.40 Short and Weak

[Raggedyman]

Don't hold your breath waiting for me to volunteer, either.

[Geeman]

The problem with terminal ballistics is that it is NOT an exact science.  Gel test are an approximation.  What clothing, how large is the subject, how worked up is that subject before the shooting begins, how reliably does the ammo do what its supposed to do?  There are just too many variables.

The posted FBI study states something like 70% of the bullets expand.  How does the increased velocity of the 10mm affect that percentage?

The video of shootings I have seen shows a flinch as a subject is struck by a bullet.  Does that flinch correlate to the amount of jump/wiggle of the gel block, which may slow the bad guy a similar amount as the shooter slows dealing with the increased recoil?

I'll state straight out that I think the 12" penetration figure is over rated.  I'm 6'1" @ 235# and I have a ruler that is shortened to 10".  There are very few face to face situations that that round won't reach vitals.  I'm wide through the shoulders and 10" reached the center of my chest after passing through my arm.  I understand the police need, but they have a much higher possibility of using that weapon than I do. 

As a citizen, I figure that I can avoid most possible situations by being alert and not being the "easy" target of a bad guy.  When something is starting up, I can get out of most of those situations, even if that just means cutting and running.  When all that fails, how many of those cases lend to the "fear of death of great bodily injury" case?  The best use of a handgun is to do whatever is possible to avoid needing it.  Police don't have that option.  They need to inject themselves in the exact situations I try to avoid. 

40 short and weak, it is good.  9mm, it works.  45 might be as good as caliber as close handgun fighter can have.  Heck, a 380 with a full magazine might be close to perfect when adrenaline is pumping through a less thoroughly trained citizen.  To me, too much fuss over minor differences.  Its all interesting, but caliber choice is small potatoes in comparison to keeping out of situations, training well for what likely will never happen, and actually having the weapon with you in the unlikely event you need it.  Personally, I don't feel under gunned with a 135g Nosler pushed as fast as the 10mm pushes it, and 8-9" of penetration will do more damage than what these tests portray.  It largely doesn't matter which of these calibers you have with you to be truthful.

Greg

[mag360]

Ill say it again ..."penetration in gel does not exactly correspond to tissue".  Thats right that if you stick a ruler perpendicular to your body that 10" will extend it to a vital organ. However our best ballistic experts disagree that is sufficent criteria.   The fbi test concludes that you need a minimum of 12" penetration of DENIM COVERED GELATIN to ensure sufficient wounding.  Your 8" gel penetration of the 135gr nosler round that is falling apart or expanding so wide it cant even make it 9" is probably going to get stopped a few inches into the body after hitting a bone.  The bullets need to stay together and not expand out wider than designed to reliably penetrate.

Hold your arms out together like you are shooting.  If someone hits you in an extended arm that bullet needs to go through 6-8" of tissue and bone then needs to make it thru your ribs to hit something important.  I bet that 135gr nosler doesnt even get thru a 6" thick arm.

I mean 12" is the minimum established amount up to 18".  Beyond 18" the conclusion is the bullet should have expanded more to create a larger wound cavity.

[Raggedyman]

The problem with terminal ballistics is that it is NOT an exact science.  Gel test are an approximation.

Kind of, except that properly conducted professional gelatin tests are an EXTREMELY close approximation.

"The IWBA published some of Gene Wolberg's material from his study of San Diego PD officer involved
shootings that compared bullet performance in calibrated 10% ordnance gelatin with the autopsy
results using the same ammunition. When I last spoke with Mr. Wolberg in May of 2000, he had
collected data on nearly 150 OIS incidents which showed the majority of the 9mm 147 gr bullets
fired by officers had penetrated 13 to 15 inches and expanded between 0.60 to 0.62 inches in both
human tissue and 10% ordnance gelatin. Several other agencies with strong, scientifically based
ammunition terminal performance testing programs have conducted similar reviews of their shooting
incidents with much the same results--there is an extremely strong correlation between properly
conducted and interpreted 10% ordnance gelatin laboratory studies and the physiological effects of
projectiles in actual shooting incidents." - Dr. Roberts



"The test of the wound profiles validity is how accurately they portray the projectile-tissue
interaction observed in shots that penetrate the human body.  Since most shots in the human body
traverse various tissues, we would expect the wound profiles to vary somewhat, depending on the
tissues traversed.  However, the only radical departure has been found to occur when the
projectile strikes bone: this predictably deforms the bullet more than soft tissue, reducing its
overall penetration depth, and sometimes altering the angle of the projectile's course. Shots
traversing only soft tissues in humans have shown damage patterns of remarkably close
approximation to the wound profiles.

The bullet penetration depth comparison, as well as the similarity in bullet deformation and yaw
patterns, between human soft tissue and 10% ordnance gelatin have proven to be consistent and
reliable.  Every time there appeared to be an inconsistency a good reason was found and when the
exact circumstances were matched, the results matched.  The cases reported here comprise but a
small fraction of the documented comparisons which have established 10% ordnance gelatin as a
valid tissue simulant." - Dr. Fackler

I'll state straight out that I think the 12" penetration figure is over rated.  I'm 6'1" @ 235# and I have a ruler that is shortened to 10".  There are very few face to face situations that that round won't reach vitals.  I'm wide through the shoulders and 10" reached the center of my chest after passing through my arm.

If the bad guys happen to be the same size or smaller than you are and if they are willing to stand square to you and not move and not seek cover and not do something like point a weapon at you, then you would probably only need about 4"-6" of penetration. If any of those situations don't exist then you *might* need more. For example, if a person were to point a weapon at you, and if your shot impacted the forearm, your bullet might need to traverse 6" or more of flesh and bone before even reaching the torso. If you were knocked to the ground in the initial attack and you had to fire from a supine position, your rounds could also hit the attacker's limbs before reaching the torso and even then, the bullet could traverse 10" or more of gut before reaching the thoracic cavity. In some situations 12" might not be enough penetration, which is why the FBI recommended that number as the MINIMUM necessary for defense. I'm not an expert, though, which is why I lean on the recommendation of people who are.

