[quote]devildog_jim wrote:
[quote]Robert A wrote:
[quote]devildog_jim wrote:
On wound ballistics:
The best link I can find on this subject is this guy:
http://www.gunthorp.com/Terminal%20Ballistics%20as%20viewed%20in%20a%20morgue.htm
From the medical examiner’s point of view you are more likely to put him down without needing followup shots using a big and slow caliber than a light and fast caliber, but it is also better to have a gun you can shoot well of a “lesser” caliber than one you can’t in the “perfect” caliber.
Theory is great, but in practice when you shoot someone with a .45 they die, and the usually do it quickly enough that they don’t shoot back much. Some loadings of 9mm do that too, but most commercial off the shelf .45 will work. Of course shot placement is #1.
When you shoot someone between the eyes they die fast, but most people can’t hit a silhouette target at 3m under extreme duress so I’m going to assume that something that stops on a single center-mass shot is what we’re looking for in a self-defense situation. Its the same as me preferring the 1911 trigger, it allows for error in situations where some error is almost guaranteed.
Edit to add: This guy find the difference to be less extreme, although still in favor of a .45 9mm vs
[/quote]
I really think the biggest advantage the .45 has had over its competitors has been the 1911.
Here is a germane link that C_C sent.
Regards,
Robert A[/quote]
I notice that the “weakest” round they used was a 9mm (the smallest was the .357 SIG, which i feel is uncommon enough to discount in most people’s gun buying decisions) and even that one I would call “borderline to good enough, depending on load.” I’d like to see similar testing, but with .380, .38 special, .25, and .22, the little-gun calibers that I feel are probably not well-suited due to lack of power. It’s possible that I’m mistaken.
And after reading all this, I’m still packing a single stack 1911 in .45 with Black Hills 230gr +P. I’ve seen nothing to suggest that it isn’t one of the better solutions out there.[/quote]
Well, more ammo in the mag would be nice to have, but yes, I by no means meant to pursuade you against your particular choice of a carry gun and caliber.
As far as the other calibers, I’m certain I’ve seen similar tests done on them… You might find them on the m4c terminal ballistics subforum (not in the stickies), or maybe it was elsewhere…
Anyway, I don’t see much reason to stick with anything but the big 3 for your actual carry pistol, no matter whether you’re LE or Mil/paramil or just a concerned homeowner… Bigger calibers tend to make for somewhat crappy combat pistols for a variety of reasons (recoil, followup shots more difficult, muzzle flash, noise, the lower ammo count, and ultimately they’re still just pistols, so no real temporary wound channel to help… Need to spend more time retargeting, heavier… Revolvers are even worse for obvious reasons).
The smaller calibers crush so little tissue and also tend to do less well against windshields etc…
I’ve so far been focusing more on “immediate” physiological stops in this thread due to you bringing up one-hit stops, and that may give the false impression that I’d go with a 22 or something as it can technically get the job done… But of course I would not want to rely on something so dinky as many stops are ultimately not CNS hits but delayed incapacitation through bleeding…
And a 22 pistol makes such tiny holes and is so shitty against barriers, that well… Would not want to wait for the guy to bleed out 3 hours later…
We had some real scares when the 4.6 PDW was introduced… There’s a gun that proves that a human being can indeed fail to notice 20+ pieces of metal in his torso and look at you funny while at it.