close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

9 mm vs .40 S&W vs .45 acp

Discussion in 'General Firearms Forum' started by iluv2viddyfilms, Jan 25, 2012.


Tags:
  1. iluv2viddyfilms

    iluv2viddyfilms
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    901
    0
    Location:
    Des Moines, IOWA
    These are probably three of the most common automatic calibers to carry and I know this isn't the first time someone has asked to compare them. However I was curious as to the foot pound or jules produced by each caliber in the common factory loadings. I have a firearm in each of these calibers.

    I went to wikipedia... and I'll accept it as a reliable source, at least for an online question and found the following:

    9 mm 115 grain FMJ = 570 J and 420 foot pounds pressure.
    .40 S&W 180 grain FMJ = 598 J and 444 foot pounds.
    .45 ACP 230 grain FMJ = 561 J and 414 foot pounds.

    So there really isn't much difference at all in energy expelled from the rounds. I know there's the old saying that speed kills which is why a relatively narrow .30 rifle round can do so much damage with the supersonic speed it produces - three or four times the amount a handgun round.

    At these lower speeds does the size of the wound channel make the big difference in going with the .45 acp over the 9mm? I ask because if energy is what matters then you would think the 9mm would be a more effective round because it gives off slightly more kinetic energy.

    I don't know much about ballistics but can anyone explain this or share their thoughts?
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. brisk21

    brisk21
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    4,202
    10
    Location:
    Michigan
    I would say for handgun rounds, the largest, heaviest bullet with adequate penetration would be the best when considering "stopping power". I could be completely wrong though, Im no expert.
     

  3. WoodenPlank

    WoodenPlank
    Expand Collapse
    Who?

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    7,958
    3
    Location:
    NW Florida
    Or go with 357SIG, and get over 500 foot pounds of energy with a 125gr projectile.
     
  4. MRBULLRED

    MRBULLRED
    Expand Collapse
    ????????

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    93
    0
    Location:
    BATON ROUGE LA
    Or go with 10mm and have 800 ftlbs.. Or better yet, 50bmg and have over 10,000 ft.lbs.
     
  5. WoodenPlank

    WoodenPlank
    Expand Collapse
    Who?

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    7,958
    3
    Location:
    NW Florida
    Might have a hard time fitting that in a handgun. :upeyes:
     
  6. Lior

    Lior
    Expand Collapse
    GUNS=FREEDOM

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    2,660
    32
    Location:
    Israel
    9mm is the SD round that I am most able to afford to shoot 6,000 of per year, so that is what I carry (I also shoot a lot of .22LR and .177, but not out of repeating firearms).
     
  7. Feanor

    Feanor
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    3,545
    3
    Follow the link and read to your hearts content, he covers it all. And there is really little difference between the calibers you've listed when it comes to terminal ballistics, oftentime's, ME's even have difficulty distinguishing the difference at autopsy! DocGKR is pretty much the authority on the subject.
     
  8. Bruce M

    Bruce M
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    38,410
    9,052
    Location:
    S FL
    Some statistic suggest that there is little difference in actual use between the three calibers. And there is also some evidence that suggests that luck may have a substantial part to do with the outcome also. Ever hear someone in a trauma center say if the bullet had been a centimeter or two to the left/right the guy would have died. Even really really good shots may have some difficulty placing shots a centimeter or two during an actual fight.
     
  9. Bilbo Bagins

    Bilbo Bagins
    Expand Collapse
    Slacked jawed

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    11,211
    1
  10. wavetrain75

    wavetrain75
    Expand Collapse
    Useless Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    3,409
    1
    I thought Groundhog Day wasn't for another few weeks.
     
  11. aircarver

    aircarver
    Expand Collapse
    Ride Continues
    Silver Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2002
    27,412
    3,098
    Location:
    Ft. Worth, Republic of Texas
    Not to mention holstering it ....



    :outtahere::supergrin:

    .
     
