FBI moving to 9mm

[ghosthunter]

Interesting read.


http://loadoutroom.com/12077/fbi-going-9mm-comes-science/

[Band]

Thanks for posting that article.  It highlights the reasons I have determined to get a 9 rather than a .40.  Now I just need to settle on a particular model.  No hurry, I guess, since I've already been studying what to get for the past 2 years or so.

[hillbilli]

every weapon is a tradeoff, and we make compromises, if not we would carry 12 guage sidearms with 100 round magazines.. and we accept that, but in any debate or discussion about what is better or best, as soon as what you say or print is clearly BS, no one will take you serious, and will discount whatever you say.. and most of us have a functioning BS meter. That said the problems with the 9mm article is when he says that 9mm has "all of the terminal performance" of the bigger calibers, or that "select projectiles outperform the bigger calibers". We are using the same bullet designs for all the calibers, and the mechanism of expansion with modern hollowpoints is well known, with gel and other tests available in a thousand youtube videos. The same bullet designs, at the same velocity (9 and .40 are the same velocity; heavy bullet at 950 same as 185gr in .45, light bullet at 1250)- results in the bullet that has 20% greater frontal surface area (40% greater for .45) having a wider expanded bullet, and thus a wider permanent cavity. There is no magic formula that makes an HST or whatever design that will open to x2 original diameter only work in 9, and not .40 or .45. Yes Hollowpoints vary in individual performance- and as they typically vary from 1.5-x2 diameter a 9 that opens to x2 will be wider than a .45 that only opens to 1.5x.. but the average with the same bullet design will always favor the bigger caliber. To say it does not is to ignore the numbers and cherry pick your data to make it say what you want. An honest answer would be to say some individual bullets will expand more than some .40 or .45 bullets, or to say that the newer 9mm rounds have MOST of the performance of the bigger service rounds.
   He is absolutely correct when he says the 9 has less recoil, more mag capacity, less ammo cost. Yes with a central nervous system hit a 9mm is 100% as effective as a .40 or a .45. As he states at service pistol velocities "temporary cavity" does not matter, it is about permanent cavity- what you actually cut or break. Tissue is very elastic, and I don't doubt what he says about medical professionals not being able to determine between the wound tracks in flesh, as the difference between a 9 and a .45 that have perfect x2 expansion is the difference between .72 and .90 diameter- but I'm convinced he could tell the difference between a narrowly missed artery nerve or organ- and one that is nicked by the wider bullet. That being said I do own 9mm, and do carry it- but the reality is frontal surface area IS a factor- and 9 ball has 60% of the .45, and in equally expanded hollowpoints it is still about 62% of the .45. How much that matters is debatable.     
         

[10thmountainarcher]

I like me some 9mm, I used to be a big 45 guy but the truth of the matter is I like carrying 3 mags and having 52 rounds rather than 40 if I carried a 21. Nothing will replace getting good hits on target.

[jasnt]

every weapon is a tradeoff, and we make compromises, if not we would carry 12 guage sidearms with 100 round magazines.. and we accept that, but in any debate or discussion about what is better or best, as soon as what you say or print is clearly BS, no one will take you serious, and will discount whatever you say.. and most of us have a functioning BS meter. That said the problems with the 9mm article is when he says that 9mm has "all of the terminal performance" of the bigger calibers, or that "select projectiles outperform the bigger calibers". We are using the same bullet designs for all the calibers, and the mechanism of expansion with modern hollowpoints is well known, with gel and other tests available in a thousand youtube videos. The same bullet designs, at the same velocity (9 and .40 are the same velocity; heavy bullet at 950 same as 185gr in .45, light bullet at 1250)- results in the bullet that has 20% greater frontal surface area (40% greater for .45) having a wider expanded bullet, and thus a wider permanent cavity. There is no magic formula that makes an HST or whatever design that will open to x2 original diameter only work in 9, and not .40 or .45. Yes Hollowpoints vary in individual performance- and as they typically vary from 1.5-x2 diameter a 9 that opens to x2 will be wider than a .45 that only opens to 1.5x.. but the average with the same bullet design will always favor the bigger caliber. To say it does not is to ignore the numbers and cherry pick your data to make it say what you want. An honest answer would be to say some individual bullets will expand more than some .40 or .45 bullets, or to say that the newer 9mm rounds have MOST of the performance of the bigger service rounds.
   He is absolutely correct when he says the 9 has less recoil, more mag capacity, less ammo cost. Yes with a central nervous system hit a 9mm is 100% as effective as a .40 or a .45. As he states at service pistol velocities "temporary cavity" does not matter, it is about permanent cavity- what you actually cut or break. Tissue is very elastic, and I don't doubt what he says about medical professionals not being able to determine between the wound tracks in flesh, as the difference between a 9 and a .45 that have perfect x2 expansion is the difference between .72 and .90 diameter- but I'm convinced he could tell the difference between a narrowly missed artery nerve or organ- and one that is nicked by the wider bullet. That being said I do own 9mm, and do carry it- but the reality is frontal surface area IS a factor- and 9 ball has 60% of the .45, and in equally expanded hollowpoints it is still about 62% of the .45. How much that matters is debatable.     
         

. I think the main point was. All Leo in the test shot better with 9mm. If you can't hit your target it wont matter what your shooting.  Imo this is what the whole point was.  Most Leo are not good shooters,many don't even practice.    there is no question that a .45 can cause a larger wound Chanel, even with no expansion it is still larger. Blood exiting the body is not even on the list of importance when it comes to Leo choosing a bullet. Internal damage and deep penetration are. They don't need to track there target. Just need the threat to stop.

[pd]

every weapon is a tradeoff, and we make compromises, if not we would carry 12 guage sidearms with 100 round magazines.. and we accept that, but in any debate or discussion about what is better or best, as soon as what you say or print is clearly BS, no one will take you serious, and will discount whatever you say.. and most of us have a functioning BS meter. That said the problems with the 9mm article is when he says that 9mm has "all of the terminal performance" of the bigger calibers, or that "select projectiles outperform the bigger calibers". We are using the same bullet designs for all the calibers, and the mechanism of expansion with modern hollowpoints is well known, with gel and other tests available in a thousand youtube videos. The same bullet designs, at the same velocity (9 and .40 are the same velocity; heavy bullet at 950 same as 185gr in .45, light bullet at 1250)- results in the bullet that has 20% greater frontal surface area (40% greater for .45) having a wider expanded bullet, and thus a wider permanent cavity. There is no magic formula that makes an HST or whatever design that will open to x2 original diameter only work in 9, and not .40 or .45. Yes Hollowpoints vary in individual performance- and as they typically vary from 1.5-x2 diameter a 9 that opens to x2 will be wider than a .45 that only opens to 1.5x.. but the average with the same bullet design will always favor the bigger caliber. To say it does not is to ignore the numbers and cherry pick your data to make it say what you want. An honest answer would be to say some individual bullets will expand more than some .40 or .45 bullets, or to say that the newer 9mm rounds have MOST of the performance of the bigger service rounds.
   He is absolutely correct when he says the 9 has less recoil, more mag capacity, less ammo cost. Yes with a central nervous system hit a 9mm is 100% as effective as a .40 or a .45. As he states at service pistol velocities "temporary cavity" does not matter, it is about permanent cavity- what you actually cut or break. Tissue is very elastic, and I don't doubt what he says about medical professionals not being able to determine between the wound tracks in flesh, as the difference between a 9 and a .45 that have perfect x2 expansion is the difference between .72 and .90 diameter- but I'm convinced he could tell the difference between a narrowly missed artery nerve or organ- and one that is nicked by the wider bullet. That being said I do own 9mm, and do carry it- but the reality is frontal surface area IS a factor- and 9 ball has 60% of the .45, and in equally expanded hollowpoints it is still about 62% of the .45. How much that matters is debatable.     
         

Well said.

I think the greatest point made in this article is the atrocious accuracy exhibited by LEOs during firefights (70% to 80% of fired bullets miss their targets).  Given that .40S&W and .45ACP have noticeably higher recoil (which further decreases follow up accuracy for most shooters), I think the switch to 9mm would make sense.

There is another issue that potentially could affect this discussion.  Those stray bullets have to go somewhere, and might eventually become highlighted in this environment of LEO bashing.  I would hate to see rules of engagement written where LEOs were discouraged from taking any shots if stray bullets would occur--think about crime rates in such a scenario.

[Band]

I'm having a tough time finding a chart comparing muzzle velocity for the various 9mm autos on the market.  Can someone point me in the right direction, please?

[zwickeyman]

Here you go
http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/849728/posts

I had a better one but cant find it

[Band]

I had a better one but cant find it

I'm hoping someone can because those links don't hit the mark for what I'm after.  But I appreciate the effort.

[Bofire]

Band, maybe you could go to factory sites and compare the published specs?? Makes me wonder about all your posts. this aint rocket science. published velocity numbers.??
I like my 9mm Glock cause it is cheap, finish is already ugly, it works, and I am good enough to put 5 or 6 in your face at defensive ranges, and if it gets stolen I do not care.
Now one of my 1911s gets ripped off I am going to cry for a year. or a S&W  revolver . WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Carl

[Band]

Band, maybe you could go to factory sites and compare the published specs??

That's certainly my backup plan if I don't find one location where I can see the full range of offerings side by side.  Just trying to make it a little simpler.

[magnanimous_j]

I think the big take-away from this is that there is no practical hand gun round that is a 1-shot death ray compared to the others. Seems to me that speed and accuracy of the shooter is by far more important than the ballistics of the weapon. It’s easy to see why we make this logical error: When we’re comparing different defensive weapons, we take for granted that we can actually hit the guy.

I personally like the 9MM if for no other reason than I can reliably double-tap my compact and I have to have a full size in .45 to be able to do it.