Ammo Evolution

[creeky]

This comment by Tungsten got me to thinking. Instead of adding to an already HUGE thread form "Questions from a new girl" I thought I would address them here. Tungsten comment below...

I would also strongly encourage you to not give much consideration to the idea of carrying a .22, .25, .32 or even .380 for self defense.

Those calibers just are not sufficient for the job.

First off I agree completely. No Argument. I also think

that .380 is not personally for "me" but I wouldn't completely discount it for another to use. But my observation is as follows...

It's strange that calibers that were once thought "the norm", or "good for defense" fall by the way side as newer (and BETTER) calibers come out.

I have been doing some reading on older handgun calibers recently. Mainly

the 32 S&W, and the 32 S&W Long. At one time the 32 S&W was considered the bare minium for defense and considered a decent round. But when the .380 acp came along with roughly twice the speed, and power it quickly fell behind. Same with .380 and the 38 Special. Again an improvement and what became the norm for "minimal" calibers for self defense. Again fast forward to the early ninties (I think it was) 9mm comes on the scene and catches favour quickly. Now some think 9mm is better suited as the "minimum" in size.

While this type of stuff has a lot to do with opinion, and it is hard to

have an absolute answer to such things. It is interesting in how not only do we seek to continue to improve the cartridges, but we seem to be quick to leave behind older calibers as quickly as the new ones come out.

Not saying that is bad, or anything just an observation. Or that a 32 S&W should be carried now a days either. Just that it's interesting to look back and see how these calibers have evolved and why.

(Yes I realize that .45 acp has been around "forever". )

Can't say I wouldn't mind having one of these old pistols just to play and tinker with as well!

[molonlabetn]

A big part of the ability of a handgun to stop someone is the psychological response to being shot. Considering the proliferation of violent images and drugs which alter the state-of-mind of most folks who you may need to defend yourself from, it is understandable that it may take more shock, and more actual, physical trauma to bring a determined, desensitized human down than it used to.

The fact that more people nowadays in this country are either more obeise or more muscular than the average person 100 years ago may have something to do with increased penetration and tissue disruption required to reach vitals.

[towerclimber37]

hahahah I guess it goes to show ya.. just like Godzilla, size matters!

[Im Neero]

So can I now justify a few extra pounds as "ballistic protection?"

[creeky]

So can I now justify a few extra pounds as "ballistic protection?"

LOL!!!

"Good ole Boy Body Armor!"

[musicman]

LOL!!!

"Good ole Boy Body Armor!"

Sweet!! I must be bulletproof! Would I be considered as having Level III body armor?

[molonlabetn]

It would seem to me to be a matter of diminishing returns, since heavier 'body armor' would thereby create a larger target... But I'm sure that there is a middle ground where surviveability would be enhanced, the need for increasingly powerful chamberings being the evidence (or, at least, projectiles designed to penetrate farther).

Either way, shot placement is key... though greater penetration and available energy to the vitals increases the likelihood that a given impact point will allow neutralization.

[Guest dotsun]

OK ML, you've stolen my thunder in at least 2 threads today. I guess you get a +2 and I'll go off and sulk now.

[Guest Boomhower]

Would I be considered as having Level III body armor?

I wouldn't think so. Just cal it what it is. Level (plum) if your bubble is in the middle.

[Guest Boomhower]

EDIT: Dbl post.

[DaveTN]

I don’t think much has changed in the last 50 years.

#1 The .45ACP has held the #1 spot for 100 years.

#2 The .357Mag has held he #2 spot for at least 50 years.

#3 The #2/3 spot was held by the .38 Special for 60 years. The 9mm (arguably) knocked it out of the number three spot in the 80’s, but not because it was a better round.

The 9mm has been on the scene longer than the .45ACP. But it didn’t out perform the .45 a hundred years ago and it still doesn’t today.

So what’s changed? Well… we have designer rounds now to choose from.

Airplane hijackings became a problem so we got the Glaser. Because an attempt was made to outlaw them we still have people that think they are a carry round.

The 10mm; that didn’t work so well, so we got the .40S&W.

The .357Mag couldn’t be used in an auto loader so we got the .357Sig.

Glock didn’t have a round with their name on it so we got the .45GAP.

How have those rounds worked out?