  12. bac1023

    bac1023
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    101,825
    2,435
    Location:
    PA
    9mm is my favorite by far. :cool:
     
  13. scccdoc

    scccdoc
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2011
    1,394
    1
    Accuracy is your greatest ally.Shoot the caliber with which you're most accurate and can reacquire the target quickly..........DOC (ps I shoot a 40 )
     
  14. MajorD

    MajorD
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    2,376
    99
    sccdoc- has the right idea- the caliber you can shoot most accurately is the one to use. From what I have seen- first hand knowledge from working trauma and some trips to the sandbox- shot placement is what results in incapacitation- doesn't matter if it is a 9mm or a 50 bmg.
     
  15. kennjen

    kennjen
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    301
    0
    #15 kennjen, Jan 25, 2012
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2012
  16. DeLo

    DeLo
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    755
    1
    Location:
    Southland
    10mm.
     
  17. TN.Frank

    TN.Frank
    Expand Collapse
    Glock4Life

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2004
    5,663
    176
    Location:
    Avondale, AZ.
    That's why I always say caliber is secondary, shot placement is key with any handgun ctg.
     
  18. barth

    barth
    Expand Collapse
    six barrels

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    6,293
    382
    Location:
    The Free Zone
    9x19 Win Ranger +P+ |115@1320, 21.7 mv, 444 E|BR 9.6", 0.53", 2.11cu|CL 10.2", 0.65", 3.37cu|avg 2.74, 3.89 re, 0.70
    9x19 - caliber
    Win Ranger +P+ - the name of the load
    115@1320 - bullet mass in grains @ muzzle velocity
    21.7 mv - bullet momentum in lb*fps
    444 E - muzzle energy in ftlbs
    BR - what follows is the data for bare gelatin
    9.6" inches of penetration
    0.53", final expanded diameter of bullet
    2.11 cu, approximation of wound volume. (this does not take into account the expansion profile as a function of depth, but it should be roughly proportionate to actual wound volume)
    CL - what follows is the data for clothed gelatin
    same fields as the bare gelatin, as defined above
    avg 2.74 - Average wound volume, clothed and bare gelatin
    3.89 re - Free Recoil Energy, assuming a 1.88 lb pistol
    0.70 - Average would volume per unit Free Recoil Energy.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    9x19 Win Ranger Talon|147@ 864, 18.1 mv, 243 E|BR 13.8", 0.61", 4.03cu|CL 15.2", 0.59", 4.17cu|avg 4.10, 2.72 re, 1.51
    9x19 Win Ranger Talon|147@1017, 21.4 mv, 337 E|BR 13.8", 0.66", 4.70cu|CL 15.5", 0.65", 5.14cu|avg 4.92, 3.77 re, 1.31
    9x19 Win Ranger +P+ |115@1320, 21.7 mv, 444 E|BR 9.6", 0.53", 2.11cu|CL 10.2", 0.65", 3.37cu|avg 2.74, 3.89 re, 0.70
    9x19 3-D |115@1178, 19.4 mv, 354 E|BR 11.6", 0.54", 2.66cu|CL 13.9", 0.48", 2.52cu|avg 2.59, 3.10 re, 0.84
    9x19 Rem +P+ |115@1221, 20.1 mv, 380 E|BR 10.8", 0.63", 3.37cu|CL 10.9", 0.62", 3.29cu|avg 3.33, 3.33 re, 1.00
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD |115@1259, 20.7 mv, 404 E|BR 12.3", 0.67", 4.35cu|CL 22.1", 0.40", 2.78cu|avg 3.43, 3.54 re, 0.97
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD |115@1197, 19.7 mv, 365 E|BR 12.8", 0.67", 4.51cu|CL 22.6", 0.44", 3.44cu|avg 3.78, 3.20 re, 1.18
    9x19 CorBon +P |115@1317, 21.6 mv, 442 E|BR 8.9", 0.52", 1.90cu|CL 10.2", 0.61", 2.98cu|avg 2.44, 3.87 re, 0.63
    9x19 Fed +P |115@1237, 20.3 mv, 390 E|BR 11.2", 0.53", 2.48cu|CL 10.6", 0.62", 3.20cu|avg 2.84, 3.41 re, 0.83
    9x19 Fed Silvertip |115@1091, 17.9 mv, 304 E|BR 10.1", 0.63", 3.13cu|CL 11.8", 0.58", 3.12cu|avg 3.13, 2.66 re, 1.18
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD +P |124@1223, 21.7 mv, 411 E|BR 13.4", 0.68", 4.87cu|CL 20.2", 0.53", 4.47cu|avg 4.64, 3.88 re, 1.20
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD |124@1116, 19.8 mv, 342 E|BR 11.8", 0.69", 4.41cu|CL 22.0", 0.36", 2.24cu|avg 3.22, 3.23 re, 1.00
    9x19 Rem |124@1109, 19.6 mv, 338 E|BR 12.4", 0.60", 3.52cu|CL 13.7", 0.57", 3.50cu|avg 3.51, 3.19 re, 1.10
    9x19 PMC/Eldorado SF |124@1118, 19.8 mv, 344 E|BR 10.7", 0.63", 3.32cu|CL 20.1", 0.41", 2.65cu|avg 2.98, 3.24 re, 0.92
    9x19 CorBon XTP |124@1123, 19.9 mv, 347 E|BR 13.9", 0.56", 3.44cu|CL 18.3", 0.46", 3.04cu|avg 3.24, 3.27 re, 0.99
    9x19 Fed HydraShok |147@ 935, 19.6 mv, 285 E|BR 13.6", 0.60", 3.85cu|CL 16.1", 0.52", 3.41cu|avg 3.63, 3.19 re, 1.14
    9x19 Win Black Talon |147@ 946, 19.9 mv, 292 E|BR 14.8", 0.60", 4.20cu|CL 16.4", 0.61", 4.78cu|avg 4.49, 3.26 re, 1.38
    9x19 Rem |147@ 987, 20.7 mv, 318 E|BR 18.1", 0.51", 3.71cu|CL 15.9", 0.59", 4.36cu|avg 4.03, 3.55 re, 1.14
    9x19 Hornady XTP |147@ 918, 19.3 mv, 275 E|BR 22.1", 0.44", 3.36cu|CL 20.5", 0.46", 3.41cu|avg 3.18, 3.07 re, 1.04
    9x19 Fed HydraShok |147@ 995, 20.9 mv, 323 E|BR 21.4", 0.37", 2.30cu|CL 15.6", 0.60", 4.41cu|avg 3.28, 3.61 re, 0.91
    9x19 Win Silvertip |147@ 902, 18.9 mv, 265 E|BR 14.6", 0.53", 3.22cu|CL 18.1", 0.47", 3.14cu|avg 3.18, 2.97 re, 1.07
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD+P |124@1155, 20.5 mv, 367 E|BR 13.2", 0.62", 3.99cu|CL 16.1", 0.53", 3.55cu|avg 3.77, 3.46 re, 1.09
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD |124@1068, 18.9 mv, 314 E|BR 12.6", 0.59", 3.44cu|CL 17.5", 0.51", 3.57cu|avg 3.51, 2.96 re, 1.19
    9x19 CCI/Speer GD |147@ 924, 19.4 mv, 278 E|BR 14.8", 0.57", 3.78cu|CL 14.7", 0.55", 3.49cu|avg 3.63, 3.11 re, 1.17
    9x19 Win Ranger PG |124@1015, 18.0 mv, 283 E|BR 12.5", 0.65", 4.15cu|CL 14.0", 0.61", 4.09cu|avg 4.12, 2.67 re, 1.54
    9x19 Win Ranger T |147@1016, 21.3 mv, 337 E|BR 13.8", 0.66", 4.72cu|CL 15.7", 0.00", 0.00cu|avg 2.36, 3.76 re, 0.63
