I've wondered about this for some time.
Is the perception that 9mm isn't up to the job of defense against persons mostly because of the military's experience with the round, or is it something more?

The reason I ask is because I'm wondering if this perception is based on skewed experience. Sure, 9mm isn't going to be very effective for the military, since they aren't allowed to use hollowpoints. It'll cause almost nothing but temporary cavitation with the long and rounded FMJ bullets that a 9mm takes.

But, if it's primarily based on police experience, that's something different.

So, how much of this perception of being inefficient is really deserved?

Thats a good question Ko.

I think it comes from our love affair with the 45 acp. Most folks feel that the 45 is the ultimate manstopper and anything smaller just won't work well. Most folks that push for lesser calibers such as the 9mm and the 40 S&W cite the longer learning curve to be effective with the 45.

As far as how effective the 9mm is for a military round almost every nation in the world uses it and in fact so does ours now, though my understanding is there looking to go back to a 45 of some sort.

Heard that Navy Seals and Army SOCOM folks carry 1911 type 45s again. Many feel the low velocity, heavy 45 bullet is the better manstopper over the 9mm. This debate will never end. Do know that the 9mm high velocity, light bullet is nothing to trifle with. Dead is dead, period.

Military standards for ammunition are heavily weighted towards penetration. When you think about it, this makes sense. Many if not most military targets are going to be shielded behind some sort of cover, heavily clothed, or lightly armored. One thing you definitely get with 9mm hardball ammo is penetration, in spades. Another factor -- the smaller the cartridge, the more you can carry, and that certainly has to play a role.

That said, the jacketed hollowpoint has given the 9mm much improved performance in a civilian self-defense capacity. No question a .45 will always give you a bigger hole, and given guns of equal size the .45 would always seem to be the logical choice. But a good 9mm loaded with quality hollowpoint ammo is no slouch, and I would never feel undergunned with such equipment for self defense.

If you look at it strickly by the numbers. .45 230 grn is about 396 ft lbs. of energy 9mm 115 grn about 340 ft lbs. not a huge difference in terms of energy. The plus side to the 9mm is capacity and weight/concealability. I carry either a 9mm or .38 snubbie for protection, depends on the season/dress.

Here's something to chew on when making a decision like this.

From the Box O' Truth:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot27.htm

Nice write up. I have done some water testing of my own and b/c of them carry 147 GRN JHP in the 9MM and 125's for the snubbie, found they worked the best.

funny story but true. One day at the range using the .38 snubbie with some 158 grn LRN reloads that may have been loaded a little on the light side. Shooting at some tin cans for fun and when I hit the one can it went flying about 25-30 yds downrange. when I later retreived the can I found the can with an entrance and a huge dent but no exit. the bullet was still in the can....I think I loaded them a little too light. Kinda cool to watch the can fly though.

funny story but true. One day at the range using the .38 snubbie with some 158 grn LRN reloads that may have been loaded a little on the light side. Shooting at some tin cans for fun and when I hit the one can it went flying about 25-30 yds downrange. when I later retreived the can I found the can with an entrance and a huge dent but no exit. the bullet was still in the can....I think I loaded them a little too light. Kinda cool to watch the can fly though.


I too carry a 38 snubby for a carry gun. I just couldn't find anything that hides as well or has as much punch for it's size with 125 grain jacket plus P hollow points.

I believe much of the perception comes from the fact that both the 9x19 and .45 ACP were loaded with RN bullets for the first 60 or so years of their existence. With ball, most experience shows the .45 ACP to be superior to the 9x19. It wasn't until the 70's that effective JHP bullet designs began to appear in autopistol cartridges, and even then it took several years for the technology to mature.

IMO, with modern designed expanding bullets, the difference between the .45 ACP and 9x19 is so slight as to be negligable. It comes down to what launch platform you are most comfortable with, not the cartridge.

There are still many folks beating the 9x19 vs .45 ACP horse by still refering to the Thompson/Lagarde tests of the early 1900s. They shot less than a dozen cattle, with cartridges typical for the period. If I remeber correctly the only autopistol cartridges used were the 7.65 Luger, the .38 Auto, and the 9x19.

Anyone using that type of methodology today for "scientific" testing would be laughed right off the planet.

The best performing cartridge in the Thompson/Lagarde test was the .30/7.63mm Mauser. Go figure! Guess it tumbled.

