This video by Paul Harrell pretty much seals the deal for me. In terms of penetration (referencing the FBI Miami shootout), recoil, etc. The 40 is still the better round:

The 40 is a well balanced round . It’s sure been poo-poo’d lately , doesn’t make much sense to me

I don't understand why he bothered to shoot the 115 jhp. It is not surprising that it behaved just like it did in 86.

In the comparison of golden delicious to red delicious, (Hornady Critical Duty for each chambering.) It was the 40 caliber which stopped 2 bullets at the heart level.

It is good that bad guys aren't made from concrete blocks.

If you want to see if you can shoot a 9mm faster than a 40, get a timer. Shoot under time constraints. 95 percent will see a difference. If you don't see a difference, pat yourself on the back. A good shooter will shoot well with whatever you hand him.

He made the point of the 9mm Crtical Defense out penetrating the 40. His point was in his opinion, it was not worth it to change the entire department's inventory on what was ostensibly picking flyshit out of pepper. (9mm replacing the 40)... Then again, I admit I have a bad case of 9mmDS...

Well, the 9s are cheaper to shoot and come in colors.

It's clearly more powerful. The only question is: does that extra degree of power increase "stopping power" sufficient as to justify a smaller capacity, increased recoil, and increased stress on the pistol, resulting in significantly shorter service life?

I hold PH in high regard for his qualifications, and I can see his position, but because of my own experiences as a firearms instructor/trainer in the law enforcement field, I understand why agencies are turning to the 9mm.

The first reason is cost of ammunition. As a matter of fact, agencies can purchase a year's training ammunition in 9mm cheaper than they can buy 40 S&W. This does not mean they will spend the same money, and shoot more, (like they should) just that they will save on yearly ammunition expenditures.

I'm sure you are aware of a training principle called "Teaching to the Two's." In a nutshell, every student in a classroom has aptitude on a scale of 1-10. From a teaching standpoint, it is standard to "Teach to the twos". If you can extrapolate that, and realize that most kids don't come from farms anymore, you can see that you will have to begin handgun training with recruits at a "2" level. Some will excel. Some won't. Some can't hit the ground with their cap. It is the job of Cadre to make them all "proficient".

My own experience was skewed, in a way, since my old agency had a designated sidearm and backup, and that is what we had to shoot, and we had to shoot issued ammunition. When I taught at the Academy, I saw some Cadets fail training because they could not pass the range requirements. Toward the end of my time there, I was pressured by my superiors to pass some Cadets who could not meet the standard, but held my ground. Some were the ones you might imagine, some were white males.

The deal is this: I firmly believe "WHERE you hit them is more important than What you hit them with." I do not advocate the 22 LR for Duty Carry, but I have seen it work in civilian self defense situations enough to know that it is deadly.

If I were putting on a gun belt to work again, and could pick my own sidearm, I'd likely have to choose between 10mm and 357 Sig. If I took a job with a Dept that dictated 9mm, I wouldn't loose sleep as long as I could run Hornady 135 grain Critical Duty, Federal HST in either 124 +p or 147 +p. If you are carrying 9mm, just be prepared to shoot more.

Dead is dead. Sheetbird shot 8 times with 9mm is no more dead that sheetbird shot twice with a 45.

Crimson Tide, I think this makes good sense. Our Department recently made the change from 45acp to 9mm. We were due to rotate out a number of weapons and decided to just go ahead and change them all out. Ammunition cost was a major factor.

Holy retarded.

I don’t buy into the increased stress / short service life thing . Never seen a credible , valid study to back it. This is only my opinion . Besides statistically the number of us that will shoot one into the ground is very low . Still a metric ton of guys using 40 in competition (read: massive round counts ) to make major .

Capacity ? 2 rounds difference I guess for most across the board . A grasp when everyone clamors to single stack pocket guns these days lol . Better bone up on reloads

Recoil ? I guess it might bother someone

As to recoil, it's not so much a matter of bothering anyone, in terms of being punishing. There's no pain in it at all. Feels just fine to most folks. Where recoil comes in is regarding shot to shot aiming, and while an active competition shooter might be able to demonstrate equal shot to shot time, per same accuracy, that's likely not the case for a typical cop who mainly shoots a few hundred rounds a year, mainly just before qualifications.

Dead is dead. Sheetbird shot 8 times with 9mm is no more dead that sheetbird shot twice with a 45.

While that may be true, there is a difference in the public perception between a suspect being shot 8 times vs. 2 times. The general non shooting public doesn't understand the dynamic and complex situation shooting an armed violent homicidal bad guy presents to the good guys. Movies and media have made the ignorant general public think good guys should shoot the gun out of their hands or wing them in the shoulder. But not shoot them eight times, that's just not right! Blah, blah... I have personal experience in such a situation and it's a tough sell to make that granny on the jury understand the realities of gunfights. Hell, you can read the same deal right here on the Fire from the cop haters.

I don't think every officer should be packing full house 10mms because of that. In fact, that is the argument for the 9mm. Accuracy counts! Only accurate hits contribute to the good. If it's easier to get the troops to manage the 9mm then that extra millimeter of the .40 doesn't matter one percentage point of stopping power.

I would not want to get hit by either.........but PH makes me scratch my head with his 'ballistics tests' - what consistency is his 'media?'

I think stats on the street should be considered a high level of relevancy to what a particular ammo and cartridge will do in a PD situation.

I don’t disagree with you .
Personally it’s a non issue. I said I guess it could bother some
I shot a bone stock g22 in tournaments this winter . Had no issue stacking double taps on top of each other while running , and saw no growth in times

Service size pistols are very forgiving

Except for the exceptional macho mano's on The 'Fire, it's really not debatable that the bulk of the potential gun carrying everyday Jo Blow public will shoot a 9mm faster & more accurately under any circumstance, compared to the 40 given, both rounds through comparable gun models for weight & barrel length.

As CT implies, accuracy counts most, speed 2nd.................given the relative small difference in performance between the rounds (again, given similar bullets in the respective calibers), why would most everyday Jo Blows, pick the 40?

Does anyone know what the most traded in gun model is in the last few years?????????


Glock 27..............& I've watched LGS salesmen along with women's significant others
of whatever design, try really hard to put a new & inexperienced female shooter into that exact model.

Virtually guaranteed that nearly 100% of them will not keep the gun long enough to run even 1 box of ammo through it....................because they simply cannot manage it.

The 40 is a great round for the macho manos who can actually shoot it well, but for the vast majority of others, the 9mm is a better choice.

MM

The 40 is a darn near perfect blend between number of available rounds available in the magazine and power/penetration/ wound channel! memtb

Hand me pa pa government model 1911 in a 45 auto, covid 19 face mask, and keep a 6 foot buffer.

Funny thing is that the cops who carry oftentimes aren’t gonna know the difference between the two rounds cuz they can’t hit anything in the first place.... or 12th place... or 19th...

For me personally I’ve switched to a high cap 9mm from a 1911 in .45 due to my perception that dangers have changed. I used to be concerned about an assailant or 2 attempting to rob me and my family. Today I think more of large numbers of assailants looking to take advantage of a person they perceive as weak and just beat the crap out of me and my family.

.40 just doesn’t factor in for me. 9mm is good enough. .45 is best.

40 is disfavored for the same reason they did away with physical strength requirements they used to have for police, firefighters and soldiers.

“You be the judge”

Ok I judge that was one of the stupidest things I’ve ever watched.

I think there are a few who in mu opinion missed the point. First, the guy on the video's credentials are pretty solid. Second, he is clearly on point and even more so, he DEMONSTRATES there is virtually no difference when it came to a lot of issues, his point was, if there is virtually no difference (with the exception of increased, albeit slight increase in recoil, hence my "for teh wimmins" quip), why go through the expense of having to train whole departments on it? As to ammo cost, surely economies of scale would offset that. But I see my intent on ruffling feathers had an effect....

You make a valid point, but it is one I believe that can be easily explained by body cam footage from several police shootings that show in real time how many bullets bad guys can seem to soak up and still fight. Even granny can tell that sometimes it takes a handful of rounds to make 'em quit.

Not directed at you CT, just a general statement for those following.....

Anyone reading this IS NOT in the 95%. And it's not 95%, it's more like 99.9999999%. Ben Stoeger, one of the two or three best shooters on the planet, has commented that it is easier to shoot accurately at speed with a 9mm than a .40.

A good shooter will shoot well with whatever you hand him. And he'll shoot better with a gun that recoils less.

Recoil and "wimmins" shooters are a small part of why many departments are switching to 9mm.

That is his point. So why go through the expense?

And THAT is exactly my point. Nothing more.

Increased stress and shorter service life is a real thing. If you've never seen it that's only because you don't have enough experience with what you're talking about.

Yes, some people are still using .40 in competition. No, it's not a metric ton of them. And not that many at all compared to competition in general. They're the minority. And of those who use them in competition, very, very few will ever fire "massive round counts" and of those, they're not using plastic frame pistols to do it, and of those they're not using factory .40 either.

In short, you're wrong about a lot.

I may be misunderstanding your comment here , but I could only speculate that the big change came from recoil complaints and maybe ammo costs ?

Couldn’t say . The recoil is a non issue in a service sized gun for me personally , which is what I was saying .

The 9mm has been en Vogue lately with many . Everything finds itself in that limelight for a period , the 40 did .

Because .40s beat up plastic guns. And because 9mm is cheaper to buy. And mostly because anyone who says it's a "non-issue" doesn't know what they're talking about.

Then I bow out . I stated my observations . Be glad to have the experts weigh In

Again I said I , nor most have or will shoot one to pieces

Again I said I haven’t seen a definitive study from someone who has (but I’d honestly like to )

And again I said “to make major “

And competitors aren’t shooting many rounds these days ?

LOL

That might mean you're not shooting very fast.

Probably

Most larger departments transition duty weapons on a regular or semi-regular basis anyway.

If they were using the .40 before they're going to move to the 9mm in the future.

The damage a .40 can inflict to polymer frames is very real. Anybody that says otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about. It is very hard on guns.

Logic would seem to indicate the same will apply to the 357 Sig

An increase in power will produce a shorter life span. The same applies to motors

But is it enough difference to matter to everyone

I have little or no experience with the .357 Sig.

