9mm Luger via a LEO's perspective - Page 6

9mm Luger via a LEO's perspective

This is a discussion on 9mm Luger via a LEO's perspective within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; From Gunthorp's guide to the gutterally germane; Point Blank: Hold on range, where the trajectory rises or falls by an insignificant amount throughout the range ...

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 210
Like Tree183Likes

Thread: 9mm Luger via a LEO's perspective

  1. #76
    VIP Member
    Array gunthorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    home office
    Posts
    2,355
    From Gunthorp's guide to the gutterally germane;

    Point Blank: Hold on range, where the trajectory rises or falls by an insignificant amount throughout the range

    Point Blank: From contact to very close range (vernacular)

    Point Blank: Point shooting with blanks, similar to a liberal's argument
    WHEC724 likes this.
    Liberty, Property, or Death - Jonathan Gardner's powder horn inscription 1776

    Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
    ("Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.")
    -Virgil, Aeneid, vi, 95


  2. #77
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,503
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    While it may be possible to handload the .38 special to impressive power levels when used in .357 magnum class revolvers not everyone can do that.
    If you look at factory loadings there is a marked difference between .38 special +P ballistics and 9mm or 9mm+P.
    Winchester PDX1 factory loading of .38 special +P has an advertised muzzle energy of 260 ft/lbs.
    Winchester PDX1 factory loading of 9mm has an advertised muzzle energy of 326 ft/lbs.
    Winchester PDX1 factory loading of 9mm +P has an advertised muzzle energy of 396 ft/lbs.
    The standard pressure 9mm offers about 25% more energy and the +P about 50% more energy.
    The factory loadings from Federal are similar With the +P .38 in the mid 200's for energy and the standard pressure 9mm above 300.

    I am not aware of any department in this country that handloads ammunition for issue to it's officers. For those that do not the 9mm semi auto is a significant improvement over their previously issued .38 revolvers.

    (That being said I am now on my way to try to swing a deal on a S&W model 65-1 I have had my eye on for a while! )

    Those who don't choose to handload are at the mercy of what the ammunition manufacturers decide to serve up.


    All is not lost for non-handloaders as they too can enjoy using .38 Special ammunition that gives up nothing at all to the vaunted 9mm and the range of performance it offers.

    After all, one person can selectively choose factory ammunition to prove a point as well as another. Consider the Buffalo Bore factory .38 Special 158 grain loads and then look back at those 9mm bullet weights and energy figures. That marked difference mysteriously disappears.

    How about 1167 fps and 475 ft./lbs. from a common 4-inch Smith & Wesson Model 15 .38 Special. Even from a 2-inch snub this load equals the energy of that Winchester 9mm +P loading and does it with a heavier lead bullet that many consider has a superior profile.

    Heavy .38 Special +P Pistol & Handgun Ammunition

    Copied from the site:
    S&W mod. 60, 2 inch- 1040 fps (379 ft. lbs.)
    S&W mod. 66, 2.5 inch- 1059 fps (393 ft. lbs.)
    Ruger SP101, 3 inch- 1143 fps (458 ft. lbs.)
    S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch- 1162 fps (474 ft. lbs.)

    38 Special +P OUTDOORSMAN Pistol & Handgun Ammunition


    • 1255 fps -- Ruger GP 100, 6 inch barrel, 357 mag.
    • 1186 fps -- S&W Combat Masterpiece 6 inch barrel, 38 SPL (circa 1958)
    • 1146 fps -- S&W Mt. Gun, 4 inch barrel, 357 mag.
    • 1167 fps -- S&W Mod. 15, 4 inch barrel, 38 SPL (circa 1968)
    • 1112 fps -- Ruger SP 101, 3 inch barrel, 38 SPL
    • 1043 fps -- S&W Mod 66, 2.5 inch barrel, 357 mag.
    • 989 fps -- S&W Mod 340PD, 1 & 7/8 inch barrel, 357 mag.
    • 1027 fps -- S&W Mod 642 (pre dash), 1 & 7/8 inch barrel, 38 SPL

    It's easy to conduct an internet cartridge war by selectively using variously advertised or published quoted figures but the proof is in the pudding. I'm like GMan. I've shot lots of stuff with the .38 Special and considerably less with the 9mm. I think more highly of the .38 Special.