SEALs use the SIG-Sauer P-226 in 9mm as their PDW. The H&K Mk 23 Socom pistol is used by a limited number of team members for its ability to use a suppressor with the slide locked as a single shot pistol for quiet sentry elimination. Slide noise often being the loudest aspect of a suppressed pistol.

There is a competition currently underway for a new service pistol. 49,000 Units for SOCOM and 600,000 pistols for all other units. Pistol caliber is .45 ACP in both cases.

KO, I believe it is a perception issue. From compiled statistics, the .45 ACP 230 gr. FMJ has a one shot stop percentage of 62%. The 124 gr. 9mm NATO ball load comes in at 63%. I don't care about opinions concerning OSS percentages. There are counter arguments, yet there is relevance. FMJ ammo is the conclusion in either case. There are 2 very different schools of thought here that go very much overlooked. The .45 is preferred by some because of its larger caliber wound channel as far as its own diameter goes. It also has higher momentum which is a clouded issue itself when you consider that most shooters define momentum by some pretty simplistic criteria. The 124 gr. 9mm NATO load is an excellent penetrator. Penetration is not the issue. Penetration alone does not equate to stopping/incapacitation/killing power, it's a part of it, but certainly not the solution. The 9mm was chosen as our service cartridge in the 80s for several reasons. One being logisitics, since most of our allies use it. Secondly, the 9mm 124 gr. NATO load has higher velocity. That coupled with its length to diameter ratio-sectional density, it tumbles and will create more devistating wounds IN THEORY. Much the same reason we switched to the 5.56 X 45mm.

When the 9mm started becoming very popular in the US almost all of the US ammomakers reduced its performance in comparison to European ammo. SAAMI reduced the pressure rating from 35,700 CUP, to 35,000 PSI with +P going to 38,500 PSI. Some say there is no direct correlation between PSI and CUP. That is only half correct. Any serious student of geometry should know that the two values can be correlated GRAPHICALLY. So what you get, is 35,700 CUP and +P 38,500 PSI are nearly identical pressure equivelants. The current SAAMI standard for 9mm ammo at 35,000 PSI is also listed by some powder companies in CUP value at 33,000 CUP.

The best loads in either caliber will require a JHP bullet to be most effective. But, the old dragging argument has always compared the best .45 ACP loads to inferior 9mm loaded below its original pressure spec. This is why some don't understand the relevance of Kinetic Energy, which like penetration, is a part of the equation with neither being the solution on their own merits. Combined, with high levels of kinetic energy it is easy to understand why JHPs are necessary in the stopping power equation. The ideal level of kinetic energy by those who actually study it, is 500 Ft./Lbs. Personally, I look at a window of +/- 50 Ft/Lbs. 450-550 Ft/Lbs being the "window". This is verifiable by the best performing loads ever compiled by OSS statistics: the 125 gr. .357 Magnum JHP at just under 550 Ft/Lbs when you consider a load at 1400 FPS fired from a 4" revolver. Exactly what the folks at SIG tried to replicate with their autoloaders and the .357 SIG cartridge. 185 gr. +P .45 ACP is very similar in KE and ties for the best OSS percentage at 96%, the standard set by the 125 gr. 357 Magnum. The better 155 gr. JHP 40 S&W loads achieve 500 Ft/Lbs, that's why they're at the top in their caliber ranking with the best load being the 165 gr. Rem. Golden Saber that develops around 485 Ft/Lbs of KE. Many good JHP loads in 9mm will achieve 450 Ft/Lbs of energy, but they will require that +P or +P+ designation to achieve it. You'll also find that most often they are 124 grs. Not to say the 147 gr. JHP can't be effective, but very few outside of Cor-Bon have understood it can be about as good as it gets for a defense cartridge when it is also loaded to +P. At subsonic speeds, its sectional density is actually too high and the only reliable method of making it do its work; what KE is all about to begin with, is to obtain higher velocity to ensure expansion. That's why there were so many overpenetration issues in the early days of 147 gr. JHP 9mm. They were to slow to develop the required energy to expand reliably. Now everyone makes majic bullets in an attempt to achieve the same effect. Thanks just the same, but I'll take the 124 gr. +P JHP in 9mm. Most 9mm pistols are sprung for standard pressure 115 and 124 gr. loads, so if you want to go to +P 147s, you will need a heavier than standard recoil spring.

