[Berto]

9mmp, easily

 

[BDM71]

I don't have a #1 caliber because it depends on the gun I am carrying. In my hands, 9mm would be too powerful for a Ruger LCP II or similar size/weight pocket pistol, and .357 SIG would be too powerful for a G43 or P365 (in my opinion). What I really favor is the .355" bullet diameter for concealed carry handguns (.380 ACP, .9mm Parabellum & .357 SIG). I prefer to carry my SIG P229 in .357 SIG because it is marginally better than the rest (and perhaps significantly better potentially), but for anything lighter than my SIG I carry either 9mm or .380 ACP.

I like .357 SIG better than 10mm, for example, because the lighter bullets should suffer less from over penetration (especially Underwood/Lehigh Defense XD rounds), yet, they can deliver similar energy to that round and often exceeds factory .357 Magnum rounds (though the latter can obviously be loaded hotter).

On average, .357 SIG appears to take fewer rounds to stop someone than .380 ACP, 9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP. Statistically it fails to incapacitate slightly less than, not only these calibers, but also .44 Magnum (which over penetrates) and even 12 Gauge shotguns (and is tied with .357 Magnum & centerfire rifles). Note: shotguns and rifles are much more lethal, but not any more effective in stopping people in typical self defense situations.

.357 SIG tends to shoot flatter, faster and more accurately than .380 ACP, 9mm, or .40S&W though .45 ACP is a little more accurate (but doesn't benefit from this accuracy).

Theoretically, .357 SIG should jam less often because of its bottleneck design.

It typically has less recoil than heavier calibers .40S&W and up (though it has more muzzle blast; but it can be hand loaded to be as tame as 9mm).

The percentage of people actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head shots) is better for .357 SIG than .380 ACP, 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP.

Lastly, because of its expense for departments in terms of both ammunition and maintenance (.357 SIG pistols wear out more quickly compared to other calibers), the commercial options have never been nearly as plentiful as with other calibers, so I don't think its true potential has been realized. The imperfect study that I gleaned most of this information from (An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association) was conducted before the XD rounds I mentioned were available, for example. Had these rounds been available for .357 SIG I believe it could have widen the gap further because of the velocity and lighter weight of the bullets. Even lightening a .45 or .40 still can't deliver as much energy because of the BC of the .355" bullets which helps with velocity.

Don't get me wrong, as the study points out, all these calibers are all good options and there isn't much of a difference between them practically speaking. Shot placement is the most important thing, but if we're going to tease out the comparison for the best caliber, I believe all these reasons make .357 SIG the best candidate. Not perhaps for police departments, other agencies and the military because they have to arm hundreds or thousands of people (as the costs I mentioned add up), but for individuals carrying guns that easily handle the .357 SIG I believe it has an edge. Whether that difference is worth it is up to the person's budget and personal preferences (like the size and weight of the firearm they like to carry). This last point is the only thing other than price that prevents me from truly favoring this caliber. But whether I am carrying a small, medium, or large-size concealed carry firearm, .355" diameter bullets are my favorites (thought I still carry .40 as well). The interesting thing about 9mm is that in this study, it was the only larger caliber (not counting .25 ACP, .32 ACP and .380 ACP) that were mostly FMJ bullets. Think about that. Remember, these were approximately 1,800 people shot with the various calibers, and the failure to incapacitate rate for 9mm was 13% which tied .44 Magnum, .40 S&W, and technically beat .45 ACP (all of which mostly used HP bullets). That makes 9mm Parabellum the king for using cheap ammo, but like I mentioned, the .357 SIG can be loaded to replicate 9mm in virtually every way. Anyway, that's just my opinion. No study is perfect, everyone is flawed including this one, but it's the best information I have to go on. I also happen to believe a lighter bullet delivering over 500 ft. lbs. of energy to produce hydrostatic shock is what largely sets .357 SIG and .357 Magnum apart (see the controversial Courtney & Courtney: https://a.org/abs/1102.1642), but everyone has their opinions. It certainly doesn't mean I am right.

