The current mantra is that only the tissue directly "crushed" by handgun ammo counts. Since all defensive ammo is tuned to penetrate 12-18" in ballistic gel, per the FBI protocols, a 9mm and a 45ACP will penetrate the same. The only variable between the two is expanded diameter. A 45ACP will expand to a larger diameter than a 9mm. Greg Ellifritz's data seems to indicate you need 3 hits with a 9mm to 2 for the 45ACP to get an attacker to stop. So the only question is how fast can you shoot that many rounds with your handgun.

quote:

Originally posted by Nuclear:
Greg Ellifritz's data seems to indicate you need 3 hits with a 9mm to 2 for the 45ACP to get an attacker to stop. So the only question is how fast can you shoot that many rounds with your handgun.

Now, is there anyone knowledgable in such matters who believes that this can actually be broken down so neatly? Really? With the myriad of variables involved? Not the least of which is the motivation, mental and physical condition of the person being shot? Or if it's a frontal shot versus a cross torso shot, or whether the projectile strikes bone, and on and on?

Yes, ammo is tuned for this penetration range of 12 to 18 inches in ballistic gelatin, but that's not necessarily how bullets behave in actual shootings. The human body is not homogenous.

This sounds like complete bullshit to me. I mean that. Utter bullshit. I don't know who is this person you're talking about, but apparently he's considered to be an authority on the matter, but just this one statement alone from him makes me think he's not as expert as he's considered to be. Nothing- nothing is cut-and-dried when it comes to shooting human beings. A .22 LR fired from a two inch barrel has put down humans more times than you could possibly count, and sometimes, people survive multiple shots from rifles generating twenty times the energy of that little .22. GMAFB

I carried a 45 for almost 20 years before the agency pushed hard towards 9mm 320's.

90% of the time, you won't notice any difference. The other 10% of the time, you'll want the biggest bullet possible. Bigger bullets will always have an advantage when it comes to breaking bone and not deviating from their original trajectory. This reflects momentum and the heavier projectiles always have an advantage.

For instance, if you are shooting straight on into a threat from the front you won't realize much difference. Now, if you have to shoot from the side and the bullet has to break humerus, then ribs, then drive through and hit the heart, the 45 will likely serve you better.

If you have a really dedicated opponent and are relying on strict blood loss for a stop, the bigger hole will pay off. Thicker liquids, like blood, are very sensitive to hole size when it comes to draining quickly.

John, you're one of the very few people I defer to on this topic.

When the manufacturers "improved" the 9mm round, they also improved all the other rounds they produce.

I worked Robbery/Homicide for almost 20 years. Around 200 GSW homicides. Saw the 2nd place winners killed with everything from 22 to 12 guage. Shot placement being the deciding factor. Hit something vital, they were deceased.

That said, bigger is better. We noticed those shot with 38, 9mm, 380 were usually alive at the scene and many were saved by medical intervention.

Those shot with 357, 40, 45 and 12 guage, were usually dead at the scene. We noticed this. And we all carried 45s. And if we expected trouble, we had the 870 or later the 590A1 in hand.

When I can no longer shoot a 45 quickly and accurately I will carry a 9mm. But until then..... Regards 18DAI

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by Nuclear:
Greg Ellifritz's data seems to indicate you need 3 hits with a 9mm to 2 for the 45ACP to get an attacker to stop. So the only question is how fast can you shoot that many rounds with your handgun.

Now, is there anyone knowledgable in such matters who believes that this can actually be broken down so neatly? Really? With the myriad of variables involved? Not the least of which is the motivation, mental and physical condition of the person being shot? Or if it's a frontal shot versus a cross torso shot, or whether the projectile strikes bone, and on and on?

Yes, ammo is tuned for this penetration range of 12 to 18 inches in ballistic gelatin, but that's not necessarily how bullets behave in actual shootings. The human body is not homogenous.

This sounds like complete bullshit to me. I mean that. Utter bullshit. I don't know who is this person you're talking about, but apparently he's considered to be an authority on the matter, but just this one statement alone from him makes me think he's not as expert as he's considered to be. Nothing- nothing is cut-and-dried when it comes to shooting human beings. A .22 LR fired from a two inch barrel has put down humans more times than you could possibly count, and sometimes, people survive multiple shots from rifles generating twenty times the energy of that little .22. GMAFB

I suspect he's referring to this study, which makes for interesting reading: https://www.buckeyefirearms.or...ndgun-stopping-power

But I don't know where he gets the 3 vs. 2 figure. The study did keep track of the "average number or rounds until incapacitation" (and many other things) but the conclusion isn't at all that things are cut and dried -- quite the opposite. The average number of shots to incapacitation was about the same between .22LR and .44 Magnum, with "typical duty calibers" like 9, 40, and 45 taking slightly more than average (for reasons you can imagine that are probably not related to actual effectiveness).

