# Which are the better rounds??



## Flashbang (Sep 11, 2006)

Which are better...the early century rounds - .45 ACP and 9mm... or the late century rounds - .357 sig and 10mm ( ok...ok.. I left the .40 out cause I hate it! ) I think the late century technology is better ( if not cheaper and more prevalant )


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

U are just determined to bring the caliber wars to our website, huh :smt082

Shot placement is what counts, and 9mm and 45 are fine  - I also prefer 9mm because I can afford to shoot more often. If cost was not a factor, I'd shoot more 45. Those two rounds are fine for me, and have withstood the test of time.


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

+1 With Ship.


----------



## hberttmank (May 5, 2006)

SW summed it up pretty well. 9 and 45 do it just fine for me.


----------



## dladd (Sep 19, 2006)

I am a diehard .45 fan. With the exceptions of the DE and .22 pistols, everything I plan to buy will be a .45. If it's not offered in a .45, I ain't buying.

Just my .02.

dladd


----------



## jwkimber45 (May 6, 2006)

Little different twist on the caliber war.........


I've never seen the point in the 357 Sig and 10mm personally. Just my opinion.


----------



## Revolver (Aug 26, 2006)

They all suck about the same to function in weak actions.


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

jwkimber45 said:


> Little different twist on the caliber war.........
> 
> I've never seen the point in the 357 Sig and 10mm personally. Just my opinion.


:smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163 :smt163


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

My next gun may be a 9mm because of the affordablity factor.


----------



## DennyCrane (May 11, 2006)

Well, we see what's winning in the poll....


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

I didn't vote. I think there's little practical difference between any of them, except the 10mm in its hotter guise. Then it's okay as an outdoorsman's gun, though still inferior to .44 Magnum.

I do think we have too many overlapping calibers in both pistols and rifles, and innovate for innovation's sake, rather than for practical purposes. There's precious little that can be done with a .40 S&W, a .357 SIG, or a .45 GAP that hasn't been done with a .45 ACP, a .38 Super, or a 9mm.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

well I like my .45's cuz they make watermelons go "POOF" when ya use hollowpoints:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

scooter said:


> well I like my .45's cuz they make watermelons go "POOF" when ya use hollowpoints:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


Well then I guess that ends this debate. I agree completely. When ever you can shoot something and it:

A: Makes a big mess
B: Makes a big BOOM!
C: Scars the hell out of the person next to you
D: Makes your wife roll her eyes
E: Makes you laugh like you did when you were ten years old after you super 
glued your little brothers fingers together.

It is considered a success.:mrgreen:


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Shipwreck said:


> U are just determined to bring the caliber wars to our website, huh :smt082
> 
> Shot placement is what counts, and 9mm and 45 are fine  - I also prefer 9mm because I can afford to shoot more often. If cost was not a factor, I'd shoot more 45. Those two rounds are fine for me, and have withstood the test of time.


No cal. wars here I'm right that ends it. It is great to be a majority of 1


----------



## Flashbang (Sep 11, 2006)

No warring please!! I've had enough of that elsewhere. Everybody has their favorites - variety is the spice of life. I just wonder that if the situation were reversed... say the Sig and 10mm had a 100 year headstart, would people vote the other way. I think a lot of it is just loyalty and the 9mm and .45 have had more time to build that. (but I'd still take a 357 sig over a 9 any day!!:mrgreen: )


----------



## Maximo (May 26, 2006)




----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

:smt116:smt044:smt044:smt044


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

OK, all U guys better learn the truth - the .25ACP is THE best round. All others are posers 

:smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

Huh?????????:mrgreen:


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

Shipwreck said:


> OK, all U guys better learn the truth - the .25ACP is THE best round. All others are posers
> 
> :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082 :smt082


I disagree Shipwreck. I think the .22 short is the best defensive round.:mrgreen:


----------



## Maximo (May 26, 2006)

Your all wrong, the 44. cap and ball is the best. :mrgreen:


----------



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

No, I've re-evaluated the situation. Rock throwing is where it is at!!!! :smt082 :smt082


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

A rock! :smt011 How primitive. You need a high tech launching system.


