Hating the .40 S&W?

Pumpkinslinger · Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:20 am Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

I think Chambered hit one nail right on the head. When people compare "cartridges" they usually ignore the bullet type/construction. For example, Wikipedia has a table of 9x19mm loads that shows test results for different bullets. Note that the Winchester FMJ penetrates almost twice as far as a Speer Gold Dot JHP but the Speer bullet produces twice the "permanent cavity" volume. I admit that this isn't exactly an "apples to apples" comparison either because of differences in bullet weight and velocity.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...Parabellum

I've often wondered why the military isn't using a better bullet shape in their loads. From what I can tell the military loads all use a very pointed bullet. Why aren't they using a FMJ Flat Point, something like Winchester's ( www.midwayusa.com/prod...uctFinding )? It would have to improve terminal ballistics.

chambered221 · Posted: Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:52 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Mike, I'm assuming that your familiar with the Hague Peace Conferences so that's probably not where you were going !!!
In those Declarations it's not the need to use FMJ's, it's more about not using bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body.

For those that don't know, the US never signed on to this agreement but abides by it.
What they did sign on to was the unnecessary suffering portion of arms, projectiles and materials.

It's also my understanding that we need not apply any of this to the current counter terrorism operations. The Geneva Convention is about conventional warfare against standing state sponsored army's.

PaulS · Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2015 9:33 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Any ammunition that caused undue tissue damage or some such BS.

I guess they didn't understand that guns are lethal under the right circumstances.

Vince · Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 1:42 am Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Paul, it's ok to kill or wound, but you are not allowed to be cruel whilst doing either.

From memory, the gene a conventions came into being after the poms started using ammo made in India...dum dum I think the ammo was called. The ammo was considered cruel and downright nasty because of the wounds it caused. I suppose it's sort of like our hunter's ethic...it's ok to kill, but you must be humane.

Bushmaster · Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:42 am Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

What's humane about killing anything? Enyone ever asked a deer what he/she thought?

Honey? Would you please pass the venison ribeye? Thanks...

PaulS · Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:03 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Expanding bullets are more humane killers - so long as bullet placement is there.

When using full metal jacket the wounding channel is caused by tumbling and or the breakup of the bullet. Some of the monolithic bullets behave like FMJ too, on impact. There are a couple of reasons but the length of the bullet and marginal stabilization in rifles intended for jacketed lead bullets is the primary cause for poor performance in game.

The VLD bullets are the worst because the design requires a very long bullet for caliber in order to get the high ballistic coefficients. Using a 30 caliber VLD for hunting requires a 1: 8 twist or more. Using the Miller formula anything less than 1.2 is not likely to stabilize the VLD's on the way to the target and below 1.5 they are marginally stabile for long range target shooting. For hunting with the VLD's Miller recommends that you get a minimum of 1.8 and the higher the better. Jacketed lead bullets are stabile from 1.3 to 1.5.

The Miller formula takes temperature and barometric pressure into account and explains very well why some bullets are stable at low pressures and warm temps but not under high pressure and cold, dense air.

chambered221 · Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 4:47 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Vince wrote:

From memory, the gene a conventions came into being after the poms started using ammo made in India...dum dum I think the ammo was called.

They were nothing more than a soft nose bullet with exposed lead core !!!
They were made at the Dum-Dum arsenal.......that's how they got their name.

Bushmaster · Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:26 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Yer Kiddin' Shocked

Pumpkinslinger · Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:10 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

"Expanding bullets were given the name Dum-dum, or dumdum, after an early British example produced in the Dum Dum Arsenal, near Calcutta, India by Captain Neville Bertie-Clay."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ing_bullet

From that same article:

"The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III prohibits the use of expanding bullets in international warfare."

Yep, my previous comment was directed at the Hague restrictions. Personally all of my "defensive" loads use hollow points (handgun) or soft points (rifle).

dhc4ever · Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:18 am Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

The whole idea of modern warfare is to make war with others uneconimical, you do this by WOUNDING their soldiers, this then takes 10 people to look after them. This is why the civilised world now uses 5.56 mm. This only works against otherwise civalised nations.
If you you are against muslims or fanatics, you go up a few steps in caliber like .308, .338 or .500 caliber or you use softpoint to blow the biggest holes in them you can which will be hopefully fatal.
The hague conventions also prohibute shotguns. Perhaps thats why we have so many peace making and local insurgencies....

RePete · Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 6:07 am Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

What a thread drift. From I hate the 40S&W to ballistics.

I like the 40S&W. It easily makes major so in competition you can shoot the same gun, albeit with a spring change, in minor and major . I find it controllable especially when downloaded to minor.

I carried and used a 9mm for a number years, so a 40 isn't a problem.

inthedark · Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 10:11 am Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

dhc4ever wrote:

The whole idea of modern warfare is to make war with others uneconimical, you do this by WOUNDING their soldiers, this then takes 10 people to look after them. This is why the civilised world now uses 5.56 mm. This only works against otherwise civalised nations.
If you you are against muslims or fanatics, you go up a few steps in caliber like .308, .338 or .500 caliber or you use softpoint to blow the biggest holes in them you can which will be hopefully fatal.
The hague conventions also prohibute shotguns. Perhaps thats why we have so many peace making and local insurgencies....

You're completely wrong on the larger calibre bullets! You use pork. Thats right PORK. How you introduce the said pork into the body is entirely left up to you. But pork is the answer. for the normal non-bearded fanatics i would suggest two to three hundred pounds administered up the back side. Now this may be on the hoof or off. Party

Bushmaster · Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 12:34 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

What ever happened to the .40 S&W?

inthedark · Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 2:45 pm Post subject: Re: Hating the .40 S&W?

Bushmaster wrote:

What ever happened to the .40 S&W?

you musta missed that part. You load the .40 S&W with pork.
Got it? Good. Embarassed