 

[PEC-Memphis]

Fullclip,,that gun does sound impressive ! I want ONE !!!
I remember the Herter's catalogs,,,spent many an hour as a kid dreaming of those Herter bolt rifles ! I was puzzled even then by the advertising',,,,'when you have to stop your quarry with only one shot every time',,,,,,,,,,,,,,I wondered why they weren't just single shots ,,,,lol

I'll have to stick with my .391 Wackmaster with double hollow point tipped bullets !

“Wackmaster” - is that a pump action?

 

[GlockFan7]

You have any stats on the 40 popularity in other countries???

A question for you. Can you name one military power that utilized the .40 S&W? Keep in mind that the 9mm has 87 years and two world wars and countless revolutions and conflicts on it.

 

[fredj338]

A question for you. Can you name one military power that utilized the .40 S&W? Keep in mind that the 9mm has 87 years and two world wars and countless revolutions and conflicts on it.

I can not but I am not claiming the 40 has a long track record. Someone posted LEA shootings, they pale in the numbers compared to daily street shootings. 40Y ago the 38sp was probably the #1. Today it si most likely 9mm in the hands of the bad guys. Shootings in Chicago alone in one year dwarf LEA shootings in the same year.

 

[fredj338]

I don't have a #1 caliber because it depends on the gun I am carrying. In my hands, 9mm would be too powerful for a Ruger LCP II or similar size/weight pocket pistol, and .357 SIG would be too powerful for a G43 or P365 (in my opinion). What I really favor is the .355" bullet diameter for concealed carry handguns (.380 ACP, .9mm Parabellum & .357 SIG). I prefer to carry my SIG P229 in .357 SIG because it is marginally better than the rest (and perhaps significantly better potentially), but for anything lighter than my SIG I carry either 9mm or .380 ACP.

I like .357 SIG better than 10mm, for example, because the lighter bullets should suffer less from over penetration (especially Underwood/Lehigh Defense XD rounds), yet, they can deliver similar energy to that round and often exceeds factory .357 Magnum rounds (though the latter can obviously be loaded hotter).

On average, .357 SIG appears to take fewer rounds to stop someone than .380 ACP, 9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP. Statistically it fails to incapacitate slightly less than, not only these calibers, but also .44 Magnum (which over penetrates) and even 12 Gauge shotguns (and is tied with .357 Magnum & centerfire rifles). Note: shotguns and rifles are much more lethal, but not any more effective in stopping people in typical self defense situations.

.357 SIG tends to shoot flatter, faster and more accurately than .380 ACP, 9mm, or .40S&W though .45 ACP is a little more accurate (but doesn't benefit from this accuracy).

Theoretically, .357 SIG should jam less often because of its bottleneck design.

It typically has less recoil than heavier calibers .40S&W and up (though it has more muzzle blast; but it can be hand loaded to be as tame as 9mm).

The percentage of people actually incapacitated by one shot (torso or head shots) is better for .357 SIG than .380 ACP, 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP.

Lastly, because of its expense for departments in terms of both ammunition and maintenance (.357 SIG pistols wear out more quickly compared to other calibers), the commercial options have never been nearly as plentiful as with other calibers, so I don't think its true potential has been realized. The imperfect study that I gleaned most of this information from (An Alternate Look at Handgun Stopping Power | Buckeye Firearms Association) was conducted before the XD rounds I mentioned were available, for example. Had these rounds been available for .357 SIG I believe it could have widen the gap further because of the velocity and lighter weight of the bullets. Even lightening a .45 or .40 still can't deliver as much energy because of the BC of the .355" bullets which helps with velocity.

