close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Talking sub-compact ballistics

Discussion in 'Caliber Corner' started by LEAD, Jan 30, 2010.

  1. LEAD

    LEAD

    1,981
    1
    Jan 9, 2009
    VT
    When considering sub-compact barrrel lengths, do some rounds start to look better or worse than others. For example, since there is less barrel to burn up the powder, do the merits of a .357sig over a 9mm become lost as less time is allowed for the powder to burn.

    When using a sub-compact platform do lighter faster bullets or slower heavier bullets gain any more of an edge.

    Sorry if this is a repeat, but I couldn't find conclusive info on it.
     
  2. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,672
    902
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    Typically, the faster & smaller the bullet, the faster it loses vel. in shorter bbls. You never get to the point where a 9mm is the same as a 357sig for example, but muzzle blast & flash will start being a problem w/ high vel rounds in shorter tubes.
     


  3. LEAD

    LEAD

    1,981
    1
    Jan 9, 2009
    VT
    So would you think that a 40 would become more lucrative than a .357sig in the g27/33 platform?

    Also would you think it would be better to use something heavier in the chosen caliber, like a 180gr 40S&W Vs. a 135Gr 40, and a 147gr Vs. a 115gr 9mm?
     
  4. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,672
    902
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    It depends. Most of the JHP today will still expand well minus 100fps. There is a trend to use +P ammo to keep vel. up in the 45acp, but it only adds recoil. Same w/ say the 40 & a 155grJHP. The vel is much higher than a 180gr but recoil goes up in the smaller guns. It's kind of a balancing act. In the 9mm, I go 124gr+P, recoil is just not an issue. In the 40, I go 165gr, in the 45, I will drop to a 200grXTP or 185grWSTHP. There is no real magic choice. SOme guys will stay w/ the heaviest bullet available regardless of vel. to insure deepest penetration.
     
  5. Steel Head

    Steel Head Tactical Cat

    16,059
    30,934
    Jan 1, 2010
    A cat box in WA
    In almost all data I've found the heavier for caliber(230/45-180/40-147/9) bullets loose less fps per inch of barrel than the lighter offerings
    The trend continues-the lighter the bullet the bigger the loss
     
  6. DEADEYEGUY

    DEADEYEGUY

    1,492
    40
    Aug 22, 2009
    Most .45 loads are tested in 5" barrels. They are big slow rounds to begin with. Go to a 3" barrel you are losing alot of of velocity. Most 9mm's and .40's are tested in 4" barrels and are high presure rounds. Going to a 3"-3.5" barrel affects performance very little.
     
  7. ricklee4570

    ricklee4570

    1,826
    1
    Sep 11, 2009
    Interesting topic. Isn't there some rounds made by Speer specifically designed for the Subcompacts?
     
  8. Molon

    Molon

    111
    20
    Aug 22, 2009
    Speer Short Barrel (SB)



    [​IMG]
     
  9. Scott in Houston

    Scott in Houston

    713
    0
    Oct 6, 2009
    I love my new G32 and now want a G33, but am starting to think I shouldn't bother. My G27 is likely more effective for its caliber than the G33... from what I'm reading.

    I own a G27 and G26.
     
  10. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse

    406
    0
    Jul 19, 2008
    Atlanta, GA
    Enjoy...
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jan 31, 2010
  11. Scott in Houston

    Scott in Houston

    713
    0
    Oct 6, 2009
    Thanks! Interesting .357 stats. Now it looks like the 357 SIG is a very good performer with shorter barrel lengths.
     
  12. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,672
    902
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    Not really. The bore dia/gas expansion ratio plays a big part. Rem 230grGS go 825fps form my 5" 1911 & 775fp s from the 3.5" 1911OM, not much vel loss. The Speer 125grGDHP in a 5" 357sig makes 1380fps & only 1300fps in my 3.5" P239. Smaller bore, highe vel/pressure rounds will lose vel faster/inch. Some true testing data. http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/9mmluger.html
     
  13. Steel Head

    Steel Head Tactical Cat

    16,059
    30,934
    Jan 1, 2010
    A cat box in WA
    Almost all-------I do think the 357SIG is a great choice in short barrels
     
  14. Darkangel1846

    Darkangel1846

    2,330
    83
    Jul 19, 2004
    Oregon
    In self defense ammo I don't see any big difference at self defense distances. At up to 25 yards I see nothing to be overly concerned about, except maybe in small cal handguns but maybe there is and I just don't get it. The difference in speeds and self defense distances offer me little concern in most ammos. Now shooting at one hundred yards , yeah, then I might take some consideration into bullet weight and speed, but not at self defense distances.
    Am I wrong here?
     
  15. glocksterr

    glocksterr DirtyGlockHippy

    1,298
    0
    Aug 10, 2008
    NC,USA

    and herin lies the problem with that.

    its the heavy bullets that are velocity challenged to begin with.
     
  16. Heavier bullets are slower, but have sufficient momentum for penetration and expansion... Unless your are talking about energy dump, magic fairy dust, then yes lighter bullets have more energy to "dump"... :rofl:
     
  17. Steel Head

    Steel Head Tactical Cat

    16,059
    30,934
    Jan 1, 2010
    A cat box in WA
    :agree:


    When some Pee'd off BUFF is comin to squash you flat what do you persuade him to desist with ------a 22-250 or a 470Capsticky :whistling:

    That said-with today's ammo in it's normal grain range-if you have a 9mm,40 S&W 357SIG 45 acp or gap or 10mm in a short barrel gun
    Your better off practicing more and worrying less

    Scott in Houston You NEED a 33
     
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2010
  18. Scott in Houston

    Scott in Houston

    713
    0
    Oct 6, 2009

    haha. :supergrin: Yes. I think you're right. What better to go with the G27 & 26 than another gun that will fit the same holsters, etc. :)

    I would bet I own a G33 to compliment my G32 by mid February. :wavey:
     
  19. sigcalcatrant

    sigcalcatrant

    6,552
    0
    Mar 8, 2008
    http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/45auto.html
     
  20. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse

    406
    0
    Jul 19, 2008
    Atlanta, GA
    No prob. The data was from Ballistics-by-the-inch just plotted into a XY graph.
     

    Attached Files: