help selecting a concealble 9mm handgun

[Emperor]

Put the bullet where it's effective and hope. That's all anyone can do.

Emperor in on a rare Sunday visit.

Yep! And do that while under the most stressful situation or mental duress that you will EVER be in as a civilian.

Sooooo, in summary: With the best available ammo (already available on the market), load out (everyday), a tier 1 pistol you can comfortably carry and rapidly and effectively deploy, that can hold as many rounds while maintaining the aforementioned criterion, along with (at least one), spare magazine loaded with the same ammo.

When that moment of truth arrives (I hope it never does FOR ANYONE (more so myself)), and when you consciously decide, shoot as many bullets into the potential threat as you possible can while moving, and hope; as dwr461 suggests, that one or (hopefully), more; strike spine, brain, pelvis, or femur, to render your attacker unable to continue.

If you kill the threat instantly; it's lagniappe!

Shooting a person in self defense is like sales; "Cast a wider net!"

 

[DthunderUSA]

Dave,

I don't think I am missing any points but you crack me up. I feel like you should be on one of those All-State commercials. I'm not as young as you think, and I wouldn't necessarily describe myself as one of those "internet guys".
I did watched your video. It was good. The main thing I liked was the 40cal jacketed hollow points that struck the guy center of the chest and didn't kill the guy. Just a couple more mm of penetration and it would have been done. I have always been taught shot placement is important, but it seems that soft tissue damage is the way to go with handgun rounds. Bleed them out. Well that and a cranial nerve shot. Thanks for the video though.
Good stuff.

 

[dwr461]

Dave,

I don't think I am missing any points but you crack me up. I feel like you should be on one of those All-State commercials. I'm not as young as you think, and I wouldn't necessarily describe myself as one of those "internet guys".
I did watched your video. It was good. The main thing I liked was the 40cal jacketed hollow points that struck the guy center of the chest and didn't kill the guy. Just a couple more mm of penetration and it would have been done. I have always been taught shot placement is important, but it seems that soft tissue damage is the way to go with handgun rounds. Bleed them out. Well that and a cranial nerve shot. Thanks for the video though.
Good stuff.

Glad you enjoyed it. But now you've finally gotten back to where I was at in my post you didn't understand at the beginning of this thread. Low mass high velocity bullets such as those you're advocating have a much harder time penetrating bone. If they actually were to expand to .8 caliber and have low mass they just won't penetrate bones. I think you'll notice that the spine and cerebral nerves all are covered by bones. The ribs do a pretty good job protecting the heart and major blood vessels.

You do seem to have missed the point. Low energy is low energy. Bullet design does not increase the energy.

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Jack]

I appreciate your view on the list of rounds. I'd like to better understand what you think is a credible independent source though.

Doc Roberts.

You keep referencing the FBI when that is merely the standard being used, and I think everyone is trying to apply the same standard, which I think is a good thing. It gives us a clear consistent picture. But what independent data are you using? It's just a question.

I am referencing their informed opinion on what a handgun round should do to be the most effective. I'm also referencing their standards for testing rounds. I'm using independent data from doc roberts.

This isn't an argument in my opinion, so I apologize if you feel like it is. I think it's a good discussion about data sets. I'm not defending a purchase, I am trying to compare ammunition so that I better understand what works for my requirements. I would be more than excited at this point to have an independent ballistics expert conduct a test to industry standards instead of the two of us keep referencing data from 2006.

The date of the test is irrelevant to how it was conducted. The formula for ballistics gel hasn't changed nor has the length of an inch.

Congratulations on doing your own testing, I try to do the same, and I intend to do my own physical testing of this and many more rounds that I find useful. If / when I do a gel block test I'll let you know how it turns out. I've got a variety of ammunition in many different grain weights and I think it's all good, and acceptable ammo. I just wish there was more consistent information out there.

Do you have the link to where you found:

The denim tests for the LH defense ammo that I have been able to find on the internet say that the .82" expansion is still consistent, even through 4 layers of denim. I'd like to see the test done exactly like the above mentioned rounds, but that might have to wait.