    Don't make the mistake of discounting the effectiveness of a properly loaded .38 Special.

    Of course if automatic pistols trip one's trigger then go with the 9mm with confidence.

    The .357 Magnum is still an amazing cartridge and is very cool. It is a great candidate for selection as an all-around cartridge for every purpose. I have several .357 Magnum revolvers but scarcely ever choose them for carry or field use over .38 Special revolvers. If, for whatever contrived reason, I feel I need a more powerful handgun then .38 Special I'll reach for some sort of non-magnum .44 or .45 rather than the .357 Magnum, and certainly rather than the 9mm. The .41 Magnum and .44 Magnum are at their best when used on big game like deer.

    I'm completely unaware of what law enforcement agencies carry, issue, and shoot. I notice that the local police seem to all be armed with Glocks. Really though, is it all that important what the nations' law enforcement agencies are doing with regards to armament and ammunition? We're suppose to be the "land of the free" and we're suppose to be wearing our own "thinking caps."

    What the departments of this country are doing is only of academic interest and no real concern except for the lawman so employed.

    Ain't debate fun?!
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  3. #78
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    105

    FYI The 38 special is not as big as you think...

    I have to disagree that the 38 special is superior to the 9mm. In real life street use that thinking is in ballistic la la land. The record proves that and all the pontificating cannot change that fact.

    Also consider this:
    Back in the day when percussion revolvers were in use, the Colt Navy types had a bore dia of around .360" with a .375 or so groove dia. The bullet dia. either round or conical was about .380" Yet they were called .36. When the conversions came out, the .38 Colt used a heeled bullet of .38 dia to fill grooves. These were true .38's as far as bullet dia. went.

    When Colt decided to "modernize" .38 long-colt & go to inside lubed bullet, bullet dia. was
    reduced to fit inside case & a hollow base added to permit bullet expansion to fill grooves. Bullet dia. now was around .360-.358 dia.

    With the .38 special coming out around 1901, bullet dia. was standardized at .358-.357 & groove dia. was finally reduced to .356-.357"

    Yet now we call them .38's, when they are really .35's! Confusing huh?"

    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

  4. #79
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,505
    What record are you talking about? Bullet for bullet used, all things being equal, the 9mm simply does not have enough capacity to be ballistically superior to the 38.

    As far as diameter measurements, what's the relevance to the issue here?
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  5. #80
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,503
    Quote Originally Posted by mrwonderful View Post
    I have to disagree that the 38 special is superior to the 9mm. In real life street use that thinking is in ballistic la la land. The record proves that and all the pontificating cannot change that fact.

    Also consider this:
    Back in the day when percussion revolvers were in use, the Colt Navy types had a bore dia of around .360" with a .375 or so groove dia. The bullet dia. either round or conical was about .380" Yet they were called .36. When the conversions came out, the .38 Colt used a heeled bullet of .38 dia to fill grooves. These were true .38's as far as bullet dia. went.

    When Colt decided to "modernize" .38 long-colt & go to inside lubed bullet, bullet dia. was
    reduced to fit inside case & a hollow base added to permit bullet expansion to fill grooves. Bullet dia. now was around .360-.358 dia.

    With the .38 special coming out around 1901, bullet dia. was standardized at .358-.357 & groove dia. was finally reduced to .356-.357"

    Yet now we call them .38's, when they are really .35's! Confusing huh?"

    "The record proves that..."

    What record would this be?

    "In real life street use that thinking is in ballistic la la land."

    Show us why this is "ballistic la la land" and where the 9mm's superiority lies.

    What in the world does the Colt Navy and it's bore diameter have to do with this thread topic.? If the bore diameter is .360 then it was reasonable for Colt to term it a .36 caliber. Firearms companies have a long history of naming their cartridges without accurate reference to actual caliber anyway.

    What does the .38 Long Colt have to do with this discussion? Incidentally, the revolvers chambered for .38 Long Colt generally have a .362/.363 bore and the heeled bullet of the .38 Long Colt measures .357 so the .38 Long Colt is no "true .38" either. I handload for a Colt revolver chambered for .38 Long Colt, have original factory ammunition from several eras on hand, and have taken measurements.