All that said, there is an anomaly. The 230 gr. Golden Saber and Federal Hydra Shoks are both very much subsonic. If a true understanding of momentum is understood in terms of physics, rather than bullet weight X velocity / 1000 = momentum, that is not correct. What it defines is power factor, not true momentum. The momentum equation is a bit more sophisticated. There is one equality in all of this: EXPANSION! . . . BUT, effective expansion is also dependent on penetration. Permanent stretch cavity relates to blood loss potential, but the Temporary stretch cavity produces hydro-static shock to the central nervous system. A necessary quantifier to permanent wound channel in the absence of striking a vital organ, or better yet, severing the spine and disrupting the CNS altogether. That's why the experts tell you to aim for center of mass. Why does this anomaly exist? Well a 230 gr. .45 ACP starts at .451" of caliber and even though they come in at slightly less than 400 Ft/Lbs of KE, the level of true momentum coupled with the expansion potential of newer generation bullets like the H-S, G-S and the SPEER Gold Dot, it achieves something like momentum nirvana. To equal it in terms of smaller caliber and high KE values, the smaller calibers become more dependent on velocity to achieve the desired KE, as well as depth of penetration which has an ideal range on the human torso regardless of momentum or KE schools of thought.

Conversely, loads that start achieving more than 550 Ft/Lbs begin to loose effectiveness as they climb in KE values. The bullets start overaccelerating their potential to expand and penetrate completely through a target with little or no expansion. Original 10mm loads fall into this category with the very fast 170 and 180 gr. JHPs as do the .41 and .44 Magnums. Their bullets have completely penetrated the target before they have achieved expansion.

So, in reality, we have had an ongoing debate about something a good number of people never really understood. FMJ is FMJ regardless if it's 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP. I have shot and carried all of the popular defense rounds. Do I have a favorite? Yes, the 230 Gr. Golden Saber in .45 ACP, but mainly from a handloading perspective. It does everything a .40 S&W can do while operating at 21,000 PSI vs. 35,000 PSI for the Forty. That simple. I certainly wouldn't feel undergunned with a Forty anymore than I would a 124 gr. +P JHP in 9mm that achieves a minimum of 450 Ft/Lbs at the muzzle. I could really care less about someones opinion about the use of handloads for defense. I live in Texas, so that's a different ballgame than for those who reside in CA, MA, or NY obviously, but I have loaded 9mm to the original pressure spec. A 124 gr. 9mm Rem. Golden Saber loaded to 1250 FPS will expand to nearly .70" consistently with ideal penetration. A 165 gr. .40 S&W will do the same thing as will the .45 caliber Golden Sabers. These are the bullets I use, insert your favorite, load them to similar performance or buy factory ammo that duplicates it. Add a good 185 gr. +P in .45 ACP. Learn to hit what you're aiming at with any of them and forget about all of the other nonsense. Carry a .357 Magnum/.357 SIG? Absolutely!

I think the great caliber debate for a personal defense gun is VASTLY overrated.

Consider:

1. Most people don't want to get shot, with anything.

2. Most people who get shot, with anything, would just as soon not get shot anymore.

Human responses to trauma are entirely different than animals...... stuff that would be marginal, or completely ineffective on a 150lb animal, will often convince a 300+ lb. thug, to be somewhere else, pretty much yesterday, even if you miss.

Drugged up.... it's an entirely different problem to solve (and you'll probably wish for a 12GA at that point).

Here's something to chew on when making a decision like this.

From the Box O' Truth:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot27.htm

Darn good reference Jerry, thanks for that heads up. It sure makes me happy about selecting the little Taurus ultra-light. I ppicked up a box of the gold dots a couple of weeks ago on the advice of another member.

Any gun can fail to stop. I use the CorBon 115 grain in my Glock 26. It goes 1260 fps from the 3 inch barrel. Ive killed varmints with that bullet at lesser veloctiy so I know what it will do. The 9mm is a minimal round but is a compromise that works out with a small 9mm gun size. You have to have it on you when you need it and not in the glove box back at the car.

