9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Rifles, Machineguns, Mortars, etc...
Post Reply
KW Driver
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 6570
Joined: December 8th, 2004, 2:20 pm

9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Post by KW Driver »

so I went and test drove a Glock 23 and an XD40 today. the full size 1911 is a tad big for a carry. and 4 more rounds in the first mag, then 8/10+ in the second doesn't really strike me as a bad thing.

anyway, I really liked the 23, didn't like the XD nearly as much, and the XD (40 & 45) seems to print about as bad as the 1911, so what's the point?

I was shooting next to a King Co. deputy who was practicing for his qual, and he let me shoot his Glock 22 (his personal) as well. he said they were required to carry 9mm because they didn't over penetrate as badly as the 40. that just seems ass backwards to me.

so, I did a quick look, but anyone smart on 'em want to chime in or put up a good link for comparative ballistics between the 9/40/45? I feel good about the 9 and 45, but like I said, I thought the 40 bridged the two others on velocity, etc.

I'm not carrying or interested in buying a 9mm. so I don't know right now without seeing good numbers on a 40.

not sure about a 21/sf either, guess I need to get my mitts on one... 30 is too small.
A Co & HHC 3/75 '93-'98.
RS 10-94.


200 meters of green shit next to a river in the desert does not qualify as a "Crescent of Fertility" -me

"The meek shall inherit the earth, one meter wide and two meters long" -Lazarus Long

DixieRat
Ranger
Posts: 391
Joined: October 6th, 2004, 7:18 am
Location: Somewhere between horny and senile

Post by DixieRat »

http://stevespages.com/page8f.htm

The guy on this site has done some comparison testing. Kind of primitive, but I think it gives some reasonably accurate comparisons.
B/1/319th PFA, 82nd Abn Div 6/72-2/75
C/2/75 3/75-4/76
1/84th FA, 9th ID 5/76-8/77
TUSLOG Det 67 9/77-10/78

Tabless Bitch

KW Driver
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 6570
Joined: December 8th, 2004, 2:20 pm

Post by KW Driver »

thanks brother.
A Co & HHC 3/75 '93-'98.
RS 10-94.


200 meters of green shit next to a river in the desert does not qualify as a "Crescent of Fertility" -me

"The meek shall inherit the earth, one meter wide and two meters long" -Lazarus Long

Bandito
Ranger
Posts: 3763
Joined: November 17th, 2003, 8:23 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Post by Bandito »

KW Driver wrote:he said they were required to carry 9mm because they didn't over penetrate as badly as the 40. that just seems ass backwards to me.
Wow, that goes against any official ballistics report I have ever seen. I have the FBI's and reports from a whole bunch of independent reports.

We dropped the 9mm SMG (MP 5) due to the poor ballistics of the 9mm, especially for CQB, that stuff would rip through all kinds of materials.

.223 was found to be much better for CQB. .40 was found to be a superior round other than the 10mm for stopping power for those who wanted high capacity handguns.
Bco 2/75 1992-1996
RS Class 8-93
Owner and Director of Operations, IRONCLAD Concepts and Solutions
https://www.ironclad-cs.com

User avatar
GoldCoast
Ranger/Matchmaker
Posts: 1555
Joined: September 24th, 2006, 6:18 am
Location: Roll Tide

Post by GoldCoast »

DixieRat wrote:http://stevespages.com/page8f.htm

The guy on this site has done some comparison testing. Kind of primitive, but I think it gives some reasonably accurate comparisons.
That's really interesting.
HHC 2/75 (1998- 2000)

Duty a mountain; Death a feather.

One of these days I'll start off slow...

User avatar
McD
Ranger
Posts: 5242
Joined: February 16th, 2004, 3:52 pm
Location: OffGrid in NY
Contact:

Post by McD »

viewtopic.php?t=36575&start=0

Not very scientific but interesting.
C 2/75, 1st Plt, Wpns Sqd 76-79
RS 3-78
Mattoon's Goons

A 'Veteran' -- whether active duty, discharged, retired, or reserve --
is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to 'The United States of America,' for an amount of 'up to, and including his life.'

CloakAndDagger
US Army Veteran
Posts: 377
Joined: July 19th, 2004, 8:37 pm
Location: too close to Seattle

Post by CloakAndDagger »

The Box o' Truth is a great amature ammo testing site. While the guy that runs the site doesn't use the most high tech methods for testing, he does a better job than many about keeping tests consistent and testing a variety of non-lab type conditions. Make sure you check the back archives too.
The Box O' Truth

User avatar
Trigger
Tadpole
Posts: 105
Joined: August 28th, 2008, 5:41 pm
Location: USA

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Post by Trigger »

When loaded with quality JHP bullets, 9x19, .40, and .45 have very similar capabilities in regards to stopping people.

In regards to penetration, that is entirely dependent on the bullet and the load. FMJ and CMJ bullets will penetrate more than JHP, SWC, and RN bullets. Generally, velocity holds more influence than mass on penetration; allowing with all things equal (bullet type) the 9mm to penetrate more. For the purposes of use on people, anything over 15'' of penetration in ballistic gelatin is a waste of kinetic energy, thus why JHP bullets exist. JHP's allow you a better transfer of KE, along with a larger permanent wound channel, to the target.

As far as that Officer's department's reasoning...they're full of crap. My defensive, carry, and competition weapons are all 9mm and I feel very comfortable with it. .40 and .45ACP are good choices as well, although you are compromising on capacity with the .45ACP.

9mm is more capable than most people give it. The military is largely responsible for this with our use of FMJ ammunition, which is a terrible match for the 9mm cartridge in regards to stopping a person.

It all boils down to "you do your part, it will do its" with any service caliber handgun.
Last edited by Trigger on January 3rd, 2009, 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"A golf course is the willful and deliberate misuse of a perfectly good rifle range." - Lt. Col. Jeff Cooper (ret).

User avatar
abnhawk
Ranger
Posts: 430
Joined: February 2nd, 2008, 9:58 pm
Location: N. GA

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Post by abnhawk »

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/t ... 8;t=000964" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DocGKR is Dr Gary Roberts, and he has been involved in the scientific research of terminal performance for many years. I can't vouch for the man personally, but his frequent posts on the Tactical Forums site are generally backed by testing or reviews of real-world performance.

His supposed views, as it pertains to this conversation, is that the performance of 9/40/45 rounds is close enough that the shooter should choose whatever quality platform he can perform the best with, and buy lots of quality ammo to practice with.
C 3/75 89 -91
RLTW!

User avatar
Earthpig
Ranger
Posts: 14664
Joined: March 8th, 2003, 1:53 pm
Location: Already here. Where are you?
Contact:

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Post by Earthpig »

I think the whole 9mm vs. .45ACP argument is about as old as granite. You'll find very vocal arguments on either side.It all boils down to personal preference. Personally, I prefer the knockdown power of the .45. If you still want knockdown, but don't want to pay .45 prices, go for the .40 cal. The 9mm has so much velocity that it usually rips right through walls, bodies, whatever and hits all kinds of things tht weren't intended to be targets.

RLTW
EP
Always remember: BROS BEFORE HOES.

Post Reply

Return to “Weapons of War”