    "With the .38 Special coming out around 1901..." This could apply as far as the .38 Special's actual introduction date of 1899 could be considered to be "around" 1901. I own a Smith & Wesson .38 Special revolver made in 1904 and once owned one made the first year of production. Their bore diameters were standardized at .357 then and have remained so. Any minute fluctuation in barrel-to-barrel bore tolerances can't be construed as a factory authorized "reduction" at any point in the history of Smith & Wesson's original Military & Police/Model 10 .38 Special revolvers nor any other .38 Special revolvers they have ever produced. Colt and Ruger likewise.

    The .355 bore 9mm is closer to your ".35" than is the .357 bore .38 Special. Where are you getting all this stuff and what relevance does it have to prove the 9mm's supposed superiority to the .38 Special. Pontificating is allowed on a forum but it really ought to lead to someplace.

    "Yet now we call them .38's, when they are really .35's! Confusing huh?"

    I'm not confused. Are you?
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  6. #81
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,105
    Bmcgilvray, What I was offering was an apples to apples comparison between commercial loadings that one might expect to find fairly easily. In the spirit of apples to apples let us look at Buffalo Bores 9mm offerings as well.
    115 grain +P 1300fps 431 ft/lbs.
    124 grain +P+ 1300fps 465 ft/lbs.
    115 grain +P+ 1400fps 500ft/lbs.
    147 grain +P+ 1175fps 451ft/lbs.

    While Buffalo Bore .38 special offerings do offer energy levels higher than those of the other manufacturers, their 9mm offerings do as well.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  7. #82
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,505
    When will people finally graduate beyond energy figures as an indicator of judging cartridge performance?

    There is more than one way to up an energy figure. But energy tells us very little. Head to head, anyway anyone wants to load them, there is nothing in the numbers that show any increase of performance of the 9mm over the 38spl.

    And, you can move up to a 200 weight bullet in the 38spl, which gives it even more thump.
    Or, you can download the bullet weight to 110, and match the lightweight 9mm, but you can't take the 9mm up.

    Like I said before, the 9mm only gives you more bullets to fling at the problem, but that's the only real advantage. However, in today's mindset of gun toters, they probably need it.
    gunthorp and Alarm Guy like this.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  8. #83
    VIP Member
    Array gunthorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    home office
    Posts
    2,355
    Somebody has to say it. The 44RM is actually a 43 (.429 but I size .430). At least the 41 is honest (my favorite).

    As far as .355 or .357, is there a great difference? 147gr 9mm or 158gr 38spl, where's the argument other than bullet shape? (I like Keith SWC's) Case capacity is greater in the special, and industry pressure standards are greater for the 9. IMO it just boils down to bbl length. If you add the revolver's cylinder length, the 38 will top a 9 of the same size gun for power. Ammo capacity favors the 9. Gunsmoke 101

    Disclaimer: I'm a momentum fanboy, but I won't argue with anyone's right to decide for themselves. If your 35/38 and my 45 meet head on in mid air, what do you think will happen?

    Hint: Think 90mph Mini Cooper vs 60mph Suburban...everybody dies either way.
    Liberty, Property, or Death - Jonathan Gardner's powder horn inscription 1776

    Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
    ("Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.")
    -Virgil, Aeneid, vi, 95

  9. #84
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    When will people finally graduate beyond energy figures as an indicator of judging cartridge performance?
    Probably never.
    Bullet shape is definitely a factor but simple physics, the ability to do work is energy. The more energy you have the more work you can do. The various mechanisms of injury that are involved in a defensive shooting are all work.

    So glockman, if you were limited to factory ammo would you still recommend the .38 special over the 9mm?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  10. #85
    VIP Member
    Array gunthorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    home office
    Posts
    2,355
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    The more energy you have the more work you can do.
    Agreed. But there's work and then there's work. Contrary to Marx, not all work is equivalent. Momentum reduces deflection. If you want to reach a vital, the scenic route won't get you there.
    Liberty, Property, or Death - Jonathan Gardner's powder horn inscription 1776

    Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
    ("Do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it.")
    -Virgil, Aeneid, vi, 95

  11. #86
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,505
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    Probably never.
    Bullet shape is definitely a factor but simple physics, the ability to do work is energy. The more energy you have the more work you can do. The various mechanisms of injury that are involved in a defensive shooting are all work.