[Raggedyman]

Ill say it again ..."penetration in gel does not exactly correspond to tissue".  Thats right that if you stick a ruler perpendicular to your body that 10" will extend it to a vital organ. However our best ballistic experts disagree that is sufficent criteria.   The fbi test concludes that you need a minimum of 12" penetration of DENIM COVERED GELATIN to ensure sufficient wounding.  Your 8" gel penetration of the 135gr nosler round that is falling apart or expanding so wide it cant even make it 9" is probably going to get stopped a few inches into the body after hitting a bone.  The bullets need to stay together and not expand out wider than designed to reliably penetrate.

Hold your arms out together like you are shooting.  If someone hits you in an extended arm that bullet needs to go through 6-8" of tissue and bone then needs to make it thru your ribs to hit something important.  I bet that 135gr nosler doesnt even get thru a 6" thick arm.

I mean 12" is the minimum established amount up to 18".  Beyond 18" the conclusion is the bullet should have expanded more to create a larger wound cavity.

I was typing my reply when you posted yours and the correlation is remarkable. Your post was more concise, though.

[Geeman]

40 short and weak, it is good.  9mm, it works.  45 might be as good as caliber as close handgun fighter can have.  Heck, a 380 with a full magazine might be close to perfect when adrenaline is pumping through a less thoroughly trained citizen.  To me, too much fuss over minor differences.  Its all interesting, but caliber choice is small potatoes in comparison to keeping out of situations, training well for what likely will never happen, and actually having the weapon with you in the unlikely event you need it.

This was largely passed over, but I believe it as gospel. 

Now to the gunfight thing.

This is my favorite on the subject.  10mm isn't represented, but I don't think it would be separated from the rest of the pack.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/handgun-stopping-power

Kinda funny I tripped over this referring to the 10mm as a defense caliber.

Take your pick, but you are silly to ignore the superior real-world performance of the lighter 135-155 grain jacketed hollow points. -

from http://gundata.org/blog/post/best-handgun-caliber-and-round-for-self-defense/

Greg

[Raggedyman]

Not to be rude, but the opinions of bloggers doesn't have as much merit as the findings of peer reviewed studies.

This is hardly comprehensive but here is a great place to start: http://firearmstactical.com/wound.htm

[45BBH]

Maybe I'm a little biased towards the .40 (hey it's technically a 10mm too!), my first centerfire pistol was a G23 and I've been a .40 fan ever since.  Of course over the years I've owned my share of 10mm's too, but I always had a bit of a love/hate relationship with the 10mm.  A lot of handloading has led me to believe that while the 10mm can shoot the same bullet faster than the .40 S&W, the margin isn't as big as some think it is.  I prefer the smaller size of the .40's, and with performance that is 90%+ that of a full power 10mm (of course I'm comparing warm 10mm handloads to warm .40 handloads), what's not to like?  Plus the support for the .40 is huge, you can not only handload the .40 nicely (5.3" G35 shooting 180's to 1300 fps) but turn around and load it with a good premium factory JHP for home/self defense.

My last 10mm, a Gen4 20, I could take my 4.6" KKM and shoot a 200gr WFN hardcast to a little over 1300 fps, which is warm no doubt.   I can take my G23 with 4" KKM and shoot the same bullet over 1,150 fps.  That doesn't make it equal to the G20 load, it's 150 fps slower but also coming from a .6" shorter barrel.  Logically both rounds will punch through pretty much any deer or hog, but the 23 is a good bit smaller than the 20.  If I want more speed, the 35 with 6" barrel can shoot the 200gr WFN (or 200gr XTP) to almost 1,300 fps, not bad for being "short and weak". 

I think a lot of the .40 hate stems from most not being aware of what it's capable of, just like some (although not as many) aren't aware of "warm" 10mm loads, many more aren't aware of "warm" .40's either.

[Raggedyman]

That's a good point and if it were a question of only one or only the other, I'd keep the .40 S&W over the 10mm. The G19/23 really is the perfect size for carry. It is large enough to be able to shoot well while trimming length in a very reasonable way. The .40 S&W cartridge is widely available and brass is literally free. My G23 (picture time, picture time!) is my EDC.



But it's not a question of one or the other. We can have both. Sure, the .40 can get "close," if you consider 250 fps slower to be "close," but it can't quite do what the 10mm can and even those "close" loads you were mentioning may be on the ragged edge of pressure limits. I notice you don't mention attempting to push .40 S&W jacketed defense bullets to the limits in a factory barrel.

It's also worth pointing out that factory ammo (for those few manufacturers that actually make real 10mm) in a factory barrel shows a fairly dramatic margin.

[gandog56]

I have three 10mm's, only one .40. But of course, my forty also shoots 357 SIG with merely a barrel swap. Same slide, springs, and magazine.

[Rojo27]

Not to redirect but a similar argument could be made around actual quantifiable incapacitation results of 9mm & 357 magnum.  As far as diameter goes, almost identical.  What are we left with to explain the quantifiable differences in wounding results?  Mass and speed of the projectile; No?  I'll bet gel track of both would look similar to others in the picture you posted but the actual results are clearly different.

Very unlikely to find similar study done on 10mm but I think 357 mag makes an adequate proxy.  Close examination of 357 magnum projectiles fired at different velocities may be interesting and/or possibly add something to the conversation. 

If embeded video doesn't work, here is copy of URL:  http://youtu.be/TMfXLc7TS-0

Made the youtube video work...The Shadow!