Where should I draw the line on high powered defensive guns?

[amprecon]

I have been up and down the handgun caliber spectrum myself, buying handguns in calibers I "thought" were the best from the information I thought I "knew" at the time.

But like anything else in life, the longer you live and are exposed to certain things, the more you learn about them and begin putting them into perspective.

People need to understand that our guns and ammo are supplied by company's, companies like to make a profit, so when they come out with the latest and greatest and most powerful product, they are marketing to sell a product, to make a profit.

What a person needs to ask themselves is if that new product will fill a "need" for them. I have been a die-hard .357, 9mm, .45 acp and .40 s&w fan, but as I have learned, they can all do roughly the same thing with the appropriate type of ammo.

My latest loyalty was to the .40 s&w, but I never carried those caliber pistols with me because of the size, I realized that a pistol I didn't have on me was worthless, so I began re-considering the 9mm.

There are many who do not regard the 9mm as enough gun for defensive use. But considering it is more powerful than the .38 spl, a caliber regarded by most everyone as the most effective caliber for decades, it has proven to work sufficiently enough.

Consider that it was the choice of the German's during WWI and WWII for use by front-line troops in pistols and in sub guns. If it were not effective enough then the allies surely would not have started to chamber their sub guns in 9mm or issue pistols in 9mm as well.

Not ccw'g my .40 cal pistol all the time made me start searching for pistols I could ccw easily. The 9mm has the best choices in small sized pistols aside from the .380. So I have a small light-weight 9mm pistol that I do ccw all the time. But I believe one should be able to fire whichever pistol they ccw accurately, if you cannot fire it accurately, then you might as well not even have it.

 

[Lohman446]

I would suggest that, logically, the line should be drawn at whatever (service caliber or close) firearm you have now with the most trigger time on that is readily carried. Remember the old saying "fear the man who owns one gun because he probably knows how to use it". I think about all the time (and cost) I have spent learning different firearms. If I had, over the course of my life, invested this into a single firearm I would be far more proficient with it than I am with any of the various ones I have carried over time. Ironically my CCW journey started with a J frame decades ago and is currently at a J frame (granted this one is scandium and at least rated for a magnum though I use .38 in it).

Think how good I would be with a J frame if all the time I spent trying other things had been spent perfecting it.

 

[ThomasT]

Most people will pick their carry gun based on two things. Weight and caliber. And weight will be the biggest consideration of the two. Even if they don't realize it at the time. Most will not carry a heavy gun or at least won't carry it very long. Thats why lightweight 380s and 9mms are so popular.

I will most times be found with a 38 snub in my pocket. I have a Taurus TCP I just bought and it is indeed a small light weight gun. But its a snappy booger to shoot. And its not a fixed barrel gun. Its just really light and I am not sure how well I would do with it under stress. Shooting paper is one thing. Shooting someone who is trying to stab, beat you with a club or is shooting back is a whole nuther matter.

I have been kicking around the idea of buying a 40 S&W while they can be had cheap. But the one I want is bigger than what I would ever carry. So it would be another HD gun.

If I had, over the course of my life, invested this into a single firearm I would be far more proficient with it than I am with any of the various ones I have carried over time.

One of the best post I ever read here stated that people needed to just buy one gun and holster and a ton of ammo and stick with that. Don't shoot any other gun. Just that one gun and shoot it often. Do this and you would be the best armed you could be. What a logical thought.

 

[zincwarrior]

With a good hit, most people seem to agree that a 9mm or .40 with good defensive ammunition is enough to stop a threat in most cases. Some insist that nothing short of a .357 or .45 ACP should be used as a defensive carry gun.

I am just asking, where do we draw that line? When do we reach a level of lethality and potential damage that we are throwing away either practical carry or controllability? This is all presuming that a good hit was made with any of the above rounds.

Is a .44 magnum with deer loads too powerful to be desirable as a practical defensive carry pistol? I think that it is. .45 colt monster loads? Is there anyone at all who would walk out the door carrying a redhawk in .454 or .500?

Would anyone here go after a 100-200 pound missouri whitetail with a .458 magnum with african game loads? I know that lots of people carry 12 gauge slugs because of game laws, but would anyone choose that 3" magnum slug if they had the opportunity carry a .308?

Yes, I know that there are people who hunt with a 45-70 with monster loads. I think that it's unnecessary to throw a 300 grain JHP at over 2,000 fps when millions of deer have been taken with traditional bottle necked rounds from 30-06 on downward.

Howdah pistol. You never know when a tiger might leap out and attack you.

 

[Cosmodragoon]

... My latest loyalty was to the .40 s&w, but I never carried those caliber pistols with me because of the size, I realized that a pistol I didn't have on me was worthless, so I began re-considering the 9mm ...

I came to this the other way. I first tried .40 S&W in tiny subcompacts. I hated it. Versus 9mm, recoil was punishing. My time and accuracy suffered a little. I thought about taking the time to train around it but practice wasn't fun. So I switched back to 9mm.

Then I tried .40 S&W in larger guns that do a better job of mitigating recoil. With a larger gun and fuller grip, the trade-offs of .40 S&W can shrink dramatically. I actually enjoyed shooting it. So now I'm a fan of .40 S&W but only in full-sized guns that handle it well.

 

[J.G. Terry]

Shoot what you carry

Several years ago my G27 was stolen out of my car. It was replaced by a G23.5. These little guns were fun to shoot. During that time I several compact and sub-compact Glock's'. One of my favorites was a G29 in 10mm. If somebody did want to carry a 10mm compact is it possible to get up to speed actually shooting the handgun? Would this be possible for anybody? All this hypothetical stuff is great. Somewhere I saw a new wonder bullet in 9mm that actually expanded to .451 with good weight retention. I'm not ready for that. A good 40 or 45 if just fine.