    357SIG CCI/Speer GD |125@1372, 24.5 mv, 522 E|BR 16.1", 0.60", 4.54cu|CL 19.1", 0.54", 4.36cu|avg 4.45, 4.96 re, 0.90
    40SW Win Ranger Talon|180@1000, 25.7 mv, 399 E|BR 13.6", 0.68", 4.92cu|CL 13.5", 0.68", 4.90cu|avg 4.91, 5.47 re, 0.90
    40SW CCI/Speer GD |155@1176, 26.0 mv, 475 E|BR 10.7", 0.84", 5.93cu|CL 18.1", 0.57", 4.62cu|avg 5.27, 5.61 re, 0.94
    40SW CCI/Speer GD |155@1186, 26.3 mv, 483 E|BR 10.7", 0.84", 5.93cu|CL 17.7", 0.58", 4.68cu|avg 5.30, 5.70 re, 0.93
    40SW Hornady XTP |155@1194, 26.4 mv, 490 E|BR 14.5", 0.65", 4.81cu|CL 18.1", 0.55", 4.30cu|avg 4.56, 5.78 re, 0.79
    40SW Win Silvertip |155@1199, 26.5 mv, 494 E|BR 12.2", 0.69", 4.54cu|CL 13.2", 0.71", 5.21cu|avg 4.87, 5.83 re, 0.84
    40SW Fed Hi-Shok |155@1167, 25.8 mv, 468 E|BR 13.8", 0.61", 4.02cu|CL 19.5", 0.51", 3.98cu|avg 4.00, 5.52 re, 0.72
    40SW CCI/Speer GD |165@1076, 25.4 mv, 424 E|BR 13.1", 0.65", 4.33cu|CL 15.8", 0.60", 4.47cu|avg 4.40, 5.32 re, 0.83
    40SW Fed HydraShok |165@1007, 23.7 mv, 371 E|BR 13.8", 0.62", 4.18cu|CL 15.2", 0.64", 4.87cu|avg 4.53, 4.66 re, 0.97
    40SW Rem |165@1031, 24.3 mv, 389 E|BR 12.5", 0.67", 4.41cu|CL 16.3", 0.61", 4.76cu|avg 4.59, 4.88 re, 0.94
    40SW Fed HydeaShok |165@ 931, 21.9 mv, 317 E|BR 15.8", 0.58", 4.19cu|CL 21.1", 0.43", 3.06cu|avg 3.55, 3.98 re, 0.89
    40SW Rem G.S. |165@ 952, 22.4 mv, 332 E|BR 13.1", 0.64", 4.21cu|CL 20.0", 0.53", 4.41cu|avg 4.31, 4.16 re, 1.04
    40SW Rem G.S. |165@1022, 24.1 mv, 382 E|BR 14.8", 0.65", 4.89cu|CL 14.3", 0.66", 4.91cu|avg 4.90, 4.80 re, 1.02
    40SW Fed HydraShok |165@ 943, 22.2 mv, 325 E|BR 18.2", 0.63", 5.69cu|CL 19.4", 0.56", 4.77cu|avg 5.23, 4.08 re, 1.28
    40SW Win Ranger T. |180@ 947, 24.4 mv, 358 E|BR 13.8", 0.69", 5.14cu|CL 13.7", 0.70", 5.25cu|avg 5.20, 4.90 re, 1.06
    40SW CCI/Speer GD |180@ 982, 25.3 mv, 385 E|BR 14.5", 0.59", 3.96cu|CL 17.6", 0.60", 4.96cu|avg 4.46, 5.27 re, 0.85
    40SW Rem G.S. |180@ 931, 23.9 mv, 346 E|BR 16.8", 0.69", 6.28cu|CL 16.9", 0.63", 5.28cu|avg 5.78, 4.74 re, 1.22
    40SW Rem G.S. |180@ 945, 24.3 mv, 356 E|BR 16.9", 0.64", 5.44cu|CL 21.0", 0.43", 3.05cu|avg 4.17, 4.88 re, 0.85
    40SW Rem G.S. |180@ 893, 23.0 mv, 318 E|BR 15.7", 0.65", 5.19cu|CL 21.1", 0.51", 4.32cu|avg 4.64, 4.36 re, 1.06
    40SW CCI/Speer GD |180@ 958, 24.6 mv, 366 E|BR 14.6", 0.60", 4.13cu|CL 17.1", 0.62", 5.16cu|avg 4.65, 5.02 re, 0.93
    40SW Rem G.S. |180@ 954, 24.5 mv, 363 E|BR 14.8", 0.66", 5.06cu|CL 14.8", 0.67", 5.20cu|avg 5.13, 4.98 re, 1.03
    40SW Win B.T. |180@ 917, 23.6 mv, 336 E|BR 13.5", 0.69", 5.05cu|CL 14.4", 0.70", 5.54cu|avg 5.29, 4.60 re, 1.15
    40SW Hornady XTP |180@ 929, 23.9 mv, 345 E|BR 13.9", 0.64", 4.49cu|CL 18.4", 0.55", 4.38cu|avg 4.44, 4.72 re, 0.94
    40SW Fed HydraShok |180@ 969, 24.9 mv, 375 E|BR 14.2", 0.69", 5.29cu|CL 19.8", 0.59", 5.41cu|avg 5.35, 5.13 re, 1.04
    40SW Fed Hi-Shok |180@ 960, 24.7 mv, 368 E|BR 14.8", 0.66", 5.05cu|CL 24.0", 0.47", 4.16cu|avg 4.26, 5.04 re, 0.85
