• Advertisement
Last Online
In order to view the online list you have to be registered and logged in.



Welcome to ArmyRanger.com

Click here to Register

Search

Advertisement

9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

Rifles, Machineguns, Mortars, etc...

9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

PostAuthor: KW Driver » October 31st, 2008, 2:54 pm

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
User avatar
KW Driver
Ranger/Moderator
 
Posts: 6362
Joined: December 8th, 2004, 2:20 pm
Location: R-3803
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

PostAuthor: DixieRat » November 1st, 2008, 7:08 pm

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
User avatar
DixieRat
Ranger
 
Posts: 392
Joined: October 6th, 2004, 7:18 am
Location: Somewhere between horny and senile
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

PostAuthor: KW Driver » November 1st, 2008, 11:05 pm

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
User avatar
KW Driver
Ranger/Moderator
 
Posts: 6362
Joined: December 8th, 2004, 2:20 pm
Location: R-3803
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

PostAuthor: Bandito » November 2nd, 2008, 5:38 pm

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
User avatar
Bandito
Ranger
 
Posts: 3771
Joined: November 17th, 2003, 8:23 pm
Location: Somewhere
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

PostAuthor: GoldCoast » November 2nd, 2008, 5:48 pm

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
GoldCoast
Ranger/Matchmaker
 
Posts: 1558
Joined: September 24th, 2006, 6:18 am
Location: Roll Tide
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

PostAuthor: McD » November 3rd, 2008, 4:16 am

http://www.armyranger.com/bb/viewtopic. ... 75&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.'
User avatar
McD
Ranger
 
Posts: 5212
Joined: February 16th, 2004, 3:52 pm
Location: NY (Not the City)
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

PostAuthor: CloakAndDagger » November 4th, 2008, 1:20 pm

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
CloakAndDagger
US Army Veteran
 
Posts: 375
Joined: July 19th, 2004, 8:37 pm
Location: too close to Seattle
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

PostAuthor: Trigger » January 3rd, 2009, 4:30 pm

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
Trigger
Tadpole
 
Posts: 105
Joined: August 28th, 2008, 5:41 pm
Location: USA
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

PostAuthor: abnhawk » January 3rd, 2009, 5:39 pm

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/t ... 8;t=000964

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
abnhawk
Ranger
 
Posts: 431
Joined: February 2nd, 2008, 9:58 pm
Location: N. GA
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time

Re: 9mm/40 cal/45 ballistics

PostAuthor: Earthpig » January 3rd, 2009, 5:57 pm

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.
User avatar
Earthpig
Ranger
 
Posts: 14788
Joined: March 8th, 2003, 1:53 pm
Location: Already here. Where are you?
Has Milk Boned: 0 time
Been Milk Boned: 0 time


Return to Weapons of War

  • Advertisement

copyright credits
Army Ranger Mojo Inc. 501(c)3 a non-profit organization supporting Army Rangers past, present and future.