Is the larger calibers better as a self Defense weapon? Well according to Front Site Insitutes they are.

Penetration Is Your Friend!

Dear Subscriber,
We left off in our last report with recommending the largest caliber, heaviest bullet loaded as hot as you can handle to still be able to deliver two quick thoracic cavity shots.
The debate over which cartridge and which bullet type is best will never end as long as there are gun magazines, advertising dollars to be spent, and different manufacturers of the latest and greatest “wonderound.”
Understand this: Handguns are woefully inadequate in their stopping power as compared to a shotgun or rifle. So why do we carry handguns? Because we can! They are small enough to always have on our person for an emergency and they allow us to immediately respond in a defensive manner. (If you know you are going to a gunfight don’t be an idiot with a handgun -- take a shotgun or rifle.)
Knowing that handguns are inadequate in terms of stopping power as compared to a shotgun or rifle should lead you to want to carry the biggest handgun that you can readily conceal, in the biggest caliber, with the heaviest bullet loaded as hot as you can handle it to deliver a couple of quick shots to the thoracic cavity or a single round to the cranio-ocular cavity of an extremely dedicated opponent.
You want big holes in your opponent and you want him bleeding through and through. That means you want large, heavy bullets that penetrate.
Pretty simple, wouldn’t you say?
Yes, it is pretty simple and that’s the point.
No need to overthink it.
Focus on your ability, not the equipment, because it is YOUR ABILITY to place the rounds you choose to carry in your gun that will determine whether you live or die in a gun fight.
OK, I know you still want recommendations. Here they are. Don’t get too hung up on them. A gun in any caliber is better than no gun at all.
.45 ACP. Our grandfathers knew it in World War II and our grandfathers’ grandsons are figuring it out again in Iraq. A .45 stops ‘em best.
.40 S&W is the next best choice and in most handguns allows more magazine capacity compared to the .45ACP.
.44 Special, .357 Magnum, .357 Sig, and 9mm Plus P all run near third place.
.38 Special and 9mm are in distant fourth place. You can plan on delivering a cranio-ocular shot after two to the chest to end the fight with these calibers.
.380, .32, .25, and .22 -- Don’t even bother shooting your opponent in the chest with these. Your standard response with these pocket pistol rounds is two to three rounds to between the mustache and eyebrows (cranio-ocular cavity).
If your carry gun is one of the smaller lighter calibers that is OK. You just need to understand that you must train that much more with a short sight radius, pocket pistol to be able to deliver fight stopping multiple rounds to your opponent’s head than you would if you were carrying a 1911 in .45 or a Glock in .40 caliber and delivering two shots to the chest.
Please stay away from fragmenting bullets. Those bullets that are designed to prevent over penetration will get you killed. You WANT penetration. Because even the hottest handgun bullet is slow and mediocre compared to a rifle, you need all the penetration you can get. You want the greatest amount of linear tissue damage possible for the best chance of incapacitation (immediately dropping your opponent). You want penetration. Penetration is your friend.
So why not a .44 Magnum, .50AE, 10mm. etc? Because these guns require bigger frames due to greater chamber pressure generated and larger cartridge size, they tend to be very hard to conceal. These big guns, although they have slightly better stopping power than the .45 and .40, do so at the expense of portability, recoil control and practical use.
That leads me into the next report I will send you in a few days where I will share a very revealing discussion on carrying concealed handguns.
Dr. Ignatius Piazza
Front Sight Founder and Director

The Bold print is by Dr. Ignatius Piazza

I agree with this summary. While shot placement is everything, the round you're shooting needs to hold up its end of the bargain as well........:D

Dr. Piazza's recomendation is compatable with my observations in the field on game. The bigger and deeper penetrating rounds are on average more effective. His recomendation also concurs with Duncan McPhearson and Dr. Martin Fackler (President Of The International Wound Ballistics Assc.)

Gentlemen,
Where would you each think the 10mm fits in here. Between 1st (45acp) and 2nd (40SW) or somewhere else?
Thanks,
Greg

I would put the 10mm (my CCW just happens to be a G29) as #1 with the .45 and .40 as #2 and #3 respectively. No question. The "brute force" factor of the 10 over the .45 is overwhelming. The author of the article is dead wrong on the concealibility of the 10mm. I'm 6'2" and 220 lbs. My G29 disappears ITP beneath an untucked T-shirt. It would do the same for a considerably smaller man as well.