The military used light side arms in the past untill they had to deal with drug crazed loons. Thanks to Teddy and the Rough Riders we have history on our side. Once the M1911 was introduced the bad guys had no leg to stand on. The same for the middle east conflict. The 223 worked fine when the goal was to wound the enemy so it would take two to pull one off the battle field. That may have worked in the past but not now. The enemy hopes to die in battle for Allah. We have captured these loons with multiple 223 wounds and still they fought. In comes the old favorite 308. Many on long range patrol carry nothing less than a 308 just for knock down power. With such a number in enemy deaths with no change in our tactics shows that it helps. :D Guy

I always get a kick out of those who shoot helpless milk jugs and blocks of Jello as proof of ammo effectiveness. Lots of water flying around and impressive "wound channels." Eeeeha!
Informative, prehaps. Fun, definately. But hardly definitive, unfortunately

Last time I checked, most of those folks who require shooting dont simply stand around, awaiting your righteous shot. They are normally rather averse to the whole idea of being shot with ANYTHING, and resist in whatever way they can. Too, they are normally full of adrenaline, bones and other mass anomalies to add complications to the matter. And more often than not, they arent naked, as they are usually wearing clothing of some sort - often alot of it in the colder seasons. I also havent mentioned the occasional perp who is chock full of "illegal pain killer," of one flavor or another. There are so many variables that even the "experts" are wisely reluctant to make proclamations.

While it is true that most humans dont take a shot as well as say, your average deer of similar weight (for a lot of reasons), it isnt an absolute to shoot a bunch of milk jugs and pronounce one sort of ammo or another as, "The One." Especially not when todays shot-worthy douche-bag has probably been beaten, stabbed and very likely shot before you ever met him/her. The street thug lives in a desperate world and while not immune to pain, they are accustomed to dealing with it in ways you are not, as a rule.

With all this in mind, the only data that supports a choice you'd stake your life on is proven data which stems from actual shootings... real life stuff.

9MM in-effective, as some suggest? Not according to the data from said actual shootings. In the old days, 'hi-tech' 9MM ammo ran about 60% 1-shot effective. Not so hot. But today, with the newer bullet configurations, it runs up into 75% 1-shot fight stopping power. That aint bad, considering it's in a controllable, concealable, accurate, magazine reloaded combat gun.

There are no absolutes here, no 'magic pill." There is no, "This one is best and nothing else will match it." Besides, the best is hard to have handy all the time, anyway - that's why we depend on handguns: they are there when something better cannot be.

The best can be many things in many different situations. What we need is what is proven to work, on many levels AND what we can comfortably practice and hit with. That's not always what merely looks spectacular in pictures and print.

My, how we forget the FIRST rule of a gun fight - HAVE A GUN!

My carry items include a 22 mag derringer, a KelTec 380, and my 3; 45 1911, all dependent on clothing. While I prefer the 45, the others are much easier to hide.

I admit never being a 9mm fan, but the contradicts my 380 carry. Smaller calibers have become more of a threat given today's bullet technology.

If the discussion ever stopped, many gun companies would close their doors. The statement none of us want to get shot is VERY true, but we are the one that follow the rules. Not the ones who don't which leads many of us carry for CYA reasons.....

When the 9MM round was introduced there was a perception of ineffectiveness. Then again it was also introduced as a FMJ round used in the military. With modern ballistics and bullets the 9MM round is much more effective than before. There are hundred if not thousands of police departments and other gov't agencies that use the 9MM round. That really does say something about it's effectiveness. Now on a side note I do think there is something to be said about the 5.7MM as a novelty. I'd have to see what it could do before carrying something like that. I can foresee that or simular rounds coming into play in the future. Especially if you look at the recent releases in the small bore/rimfire world i.e. 17HMR 17 Mach2 .204 Ruger...I'm seeing a trend towards the small bore. Now granted those are for the varmiting world I can see that being carried over to the civilian market for defense as well. Ok I'm a little off topic but just my $0.02

I admit never being a 9mm fan, but the contradicts my 380 carry. Smaller calibers have become more of a threat given today's bullet technology.



Aren't smaller calibers really a bigger threat due to the fact the reduction of recoil would allow the shooter to shoot more rounds accurately? At close range, wouldn't the average shooter only be able to get off one round with a .45ACP? At that same distance, ie. 7ft or so, would someone with a pipsqueek Walther P22 be able to empty the 10rd. magazine with most of the rounds going into the person's melon???

Jim

Aren't smaller calibers really a bigger threat due to the fact the reduction of recoil would allow the shooter to shoot more rounds accurately? At close range, wouldn't the average shooter only be able to get off one round with a .45ACP? At that same distance, ie. 7ft or so, would someone with a pipsqueek Walther P22 be able to empty the 10rd. magazine with most of the rounds going into the person's melon???

