Handgun caliber-power vs capacity argument

[dgax65]

I don't really want to rehash this tired old argument, but I did find this article interesting.

Why one cop carries 145 rounds on the job

I don't think there is enough difference in energy and wound channel size to definitively say that one caliber is noticeably better than another. Given the demonstrated lack of consistent 'knock down' capability of most handgun ammo, I think it is obvious that shot placement and capacity are both vitally important and greatly outweigh ballistic performance.

I can see the logic of aiming for center of mass in a defensive shooting situation. That gives you the greatest chance of getting rounds on target and also hitting vital organs. While that tactic might be wise, it does not ensure that the attacker is immediately incapacitated. Some people might go down with a single, non-fatal .22 round to the body. Others might take 6 fatal rounds to vital organs and keep fighting until they bleed out. There just is no guarantee how the attacker will react after being hit.

I think if I were put in a situation requiring a defensive use of a handgun, I would want to have enough rounds available that I could also take some lower probability head shots in addition to center of mass. I would rather go with the higher capacity of the 9mm.

Just my personal opinion. Absolutely nothing that I said in any way discounts the importance of shot placement or frequent practice. I just know that in an unexpected, life-threatening situation you don't always respond as quickly or effectively as you might want. Training and preparation definitely helps improve your response. Having enough rounds available to keep you in the fight after the first few adrenaline-induced errant shots might be just as important.

[robcoe]

I would rather go for higher capacity, but since this is California I go for .45ACP since I am used to it and we are limited to 10 rounds

[Merc1138]

Thunder .50bmg handgun, plenty of "stopping power", don't miss.

[toby]

Again? I'll take bigger is better for $200

[anothergunnut]

I don't think I understand the cop's logic of carrying 145 rounds. He got into a (hopefully) once in a lifetime shootout and used 33 rounds. Eventually, he slowed down and started taking head shots after realizing he had a failure to stop. Once he did that, the gunfight was over.

[Nate]

I think shot placement wins every time.

[Jimmybacon43]

"Don’t waste time arguing the relative merits of various calibers. No handgun rounds have reliable stopping power with body shots."

Interesting quote from the article. And some people ask "why do you need a magazine that holds more than x number of rounds?"

[mikenewgun87]

9mm

[Tarasdad]

If my uncle were still alive he'd be happy to discuss the relative merits of caliber vs. stopping ability. He witnessed it firsthand in WWII. His opinion? Size really does matter.

I got the same comment from many law enforcement customers when I worked behind the counter at a large gun store. Those who were allowed to carry their choice of pistol and caliber nearly all chose a 1911 style handgun in .45ACP. That was my caliber of choice for a personal and home defense handgun, although I preferred my SIG P-220 to the 1911.

[Press Check]

Great read.

[brebsedrets]

good,he slowed down and started taking head shots after realizing he had a failure to stop. Once he did that, the gunfight was over.

[five.five-six]

There is no replacement for displacement

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[GardoneVT]

good,he slowed down and started taking head shots after realizing he had a failure to stop. Once he did that, the gunfight was over.

I submit that's an oversimplified position.

Sometimes even a shot to the head won't put someone down. A guy beating a LEOs head to the pavement took four .45 ACP hits to the skull before he ceased the attack. In the 1986 FBI shootout , one of the suspects was shot in the head with a .38 Special round to no effect.

For an example on the flip side, a LAPD officer was shot in the heart at contact distance with a .357 Magnum revolver. Despite a big magnum hole in her chest, she still turned her attacker into maggot food with her 9mm duty pistol.

One should carry as many rounds as they can stand. If it were practical, I would carry a backpack full of loaded magazines everywhere I go-because bad guys don't fight fair, and some of them have thick skulls.

[JoshuaS]

The differences between 9mm through 45 acp, with good ammo is relatively minimal. low pressure 9mm defensive ammo might be 300 ft lbs or slightly more, while high pressure 45 acp is 500 (in principle 40 SW can be over 500 within safe loads, but not much factory ammo is loaded that hot). 357 magnum out of a 6 in barrel might get up to 700 ft lbs, but in a carry piece, where velocity matters more, closer to 500. And the difference between actual factory offered 9mm +P and 40 SW is usually 20-50 ft lbs (350-420 being the range between the two).

Handguns are inherently underpowered. But frankly once you go above 380 the performance is generally equivalent. The incremental improvements in power must be weighed against ease to shoot and capacity. To some degree, you ability to shoot it is more important than capacity or power. For a carry piece, you ability to carry

If I had to carry a gun I have currently while going to the beach or some place where it is very hard to conceal, I would carry my .25 acp. My XD 40 sc does me no good when I don't have it.

So isn't that what it boils down to? What actually works for you?

1. Can I and will I carry it, or do I need something more concealable?

2. Within that constraint, how well do I shoot it?

3. Between calibers that you shoot fine

a. What is the difference in power and capacity?
b. Is trading a lot of capacity for a little more power worth it?
c. Is trading a lot of power for a little more capacity?

I would edge, myself, to more power unless the difference in capacity was fairly substantial. Sure I would favor 15-17 rds 9mm over 7 45 acp. But I probably won't ever CCW a full size Glock, and in CA I am limited to ten. If I can carry my XD 40 which I shoot well, I would only get one more round out of the XD 9mm....not worth it. But for a home defense gun? If I were in a free state, 17 rds versus 10 in my SR 45 would be worth it.

The fact is that you are not going to carry 145 rds normally. You will carry whatever is in the gun, and maybe one or two spares, and probably not always those. And you aren't going to carry the largest capacity gun usually, but whatever is comfortable for you. That calculus is different for everyone, but very few will carry, even in a free state, more than a couple of dozen of rds.

[five.five-six]

Handgun caliber-power vs capacity argument

Um, except that 45acp is a low pressure round and .9mm is relatively high...and then i stopped reading your post.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk