Handgun caliber question

[CMF]

Now Alaska, that is a different world. Sorry that 9mm is not going into the skull of a brownie.

Looks like it did in this video. 10 looks better, but 9 penetrated.
I'm not saying I'm set on a 9. I plan to try out a 10 before I go to AK.

 

[Snowwolfe]

It is pretty easy to steer penetration tests one way or the other simply by using a different brand of bullet or changing the velocity.

 

[CMF]

It is pretty easy to steer penetration tests one way or the other simply by using a different brand of bullet or changing the velocity.

I would agree that different bullets and velocities would result in different penetration results.

Are you saying that the tests in the video are "steered" a certain way? If so, in what way do you mean?

I definitely wouldn't pick up any off-the-shelf ammo and expect the same results as the test in the video. I believe they mention the ammo they are using, Buffalo Bore, if I remember right.

 

[SwiftShot]

Looks like it did in this video. 10 looks better, but 9 penetrated.
I'm not saying I'm set on a 9. I plan to try out a 10 before I go to AK.

That was Gelatin and plastic not Meat and Bone. The reason you know it is not the same is the 9mm came out the back of that. Hell a 44 might not come out the back of a brownie skull from the front. Do what you want but the people that live in that country do not carry 9mm for a reason.

 

[Taudisio]

Lower 48 sure carry a 9mm your chance of dancing with a brownie are slim. More likely to run into a meth head. Now Alaska, that is a different world. Sorry that 9mm is not going into the skull of a brownie. There is a reason the most sold handgun up there is a glock 20. You have no idea how thick that head is. Can you use a 9mm to double lung him, yep. The problem is when he is coming you don't get to double lung him. You get a head down full front at 35 mph. Now lets talk weight, 450 to 1000 lbs sorry that 9 is not the choice. Anyway, you do you but if you meet one you will want more than a 9. Now your best weapon is your rifle anyway.

You should ask @Thegman how thick a grizzly skull is. He is active on this thread, an AK resident, and has fell a grizz or two…. I’d bet a dollar or two he has carried a pistol whilst outside.

 

[Snowwolfe]

I would agree that different bullets and velocities would result in different penetration results.

Are you saying that the tests in the video are "steered" a certain way? If so, in what way do you mean?

I definitely wouldn't pick up any off-the-shelf ammo and expect the same results as the test in the video. I believe they mention the ammo they are using, Buffalo Bore, if I remember right.

I am saying they can be steered any direction the person who posted the video wanted them to lean towards.
For example, bullets constructed with hard jackets and cores and shot at moderate velocities can often penetrate further than softer bullets shot at much higher velocities. And often times moderate velocities will yield deeper penetration than faster velocities with exactly the same bullet.
Testing on gelatin is not the same as testing on live tissue, muscle, and bone.

 

[LimeSpoon]

I’m not aware of a good ballistic test simulant for bone in the first place. Living bone is hydrated tissue with some degree of flexibility and neither dead bone nor plastic will replicate its properties to the best of my knowledge. Embalmed bone might be better but I suspect it’s still not a 1:1.

Anyhow, my takeaway from Dean Weingarten’s compilation - which is what I’m assuming a lot of us are referencing when we’re talking about the efficacy of handgun rounds for bear defense - is that pretty much any ‘real’ caliber will work almost all the time, so if you want to carry a 9mm, go ahead. But the larger magnum calibers seem to stop bears more decisively in far fewer shots, even in the hands of users who come off as rather incompetent or poorly trained. From what I remember, quite a few of the accounts with the less powerful rounds involve closer calls or stops that seem at least partially psychological (bear runs off voluntarily due to fear, pain, etc.) in nature.

At the end of the day a win is a win, but my stance is that I’d rather have something that can reliably physically incapacitate an attacking animal for animal defense, just as I’d rather have something that can physically incapacitate a human for human defense. It’s worth noting that even the ~200 or so accounts collected is a pretty small sample size for the purposes of DGU analysis and if we increased it by a large enough magnitude I suspect we’d start seeing more failures from the calibers more commonly involved in marginal stops.

YMMV. A service caliber handgun you carry every day beats a .44 magnum you only carry half the time, so if this is the dilemma you’re dealing with, the choice is obvious.

 

[SwiftShot]

You should ask @Thegman how thick a grizzly skull is. He is active on this thread, an AK resident, and has fell a grizz or two…. I’d bet a dollar or two he has carried a pistol whilst outside.

Wonderful, the vast majority of the freaking state carries what? 10mm 44 mag and 454. You have fun, carry a freaking 22 if you want. People that dance with those things know those things. The pistol is really the last resort anyway. Your rifle is your first choice.

 

[CMF]

That was Gelatin and plastic not Meat and Bone.

Yea, I thought they said it was a real skull, but sounds like not after going back to it.

I’m not aware of a good ballistic test simulant for bone in the first place. Living bone is hydrated tissue with some degree of flexibility and neither dead bone nor plastic will replicate its properties to the best of my knowledge. Embalmed bone might be better but I suspect it’s still not a 1:1.

I would think a dead bone would be a decent replica, A fresh dead would be the best. Someone should make that video....

I'm not advocating for a 9mm, just wanted to share the video I came across. I thought it was a real skull at first. I plan on trying out a 10mm before making an Ak trip.

 

[TaperPin]

If a 9mm fan is interested in what its performance is in various hunting situations, there’s a long history of testing different bullets and actual results on game with the the 38 Special +P, ballistically identical to 9mm. Out west traditionally the choice was the much faster 357 mag vs 44 mag, since 38 Special +P isn’t very special on big game. The 357 will have about as much velocity at 150 to 200 yards as a 9mm will have at the muzzle. Plenty of animals have been plugged with a 357, but it’s not known as a great deer hunting choice if a 44 mag is available. It kills things, you just may have a hard time finding it, regardless of what bullet is used. A 357 with a fairly hard bullet is a great outdoor carry pistol though - good accuracy for a coyote or rock chuck yet a good amount of penetration for bears in a lighter package than any 44 mag. Any pistol is better than no pistol though.

In defensive encounters with people, the human head is seen as a poor choice because it’s a small target, yet a bear brain is only the size of your fist, so a lot of talk about that as a good aiming point is just that.

 

[roosiebull]

If a 9mm fan is interested in what its performance is in various hunting situations, there’s a long history of testing different bullets and actual results on game with the the 38 Special +P, ballistically identical to 9mm. Out west traditionally the choice was the much faster 357 mag vs 44 mag, since 38 Special +P isn’t very special on big game. The 357 will have about as much velocity at 150 to 200 yards as a 9mm will have at the muzzle. Plenty of animals have been plugged with a 357, but it’s not known as a great deer hunting choice if a 44 mag is available. It kills things, you just may have a hard time finding it, regardless of what bullet is used. A 357 with a fairly hard bullet is a great outdoor carry pistol though - good accuracy for a coyote or rock chuck yet a good amount of penetration for bears in a lighter package than any 44 mag. Any pistol is better than no pistol though.

In defensive encounters with people, the human head is seen as a poor choice because it’s a small target, yet a bear brain is only the size of your fist, so a lot of talk about that as a good aiming point is just that.

That is precisely why my plan is one shot in each eyeball, so it can’t see me

These threads are always pretty funny because it’s nearly all speculation besides some data and testimony. I think putting accurate shots on target is the hard part, getting about any cartridge to penetrate a skull is not a huge deal, brown bear skulls are not that thick, and most 9mm are not going to bounce off, it seems pretty obvious… I could see a bullet deflection if you hit a little high, but it’s not bouncing off and not penetrating

I always figured people wanted big pistols for frontal body shots, knowing that your first shot or 2 might not be in the skull on a charging bear, and a 454/460/500 will penetrate deeper and hopefully do enough damage to stop it

I would take my chances with a 9, I used to carry a G20, and then got tired of packing it most of the time, but I ALWAYS have my hellcat with me, which is certainly better than my G20 or 629 sitting at home, and I shoot the hellcat better than either

If I ever get mauled, it will not be due to my little 9 not being enough, it will be because my shots were not on target, and I’m confident in that, but like most, I have never had to prove that, so I will have to confidently speculate like everyone else

 

[nm.otter]

FF. EP 6. 22 Mag for Bear Defense? - Shoot2Hunt

Form goes over why the 22 mag is his preferred caliber for bear defense and how he is proficient with it!

www.shoot2hunt.com

 

[Thegman]

Wonderful, the vast majority of the freaking state carries what? 10mm 44 mag and 454. You have fun, carry a freaking 22 if you want. People that dance with those things know those things. The pistol is really the last resort anyway. Your rifle is your first choice.

Just for perspective, 20-25 years ago people often said the same things about 10mm as you're saying about the 9mm. The 10mm was "way underpowered" compared to the 44 Magnum (which, back then, was often considered the "bare minimum" in these conversations). Just because someone lives in AK, doesn't mean they have any real level of knowledge about handgun ballistics and their actual use in bear defense.

The popularity of the 10mm is more about guys wanting the most "powerful" auto available, and the fact that there are a lot more 10mm options available now. It's become "okay" in group-think to carry the 10mm in the last 10 or 15 years because of shifts to auto platforms over revolvers, in general, not because the 10mm has been shown to be "superior" or even the equal of, e.g., the 44 Magnum, etc.

I've never met a guy who carries a 10mm who also has any knowledge about its actual terminal performance compared to a 9mm. I have met guys that carry a 10mm for bear defense that think a guy using a 9mm for bear defense is going to die, for sure. Their thought that there's that much difference between the two is never coming from any level of knowledge about the subject. Exactly the opposite, actually.

FWIW, on Kodiak this week, between 4 guys, two carried pistols (when they were bow hunting). One carried a 9mm, one carried a 10mm, no one said a single word about that, whatsoever. Maybe not as big a deal as you're thinking it is.