Don't get me wrong, as the study points out, all these calibers are all good options and there isn't much of a difference between them practically speaking. Shot placement is the most important thing, but if we're going to tease out the comparison for the best caliber, I believe all these reasons make .357 SIG the best candidate. Not perhaps for police departments, other agencies and the military because they have to arm hundreds or thousands of people (as the costs I mentioned add up), but for individuals carrying guns that easily handle the .357 SIG I believe it has an edge. Whether that difference is worth it is up to the person's budget and personal preferences (like the size and weight of the firearm they like to carry). This last point is the only thing other than price that prevents me from truly favoring this caliber. But whether I am carrying a small, medium, or large-size concealed carry firearm, .355" diameter bullets are my favorites (thought I still carry .40 as well). The interesting thing about 9mm is that in this study, it was the only larger caliber (not counting .25 ACP, .32 ACP and .380 ACP) that were mostly FMJ bullets. Think about that. Remember, these were approximately 1,800 people shot with the various calibers, and the failure to incapacitate rate for 9mm was 13% which tied .44 Magnum, .40 S&W, and technically beat .45 ACP (all of which mostly used HP bullets). That makes 9mm Parabellum the king for using cheap ammo, but like I mentioned, the .357 SIG can be loaded to replicate 9mm in virtually every way. Anyway, that's just my opinion. No study is perfect, everyone is flawed including this one, but it's the best information I have to go on. I also happen to believe a lighter bullet delivering over 500 ft. lbs. of energy to produce hydrostatic shock is what largely sets .357 SIG and .357 Magnum apart (see the controversial Courtney & Courtney: https://a.org/abs/1102.1642), but everyone has their opinions. It certainly doesn't mean I am right.

Its all personal preference based mostly on emotion. There is no empirical data showing any service caliber is significantly better or that any provides one shot torso stops better than any other. I shoot them all, carry them all but I realize my skill & ability is far more important than caliber. I too let the gun decide the caliber. While I could carry a G27& have, I dont shoot it quite as well as a G26 in tied drills, skill & ability. If going to a bigger gun in my 10+1 state, I might & have gone to a G32 instead of a G19, but could also go xd45C or even 1911 ltwtComm. All based on what I shoot best, not so much caliber.
FWIW, I am far less concerned about over penetration vs a miss. I actually would like my bullet to just exit. Two holes are always better than one. Why I never liked light for caliber stuff that might not make it to vitals.

 

[BDM71]

Its all personal preference based mostly on emotion. There is no empirical data showing any service caliber is significantly better or that any provides one shot torso stops better than any other. I shoot them all, carry them all but I realize my skill & ability is far more important than caliber. I too let the gun decide the caliber. While I could carry a G27& have, I dont shoot it quite as well as a G26 in tied drills, skill & ability. If going to a bigger gun in my 10+1 state, I might & have gone to a G32 instead of a G19, but could also go xd45C or even 1911 ltwtComm. All based on what I shoot best, not so much caliber.
FWIW, I am far less concerned about over penetration vs a miss. I actually would like my bullet to just exit. Two holes are always better than one. Why I never liked light for caliber stuff that might not make it to vitals.

I agree in part with what you said, but the study I linked is the results of 1800 people being shot with various calibers. These weren't gel tests or some other type of facsimile being tested. For starters, the study is undoubtedly flawed, as all studies are one way or another (which is almost always admitted by the author), as it does not identify the ammunition used beyond caliber and whether it was an FMJ or HP, for example. I could go on and on about why one should not form a solid opinion or accept the data as fact, but at the same time, we also have to look at the topic posed from the other side. In doing so, I would ask you what evidence you have that proves there is no significant difference in calibers? For example, every study is going to have a margin of error. It may be 2, 3, or 4 percent or more. I cannot deduce from this whitepaper the margin of error which might be derived from the raw data. However, let's say on average the margin of error is 3 percent. If this were true in this case, and I admit that is a big "if", that would mean the 4% spread regarding failure to incapacitate between 9mm, .40 S&W, & .44 Magnum vs .357 Magnum & .357 SIG is not by chance alone which means, by definition, it is "significant" (and the old adage that you can't prove a negative dubious at best).

