Confused by 40 vs .45 ballistcs

This is a discussion on Confused by 40 vs .45 ballistcs within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; It's such a fine line. Given the same weight, greater velocity wins, but only if it doesn't affect your ability to get back on target ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 60
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: Confused by 40 vs .45 ballistcs

  1. #16
    VIP Member
    Array WHEC724's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    6,446
    It's such a fine line. Given the same weight, greater velocity wins, but only if it doesn't affect your ability to get back on target vs. the lower velocity.

    Then when you add in the intangible 'metal on meat' factor, I end up preferring the 230 gr .45.

    That is... until I start working to justify getting something in 10mm...
    __________________________________
    'Clinging to my guns and religion

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    15,877
    When the ballistic numbers are that close, I don't the anyone on the recieving end will know or care about the difference. Either is effective when placed appropriately.
    Retired USAF E-8. Remember: You're being watched!
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  4. #18
    Member Array 12 gauge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    308
    Try the 180 gr or 200 gr in the 10mm and all arguments end!

    12 Gauge
    Richard58 likes this.
    "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms..."
    --Richard Henry Lee, 1788

    "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson

  5. #19
    Member Array centermass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lake Charles, LA
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by PAcanis View Post
    Centermass, I was shot before, I was knocked off my feet, but it was a shotgun blast. Still, I always wonder how these folks can keep going after being shot... with anything.

    Anyway, is it fair to say that the .40 would penetrate deeper due to the added velocity?

    Sorry to hear that you were shot. I would think that a shotgun blast would effect you different than a handgun blast. Even more so if it was buckshot that hits you. I wasn't saying there is no such thing as knockdown power, as a 50 caliber rifle round will surely put you on your rear. But I don't think that comes into play as much with a .40 or .45 which is what we are talking about here. In other words, if I had to shoot someone with either round I wouldn't expect them to be knocked down with just one shot. They may fall down if they are mortally wounded or freak out because they were just shot, but I wouldn't expect them to be physically moved enough to be knocked down. My opinion as to how they can keep moving is again on the psycological level. There have been people shot in the heart that have kept on moving another 10 feet before falling. Put that into a typical police gunfight senario and it looks like the perp isn't being affected by the bullets when in fact he has already been mortally wounded. He just hasn't fallen yet. Be it drugs, or just the state of mind that he's in. A normal person that is of sound mind would probably fall sooner because if the mental trauma of being shot. Take the professionals, cops. There have been cops that were shot and stayed in the gunfight only to freak out later when they realize they have been shot. Things don't register the same when the blood is pumping and the heart is thumping. When your that pumped up you focus on the objective. Kinda like not feeling a broken hand until after the fist fight. I think that you would have to take alot of factors into consideration when determining penetration. If your shooting at another human. What kind of clothes does he have on? How far away is he? Hollowpoint or FMJ? Ect....
    Ruger GP100 .357 mag
    Ruger p-90 .45acp
    Taurus PT-140 acp
    Rossi .357 mag
    Hi-point .45 acp
    DTI AR-15

  6. #20
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,776
    I agree with repsupt99, fully. The shorty forty will be snappier and offer greater muzzle jump which IMO, is more a cause of second shot "flinch" than direct to the rear recoil. I have owned a 40 Glock, actually TWO of them. One a Model 23 and one a model 27. The 23 was by far the more difficult gun to shoot accurately over longer periods of time which will degrade your accuracy, substantially. IMHO, the 40 is the answer to a question not correctly asked. The ammo is far more expensive and difficult to come by in some areas than the 45 which can be had in often places where you would least expect an available supply!
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  7. #21
    Senior Member Array hayzor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    716
    Ammo and ballistics threads seem to provide a lot of opinions supported by some data and a lot of opinions supported by no data.
    My conclusion-
    All bullets hurt when they hit someone (preferably a BG). Bullets tend to stop a BG when he is hit in the right spot – multiple times is preferred.

    I carry 9mm 115 or 124gr FMJ rounds in an XD, and don’t think twice about it.
    The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it. Albert Einstein

    "People in Arizona carry guns," said a Chandler police spokesman. "You better be careful about who you are picking on."

  8. #22
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,653
    Rollo, the greater sectional density, combined with the 40s advantage in velocity, effects the terminal performance, or, how it sheds its energy. The problem is, alot of people read about stuff and will quote you buzz terminology like velocity, weight and caliber used by their favorite gunwriter, or internet commando, expousing the virtues of things like energy and so on, but do not really understand the complete picture, which is so much more.
    In peoples minds, the bigger bullet is better, which most people will agree to, including myself, but there is so much more to it than that. when we take the 45 and 40 and compare the weights, they are very close. 185 v 180. No big deal. When we compare the velocity of the two, once again, no big difference. When we look at the diameter, there is a noticeable difference to the eye, but here is where that difference really comes into play.
    The overall length of the 40 at 180 grains will be longer than the overall length of the 185 grain 45. This gives it a longer sectional density, and that is the real difference in the terminal performance on target. A longer bullet simply has more penetrating power. The sectional density of the 40 in 180 grain is .161, compared with the 185 grain 45 at .130. To match the SD of the 40, you will have to bump the 45s weight up to 230 grains.

