10mm or .45

[brianinarng52d]

I really appreciate all the help everyone. I'm going to go check out the gun show this weekend and hopefully be able to find what I'm looking for.

 

[jtmarine1911]

10mm or 45ACP! Oh joy! I myself being a 45 fanatic would recommend the 40S&W! The 40S&W is essentially a shortened 10mm and factory ammo is very compariable muzzle energy wise, (Depending on bullet selection) to the 45. It is also quite apparent when shooting the 40 and 45 it doesn't have as much muzzle flip. Like I said, I prefer the 45, because regardless whether the bullet expands or not it still a bigger hole. Another of my reasons for liking the 45 is the dreadful event of over penetration! That is my turn off when it comes to the 10mm, the higher velocity means more momentum equaling the high chance for over penetration. With the 40 this chance is reduced but is still a chance due to the high velocity.

 

[rhino]

Speak for yourself, Nancy.

I am rather delicate, I must admit.

 

[Joe Williams]

If you want the best "knockdown power" available in a defensive sized handgun, in a round with decent ammo availability and that is controllable, get a four inch revolver in .357 Magnum and load it with 125 grain JHPs. Statistically, this is the closest thing you'll come to to a one shot stopper, working about 96% of the time.

 

[ChalupaCabras]

Marshall & Sannows "one shot stop" study is inherently flawed, as it does not include any incident where more than one shot was fired, regardless of hit percentages. It also doesn't take shot placement into account.

Thus it ignores the vast majority of ballistic data, and is not viable for most real world shootings.

The OPs question is about 10mm and 45, both of which have great track records. If he wants an autoloader, then thats what he should get.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

All kidding on my part aside:

If I were making the decision you are, but in my current financial situation, I would go with the .45ACP.

Now, if I made 2x as much and/or were set up to reload, then I might very well consider the 10mm.

But for me, now, the extra cost of 10mm, both in a platform and in the ammunition itself, would keep me from it.

Something else for you to consider: Lots of folks boar hunt with a 10mm. I'm not sure the dimensions of the cartridge, so I don't know if it's legal for Indiana deer or not.

-J-

 

[Joe Williams]

Marshall & Sannows "one shot stop" study is inherently flawed, as it does not include any incident where more than one shot was fired, regardless of hit percentages. It also doesn't take shot placement into account.

Thus it ignores the vast majority of ballistic data, and is not viable for most real world shootings.

The OPs question is about 10mm and 45, both of which have great track records. If he wants an autoloader, then thats what he should get.

To ignore the only real study of real world performance of cartridges in actual shootings is foolish. Yes, the studies have some flaws, but they are still an important piece of data to be evaluated, along with other available information. And he also asked about best stopping power... which isn't found in a semi-auto cartridge. :P

 

[Joe Williams]

I have a 40 s&m and I shoot 180 grain. Works great, no jams and plenty of punch and $20.00 a box. Cant beat it.

.40 S&M, huh....

For the perverted gun owners

 

[rhino]

To ignore the only real study of real world performance of cartridges in actual shootings is foolish. Yes, the studies have some flaws, but they are still an important piece of data to be evaluated, along with other available information. And he also asked about best stopping power... which isn't found in a semi-auto cartridge. :P

Those "studies" aren't just flawed. They're essentially meaningless and worse yet, the end result is to promote a lie that there exists such a thing as a predictable "one shot stop." The only reliable one shot stop with a hand held weapon is to destroy the medulla oblongatta. That's it, and that's not an easy shot to make.

The complete lack of any understanding of statistics or data analysis on the part of Evan Marshall was well documented and discussed shortly after the first book was released. The two authors did a gross disservice to the body of knowledge of defensive shooting and the students thereof. The ghost apparently still lingers.

The ideas promoted by the book are wrong and they're dangerous for people who are either unaware or choose to believe. Marshall leads people to believe that they can buy a gun with magic bullets (i.e his pet .357 magnum) that will "stop" someone with one shot. The truth is, all common handgun calibers are puny and relatively ineffective at stopping human aggressors.

According to John Farnam (who has done the research), only about 3% of all gunshot wounds in America are fatal. That includes suicides and suicide attempts. This is why it's so important to understand shot placement and being able to do it on command with as many shots as are necessary to eliminate the threat's ability to harm you.

 

[xamsx]

.40 S&M, huh....

For the perverted gun owners

 

[ChalupaCabras]

.40 S&M, huh....

For the perverted gun owners

I may disagree with you on ballistics, but thats funny right there.

 

[antsi]

To ignore the only real study of real world performance of cartridges in actual shootings is foolish. Yes, the studies have some flaws, but they are still an important piece of data to be evaluated, :P

It's not data. In order to be data, it has to be collected in a systematic and consistent way.

M&S's work is a collection of anecdotes. It's like saying "95% of the guys at the gun store say 10mm is better." Just because it's a number doesn't make it meaningful data.

 

[Joe Williams]

It's not data. In order to be data, it has to be collected in a systematic and consistent way.

M&S's work is a collection of anecdotes. It's like saying "95% of the guys at the gun store say 10mm is better." Just because it's a number doesn't make it meaningful data.

What you get when you ignore real world shootings is the failure that Dr Martin Fackler brought us when HIS studies convinced the FBI that the Silvertip was the ideal round for law enforcement use. His data was collected in a systematic, consistent manner. It also ignored real world shootings, and his failure and ridicule of M&S's work ended up killing cops.

I look at real world shootings, I look at lab results, I look at ALL available information before choosing a round, including Dr. Fackler's work cause he's not an idjit, he was just wrong. And real world shootings provide the most valuable information, because (here comes winner for "obvious statement of the month" award" ballistics gel isn't people, and people aren't predictable, or consistent.

You'll note that the modern gel testing results are based, in part, on real world shootings. They've compared their testing processes to real world shootings to make sure there is a correlation. A vital step that was overlooked for too long.

 

[antsi]

You'll note that the modern gel testing results are based, in part, on real world shootings. They've compared their testing processes to real world shootings to make sure there is a correlation. A vital step that was overlooked for too long.

This part does make sense. Yes, external validity is important.

However, the M&S "percentage one shot stops" numbers are not data. There is no telling what the denominator is, because there is no control over which real world events get counted as observations and which ones don't.

I am not a member of the Facklerite religion. I am not a part of that argument. His original data had good internal validity, but poor external validity. This was a major flaw and a problem.

Marshall and Sanow's work has no validity, internal or external, because it isn't data. You can read it as an interesting collection of anecdotes and draw from it what you will, but the numbers mean nothing.

 

[ChalupaCabras]

I don't have a dog in either fight, though I have read the criticisms of both studies.

My biggest problem with M&S is the fact that It willfully chooses to ignore many of the most important factors in a shooting, such as shot placement, in favor of some magic number (which is apparently "1"). M&S state that all of the one shot incidents were "hits to the torso". Hit to the torso could be anything from a shoulder, to the heart, the gut, or it could pass harmlessly between the organs. Its just too broad of a criterion to determine if any real damage was done, regardless of caliber.

 

[antsi]

I don't have a dog in either fight, though I have read the criticisms of both studies.

My biggest problem with M&S is the fact that It willfully chooses to ignore many of the most important factors in a shooting, such as shot placement, in favor of some magic number (which is apparently "1"). M&S state that all of the one shot incidents were "hits to the torso". Hit to the torso could be anything from a shoulder, to the heart, the gut, or it could pass harmlessly between the organs. Its just too broad of a criterion to determine if any real damage was done, regardless of caliber.

That is a problem. The bigger problem is the ad hoc method of collecting observations.

Here's an example to illustrate:

Did you know that 90% of Indiana gas stations are in Carmel? Here's how I found that out. I asked some people in my church where they usually buy their gas. This yielded me the names and locations of 8 gas stations. All of these were in Carmel. I went driving up Rangeline avenue, from 106th street to 156th street and saw two more gas stations. One of these was in Carmel and the other was in Westfield. There you have it: there are 10 total gas stations in Indiana, and 9 of them are in Carmel.

Based on my "data," Carmel is hands-down the best town in Indiana for the availability of gasoline. Unless you ride a bike everywhere or drive an electric car, you'd be foolish to live anywhere in Indiana except Carmel.

 

[Joe Williams]

I don't have a dog in either fight, though I have read the criticisms of both studies.

My biggest problem with M&S is the fact that It willfully chooses to ignore many of the most important factors in a shooting, such as shot placement, in favor of some magic number (which is apparently "1"). M&S state that all of the one shot incidents were "hits to the torso". Hit to the torso could be anything from a shoulder, to the heart, the gut, or it could pass harmlessly between the organs. Its just too broad of a criterion to determine if any real damage was done, regardless of caliber.

But in a self defense scenario, we don't care how much damage was done, or even if any real damage was done. All we care about is what the studies address: Does the bad guy stop attacking? Ignoring shot placement and accounting only for torso shots makes the anecdotes (and I will grant that's all they are) more relevant to real life. But being anecdotes doesn't make them worthless. You get enough of them, and you've got enough to make judgements with. When I look Federal's 9BP 115 gr JHP and see it's got an 82% one shot stop record, that actually doesn't tell me much. But when I look at 382 shootings, 317 stops and 82% stopping record, I know that it's a round with a proven record in real world shootings. Then I can look at gel testing and see if it meets my needs for penetration and expansion, look at any reviews available and see if it's got a record for reliable feeding and accuracy reports. Or, with a newer round, I can start with the gel testing and see how it compares to similar rounds that have proven to be effective in those same real world shootings.

 

[brianinarng52d]

Thanks for all the input guys, I went to the Indy 1500 yesterday and made my decision, I went with an XD-45. I am very impressed with it so far. Hopefully it stays that way.

 

[ChalupaCabras]

Thanks for all the input guys, I went to the Indy 1500 yesterday and made my decision, I went with an XD-45. I am very impressed with it so far. Hopefully it stays that way.

Congrats Brian! The XD-45 has a great reputation. It should serve you well.

in a self defense scenario, we don't care how much damage was done, or even if any real damage was done. All we care about is what the studies address: Does the bad guy stop attacking?

In all fairness Joe If the shot doesn't do any damage then how is it going to stop the attacker? What you said is all well and good, but in reality, the shot MUST do significant damage in order to physically stop your aggressor. The only other way the attacker will stop is if the presence of the gun or physical resistance are enough to stop the attacker psychologically. If thats the case, then not only was the attacker not committed to his attack, but literally any real firearm would have done the trick.

All fights, including life threatening encounters, are a combination of tactics, psychology, skill, and tools. TOOLS are the least important factors.

 

[shooter@5(4)life]

Yeah, but is there anyone that doesn't think the G-20 with 15+1 of 10MM wouldn't do the job? If that doesn't bring "it" animals, bad guys etc...etc... down you could throw it at them!