I saw the 40 introduced and used by LE agencies until I retired in '16. Firearms instructor, armorer and communicated with others from small agencies to the state patrol. Practically all of them used Glock 40s and some stayed in service over ten years, seeing 3-4 qualifications a year with full-boat service ammo. If those guns were breaking we would have heard about it- but never did. Change the recoil spring assembly at recommended service intervals or when indicated by function checks. These guns are fine if maintained properly.

The Glock 22's and 23's are known to do better than others in the long term.

That's about 2,000 rounds. Not surprising that most of them last that long without someone noticing that there's a problem.

They didn't notice a problem because there wasn't one.

Jesus Blue, listen to yourself. You get all dogmatic like this and sound about half as smart as you apparently are.

I'm not out to convince anybody of anything, mostly because I don't GAS.

But if somebody wants to see what people mean when they discuss the longevity of 40's stuffed into 9mm frames, put 10K through a Beretta 96 and 10K through a Beretta 92.

Let me know what happens.

Some guns are best in their original format and the Beretta is a great example. I'm still kicking myself in the ass for trading off a stupid-accurate 92G Centurion. I did have a 96 Centurion a couple of years later, which lasted long enough to trade it for a filly. Four legged variety

Thank you for that point of view. The video did not address that and you made two important points. thanks again.

Don't usually agree with Blue...but I know the last department I worked for started issuing G22s after I retired. Officers have to qualify twice a year for a total of 144 rounds per year...if the officer kept the gun for 20 years it would be 2880 rounds. RARELY did any of the officers fire a shot not in qualification... Take initial training of probably 800 rounds and the occasional combat course and it is doubtful that a gun issued to one of these officers would see 5K rounds in the life of gun....

As to the .40 itself...an excellent round but unfortunately it does recoil more than the average non-shooter can shoot well.....and 95% of LEOs are non-shooters.

In the department above, the previous policy allowed an officer to buy their own firearm in either 9mm or .45 ACP as long as it wasn't a SA like a 1911. S&W, GLOCK, SIG, Kahr, Walther...whatever you wanted to carry. 95% could pass the qualifier without much problem. From what I was told when the department went to the ISSUE gun 50% had a hard time passing...mainly because 40% were women for whom the gun was too big and recoiled too much...

Bob

Interesting points of view, I don't own plastic pistols so that ain't a concern. 9's are easier to shoot faster in a pistol the same size as a 40 because it weighs more. Mag dumps with a 9 on a perp only LEO's are gonna get away with "rationalizing it as neutralizing the threat only flys for LEO's" Joe A Public thinks the rest of should only shoot once then get shot for our trouble. Which favors the 40 if you can shoot it well. I am patiently waiting for PH to make a you tube video on how to select women based on their underware choices. You all have a great day! MB

I'm dogmatic about what I've seen with my own eyes. And you're usually dogmatic that what you haven't seen doesn't exist.

I've seen slide release levers broken that "average" shooters didn't notice. And I broke a frame pin on a Glock 22 that caused occasional malfunctions and wasn't diagnosed until the 3rd Glock armorer looked at it (the first two were Glock reps). They diagnosed the recoil spring, magazine springs, magazines, poor grip, and bad ammo. The 3rd had seen the problem before in other .40s and knew what to look for. So IME .40 ammo in plastic guns can cause problems that aren't noticed or diagnosed correctly.

We hit 2K rounds before cadets leave the academy .

Jorge,

IMO what he demonstrates is what a world class shooter with 30" triceps can do with the 40. Most shooters don't have those beef quarter triceps he does, which greatly aids in controlling recoil.

For the rest of us, we are probably better off with a well stoked 9mm.

Translation:



Oh. OK. You win.

So it begs the question, aside from the 2" of extra penetration during the FBI shooting (where the 9mm failed) and the 40 is SUCH a burden, why did half the known world go to the 40 in the first place, over a bullet? Once again government bureaucracy and feathermerchants rule the roost... BTW, Paul Harrell has a BUNCH of really good videos. I highly recommend him.

I saw a group of Gen 2 Glock 22's break extractors pretty consistently once they hit about 1,500 rounds. Glock told me it was a known issue and they redesigned the extractor for the .40 S&W guns. To their credit the new extractors gave us no issues. There were some other issues, ejector breaking, front sights coming off.

Jorge, this is just my opinion, but I think that half the known world transitioned to the 40 S&W because the FBI did. They were following the FBI's lead.

exactly! Here's another curve ball; the Secret Service uses the 357 SIG....

What does Hutch say about it?

Jorge1: The 40 S&W being superior to the 9m/m was NEVER in doubt with me.
Don't need no stinkin video.
Thanks anyway.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Why do they use the .357 SIG?

Overreaction. A bunch of FBI agents died or were badly wounded in a shootout with two bank robbers due mainly to the failure of a 1980s designed hollow point 9mm to penetrate through a perp's shoulder, all the way through his heart. Their first overreaction was to adopt the full house 10mm, not the .40 S&W. That was a flop, because so many couldn't shoot well with it. Then they toned it way down, and most of them could handle it, so someone came up with the idea of shortening the 10mm to fit in a 9mm pistol, while keeping the toned down 10mm power level.

They didn't jump directly from 9mm to .40 S&W.

The correct solution was to urge ammo makers to improve their 9mm bullet designs and powder charges using scientific testing, which is what happened anyway, thus shrinking the gap between .40 S&W and modern 9mm in terms of terminal performance potential.

Yep.

I^^^^THIS 100% The Beretta 92, Sig 226, Glock 17, S&W 5906, etc. were all designed around the 9mm Parabellum. When the 40 S&W was shoe horned into those pistols, Beretta 96, Glock 22, S&W4006 etc and things started to break sooner. Most of the newer polymer striker fired pistols that were designed after the 40 S&W came out and designed specifically for the 40 S&W cartridge and then adapted to the 9mm hold up much better. The cartridge that is probably the toughest on pistol frames is the 10mm Auto, Glock designed their Model 20 around that cartridge and from what I here there are no breakage issues with it. From what I hear it runs like a sewing machine.

I think a lot of people forget who the "experts" were in the late 80's.

I've never seen a more detailed or well articulated argument for why the FBI has opted to use 9mm chambered guns at this point in time. You'd have to be a subjective person to argue any of their points.

Jorge, I not 100% certain but I think that even the Secret Service has transitioned to the Glock 19 in 9mm.

I don't disagree that some 9mm pistols were insufficiently modified to accept .40 S&W, but the S&W 4006 should not be on your list. The slide and frame were beefed up, and the frame rails and recoil timing were changed.

Also, the Glock 20 gets my vote for the most kB!'d pistol. There have been a half dozen kB!'d here on the Campfire.

JOG, my mistake about the S&W 4006, I wasn't aware of how extensive the modifications were to that platform. And I learned something new about the Glock 20, I was not aware of the Kaboom issues with it. I thought most of the kaboom issueswere with the 40 S&W in the 22 & 23.

No idea, but I'm sure some government bureaucrat came up with the TOE>

I can relate to the Beretta. We use them here in 9mm and I've had to send back a BUNCH for rework because of the cracked block...

So can we have the CLiff Notes as to why the FBI transitioned (other than less recoil and weapon service life?

That would make sense overall.

How many had cracked frames?

The Cliff notes version, less recoil, better accuracy by the agents, service life of the pistol more effective ammunition and lower cost for ammunition. I have seen the paper Quantico wrote explaining the reasons for the switch but I don't have a copy of it at the moment.

Normally I would make a smart ass comment about watching a Paul Harrell video before reading the actual report, but because I love pilots I will make an exception.

The high points:

-Penetration standards are met.

-More bullets are better than less bullets.

-Data indicates the "one shot stop" theory is bullschit. Barring CNS.

-Cost.

-Deflection theories ended up being myth.

-Most barriers in vehicles can't be penetrated by a .40 or .45 any better than a 9mm.

-Overall marksmanship/scores/hit factors increase regardless of shooter skill level.

I believe that the latter versions, 3rd gen of the locking block are much more durable. I also think that in the 92 design, the locking block is a wearable/consumable item. It is easier and cheaper to replace a cracked locking block than it is to replace a cracked frame.

I don't know how many times you've been to Quantico but I don't think that's the word I'd use to describe a lot of the people involved in this type of testing in the past decade.

I'm not talking about the locking blocks.

I'm talking about the frames.

We've had them since January of 2015, give or take. We have an inventory of 90. So far, I've sent nine back and have three more to send. They do turn them around pretty fast.

Agreed that you probably aren't going to wear a 4006 down.

Probably.

Nine cracked 92 frames in five years seems a wee bit high.

There is a lot of truth in this I believe. 40 got stuffed into guns/frames that were not originally designed to handle it long term. Later designs, say such as the M&P seem to handle 40 easily. It’s entirely likely that earlier designs may hold the pressure enough to be safe to fire, but show wear faster on some parts.

Mark in GA

I lived in Quantico for a while at the Marine Air Station barracks ( I was commuting to the Pentagon) Good friend of mine was at the Amphib warfare school and also a Scout Sniper. Taught me a LOT about long range shooting as well as side arms. And yes we also got to play over on the FBI side. I'm no pistolero, but I did shoot with them and the NYPD Swat folks and of course here. While I am SURE you and many others here have FAR more trigger time than me, I know enough to make informed decisions and form opinions.

As to the videos, have/did you watch it or any of his other videos? I think he is extremely credible. Thanks for the Cliff notes, but basically the video's point was the 9mm with modern stuff was, for all practical purposes, the equal of the 40, so why change? Blue provided the missing factors in the equation of cost and recoil (wimmins). Number of rounds was to me a wash (15 v 17)?

I think his videos suck.

The failure rate on the Navy side is even worse.

Then two things
1. We will agree to disagree
2. I know his bona fides and combined wit what he has to say, I'll take his advice (so far) as well..

