9mm vs .357 Sig vs .40 S&W vs .45 ACP

[Marine Cpl]

The .357 Sig reigns supreme on these barrier penetration tests followed by the 9mm as a close second. I wish it was more popular.



Thoughts... With the. 40 S&W and the .45 ACP, you get no extra performance with the added recoil you get from those 2 rounds.

With the .357 SIG, you get more penetration at a cost of added flash, recoil, concussion, and monetary cost.

There are 9mm +P+ rounds that almost approach the .357 SIG's velocity from Underwood and Buffalo Bore if one wanted to go that route.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Did this thread really just happen? Lol.

 

[MilesTeg]

You forgot 10mm Darth will be upset!

 

[Criticalt]

You forgot 10mm Darth will be upset!

THEY ALL FEAR THE MIGHTY 10mm!!!

 

[Marine Cpl]

THEY ALL FEAR THE MIGHTY 10mm!!!

10 mm is too big for concealed carry.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Did this thread really just happen? Lol.

Hey. Better this than the Democrats that.

 

[togmaster]

Popcorn yum.

 

[Day444]

Wish I could see into the future.. Will the .357 Sig be around in the years to come?

 

[Phazer]

Wish I could see into the future.. Will the .357 Sig be around in the years to come?

Ummm....is it around all that much now?

 

[Deplorable Me]

Which one can you put on target? That's the best one.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Which one can you put on target? That's the best one.

9mm

 

[Podmonkey]

You lose some capacity too. And that is a big deal since those extra couple rounds offset whatever minor performance gains other defensive cartridges have over the 9mm. As always, only valid in free states.

 

[Criticalt]

10 mm is too big for concealed carry.

Not on my 6ft 260lb body it aint.

Glock 10mm, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room, accept no substitute.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Not on my 6ft 260lb body it aint.

Glock 10mm, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room, accept no substitute.

The .357 Sig beats the 10mm in velocity for added barrier penetration. The 10mm beats the Sig in bullet weight for added soft tissue penetration. Since you would be using hollow points that are designed to stop between 12 to 18 inches in gel anyway, why not the Sig for the winner?

 

[dsdmmat]

Not on my 6ft 260lb body it aint.

Glock 10mm, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room, accept no substitute.

No problem carrying a full sized bullet launcher here either.

 

[Criticalt]

The .357 Sig beats the 10mm in velocity for added barrier penetration. The 10mm beats the Sig in bullet weight for added soft tissue penetration. Since you would be using hollow points that are designed to stop between 12 to 18 inches in gel anyway, why not the Sig for the winner?

Because in my real world, personal testing at car doors and other metal objects, the 10mm destroys everything it comes in contact with.
Hey, I have nothing against 357 sig, I just happen to own a 10mm that has demolished everything ive pointed it at. Woooohoooo 10mm!!

 

[Criticalt]

Because in my real world, personal testing at car doors and other metal objects, the 10mm destroys everything it comes in contact with.
Hey, I have nothing against 357 sig, I just happen to own a 10mm that has demolished everything ive pointed it at. Woooohoooo 10mm!!

Plus I will add that in a self defense situation at point blank range, ZERO people will walk away from ONE center mass 10mm, so ill be ok.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Plus I will add that in a self defense situation at point blank range, ZERO people will walk away from ONE center mass 10mm, so ill be ok.

In soft tissue, the 10mm will perform no better than the .40 S&W. All hollow points are designed to expand and stop at a certain depth.

Being that they are the same diameter bullet, once expanded and stopped at about the same depth (within an inch or two depending on the load), how will the 10mm be any better?

In soft tissue the 10mm only shines in a FMJ or hardcast for penetration against something like say a bear.

 

[Bananabandit]

+1 on 10mm.
Glock 40 is no CC firearm, but Glock 29 is.

 

[Criticalt]

In soft tissue, the 10mm will perform no better than the .40 S&W. All hollow points are designed to expand and stop at a certain depth.

Being that they are the same diameter bullet, once expanded and stopped at about the same depth (within an inch or two depending on the load), how will the 10mm be any better?

In soft tissue the 10mm only shines in a FMJ or hardcast for penetration against something like say a bear.

Screw that gel crap, no cloths, no bones, no fear and no crying. The 10mm devours screaming bad guys.

 

[Criticalt]

Actually I carry a 9mm or 357 mag.

