Which is the best 9mm pistol?

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NEXT

Yimmy RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 2:12:54 PM

link This shows a rather hit and miss test, showing a 9mm round (and a JHP at that) managing to penetrate a US flak jacket, while the .45 round failed. I do not have a source saying .45 failed to the same degree as the .30 cal carbine round in Korea, however given that .30 carbine is close to .357 magnum, I think it a given. Its a fairly interesting extract from that article you postd, however I don't really see how they can seperate temporary cavities and bleeding, when surely the two are very similar?

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 3:32:45 PM

>>This shows a rather hit and miss test, showing a 9mm round (and a JHP at that) managing to penetrate a US flak jacket, while the .45 round failed.<< That's a Vietnam-era protective vest that is only rated to stop fragmentation, not small arms fire. Despite what the website claims, it is not a level II vest. To qualify for Level II status, the vest must be capable of stopping 124 grain 9mm full metal jacket rounds travelling at or less than 358 meters per second. Current US body armor exceed the level IIIA standard without hard plates, which means it will exceed a standard of 124 grain 9mm FMJ at 427 meters per second. The same website you cited has a sequence of shots at IIIA protective material at link It stops 9mm penetration completely (likewise 45 ACP and 40S&W). >>I do not have a source saying .45 failed to the same degree as the .30 cal carbine round in Korea, however given that .30 carbine is close to .357 magnum, I think it a given.<< Not particularly. The anecdotal accounts of 30 Carbine failing do not mention engagement range. The sights on my USGI M1 carbine are adjustable for range out to 300 yards -- and given the poor design of the 30 Carbine round, I am completely willing to believe it fails to do the job at 200-300 meters, rather like pistol rounds. But I'm not aware of any claims that 30 Carbine does not do its job at CQB ranges. >>Its a fairly interesting extract from that article you postd, however I don't really see how they can seperate temporary cavities and bleeding, when surely the two are very similar?<< Most body tissue is relatively elastic in nature and can deal with some unpleasant dynamic stretching. Consequently, temporary cavity will not translate directly into bleeding unless the stretching is so extreme that it translates into tearing, as you might see with high powered rifle rounds. Alternately, a bullet that fragments like 5.56mm can cause bleeding associated with temporary cavity by producing the same tearing effect via fragmentation. Or you can hit non-elastic or not very elastic tissue like the liver and a little stretching will go a long way. The comparative low power of handgun rounds compared to rifles, etc., is basically what prompted the FBI to reject KE models of relative lethality in favor of the idea that 12 inches/30 centimeters of penetration, coupled with the biggest hole you can generate being preferable.

Quote Reply

buzzard RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 4:58:25 PM

"I do not have a source saying .45 failed to the same degree as the .30 cal carbine round in Korea, however given that .30 carbine is close to .357 magnum, I think it a given." I'm not sure what your point is here. A .357 magnum is appreciably more powerful than a 9mm. If you are making an argument that a .357 can't do the job, a 9mm sure as heck won't. In general a .357 will fire a heaver bullet at a higher velocity. 9mm = 35 caliber, while the .357 is about the same. Generally 9mms will shoot a 115 or 124 grain bullet. The most common .357 round I see is the 158 grain load. I don't have my loading manual here but from memory 9mms generally throw a bullet at about 1000 fps (~320 mps). A .357 will throw a bullet at more like 1200-1400 fps. If I care to look this all up I can find average loadings for .357, 9mm and .30 M1 carbine and we can compare them. I personally own 2 9mm pistols and 2 .45 ACP pistols. I favor the .45 for carry since I go with the evidence that the .45 tends to be more lethal. I suppose if I were to carry a pistol with the expectation that excrement would be hitting the ventilator (and I couldn't switch out for a rifle or shotgun), I'd probably go with my double stack HK USP 40 actually. Of the 9mm pistols I have shot, my favorite is the Sig Sauer P226. I have shot S&W, Glock, Ruger, and Taurus 9mms. The Taurus design is very simmilar to the Beretta. buzzard

Quote Reply

Yimmy RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 5:36:14 PM

"That's a Vietnam-era protective vest that is only rated to stop fragmentation," Well, er... yeah. Hence my calling it a "flak jacket"... "Not particularly. The anecdotal accounts of 30 Carbine failing do not mention engagement range. The sights on my USGI M1 carbine are adjustable for range out to 300 yards" .357 is superior in penetration to 9mm, while 9mm is superior in penetration to .45. Simple as that. "temporary cavity will not translate directly into bleeding" That, I do not believe.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 6:46:15 PM

>>If I care to look this all up I can find average loadings for .357, 9mm and .30 M1 carbine and we can compare them. << From Cartridges of the World, 9th Ed. 9x19mm (American military load) 124 grain FMJ, 1299 fps, 465 ft-lbs 45 ACP (military load) 230 grain FMJ, 855 fps, 405 ft-lbs energy (Note that only one other 9mm load listed -- 88 grains at 1500 fps -- exceeds 45 ACP's 405 ft-lbs, and most are in the mid 300 ft-lb range.) .357 Magnum 158 grain load, 1235 fps, 535 ft-lbs .30 Carbine (military load) 110 grain FMJ, 1975 fps, 955 ft-lbs. In other words, .30 Carbine is a significantly more powerful round than any of the three pistol rounds, even the 357 Mag. On the down side, it is the smallest in terms of diameter, going back to the FBI's take on such things, but comparisons begin to approach the apples and oranges issue of rifle versus pistol rounds.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 6:53:43 PM

>>Well, er... yeah. Hence my calling it a "flak jacket"... << And is rather like my saying that the .32 ACP round is a good pistol cartridge because it will shoot a hole in a 1916 vintage tin hat, yes? >>.357 is superior in penetration to 9mm, while 9mm is superior in penetration to .45. Simple as that. << But also meaningless. I refer you back to FBI -- as long as a pistol round will penetrate 12"/30cm or more through tissue all that matters is the size of the hole it makes. >>"temporary cavity will not translate directly into bleeding" That, I do not believe.<< Whether or not you believe it is not particularly relevant, since it is a demonstrable, proven and well documented fact within military medicine, with the caveats I noted previously. For handguns, temporary cavity stretching is usually not severe enough to be an issue, hence, again, the FBI's rejection of simple kinetic energy models, temporary cavity models, etc., in favor of depth of penetration and width of hole.

Quote Reply

Yimmy RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 7:24:42 PM

Meh... this is going nowhere. I didn't realise .30 carbine delivered so much energy mind.

Quote Reply

lrsrng RE:Are you kidding? 12/8/2005 7:53:50 PM

S/W 5906

Quote Reply

Jungle-Man RE:Which is the best 9mm pistol? 12/21/2005 5:26:22 PM

I was at the range the other day with a friend of mine and he let me shoot his Steyr M-A1, and I've got to say it was the most comfortable handgun Ive ever fired. There was almost no muzzle jump whatsoever and the grip is the best positioned in relation to the barrel out of all the handguns I've handled (which isnt many but still).

Quote Reply

lrsrng RE:Which is the best 9mm pistol? 12/21/2005 6:03:24 PM

Go with what is comfortable to you.Gun Woman or Car.There is a lot to be said for comfortable.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NEXT