    The 9mm has a larger SD than the 45 in every bullet weight comparing lightest to heaviest. SD favors smaller calibers, thats why I am a fan of heavy bullets in smaller calibers. Of course it can get to a point of diminishing returns.
    Hoganbeg and Blackheart6 like this.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Rollo, the greater sectional density, combined with the 40s advantage in velocity, effects the terminal performance, or, how it sheds its energy. The problem is, alot of people read about stuff and will quote you buzz terminology like velocity, weight and caliber used by their favorite gunwriter, or internet commando, expousing the virtues of things like energy and so on, but do not really understand the complete picture, which is so much more.
    In peoples minds, the bigger bullet is better, which most people will agree to, including myself, but there is so much more to it than that. when we take the 45 and 40 and compare the weights, they are very close. 185 v 180. No big deal. When we compare the velocity of the two, once again, no big difference. When we look at the diameter, there is a noticeable difference to the eye, but here is where that difference really comes into play.
    The overall length of the 40 at 180 grains will be longer than the overall length of the 185 grain 45. This gives it a longer sectional density, and that is the real difference in the terminal performance on target. A longer bullet simply has more penetrating power. The sectional density of the 40 in 180 grain is .161, compared with the 185 grain 45 at .130. To match the SD of the 40, you will have to bump the 45s weight up to 230 grains.

    The 9mm has a larger SD than the 45 in every bullet weight comparing lightest to heaviest. SD favors smaller calibers, thats why I am a fan of heavy bullets in smaller calibers. Of course it can get to a point of diminishing returns.
    THANK YOU! That was the type of information I was looking for. I hate now days that when ever a question gets asked about ballistics people always assume your asking a "what caliber is better question". Thank you glockman10mm for taking the time to read the post and not assuming I was asking another magic bullet question :)
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    THANK YOU! That was the type of information I was looking for. I hate now days that when ever a question gets asked about ballistics people always assume your asking a "what caliber is better question". Thank you glockman10mm for taking the time to read the post and not assuming I was asking another magic bullet question :)
    You are more than welcome! I wish I could take credit for this, but I had the same questions a long time ago, and when I started really experimenting with bullets for handgun hunting, I was fortunate enough to meet Jim Wilson of Shooting Times at a wild boar hunt in Montarey Ranch in Tennesee, and being the genuine real person that he is, he took his time and went into great detail to explain this to me. Just passin it on.

  11. #25
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Rollo, the greater sectional density, combined with the 40s advantage in velocity, effects the terminal performance, or, how it sheds its energy. The problem is, alot of people read about stuff and will quote you buzz terminology like velocity, weight and caliber used by their favorite gunwriter, or internet commando, expousing the virtues of things like energy and so on, but do not really understand the complete picture, which is so much more.
    In peoples minds, the bigger bullet is better, which most people will agree to, including myself, but there is so much more to it than that. when we take the 45 and 40 and compare the weights, they are very close. 185 v 180. No big deal. When we compare the velocity of the two, once again, no big difference. When we look at the diameter, there is a noticeable difference to the eye, but here is where that difference really comes into play.
    The overall length of the 40 at 180 grains will be longer than the overall length of the 185 grain 45. This gives it a longer sectional density, and that is the real difference in the terminal performance on target. A longer bullet simply has more penetrating power. The sectional density of the 40 in 180 grain is .161, compared with the 185 grain 45 at .130. To match the SD of the 40, you will have to bump the 45s weight up to 230 grains.

    The 9mm has a larger SD than the 45 in every bullet weight comparing lightest to heaviest. SD favors smaller calibers, thats why I am a fan of heavy bullets in smaller calibers. Of course it can get to a point of diminishing returns.
    Good post IMO! Ballistics. Another science of it's own based on the foundations of basic principles. I'm a fan (an old one), of E=MC˛. Ballistics make a new twist on things from that point on. SD and BC tend to extrapolate on what's known in an idealistic environment. IMO...let the scientists test the flow of ketchup before they tell you what you need for self defense. Hunting and taking game effectively in the wild is where ballistics play a more important role IMO. A good, clean kill on game is what I've devoted most of my time to. In our hopes of being able and sufficient with our means in killing another human being, we shouldn't worry about such things so much as the willingness to do so. We're still human, and we'll never 'perfect' anything. That's the honest truth.

