Asta, just want you to know I'm not calling your out or trying to second-guess everything you wrote. I just have a few mild disagreements with some of it, and thought I'd point out my own opinion. Most of this is just conjecture anyway as no one here is a ballistics expert. - AR
Asta85 wrote:The 9mm is not a bad round, but it has less stopping power, thus requiring either more prescision, or more hits. The .40 is known as the "compromise" round. Why? It has more stopping power than the 9mm, but just isn't quite the .45. The .45 is a big bad bullet, and it will stop.
This is a bit simplistic. Both 9mm and .40 are moving faster than typical .45 loads. And all three - with proper load (i.e. 9mm +P) - will from a duty-gun length barrel exceed the magical 400 ft-lbs of energy number that - at least on paper - makes for good pistol stopping power. Beyond that and some ballistic gelatin tests, the rest is all guess work and conjecture. Bullets do weird things. People have dropped dead from a .22LR, while others have walked around with multiple .45-cal bullets in them. I've even heard a story from a SWAT guy of a bad guy getting up after a pair of 5.56mm Hornady TAP bullets to the chest. Point is, there is no magic bullet or "manstopper" and one of these three is not necessarily "better" than the others. Its all just varying degrees of "who knows?" and with the right gun and load, all are proven good self defense rounds.
Asta85 wrote:Once you decide essentialy how much you want to shoot at a badguy, you are almost ready to go to the store.
I agree with this - picking a caliber is a good first step that will help narrow choices. But this is just as much about the feel of the gun and how it shoots than the caliber itself - example, a .45-cal Glock's grip is too large for many people to hold - thus not a good choice at all. But 9mm/.40/.357 Glocks do fit more hands. Of those three, some may find .40/.357 too snappy in the same frame as a 9mm. So, you're on the right track, but just picking say ".45 ACP" and then trying to find the right gun in that caliber may not leave many good choices. The caliber and gun go hand-in-hand in determining the "fit" of the gun to the shooter for multiple varied reasons.
Asta85 wrote:I believe you stated that you have an injured wrist, but I wouldn't let that get in the way of your decision just yet. Why? If your wrist is going to recover, you should be readily able to handle any recoil given by the .40s&w. People will tell you all day long that the .40 has more recoil/kick/push than the 9mm... Ya think?! A few factors here, GENERALY (from my shopping experience) most of the brands put their .40's, and 9mm's on the same frame and such making it essentially the same pistol in dimensions and weight. Bigger bullet + More powder + Same size as a 9mm = tranfers more energy to you, aka kick. People will also say "the .40 has more kick than the .45!" Well, .45's are GENERALY on a larger frame, and have a greater weight. Energy to move the bullet, slide, and the weight of the pistol is eaten up before it gets to you resulting in a not as harsh kick. Also I noticed that recoil is effected by how steady a person is on their feet standing anyway. If you are easily knocked back, or have less muscule control the 9mm may be right for you. I shot about 20rds from a SIG 9mm last August on my honeymoon, and I no trouble controlling it at all.
Again, you're on the right track, but I can tell you from personal experience that in a similar-sized gun the .45 ACP is "easier" to shoot and kicks a bit less than a .40 S&W. Both recoil more than 9mm, but it's a different feel. .40-cal "jumps" in your hand, popping your wrist back sharply whereas .45 is a hard push straight back (this is why a lot of shooters like a ported barrel with a .40 or .357). The difference is the pressure of the loads (.40 standard load is higher pressure than .45 standard load). To say anyone can shoot a .40 is too general. Some people don't shoot it as well and don't like it. A good shooter with strong wrists and good technique can effectively shoot anything well - but everyone has a caliber/pistol that just fits them best.
What makes the .40 so advantageous as a police or self defense caliber is the unique combination of capacity (similar to 9mm) and energy delivery (almost to level of .45). The trade off is that it is a more jumpy round that can be a bit more difficult to control, especially for someone with wrist or hand injury issues.
Asta85 wrote:My brother chose the 9mm saying "well if you put the bullet where it counts, size doesn't matter." Maybe so, but in the event that you need to use your weapon you will probably not have time to perfectly aim exactly "where it counts", and I would rather have a round that will provide more knock-back, and/or knock-down power.
This is a misnomer. A handgun bullet can't be big enough to overcome an errant shot. Regardless of caliber, putting the bullets "where it counts" is the most important task of a self-defense shooter, not only from a stopping power perspective but also from the perspective of avoiding hitting innocents or others' property with stray bullets. A single 9mm center mass will have much more stopping power than a .40 or .45 grazing an arm. I'd venture to say a 9mm dead center in the chest even has a better chance of stopping an attacker than a .40 or .45 in the stomach. And certainly a 9mm to the leg is more dangerous than a .45 whizzing past your head. Point is, choose the caliber/gun you can shoot best and then PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE. IMHO, an IPSC Grand Master with a 9mm is much more dangerous to a bad guy than some guy with a new .45 he's never shot.