Fortunately I've never had to shoot a human and probably never will. When I first began big game hunting I was a fan of Elmer Keith and thus found myself hunting Colorado deer and elk with a 45/70 and a .338 Win Mag. Over the past forty years I've come to find that shot placement is so all important that all else is trivia. The bullet must, of course, have sufficient penetration to reach the vitals from whatever angle the shot is taken but enough is enough and more is not the least bit better. I see no reason to think it would be much different with human targets. I don't know from what angle you might shoot a human to require a 300 grain .44 mag to have sufficient penetration. For chest shots the .38 special will generally exit the far side and how on earth could you use more than that?

What do you base your assumption that a 38 Special will exit? I have read many account where the 38 Special did not exit.

I would put the 10mm (my CCW just happens to be a G29) as #1 with the .45 and .40 as #2 and #3 respectively. No question. The "brute force" factor of the 10 over the .45 is overwhelming. The author of the article is dead wrong on the concealibility of the 10mm. I'm 6'2" and 220 lbs. My G29 disappears ITP beneath an untucked T-shirt. It would do the same for a considerably smaller man as well.

Well, I think the author was just unaware that some companies have been putting 10mm into compacts, and in the case of Glock, even subcompacts.

My hesitation with the 10mm as a defensive gun is the stories (whether or not they're *just* stories is debatable) the FBI told of 10mm overpenetrating. While, yes, penetration is your friend, you only want to hit the attacker.

Well, I think the author was just unaware that some companies have been putting 10mm into compacts, and in the case of Glock, even subcompacts.

My hesitation with the 10mm as a defensive gun is the stories (whether or not they're *just* stories is debatable) the FBI told of 10mm overpenetrating. While, yes, penetration is your friend, you only want to hit the attacker.


Then don't miss, missing is much more likely to hit an un-intended target than any "so-called" over penetration

If you don't get caught up in the fact that the 10mm is a different bore diameter, the ballistics are near identical to the .357 Mag (same bullet weight at similar velocities from similar sized guns).

Not identical, but darn close. And that's not a bad place to be.

Gentlemen,
Where would you each think the 10mm fits in here. Between 1st (45acp) and 2nd (40SW) or somewhere else?
Thanks,
Greg

I love the 10mm and have since its inception, but I like diameter, and the .45 just makes a bigger hole. So, I would rank the 10 between the .45 acp and the .40 Smith.......

I love the 10mm and have since its inception, but I like diameter, and the .45 just makes a bigger hole. So, I would rank the 10 between the .45 acp and the .40 Smith.......


Also the 45 ACP can be loaded to higher velocity than the original load of a 230 grain bullet at about 850 FPS. Corbon loads a 185 grain XPB bullet that I have chronographed out of both of my 1911's that exceeds 1100 FPS. That should leave an impression..

Clint Smith of Thunder Ranch likes to say: don't go into a gunfight with any handgun caliber that doesn't start with a "4". This would also include the 10mm but you have to do the metric conversion LOL. I don't carry anything smaller than a 40. I do however like a 357 mag but I have seen a man shot 3 times center mass with one and live to tell about it. I don't think I would really blame that one on the caliber though I just think it wasn't his time.

With so many of the newer bullets in common self defense calibers, under penetration is common. These new bullets are designed to expand more reliably than bullets of the past and in some cases, velocity is not as high as it can be. I have seen .25 ACP's exit the back on a chest shot and I have seen 180 grain .40 S&W's and 125 grain .357 magnums stop well short of the vitals in chest and back shots. Energy transfer is great but at most defensive handgun velocities, penetration is more important. Someone that can place several smaller rounds on target quickly is usually much better than misses or hits to non vital areas with bigger bullets. Think of the effect of 00 buck. Many small holes can do lots of damage and let out lots of blood.

Kudu40

People dont seem to give enough importance to muzel velocity . Drop a gulf ball into a bucket of water from 4 ft and it will give a little splash . But if you were to chuck it into the same bucket of water as hard as you can you will get a really big splash .

IMO I would trade grains off the weight of my projectile for more feet per second . I have shot at least 100 Kangeroos with a 44mag and found 200 grain hornady XTP's driven as fast as i could worked the best . Also used use 200gr cast lead SWC driven about 1000 fps and these worked prity well to . Muzel blast and recoil of the above mentioned load was about equel to 240gr SWC going about 800fps , but the 200 grainers worked a whole heap beter cause of the extra velocity .

Bigger splashes can sometimes do the job, but not always. I have read P.O. Ackley's books and studies and from what I got from it, ultra high rifle velocities are needed to get the desired results. Some bullets will penetrate farther at lower velocities. The shock possible from most defensive handguns, in my opinion, would not be enough to rely on when your life is hanging in the balance.

Kudu40

Somewhere I read that according to statistics more one shot stops on humans have been accorded to the 357 mag than any other cartridge. Not sure where I got that so wouldn't take it a gospel, but it is interesting. I've always figured that if a self defense situation ever does happen it's going to be at close range and my little 38 is deadly accurate in that under 7 yard range.

I handgun hunted for years and used the 44 and 41 magnum, mostly the 44 with hardcast lead bullets with great results. On bear and deer I couldn't tell any difference in killing power.

I carry a Taurus Ultra-light snubby 38 special for my carry gun. I stoke it with Speer 125 grain gold dots and though there are lots of more powerful rounds out there I sure wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of one of those. From my perspective I've not found anything that's as easy to carry, easy to conceal and easy to shoot as one of the little 18 ounce snubby revolvers.

My old hunting partner bought a Taurus Millennium in 40 S&W and though it's pretty near the size of my snubby it's not near as easy to carry and he finally ended up with one of the fanny packs designed to carry concealed.

The little 38 inside a ten buck Uncle Mikes pocket holster just drops into a front jeans pocket and disappears. I know that for ease of use the revolver is much simpler. I can count four buttons on the side of his vs the single cylinder release on mine.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q172/faucettb/Preditor%20masters/100_7553.jpg

Bigger splashes can sometimes do the job, but not always. I have read P.O. Ackley's books and studies and from what I got from it, ultra high rifle velocities are needed to get the desired results. Some bullets will penetrate farther at lower velocities. The shock possible from most defensive handguns, in my opinion, would not be enough to rely on when your life is hanging in the balance.

Kudu40

Point taken Kudo . I remeber watching the "myth busters" once and they doing experiments on guns penetrating water . Cant remeber what guns they used exactly ,but was something like 223 and 30 06 as well as some others . Was reall suprising how badly they penatrated water , evan with sold mill ammo . From memory only penatratrd something like 4 or 5 ft . I was muckin around down at the creek once with my 44 , and found cast lead projectiles (200 and 240gr) would penatrate at least 10ft of water and still flaten on a rock .

as an aside ,couldnt make the 44 bounce of the water no mater low of an angle i shot across the water . i guess swc just go straight .

All I know is like i said , 200gr would definatly kill roos better than 240gr in any diferent type of projectiles i tryed (XTP , PMC fatory ammo and Cast lead SWC) . A big roo is prity similar to a human , relitivly narow chest and stands on hind legs .

Any way all academic really esp since they took my 44 blackhawk of me .

Bigger is always better, IF you can handle it.
The FBI dropped the 10mm because they could NOT handle it.

If you think that shooting something imparts some "energy" to it, set up a 100 lb log on end and shoot it. See if any gun you have will knock it over.

All that "energy" crap is crap.
Physics boys will tell you it is lost in deformation of the bullet, dissipated as heat, etc., etc., etc., but the bottom line is that it isn't there for you to use.

Like shoot the log and become a believer

NSC

i do believe that i agree for the most part with his imminence..
probably closer to the average results than anything.. i say that because an well placed shot
by the22 is a one shot stopper if you shoot that well.32 is a different thing altogather ..
a .380 different again.. those are the guns i have most of my experience with so its a misstake to lump those three togather..the .380 can with flat nosed hot rnd bust a sternum..
i have two 8 inch pieces of cured hardwood 2by8 lumber.. both busted so i could finish splitting them with my foot..however as i posted on my post.. there was a second piece under the first piece of lumber that just got a little dent..my 9 mm with +p ammo would put an hole thru both..this with ball ammo as i couldnt find flat nosed..so im going to give you theres an big difference between .380 and 9 mil ,or 38 + p rnds..
my practice shows that an face shot is as easy as the chest shot for me .. for some reason..
now thats not if im in the air jumping to avoid getting hit..then you just shooting at his mass.
and hoping you hittim somewhere..you wanta hit him before the gunfight starts..
all the more reason for those who choose small cal. to be observant all the time..
all our training is to get the first,second an third shot off an make them stoppers..
after the leads flying ,,its mostly just which one of you the creator thinks time on this earth is up..at least thats what seems to be the case to me..
one more thing:).. if you don t shoot your gun well [ and if you carrying it you should]
then id say go for chest or body mass even with a 22.of course what you do oughta be what you believe in..
ps ive found an mass of young gum trees .. i go thru them shooting and i think its the best practice place ive ever found..sooner or later the trees gonna be cleared for development ,,if construction ever picks back up..so if you can find something like that ,,its a good way to work on your plan..just don t shoot your uncles tractor planted pines ..he gonna frown on that..:)

If you think that shooting something imparts some "energy" to it, set up a 100 lb log on end and shoot it. See if any gun you have will knock it over.