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

The blended metal was snake oil. The polymer ball is the expansion gimmick. This stuff is an all copper cor-bon powerball. And I would almost gurantee you if you asked they have Bulmer on staff or as a consultant. This isn't new they are rehashing and old idea with copper instead of lead and for all the same old reasons it won't work.

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Vanilla,
I don't know what Lehigh used to be called. I do know that they have been a firearms industry part manufacturing company before they got into the bullet business, at least that's what a friend of mine told me. He is actually the one who brought me by their booth two years ago at Shot Show. He was going to talk to them about manufacturing some parts for an invention he had and I was with him. At that point, I don't think they had the ammunition up and running. This year at Shot Show is where I saw the ammunition. So, short answer is I don't know what they used to be called or who the inventor is. I do not think there are any patents on their handgun rounds, at least none that I have come across. The ammunition does not have a polymer insert in it. It is basically a hollow cavity. They have scored the edges vertically which is how I believe they are able to get the consistent expansion.

No this ammo is not the same stuff as the RCBS stuff. That sounds a lot different than what this is. I guess the Stan Bulmer stuff is some kind of multiple metal process. I couldn't really get a good understanding of what they were trying to do or sell, but it didn't sound like it made it very far.

The Lehigh Defense bullets are made with a Swiss machine and are milled out of a solid piece of copper. I don't think this is any kind of new process though. I have heard of stories that monolithic bullets made with swiss machines have been around for a while but have just never taken off because of inconsistent expansion.

I have a box of the Barnes Tac-XPD ammo that is another all copper ammunition. It is relatively new to the market but it looks promising. I plan on researching this more as well.

Thanks,

The primary attribute of the all copper bullets was their lack of a jacket. When passing through an intermediate barrier there was no jacket to rip off and take mass with it. However there is no free lunch and the copper bullets had other issues, poor expansion being chief among them. Most manufacturers rather than continue pursuing copper turned to chemically bonding jackets to projectiles and Bonded Ammo was born. It offered better expansion and intermediate barrier performance.

Legih appears to have recycled the polymer ball gimmick in order to fix the expansion issue at the expense of the barrier performance that copper projectiles excelled at in the beginning, an odd choice. Me I'll pass.

 

[Vartarg]

Three best choices, in descending order:

Glock 19

Glock 19

Glock 19

 

[dwr461]

GLOCK 19 what's that? Never heard of it?



Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DthunderUSA]

Here are the links I came across.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OIMa1hBetw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If8-D-j8Zn0


Can you find the Dr. Gary K. Roberts report that goes with the table you linked? I'd like to see what his test parameters were. Like you said, how it was conducted is more important than date.

 

[DthunderUSA]

Vanilla, you said: "The blended metal was snake oil. The polymer ball is the expansion gimmick. This stuff is an all copper cor-bon powerball. And I would almost gurantee you if you asked they have Bulmer on staff or as a consultant. This isn't new they are rehashing and old idea with copper instead of lead and for all the same old reasons it won't work."



These rounds are not copper bonded. And, there is no polymer ball insert. Doesn't appear to me they are re-hashing anything.

Do you know for a fact that the guy Bulmer is on staff there, or are you speculating?

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Vanilla, you said: "The blended metal was snake oil. The polymer ball is the expansion gimmick. This stuff is an all copper cor-bon powerball. And I would almost gurantee you if you asked they have Bulmer on staff or as a consultant. This isn't new they are rehashing and old idea with copper instead of lead and for all the same old reasons it won't work."





These rounds are not copper bonded. And, there is no polymer ball insert. Doesn't appear to me they are re-hashing anything.

Do you know for a fact that the guy Bulmer is on staff there, or are you speculating?

I misread your reply. I thought you said they did use a polymer ball. My mistake. I am asking about Bulmer. My bet is he is involved. How is this better than the Cor-Bon DPX Stuff?

 

[Bigtex1959]

M&P Shield is the gun for you!!