This is the correct timeline. Suppose the 80's designed HP had been replaced with a FMJ? Penetration would have been there in spades. The incident that sparked all of this really showed that the officers involved were in no way ready to arrest the bank robbers, either in the way they were armed or the fact they were not wearing body armor. I personally believe that more than a cartridge change the incident ushered in an era of improved body armor and the requirement to wear it. As far as the 9MM or the 40 being the better "stopper" I believe the man behind the gun is more important than what the gun is chambered for.

I know.

Prior to 1994 our city PD issued Smith 65's loaded with 38+P+ ammo. The Deputies and county PD could carry anything they wanted as long as they could qualify with it. They furnished personal guns. In 1994 the City issued Smith 5906's in 9mm, the County and SO went to G22's in 40 S&W. The GSP has been all over the place. In 1994 they had Smith 686's and carried 357 ammo. They had a brief look at Smith 4506's, then G22's, then Glock basically gave them G37's in 45 GAP but no one liked them and they went to G17's in 9mm.

Since 1994 we've had 13 LE shootings, 7 with 9mm, 6 with 40 S&W. There were never more than 3 shots fired by any officer and all bad guys were DRT. There were no survivors and no difference in how quickly they went down.

Departments upgrade to new guns about every 10-15 years anyway, sometimes they make them last 20 years. The 5906 was discontinued and the M&P 9mm pistols our city tested didn't meet reliability standards so our city replaced their 20 year old Smiths with G17's in 2014. The SO changed to G17's last year and the county will when they buy new guns the next time.

Going from a G22 to a G17 didn't require any more training or even new holsters. Our Sheriff contacted numerous agencies around the country who had made the switch from 40 to 9mm and none of them could offer any evidence that the 9mm pistols were any less effective than what they'd been using. On paper the 40 looks better, but the end results are all that matter.

Very well stated.

Really? I wasn't aware of a half dozen G20 blow ups from Fire members alone?

Exactly! It's the same with rifle cartridges. If the forum was around 40 years ago, everyone would have been talking that anything less than the 270 wasn't enough for deer. The 243 was marginal and only for women and youngsters who couldn't handle a "real gun". Look at today. With Barnes and other bullets, not only is the 243 great for deer, but people are even shooting deer successfully with the poodle shooter 223. People aren't using the bigger guns as much for deer and other medium game because there's no reason to put up with the recoil, etc. It's not that they can't handle it, it's that there's no reason to.

This U-tuber is well worth watching, much pragmatic and useful info there. Don't worry about them 9x19 guys, they are making up for lack of size by using +P+ ammo.

The FBI is in same position as the British Forces were in the 1930s. The officers were not used to shooting handguns, therefore, Webley & Scott/Enfield .38/200 (.38 Smith & Wesson with 200gr lead bullets) revolvers came into use replacing older, larger more cumbersome pieces.

That's as compelling as any other argument you've ever made.

Quite the endorsement.

LOL.

Those Webley & Scott top break .38/200s are great. They have excellent sights for military handgun of that era are pleasant to shoot and are accurate. Those assembled by Holland & Holland were Cats Meowwww. The marking 'Wartime Finish' are just precious!

I currently own 3 9mms, 2 .45 ACP's, and zero .40's.
Reason being, I have had the opportunity to shoot all three calibers, side by side, in similar Smith and Wesson M&P pistols.
For me, at least, the recoil and noise of the .40 was noticeable over the other two, to the point of being objectionable to me.

I like his videos, my son told me about them. he also told me that "dad, if you ever had a youtube channel this would be you". LOL

Holy schitt; making a statement like that on here could quickly lead to having your man-card pulled by some here.......................just sayin'.

MM

interesting thread. 9mm with the right bullets is good. 40 is certainly more powerful. i'm a certified geezer and this reminds me of all the 9 vs 45 magazine articles
from the 80s.

one thing I haven't noticed is recoil comparison. 40s I have shot, especially the plastic ones, are pretty snappy.

but, most police I have known and read about can't shoot worth [bleep]. surprising considering their line of work. nothing is effective if you can't hit.

More my speed:

TRexarms and Garand Thumb are pretty decent channels.

I have not seen TRexarms, I'll have to check him out. I like Garand Thumb, Larry Vickers Tactical and Warrior Poet Society.

Old opinion, all pistols are underpowered and 9 will do exactly the same thing as a 40 as will a 45

Paul’s lung tissue simulation material and other simulation material are a bit of a hoot. Again all handguns in the CCW department are underpowered. It makes not 10% difference the shorty 40 or the 9mm.

You are just clinging to that narrative...

And no, they’re not all underpowered... :-)

Why did you change your post??

Your usual position, but we’re talking people shooting not buffaloes, no 454’s are usually involved in civilian shootings

You always get yourself in a pickle when you make sweeping statements.

So why did you change your post?

I like Vickers as well.

Good post, so I'll ask you this question; if there is no difference in effectiveness between the two rounds (except for the agreed upon fact of longevity, TWO (2) more rounds and cost although that is debatable using economies of scale (volume), why go through the expense of replacing all your weapons just because of the aforementioned reasons?

As far as "Kabooms" go, right after the Glock 22s came out, an aquaintance bought one, and a case of Fiocchi ammo, to shoot IPSC with. He could count on at least one Kaboom from the ammo/gun combo every time he shot it. The barely supported chamber of the Glock 22, and the rather thin cases made by Fiocchi guaranteed an issue, he could count on it.
He was buying his pistols AND ammo from a single source, an LE distributor just down the road from his house. About once a month, he'd go in there and they'd swap him out a new Glock, until they both got tired of the runaround and he got into a Tanfoglio or some other flavor of .40 (So he could shoot up that case of ammo!).

I thought the whole exercise was a bit silly. It didn't make me a fan of the .40 though, as I had to RO the guy, and duck from time to time when extractors or other parts exited his pistols.

Well.......it's a secret

Re: the posing about dept. shooting with 9 vs 40, what ammo was used do you know?

Curious what ammo you folks are carrying, and in which cartridge?

Where’s my hurt feelings report?

And I was so happy to have you back...

More like FBI agents died in the shootout because none of them could hit [bleep] for shinola and it took one FBI guy with his arm half blowed off and a riot gun at point blank to terminate the perps. MB

Glockduffus A.K.A. BFR loves the 9mm.

Well almost . The FBI agent who had the 9mm had apparently poor eyesight and lost his glasses in the imbroglio so he couldn't see well. His one hit was that 9mm round that stopped short...

I believe everyone reading this IS in the 95 percent. And I agree that it is more like the ivory soap number 99 and 99/100%. Stoeger knows his business.

That should be a model for police training.

Never underestimate the power of the Big "I". I have never understood why the world of Law Enforcement listens so intently to an agency who is involved in fewer gunfights than police departments in Las Vegas, New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago, just to name a few. The only reason they are somewhat credible in this area is because they have a budget that allows them to do ad nauseum testing.

Oh, and remember this: If that 115 grain winchester silvertip had penetrated 2" more in Miami, You would have never heard of the 40 Smith and Wesson.

The secret service has always had a "thing" with having something different. I remember some years back, they had Remington PSS rifles chambered for 7mm Rem Mag.

Because range scores go up with 9mm. 80-85% shooters become 90-95% shooters.

That means that the "problem children" in your given department will shoot better. The upside to this is that when you end up responding to a school shooting with multiple shooters and the only help you have is the worst shooter in your department, you have more help than you had when he or she was shooting a 40. And since the effectiveness is identical, there is no negative to issuing 9mm.

Better do some reading...Jerry Dove shot Platt...his partner Ben Grogan was the one who could not see...

word...

You can always post it here and we can all learn, because it goes against what I read and saw on the presentation. Here is the video. It's addressed in here, but maybe he's wrong. (go to 29:50 in the video where the glasses issue is discussed).

Sorry but it was Jerry Dove that lost his glasses and couldn't see well without them. Yes Jerry Dove is the one that shot Platt.

The .22 Long Rifle has an excellent record on wild game.

Squirrels and grizzlies aren't the same, and neither are 120-lb hood rats and 240-lb meth heads. The latter comparison is always missing or poorly defined whenever I read up on shooting statistics. The results of the shooting are important, but so is WHAT was shot. There are plenty of bad guys, where if I could decide on the spot, I'd pick a .40 S&W over a 9mm.

I don't put much stake in cartridge 'shootability' comparisons. They always contain an "everything else the same" element that I can ignore. If I choose to select a cartridge with more power I can also choose a gun with more weight or barrel length. I can pick a 20-oz 9mm or a 30-oz .40 S&W and the shootability debate is moot.

The .40 S&W is a bigger hammer. I can offset any negatives with pistol size. Sure, gun size and weight can be a negative all by itself, but that sword cuts both ways - we can compare shooting times and accuracy of a mouse gun in 9mm and a .Hi-Power in 40 S&W.

Anyhow, I enjoy the debate.

I've got a .40 S&W conversion barrel for my Glock 20, and it's a positive pleasure to shoot with that barrel installed. Shot to shot placement is about like a Glock 19. I'd much rather carry the Glock 19, though.

For Hawk....

Just a WAG, but I’d think it has to do with barrier penetration. Doesn’t the 357Sig perform better than most in that area?

Raise your hand if you'd feel under gunned performing police work with a G17.

No.

Yes. There is no doubt about that. The 9 MMS +P nor the 45 ACP +P will not penetration hard barriers as well as the 357 Sig. The 357 Sig is the only service cartridge that I've shot that penetrated through 1/8" steel plate

I’d seen where it was reported to, but no controlled tests.

Why would they use it? Sig give it to them cheap to launch a cartridge?

What do they all do on a car door?

No idea.

9mm and 45 +P will go through a car door if they do not hit the steel window roll up mechanism

The 357 Sig goes through with more force. Takes velocity to penetrate steel. in all fairness the 357 Sig from Underwood are advertised st 1475 FPS

My point is that finding one loading of one type of cartridge that goes through one type of barrier isn't going to be the deciding factor when you're equipping 20K + cops.

The guy running it is a stud.

Wouldn't that be more a function of the specific bullet used?

No bullet from 9am +P or 45 ACL +P penetrate q/8" plate.

JHP's in 357 Sig penetrated the 1/8" plate. Heavy brass jacketed flat points would penetrate one plate and leave a large dent on the second 1/8" plate

Speed penetrates steel

Do they go through soft armor?

