How important is the Service Caliber you choose?

[Center_Shot]

@Son of Vlad Tepes

SGalbra thanks for all of your explanations.

The data you cited above is the old FBI test results. Is there a new updated sheet that shows their testing data for all of the newer rounds out there (Ranger T, Gold Dot, HST, Win Bonded, etc.?)

These are suppose to be some of the results from the FBI testing that I obtained on another web site several years ago, and placed in my records. These show penetration and expansion of the round.

9mm +P 124 Gold Dot
Bare Gel: 13.4/.68
Heavy Clothing: 20.25/.53
Steel : 17.35/,50
Wallboard : 12.65/.62
Plywood : 16.6/.53
Auto glass: 11.05/.51

9mm 147 Gold Dot
Bare Gel: 13.70/.71
HC : 14.6/,59
Steel: 19.8/.44
Wallboard:15.25/.56
Ply: 20.15/.41
Auto : 14.30/.53

9mm 147 Federal HST
Bare Gel: 11.95/.74
HC : 15.05/.59
Steel: 18.4/.42
Wall: 13.7/.62
Ply: 13.85/.61
Auto glass: 9.9/.59

40S&W 180 Gold Dot
Bare Gel: 14,5/.59
Heavy Clothing: 17,55/.60
Steel: 17.30/.54
Wall: 14.35/.68
Ply: 19.55/.58
Auto Glass: 10.00/.58

.40 S&W 180 Winchester
Bare Gel: 14.1/.66
HC: 14.85/.62
Steel: 16,25/.55
Wall: 22.05/,42
Ply: 21.95/.42
Auto glass: 11.85/.48

40 S&W 180 Federal HST
Bare Gel: 11.5/.93
HC : 13.65/.74
Steel: 16.3/.53
Wall: 12.95/.73
Ply: 13.40/.73
Auto Glass: 11.20/.52

I still can’t see much difference in the 9mm and the 40S&W IMHO.

[sgalbra76]

@Center_Shot

These are suppose to be some of the results from the FBI testing that I obtained on another web site several years ago, and placed in my records. These show penetration and expansion of the round.

The FBI uses the “recovered diameter” measurement, not maximum expanded diameter. Those numbers clearly indicate a maximum expanded diameter which is not representative of bullets recovered in actual shootings.

Therefore…not FBI testing data.

[sgalbra76]

@kjdoski

If you’re like me, and restricted to carrying agency-issued ammunition and your agency issues REALLY BAD 9mm ammunition, then I’d advocate a different caliber IF YOU CAN HANDLE IT. What I mean is, if you can shoot a similar platform in .40 S&W with equal accuracy, and near equal speed, then I’d advocate the carry of the .40. In my case, while I REALLY dislike the .40 S&W for a variety of reasons, I shoot my G23 with more accuracy, and at a speed which is indistinguishably slower when compared to my G19 (five shots in .78 seconds with the G19; five shots in .82 seconds with the G23) - so I opt for the “more capable” caliber. I know LOTS of agents, though, who went .40 because it was “better” and now have pistols they don’t shoot well, and don’t like to practice with because of increased recoil (this is especially true of folks who’ve bought “subcompact” .40s like the G27 and Kahr PM40).

This is similar to my situation, and law enforcement in general. Given govt contracts, we rarely get to pick and choose the ideal ammo for our duties. The 9mm is more depended on what type of ammunition that you choose in order to achieve good barrier penetration, as well as good penetration of internal bone structure. Reference Dr. Lane’s FBI tests in 1993, and the Canadian’s follow up research in 1994 which demonstrated that there was a clear difference in internal bone structure penetration with the larger, heavier calibers. The .40 is able to meet all the FBI protocols(180gr) with almost any JHP on the market making it very appealing to LE agencies.