The basic conclusion of the study was that the details of the bullet matter much less than we tend to think. I like a fancy bullet that looks good in gel as much as the next guy, but it's way, way down on the list of important variables.

I was using "average number of rounds to incapacitation" from the linked study. It's listed as 2.45 for 9mm, so 3 rounds in reality, and 2.08 for the 45ACP, so 2 in reality, since we can't shoot partial rounds.

The rest of the stats were a wash between the two calibers, and yeah, all the handgun rounds were close to each other, with the rifle and shotgun rounds being about twice as fatal.

Is the study valid? I don't know, it's just the "latest and greatest" in these handgun stopping studies. Ellfritz is a cop and instructor, not that those things mean much, but his methodology isn't bad.

I'm a fan of larger diameter holes, there is no way they aren't doing more damage and hitting more important structures in the body. I also know from trying to shoot as fast as possible in competition that I can shoot multiple rounds and get hits through a 9mm slightly faster than a 45ACP. But not 50% faster.

I carry a 9mm most of the time, as my larger caliber (heavier) guns bother my back after a few hours.

Back to the OP's question, yeah, I do think there is a practical difference - the size of the hole.

quote:

Originally posted by ajp3jeh:
I carried a 45 for almost 20 years before the agency pushed hard towards 9mm 320's.

90% of the time, you won't notice any difference. The other 10% of the time, you'll want the biggest bullet possible. Bigger bullets will always have an advantage when it comes to breaking bone and not deviating from their original trajectory. This reflects momentum and the heavier projectiles always have an advantage.

For instance, if you are shooting straight on into a threat from the front you won't realize much difference. Now, if you have to shoot from the side and the bullet has to break humerus, then ribs, then drive through and hit the heart, the 45 will likely serve you better.

If you have a really dedicated opponent and are relying on strict blood loss for a stop, the bigger hole will pay off. Thicker liquids, like blood, are very sensitive to hole size when it comes to draining quickly.

How in holy hell have I missed coming across you on this forum for a decade, John? It's funny the first time we met at RM Advanced both shooting God's caliber. It kinda sucked because Tom was still scoring hits only INSIDE the ring! That's still the best class I've ever taken.

John's the man!

I'm retired now but when I worked I started out carrying a revolver in 38special with +P ammo for about 5 years. We then had the option to use a 9mm. I stayed with the revolver because I didn't see a big advantage to carry the 9mm.
When we were allowed to carry other calibers I went with the Sig P220ST and carried it for 25 years.My thought was I would probably only get off a few shots in an encounter, in that case I want them to be the biggest (bullet weight wise)for penetration. I carried 5-8round magazines with 230grain Winchester Ranger ammo, it worked for me.
Now for CC I carry a 45Kahr 230gr Ranger or a CZ Shadow in 9mm with 147gr Ranger.With all the turmoil now I carry the CZ more than the Kahr for the extra ammo capacity.
I always carry a second magazine with any semi-auto I carry because of possible malfunction issues.
I was never that concerned about ammo brands as long as they came from a major manufacturer. I settled on Winchester Ranger because of its past performance and history.Shooting through barriers and there performance was not a big factor to me.
Shooting bullets through clothes and expanding and not over penetrating is a greater concern.

quote:

Originally posted by armored:
Shooting bullets through clothes and expanding and not over penetrating is a greater concern.

Hornady's Critical Duty / Critical Defense bullet design addresses this.

quote:

Hornady's Critical Duty / Critical Defense bullet design addresses this.

I am thought critical duty tended to penetrate deeply/was designed more around penetrating barriers where the defense stuff was more along the lines of faster expansion.

I could be wrong.....it’s happened....maybe once but it has happened. . Seriously though if I’m am incorrect I’d appreciate some insight as I’ve stayed away from critical duty for that reason.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:

quote:

Hornady's Critical Duty / Critical Defense bullet design addresses this.

I am thought critical duty tended to penetrate deeply/was designed more around penetrating barriers where the defense stuff was more along the lines of faster expansion.

I could be wrong.....it’s happened....maybe once but it has happened. . Seriously though if I’m am incorrect I’d appreciate some insight as I’ve stayed away from critical duty for that reason.

https://www.americanrifleman.o...-critical-duty-ammo/

Critical Duty addresses both barrier penetration and reliable penetration with expansion.

