Originally Posted by N/Apower
Read the whole article, it's pretty interesting, I think, and the man has obviously "been there, done that" with regards to shooting lots of animals with zippy .355's and slow .45's.
What I personally drew from it:
We know the 9mm and the .45 do NOT create identical permanent wound-cavities. The .45 creates a larger one. Yet the 9mm performed just the same as the .45. Why? Velocity? TC made up for the smaller permanent cavity? I won't even pretend to know. However, these experiences also seem to discount BPW having any effect, at least that this author saw. If a lightweight animal being hit with a zippy round reacted the same as a lightweight animal being hit with a 900fps hard cast bullet, I would say BPW was not at play here.
Included is a picture of a wound from a .45 and from a 127 +P+. Sadly, they are close-ups and you can't tell much.
Again, from the article:
I don't think this means they did BETTER than the .45, but that they did as well (reading the whole article), and he could not account for it. However, I would hazard a guess that the damage he referred to these rounds causing was a factor of fragmentation and not necessarily velocity. Ergo, chalk it up to bullet design instead of velocity (I guess you could argue that velocity caused fragmentation, but then, one could just argue in favor of using Glasers or something, not something I would do.). As he said later in the article, a 185gr Corbon did the same thing.
IN THE END
It seems that regardless of the mechanism used, 9mm, .45, .40, and .357 SIG all do about the same darn thing when you use the right ammo. You pays your moneys, you makes your choice, and you do your damndest to defend it on some random internet forum.
I didn't skim it. I believe you added all this when you edited the post adding all this additional stuff after I had already quoted it when it had been a much smaller post. Hadn't gone back to look at it after I quoted it.
I read the link. It was interesting. I can't explain what the man says in reguard to the various loads all seeming to drop game equally well overall. Then again, there's no good reason it shouldn't have happened the way it did. I do assume he's generally telling the God's honest truth. What I can say is that I would't have expected any overall difference between 9 or 45.
A man from Mississippi was the one who told me of the feral dogs and coyotes he's shot. He had specifically claimed that he had used 9mm 127gr +P+ (among some other 9mm loads) and a 125gr 357SIG load (can't remember the specific load). He said the 357SIG load clearly dispatched the animals quicker on average than any 9mm load he had ever used. He assured me he had taken out dozens of animals before coming to that conclusion.
is that it really takes ~1400fps and up with bullets that penetrate 10" - 13" in ballistic gel and expand well with a little bit to a moderate amount of fragmentation to begin to really start noticing the effects of BPW taking effect any kind of majority of the time. I have nothing to back that up. Can't prove it, and only have circumstancial evidence to support it.
That said, it's not that surprising to me that the guy in the link you provided didn't see a difference in incapcitation times between the 45 load and 9mm 127gr +P+ load. I think it would have been more telling to see results from a sample size a bit larger than 1 each. But we can't always have our cake and eat it too. Therefore, I digress.