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

Shipwreck said:


> No, I've re-evaluated the situation. Rock throwing is where it is at!!!! :smt082 :smt082


GREAT:smt011 now they're gonna try and pass a shitload of rock control laws and Ill havta pave the driveway................:smt022 :smt022


----------



## Flashbang (Sep 11, 2006)

Dang you threadjackers!!! I'll post this poll again in 100 years and then we'll see who laughs last!!!!







................. LOL!!
By the way, who makes holsters for that rock chucker?


----------



## john doe. (Aug 26, 2006)

Flashbang said:


> Dang you threadjackers!!! I'll post this poll again in 100 years and then we'll see who laughs last!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fred Flintstone.:mrgreen:


----------



## poncaguy (May 7, 2006)

I liken 40 S&W, 45, and 357 Sig.....9mm is ...........weak, but fun.


----------



## tekhead1219 (May 16, 2008)

+1 with SW


----------



## WinM70 (Jul 6, 2008)

I've had my 9mm for almost 20 years and it's done everything needed.
If I really get some extra cash I might pick up a 45.


----------



## Don357 (Dec 4, 2007)

:watching:I'm enjoying this show!!:anim_lol: But you know my favorite is more is considered more lethal than any of those mentioned. It's a drinking straw and a piece of paper. Can you say...
..."SPIT BALL!":smt083


----------



## bdp2000 (Apr 22, 2008)

:smt104:smt104:smt104Screw all of that...from across the room, I can give the "stink eye" that will have more stopping power than any modern round!

:smt033:smt033:smt033


----------



## cupsz71 (Nov 19, 2007)

ahhh not a caliber war!:smt075

DOUGH!


----------



## unpecador (May 9, 2008)

The war is over.


----------



## USAFgsm (Dec 18, 2006)

This isn't a caliber "war." In order to have a WAR there needs to be some shooting.



So here's what's going to happen. I will shoot each of you with each of the calibers in question, and then we'll take a vote to see if we can all decide on which one ruined your day the most.

Sound good?


----------



## unpecador (May 9, 2008)

Go ahead and shoot at your computer, I guarantee you that I won't feel a thing. :mrgreen:


----------



## zhurdan (Mar 21, 2008)

I guess I'm a weirdo, I'd hav voted twice! My two primary carry pistols, based on what I'm wearing and how hot/cold it is are a .45 and a .357Sig.

Oh well, both are expensive to shoot, both would do the job, both put a big fat smile on my face every time I shoot them. Win-Win for me.

Zhur


----------



## USAFgsm (Dec 18, 2006)

unpecador said:


> Go ahead and shoot at your computer, I guarantee you that I won't feel a thing. :mrgreen:


Trust me, some days I feel like doing just that. I hate computers.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

Does anybody know what caliber rock David used to slay Goliath?

I would think that is the ideal caliber.

:mrgreen:


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

:buttkick::nutkick::smt030:smt066


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

You forgot to specify which century. Thus my choice, a half-inch round ball in a linen patch over 80 grains of fffg, is missing from the list.
:mrgreen:


----------



## Flyboy_451 (Aug 8, 2008)

The question posed could be answered in many ways, so consider this...If we are talking about .45 and 9mm as they were initially designed, that would require evaluating them with ball type ammo, in which case, the modern cartridges with late technology high performance bullets would certainly be batter for almost any application.

If you evaluate all cartridges with modern bullets, the issue is less clear, although I would have to side with the newer calibers. While I am a big fan of the .45 and 10mm both, the edge has to go to the 10mm with the stipulation that we are talking about someone using it that reloads. The 10mm is a unique and very versatile cartridge capable of handling everything from informal target shooting with light loads to a serious woods packing pistol launching 200grn bullets in excess of 1200fps. No matter how you slice it, the 10mm is capable of delivering more energy on target than the .45, but still retains the ability to be loaded with bullets as light as 135grn and being very pleasant and accurate to shoot.

