[MikeG]

EMP3, I think the forum has endured enough of your 'contributions.' Goodbye.

 

[Whitworth]

Wow, my feelings are hurt.

By the way, I served in the Marine Corps also at cost to the taxpayer, but I guess that doesn't count.

So, I reply to statements someone makes on this site, and now I am an internet stalker. How does that work? Let me explain how this internet thing works. You make sweeping statements about the efficacy of the .38 Special versus the .357, and then when called on it to clarify, you essentially tell folks to look at the FBI's test results, but don't offer any explanation. When you get called on it, you're not getting stalked. So, maybe you should backtrack and realize what you have done before resorting to calling me a "stalker."

Oh, and my opinion is born of experience, not theory.

 

[CraigC]

Whitworth,

You're becoming an internet stalker.

You're practiced at the art of propaganda. What "sweeping declarations" have I made?

You'd make Nancy Pelosi envious.

You've spent a lot of your tax dollars training me how to terminate imminent threats and how to stay alive. All of my professional continuing education hours for which you've paid were based upon scientific principles.

You, on the other hand, hustle opinion as knowledge.

Get a life. You'll be happier that way.

You know someone has lost the argument when they resort to personal attacks and comments. Deflections are a big red flag for me and you've thrown up several. You do realize that your "stalker" has written books on the subject, right? Books with information compiled from dozens of fellow handgun hunters. No sir, you've posted nothing but "sweeping generalizations" because all you have is a little bit of book study and one rifle-killed elk. The rest of us have spent more time elbow-deep in gutpiles than you have studying paper data.

 

[COSteve]

You mention “added performance.” Measured how if I may ask? Less drop at range? More terminal effectiveness? Have you shot game with either? Just curious.

The extra performance of the 45 Super over the 45 acp is the result of the increased velocities. Typical fast velocities for a 200grn 45 acp are in the 1,020fps range so the 45 Super with a measured velocity of 1,307fps demonstrates a 28% velocity increase. This gives a flatter trajectory which at pistol ranges isn't much of a factor but also produces significantly higher ME (1,020fps generated 462ft/lbs of ME while 1,307fps generates 758ft/lbs of ME, a 64% increase) which is important against thick skinned 4 legged threats in the woods.

As I said above, even though these are significant increases, they don't come near to my most powerful 165grn 10mm loads at 1,589fps and 925ft/lbs ME, my 180grn at 1,479fps and 874ft/lbs of ME, or my 200grn at 1,383fps and 849ft/lbs of ME. And again, the recoil produced with my 10mm isn't anywhere near as strong as that of the 200grn 45 Supers at 1,307fps and 758ft/lbs of ME.

Again, the increased performance of the 45 Super or 10mm over the 45acp or 40s&w against thin skinned, 2 legged threats is likely not necessary but I'm loading for possible defense against dangerous, thicker skinned animals in the Rockies. I need the extra penetration of the 'magnum' level loads to ensure adequate penetration and wounding effects.

 

[MikeG]

Light bullets with the .45 Super is going the wrong direction, in my opinion. Better off with a 230gr - 260gr. bullet. More reliable penetration, and with a good nose shape, plenty of wounding potential / tissue destruction.

 

[recoil junky]

Unless those lighter bullets are tougher, they may not deliver the wanted penetration anyway due to over expansion.

Now, this may be comparing tangerines to oranges, but it testing full house loads using 200 grain bullets and 240 grain bullets of the same design and manufacture in a 44 magnum, the 240's won out because they penetrated further and held together better than 200's. The felt recoil was "about the same" so it was an easy choice.

I look for terminal performance in a "self protection" bullet, not energy of velocity.

RJ

 

[Whitworth]

Light bullets with the .45 Super is going the wrong direction, in my opinion. Better off with a 230gr - 260gr. bullet. More reliable penetration, and with a good nose shape, plenty of wounding potential / tissue destruction.

Mike is right. Unless you’re talking monolithic solids, you are handicapping the .45 Super with those light bullets. I don’t know what 165 grain bullets you load in your 10mm, but I would love to know. Another issue is ME. It’s piss poor measure of lethality. I would be more concerned with the nose profile and construction of my bullets if animal defense is the primary function.

 

[CraigC]

Mike is right. Unless you’re talking monolithic solids, you are handicapping the .45 Super with those light bullets.

