a 50.


A deagle .50, or a Browning .50?
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Angel Eyes on May 24, 2016, 01:56:09 PM
Just get one of these and be done with it:

(https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/18HbJ.v5LcK2XF5vJ5.mQQ--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9NDY2O3E9OTU7dz0zNjY-/http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f181/59729d1245755790-worlds-largest-most-powerful-handgun-pfeifer-zeliska-600-nitro-express-revolver-01.jpg)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 24, 2016, 02:17:57 PM
No, no, no, that is a 50.

The .45 is what the overcompensating .50 WANTS to be.

But never can be.

Weep on, half-incher...
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: wmenorr67 on May 24, 2016, 03:11:31 PM

A deagle .50, or a Browning .50?

Both of them can take down an airliner at cruising altitude.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lupinus on May 24, 2016, 03:54:42 PM
I'm surprised at you people.

Don't know know that shooting someone with a 9mm actually HEALS them?

A .40 might hurt them a little...

But a .45?

A .45 hits with such force that it sucks all of the body's contents, organs, fat, bones, etc., out and just leaves a skin bag lying on the ground.
Yeah well 10mm practically vaporizes the bastards, leaving just enough behind to be a satisfying acknowledgment you got him.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: T.O.M. on May 24, 2016, 03:56:38 PM
Some guy did a statistical analysis of police and civilian shootings.  Injuries due to 9mm, 40, and 45 were an order of magnitude worse than injuries with smaller calibers.  They saw no effective difference between the 3 main calibers as far as deaths/serious injury/stopping the attacker. 

I don't remember who did the study.  I heard an interview on GunTalk.

Are you talking about the study done by Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow back in the 80s/90s?  God, I remember reading so much about that, and the arguments back about their lack of scientific methodology.  Funny, though, that their "results" indicated that faster, bigger, and hollow point bullets led to more stopping power.  Not many people arguing against that.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lee n. field on May 24, 2016, 05:36:48 PM
.357 Sig


(Now there's a cartridge I don't much see the point of.)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on May 24, 2016, 05:48:36 PM
.357 Sig


(Now there's a cartridge I don't much see the point of.)

A solution to a problem that never existed.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: bedlamite on May 24, 2016, 05:52:51 PM
.357 Sig


(Now there's a cartridge I don't much see the point of.)

While I don't have one and wouldn't get one, If that's what someone wants I have no problems with it. 'because I want one' is a valid reason IMO. Honestly, I have entertained the thought of a 9x25 Dillon in the past.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Scout26 on May 24, 2016, 06:32:04 PM
Isn't Tam is the middle of a 2000 round test of .357 Sig (or maybe she's finished it.  I've lost track.)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on May 24, 2016, 06:56:57 PM
Isn't Tam is the middle of a 2000 round test of .357 Sig (or maybe she's finished it.  I've lost track.)

I think she finished that one and went on to abusing something else.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on May 24, 2016, 07:02:28 PM
While I don't have one and wouldn't get one, If that's what someone wants I have no problems with it. 'because I want one' is a valid reason IMO. Honestly, I have entertained the thought of a 9x25 Dillon in the past.

Dad went through a few. He sold the last one years ago. He had me shoot it first, to see if I really wanted to keep it.

I declined. Too me, it's a very "meh" caliber. I figure it to be in that same middle ground as the .40 S&W, solution to imaginary problem of wanting equivalent power to a larger round with smaller recoil, but less enjoyable to shoot. Obviously, there are some fans of it still out there. They are welcome to it.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Angel Eyes on May 24, 2016, 07:03:18 PM
Yeah well 10mm practically vaporizes the bastards, leaving just enough behind to be a satisfying acknowledgment you got him.

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FWbVeVVU.jpg&hash=2d0f85d899006d17ff230ccb8c0a0f73c2111a6c)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: HeroHog on May 24, 2016, 07:35:10 PM
I like my 9mm in 9x29mm format (9mm Winchester Magnum!) Damn, I miss that (those) guns...  :facepalm:

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fherohog.com%2Fimages%2Fguns%2FCompare9mms.jpg&hash=fdfcfd04f17df696bd8c1e44bf08feba2b8665b7)
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fherohog.com%2Fimages%2Fguns%2F9mmWinMagL.jpg&hash=3fb1f1cef1ebca09bc700afbf52aa737f14f4d13)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: tokugawa on May 24, 2016, 07:36:35 PM
GUNZ?   We don't need no stinkin gunz.