The .357sig vs. 9mm is much the same argument, although I will be the first to admit that I am not really a fan of either of these calibers. The sig cartridge is capable of delivering .357 mag performance from an auto pistol and this is very appealing. I personally would prefer a good .357 mag in a stout revolver for most applications. The sig cartridge, with it's bottleneck shape and short neck, is not as easily loaded as straight wall design of the 9mm. The 9mm is also more pleasant to shoot as a result of the lower pressures and velocity, much like comparing a .38spl to the .357mag. I find it amusing that people will tout the 9mm, yet belittle the .38spl, as they are VERY similar in performance.

So my vote goes to the newer cartridges, although I still think the old .45 is awful tough to top!!!

FLY!!!


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Flyboy_451 said:


> I find it amusing that people will tout the 9mm, yet belittle the .38spl, as they are VERY similar in performance.


I don't know about that. Comparing like rounds, both from a 4" barrel, Remington claims the following ballistics:

9mm 124 gr +P Golden Saber - 1180fps for 384 foot pounds
.38 125 gr +P Golden Saber - 975fps for 264 foot pounds

Thus, the 9mm is 31% more powerful than the .38. I don't think a difference of almost a third is insignificant or even really similar, at least on paper. Maybe gelatin would tell a different tale, but I suspect 9mm will substantially outperform .38 there as well.


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

My chronograph has confirmed the superiority of 9MM over .38 special on numerous occasions.

.38 is just fine for plinking but give me a bit more when my life might depend on it.

Dang, did we agree again Mike? :mrgreen:


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Gee, another magic bullet post.

In general, any name brand factory fresh brass cased ammo will do an adequate job if you do your part. >9mm for SD of course.

You can debate, 9mm vs 38spl vs. 45, gelatin, clothed gelatin, dead animal, etc. till the cows come home for SD, but in the end multiple hits with any bullet will provide superior self defense results than a single hit of the latest hyper super expanding mega caliber handgun bullet any day of the week IF YOU DO YOUR PART.

NO AMOUNT OF SPENDING ON EQUIPMENT WILL COMPENSATE FOR INADEQUATE SKILLS!!!!


Back on topic: Better round? For what? Competition, self defense, or war?

Competition, you want fast cycling, low recoil ammo. Penetration, expansion, wound cavity is irrelevant. JHP is a waste of money.

Self defense, you want low flash, high penetration, high expansion. JHP of course.

War. You want a battle rifle and a squad of guys with you. In the military you use what is issued to you and nothing but.


----------



## Flyboy_451 (Aug 8, 2008)

As others have pointed out, the 9mm outperforms the .38spl. I do not disagree with that at all. I did a small amount of research and have presented it below with some comments and thoughts following. My Speer loading manual lists, for the .38spl a 125jhp load @ 1053fps. This equates to 307.7 foot pounds of energy. Another load listed is a 158grn hp @ 944fps adding up to 312 foot pounds of energy. These are the hottest loads listed in this manual, so for comparison I will list the hottest loads presented from the same manual for 9mm. 124grn @ 1249fps= 429 ft/lbs and 147grn hp @ 1001=327 ft/lbs.

38spl=307.7 & 312 for the two bullet weights shown

9mm=429 & 327 respectively

This averages out to about a 31% difference as was pointed out by Mike. Now we are only left with the question, does this 31% difference add up to an appreciable degree of difference in real life situations? I honestly do not know the answer to this question, but let's at least look at some possibilities...

As these are both popular self defense rounds, I will limit my thoughts with regards to that being the application of the cartridges. I think it is fair to say that any of the loads listed above would have a very good chance of fully penetrating and exiting a human chest cavity with a center mass shot. This is assuming an average size male adult, and striking only the bones of the rib cage. 

