Is 9mm The Way To Go?

[Ron3]

I suppose if a person only wanted to use solid bullets and didn't want ridiculous amounts of over penetration a .380, .38 snub, .32 magnum, 9x18, longer barreled .32 acp, .45 acp with weak SWC or a .44 special with "cowboy loads" would give the desired performance.

[Uni-Vibe]

I've shot enough animals with a pistol both hp and fmj, I will never carry fmj. A 230gr gold dot at 950fps penetrates well and dumps a lot of energy on the way through. A 230gr fmj just pases straight though with very little energy dump.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

"Dumping energy" does not kill people or animals. Destruction of the central nervous system, or exsanguination, does.

The FBI dumped lots of "energy" into Michael Platt. He didn't seem to notice. He was winding down due to loss of blood, and was only stopped when SA Mireles put a .38 slug into his head.

[Arik]

"Dumping energy" does not kill people or animals. Destruction of the central nervous system, or exsanguination, does.

The FBI dumped lots of "energy" into Michael Platt. He didn't seem to notice. He was winding down due to loss of blood, and was only stopped when SA Mireles put a .38 slug into his head.

For every example of the FBI shootout where hollow points didn't work there's one for where fmj and the central nervous system didn't either. Even though rounds penetrated to the vitals

[ubet]

For every example of the FBI shootout where hollow points didn't work there's one for where fmj and the central nervous system didn't either. Even though rounds penetrated to the vitals

For the few examples where fmj worked, their are hundreds of where they failed.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[ubet]

"Dumping energy" does not kill people or animals. Destruction of the central nervous system, or exsanguination, does.

The FBI dumped lots of "energy" into Michael Platt. He didn't seem to notice. He was winding down due to loss of blood, and was only stopped when SA Mireles put a .38 slug into his head.

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of hunters out there every year, that a projectile expanding and passing through but not exiting an animal works better than a fmj. It doesn't. You can argue that the sky is purple until you're purple in the face, but you're still wrong. You have one documented instance where fmj might have been a better option, from 30 years ago. Do you have ANY documented instance from this millennium? Hp technology has rapidly progressed since Miami. Hell, it is light years beyond what it was in 2000. But no, keep quoting one instance, that's over 30 years old.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Arik]

For the few examples where fmj worked, their are hundreds of where they failed.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Better way to phrase it ^ for sure. I'm just trying to stay within the ridiculousness of using the 1986 shootout as modern balistics

[wtm75]

I don't feel like quoting anyone specific. So read these if it pertains to you.

1. I'm not ignoring the liability of over-penetration. I'm saying that it's an overblown myth. The majority of every shooting has a miss. That miss is an over-penetrator since it didn't stay in the body. It went beyond it. Where are the countless victims because of it? It's very rare. Could happen. Yes. But extremely rare. Most people know their target and beyond. Just because you carry a jacketed hollow point, it doesn't mean that you should ignore safety rules since you are more than likely to miss at least one shot as statistics prove.

2. FMJ in service calibers does just fine against windshields and car doors. There are numerous videos to prove that. Flat pointed FMJ's, Hard Cast, or monolithic flat-face bullets do even better as far as deflection and ricochets goes. About the same as a hollow point and sometimes better since a hollow point can deform after hitting a hard enough target changing trajectory once it hits another object. Flat pointed bullets usually fly straighter.

[wtm75]

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of hunters out there every year, that a projectile expanding and passing through but not exiting an animal works better than a fmj. It doesn't. You can argue that the sky is purple until you're purple in the face, but you're still wrong. You have one documented instance where fmj might have been a better option, from 30 years ago. Do you have ANY documented instance from this millennium? Hp technology has rapidly progressed since Miami. Hell, it is light years beyond what it was in 2000. But no, keep quoting one instance, that's over 30 years old.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Rifle bullets vs. Pistol bullets are two different animals. Velocity differences are up to 2,000 feet per second greater and sometimes more.

[MegademiC]

I don't feel like quoting anyone specific. So read these if it pertains to you.

1. I'm not ignoring the liability of over-penetration. I'm saying that it's an overblown myth. The majority of every shooting has a miss. That miss is an over-penetrator since it didn't stay in the body. It went beyond it. Where are the countless victims because of it? It's very rare. Could happen. Yes. But extremely rare. Most people know their target and beyond. Just because you carry a jacketed hollow point, it doesn't mean that you should ignore safety rules since you are more than likely to miss at least one shot as statistics prove.

2. FMJ in service calibers does just fine against windshields and car doors. There are numerous videos to prove that. Flat pointed FMJ's, Hard Cast, or monolithic flat-face bullets do even better as far as deflection and ricochets goes. About the same as a hollow point and sometimes better since a hollow point can deform after hitting a hard enough target changing trajectory once it hits another object. Flat pointed bullets usually fly straighter.

Please provide link demonstrating a fmj test through autoglass and then gel please.

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of hunters out there every year, that a projectile expanding and passing through but not exiting an animal works better than a fmj. It doesn't. You can argue that the sky is purple until you're purple in the face, but you're still wrong. You have one documented instance where fmj might have been a better option, from 30 years ago. Do you have ANY documented instance from this millennium? Hp technology has rapidly progressed since Miami. Hell, it is light years beyond what it was in 2000. But no, keep quoting one instance, that's over 30 years old.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Its the crushed tissue that is of significance with pistol rounds.
Higher velocity and surface area creates a larger temp cavity, which matters with rifle rounds.

“Dumping energy” is a byproduct of crushing tissue, not a direct wounding machanism with pistol rounds. Semantics, but I think its worth being clear to communicate it properly... IMO.

[flenna]

.45 ACP. Go big or go home.....