9 vs 40 splits

[vospertw]

I'm trying to put some numbers to the comparison between 9 and 40. If you have some split times where you fired essentially the same course of fire with relatively similar guns (trying to keep it at least McIntosh to Fuji apples) in 9 and 40, I'd like to hear your splits. Actually, what I really needis the delta between the times, so if you are more comfortable with that number, no worries. Also, appreciate knowing how many shots in the string of fire if more than two. Probably not necessary to mention but if you we're shooting so fast that you weren't hitting the target, please discard those numbers.

I'm coming at this from the standpoint of defensive shooting; you hear many instructors talk about being able to fire the 9 faster, but I'd like to see if it's really an advantage in the average string of fire for defensive shooting (generally 3-5 shots). I also think that no matter the physics, each of us has a physical limit on how fast we can work our trigger finger, so at some point in your proficiency level that delta will shrink or disappear entirely.

Your competition splits will likely be faster than a defensive shooter but since the comparison is relative, I think it's still valid. Any actual data would be appreciated. Thanks all!

[joelogic]

I like where you are coming from but I do not think it is a far comparison. SD/Duty 40S&W out of the Glock vs 9mm bunny farts out of a race gun would not be a fair comparison. It would have to be same gun/same ammo.

40 minor vs 9 minor out of a race gun would show virtually no split difference.

IMHO, the bad rap comes Duty 40 S&W out of a glock "hurting" your hands and wrists and people needing to "shake" it off before firing another round.

[vospertw]

Joelogic, I certainly get your point. The same problem exists with SD ammo so not sure how to get around it - start throwing in the various grains, SP vs +P, etc. my thought was that using the lowest recoiling rounds in both calibers would give as fair a comparison as possible. The actual time delta is going to get bigger with more recoil but I was hoping the percentage faster/slower would be fairly consistent, i.e. If you are 20% faster with 9mm and competition loads, you might be roughly 20% faster with SD loads.

Of course, that may be a completely false assumption but gives a starting point for the discussion for now.

Edit: I plan to do a comparison using comparable Glocks and Winchester Train and Defend ammo as a way to normalize a much as possible. However, I thought getting splits from more proficient shooters would be helpful.

[mej16489]

I don't think the time differences are anywhere near the 20% you've thrown out there.

I have M&P Pro Cores 5" in both 9 and 40. Both with an RM07 on them. My goto ammo for 9 is PMC Bronze 124 grain, for .40S&W 185 grain UMC.

I run drills on steel with both quite regularly - frankly, the times between the two over a 40 second string with lots of movement and high round count are essentially the same. With 9mm I might need to take an extra shot or 2 due to a weak/low hit on a heavy popper. That basically never happens with the .40.

I shoot allot of steel, so the net effect is basically identical. If I was purely shooting paper, the 9 would be maybe 2% faster - that's about 1 second faster over 40 seconds.

[rkt88edmo]

I'm trying to put some numbers to the comparison between 9 and 40. If you have some split times where you fired essentially the same course of fire with relatively similar guns (trying to keep it at least McIntosh to Fuji apples) in 9 and 40, I'd like to hear your splits. Actually, what I really need is the delta between the times, so if you are more comfortable with that number, no worries. Also, appreciate knowing how many shots in the string of fire if more than two. Probably not necessary to mention but if you we're shooting so fast that you weren't hitting the target, please discard those numbers.

I'm coming at this from the standpoint of defensive shooting; you hear many instructors talk about being able to fire the 9 faster, but I'd like to see if it's really an advantage in the average string of fire for defensive shooting (generally 3-5 shots). I also think that no matter the physics, each of us has a physical limit on how fast we can work our trigger finger, so at some point in your proficiency level that delta will shrink or disappear entirely.

Your competition splits will likely be faster than a defensive shooter but since the comparison is relative, I think it's still valid. Any actual data would be appreciated. Thanks all!

http://www.rogersshootingschool.com

They are one of the earlier and stronger proponents of the 9mm shootability factor. Time pressure is a big component of their program. They actively encourage students to switch to 9mm during their multiday classes if they are lagging. They don't just talk about it, they have the data. How that actually plays out in terms of self defense probably can't be measured due to the high number of variables in incidents.

