Caliber Blabber

[Guest grimel]

You were the one that referred to foot pounds and KE in the same sentence as if they were the same thing. Not me.

They are the same thing.

Both KE and momentum are ways to consider energy of a moving object and that is why I said "same thing for our purposes".

Yet, they aren't the same "for our purposes". They are different measures that have different applications.

My example of recoil was fine. I said take "two glocks" (they weigh the same basically) then shoot the two calibers, that way you can feel the energy comparison.

Which has exactly zero to do with hitting harder. But, to play your game, I'll take a G26 and a G21sf. Loaded the G26 weighs what the G21 weighs empty. It has a shorter grip (concentrating the force to a smaller area).

[timcalhoun]

No, they are not the same thing. They do not calculate the same thing. They are not designed to calculate how hard a bullet hits. Neither is more realistic than the other.

Kinetic energy in simple terms is the energy of an object based on it's speed. Momentum is an objects resistance to change of speed (again in simple terms).

So, both ke and momentum uses mass and speed right? So the more energy an object has per ke the more momentum it will have. Increase the numbers in either mass or speed and both the ke and momentum are changed in the same direction. This is why I said for our purposes. We are really splitting hairs here. Silly really.

Edited July 20, 2009 by timcalhoun

[Good_Steward]

I will add my by linking this:

AIMED Point Shooting or P&S

[timcalhoun]

Which has exactly zero to do with hitting harder. But, to play your game, I'll take a G26 and a G21sf. Loaded the G26 weighs what the G21 weighs empty. It has a shorter grip (concentrating the force to a smaller area).

OK since you just want to be a jerk. We can take the gun out of it. Let's take a pepper popper and calibrate it to just past the point so your 9 can no longer knock it down. Then lets see what happens when I shoot it with my 45. That's right. I've seen this happen a hundred times at USPSA matches. The only person having trouble knocking the steel down is the guy shooting factory 9 ammo usually 124 or 147. I think that is a pretty good example of mass and velocity at work weather you want to think of it in terms of ke or momentum.

Edited July 20, 2009 by timcalhoun

[Guest MCRAIG]

Why not make a compromise and get some Corbon 45 that will travel close to 1000 fps, or some 9mm that will travel close to 1450 fps? It would suck to get hit by a 22 IMHO, but would of these loads could make your day go from bad to worse.

[deerslayer]

MidwayUSA - Buffalo Bore Ammunition 9mm Luger +P+ 124 Grain Speer Gold Dot Jacketed Hollow Point Box of 20

124gr at 130fps in 9mm

I'll believe it when I see it chronograph 1300. Even if it does, how could 1250-1300 fps be considered a standard for multi-caliber comparisons?

[Guest Muttling]

My point is that is pure unadulterated bull*****. It is a freakin' service handgun round. IOW, they are all *****. A difference of 50fpe (NATO 9mm vs 45acp) is a big zero in terminal effect. Put the little pill where it belongs and the result will be the same for both.

Switch to expanding ammo, and the results for service rounds are the same. The bullet to bullet variations are greater than the difference between rounds. The choice of projectile with regards to penetration vs barriers provides a difference for LE.

For the record, shot placement is the ONLY thing that has a significant difference in terminal performance among service rounds.

Otay. Put on a ballistic plate that will NOT be penetrated by a side arm. Take a hit from a 9x19 and then take a hit from a 45 ACP. Tell me which one leaves a bruise and knocks you on your butt.

Even if I can't penetrate, I want a round that will knock them back and give me a chance to run like hell.

As I said before, you go ahead feel good about that 9x19. I'm sure your feel good will go a long ways when it comes to saving your butt.

[deerslayer]

No, they are not the same thing. They do not calculate the same thing. They are not designed to calculate how hard a bullet hits. Neither is more realistic than the other.

Kinetic energy in simple terms is the energy of an object based on it's speed. Momentum is an objects resistance to change of speed (again in simple terms).

KE=1/2mv^2 while momentum (P) is P=mv.

Last I checked, 1/2mv^2 doesn't equal mv; thus, they aren't the same thing.

Your opinion has about as much weight as my opinion, OTOH, more than a few people have been researching this for some time (doc roberts pops to mind). These folks who are trying to find what actually works instead of following the oft repeated myths come to amazingly similar conclusions - handguns suck, long guns rule. The only reason to use a handgun is you can't use a long gun. Given premium expanding ammo, service handguns perform equally well, given FMJ they perform equally poorly. For a handgun, shot placement (given adequate penetration) is the only thing with significant merit.

Given scientific data, the choice in handguns becomes what one shoots the best and what one can shoot effectively weak hand only (the "worse" case).

Is that any clearer?

Clear as mud.

IF KE is based on speed, why does it multiply everything by bullet weight?

Of course they are not the same thing. Feet per second and miles per hour are not the same, but they are used to describe the same thing.

I think a simplified but practical way of looking at both is to say that they are attempting to measure the power of a projectile.

BTW, I agree and rant constantly about a handgun's limited utility as a manstopper. I'd rather have a .45 than a .380, but I'd rather have a .30-06 than either one. It's clear to me that a .45 hits harder, resists changes in speed more, has more energy, or whatever, than a 9mm. Having said that, I carry a 9mm when my .40 is dirty, which is more often than not.

[Guest grimel]

Otay. Put on a ballistic plate that will NOT be penetrated by a side arm. Take a hit from a 9x19 and then take a hit from a 45 ACP. Tell me which one leaves a bruise and knocks you on your butt.

neither, have you no grasp of physics? If the gun could knock me down, you'd be knocked down when you shot it.

Even if I can't penetrate, I want a round that will knock them back and give me a chance to run like hell.

Doesn't exist.

As I said before, you go ahead feel good about that 9x19. I'm sure your feel good will go a long ways when it comes to saving your butt.

Have you read my sig line? It's a freakin' pistol! I EXPECT it to fail. I have zero illusions a service pistol is worth a damn. I'm not really sure about a 223 with FMJ and tend to prefer a 7.62x39 with JHP and STILL plan on shooting more than once.

[Guest Ghostrider]

What I roll my eyes about is the constant touting of the .45 as some super natural man stopper of a round by some, when in truth it falls far short in a lot of areas where other calibers excel. All stats verify this. 9mm, .40, .357 SIG, .45 are all equally adequate as SD rounds. Some are better in certain areas than others and that is why we have choice.

Yeap, it's an old argument, I'm an old man.

I never said nor implied it's something supernatural. In my personal experience it's MUCH more likely to knock a man off his feet than a lighter caliber.

I'm not talking 100yards downrange, or how much internal damage it does, or what it might do to some gelatin, or any of that. I want to take the BG off his feet when he's intent on doing me first. Most guys who figure out they are laying down because they've been shot tend to stay laying down. Sure, some guys will get back up, but the majority won't.

Please read your sig. You also might read some history while you're at it.

Based on the experience with the Moros and extensive testing on animals and human cadavers, an Army Ordnance Board headed by Col. John T. Thompson (inventor of the Thompson sub-machine-gun) and Col. Louis A. La Garde, determined that the Army needed a .45 caliber cartridge to provide adequate stopping power. In the mean time, Browning who was working for Colt, had already designed an autoloader pistol, around a cartridge similar in dimension to the .38 Super. When the Army requested designs for a new handgun, Browning re-engineered this .38 autoloader to accommodate a .45" diameter cartridge of his own design with a 230 gr. FMJ bullet, and submitted the pistol to the Army for evaluation.

source: The Sight's M1911 .45 ACP Page

Should you have a mind to look into the Moros and how the decision that a knock down handgun was necessary, you will learn a tad bit of history.

I know that 38s, 22s, 40s and 9s will kill. That would be silly, and I never said it. I respect why the army went to the 45. I respect that they went to the 9 for a very different set of reasons. I also recognize that as a previous poster said (thank you for your service ) when the fecal matter impacts the rotating blades, everybody from cook to Col. wants the 45 as their sidearm load.

[Guest grimel]

Clear as mud.

IF KE is based on speed, why does it multiply everything by bullet weight?

Because energy has a mass component.

Of course they are not the same thing. Feet per second and miles per hour are not the same, but they are used to describe the same thing.

They are the same thing distance per unit time and can be freely converted back and forth.

KE and momentum are related, but, not the same.

I think a simplified but practical way of looking at both is to say that they are attempting to measure the power of a projectile.

Power is yet a different measurement. It's probably a better way to measure the effectiveness of a given round. Not as good as the various tests developed by the geeks, but, probably better than KE or momentum.

BTW, I agree and rant constantly about a handgun's limited utility as a manstopper. I'd rather have a .45 than a .380, but I'd rather have a .30-06 than either one. It's clear to me that a .45 hits harder, resists changes in speed more, has more energy, or whatever, than a 9mm. Having said that, I carry a 9mm when my .40 is dirty, which is more often than not.

You are starting another argument (45 vs 380)! Different class of firearms.

Glad it's clear to you, the numbers just don't work that way.

You do realize this whole 45 vs 9 argument is an exercise in splitting hairs? The 9mm is cheaper to shoot. It wins.

[deerslayer]

Glad it's clear to you, the numbers just don't work that way.

The numbers can be made to say anything you want.

What is the "mass component" of energy? Is it the same for everything? What is the use of KE if it can't be used to tell which gun will knock over a heavy object? What does KE describe?

I bet a formula can be contrived that will convert momentum/power factor to kinetic energy.

Edited July 20, 2009 by deerslayer

[Jasongar8]

Ok who wants to let me shoot them with a 9mm and a .45. Which ever one you say hurts the most will win. :) Guys cant you just agree to disagree?

-Jason G

[Guest Bluemax]

Wow you guys make some pretty good arguements based on ballistics, kinetic energy and what not. I generally try to keep it simple. I have two guns which I rely on to carry; a P3at and a MK40. I'm well aware that the 380 is less effective than the 40 but I'm also aware that if I have on shorts and a tee shirt, that I would be more likely to carry the 380 than the heavier 40 and a 380 in my pocket is a better round than a 40 at home in the drawer

Now if you take ease of carry out of the discussion: think of this analogy, would you be more likely to survive a collision with a smart car going 100mph or a cement truck running 70 mph. I know this is kind of a "backwoods" way to make a point but it's just an opinion

[K191145]

Well I haven't shot anyone yet and hope I don't have to so I can't say with 100% certainty how my handgun and caliber choice will work. But since I was interested in handguns and subscribed to gun magizines since the early 90's, most all the so-called expert gun writers touted the .45 as the most effective handgun caliber. They had alot of praise for the .357 also so I've most often carried a handgun in those two calibers. Now I carry a Glock 21SF that's reliable, accurate, and holds 13 rounds of .45 ACP. I choose Hornaday Tap 230gr +P HP's, they shoot fine in my Glock, because I wanted a couple of hundred more FPS than the standard and HP's because they have a better chance of expanding than hardball. If I have to shoot a BG I plan, in my mind, to shoot for the torso and keep shooting until the BG stops his attack. I like having plenty of ammo in my handgun with big heavy bullets that have some extra speed.

[deerslayer]

Ok who wants to let me shoot them with a 9mm and a .45. Which ever one you say hurts the most will win. :) Guys cant you just agree to disagree?

-Jason G

If you don't use a rifle, the debate may not be immediately neutralized.

[poak]

Man, we should totally crosspost this on other gun forums.

This whole 9mm vs .45 thing needs to be examined and debated more.

When I googled "9mm vs .45", this thread was the only hit... We're definitely in uncharted waters here!

[Guest TXRoadhouse]

yopu guys have waaaaaay tooooooo much time on your hands!!!! get a caliber you can shoot accurately n go with it. if it is a 22, get some kick a$$ ammo. 9mm or 45 it doesnt matter since the perp will prolly be within 2 steps of you. anything bigger is a bloodbath waiting to happen.

[Guest TXRoadhouse]

yopu guys have waaaaaay tooooooo much time on your hands!!!! get a caliber you can shoot accurately n go with it. if it is a 22, get some kick a$$ ammo. 9mm or 45 it doesnt matter since the perp will prolly be within 2 steps of you. anything bigger is a bloodbath waiting to happen.

[timcalhoun]

yopu guys have waaaaaay tooooooo much time on your hands!!!! get a caliber you can shoot accurately n go with it. if it is a 22, get some kick a$$ ammo. 9mm or 45 it doesnt matter since the perp will prolly be within 2 steps of you. anything bigger is a bloodbath waiting to happen.

Well, it was Sunday after church and my schedule was my own. I should have done anything else.

Edited July 20, 2009 by timcalhoun

[Guest mustangdave]

While screaming CONTACT!!

Dang it!!! METALHEAD beat me to it...around Fortress MUSTANG we have a few choices. My defensive ammo is either 40S&W or .357mag...the wife has either 380Auto or 38Spec +P. Then there is the defensive 12g with BIG HURT Buckshot...and the stand off rifle in .223

[Guest pws_smokeyjones]

if 9mm is good enough for Navy SEALs, then its good enough for me. This with the understanding that my gun handling skills are only slightly below your average SEAL.

[Jasongar8]

if 9mm is good enough for Navy SEALs, then its good enough for me. This with the understanding that my gun handling skills are only slightly below your average SEAL.

Some SEALs carry the HK MK23 in .45. But some do carry Sigs in 9mm (P228, M11).

Weapons & Demo | NavySEALs.com - Experience the SEAL Edge

-Jason G

[nightrunner]

I'll believe it when I see it chronograph 1300. Even if it does, how could 1250-1300 fps be considered a standard for multi-caliber comparisons?

its not a standard at all.

i dont care how fast you throw the 9mm bullet downrange it just doesnt have the mass to hit like the .45 does. period.

[strickj]

its not a standard at all.

i dont care how fast you throw the 9mm bullet downrange it just doesnt have the mass to hit like the .45 does. period.

Mass,smass

I'd be willing to bet a hit in the head with a 16 ounce hammer will hurt just as bad as a hit in the head from a 24 ounce hammer!