All that "energy" crap is crap.

Like shoot the log and become a believer

NSC

The test you propose is actually a test of "momentum", not "energy". It takes momentum to overcome the inertial of the log at rest, and you're quite right, no small arms projectile carries that much momentum. Hollywood likes to depict people being knocked about by bullets but that's Hollywood, shotguns don't really blast people through walls. So your test should have convinced you that "momentum is crap".

Since the ammunition manufacturers want to claim their product has energy, I'll stick with that. The physicists can sit in the back corner over beer and argue technicalities all night long without changing the outcome one iota.

My test convinced me that nothing you can hold in your hand and fire is going to do anything but place a hole in a target whatever it might be. It is up to you to apply the "remote hole punch" in such a way as to make it useful. You can make them leak, or you can disconnect the control circuitry. There are no other mechanisms by which to stop an adversary from harming you. Energy or momentum as you want to call it, is of no consequence. Bigger faster bullets make them leak faster, any size that cuts the controls works.

NSC

Well anyone who has dressed out a game animal can tell you that bullets do a lot more than just punch a hole, that's what arrows do. I once shot a mule deer buck with a .357 mag. I bobbled the shot, saw the red dot drop low just as the trigger broke, but the buck reared up, fell over backward and lay still so I thought it must not have been such a bad shot after all. When I got up to him he was struggling to get to his feet so I finished him. That first shot had just cut across the bottom of the chest, plowed a bloody furrow but never got inside at all. Yet the shock of the impact close to the heart had knocked him down and out. I'm sure, given the chance, he'd have recovered from that minor wound. Many years ago, a friend had a similar experience in shooting a doe with a .444 Marlin. The bullet just lightly grazed the bottom of the chest, didn't even draw blood, but she fell to the shot and was out long enough to be finished with a knife. I once shot a buck with a .243, 87 grain bullet at about 50 yards. The shot angled back into the paunch and when cleaning up the meat I found pieces of the leaves it had been eating INSIDE the ventricles of the heart. The heart had not been touched by the bullet but stomach contents had been blasted back through the blood vessels into the heart.
You're right, those big, heavy, slow moving bullets do just drill a hole. Kick up the velocity and you'll begin to see what energy really can do. When shooting into flesh that is, when shooting a log, of course the bullet can't do anything but make a hole.

Well anyone who has dressed out a game animal can tell you that bullets do a lot more than just punch a hole, that's what arrows do. I once shot a mule deer buck with a .357 mag. I bobbled the shot, saw the red dot drop low just as the trigger broke, but the buck reared up, fell over backward and lay still so I thought it must not have been such a bad shot after all. When I got up to him he was struggling to get to his feet so I finished him. That first shot had just cut across the bottom of the chest, plowed a bloody furrow but never got inside at all. Yet the shock of the impact close to the heart had knocked him down and out. I'm sure, given the chance, he'd have recovered from that minor wound. Many years ago, a friend had a similar experience in shooting a doe with a .444 Marlin. The bullet just lightly grazed the bottom of the chest, didn't even draw blood, but she fell to the shot and was out long enough to be finished with a knife. I once shot a buck with a .243, 87 grain bullet at about 50 yards. The shot angled back into the paunch and when cleaning up the meat I found pieces of the leaves it had been eating INSIDE the ventricles of the heart. The heart had not been touched by the bullet but stomach contents had been blasted back through the blood vessels into the heart.
You're right, those big, heavy, slow moving bullets do just drill a hole. Kick up the velocity and you'll begin to see what energy really can do. When shooting into flesh that is, when shooting a log, of course the bullet can't do anything but make a hole.