Yep, with that exception, I'll take mass over velocity any day of the week.

 

[kciH]

I can't think of many instances in the pistol world where high velocity and light bullets buy you much...or we'd all be shooting FN Five Seven's. It sounds neat, but you've already got abysmal sectional density with the "normal" weight bullets.

 

[BAGTIC]

The span of the blades on broadheads is much wider than any bullet and is more likely to sever blood vessels. Blood loss is the main cause of death. How much KE does a surgeon's scalpel have?

 

[vic in va]

Mike is right. Unless you’re talking monolithic solids, you are handicapping the .45 Super with those light bullets. I don’t know what 165 grain bullets you load in your 10mm, but I would love to know. Another issue is ME. It’s piss poor measure of lethality. I would be more concerned with the nose profile and construction of my bullets if animal defense is the primary function.

I converted a 1911 to 45 Super for the sole purpose of using 255 grain LFNs.

I have a 460 Rowland conversion on the way. Same purpose, make a heavy bullet go faster in a platform I'm very familiar with.

 

[COSteve]

Light bullets with the .45 Super is going the wrong direction, in my opinion. Better off with a 230gr - 260gr. bullet. More reliable penetration, and with a good nose shape, plenty of wounding potential / tissue destruction.

Sorry for the late reply. I lost track of this thread and didn't see some of the last posts.

I agree, however, the issue with the heavier bullets is that to give it any decent performance, you have to add a muzzle brake to slow down slide speed and reduce battering. Even with a 24# recoil spring and a slide/barrel that weigh almost 5oz more than a stock G21's, the recoil impulse is significantly heavier with my 200grn 45 Supers than my 180grn 10mm 'nuclear' level loads. That's the central problem with 45 Super, it's recoil is so significant at levels it excels in that it requires a large muzzle brake as well as heavy recoil springs. Even then, the blast and recoil is more than the average shooter would enjoy.

 

[Kevinbear]

The way I figure it you should have at least one pistol in every caliber in case you meet someone new to the area who is looking for a place to shoot and say's "don't worry about ammunition, I have plenty". ha ha

 

[TMan]

The way I figure it you should have at least one pistol in every caliber in case you meet someone new to the area who is looking for a place to shoot and say's "don't worry about ammunition, I have plenty". ha ha

That's pretty generous.

I'm not that good, I guess

 

[shooterPaul]

Well, the comparisons are fun but both cartridges were designed to do different jobs.
The 10mm is very close to a 357 magnum - closer than the 357Sig when comparing the NUMBERS.
The 45ACP is closer to the 40S&W if you compare the NUMBERS.
The 10mm is a better cartridge for game but not ideal for shooting rapid fire at bad guys, much like the 357.
The 45ACP was designed to stop small human in rage type charges while the 40S&W was designed for less recoil and faster follow ups than the 10mm.

Trying to compare the 10mm with the 45ACP is like comparing a bow to a spear. Two classes of weapons for two very different jobs. They are both lethal in competent hands. One has considerably more Energy and as a result is harder to manage for rapid follow up shots. The 45 ACP is easier to control in recoil and faster on follow up shots but has considerably less energy (power). Does that make one better? Better at its given task - yes but not better in the other task necessarily.

 

[CraigC]

If you're comparing energy figures, you're looking at the wrong numbers.

 

[shooterPaul]

45ACP = 200 grain bullet at 1010 fps and the 10mm = 200 grain bullet at 1216 fps
45ACP = 453 ftlbs 10mm = 657 ftlbs

The 10mm has almost 50% more energy.
Where did I go wrong?

 

[MikeG]

45ACP = 200 grain bullet at 1010 fps and the 10mm = 200 grain bullet at 1216 fps
45ACP = 453 ftlbs 10mm = 657 ftlbs

The 10mm has almost 50% more energy.
Where did I go wrong?

Believing that it matters

 

[pocketshaver]

45ACP = 200 grain bullet at 1010 fps and the 10mm = 200 grain bullet at 1216 fps
45ACP = 453 ftlbs 10mm = 657 ftlbs

The 10mm has almost 50% more energy.
Where did I go wrong?

using 200 grain bullets in a 45acp

 

[CraigC]

In case you missed it, read the second quote in MikeG's signature.