    40SW Win Ranger SXT |180@ 905, 23.3 mv, 327 E|BR 11.2", 0.70", 4.31cu|CL 13.0", 0.64", 4.18cu|avg 4.25, 4.48 re, 0.95
    40SW Win Ranger PG |165@1109, 26.1 mv, 450 E|BR 13.1", 0.73", 5.48cu|CL 14.5", 0.72", 5.90cu|avg 5.69, 5.65 re, 1.01
    40SW Win Ranger T |180@ 943, 24.2 mv, 355 E|BR 13.6", 0.68", 4.94cu|CL 14.6", 0.70", 5.62cu|avg 5.28, 4.86 re, 1.09
    45ACP CCI/Speer GD |185@1041, 27.5 mv, 445 E|BR 11.9", 0.68", 4.34cu|CL 14.8", 0.68", 5.36cu|avg 4.85, 6.26 re, 0.77
    45ACP Rem G.S. |185@1037, 27.4 mv, 441 E|BR 14.4", 0.72", 5.86cu|CL 15.9", 0.68", 5.79cu|avg 5.83, 6.21 re, 0.94
    45ACP Rem G.S. +P |185@1046, 27.6 mv, 449 E|BR 10.1", 0.87", 6.00cu|CL 9.5", 0.81", 4.90cu|avg 5.45, 6.32 re, 0.86
    45ACP Fed Hi-Shok |185@ 874, 23.1 mv, 313 E|BR 11.7", 0.74", 5.03cu|CL 19.8", 0.61", 5.79cu|avg 5.41, 4.41 re, 1.23
    45ACP Win Silvertip |185@ 951, 25.1 mv, 371 E|BR 10.7", 0.78", 5.11cu|CL 10.9", 0.73", 4.56cu|avg 4.84, 5.22 re, 0.93
    45ACP Fed Hi-Shok |185@ 953, 25.2 mv, 373 E|BR 13.3", 0.63", 4.15cu|CL 12.4", 0.74", 5.33cu|avg 4.74, 5.24 re, 0.90
    45ACP Rem |185@ 903, 23.9 mv, 335 E|BR 16.2", 0.70", 6.23cu|CL 24.6", 0.55", 5.83cu|avg 5.49, 4.71 re, 1.17
    45ACP CCI/Speer GD +P |200@1062, 30.3 mv, 500 E|BR 11.7", 0.75", 5.17cu|CL 18.8", 0.55", 4.47cu|avg 4.82, 7.61 re, 0.63
    45ACP Fed HydraShok |230@ 956, 31.4 mv, 466 E|BR 13.8", 0.72", 5.64cu|CL 13.6", 0.74", 5.83cu|avg 5.73, 8.16 re, 0.70
    45ACP Fed HydraShok |230@ 878, 28.8 mv, 393 E|BR 16.6", 0.66", 5.66cu|CL 20.2", 0.55", 4.80cu|avg 5.21, 6.88 re, 0.76
    45ACP Fed HydraShok |230@ 858, 28.2 mv, 375 E|BR 13.7", 0.71", 5.42cu|CL 16.4", 0.66", 5.59cu|avg 5.51, 6.57 re, 0.84
    45ACP Win |230@ 802, 26.4 mv, 328 E|BR 17.9", 0.60", 5.06cu|CL 24.0", 0.51", 4.90cu|avg 4.57, 5.74 re, 0.80
    45ACP Fed HydraShok |230@ 854, 28.1 mv, 372 E|BR 14.9", 0.71", 5.90cu|CL 15.4", 0.64", 4.97cu|avg 5.43, 6.51 re, 0.83
    45ACP Rem G.S. |230@ 885, 29.1 mv, 399 E|BR 14.1", 0.76", 6.37cu|CL 16.6", 0.69", 6.19cu|avg 6.28, 6.99 re, 0.90
    45ACP Win Ranger SXT |230@ 819, 26.9 mv, 342 E|BR 13.2", 0.73", 5.55cu|CL 17.9", 0.63", 5.56cu|avg 5.55, 5.99 re, 0.93
    45ACP CCI/Speer GD |230@ 896, 29.4 mv, 409 E|BR 16.0", 0.69", 5.98cu|CL 18.9", 0.59", 5.17cu|avg 5.58, 7.17 re, 0.78
    45ACP PMC/Eldorado SF |230@ 853, 28.0 mv, 371 E|BR 13.9", 0.67", 4.90cu|CL 22.6", 0.45", 3.59cu|avg 4.04, 6.49 re, 0.62
    45ACP Rem G.S. |230@ 871, 28.6 mv, 387 E|BR 15.0", 0.71", 5.94cu|CL 18.9", 0.73", 7.89cu|avg 6.91, 6.77 re, 1.02
    45ACP CCI/Speer GD |230@ 847, 27.8 mv, 366 E|BR 13.2", 0.74", 5.66cu|CL 14.3", 0.70", 5.50cu|avg 5.58, 6.40 re, 0.87
    45ACP Fed Hi-Shok |230@ 860, 28.3 mv, 377 E|BR 13.8", 0.80", 6.96cu|CL 17.4", 0.67", 6.13cu|avg 6.55, 6.60 re, 0.99
    45ACP Win. B.T. |230@ 886, 29.1 mv, 400 E|BR 11.9", 0.77", 5.56cu|CL 13.9", 0.74", 6.00cu|avg 5.78, 7.01 re, 0.83
     