HAL-AY-UL-A COYOTEJOE
Thats exactly the point I was trying to make regarding Driveing 200gr 44mags faster than 240 gra projectiles . Bigger calibers work better than smaller calibers cause basically they make a biger hole and dont have to be relied apone as much to expaned . Must bleed of a lot of energy/velocity to make a slug mushroom .

But if you can make a big caliber go really fast , as CoyoteJoe said then you can see some truely amazing damage done .

Ruger Redhawk 44 mag. 240 grn hard cast on top of 24 grn of H110. 400 lb wild hog @ 40 yds, shoulder shot through sheild with exit on other side. Dead hog on the spot. Chest cavity looked like it had been put in a blender. Massive hyd shock, liquified most all of it.

Bigger is good if you can handle it and control it. I do not use a 44 mag for self defence, too much for that. I keep a 40 S&W in my truck for that and a short barrel 12 ga in the home with high brass #4.

I like the 40 for the fact that I can make it through the door of my truck if needed and 14 rounds. 12 ga for, I know that he is stopped and will not harm me or my family.

Somewhere they may have a caliber that is a do all, but I have not found one yet. I would not use a carry gun for grizzly protection for home protection and vise versa.

Bigger splashes can sometimes do the job, but not always. I have read P.O. Ackley's books and studies and from what I got from it, ultra high rifle velocities are needed to get the desired results. Some bullets will penetrate farther at lower velocities. The shock possible from most defensive handguns, in my opinion, would not be enough to rely on when your life is hanging in the balance.

Kudu40


One problem with that line of thinking and that is a handgun doesn't have the velocity potential of a rifle. Ackley thought highly of the 220 Swift with copper bullet near 4000 FPS, that's not happening with a defensive handgun. It takes a least 2000 FPS to inflick secondadry wounding due to velocity according to Dr. Martin Fackler, And that's not happening with a defensive handgun either.

I believe my experiance shooting kangeroos is relavant to this thread , being that they stand upright like a human , extreamly tough , have a relitvly narow chest like a human and that it doesnt matter about breaking shoulders like when your shooting 4 legged critters . Acording to most opinions on this thread , All you need is shot placement and penatration . Back when I was young and silly , I thought that useing the bayonet on my SKS to finish off roos would be a good idear . Didnt do that to often , way to cruel , had all the "penatration" and "shot placement " you could want , but the poor barsteds wouldnt die (not in a hurry any way ) Wasnt nearly as efective as say shooting them with a 22short evan .

44 specail loads useing cast lead SWC(about 800fps) would have all the penatration need to go cleen through a roo but they wouldn't kill nearly as well as the same SWC driven at over 1200fps .

Is penatration important ? Absoultly no arguments there . But I recon Dr who ever he was Knows two thirds of stuff all if he recons secondary wounds or how ever he put it only ocure once you reach the magic 2000fps . Go shoot something with a bow and arow and see how slow they usally die .

A bow and arrow can kill intantly with central nervous system hits. One of the quicketst kills that I have ever experienced was a Caaribou shot in the neck with a 125 grain Thunder Head. That arrow flattened that animall like lighting. The old Kieth semi wadcutter does not have as large of a meplatt as does the LBT style flat point hard cast and is not as effective IMHO

I have no dout that arows can and do produce quick kills . I once killed a rabit with a rock . But you want find the masive tisue damage that you will find with any well constructed bullet driven at a reasonable velocity .

IMHO a wide flat point hard cast will do an amazing amount of destruction as this photo of will attest. Notice that the leg is missing as it pulled of during skinning and this damage was caused by a wide meplat hard cast

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/WFN45CalWound.jpg

The small skinny meplat on many of the semi wadcutter hard cast bullets are not nearly as impressive as the wider meplat LBT style bullets and are marginaly better than round nose. A Meplat of 75 to 80 percent of the bullets diameter leaves very impressive wound channels in my experience and they are my prefered projectile in a revolver for both small and large game

IMHO a wide flat point hard cast will do an amazing amount of destruction as this photo of will attest. Notice that the leg is missing as it pulled of during skinning and this damage was caused by a wide meplat hard cast

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d62/jwp475/WFN45CalWound.jpg

The small skinny meplat on many of the semi wadcutter hard cast bullets are not nearly as impressive as the wider meplat LBT style bullets and are marginaly better than round nose. A Meplat of 75 to 80 percent of the bullets diameter leaves very impressive wound channels in my experience and they are my prefered projectile in a revolver for both small and large game


Yes indeed jwp! WFNs do a whole lot of damage between the holes!