I don't have any splits myself but it would be fun to run splits using Glock 17, 19, 34, 22, 23, 35 to see the differences.

Regarding the part of your post that I've put in bold, I find your wording a bit confusing and I am not sure what you are trying to state there. Generally, the mechanical speed of most shooters to pull the trigger is not the limiting factor in the shooting function.

If you are shooting the same guns using ammo that has the same bullet weight and fps there should really be zero difference. The difference in shooting the two calibers is all about the difference in the most common loads, not the diameter of the bullets. Generally, .40S&W is just throwing a heavier bullet faster than a 9x19mm, which causes there to be more recoil to deal with ceteris paribus, unless you have trained to a Miculekian level.

[vospertw]

Mej - I put 20% as a number to throw out there and yes, agree it's likely way high. Goes to my hypothesis though that although I agree with the physics of the 9 being "faster" I'm not sure that there's a significant difference I've the course of a realistic string I fire. I don't think, as some instructors have proposed, that the split would be big enough to get out an additional round of 9mm in the same time it takes to fire 3-5 rounds of 40 say 5 rounds of 9 in the same amount of time as 4 rounds of 40.

[vospertw]

Rkt88edmo - agree that trigger speed is not the limiting factor for most shooters. However, I have seen instructors say "you will always be faster" regarding 9 over 40 but shooters aren't robots and there is some finite speed at which we can each pull the trigger. Especially if you are talking abut something like a Kahr with a longer trigger pull/reset. Granted, it may not be worth the resources to develop your skill to that point, but it may come easier for some people. I guess my point is that recoil management is a part, but not all, of the discussion.

[rkt88edmo]

However, I have seen instructors say "you will always be faster" regarding 9 over 40 but shooters aren't robots and there is some finite speed at which we can each pull the trigger.

I can't understand what point you are trying to make in the above sentence.

Especially if you are talking abut something like a Kahr with a longer trigger pull/reset. Granted, it may not be worth the resources to develop your skill to that point, but it may come easier for some people. I guess my point is that recoil management is a part, but not all, of the discussion.

I'd suggest taking the time to define what the different variables are that you are looking at and analyzing.

[speedrrracer]

No difference according to the timer for me, and while I don't have identical guns, they're not wildly different, either.

Just so happens I shot Bill Drills with an Accushadow (9mm) and a 1911 in .40 from JVDynamics today. The Accu was making minor power factor in USPSA, the 1911 major PF.

I end up with 15-16 splits on both. In this case, there's not enough recoil to make an appreciable difference. Perhaps if I was shooting a 2" dot at 10 yards instead of a full A-zone, because when you can keep the sights on the target through the entirety of the recoil motion, then the only limitation is the speed of your trigger finger.

I think it will "never" (see below) make a difference, and you're barking up the wrong tree. You certainly don't need to be even close to Jerry Miculek's level to control the recoil of a full-size, 40 caliber pistol. Maybe if you up the ante to include 50AE Desert Eagles or plastic sub-compacts in .45, then the snappiness might cause an discernible difference in split times at the lower skill levels for average-size targets, or, as mentioned previously, require very small targets at sufficient distances.

However, I think it would still make no difference for a better shooter. Get a GM and the splits on a 2" dot at 10 yards will be the same whether it's a 9mm at minor PF or a 45 1911 making major. Get Jerry Miculek or someone similar and you can probably up it to include Desert Eagles in 50AE.

So what question are you really asking? IMO, you're only asking the question to which everyone already knows the answer -- it's the Indian, not the arrow Your splits will be identical up to the limits of your skill in recoil control, so the greater your skill, the greater the discrepancy in ammo power factor & reduction in target size over which you can maintain identical splits

[Gh0sT]

To OP: At power factor for IDPA, shooting at a IDPA target at 7 yards:

Cz 75b - fastest splits .10 recorded to date. Bill drill all down zero average is .12

XD40 tactical - fastest splits .11. Bill drill all down zero .16.

Note for my own personal reasons I do not shoot .40 unless I am going to play USPSA limited major.