  19. Aceman

    Aceman
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2008
    6,977
    57
    Location:
    Tampa
    CAliber is secondary to a point. .22/.25 vs 9/40/45 for example.

    The real quesiton is reliability of stopping. And in that area, bigger is generally better.

    9 v 40 - likely no/little diff
    40 v 45 - also likely the same
    9 v 45 - maybe some, but possibly marginal difference. Gotta love 45 though! That said - I generally prefer 9

    but .25 vs .45....there WILL be a difference there.

    You have to run the experiment enough times to rule out luck, obviously vital hits etc.
     
  20. VinnieD

    VinnieD
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    1,238
    40
    As far as I can see, you can slide the bullet diameter and weight up and down the scale all you want with roughly the same powder charge and get the same outcome.

    The overall force behind a round's penetration ability comes down to its forward inertia, and that's a simple case of Mass and velocity. To retain inertia you need mass, but the more mass you add with the same force you lose velocity. Thus you get light 9mm rounds with less mass and more velocity performing not much different from .45acp rounds which will have less velocity but more mass.

    If you go too far to the light extreme you can get your projectile faster but don't have enough mass to retain the inertia and it quickly loses inertia and with it penetrating capability. Conversely if you get too heavy without increasing the charge propelling the projectile you don't get the projectile moving fast enough to build up any forward inertia. 9mm, .40S&W, and .45acp (along with most other standard power rounds in the same category) all seem to slide up and down the scale in the same safe zone of moderate effectiveness.

    This is why I stand by magnum rounds. To get any real effectiveness you need both mass and velocity. In other words a heavy projectile moving at high speed and with that carrying a ton more inertia. Thus a hot loaded .357 magnum or 10mm round with a heavy projectile is going to outperform anything with less charge behind it regardless of caliber. It's simple force=mass x acceleration


    If you can't carry or handle a more potent round, then just carry whatever in the range you shoot most confidently. I could maybe argue that wider diameter round will produce a slightly larger wound, while a smaller round will give you more shots, but that's an argument that's been made plenty of times already.