 

[Lohman446]

The G29 recoil is hardly unmanageable. Perceived recoil is much less than my Delta Elite. Define up to speed? It’s likely quicker on follow up shops than the 357 “combat” handguns of a bygone era that served their purpose when used

 

[Nanuk]

Nope. It's about equal even when shooting caliber typical bullets, such as 230gr in 45 ACP and 180gr in 40 S&W. This is demonstrated in the article. Read it again.

Did you read what I wrote? The 155 is whole nother beast in the 40.

 

[J.G. Terry]

Up to Speed. An old expression for getting proficient. This expression was used inappropriately in this context.

 

[74A95]

Did you read what I wrote? The 155 is whole nother beast in the 40.

Not interested in your anecdotes. They're irrelevant. The same could be said about bullet XXX in the 45. Again, irrelevant.

It's a general issue about the recoil of a 40 versus a 45. As well explored in the link I posted, they're roughly equal.

 

[Nanuk]

Not interested in your anecdotes. They're irrelevant. The same could be said about bullet XXX in the 45. Again, irrelevant.

It's a general issue about the recoil of a 40 versus a 45. As well explored in the link I posted, they're roughly equal.

They are equal if you are using the same weight bullet at the same velocity in the same weight/design of gun. If not they are not. A bullet that produces 469 FPE will recoil more than a bullet producing 369 FPE in the same gun. I am not naming loads I am stating a fact.

Similar is not equal.

What anecdote?

 

[Blue Duck]

Well, people can talk about the 9mm all they want, but unless one is loaded with really good top level hollow points, I don't have a lot of confidence in them as far as stopping powered goes. But I carry a 9mm shield sometimes when I don't want to carry a bigger gun.
But I have far more confidence with 40 and 45 caliber so I usually carry something bigger, like a G22 in 40cal or my favorite a Lightweight commander in 45ACP.

I do think those 3 calibers are base line, and I will carry smaller calibers like the .380 when I just don't want to carry anything bigger, but I do so, knowing I am compromising myself, if I really needed it, but it's still better then a 45 left at home in the safe. Any gun is better then no gun, but I hope to heck, if I actually needed one, I will be carrying a 40 or 45 on that day. Hopefully, that day doesn't ever come.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

This discussion is about the highly subjective decision of where/when to decide that a particular cartridge is "too much" for effective use as a self defense loading. The question is obviously subjective, because a cartridge that one person may have no trouble controlling and shooting accurately may not be accurate or controllable for a different shooter.

This obviously means that most responses are going to be based on personal experience and personal perception.

Since we should all recognize that going into the discussion, there is no reason or justification for personal attacks in the course of this (or any) discussion. So ...

COOL YOUR JETS!

 

[74A95]

They are equal if you are using the same weight bullet at the same velocity in the same weight/design of gun. If not they are not. A bullet that produces 469 FPE will recoil more than a bullet producing 369 FPE in the same gun. I am not naming loads I am stating a fact.

Similar is not equal.

What anecdote?

Okay, so you didn't understand that article. I won't ask you to read it a third time.

Muzzle energy and recoil force are not the same. The are calculated with different formulas.

More muzzle energy does not mean more recoil force, except when you're shooting the same weight bullet in the same caliber in the same gun with the same gunpowder. When you look at different calibers and different bullet weights, things get more complicated.

Let's do some math. Recoil force was calculated for a 2.5 pound gun.

40 S&W, 180 grain bullet, 1000 fps, 6.6 grains of Power Pistol gunpowder*.
= 400 ft lbs of muzzle energy. 4.58 ft lbs of recoil force.

45 ACP, 230 grain bullet, 850 fps, 6.7 grains of Power Pistol.
= 369 ft lbs of muzzle energy. 5.28 ft lbs of recoil force.

The 40 S&W produces more muzzle energy (31 ft lbs), but the 45 produces more recoil (0.7 ft lbs).

Now lets look at the same gun, since you brought that up. Let's stay with the 45 and compare published data for 230 and 185 grain bullets. I'm going to use Remington data with their BJHP bullets, though I'll drop the gunpowder weight since that's unknown.

230 gr @ 875 fps = 5.14 ft lbs recoil, 391 ft lbs ME.
185 gr @ 1015 fps = 4.47 ft lbs recoil, 423 ft lbs ME.

So, same deal. The 185 grain bullet produces more ME, but produces less recoil force.



You don't have to take my word for it. Go to this link and plug numbers in to get the answer: http://kwk.us/recoil.html


Also, the article at that link shows that if you push the same bullet to the same speed in different calibers, such as a 200 grain bullet to 825 fps (165 power factor) in the 45 Auto and the 40 S&W, the 45 Auto produces more recoil. Since I said I wouldn't ask you to read the same article again, I'll tell you why - it's because the 45 requires more gunpowder.


*I include the weight of the gunpowder because it contributes to recoil force. Numbers come form Hornady Loading manual 10th edition.

The actual numbers you end up with will depend on the specific ammo tested. In the linked article, the 45 Auto ammo was a little slower than usual. That's fine, and when looking at that comparison, it was clear that the recoil from the 40 and 45 is about the same. Change the numbers, depending on whose ammo is tested, and the relative amounts of recoil can change.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Since we should all recognize that going into the discussion, there is no reason or justification for personal attacks in the course of this (or any) discussion. So ...

COOL YOUR JETS!

Some folks need to understand what "hint" means.

Since people still can't play well with others in caliber wars ... CLOSED.