The H ell y’all say, I am going with the 5.7.😆

I have no experience with shooting soft armor

Got to have special loads for the 5.7 for it to go thriu

Already saw it. I've been a subscriber of his for many years. Never miss one.

John Burns crazy half brother....

You sure about that?

Jerry Dove was the passenger and a fairly young guy. Ben Grogan was driving and a much older agent. When Ben skidded their car to a halt his glasses came off his face and were found under the brake peddle...

..and I have seen Paul's videos...not one of his better ones and I watch him all the time.


...like I said...go do some reading.

and were found under the break peddle...

..and I have seen Paul's videos...not one of his better ones and I watch him all the time.


...like I said...go do some reading.

About brake peddles?

Clark,

Is soft armor that light skinned Latino with thunder thighs?

W. Bill

" The collision knocked off Grogan's glasses, and there is speculation his vision was so bad that he was unable to see clearly enough to be effective (a claim disputed by the FBI's medical director, who stated that Grogan's vision was "not that bad"). Grogan is credited with landing the first hit of the gunfight, wounding Matix in the forearm as he leaned out of the Monte Carlo to fire the shotgun at Grogan and Dove."

As to the FBI's Medical Director's claim... In 1974 I worked as an intern for DEA in Boston. About 1990 I ran into one of the now retired agents at a gun show in Portsmith, NH and we ended up going out to lunch. The topic of the gun fight came up and this guy's best friend happeded to be...Ben Grogan.. And his statement to me was Ben's vision was so bad he was legally blind without his glasses. And if you look at the original FBI Training Video on the shooting, Grogan's supervisor said Ben could not see 10' without his glasses...

Poor tactics lost the fight in Miami . Not 9mm Silvertips.

I wish.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FrEwoW8FkWY

I don't know if y'all will be able to see the vid but.....

357 sig vs IIIa soft armor in a lab setting

Where does it say what load was used? It's interesting but a lot less meaningful without knowing what bullet and what velocity.

On steel, the bullet type doesn't matter so much, other than harder bullets generally punch through better; mostly it's about high velocity. Soft armor is not that way though; bullet choice matters a lot. A hard cast can act different than a JHP, which can act different than a swaged lead plated bullet.

Not to mention horrible marksmanship...

357sig @1470 FPS.

The one serious marksman amongst them lost his glasses right at the start of the gun fight.

Ive shot thousands of rounds through various 40s, mostly Glock 22 and 23 models with a few Sig P226 and HK USP. No kb. No frame damage. I had one catastrophic failure with a glock 23. I broke the slide lock spring while firing, which allowed me to fire the remainder of my mag...... I racked the slide.....it fell off and hit the ground. But before we jump on glock or the 40 SW. I had shot numerous 9mms. I had again 1 catastrophic failure with a Sig 229 9mm. I broke the locking lug and the gun couldnt continue to fire. Unsure if a round had been chambered, i used a pallet to assist me in removing the slide. Also had 3 sig springs [bleep] the bed in less than a few thousand rounds using a 9mm. Things happen and good reminder to inspect your firearms.

Everybody isn't a gunfighter. No matter that they think they are.

To no one in particular,
My agency is currently contemplating changing from the .40 to the 9...like many here, the rank and-file questioned the costs more than anything. Interestingly, the brass that wants the change said the difference in ammo costs was minimal and not a factor at all. But we only have 200 or so agents.

A quick query of the Hornady website lists their 135 +P Critical Duty 9mm (which I think is one of the FBI's choices) as having a muzzle velocity of 1110 fps and 369 foot pounds of energy form a 4" barrel.

Their 165 Critical Duty .40 is listed as having 1,175 fps and 506 foot pounds of energy from a 3" barrel.

In our case of being a federal, hence nationwide, agency, it just seems to me that an officer working in warm climates with confrontations with mostly lightly-clothed adversaries would not be as concerned about the two cartridges as someone who, for half the year, confronts adversaries typically wearing Carhartts over a wool or flannel shirt, maybe again over thermal underwear.

I'l take the extra 137 or so foot pounds of energy. It may not be a perfect comparison, but if that equates to, more or less, dropping an additional 137 pounds on a guys chest from a foot, in addition to the original 369 pounds that the 9 gave, that sounds good to me.

I am a firearms instructor, and I just haven't seen the issues of poor shooters really doing any better with a nine on a standard qual course. Competition is a whole different issue, where, like race cars, a tenth of a second may make a big difference, but I'd really hate to dumb-down the whole agency to accommodate the weaker shooters who don't have any personal interest in firearms anyway.

but I'd really hate to dumb-down the whole agency to accommodate the weaker shooters who don't have any personal interest in firearms anyway

Unfortunately that's not how it works in today's world.

My nephew's department made the switch from the Glock 22/23 to the 17/19 last year. He's happier with his 19 than he was with his 22. He says he shoots it better, and doesn't feel disadvantaged.

What would you call a hit ratio of 26:1?

Shooting at a moving target that is shooting g af you and trying to keep from getting hit isn't like shooting on a firing line

Does the fact that a bullet can penetrate a 1/8 steel plate have any relevance when shooting at people? Yes, there is that one in a thousand chance of the bad guy hiding behind steel, but other than that...

Yes it does. Three times in the last year we’ve had azzhats try to drive over an officer. Meth and desperation make for some interesting chit.

Hell yes it does. What do you think car doors are made of? Many rounds will go through the door bug not it they hit the steel wi dow roll up mechanism but the 357 Sig will go through any way

Not 1/8"

You have never shot a car door. I can tell by your posts and you completely ignored the part about the steel window rollup mechanism

Have you ever looked inside a car door? There ain't much there.

A good shooter is gonna make hits with whatever caliber he has. A bad shooter is still gonna be a bad shooter.

Unless you hit the steel wi Dow roll mechanism and i you do 9am +P, 45 ACP +P will not go through it. The 357 Sig will as will 35i mag, 41 and 44 mag. I've never tried the 40 S&W

I think you could easily drill 1/8 " mild steel" with an AP parabellum - maybe even a Mak. (with standard Russian Mil. cart.) would do that ; but - 357 Sig. will do it with H.P.s.

357 Sig. is a superb L.E. cartridge.

I haven't shot pigs released from a cage and filmed it, either.

While jwp's penetration test is interesting, it takes us down a rabbit hole that needn't be explored.

You're not going to convince somebody to equip 20K gun carriers because the cartridge in question can sometimes penetrate a window regulator.

I figured that, but eight FBI agents after an astounding number of rounds expended and the 26 rounds expended where (if I read the narrative correctly) were from behind and using the hood of a car as a rest/cover. One of the biggest "takeaways" from this and other shootings is LEOs do not receive enough training/practice...

I'm pretty sure the takeaways from this shooting have been addressed by any department or agency that's worth a fugk.

It happened in 1986.

And it's interesting that at the time, the FBI followed the advice of gun nuts. Only to discover years later, that gun nuts don't necessarily know WTF they're talking about when it comes to police work and real world shooting.

Well, SOMEBODY's recommending stuff I wouldn't....

If the FBI endorsed the 10mm tomorrow, all the deer hunters and backpackers of the world would applaud.

right over your head

no disagreement

I swear this topic gets posted just to start arguments. I can promise you that .02 of bullet diameter is not really that important in a gunfight. 40's work fine, but so do 9mm's and 45's and 357 Sigs, and several others. Some of you argue about this like it's religion.

[/quote]If the FBI endorsed the 10mm tomorrow, all the deer hunters and backpackers of the world would applaud. [/quote]
Actually the FBI did endorse the 10mm, It's how we got the S&W 1076.

.40 was not around for the Sunniland shooting. My BIL was though, and was involved in the event, before and after. He was on the board within the FBI that brought the 10MM, and then the .40 to the agents. He knows what happened, what was discussed after, and how all that worked out. Interesting to talk to. Much of what has been bruited about is conjecture and bs

Nope, right over yours. We're still waiting for the autopsy photos and mushroomed bullet pictures.

Actually, you are supporting what I posited. That is, if there is no discernible difference and you have an entire department armed and trained with a caliber (in this case the 40) why go through the expense of replacing them with a 9?

https://eliteammunition.com/

Elite took down his video's don't know why in this time of turmoil he would do that, you can look around and see some video's regards this subject.

THIS. In Spades. Some years back, before I retired, and while still working at our academy, we had a douche bag colonel come upstairs and opine to me, that instead of quarterly qualifications, we should cut back to two ranges a year. It just so happened that the weekend before, one of our people had emptied a G 35 and had managed to miss the bird he was shooting at, 16 times. Douche bag got red faced and stomped out of my office, but that was the last I heard of cutting back on ranges.

My old department started issuing the Smith and Wesson 1076, iirc in 1991. We transitioned from the Smith and Wesson 686, 357 Magnum. I came on in 1995. We issued the 1076 until 2003, iirc. It was a helluva pistol. Highly accurate and enough juice to do the job. The problem was ammunition. We went from Federal Hydra shoks to Master Match custom loaded 180 grain Gold Dots.

With all that said, if I were working the road again, and wearing a 10mm, I would load Underwood Ammo 165 grain Gold Dots, and feel well armed.

It seems to be a lot easier to hit chit on the internet than in real life.

I was almost run down in 2015. it is still amazing what Adrenalin can do for an old fat man.

You missed again

This ^^^^^^^^ and some pretty coincidental bad luck.

MM

This is about the most drilled down post of this thread

Along with Joel's statement about involved shootings. Lest also remember most feebs aren't cops...but lawyers and accountants....they will test until until they get their desired answers.

One thing I am damned sure of is investigator should not even beinin their name....I suggest the change to constipator

However I feel a bullet should be able to penetrate both sides of an empty 55 gallon steel drum and do damage on the far side.

Rifles do that reliably. Which by the way is a big sticking point of the FBI tactics the day of the shooting. Why did this special stakeout squad not use long guns for the takedown? The FBI certainly had access to long guns, shotguns and probably the MP5's that were popular at the time. The FBI knew these guys were violent, had murdered multiple people and used a rifle in the commission of their crimes. Ultimately a shotgun was deployed but almost too little too late.