You may shoot all the calibers, but that in no way prepares you to judge empirically whether or not one caliber is better at another when it comes to one shot torso stops or virtually any other relevant metric (including failure to incapacitate). One must keep in mind that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Furthermore, prima facie, the data DOES show there are some calibers that are better than others in that metric among others. Whether the data can be trusted is another story. In any event, I know of NO study that proves otherwise. Moreover, the study of hydrostatic shock I cited, if similar studies by Americans and the Chinese that came to the same conclusions can be trusted (and the results were replicated), then there is most certainly an advantage to calibers & ammunition that can deliver 500 ft. lbs. or more of kinetic energy. In fact, if those studies are correct in their conclusions (yes, that is plural as the study I cited in turn cites others using the same 500 ft. lb. line of demarcation), hydrostatic shock would provide an exception to the shot placement statement we've both made as it would mean that shot placement was not nearly as important in those situations. The Chinese and Americans demonstrated that the CNS of canines and swine could be shut down by shooting those animals in the rear leg. Most of the commercial ammunition available at the time of this study, however, could not be relied upon to DELIVER 500 ft. lbs. or more of energy. Had the rounds available today which are rated at over 600 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy had been included in the data, it is not a stretch that the .357 Magnum and .357 SIG rounds might have had a failure rate even lower than 9% as these rounds do not tend to over penetrate. As one coroner well versed in examining gunshot wounds stated, he never saw a 357 leave the body or a .44 magnum stay in one.

Of course we also understand that cost considerations and other logistical realities come into play when ammunition is selected department-wide, agency-wide, or service-wide, and decisionmakers make a habit of defending their ammo choices understandably, and these "findings" echo throughout the gun world. Yet, we shouldn't take this or any data at face value, but I think it is appropriate that at least tentative opinions be had if people choose to place at least some trust in the data which suggests certain calibers are better at some things than others. The truth is that a truly scientific approach to solving this debate would be as unethical as it would be costly, but just because there is an absence of such data does not mean that no significant differences exist in calibers. In my opinion that is a fallacy because we are limited in what we can test. I certainly believe shot placement and ammunition selection in most situations is far more important than which of the popular calibers one chooses (even considering hydrostatic shock), and I stated as much; but to suggest matter-of-factly that there is no significant difference in caliber is perhaps more misleading than stating the opposite (as the data does demonstrate some significant differences at face value). Whether these differences are qualitatively significant is subjective, but if the data was tested properly (e.g. reproduced), it could very well prove quantitatively as well as qualitatively significant significant differences. As I often mention when I comment on the subject, for anyone who has lost a loved one, if you could have given them a 5% advantage in surviving they otherwise didn't have, would it have been worth it? The opinions would be just as various if not moreso, but certainly some people look for every advantage they can get. Quantitatively, from a statistical standpoint, I'd be willing to bet that switching a department to ammo capable of reliably delivering hydrostatic shock would increase the chances of survival far more than many of the tactics taught (such as one-handed manipulations).

 

[fredj338]

I suppose you have a point in all of that but it still stands, there is no established data showing one service caliber is vastly superior to another. We are punching holes. Look at gel tests, the best bullets are doing 65cal & 16" plus, regardless of caliber. Some want to put emphasis on how much the block wiggles & attach an energy dump factor to it, which anyone that has been in a shooting, studied shootings or hunted large things, knows isn't there.

 

[GlockFan7]

I can not but I am not claiming the 40 has a long track record. Someone posted LEA shootings, they pale in the numbers compared to daily street shootings. 40Y ago the 38sp was probably the #1. Today it si most likely 9mm in the hands of the bad guys. Shootings in Chicago alone in one year dwarf LEA shootings in the same year.