The following is purely my opinion, which I believe to be based on reasonable assumptions. If their is by chance a physicist, or someone else with knowledge that shows this to be inaccurate, please feel free to chime in.

.38 vs. 9mm is somewhat convenient in that the bullet diameter is within .001" and bullet weight varies by only about ten grains maximum with similar bullets. I think it would be fair to say that the energy required for both a .38 vs. 9mm to have full penetration of said target is for all practical purposes identical. Modern bullets are designed in such a way that they are tailored to perform at velocities appropriate to the caliber that they are intended for, thus I think it also fair to think that the given bullets would have similar expansion characteristics.

Let's say that the energy required to fully penetrate the target described, with these bullets is "X". Let's label energy remaining after full penetration with the .38 loads as "E". It then follows to say that the energy of the .38 loads is "X+E", and the energy of the 9mm loads is "(X+E)+31%". Because both the .38 and 9mm bullets have already fully penetrated the target, any energy benefit that the 9mm enjoys is simply wasted pushing the bullet through air. The only real difference from either round would be in the temporary cavitation. While I do believe that temporary cavitation is a significant part of the wound, it is very difficult to quantify, as has been noted by many people much smarter than I am. The permanent wound channel created by the two calibers would, I believe, be near identical, as would the amount of energy delivered onto the target. Thus I think it is safe to say that the ballistic advantage of the 9mm is only evident when larger bone structures are hit, thus depositing more energy on target, and even then I am not sure how much of an advantage it would be. Perhaps someone with a better education than mine can enlighten all of us, or perhaps even show me something that I have overlooked, or rationalized improperly. My personal opinion is that the .38 and 9mm are both what I would consider to be the minimum calibers for self defense in full size revolvers and pistols respectively.

Be safe...

FLY!!!


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

I found some gelatin results for the above Golden Sabers.

9mm - 12.6" penetration/.68" expansion (bare)
.38 - 9.9" penetration/.63 expansion (bare)
.38 - 10.6" penetration/.60" expansion (clothed)

Couldn't quickly find 9mm results in clothed gel (a little help, *submoa*?).

.38 seems very short on penetration. This can obviously change with other loads. But once again, 9mm seems the better choice, both penetrating deeper and expanding more. The rounds do not seem the same to me.

Pulling load data from a manual is okay, but few people carry reloads for defense, so it seems to be a poor comparison when info on common factory loads is easily available.


----------



## Deltaboy1984 (Jun 1, 2008)

Older they combined have killed more men than the newbies ever will. :smt1099


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

*Flyboy* has presented an interesting essay, but there's a flaw in his reasoning, to wit:
He expects both the .38 Special and the 9mm bullet to exit the target after hitting it.
But the .38 Special is more likely to place its slower-travelling bullet within its (human) target, while the speedy 9mm is more likely to send its bullet all the way through.
Under these circumstances, the .38 Special will deliver more energy to the target than the 9mm will, even though the 9mm bullet carries more energy along with it.

It's all academic. Just hit, and keep hitting until the fight stops. Then it doesn't matter what you're hitting with.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

And the flaw in *Steve's* reasoning is that modern 9mms will exit. In JHP form, assuming a decent hit, they generally do not. Thus, the 9mm will deliver more energy (which isn't necessarily the same as _damage_) to the shootee than the .38 Special.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> And the flaw in *Steve's* reasoning is that modern 9mms will exit. In JHP form, assuming a decent hit, they generally do not. Thus, the 9mm will deliver more energy (which isn't necessarily the same as _damage_) to the shootee than the .38 Special.


In that case, I agree that the 9mm is the better round.

Is it the consensus of the forum that .38 Special and 9mm Kurtz (.380) are roughly equivalent, as self-defense rounds?