It should be noted that the data that drove the FBI's conclusion was based on ALL law enforcement involved shootings throughout the country.

Not their own.

Imagine a similar scenario nowadays. Operation Barbarossa would pale in comparison.

The deployment of long arms for that type of scenario in 1986 was borderline unheard of.

Long arms and law enforcement didn't begin to become mainstream until well after the North Hollywood shootout. And even today, they're not as common as many might think.

sweet! but he shoulda used a Walker!

Probably true in terms of rifles. Shotguns on the other hand...

I shot a 1076 a few times. It was a very fine pistol, but heavy, and I think that was one of the strikes against it. The full power 10mm ammo was deemed too much, so they loaded down the 180's to subsonic velocity. Someone at S&W said wait, let's shorten the case and we'll be able to put it in 9mm framed guns, that weigh less, but match the subsonic 10mm ballistics, and then the 40 S&W was born.

The guy has a few entertaining and informative videos, but those are mostly his older stuff. He's starting to get long winded, whiny, and defensive about viewer comments. The guy needs to trip his give-a-[bleep] and tell what he knows.

That's been my observation, as well.

My agency has not even considered switching back to the 9mm. We are staying with the G22, 40 cal, Federal 180gr HST. Some of our neighboring agencies have switched over. The largest of them did so after a huge mistake of trying to adopt FN 40 cal pistols from Sig's 40 cal. It was a nightmare for them. No 9mm is in out immediate future.

The main reason the FBI switched back to the 9mm is an easy one to understand: $$$. The dollar amount for ammunition per Agent has been EXACTLY the same since 1998. Back then ammo was plentiful. Every quarterly qualification everyone would shoot up the duty ammo they had acquired the quarter before and then would be issued fresh duty ammo. Fast forward decades, the dollar amount from 1998 is the same, but ammo prices have skyrocketed. Now the first thing a shooter does is download all service ammo and save it.

The cost of ammo was the driving reason for the switch. Additional "benefits"? Marginal shooters of .40 S&W or .45 ACP can now pass the qualification course with a 9mm. Saves time and money because a trainee does not have to be recycled for remedial shooting so graduates on time, fewer lost trainees due to failure to qualify so the cost of background checks and hiring is saved, etc. Simple.

Yep. If there's one thing that I know, it's that the Federal Government is always looking to be more frugal with our money. That has to be the explanation.

cs2blue,

After my agency said that we're going to the 9 but was still deciding between a Glock or a Sig, I bitched a little because no consideration was apparently given to any other makes, even for personal purchase. If you don't mind, what FN was tried and what were the problems?

When I came to my present agency in 2003, we were using .357 Sigs. I bitched then when we went to .40s, but 9s??? The horror.

Thanks.

That's odd because CBP quals with duty ammo. They don't have anything like FMJ range ammo.

Where are you getting this information?

Incorrecto.

My agency qualed with duty ammo, and ball. Took the highest of two scores, and replaced duty ammo with fresh.

Stray, it was the FNS 40 cal, they had a mess of issues with them. Such as, front sights detaching from the slide, accidental discharges (holster related), excessive slide temps during testing( against of the weapons) finish flaking off. functioning was poor, and a high incidence of internal parts breakage. To the tune of 1.4 million $. Last and the worst issue. One of their firearms instructors and head of the testing staff was a competitive shooter factory sponsored by who............................................................................................................. FN Herstal of course!!! What a cluster!!!!. Now they are carrying glock 17, 9mms. 147gr. go figure, Outside of the skewed test results where FN was the winner????. A reevaluation of the testing data revealed that glock had actually come out as the winner. 2 years worth of headaches and money wasted. All because of one guy!

Wrong. I work at a range where the local CBP officers qual and am very good friends with the FIs.

Or a well trained shooter. Lots of incidents out there of well aimed, precise fire neutralized opponents. Sgt Alvin C York with one of those "archaic" 1911s comes to mind, where he engaged and neutralized four charging Germans (with rifles and fixed bayonets) and close range and NOWHERE was I insinuating I could have done better, but I get it this is as you say the internet where taking swipes at posters is "de rigeur". Now maintaining focus whilst being "locked on" by AAA radar and pressing, well I can relate to that...
A few here "get it". and incidentally, there WERE MP-5s in the stakeout, but those agents were out of position and did not participate...

A 124 grain XTP JHP will penetrated through 2 55 gallon drums and into the third denting the offside. This only demonstrates the ability to penetrate the steel drums with plenty of stream, nothing correltes to shooting living flesh by shooting steel

OFO is one portion of CBP.

CBP purchases FMJ ammo. They have for years.

CBP is not the FBI. One is DHS, the other is DOJ.

Correct, but it is, by far, the largest division. We get US Customs and Air & Marine and the local BP wants to use our range again. They used to, but stopped. Customs is on our range 10-5, 3 days a week.

I am aware of that. I just assumed (I know, I know :)) that the FBI would do that also. The only unit I know of that uses practice ammo is are the Fidos (FFDO) and they don't really count.

I believe you.

But CBP buys and uses practice ammo.

They have for years.

Hey stay at home dad, go grocery shopping!

My wife already did that.

But she forgot my new XBox game so I'm kinda pissed.

The FBI uses practice ammo....for 16,000 Agents using duty ammo for practice would be very expensive.

CONSTRUCTIVE thoughts?

Paul does great videos. learn something new every time I watch his stuff.

Jorge,

My constructive thought is to read the FBI report and their conclusion instead of watching Paul the bag of oranges shooter guy.

Jorge,

I like Paul Harrell's videos but I agree with deflave, read the report and then decide if you buy into the FBI reasons for switching calibers. The report isn't that long.

Anyone who has shot steel plates with a 9mm using 115 grain or 45 ACP in 230 ball knows there is a tangible, observable, difference. The 45 is throwing 100% more mass per shot, and it shows. To be honest, I'm not invested in the FBI report. If the FBI will lie about Flynn, and others, they will lie about this too. Most agents are not street cops. FBI had to find a caliber that its agents could qualify with. All pistol calibers that are controllable are at best a comprimse.

There is nothing wrong with a 1911, and its trigger break and reset has yet to be duplicated. Problem is your no longer facing one or maybe two bad guys. They travel in packs, and 9 rounds may not be good enough. Know that if you find yourself in a deadly force incident your probably going to miss a couple of shots unless its contact distance. Bad guys are going to be moving. Most of the bad guys I encountered were carrying 40 or 9's in the Glock. Loaded with ball. When they weren't carrying SKS's or a AK variant.

2011's in a 45 or 9 are a chunk to carry, though they solve the ammo load issue.

I carry a 9mm because it's become the caliber I can shoot reasonably well with little to no practice. Glocks because they are bullet proof as your going to get in this world. While a training issue, I don't want to worry about engaging the grip safety or thumb.147 grain HP's because they haven't made a 160 grain HP yet. Most famous LE loads known for ending fights right now have been with heavy for caliber bullets. With the exception of the .357 Mag.

I'd love to read it in it's entirety (I've read excerpts). Do you have a link and is there anything in that video you can point to that goes against the study? You know more about this stuff than I eve will, I do value your opinion.

The Detective who did my background check had two questions:
1. Would you stop a speeder in the rain?

2. Do you mind bitching about something that rubs you wrong?

Two "no's" sailed me straight into the academy.

Could you take Paul Harrell in a bare knuckle fight?

This is the ES of their testing:

http://looserounds.com/2014/09/21/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/

Yes I've read the full report. It would bore any sane man to tears. I don't now that it can be found online but I don't know that it can't either.

The problem with the video is that he's not doing a scientific analysis. He's shooting through some fugking oranges with a heart or rack of ribs or some schit in the middle.

It's akin to my showing you a kill shot with a .270 and another kill shot with a 30-06. And punctuating it all with "You make your own conclusion."

It doesn't mean anything.

I don't know.

Thank you. Any thoughts on what er've beat to death, recoil, accuracy, etc? I'm just very interested on what folks in the know think and I do listen, hell I even got myself a Glock or two (357, 45) and I confess on having 9mm and 45/70 derangement syndrome and my carry gun is a Colt Officer's in 45 ACP, but anyway, enjoyed the discussion .

Travis.

Are you jealous of Paul Harrell?

He can shoot pretty good.

Makes great videos.

Good humor.

Jus ax'n

W. Bill

I'm not sure what you mean in regards to beat to death, recoil, etc.

I'm not jealous of anybody.

I don't think he can shoot very well.

I think his videos suck.

I don't care for his humor.

Doesn't mean he's not a good person. I just wouldn't put a whole lot of value on his product.

Oh.

Sorry. His point (and I guess mine) is that there is really not much difference between the two to justify the expense of re-outfitting and entire Agency, PD, etc on what are ostensibly identical weapons ( I buy ammo in large quantities for the company I work (9mm) and I have priced 40s and it's pretty close. I read the link BTW, very well done and it does make sense. Edited to add; As far as his shooting, it appears he has plenty of bona fides.

In the end, there isn't much expense. If you are an agency who already had Glock 22's for instance, Glock generally trades pretty favorably to have their latest/greatest in your agency's holsters. So, You trade your Gen 4 G22's for new Gen 5 17's. The money outlay is minimal, at best, and you don't need new duty holsters. You make up on the cost of practice ammo, and duty ammo is a wash. In the end, you more or less break even, but you have newer guns, with newer night sights.

And like Paul said, you aren't losing anything from a performance standpoint.

I can't speak for every municipality in the country but I have never heard of any department or agency switching just for the sake of switching.

It's usually centered around new contracts and the service life of existing firearms nearing expiration.

What's wrong with his shooting? he has a boatload of awards and professional and military qualifications.

Nothing really.

But if you're going to compare a 9 to a 40 in an attempt to add value to the conversation it should all be on a timer with a heavy leaning toward splits, first round to last, A-zone only. Stuff like that.

Slow fire with a stopwatch doesn't tell us much. Matter of fact. It doesn't tell us anything.

I'll bet on you...............just not too much, though.

MM

If I'm not too drunk I usually do OK.

Usually.

