It's called a 460 Rowland.But I suppose in fantasy land where you can get 45 ACP to push 230 gr rounds at 1300FPS, sure, it's better.
Who made this statement?
Certainly not the article...
Hi All,
Here's an interesting article on stopping power of common handgun cartridges based on data compiled over 10 years from actual gun fights. This is written by a firearms instructor for a central-Ohio PD. It compares everything from .22lr all the way up to .50AE.
Conclusion
This study took me a long time and a lot of effort to complete. Despite the work it took, I'm glad I did it. The results I got from the study lead me to believe that there really isn't that much difference between most defensive handgun rounds and calibers. None is a death ray, but most work adequately...even the lowly .22s. I've stopped worrying about trying to find the "ultimate" bullet. There isn't one. And I've stopped feeling the need to strap on my .45 every time I leave the house out of fear that my 9mm doesn't have enough "stopping power." Folks, carry what you want. Caliber really isn't all that important.
Didn't read the link but the quote above is pretty much the conclusion I have come to as well.
Shot placement coupled with equipment familiarity, reliability and ammunition capacity capabilities have replaced my "I need BIG Bullets" thought process.
Worthless article. The data seems far to shaped by the no name researcher to be valid. I also find it humorous that he did all this work just to conclude that there is no magic bullet, that shot placement and a reliable weapon are more important than caliber. Imagine that.
There are several things more important that caliber but when the time comes for that choice there are a few points that can't be overlooked. The only time caliber doesn't matter is with perfect shot placement(assuming adequate penetration) and psychological stops. In all other scenarios the more blood that is let out the faster incapacitation occurs. Big holes let out more blood than small holes.
Where is your study?
"All else being equal" already takes YOU into account. It also takes into account lighting conditions, temperature, humidity, wind speed, SHOT PLACEMENT, any material that the bullet has to travel through, size, orientation & physical condition of the shootee along with any other variables that you can hold constant. The only thing that changes is the "caliber" (or should I say "cartridge").
I will grant you that in a real world dynamic situation there is no way to control all those other variables but that's not the point. THE POINT IS that using any situation as a GIVEN with the ONLY thing that's changed is the cartridge used, the larger/better ballistically/better expanding the bullet the more damage that is going to occur & the more LIKELY it is to stop the attack sooner. Which to me is the definition of "stopping power". I never said it was an absolute. I never said anything about a "one shot stop".
If you DON'T hold everything else equal then there is NO WAY to EVER talk intelligently about self-defense cartridges. OR tactics. Or ANYTHING else at all, for that matter. That's why they use CONTROL GROUPS in any scientific test - to try to eliminate or minimize the effects of any variables other than what they are trying to test.
That said, I am still going to say, without a doubt, that ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL a larger bullet will have a higher probability of causing more damage to an attacker therefore it is a better choice for sel-defense.
Or to state it more succinctly - the bigger the caliber, the better.
I'm not saying it would be better FOR YOU, under ALL situations, to carry a bigger caliber. If YOU can't shoot a certain gun well - don't use it. If all you can handle is a .22LR then that's what you should use (or practice with something bigger until you can handle it better).
All I'm saying is that to make the statement that "a .22LR is just as good as a 9mm is just as good as a .357magnum is just as good as a .45ACP so you might as well only ever carry a .22" is just silly & is not recommended by ANY legitimate self-defense firearms instructor or anyone else who has ANY COMMON SENSE at all.
Good info, thanks for posting. I have been telling friends for years there is no significant difference between 9mm and .40 in a defensive situation and this will help my argument.
The gun one should carry should be the largest caliber that one can reliably operate as needed when needed to achieve an agreed upon goal, in this case stopping power. If a person starts with a .22 and works up to a .45 there is the possibility that all the ingredients needed for stopping power decrease with an increase in caliber.
If you can agree with that statement then we are really talking past each other and don't have any disagreement between our position/belief.
I'm not saying it would be better FOR YOU, under ALL situations, to carry a bigger caliber. If YOU can't shoot a certain gun well - don't use it. If all you can handle is a .22LR then that's what you should use (or practice with something bigger until you can handle it better).
Sales phrases and demonstrations I didn't agree with, are all based around ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL without including the individual. Placing various bullets on the calander to impress with size,telling a customer not to worry about recoil because it would only be fired once or twice. etc.
Me? I have shot a few pistols, and I settled on a comfort level with a .32. I can hit something with it, easier to conceal, easier to manuever in close quarters, I can fire it off multiple times without my ears ringing for the next hour, the muzzle flash is tolerable, and I will carry it everywhere. I also carry a 9mm most of the time, but if its 7/10 days with the 9mm, Its 9/10 with the .32 and on the tenth day it is probably a .25acp (gasp!)
Good info, thanks for posting. I have been telling friends for years there is no significant difference between 9mm and .40 in a defensive situation and this will help my argument.
If that's what you are comfortable with then good for you. I'm not criticizing any individual person's choice in a carry gun.
If rolling your eyes isn't criticizing, what is it?
So do you argue that there is no "real difference" between the .500S&W & the .22LR as the subject study seems to imply? Or at least what some people WANT it to imply?
NOBODY has ever argued that a .22LR bullet creates the same tissue damage if it hits the same spot as a .45 ACP bullet. Which is the point you keep trying to shove down our throats.
The study showed that people stop when they get shot. Whether that be a .380 or a .45. Whether that be because their body stops functioning or maybe they just crapped their pants.
I've seen a thousand videos on TV and youtube. The bad guys are dumb thug hoodlums 90% of the time. They run away when a Chihuahua attacks them. They're certainly not going to stand there and take my .380 rounds to their center of mass.
I've yet to see one video of a meth crazed zombie that just keeps coming until a .45 takes its head off.
IMHO the best is one that doesn't over penetrate and transfers the most energy in a person before coming to rest. I would think that a high speed low weight bullet would cut through like a knife into butter not transferring much energy because of decreased "friction" in correlation to smaller nose diameter...
On the same token, if the bullet Nose diameter is larger, and the bullet weighs more and is traveling at 3/4 bullet As speed, then more energy will be transferred and the wound channel will be more profound.
As a nurse, I would tend to think that while pass through shots would cause exanguination quicker...you also have twice the chance of clotting and collateral damage. More energy transfer FTW.
Regardless though, if you can't hit a basketball with it at 20 feet you might as well shoot yourself in the leg
Don't fall into the trap of supporting a flawed study based on the fact that it supports your decision to carry what many feel is at the bottom limit (or below) of being an adequate self-defense round while ignoring all of the rest of the evidence to the contrary.
Again, the study is not "flawed". The study is a compilation of real life data.
Unless you can show that he lied while collecting the data, the numbers in the tables are what they are.
You seem to have the problem because it doesn't support your decision that bigger is always light years better than smaller.
Instead as caliber goes up, there is a marginal improvement in "stopping power". About what I would expect. But not what the "big caliber people" like to portray...
Shot placement really matters