----------



## Flyboy_451 (Aug 8, 2008)

Steve and Mike, 

You both bring up valid points, and I had considered both of them. The answer is that I don't have an answer. The points I made were simply from the point of view of being an interesting discussion. While the topic of ballistics has been studied for years, it is very difficult to arrive at precise outcomes for any type of research. There are simply too many variables to try to account for in any given situation. I was not intending to say that the performance of the two rounds is identical, only that they are similar.

I think I will stick to my personal preference of medium to large diameter bullets at moderate velocities. I would not feel ill protected were I to carry either a .38 or a 9mm, but I do prefer to have a gun that launches a larger bullet. This is in part due to a larger permanent wound channel and partly because of the superior penetration of inanimate objects such as glass, car doors, ect. that larger calibers offer. 

Having used a .45 in combat situations, I can say from first hand experience that it does a fine job. Judging from accounts of many law enforcement agencies, shooting a variety of cartridges, both the .38 and the 9mm have shown themselves to be effective with proper shot placement as well. There is little doubt that any of these calibers would be a suitable defensive firearm, but there can certainly be interesting discussion of pros and cons of various calibers without starting a "Caliber War". Thanks for throwing your hat in the ring and keeping it civil and thoughtful.

In answer to the question that is as old as guns themselves....The best caliber is the one that you can reliably put rounds on target in a timely fashion with. Oh yea, my personal definition of stopping power: The ability, in a combat situation, to deliver the FIRST TELLING BLOW.

Thanks agin for your input guys, 

FLY!!!


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Flyboy_451 said:


> ...The best caliber is the one that you can reliably put rounds on target in a timely fashion with. Oh yea, my personal definition of stopping power: The ability, in a combat situation, to deliver the FIRST TELLING BLOW...


Agreed.
I, too, rely on the .45 ACP.
My wife does her bit with a .38 Special, because that's what she's comfortable carrying, and using.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

I also concur that any of the popular defensive rounds will work fine with good shot placement, and that software is vastly more important than hardware. I was merely disputing the assertion that 9mm and .38 Special are ballistically equivalent, which they plainly are not.


----------



## Flyboy_451 (Aug 8, 2008)

WOW Guys, 

I think the three of us have successfully managed to hi-jack this thread. Once again, thank you both for both your comments and the way in which they were presented.


Fly!!!


----------



## banjar (Dec 11, 2008)

The way I see it Elmer Fudd used a wok to kill the wabbit with and I think it was a .45


----------



## BT2Flip (Jan 1, 2009)

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG...? 

we all know .45's will rock your world!


----------



## Tombstone17 (Feb 28, 2009)

Because I know it will WORK!!! ACP45


----------



## RotorHead (Aug 13, 2008)

*Current viewpoint*

Today I believe it is as much about availibility as anything. I shoot only 9mm, when I can get it.

NSDQ
G-19


----------



## exercisemyright (Dec 19, 2008)

scooter said:


> GREAT:smt011 now they're gonna try and pass a shitload of rock control laws and Ill havta pave the driveway................:smt022 :smt022


:anim_lol::anim_lol::anim_lol::anim_lol::anim_lol:


----------



## nailer (Apr 26, 2009)

I can shoot my S&W model 60 very accurately using 38 +p. With a hair trigger, I have a very steady hand. I'd hit my target 5 times all grouped within 1 to 2 inches. With my 45, that accuracy disappears because of trigger pull, recoil, etc. The same 5 shots would be 2 or 3 hits with a larger grouping. Wouldn't the less powerful 38s be better than the more powerful 45s in this situation? Obviously, more practice with the 45 would help, but I don't think it would ever reach the other's accuracy. 
What I'm asking is it better to have five hits with the 38 or two with the 45, if all hits were in the same area?


----------



## DevilsJohnson (Oct 21, 2007)

Whatever you're shooting best I guess. I like a 45but that's what I've shot most of my shooting life and I use it well. If I shot a 38 best I guess I'd use that.


----------