Thanks, cs2blue, for the reply. Back in the day, when I was an agent with Customs-I guess they call it legacy Customs now since it was before DHS--one guy in the organization specced out the CS-1 revolver. For agents, it was a S&W 686 with a 3" barrel and a round butt for plainclothes carry, the then-relatively new L frame for longevity, tighter extractor/ratchet tolerances for supposed less end-play, and a tighter barrel/cylinder gap. Inspectors got the 4" barrel. On paper, it supposedly the perfect gun; in reality, it bound up with the slightest bit of unburned powder under the extractor, or crud between the barrel and cylinder, the bigger cylinder wore a hole in your hip on long surveillances in a car, and it weighed a ton. Because of one guy. Good times.

Anyone who has shot steel plates with a 9mm using 115 grain or 45 ACP in 230 ball knows there is a tangible, observable, difference. The 45 is throwing 100% more mass per shot, and it shows.

Lee is correct about this.
I usually shot plates about once a week. That’s before the virus scare. But you also need to factor in ammo.
Winchester white box is a weak sister. Speer Lawman on the other hand is snappy. Hasbeen

Got it. Again, thank you. Any thoughts on the 38 Super? Also what bullet do you recommend for a 9mm?...

I don't have my notes right here but besides the two shotguns at the scene (one in the back of Supervisor Gordon McNeil's vehicle and the one Ed Mirales used in the fight) there were 2-3 more cars with agents cruising South Dixie Highway. I believe there was an M16 in one and a MP5 in another...but they were at the ends of the patrol zone when the vehicle was spotted and didn't get to the scene till the end of the fight... I am not sure if there any other shotguns in the other cars.

The distances involved in the shooting:

McNeil: 8'

Dove, Grogan and Hanlon: 35-40'

Mirales: Shotgun: 35' Handgun 15'-2'

Risner and Oratia: 35 yards

They had more than enough firepower out there....

Bob

ps...and if Platt had a Mini30 instead of a Mini14 there would be three more dead agents...McNeil, Mirales and Hanlon...

No experience with the .38 Super.

Anything reputable that's heavy for caliber. 147ish preferred.

For training, whatever's cheap.

TY.

jorge... .38 Super...have been carrying one daily for 40 years... If you go with Underwood, Buffalo Bore, Georgia Arms or one of the smaller companies, they all make Super ammo that is right up there with the 357 SIG.

90-100 grain: 1550
115 grain: 1450
125 grain: 1350

Super from the big three is nothing more than 9mm +P...if that.

I use the Underwood Xtreme Defender 90 grain running 1560 from a Commander and 1650 from a 5"...

Bob

I have a good stash of Super 147s from Georgia Arms that runs 1250. I haven’t yet gone over to the dark side to try the 90s but I’m going to soon. I have an almost virginal Super on the way so I need to try some new recipes.

I guess things don't change much, in the 1930's the Border Patrol got Colt New Service revolvers with 4" barrels in,get this, 38 special caliber, because of 1 guy, Col Charles Askins. A huge New Service, in 38 special. They could have gotten Colt Official Police revolvers if they wanted the 38 special. Charlie Askins didn't like the issue Colt 1917's in 45 ACP because they had to use half moon clips, things that speed up revolver reloading.

The Underwood 125 grain in 357 is 1475 FPS

An accuracy test at slow fire is rather meaningless............most mid-range cartridges are all pretty comparable...............it's accuracy (ability to hit the target) at speed that is at issue.

That Harrell used 115 gr HP's for a penetration test, regardless of the test medium, skews the results before the shooting commences; should have at least used 124, either +P or not, & also with a premium bullet.

The Federal 115 HP used for his test is not a premium bullet compared to the 135 CD or HST's or Gold Dots.

That test as it stands really doesn't provide enough data to conclude that the 40 is a better fighting gun for most people, (meaning number of effective hits) especially with the ammo chosen, except for the CD in both cases...........it does tend to show some difference between a standard bullet (albeit it in a light weight) to a more premium bullet in the same cartridge.

MM

The 357 SIG is always going to run hotter than a Super simply because it holds more powder... Most companies make a 357/125 running 1350 out of a 4.25" barrel... It takes a 5" barrel for a Super to equal that.

But at least with the smaller companies the Super is loaded to its full potential instead of being just a watered down 9mm...

Jorge,

I don't have any experience with the 38 Super, but in 9mm I use on of the premium 124gr+p hollow points, Federal HST, Speer Gold Dots, Remington Golden Sabre Bonded or Black Belt, Winchester PDX, Hornady American Gunner XTP or the Hornady Critical Duty 135gr +p. To keep it simple, you said that you use a Glock 31 in 357 Sig, whatever 124gr/125gr load you are using in the 357 Sig, use that companies 9mm 124gr+p offering with the same bullet technology, ie Gold Dot & Gold Dot or HST & HST etc.

RJ: I'm familiar with the 38 Super although I don't own one. I was just asking him in particular for his opinion. And thanks all for the recommendations on 9mm ammo use. I don't think I'm buying anytime soon, so I'll have to make do with my Hi-Power

Good points. Bad marksmanship has to be blamed for a lot of it.

It seems that those blaming marksmanship have ever participated in a gun fighter. Those that have been involved typically miss 70 to 80 percent of the time. Most aren't in numerous gunfights, therefore they are only under that supreme stress once

For anyone who's interested, Hickok45, in today's video, discusses this very topic, i.e., the changing fortunes of the .40 S&W and the moves towards the 9mm. Start watching at 40 minutes (just a coincidence).

HIckock to the rescue.

Yeah, start watching at the 40 minute mark because it took him 40 minutes of rambling to finally get to the point? I'll pass...

Alvin C. York did

Alvin would have done better with a 9mm.

Exactly and that is why he won the CMOH and is famous

Not many Alvin Yorks

We all know you watched it.

I was just messing with you

Hell yes.

Hitch-kock couldn't rescue dog-schitt from the shovel................he's about the last person on Urth that I'd take any advice from or give what he says any credibility.

MM

Paul Harrell and his meat target are infotainment. There is information there and how you interpret it is subjective at best. But the videos do show differences in bullet performance. The validity of the meat target has to be questioned until we start shooting bad guys constructed of rib racks, pork steak, and bags of oranges. I still watch some of his videos with interest and as Harrell suggests, make my own judgements.

Lots of guys question the validity of calibrated ballistic gelatin and ask how closely it resembles a bad guy. The answer is that ballistic gelatin doesn't need to simulate a bad guys body. The Fat Bald Ignorant guys get to look at lots of bad guys bodies (and good guys too) that have been rendered inert via gunshot wound. They can determine what loads and weapons were used and make up a complete set of data from that alone.

If the FBI then takes the weapons and loads that they knew performed well in shootings and shoot those loads into ballistic gelatin it simply tells how the effective loads performed in gelatin. And it can then be extrapolated that other loads that perform in a similar manor in ballistic gelatin will also perform about as well in bad guy targets.
This type of testing can be of value in evaluating new loads that have never been used against a bad guy target and a determination can be made, within reason, how the new load should perform.

My brother was involved in 6, on the books, 4 hits 3 DOA, And that was with a Smith and Wesson model 10. New York City was a crazy time in the 80s.He’s a pretty good shot on paper, he was just real good in stressful situations.

One of the major criticisms of the meat target is that there is no way to calibrate it as is done with a proper ballistic gelatin test. It's been pointed out that bad guys are generally in need of calibration too.

Infotainment rules...

Edit; FPSRussia rocks...

Correcto.

And well stated.

You have the patience of Job.

Fuggin'- A.

Nope, I'm not in to self harm. Can't put myself through that BS willingly.

Do you suppose I lay awake nights hoping no one at the Fire will disparage the nice old fellow if I post one of his videos?

No.

But if you can make it through one of his videos, you have the patience of Job.

As JWP mentioned earlier, most LEO gunfights have 70 - 80% misses, so I guess another test should be entered into this.

Have DeFlave stand there and miss the Gelatin blocks 80 times out of 100 and then check the blocks.

Meanwhile, I'll watch Paul. He don't miss.

W. Bill

I enjoy the guy's videos.

Had not bothered to watch Paul's video on the FBI shooting again because I saw it shortly after it came out and think I put out a Public Comment at that time that he really needed to study the shooting just a little more than he did...

In looking at it again I can only say he got so much of it TOTALLY wrong that anyone who has a conversation about the gunfight based only on Paul's presentation is going to made to look like an idiot. For someone who "supposedly" took a two day seminar by FBI Agents on this event, was either not taking any notes or slept through the class...or not even there.

If you really want to find out what went down, as best as can be determined, there are videos on YouTube that are the FBI Training Film and another by the Dade County Sheriffs Department who did most of the investigation. There are also several interviews with the agents involved. The best book on the subject is by Dr. French-Anderson on the forensic annalist of the gun shot wounds each of the suspects received. It is a hard book to get hold of but well worth it if you can... DO NOT WATCH THE MADE FOR TV MOVIE...it is so bad that when previewed by the FBI Agents involved several wrote asking that it not be aired...

I could only make it to the 34:00 minute mark.... After he said that an agent across the street fired two "12 round magazines" and was killed while trying to reload I understood the man had no clue what he was talking about...as that NEVER HAPPENED....NOT EVEN CLOSE. And the agents who were using semis had S&W 15 shot handguns...not 12.

JWP...I can now understand why you thought I was wrong...if you have never studied this gun fight and relied only on this video, unfortunately you put your faith in the wrong guy...as he is totally full of you know what....

Bob

Enjoy.

"The new [insert model] is such a great gun it would replace my Glocks if I didn't already own so many magazines."

Why are some of you guys picking on Hitchcock and Harrell? People that actually do something, like providing good information. I have lived long enough that guys that knock others work can't even come close to bettering the ones they are knocking. If, you can, prove it or STFU.

Insecure hero worship, eh?????????????????

MM

No I'm pretty secure in my hero worship.
She wears scrubs.
She is a nurse
She works in the ER.
She is drop dead gorgeous.
She is my daughter.

In point of fact, Harrell seems to shoot fairly well for the style of shooting that he uses in most of his videos. Fact is, though that most of his videos are about target grouping and/or bullet performance. Now and then he'll run a rack of plates or row of soda jugs.