 http://www.blackfive.net/main/2011/01/the-fight-one-lone-retired-gurkha-against-a-train-with-40-bandits.html
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 24, 2016, 08:29:23 PM
Are you talking about the study done by Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow back in the 80s/90s?  God, I remember reading so much about that, and the arguments back about their lack of scientific methodology.  Funny, though, that their "results" indicated that faster, bigger, and hollow point bullets led to more stopping power.  Not many people arguing against that.
I thought it was something just in the last 10 years.  I don't know that it was necessarily scientific, just looked at caliber and basic effects.  I will have to look for it at some point.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lee n. field on May 24, 2016, 09:45:03 PM
Is this it:  An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power (http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power)?

(Dang.   Fixed the pseudo-html.)
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 24, 2016, 11:14:29 PM
Is this it:  ?
That sounds a lot like what I remember.  Different conclusions than I remember.

Quote
No matter what gun you are shooting, you can only expect a little more than half of the people you shoot to be immediately incapacitated by your first hit.
Quote
Take a look at the data. I hope it helps you decide what weapon to carry. No matter which gun you choose, pick one that is reliable and train with it until you can get fast accurate hits. Nothing beyond that really matters!
Pick a defensive gun and caliber that you can shoot quickly and accurately.  Pretty common advice actually.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: K Frame on May 25, 2016, 07:33:20 AM
I actually prefer my 9x32R.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: HeroHog on May 25, 2016, 09:45:24 AM
I actually prefer my 9x32R.

Wow, had to Google that one!
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Balog on May 25, 2016, 04:12:28 PM
All handgun calibers suck. Everything from 9mm up is essentially the same. Choose the platform you shoot well, the caliber isn't relevant.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Northwoods on May 25, 2016, 11:13:54 PM
Proof that the community standards are slipping.  In true gun fora fashion I reply that the only correct choices are 10mm or .45 Super.

FTFY.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: roo_ster on May 26, 2016, 12:41:52 PM
Seriously considering getting a heavy recoil spring and heavt fp spring for my all steel  5" bbl 1911 since it came back from S&W, just to shoot .45Super. 

That would be for jaunts in the woods to shoot this or somehting like htis:
https://www.underwoodammo.com/45-super-255-grain-hard-cast-flat-nose/
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: HeroHog on May 26, 2016, 12:48:30 PM
Proof that the community standards are slipping.  In true gun fora fashion I reply that the only correct choices are 10mm or .45 WinMag.
FIFY

https://youtu.be/Q-fALF7lfIU

Ordered one for a friend when I was an FFL. Fun gun to shoot! Stung a bit but nice trigger and accurate.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: zahc on May 26, 2016, 07:10:03 PM
So, I have resolved to get another 9mm. The only remaining question is XDS vs. Shield, or some 3rd option I don't know about.

I actually went to buy a XD 9 compact when I got my M&P, but I walked out with the M&P instead. It just seemed more rounded/refined, and it was on sale. The XDs have come a few revisions since 2007 though, and I always liked the grip safety and the trigger widget vs. the M&P hinged trigger which I just think is stupid.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: AJ Dual on May 26, 2016, 07:52:01 PM
I don't know why, but in full size pistols, I actually respond better with the snappier recoil of .40, than I do in the same pistol in 9mm or .45. My carry HK USP is in .40, and I have a USP in 9 to go with my Gemtech 9mm multimount suppressor, and I've shot a USP 45 of a club member for a few magazines, and for whatever reason, I shoot the USP .40 better than either the 9 or the .45. Slide velocity and recoil impulse seems to have a lot to do with the "sweet spot" for me, as much as grip and trigger ergonomics and the sight picture.

I think I make use of the quicker/sharper recoil impulse to index back on target better/quicker or something. Other than that, I do agree the really good modern bullet designs have eliminated a lot/most of the "caliber debate". At least when everything else is equal.

In short/compact pistols, it might be different. But after the capacity argument, I think "what works for you" overrides everything else. Because you have to hit what your aiming at of course, for the terminal ballistic argument to even come into play.

10mm, .357Sig, .460/.45super in autos, or .357 or .44 mag from a revolver is still going to be in a higher class. Unless you're shooting the .357 from a snubbie and losing most of it's potential from short barrel and cylinder gap, and arguably not pushing it much harder than a .38 +p.

Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MillCreek on May 26, 2016, 08:25:05 PM
Oh, and just for the record?