Jim

I suppose it would depend on how you define an "average shooter". I consider myself an above-average shot, but I have no delusions of myself as a fast-and-fancy gunfighter -- basically competent, perhaps, but certainly no more than average. But even so, I feel pretty sure it would take me no longer than maybe a couple of 10ths of a second longer to empty my .45 into a close-range target than it would to empty my .22. Given a choice, I'd prefer to have the .45.

But for sure, some folks are going to do much better with a smaller caliber. I wouldn't say that makes a small caliber more of a threat than a larger one, but it could sure make it as much of a threat.

I gotta agree with the sentiment that there is little "average" about a defensive armed encounter. Regardless of the caliber you favor, be it large or small, the prudent man considers such activities extraordinary - and prepares for the worst. Might I suggest you:

Carry enough power, without it being uncontrollabe.
In general, this starts at .380 level and goes up. Some will debate this, but with the modern loads, it will suffice as a start. There is alot of drivel around today masquerading as science or the truth....the little .22 being easy to shoot and therefore easy to win a gun fight with is just one example.

Carry it where it will do you the most good and is accessible.
This means in good leather, where you can live with it - since that is what you must do. A gun that is left home because it is uncomfortable or bothersome is of no use.

Carry it to where you practice defensive shooting regularly.
Realistic practice is the key to all of this. Dreaming up scenarios, "where this or that might or should work" is folly. Knowing how to hit with your chosen weapon at a moments notice or under extreme stress is real world - and is what saves your life.

The gunners motto?: "Expect the worst."

Now, if a .22LR makes you happy, after you've done your due diligence, then have at it. As another said, you cant have a gunfight without a gun. But, me personally, Ill take a .38 snubby as minimum and 9MM will do nicely, thanks.

Aren't smaller calibers really a bigger threat due to the fact the reduction of recoil would allow the shooter to shoot more rounds accurately? At close range, wouldn't the average shooter only be able to get off one round with a .45ACP? At that same distance, ie. 7ft or so, would someone with a pipsqueek Walther P22 be able to empty the 10rd. magazine with most of the rounds going into the person's melon???

Jim

Well, I tend to think of it in term of "the first shot is the most important one." Because, especially at 7 ft, you might not have the luxury of a second shot to finish what the first one started.

Gents,

KO, I expect that last shot is the one that matters most. Best to live with the philosophy, "shoot until the target changes shape."

Had a boss once, heck of a good operator, whose carry gun was a 22. He called it his "can opener". He is still around, and still mean as a snake.

I've always thought a sensible minimum was a 38, so that is the lightest I will carry. I do like a 1911 45 because it shoots so straight, and a 9 because for some reason, every pistol that shoots a 9 works, dang near every time.

I don't reckon a fellow ought to put his faith in the bullet of any pistol, regardless of caliber- personal experience tells me they don't deserve it. Fellow ought to place his faith in himself as an operator, and then the gun as a reliable tool, and then go forward without fear. Pistols are arms of convienance, and little else, but it does make sense to master them, because if you need one, you need it bad.

Not sure what causes the issue with the 9mm, figured is was something that the boys like to complain about, just like everything else, chow, boots, pay, living quarters, etc. Back in the old days, when the regular troops were armed with 1911s, the boys complained about them, too, and the 9mm Hi-power saw lots of service with the De Opresso Liber bunch. Those fellows always liked to be different.

If you have the misfortune of shooting somebody in anger with the 9mm, and your aim is up to snuff- what the guy is not going to do is look at the hole in his heart and say, "I'm glad this hole is only .355 inches."

Best to you guys.

Steve

KO, I expect that last shot is the one that matters most. Best to live with the philosophy, "shoot until the target changes shape."
Not strong on tactics or strategy, but a philosophy with merit!

Had a boss once, heck of a good operator, whose carry gun was a .22. He called it his "can opener". He is still around, and still mean as a snake.
Unfortunately, while this says volumes about his character, it says little of his success with his weapon choice in combat. Or HIS tactics, for that matter..

I've always thought a sensible minimum was a .38, so that is the lightest I will carry.
Seems to be the concensus among the cogniscenti, too.

Fellow ought to place his faith in himself as an operator, and then the gun as a reliable tool, and then go forward without fear. Pistols are arms of convienance, and little else, but it does make sense to master them, because if you need one, you need it bad.
Can I get an "AMEN?"