There's been one glaring oversight in this thread. The choices are not just 9mm and .45. .40 slips very nicely between the two. A 180 grain .40 splits the difference between the 9mm and .45 in expansion, and gives up much less round count to 9mm than .45.

This is a very viable option.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
There's been one glaring oversight in this thread. The choices are not just 9mm and .45. .40 slips very nicely between the two. A 180 grain .40 splits the difference between the 9mm and .45 in expansion, and gives up much less round count to 9mm than .45.

This is a very viable option.

Yeah but the OP only asked about those two. I already feel bad muddying the waters with my 7.5fk thoughts.

I like .40 too though. But I am kinda Mormon in my caliber religion as I have taken many wiv.....errr calibers.

quote:

Originally posted by cslinger:
I am thought critical duty tended to penetrate deeply/was designed more around penetrating barriers where the defense stuff was more along the lines of faster expansion.

Both Critical Duty and Critical Defense use the FTX bullet design; a non-bonded, high antimony core mechanically locked to a copper jacket, and a polymer plug filling the hollowpoint cavity.

When I was a kid, the old-timers used to fill the the cavity of their hollow point bullets with soap. The idea is the same with the FTX polyer tip- fill the cavity with a unifom, malleable material, which prevents the hollowpoint cavity from plugging up and (theoretically) aids in expansion. If the cavity of a standard hollowpoint is plugged by clothing such as denim, cotton or leather before entering a body, the bullet will not expand and will act as a full metal jacket, non-expanding slug. The soap of the old timers, and the polymer tip of the FTX bullet design prevents material from entering the hollowpoint cavity and prevents clogging. The polymer tip also prevents the hollowpoint cavity from collapsing in on itself when passing through hard materials such as wood and metal, which is something that routinely happens with standard hollowpoint projectiles.

I don't care for Critical Defense 9mm ammo. It doesn't penetrate worth a damn. If Hornady would get away from the 115 grain bullet weight for the Critical Defense 9mm load, and instead make it a 124 grain bullet, they'd be on to something. I think they stay with 115 grains because they are trying to make Critical Defense a light recoiling load.

The 135 grain Critical Duty +P, on the other hand, penetrates quite well. It pounds through automobile glass and still penetrates 14 or 15 inches of ballistic gel after doing so. It performs very well and consistently in all six phases of the FBI testing protocol: bare gel, heavy clothing, auto glass, sheet metal, drywall and plywood.

The 9mm 135 grain +P Critical Duty load was chosen three years ago by the FBI as their official duty load for their G17M and G19M pistols. They could have whatever 9mm ammo they wanted, and this is what they chose. That says a lot.

While it's less likely a civilain will be shooting into (or out of) a vehicle, or shooting through barriers, the chances of this have increased in the past few months, and while not an optimal choice for home defense, this load would be aces out in the world.

My wife was headed to Bimart the other day and I told her to pick up a couple boxes of .45
I didn't specify that I was looking for FMJ and she brought back the last two boxes of .45 they had.
Critical Duty 220gn +P @ $25 for a box of 20.
I have a case of HST and was just going to toss them in with the rest.

Then I looked into them a bit more and with the increasing stupidity around here I ran a couple mags to check function and now have the 220 in the car loaded up with those along with my EDC that's loaded with 147gn HST's.

That Lucky Gunner link was interesting.

I had been buying Gold Dot 124 + P but have started getting some Gold Dot 124 standard pressure for the S&W Shield. This has me thinking I need to try some standard pressure 147 HST.

quote:

Originally posted by DirectDrive:

Here are some test results to take a look at.
https://www.luckygunner.com/la...mmo-ballistic-tests/

My carry is 9mm 124gr HST standard velocity.

Thanks for the link, DirectDrive. For the life of me I couldn't remember the url.

Question for those using Hornady Critical Defense loads...have you experienced any feed ramp issues with the more conical shape on certain gun types (e.g., Kahr or certain older SIGs)? I used to have a SIG P230SL and it just would not play nice with the .380 Hornady. Was wondering about my Kahr PM9 and MK9.

i have been having this debate with myself for weeks now. I am coming off of patrol and moving to a plain clothes assignment soon and I want the BEST I can afford or find..
I am not a 95% guy or its "its almost as good" guy..plus I dont want to be the guy/cop who has to shoot someone 7 times (in the back no less) to put someone down. I want to do that job in 1 to 2 shots, tops..I currently run 357 sig and like the split between capacity and effectiveness ..If you have a fullsize glock with 9mm and a FS glock with 45, same HST load, why would you not take the 45??