Can you feel a recoil difference between the 9mm and .40S&W…sure. You can also feel a difference in recoil between the various 9mm loads, although it is VERY difficult to measure such differences in timed and dynamic courses of fire in likely scenarios. In the Glock platform I do notice more of a felt recoil difference between the 9mm and the .40. However, when you get into platforms such as the Sig P229 or S&W M&P, the difference is very minor. Most of our proficient officers cannot demonstrate one caliber to be easier to shoot than the other in applicable scenario shooting. The differences in shooting performance is more based on theory and seeing how fast one can dump a magazine into a target’s COM at 7yrds. Once you spend some time with the .40 180gr and the right shooting platform, it’s hard to justify going back to the 9mm unless you want a lighter overall carry package which I sometimes opt for.

[PA_PATRIOT]

@sgalbra76

All that being said, I am not a big fan of the FBI’s adoption of the Glock .40. It does okay if you keep a tight maintenance schedule, but it isn’t very forgiving if you don’t. I’ve heard FBI agents are required to keep a round count log on their pistols and keep their armorer up to date on that log.

My department allows Glock Model-22 .40S&W pistols, do you know what the FBI’s maintenance schedule is for this pistol?

[sgalbra76]

@Phila PD

My department allows Glock Model-22 .40S&W pistols, do you know what the FBI’s maintenance schedule is for this pistol?

Don’t know. I’m a Sig armorer, and the Sig schedule is spring replacements every 5k rounds. I know that the Glock recommended spring replacement is between 5k-10k rounds. I do remember hearing from a FLETC instructor that the FBI service on their .40s was about half that amount of time. So, most likely a recoil spring replacement every 3k-4k rounds…but that is just speculation on my part.

[PA_PATRIOT]

When I renewed my Advanced Glock Armorers cert last year I ask this same question in class and the reply was 5K to 10K also, later when on a break I pressed the instructor and was later told he swapped out his every 2.5K

[tpd223]

Just to be a smart ass, I noted these numbers from the good Doc;

9mm Fed 147 gr HST JHP; ave vel=997 fps (G19)
BG: pen=14.6", RD=0.61", RL=0.39", RW=147.1gr
4LD: pen=15.6", RD=0.56", RL=0.53", RW=145.5gr

vs

.40 S&W Fed 180 gr HST JHP; ave vel=959 fps (S&W 4006)
BG: pen=14.0", RD=0.70", RL=0.43", RW=181.2gr
4LD: pen=15.0", RD=0.56", RL=0.52", RW=180.7gr

and;

9mm Win 124 gr +P JHP (RA9BA); ave vel=1206 fps (G19); gel cal= 9.5cm@593fps
BG: pen=13.5", RD=0.61", RL=0.38", RW=124.5gr
4LD: pen=15.1", RD=0.47", RL=0.48", RW=124.5gr

vs

.40 S&W Win 180 gr JHP (Q4355); ave vel=979 fps (S&W 4006); gel cal=9.5cm@590fps
BG: pen=14.3", RD=0.65", RL=0.36", RW=181.7gr
4LD: pen=17.2", RD=0.51", RL=0.54", RW=182.3gr

I note in the heavy clothing event, the 147gr HST appears to be .6" better than the same bullet in .40cal.

On the street I haven’t noted any issues with decent 9mm duty ammo, mostly the 124gr +P Ranger-T and Gold Dot.

ETA; I wouldn’t let my G22 recoil spring get more than 2000 rounds on it, from my experience.

[DacoRoman]

This is like the most enlightened and erudite caliber war thread that I’ve ever read. ;)

Thanks for the info and great discussion.

[Center_Shot]

@sgalbra76

The FBI uses the “recovered diameter” measurement, not maximum expanded diameter. Those numbers clearly indicate a maximum expanded diameter which is not representative of bullets recovered in actual shootings.

Therefore…not FBI testing data.

My friend I believe you are mistaken. This came from a very competent source as being FBI testing.

[myantispambox]

@sgalbra76

The primary reason for the FBI going from the 9mm to the .40S&W was due to the poor penetration ability of the 9mm.

Partially right. But the problem wasn’t the caliber (9mm) it was the ammo (115gr Winchester Silvertip). Hence the reason for the 12" minimum standard, which most good 9mm ammo now achieves.

[DocGKR]

At the time the FBI made the switch, there were NO robust expanding 9 mm loads which consistently met the terminal performance requirements.