    So glockman, if you were limited to factory ammo would you still recommend the .38 special over the 9mm?
    I would recommend either, depending on what type of weapon one chose. With a qualifier; the 9mm be loaded 147+p, and the 38 be loaded 158 lswc in standard pressure or +p.
    I like the 9mm for it's capacity, but prefer the revolver for various reasons.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  12. #87
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,503
    "...you can download the bullet weight to 110, and match the lightweight 9mm, but you can't take the 9mm up."

    True this, and a little secret about .355 diameter 9mm component bullets is that a handloader can seat and crimp them into .38 Special cases over a suitable charge of powder, shoot them out of his revolver and achieve 9mm performance with reasonable accuracy. That .002" is so minuscule as to be almost meaningless.

    "While Buffalo Bore .38 special offerings do offer energy levels higher than those of the other manufacturers, their 9mm offerings do as well."

    Sure they do and both offerings look pretty appealing to the performance-driven handgun shooter.

    Personally though, in looking at that 500 ft./lb. figure in that 9mm data, I'd rather fling 158 grain lead SWC bullets than 115 grain JHP bullets. Though, in the overall scheme of things, good hits with either are going to be golden and bad hits are just bad.

    While we're at it, the jacket on a bullet doesn't necessarily make it any more special than a simple lead bullet. Lead bullets can be produced to give whopping great expansion. It sometimes seems that folks have come to expect jackets on their performance ammunition without considering it's purpose. Hence we see, piddly, pop-gun, .38 Special loads traveling 700-850 fps out of snubs but wearing their jackets because the ammo makers know the market expects to see jackets, puts a lot of misplaced trust in the perceived need for bullet jackets to accomplish the desired expansion, and will shun most so-called "performance oriented ammunition" if the bullets aren't wearing jackets.

    The 9mm is fine for a person desiring a semi-auto pistol in an adequate, controllable cartridge same as the .38 Special is fine for the fan of the revolver. I remember a time around 1980 when the ancient and hoary 9mm, originating in 1902, had just acquired a new-found popularity as the "wonder cartridge" of the era. Some dumb-cluck gun scribe, likely in Guns & Ammo, waxed so enthusiastic as to claim the 9mm was "far more powerful than the .38 Special...Approaches the .357 Magnum in power!" It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. 9mm is a fully adequate, yet mediocre auto-pistol round just as the .38 Special is in the revolver.

    I mostly prefer revolvers so I like the .38 Special. If I determine to carry an automatic, it's just as easy to fit one in a larger caliber into my carrying style as it is to accommodate a 9mm. I'm uninterested in any of the stunted 9mm pistols marketed, preferring guns of full size and weight.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  13. #88
    Member Array mrwonderful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    "The record proves that..."

    What record would this be?

    "In real life street use that thinking is in ballistic la la land."

    Show us why this is "ballistic la la land" and where the 9mm's superiority lies.

    What in the world does the Colt Navy and it's bore diameter have to do with this thread topic.? If the bore diameter is .360 then it was reasonable for Colt to term it a .36 caliber. Firearms companies have a long history of naming their cartridges without accurate reference to actual caliber anyway.

    What does the .38 Long Colt have to do with this discussion? Incidentally, the revolvers chambered for .38 Long Colt generally have a .362/.363 bore and the heeled bullet of the .38 Long Colt measures .357 so the .38 Long Colt is no "true .38" either. I handload for a Colt revolver chambered for .38 Long Colt, have original factory ammunition from several eras on hand, and have taken measurements.

    "With the .38 Special coming out around 1901..." This could apply as far as the .38 Special's actual introduction date of 1899 could be considered to be "around" 1901. I own a Smith & Wesson .38 Special revolver made in 1904 and once owned one made the first year of production. Their bore diameters were standardized at .357 then and have remained so. Any minute fluctuation in barrel-to-barrel bore tolerances can't be construed as a factory authorized "reduction" at any point in the history of Smith & Wesson's original Military & Police/Model 10 .38 Special revolvers nor any other .38 Special revolvers they have ever produced. Colt and Ruger likewise.

    The .355 bore 9mm is closer to your ".35" than is the .357 bore .38 Special. Where are you getting all this stuff and what relevance does it have to prove the 9mm's supposed superiority to the .38 Special. Pontificating is allowed on a forum but it really ought to lead to someplace.