My chosen carry gun is most often a Smith & Wesson Centennial J frame in .38 Special.

5 rounds.

Ditto here, with the exception of that it is either a Ruger LCR, a Taurus 850, or a Ruger SP-101. All loaded with the Speer Gold Dot short barrel .38+p 135 grain JHP.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 26, 2016, 08:32:00 PM
So, I have resolved to get another 9mm. The only remaining question is XDS vs. Shield, or some 3rd option I don't know about.

I actually went to buy a XD 9 compact when I got my M&P, but I walked out with the M&P instead. It just seemed more rounded/refined, and it was on sale. The XDs have come a few revisions since 2007 though, and I always liked the grip safety and the trigger widget vs. the M&P hinged trigger which I just think is stupid.

Get the Shield in 9mm.  The Shield is more popular and therefore has more accessory options for it.  Also, it is made in America, which makes getting parts easier.  Finally, Apex Tactical, makes triggers and parts for it.  And Apex doesn't waste their time on sub-par guns.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: MechAg94 on May 26, 2016, 08:40:19 PM
FIFY

https://youtu.be/Q-fALF7lfIU

Ordered one for a friend when I was an FFL. Fun gun to shoot! Stung a bit but nice trigger and accurate.
Looks like a 1911 slide on a CZ frame. 

The only AMT gun I have is a .22 Lightning Rugger Mark II copy.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: tokugawa on May 26, 2016, 09:41:52 PM
The XDS has a nice mag release- hard to push, and ambi.   
 I am going to insert a little rant here--
  People go on and on about drop free magazines and easy release mags , but they are are putting the cart before the horse. You want to live with  a stiff mag release after the mag is empty, or do you want to have one shot only, because the mag popped free inadvertently? This is a flaw the G19 has- I have had multiple instances of the mag release being activated by routine activity, and finding out the mag was loose.  Also a reason I think all the hoo doo about "drop free" mags is idiotic for day to day carry. So what if you lose a tenth of a second on a play course- in real life, if that mag release activates, and the mag falls away, it is bad. Much better to have that mag still in the well, but needing to be latched back in. 
 
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: HeroHog on May 26, 2016, 09:54:08 PM
The AMT WinMags we owned were flawless in their operation. Yeah, odd as hell calibers ya had to hand load but great guns to attract friends and have fun with. I open carried mine in a horizontal rig shoulder holster a time or two when I was in VA with the VCDL at gatherings just for giggles. I was in my wheelchair so the muzzle wasn't in people's faces/chests but I guess groins were at risk...
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: seeker_two on May 26, 2016, 10:12:24 PM
I like shooting .40S&W in full-size guns, especially 1911's. But I don't like them in CC-sized guns....that is where 9mm shines.  My two CC pistols are a Ruger LC9 and a S&W SD9VE, but I carry the LC9 most. The thing I discovered from carrying is that I don't like double-stack guns for CCW. It just adds too much weight and throws off the balance in a holster. Single-stack pistols don't have that issue.

I may add a Kahr CW45 or CT45 to the rotation in the future. Pistol bullets are limited in their velocity, especially from shorter barrels. If I can't have velocity, I'll settle for mass.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 26, 2016, 10:15:29 PM
The XDS has a nice mag release- hard to push, and ambi.   
 I am going to insert a little rant here--
  People go on and on about drop free magazines and easy release mags , but they are are putting the cart before the horse. You want to live with  a stiff mag release after the mag is empty, or do you want to have one shot only, because the mag popped free inadvertently? This is a flaw the G19 has- I have had multiple instances of the mag release being activated by routine activity, and finding out the mag was loose.  Also a reason I think all the hoo doo about "drop free" mags is idiotic for day to day carry. So what if you lose a tenth of a second on a play course- in real life, if that mag release activates, and the mag falls away, it is bad. Much better to have that mag still in the well, but needing to be latched back in. 
 

Why not have both?  A properly made pistol works that way.

I have never had a problem with mag releases that are too loose, but I don't own any Glocks either.  That sounds like a defective gun and/or an easy fix.

If you are serious about selecting a handgun for defensive uses consider how well you can operate it as a handgun as opposed to a handsgun.  Can you work it one handed?  Would you want a drop-free mag in that case?

Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 26, 2016, 10:17:46 PM
If I can't have velocity, I'll settle for mass.

Which is easier to accelerate in a short barrel, a puny 9mm or a massive .45? 