My G20 is mostly used for dismantling automobiles and chopping down trees. No sissy hollow points here, FMJ log splitters only.

 

[Podmonkey]

Actually I carry a 9mm or 357 mag.

My G20 is mostly used for dismantling automobiles and chopping down trees. No sissy hollow points here, FMJ log splitters only.

I think you could find more efficient tools for either of those tasks.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Screw that gel crap, no cloths, no bones, no fear and no crying. The 10mm devours screaming bad guys.

You see, that's the nonsense that brings about the whole .45 ACP's will spin you like a top crap.

Experts that know much more than us say different. Ballistic gel is an accurate medium that does take bones into account. It isn't an inch for inch ratio.

 

[Podmonkey]

You see, that's the nonsense that brings about the whole .45 ACP's will spin you like a top crap.

Experts that know much more than us say different. Ballistic gel is an accurate medium that does take bones into account.

I don't think gel takes bones into account how could it? By specing the average density of the human body? That won't reflect the actual behavoir of a bullet striking bone. The value of ballistics gel is by comparing the performance of various bullets in relation to each other in the same medium under the same conditions.
Just because a bullet penetrates and expands x amount in gel doesn't mean that is what it will do in a living body.
Honestly I don't think it matters much. Bullet type and selection is more important than caliber. I will take a 9mm HST over a generic cheapo 10mm or 357 SIG JHP any day.

 

[togmaster]

And I thought The Penitration Chanel was a porn channel.

 

[Podmonkey]

And I thought The Penitration Chanel was a porn channel.

I was gonna say something about that too but I forgotted.

 

[Criticalt]

I don't think gel takes bones into account how could it? By specing the average density of the human body? That won't reflect the actual behavoir of a bullet striking bone. The value of ballistics gel is by comparing the performance of various bullets in relation to each other in the same medium under the same conditions.
Just because a bullet penetrates and expands x amount in gel doesn't mean that is what it will do in a living body.
Honestly I don't think it matters much. Bullet type and selection is more important than caliber. I will take a 9mm HST over a generic cheapo 10mm or 357 SIG JHP any day.

This is what I heard in the Army, but what do they know about shooting people with guns.

 

[Podmonkey]

This is what I heard in the Army, but what do they know about shooting people with guns.

Why should they? There is no choice of caliber in the Army. 9mm, 5.56 or bust. Or I suppose 7.62, .50 BMG and 40mm grenades too, technically speaking.
And I don't know about you but I didn't learn all that much about small arms in the Army beyond how to shoot them at paper and pop ups and some expedient remediation drills. We did nothing with ballistics or wound theory, above our pay grade I suppose. Though I was artillery and not infantry mind. Small arms was not the focus of my MOS.

 

[Marine Cpl]

I don't think gel takes bones into account how could it? By specing the average density of the human body? That won't reflect the actual behavoir of a bullet striking bone. The value of ballistics gel is by comparing the performance of various bullets in relation to each other in the same medium under the same conditions.
Just because a bullet penetrates and expands x amount in gel doesn't mean that is what it will do in a living body.
Honestly I don't think it matters much. Bullet type and selection is more important than caliber. I will take a 9mm HST over a generic cheapo 10mm or 357 SIG JHP any day.

The gel is just a repeatable medium.

I forgot what FBI report I read but basically they fired bullets into human and animal cadavers through skin and bones. Those that penetrated enough into vitals, they then fired into ballistics gel and measured the numbers. So if it hit vitals through bone on carcasses, it penetrated about 12 to 18 inches when fired into gel.

The FBI uses and trusts gel. They do numerous tests to make sure ammo performs up to their specs. I'm more inclined to trust the guys with lab coats that the FBI employs rather than some guy wearing a flannel on the web who thinks a .45 ACP will spin you like a top.

 

[Criticalt]

You see, that's the nonsense that brings about the whole .45 ACP's will spin you like a top crap.

Experts that know much more than us say different. Ballistic gel is an accurate medium that does take bones into account. It isn't an inch for inch ratio.

A 45 will not spin you like a top but it does have more force than a 9mm when it hits flesh and bone.
I have a .38 a 9mm, 10mm, 45, and 357. I trust all of them with my life because of ammo choice and shot placement.
Ammo manufacturers make deadly ammo for most calibers.