Not sure what causes the issue with the 9mm... Back in the old days, when the regular troops were armed with 1911s, the boys complained about them, too, and the 9mm Hi-power saw lots of service with the De Opresso Liber bunch. Those fellows always liked to be different.

When the .45 ACP came on the scene, it was like a bolt from the blue, compared to it's predecessor, the old .38 Long Colt. That round was, give or take, the equivalent of a mild .380 hardball load (the old .38 Long). In it's hardball guise, the .45 does alot better, punching a big pair of holes, no doubt about it. Bad guys fell down pretty well in front of it - the mystique stuck.

The 9MM, on the other hand, is a paradox. Both a failure and a success, it is reckoned one or the other by which side of it you happen to be on, mostly. When stoked with milspec hardball, mandated by the Geneva Convention, the HB 9MM is a dubious stopper on it's own. It does penetrate well and is quite controllable, yet it really smells alot like a FMJ .38 Special +P load from the same length barrel. Works 'bout like one, too, by all accounts. This is the failure part, mostly recognized by the shootist. Most of the complaints about its ability to dispatch a rabid, bloodthirsty enemy have come from those who have actually shot such enemies with it.

But, remember, military thinking has always been divided by the "Kill em" or "Wound em" schools of thought - a dead enemy is good, but a wounded one is both out of the way AND ties up a couple more of his enemy buddies: that's 3 for 1! This is the success part, which, for the unfortunate victim is quickly realized.
(This only works, of course, if you the shootist actually survives the shooting encounter. Most ground pounders prefer a DEAD enemy, as merely wounded ones have an obnoxious tendency to continue to shooting/fighting back.)

There is another "success" element, too, to the 9MM. It is relatively small, so you can stuff a lot of them in a full size side-arm. So, if nothing else, you can wound lots of bad guys with it.

While the stopping power in 9MM military loads may be lacking to some degree - it still has the shock and wound factors going for it. All these things add up to an overall plus, from both the tactical and logisitcs standpoint. Basically, the 9MM works on many levels in military applications, no doubt it's main reason for staying in service.

If you have the misfortune of shooting somebody in anger with the 9mm, and your aim is up to snuff - what the guy is not going to do is look at the hole in his heart and say, "I'm glad this hole is only .355 inches."
But, you don't need the milspec HB anymore for anything more than practice, nowadays. Todays +P loads and "engineered" bullets, increase both the shock and stopping factors, easily surpassing military hardball and even bettering those designs from just a decade ago.

There really is little to complain about with the "New Age" 9MM - that is, if you, like me, prefer the "4C+P" design philosophy in handguns:

Compactness,
Concealability,
Controllability,
Capacity,
Power

Guns that exhibit such design criteria take you very near, if not within, .38 Sp +P+/.357 Magnum territory. With that in hand, that same guy whose bad fortune got him accurately shot with your 9MM is probably gonna be knocked out, or at least knocked silly, before he has the idea to measure the holes in his chest. That works for me.

Best to you guys.
Ditto

Sir,

I get the impression that I have offended you with my post, and that certainly was not my intention. My apologies.

I see now that I did not do a very good job of making my point, and I will try in the future to be clearer.

Best,

Steve

Sir,

I get the impression that I have offended you with my post, and that certainly was not my intention. My apologies.

I see now that I did not do a very good job of making my point, and I will try in the future to be clearer.

Best,

Steve
Nothing oculd be farther from the truth, Steve. You made a lot of good sense - so did I, I believe. That's what were here for to share ideas, together.. I for one thank you for doing so.

Sometimes there is real problem in this media to take things in the wrong context, since it is one sided at any given moment. Much relies on reading between the lines. I only hope whatever I posted that may have given the wrong idea can be dismissed.

Again thanks for your response worthy post.

David

KO, The biggest problem w/ the 9mm is against Angled soft objects such as windshields. Against a human, dead is dead. But against an angled soft target it deflects. It is true the stopping power is similar to a .38 spec., but if you add 10 grains to the standard 115 grain FMJ you have a different animal. If your bullet has an edge, such as a SWC you have a definite advantage to a sloped soft target, and a great bullet to stop what is coming. I load 125 grain Lead and it is accurate, great knock down power, and it's cheap! For 9mm handgun loads a 95 grain bullet is a real devastating bullet. My Zoom Splat! A great low penetration round. I use both in 9mm carbines, Good stuff! I only shoot .45acp and 10mm for Auto sidearms in compitition, but the 9mm is adequate! jp.
I usually carry a .380 SIG P230