FWIW, 9mm has more short-barrel loads than does .45Auto.
Title: Re: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: seeker_two on May 26, 2016, 10:57:28 PM
Which is easier to accelerate in a short barrel, a puny 9mm or a massive .45? 

FWIW, 9mm has more short-barrel loads than does .45Auto.
True.....but, something that takes a lot of effort to get moving also takes a lot of effort to stop moving.....or, at least, that's what the guy with the apple told me.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: zahc on May 26, 2016, 10:59:32 PM
The XDS has a nice mag release- hard to push, and ambi.   

Good point. I sort of like being able to drop the mag with my index finger, and my son is a lefty.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Northwoods on May 26, 2016, 11:09:14 PM
True.....but, something that takes a lot of effort to get moving also takes a lot of effort to stop moving.....or, at least, that's what the guy with the apple told me.

William Tell or Steve Jobs?

[yes, I know]
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: tokugawa on May 27, 2016, 12:06:31 AM
Why not have both?  A properly made pistol works that way.

I have never had a problem with mag releases that are too loose, but I don't own any Glocks either.  That sounds like a defective gun and/or an easy fix.

If you are serious about selecting a handgun for defensive uses consider how well you can operate it as a handgun as opposed to a handsgun.  Can you work it one handed?  Would you want a drop-free mag in that case?



 The problem with the G is that the release is plastic on plastic- the coefficient of friction is very low. 
 I do not trust the mag to not release, especially if there were an altercation where the gun is being struggled with. Ride the thumb over the release and the mag is going to get dropped. I would rather have a mag I have to rip out with my teeth than a mag that drops out inadvertently.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: RoadKingLarry on May 27, 2016, 12:09:24 AM
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi23.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb398%2FFLHRI-OK%2F1911.jpg&hash=d2db0828631d1293985add1b0b9376987154e2e3) (http://s23.photobucket.com/user/FLHRI-OK/media/1911.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 27, 2016, 07:46:50 AM
True.....but, something that takes a lot of effort to get moving also takes a lot of effort to stop moving.....or, at least, that's what the guy with the apple told me.

All correct, but the HP bullet needs the velocity to expand correctly.  I would give up the velocity in favor of mass to gain penetration only if I knew that expansion and penetration is marginal in the other loads.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lee n. field on May 27, 2016, 08:18:12 AM
The XDS has a nice mag release- hard to push, and ambi.   
 I am going to insert a little rant here--
  People go on and on about drop free magazines and easy release mags , but they are are putting the cart before the horse. You want to live with  a stiff mag release after the mag is empty, or do you want to have one shot only, because the mag popped free inadvertently? This is a flaw the G19 has- I have had multiple instances of the mag release being activated by routine activity, and finding out the mag was loose.  Also a reason I think all the hoo doo about "drop free" mags is idiotic for day to day carry. So what if you lose a tenth of a second on a play course- in real life, if that mag release activates, and the mag falls away, it is bad. Much better to have that mag still in the well, but needing to be latched back in. 
 

My XDS magazines I pretty much have to yank out of the magwell.  Big hands, short grip.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: lee n. field on May 27, 2016, 08:20:37 AM
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi23.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb398%2FFLHRI-OK%2F1911.jpg&hash=d2db0828631d1293985add1b0b9376987154e2e3) (http://s23.photobucket.com/user/FLHRI-OK/media/1911.jpg.html)

7 rounds of 230 grain .45 is about the same mass downrange as 15 rounds of 115 9mm.   Funny how the math works.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: roo_ster on May 27, 2016, 09:29:37 AM
Which is easier to accelerate in a short barrel, a puny 9mm or a massive .45? 

FWIW, 9mm has more short-barrel loads than does .45Auto.

All correct, but the HP bullet needs the velocity to expand correctly.  I would give up the velocity in favor of mass to gain penetration only if I knew that expansion and penetration is marginal in the other loads.

.45Auto needs only one short bbl load: hardball.  Or most any .45ACP HP. 

Expand?  Not expand?  Doesn't matter, I'm the guy with .45ACP.

Yes, that ^^^ is a bit flip, but has a kernel of truth.  I generally don't expect any load coming from a snubby or short bbl semi-auto to expand.  So I don't get too excited by JHP loadings for them and am OK with FMJ, WC, and SWC stoking my itty bitty handguns .  If I want reliable JHP expansion, I move up to a 4"+ bbl.
Title: Re: 9 or 40
Post by: Fly320s on May 27, 2016, 10:32:32 AM
Good.  You know the why's and how's.