 

[rasputin]

I've carried a Glock 26/27. Great shooting pistols, but were problimatic for me when carrying appendix, which is my preferred method of carry. I'm tall, in good shape, and dress in relatively form fitting clothes. The width of sub compact Glocks caused some issues for me.
I currently carry a S&W 642 in 357 or my recently aquired M&P shield 9mm. Ive found the Shield to be easiest to carry, shoot, and live with.

If concealed carry isn't as important go with the Glock 19. My brother owns one, and its a legendary Jack of all Trades weapon.

The sheer volume of people recomending the G19 should tell you that maybe you need to try one. The grip angle might be a little funky for some people, but its clearly not the deal breaker most people make it out to be.

 

[MadJax]

Thanks everyone I have gotten both a lot of good objective information and informed opinion from this post.
unfortunately due to some sudden personal events i will be moveing to the southshore and can not afford to spare the money on a handgun right now.

This post has cleared some things up for me and i do plan to buy a pistol within the next year if not sooner
What i take away from this post is that caliber is more important than capacity in a defense situation as a result i have decided to look at 40caliber as i feel its a good compromise between the 9mms capacity and the 45s stoping power.
the most important thing i take away is that a gun is an investment and i may have been to concerned with price instead of functionality.
Instead of mearly getting something affordable i will spend extra to get something of unquestionable quality.

Once again thank you all while i wont be buying soon il be keeping my eyes open for a p226 or better.

 

[Jack]

Here are the links I came across.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OIMa1hBetw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If8-D-j8Zn0


Can you find the Dr. Gary K. Roberts report that goes with the table you linked? I'd like to see what his test parameters were. Like you said, how it was conducted is more important than date.

So it doesn't make 12" of penetration like they claim, and the bullet breaks up when encountering hard surfaces. I'd love to see that against a car door or auto glass. All of the testing I've seen from doc Roberts is based on 10% ballistics gel with a calibration BB fired at around 600 fps to confirm the block is good.

 

[Jack]

What i take away from this post is that caliber is more important than capacity in a defense situation as a result i have decided to look at 40caliber as i feel its a good compromise between the 9mms capacity and the 45s stoping power.

This is the opposite of what you should take away from the discussion. 9mm is a superior caliber to 40 for a number of reasons. One of the keys for you, being an inexperienced shooter, is recoil. 9mm is easier to manage, and the gains in lethality by going to 40 over 9mm are marginal at best. Bullets in the gun = time in the fight.

 

[dwr461]

What i take away from this post is that caliber is more important than capacity in a defense situation as a result i have decided to look at 40caliber as i feel its a good compromise between the 9mms capacity and the 45s stoping power.

Huh? So you reached that decision based on what from this thread? 9mm is what I'd recommend.

Dave


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Hattrick 22]

I have now experienced derp overload....

 

[MadJax]

Part of my reason for originally wanting a 9mm was because I believed capacity was more important in a defense situation or otherwise.
but after reading some of this post and looking into it myself a little bit more I believe that in the question of capacity vs caliber it comes down to personal opinion.

I simply believe this because after looking into it extensively online and talking to every gun owner and LEO iv met over the last few years.
I have seen and heard many well informed well substantiated yet conflicting views.
The fact that there is so little consensus leads me to believe its more about shooter preference than anything.

Part of the reason i changed my mind on caliber was based partially on this post, later information and in my own limited experience shooting handguns.
I haven't kept count of how many I've shot but if I had to say I'd say it's in the 30s most of which were 40s or 45s only 3 9mms.
I am not a practiced shooter nor even a regular shooter iv only had a few hours here or there to shoot anything over the years but having said that i feel confident i could place 5 to 7 center of mass shots quickly with any caliber dependent on the gun.
I have heard many tell me 9mm is best for a new shooter becuse its accurate and low recoil but i have shoot more 40s than 9mms and while i found the 9 far more accurate than a 45 and has less recoil than a 40 i did not find the forty any less accurate, what attracted me to 9mm was its lower cost both in terms of ammo and guns but also its generally higher capacity.
I would compare it to building a tolerance for alcohol by starting with exclusively hard liquor than being introduced to beer later

I dont mean to offend anyone but on matters with no consensus i take away what overlaps and draw my own conclusions

 

[CUJOHUNTER]

Dude.......