  12. #26
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,101
    I don't think the .45acp will work any larger diameter bullet magic over the .40 - Shot placement being equal.
    I've not ever shot the .40 much at all but, I liked it with regard to great feed & function reliability & accuracy and would certainly not feel naked carrying it. I think "shot to shot" recovery is modestly quicker w/ .45acp but, not to any great degree. I never did or witnessed any ballistic testing of the 40.
    I just don't think there is anything so amazingly superior or unique about the .40 that would prompt me to want to change carry calibers.
    If somebody wanted to give me a firearm chambered in .40 I certainly would not tell that person..."No Thanks."
    Ammo availability in .40 is not so great around here but, there is always the Internet to solve that little problem.

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,653
    Lol, OKshooter, I think the older I get and the more I experience, the more skeptism I have concerning caliber choices based on bullet size and velocity or energy numbers. Like I have stated numerous times on this forum concerning the 40, they have justreinvented the wheel. We had something almost ballistically identical a more than a hundred years ago in an old BP revolver cartridge. The 40 is a great compromise to allow for capacity in a smaller gun.

    Six of one or half a dozen of the other.

  14. #28
    OD*
    OD* is offline
    Moderator
    Array OD*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Coopersville
    Posts
    10,662
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    We had something almost ballistically identical a more than a hundred years ago in an old BP revolver cartridge. The 40 is a great compromise to allow for capacity in a smaller gun.
    Yup, 137 years for Winchester (.32WCF, .38WCF, .44WCF are actually rifle cartridges Colt adapted to the SAA) and 126 for the Colt revolvers, 1878 for the .44WCF (132 years) and 1884 for the .32WCF & .38WCF.
    "The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper

    "Diligentia Vis Celeritas"

    "There is very little new, and the forgotten is constantly being rediscovered."
    ~ Tiger McKee

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array TedBeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bay City
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    Sorry, I think I am not explaining myself correctly. I'm NOT trying to figure out which is "better" (magic bullet theory, one shot stop, etc etc etc). I'm trying to figure out if a 185g .45 moving at 950 FPS with 375FTLBS of energy is more or less the same as a 180g .40 moving at 1000FPS with 400FTLBS of energy.
    Basically they are very simular, the difference in KE is 6.6 percent (400/375)with the 180 grain coming out on top because the speed is squared. The diameter of the .45 is 12.5 pecent larger so it will cause a larger wound channel, however given the slightly faster speed would the .40 expand slightly more?
    Also the .45 is 2.7 percent heavier and heavier bullets are generally considered to penetrate deeper.

    All in all, I would say they average within 10 percent of each other in ballistics with the .40 winning the KE portion and the .45 winning the diameter/weight numbers. The .40 probably does give you more capacity, and in a SHTF situation that might be the most important factor against mutliple assailants or in an extended gun fight (or heaven forbid, you miss 10 persent of your shots!)

  16. #30
    Distinguished Member
    Array Xader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,549
    Quote Originally Posted by MinistrMalic View Post
    I don't know many people shooting 185gr. loads out of a carry .45; I've never carried anything other than 230
    Count me as one of those who carries 185gr +P 45ACP

    The Golden Sabres 185gr +P has a greater diameter, more mass, higher velocity AND more energy than a 180gr .40 S&W of the same type

    For comparisons sake:(all measurements are at the muzzle)
    .40 S&W: 180 gr, 1015 fps, 412 ft/lbs
    .45ACP: 230gr, 875 fps, 391 ft/lbs
    .45ACP +P: 185gr, 1140 fps, 534 ft/lbs

    I have a hard time finding fault with it.

    As an answer to Rollo's post, the percent difference (in this brand) is that the 185gr +P 45 shows a 3% increase in mass, a 12% increase in velocity, and a 30% increase in energy, versus the 40S&W. So shot-for-shot, this comparison goes to the 45, IMHO.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Confused about OH Law
    By NCConcealed in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 1st, 2010, 03:33 PM
  2. I'm so confused.
    By fernset in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: January 12th, 2010, 12:06 AM
  3. Confused!!!
    By Jrod012889 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: May 27th, 2009, 04:22 PM
  4. I am confused
    By SilenceDoGood in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: November 22nd, 2007, 12:43 AM
  5. I'm so confused
    By bugs100 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: April 15th, 2005, 10:15 AM

Search tags for this page

.40 ballistics
,

.40 vs .45

,
.40 vs .45 ballistics
,
.40 vs. .45
,
.45 vs .40
,
.45 vs .40 ballistics
,
40 cal vs 45 cal ballistics chart
,

40 vs 45

,
40 vs 45 ballistics
,
45 vs 40
,
45 vs 40 ballistics
,
ballistics 40 vs 45
Click on a term to search for related topics.