In other videos he focuses on weapons selection based on economics, and the vague concept of what local laws and ordinances might require.

He appears to be of about prime age + maybe a few years. Looks fit. Seems fairly knowledgeable on most subjects. But he doesn't do much in the way of defensive shooting or instructional videos. And never claims (actually disclaims) any status as an instructor.

So... You be the judge...

"Why are some of you guys picking on Hitchcock and Harrell?"

When someone like Harwell, who has a large following who believe everything he says is gold, puts out a video like he did on the FBI shooting that isn't even CLOSE to factual, expect to get picked on.

When you say "I'm an professional", you better live up to it...

Bob

..and would you like me to waste my time detailing everything in the FBI video Harrell got wrong....just say the word and I'll do it because I'm the type of person who will put their time and money where their mouth is...

But it will take me a while as I had three pages of notes on just his first half of the video...

Bob

I wonder how much of the missing that takes place in these shootouts is due to suppressive fire?

I get it now! Magazines are like tits... The Bigger the Better!

I like Harrell's videos and he certainly has the bona fides...

By George, Jorge you've got it. We just had to put it in terms you could identify with. A high capacity magazine = Christina Hendricks and a low capacity magazine = Calista Flockhart. I've never been in a gun fight but I've heard it said that anyone that was never wished for a smaller gun or less ammunition.

Harrell talks like an old woman elementary school teacher.

Not really. High cap mags are a necessity; big boobs are an option. You try to get into a woman's pants. Getting into her bra is just something that you do along the way...

..and would you like me to waste my time detailing everything in the FBI video Harrell got wrong....just say the word and I'll do it because I'm the type of person who will put their time and money where their mouth is...


NO

...didn't think so.

I haven't read the whole thread, but the FBI didn't choose the 9mm for women; they decided OVERALL it was the best balance of shootability (EVERYONE, shoots the 9mm better than the .40 or .45)terminal performance, and capacity. I know a gent who was on the selection committee and he said the overall driving factor was score...everyone just hit more often, and scored better hits with the 9mm than any of the other common rounds.

It's pretty much the same reason MOST have switched to the 9mm.

Don't think when all the factors are added up that most people would disagree that the 9mm is the best OVERALL defensive firearm, especially for LE, it's the way the FBI led LE agencies around by the nose back to the original starting point is what irks most people.

When I was with Dallas PD there were 60-85 LE shootings per year. Unlike most cities we had a wide range of guns and calibers available...any S&W, Colt or Browning in:
.380 (investigators only)
9mm
.38 Super
.38 Special
.357 Magnum
.41 Magnum
.44 Special
.44 Magnum
.45 ACP
.45 Auto Rim
.45 Colt

Factory ammo or handloaded ammo...as long as it wasn't explosive or incendiary you were ok...

Our "hit" factor was up about 66% when the rest of the nation was about 29%...the was the 1980s... As a result there were a lot of data on what worked and what didn't. The ONLY officers I knew who changed guns and calibers were 8 of the 9 I knew personally who shot people or things with a .38 Special. Other than that one caliber I never knew anyone who who changed guns, caliber or even the brand of ammo they used.

Had several friends or co-workers who shot people with 9mm with several different loads and not one of them had any complaint. Remington HP, Federal HP and Winchester Silvertips...no problems... Then along comes the FBI shooting and all of a sudden the 9mm sucks...what sucked was the training and tactics that the FBI had to coverup and they did so by blaming the bullet.

They then brought LE...the 9mm Subsonic...disaster... 10mm...couldn't be handled by the "average" LE officer and the guns were so big people listed to one side... .40 S&W...better but still beyond what again is the average non-shooter LEO and being in a gun designed to handle 9mm was hard on both the gun and the shooter....and now 30 YEARS LATER we are led back to...the 9mm...because there was nothing wrong with it in the first place.

And the excuse is, well now there are "magic" 9mm bullets....BS....you don't need a XTP, Critical Defense, Xtreme Defender or any other big name bullet...what you have to do is plant one of them where it will do the most good... Are some "better" than what was available back in 1986...sure...but marginally so.

There are too many variables in every shooting to worry about your designer ammo... Pick a system that hits where you look and you can carry all the time...that's what's important...

Bob

Good post.

Actually, the did when they were going to adopt the 10MM and that gave birth to the 40. And now again the 9. It recoils less and the 'smaller officer/agent, aka females is "A" factor, not the only one but it's certainly there. As to the FBi. RJM's post nails it (again) poor training and tactics. Here at my job, I have several LEOs that work for us Part Time and I can tell you that at least on paper, I can out shoot every single one of them and for that matter, just about most of my other 90 plus guys/gals. The only ones that manage consistent high scores (240) are "gun loonies" who shoot A LOT. We here as well as the LEOs out in town shoot about twice a year on average. I shoot every week.

When I think of the FBI, I can't help but remember this guy:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-...identally-shot-man-gets-keep-his-n890451

Great stuff. Wonder if that was a 9 or a 40.

Always while holstered

I know. I guess service holsters permitted that back then. Trigger must have been exposed.

It was a 9mm. He is no longer an agent.

The FBI wasn't going to adopt the 10mm. They did. And it was a poor decision. That's what happens when LE agencies accept the guidance of people that are high on theory and low on experience.

I don't know where you get your information but LE agencies that are struggling with attrition rates don't change out their firearms. They change out their qualification course/requirements for hire.

IME you find just as many male shooters that struggle as you do female. However it is rare that a female is an exceptional shooter. This is due to their inherent inferiority.

Re: comparing bullets, cartridges, and performance in a consistent media - this might be useful. As I stated earlier in this thread, PH videos do not give me any 'scientific' info that is relevant......no consistency. Just me.....to each their own.

Bob, great post along with others.

https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

https://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

Another link of street stats seems to have been taken down from free public viewing.....maybe the above will be insightful for folks choosing rounds and ammo.

"IME you find just as many male shooters that struggle as you do female. However it is rare that a female is an exceptional shooter. This is due to their inherent inferiority."

...would have to disagree with the learned Mr. deflave... 99% of the time it is a [bleep] instructor, not the student. As 95% of LEOs are not "shooters", 95% of their instructors aren't either and as such have limited clue what they are doing...

Couple of examples...really horror stories..

1977...I go through the Dallas Police Academy Firearms Training Program... There are 2500 officers on the force...the whole Firearms Training Unit consists of one sergeant and four patrolman... Besides a class of new recruits every 8 weeks for one solid week, they maintain all the departments firearms, make all the .38 Special practice ammo, maintain the range and a bunch of other stuff I can't remember...5 guys...

What however was exceptional was:
All were competitive shooters
All were hunters
All were excellent shots with rifle, pistol, shotguns and automatic weapons
All could fix and maintain the departmental weapons
All were excellent TEACHERS
...and all had killed someone in the line of duty...
And that is why we had such a high officer hit rate...these guys KNEW how to teach...and how to motivate you to do your best...

Unfortunately in the mid-1980s we got a new chief who had political aspirations....so what do you do with a Dream Team..of old white guys...you transfer them all back to Patrol and put in women and minorities some of whom could barely qualify themselves and had been to remedial training...


The last department I was with had about 40% women...some of whom had never qualified...yes, you read that correctly....never qualified....but that is another story.

Two of the women in my office would not sleep for two weeks before qualification because they knew they were going to fail and have to do remedial... I did several sessions with them and another woman in the office who usually just barely qualified and funny...the next qualification all three shot low 90s...and never again failed to qualify.

And the chief instructor...a VERY good shot and knowledgeable firearms guy...who had no clue how to teach... But because he was politically connected the powers that could have removed him, and knew what the problem was, didn't have the balls to do so...

The year before I retired there were three opening for firearms training...I was turned down by the CI...and who got the positions...WM who had just had a written reprimand for flashing his gun/badge while off duty drinking in a watering home in his area of responsibility... HF...who shot next to me at the spring qualification and failed twice (one of those who never qualified) but when taken forward alone by the CI miraculously passed... And the last one...the marginal WF shooter from my office. At Central one day the CI came up to her and said she would be going to next firearms instructor school in the fall. When she asked "Why me, I'm still trying to figure out what I'm doing..." His words back were "The department wants women, and you're it..."

I've had conversations with a lot of officers from all over the country and many have their own horror stories...

And that is why Officer Dick and Officer Jane can't shoot.

I can't make this [bleep] up...my imagination just isn't that good...

Bob

Please note I was speaking to my experience.

Not anybody else's.

I agree it was not a well thought out decision.As to the weapons change out, two things: I was merely pointing out the FBI's decision to go to the GLock 9mm when their current weapon/caliber were not worn out of lacking in effectiveness and the recoil issue WAS mentioned and here in my world, when contracts change, companies change out weapons all the time. We are currently in the process of going from the M-9 to the S&W M&P (which is a good thing in my opinion) but two contracts ago we went from the Ruger to the Beretta. And yes, poor training and tactics were at the root of the FBIs disaster, but I think most here said as much so no revelation there.

So are you still thinking that 9mm's are only for pussy's.................or has your thinking been subject to revision?

MM

I'm a 45 ACP man all the way......

"I'm a 45 ACP man all the way..."

That works too. About as well as the 9mm, .40 S&W, ect.

LOL. Yep. Seems to be the case. You need to step up to rifle or shotgun to get a significant improvement in stopping power from any of the military/police handgun calibers.

A man after my own heart...................1st, last & always my favorite.

But I'll still continue to use 9's as well.

MM

Plastic guns have NO "SOUL MAN"

If'n it ain't steel,


It ain't real!

Yeah well, I have a long memory, it (38) didn't work very well during the Philippine insurrection

That's humor, you do know better, right?

I believe that was the 38 S&W

Yep, and .38 Special was considered a big power boost over it.

For some reason, I am thinking that was the 38 long Colt. I could be wrong, though.

I believe you are correct

Everyone knows the 9mm is good, the 40 is better and the 45 is best and the 357 Sig is in another realm.



I had to stoke the fire😂

That dead guy in the Texas church DEFINITELY went to another realm.