You're thinking way too small...waaaay too small. Deaths in just in WWI and WWII topped well over 100 million. Add another 6 million for Korea and Vietnam. .40 wasn't even a fantasy yet. It barely made it in time to see Desert Shield. Chicago is Disneyland by comparison. Which handgun caliber would be number 1? Of all time? Since it was invented? This year? Today? True that most wartime deaths aren't attributed to handguns, but you can bet they made a decent showing when they were needed. I'm not knocking .40 S&W. I actually like the round and I'll tell you quickly that my favorite Glock is my 23 followed next by my 27, but it's not a popularity contest. It's not a matter of which one someone things is better. It's not a ballistics battle. 118 years of continued service world-wide and growing exponentially, says a lot.

 

[fredj338]

You're thinking way too small...waaaay too small. Deaths in just in WWI and WWII topped well over 100 million. Add another 6 million for Korea and Vietnam. .40 wasn't even a fantasy yet. It barely made it in time to see Desert Shield. Chicago is Disneyland by comparison. Which handgun caliber would be number 1? Of all time? Since it was invented? This year? Today? True that most wartime deaths aren't attributed to handguns, but you can bet they made a decent showing when they were needed. I'm not knocking .40 S&W. I actually like the round and I'll tell you quickly that my favorite Glock is my 23 followed next by my 27, but it's not a popularity contest. It's not a matter of which one someone things is better. It's not a ballistics battle. 118 years of continued service world-wide and growing exponentially, says a lot.

I think you are misquoting me. I never said the 40 was even in the top 10. Go back & read the threads.

 

[Cranky old cop]

You don’t think there were many SMG kills in WW2/Korea/Vietnam?



Lolololol

Well how many were there ? Compared to say artillery ?

 

[Cranky old cop]

Over 120 tears of 9mm, I would say 9mm. The question is moot though, pointy sticks, hands & feet, all kill.

120 tears ? 😙

 

[AK_Stick]

Well how many were there ? Compared to say artillery ?

There were litterally millions of MP-40’s, Stens, Sterling’s, Grease Guns, Thompsons, PPD-40’s or PPSH-41’s used during WW2 🤣

 

[Cranky old cop]

There were litterally millions of MP-40’s, Stens, Sterling’s, Grease Guns, Thompsons, PPD-40’s or PPSH-41’s used during WW2 🤣

How many were killed by 9mm? Grease guns and Thompsons are not 9mm. Artillery and Air dropped bombs kill and wound far more than firearms of all types combined.

 

[AK_Stick]

How many were killed by 9mm? Grease guns and Thompsons are not 9mm. Artillery and Air dropped bombs kill and wound far more than firearms of all types combined.

Maybe instead of just searching through posts I made years ago to try and sharp shoot. You should read the OP and/or thread before you comment. It would prevent incidents like this 🤣

 

[LApm9]

Fullclip,,that gun does sound impressive ! I want ONE !!!
I remember the Herter's catalogs,,,spent many an hour as a kid dreaming of those Herter bolt rifles ! I was puzzled even then by the advertising',,,,'when you have to stop your quarry with only one shot every time',,,,,,,,,,,,,,I wondered why they weren't just single shots ,,,,lol

I'll have to stick with my .391 Wackmaster with double hollow point tipped bullets !

Herter was my preferred reading!

I have his cookbook, which gives excellent instructions on how to clean a turtle.

Our youth has missed so much!

 

[LApm9]

7.62x25 Tokarev?

I would love to see a quality pistol in 7.62x25 Tokarev.

 

[Cranky old cop]

Maybe instead of just searching through posts I made years ago to try and sharp shoot. You should read the OP and/or thread before you comment. It would prevent incidents like this 🤣

I am not concerned……post 73 was years ago? 🤔

 

[Cranky old cop]

I am not concerned……post 73 was years ago? 🤔

Why laugh it was your post 2hours ago? 💁

 

[M 7]

7.62x25 Tokarev?

I would love to see a quality pistol in 7.62x25 Tokarev.

So would I. Perhaps Glock does so with their next model, but I am not holding my breath either since there are not many law enforcement agencies or militaries looking for such an animal. Glock's primary interest is in satisfying law enforcement and military organizations; the recreational shooting market comes in a far distant second place.