[vospertw]

So what question are you really asking? IMO, you're only asking the question to which everyone already knows the answer -- it's the Indian, not the arrow Your splits will be identical up to the limits of your skill in recoil control, so the greater your skill, the greater the discrepancy in ammo power factor & reduction in target size over which you can maintain identical splits

I have read multiple books by respected shooting instructors (Rob Pincus, Grant Cunningham to name a couple) who recommend the 9 over the 40 with the premise that you can shoot the 9 so much faster than the 40 that eventually you can get an extra round off within a certain amount of time - for example, say 5 rounds in one second vs 4. But for realistic strings of fire, my thought is that theory doesn't hold water because the splits wouldn't be large enough to get one extra round off when you are using moderate strings of fire. Maybe shooting a full mag or something, but that's not what we see in defensive shootings. From what you guys are saying, the splits are no where near large enough. For example, using 5 shots of 9 vs 4 shots of 40 in one second, the split time would be .25 seconds with the 9 and .33 seconds with the 40. That would require an increase in split times over 30%, which seems pretty big to me. Especially when you consider your target is the high center chest - about 8"x8" - at distances of 9'-15'.

I guess I didn't do a good job explaining it but seems like we are in agreement. I merely wanted some numbers to confirm what I was thinking. As for the trigger speed, the same instructors say that if you are fast with a 40, you will be faster with a 9 no matter how good you are. My thought is that as you get better and better, recoil management becomes less of a factor in your ability to shoot fast, so it's not really true to say "always" in terms of 9 being faster than 40.

Still clear as mud?

Thanks to all though for the input. I'm sure any trouble in understanding my question is due to my explanation.

[9mmepiphany]

For example, using 5 shots of 9 vs 4 shots of 40 in one second, the split time would be .25 seconds with the 9 and .33 seconds with the 40. That would require an increase in split times over 30%, which seems pretty big to me. Especially when you consider your target is the high center chest - about 8"x8" - at distances of 9'-15'.

Just for clarity's sake, I'd like to point out that the split for 5 shots/second would be .20 sec and that for 4 shots/second is .25 sec...which is indeed 20%.

Even using your percentages, the difference between .25 and .33 is only 24%, not 30%

Having worked with numerous shooters in classes, I'll offer that it is easier to get someone shooting 9mm to .20 sec splits than a shooter shooting a .40. These aren't master class shooters, just folks who want to improve their skill level a bit.

Also in reference to finite speed, you are making a common mistake that the ability to shoot faster is based on how fast you can press the trigger. While this is true of revolver shooters...because of the distance the trigger has to travel...the real limitation of shooting speed is how fast you can perceive the sights aligned on the target. This becomes ever more important as the target becomes more discrete

[Citizen_B]

I'm of the camp that standard SD loaded 9mm will be faster than standard SD loaded .40 all other things being equal. Your only way to make a fair comparison is to shoot comparable guns/ammo, say Glock 17 and Glock 22, train perfectly equally with each, then record split times. Practically speaking that is near impossible.

Personally, I've shot the G17, G22, and G21 with standard loadings side by side, and I'm always faster/more accurate with the G17. However I've spent more time on the G17 by far so it's not a fair comparison. I do believe the gap narrows a lot as training increases, but there will always be an edge towards the lighter recoiling platforms. And let's be fair on the skill level of gun owners - there's only a small percentage that are of B+ Class skill level where that gap shrinks to a point of "not that significant". So in light of that, in general, yes I think 9mm is a good platform to recommend to the masses.

[Citizen_B]

Also in reference to finite speed, you are making a common mistake that the ability to shoot faster is based on how fast you can press the trigger. While this is true of revolver shooters...because of the distance the trigger has to travel...the real limitation of shooting speed is how fast you can perceive the sights aligned on the target. This becomes ever more important as the target becomes more discrete

I agree with this completely.

In a real SD environment, things are dynamic and your level of training (mental/physical) are tested to the limits. The easier it is to run the gun, the better off you'll be overall as your attention will largely be focused on other things.

[Bob Hostetter]

There are a lot of factors that influence the ability to manage fast splits. Strength, technique, skill, experience all have as much effect as the caliber.