Why .40?

[centexshooter]

Why not .40? Effective, available, flexible. A proven commodity. I own two and am happy with range results of both.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

One aspect no one seems to address is that the 40 is simple to reload. It is a straight case, easy sized to pick up and uses a cheaperp bullet then the 45 in bulk.

 

[pheet17]

How about buy what you are comfortable with, practice, stock up, practice, and practice some more. If you hit what your aiming at the 9mm, .40s&w, and .45ACP will do the job. After seeing the chart from DA, I don't want to be downrange with any of them pointing at me.

 

[Big country]

I never wanted to be down range of any! LOL Like Texas42 said "just get what you want and don't let anyone bother you because of it" When the fight is over no body will remember what caliber you used (except people like us) and the enemy is just as dead from a 22 or a 500 S&W, there are not varying degrees of dead.

 

[Big country]

I'd have to say that after I hit the "submit" button I realized, that last line is sig line material.

 

[TexasRedneck]

True...but I've seen firsthand folks continue with an attack having been hit with just about every round made. However....I've seen fewer of 'em continue with large-caliber than small (on average). But as I've said all along - it's YOUR choice. I just figger the worst that can happen hittin' 'em with a .45 caliber flyin' ashtray is that there's more spatter ta clean up.....

 

[Okierifleman]

True...but I've seen firsthand folks continue with an attack having been hit with just about every round made. However....I've seen fewer of 'em continue with large-caliber than small (on average). But as I've said all along - it's YOUR choice. I just figger the worst that can happen hittin' 'em with a .45 caliber flyin' ashtray is that there's more spatter ta clean up.....

I am with you on this G, if I have to hit someone attacking me with something, why not hit him with a 45? There is no such thing as overkill with a defense round, you arent worry about tearing up too much meat!

 

[Eagles1181]

OK, so I did not bother to read all the replies so I am probably repeating what has already been said. The reason I chose a .40 is that when I was looking for my first handgun, I was looking for something for concealed carry. Of the three major caliblers (9mm, .40 and .45) I felt .40 had the best of both worlds. It was availble in the smaller framed guns that the 9mm was so it would be easier to conceal. It had close to the same ammo capasity as the 9mm. Those two factors took the .45 off the table for me. I ended up with the .40 because I wanted more power then the 9mm had.

Eagle

 

[wrtanker]

Just about any caliber will stop a man, it depends on shot placement. Taken to the extreme - an inert round from a 105mm cannon will end the fight no matter where you hit the guy. On the other hand, with a .25acp you have to hit the guy in a very specific spot to end the fight. So it comes down to skill and accuracy. The less skill you have (and practice you're willing to do) the bigger the bullet you need. That's a huge generalization of course but it applies.

 

[Texas42]

talk about extreme!!!

LOL

 

[centexshooter]

Just about any caliber will stop a man, it depends on shot placement. Taken to the extreme - an inert round from a 105mm cannon will end the fight no matter where you hit the guy. On the other hand, with a .25acp you have to hit the guy in a very specific spot to end the fight. So it comes down to skill and accuracy. The less skill you have (and practice you're willing to do) the bigger the bullet you need. That's a huge generalization of course but it applies.

Very true. Shot placement is really what it's all about. Practice, practice practice.

 

[Eagles1181]

But having a bigger caliber allows you a fudge factor to compensate for stress, ect... I understand what you are saying, but if shot placement was the only consideration we would all be carrying 22s. Small, light, no recoil, and huge capasity.

Eagle

 

[TexasRedneck]

Besides which, perfect shot placement on a perp with drugs in his system STILL requires significant transferance of energy to his body to affect him. Small calibers lack that. Bear in mind that I routinely carry a .380 as a BUG - and my .45 whenever possible as well - so I'm not against 'em, just acknowledge that there ARE better options to be exercised whenever possible.

 

[Texas42]

Besides which, perfect shot placement on a perp with drugs in his system STILL requires significant transferance of energy to his body to affect him. Small calibers lack that. Bear in mind that I routinely carry a .380 as a BUG - and my .45 whenever possible as well - so I'm not against 'em, just acknowledge that there ARE better options to be exercised whenever possible.

come on. The max energy that is transfered to the bad guy is the energy that you absorb when you shoot the gun.

Very few guns, even rifles have enough "energy" to stop someone. It is blood loss and damage to the nervous system.

Probably most of the reason that a bad guy stops when he gets shot, is psychological, and he isn't going to know if you shot him with a 9mm or a 44 mag.

 

[TexasRedneck]

Excuse me - have you ever shot someone? Studied wound reports? It's about the shock and transfer - the more you have, the more likely you are to stop 'em (to a point). The wound channel (and associated trauma) of an impact from a 357/44/45/etc. WILL have a greater impact on someone than from a .380. That impact results in the blood loss and nervous system damage. My issue was the standpoint that a .380 is essentially equal to other larger calibers in terms of stopping ability. I've shot deer with a .223 that dropped in their tracks - and tracked 'em with a 7mm mag in 'em - so I'm the first to acknowledge that big caliber does NOT automatically equal faster kills. But given the choice, I'll shoot the bear with my 44 mag - YOU shoot 'em with the .380!

 

[Texas42]

sorry if i ddin't type as precisely as i should have.

i'm not saing that the energy of a round has no effect at all. i high energy round, like a .223, will do much more damage than just its diameter,but it isn't going to knock the animal down. the animal may fall down, and stay down, but that is because the tissue damage was extensive enough to cause the animal not to get up.

a .357 mag will do more tissue damage than a 9mm luger, but neither actually have the energy to push someone back. all i'm sayin is that the tissue damamge is what stops them, not the energy itself. more energy should equal more tissue damage, but the energy isn't the whole story.

ps-sorry about thc capitalization, but shift key is broken.

 

[TexasRedneck]

So....you're admittin' you're shiftless, eh?

I understand what you're saying - like I said, I routinely carry a .380 as back-up, but given the choice, I'm going for my .45 first every time. However, the .380 WILL beat the dickens out of me making faces at 'em!!!

 

[wrtanker]

LOL! I might make the faces anyway (no telling what they look like!)!

It isn't just about cavity size or energy transferance. Those are very important and the critical factor in a typical body shot. But if you "cut his motors" so to speak, that is put the round through his spinal cord or frontal lobe (I think that's the one...) then he will stop coordinated activity and go down whether you hit him with a .25 or a .45. Now me, I'm going to shoot him with a .45. I just believe the bigger the hole the better no matter where it is! I'm a good shot but I don't believe in giving away any advantage. So I'm going to shoot him with my .45 several times because I'm not going to count on hitting that critical spot when he's moving and my adrenalin is flowing. From here on the argument goes back to bullet weight, velocity, yada-yada-yada...

 

[Texas42]

ok, let me make this a little more clear.

I don't like it when people say "energy transfer" because it isn't accurate. i'm not referring to hydrostatic shock, just pure and simple energy and momentum.

I'm not even touching the .45 vs 9mm debate. or even shot placement argument.

I'm not saying that a .380 is just as good as a .45 auto. I'll even say that a .45 is marginally better than a 9mm for a defensive situation.

I am simply saying that the energy deposition of a bullet on a person isn't usually enough to make them fall over, and therefore does not really effect stopping a bad guy.

I think we are disagreeing over simantics here. Is that clear?

 

[TexasRedneck]

I am simply saying that the energy deposition of a bullet on a person isn't usually enough to make them fall over, and therefore does not really effect stopping a bad guy.
I think we are disagreeing over simantics here. Is that clear?

Yes....but no.

I'm not counting on the round makin' 'em fall over. I AM saying, however, that the larger the round, the more ya git their attention. Jest like shootin' a bear with a .380 vs. a 7mm mag. Both might kill 'em - but which one will YOU wanna shoot 'em with?