    "Yet now we call them .38's, when they are really .35's! Confusing huh?"

    I'm not confused. Are you?
    Well excuse me for offering a little history on the 38 special.

    Now when comparing factory loads the 9mm does have a better street record. The info is out there
    for anyone to find on their own. The 38 is not bad, but I have yet to see one that expands as large and as consistently as the 9mm. Now there are those people that are fackler/robert fantatics. They think the only thing that matters is penetration, they ignore everything else. Well then why don't you carry FMJ then. I would agree that we need an average of 12" penetration with good and consistent expansion. And add higher velocity to it, so much the better.

    Now I'm looking for any major or minor police agency that carries 38 special as their primary weapon. I'm not finding it. Maybe you could enlighten me.
    “Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them”
    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

  14. #89
    Sponsor
    Array SHTFGearLLC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    CDWolfe, the 9mm still does not offer anything over the 38spl, other than hi capacity handguns so chambered.

    The point that bmcgilvray made is absolutely correct. Compare any bullet you like, for instance 9mm Gold dot or 38sPl Gold Dot, and the ballistics of the 9mm are no better than the 38spl.

    As a matter of fact, the 38spl remains supreme due to it's larger powder capacity, and ability to fire heavier bullets of any design without feeding issues. In a stout framed gun, the 38spl can be handloaded to 38-44 velocities that are well into 357 magnum territory. And one would have to be ballistically retarded to argue the 9mm compares to the 357 magnum.

    Load that 38 with 5.4 grns of Unique under a 160 weight Keith bullet and it will make ANY 9mm loading look like a " pop " gun. And that, is a fact.
    (Emphasis added by me)

    Glockman10mm. I must say that I agree with most of your posts. But I'm struggling with this one and some of your follow up comments. Would you be willing to clarify?

    Comparing 9mm +p Gold Dot and 38 spc +p Gold dot we get the following.

    Code:
                 
                              38 Spc+p           9mm+p
    --------------------------------------------------------
    Bullet Weight (grains)      125                 124
    FPS                         945                 1220  
    Energy(foot pounds)         248                 410
    The 9mm looks better than the 38.

    How is the .38 spc a better defensive round than the 9mm? I realize that it is more versatile but I don't think that automatically translates to having more devastating effects on a target.

    I understand that total foot pounds of energy does not necessarily translate to more damage to the target. But I think we can all agree that it is a contributing factor.

    Here is the problem.

    Some one says that the 9mm is a more effective self defense round than the 38 spc. The provide evidence suggesting that most 9mm rounds can deliver more energy to the target (while not direct evidence, energy is a contributing factor).

    Someone else says that the .38 spc is a better round than the 9mm, their response the the above evidence is "well, you can't just go by the numbers". That's not evidence... and doesn't even discredit the evidence supporting the 9mm.

    Is there actual evidence suggesting that the 38 is a more damaging round? (Using only factory available ammo or published hand loading recipes? I don't think it is fair to get into pressure levels that exceed the cartridge specs by 40%)



    Thanks!
    Clay

  15. #90
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,105
    When my old department retired their wheel guns in favor of a wonder nine it was not because of any perceived inadequacies of the .38 special. Nobody was complaining of the performance of the 158 LSWCHP +P load that was issued. The reason for the switch was the fear of the individual officer encountering superior firepower (volume of fire). Our officers did not ride with partners (unless training) so what that single officer was carrying was all there was until the cavalry showed up. Instead of that individual officer having six in the gun and twelve on the belt, they were given sixteen in the gun and thirty on their belt. The type of encounter they were anticipating when they made the switch fortunately never happened to us.

    As one officer I have the utmost respect for said, " If I find myself in a situation where I need forty six rounds a handgun is probably not the best solution to my problem."
    64zebra likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

9mm autopsy results
,

9mm comeback

,
9mm defense ammo comparison
,
9mm effectiveness
,
9mm luger case dimensions
,

9mm making a comeback

,

9mm shooting statistics

,

9mm stopping power

,

9mm vs 45 autopsy results

,
fbi 9mm ammo
,

is the 9mm making a comeback

,
michael lee platt autopsy
Click on a term to search for related topics.