[Linked Image]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTviSRtm6Lg&feature=emb_logo

No, 38 Long Colt, sort of an anemic 38 SPCL. In fact, you have to be careful if you own a Colt Model 1892, the Specials drop right in. Now back to this issue, i had forgotten how lousy a Glock's trigger is. had an opportunity to shoot our qualifying course with three guns for comparison, 1911, M-9 and Glock 31. i'm no Wild Bill and I know it's practice, but my score was way less with the Glock. Man that trigger sucks. On the Colt, there is a good movie starring Gary Cooper called "The Real Glory" about the insurrection in the "Pi". They discuss the fact "doped up" Moros (aka moslems), were hard to stop when they came at you with a Bolo Machete. There is a scene where this is demonstrated. I have a Colt New Service 1909 with the Provenance that it was shipped to the US Army Arsenal in Manila. This is why the 45 ACP came into being...

Thanks for the history lesson that nobody hasn't heard 7 billion times.

What is the course of fire?

We all agreed it was the 38 Colt above, you miss that?

Well apparently not everyone has, otherwise why bother repeating what everyone already knows, a 45 will outperform a 38/9mm all day long given the same shot placement. As to the course, it is the standard Navy 3591.1K instruction, Navy Qualification Course, 80 rounds total, 48 rounds (including a sequence with your non-dominant hand), 36 rounds low light and 18 rounds Performance Weapons Course. Total score 240. Expert is anything above 225.

Yes. I just answered the post right after mine and only saw that it had been corrected afterwards...

What's your score with a revolver?

Jorge,

I just looked up that qual. It shows the COF ending at the 15 yard line and that it utilizes the B-21.

Please tell me this isn't correct.

I haven't shot that course with a revolver officially here on Base as nobody uses them any more. Yes the B-21. Part of the course is 3,7 & 15 yards but the Practical (not performance, I used the wrong term) Weapons course starts at 25, 20, 15 & 7...

OK.

Go shoot it with a revolver. If you don't shoot a 240 you don't know how to shoot a handgun.

Dismissed.

Aye, aye, sir...
As to the cheeseburger video..."ok"...

Not 20% difference in recorded shootings between 9mm and 45 in the last 10 years.

For grins let's use 15% and you think that is not significant?

Bullseye shooting can highlight differences between respective handguns.

A qualification course like jorge is referring to, you should see no difference in scores across a wide range of pistols.

If you do, you probably aren't very good with a handgun.

Shooting CCW qualification course I dont even look at the sights and shoot top scores. I just look at the target and fire fast, they are not difficult at all in my experience

Good post, & on target, ............................pun intended.

MM

It's easy to score 240 (max) on a B-21 target. That being said, one can tell the difference on how well you shoot by merely looking at group size.

You can determine that from shooting a cardboard fugking box.

Language mr.! You are talking to an elder with Dallas safari club connections

This is the problem when threads, good or bad, useful or not, get too long. Somewhere out there, is bitter little loser with little (or in this case nothing) to contribute, that just HAS to interject worthless, trolling drivel and crap all over a thread just because he has to look himself in the cracked mirror in his bathroom every morning. And here we have a perfect example....

Of course you can and regardless, your groups will be larger shooting an out of the box glock..

Do you think my score on a your qualification course would change whether I used a 1911 or Glock? Or revolver? Or M&P? Or XD?

No sir, not on the B-21 target and I said as much. But I bet on a standard 25 yard NRA pistol qual, scores would be different between the pistols you cited, I am agreeing with you that for LEO work the 9mm Glock was the smart choice.

I'll accept this response.

But I have my eye on you...

I don't want any more wonky-talk down here.

The Glock pistol is the firearms equivalent of the football bat.

W/o a doubt......................either one-handed or 2-handed.

MM

And to think my wife tells me I'm not funny...

Aye, aye, sir...

PS: picking up a Glock 19 this week,,,,. .

Well don't tell anyone on this site, they'll go nuts that you didn't buy a Sig...

Had a 226, didn't care for it from an ergonomics perspective. Glocks fit me better, but nothing comes close to a 1911 for me.

You have one; why don't you use it then?

MM

Naw, but he shoulda bought an M&P 2.0 Compact...

I thought me and you was the only ones that liked M&P's

I just got back from shooting my commander and shot my M&P45 too, don't know why I bother with anything else. Love my M&P's!

I carried a M&P 2.0 Compact for a year & a half or so...............................






Until I got a Sig !!!!!!! (229 Legion)


Just playin' with you...............but I really like the M&P, great pistol; have 3 of them in the house, wife loves'em.



MM

I'm not a pistolero and will never claim to be. But in my humble opinion anyone who shoots ONLY 9mm is a pussy. Sorry to offend the sensitive, but the wine is talking.

I too love my 1911’s but carry my Glock 19 as it just does a lot of things right. Got perhaps a little carried away and bought a Triarc Tri11 9mm. Only a tad bigger then my g19, 2 more rounds in the mag and has a sweet 1912 trigger.

I too love my 1911’s but carry my Glock 19 as it just does a lot of things right. Got perhaps a little carried away and bought a Triarc Tri11 9mm. Only a tad bigger then my g19, 2 more rounds in the mag and has a sweet 1911 trigger.

Whine... You misspelled it.

Everyone's a tough guy here but I think this is the first time I've heard of one drinking whine. You never know what prune pickers will come up with next.

Actually I have several. My daily carry is an Officer's Model.

Don't you feel badly under under-armed & under-ammo'ed with only a 7 round gun????????????? For those situations where you're gonna need 40 rounds or so?????? And have to fight yer way to yer rifle?

You need pants with a LOT of deep pockets to carry all those spare mags...............................

Surely you can't be serious.

MM

Nope, it's a 45 so my six (plus one) is actually 21 rounds in a 9mm so I'm one round ahead

Jorge1 carries all those spare magazines in his MC Hammer pants!

That was mean....

Man up, dude.......................

Create a diversion...................post up some big tits pics.

MM

Crickets now.

I'm just glad he managed to post something of value.

Of course, like the 45 is a MUCH better choice for personal defense than a 9mm, not t mention non-striker fired pistols are easier to shoot accurately than striker fired. Let me know if you need anything else, but folks need to know their limitations....

I love watching people that can't shoot blame the gun in their hand.

The educated folk that join organization mentioned in original post need something effective and not unpleasant to shoot, therefore 9x19 was selected. This goes back to why the British supplied their officers with small break-open revolvers chambered for the .38 Smith & Wesson cartridge. These are not the type of people that have experience shooting handguns nor do they enjoy the activity when exposed to it. This is where 9x19 with modern ammo truly shines. I like the caliber because it can be utilized in really small handguns whereas the .45ACP can not.
I can not remember the name of the company that once made real small .45ACP and these are real expensive to buy when found on second-hand market. One drawback is that you have to work the slide after every shot, something had to be dispensed with to put this round into such small package.

Oh yay.

Another babbling dumb fugk.

I guess you never heard of the 455 Webley the military sidearm for 75 years

They had both pistol and revolver .455s. Sometimes one sees Webley, S&W revolvers plus 1911s chambered for those cartridges. The American revolvers made for Canadians can still be had for reasonable prices.
Personally I think those big DA/SA Colt revolvers in .45LC are the coolest. These were the most powerful handguns used by American military, if I remember correctly 255gr lead slugs at about 950fps.

Just STFU.

The Walker Colt is the most powerful handgun used by the American military.

You should stay away from wine.

I guess you could catch a 9mm with your pussy then...Cool!

😎

Who owns this ^^^^^^ I’m Jealous.

😎

What a waste of a post.

I shoot a gen 3 glock 17 with WW white box 115 grain bullets fair at 15 yards or so, I shoot an out of the box 1911 with similar ammo about the same, either gun will work for me. OTOH I am not a crack shot like most here, however I can tell the difference in how a Glock or 1911 shoots with different ammunition, so I am not a novice either. I like MontanaMan's idea of a cocked and locked SAO sig, but I am kind of done with 1911's, they seem to work just fine until they don't. OTOH while not the most accurate gun you can buy, in God knows how many Glock's or how many thousands or rounds I have only had a single one of them exhibit a problem a gun I bought used that shot very well but failed to extract or something I forget. Lately SIG is doing very well, the P365, P320 compact carry. I am also very interested in the compact legion SAO.

Not a thing wrong with the 2.0 S&W Compact...........feels great in hand, nice trigger, reliable as heck............and since they are not as popular, less expensive, with Steel sights to boot............Glock could improve their ergos, trigger, and grip texture......yes they are reliable as well. I'm sure a 2.0 will shoot as good if not better than the Glock.

Let the flames begin.....

Big advantage of Glock is out of the box reliability w/o shooting in period and easy gun maintenance. Colt offers military version of 1911 (M45A1) to the public. This is probably reliable pistol, but if you shoot one a lot and need spare dual recoil spring replacement you're screwed because Colt does not offer replacement to the public. WTF? I guess one sends it to them for service ie spring replacement?

Most modern design striker fired handguns from the major high quality manufacturers offer the same advantages. This is not new.

I'm with you. My 2.0 Compact edged out my G19.

I can't believe people still believe this schit.

Any modern, reputable poly frame 9mm is going to be reliable out of the box, require no break in, and be easy to maintain.

I do not believe in break in periods and would never buy a gun from manufacturer that suggests one. From ergonomic point of view the Glock is very aged design, but I used it as an example because nearly everyone is familiar with them.

I'll allow that.

But only because I'm sober. Right now.

pfft...




Testing

This guy is well worth watching. Another good UTube site is called Military Arms Channel.

The gentleman doing the testing employed the 150 grain 9mm HST, not the 147 grain HST which runs ~ 125-150 fps faster in it's readily available non +P form.

That load is in the 'Micro' line and designed to be used in small subcompact or micro guns. The Sig ammo line includes both JHPs and FMJs in their special '365' ammo line. Such rounds are used by smart people.
Obviously the +P or +P+ ammo was designed for duty size guns or something similar to G26 or larger.

That's not testing.

The link sureashit is...

The Sig P365 is +P rated with only a 3.1" barrel

Sorry.

I didn't see the link.

I just put the video up because I found it entertaining and on face value, his rube-goldberg testing makes some sense, at least to me. You are correct it is by no means a controlled experiment, but is sure showed some of those bullets as underperforming.