Info on this somewhat famous ballistics photo?

PlayboyPenguin · Dec 25, 2009

Regarding the often used picture above, I see it all the time but never see any info as to what manufacturer was used. I also never see any info as to why they chose lower velocity .40S&W rounds when much more comparable (to the 9mm velocities) ones are available? In fact I have never even seen a .40S&W with that low a velocity before. Every rating I have ever seen in in the 950-1500 range (depending on grain) and I have never personally chronographed one under 970. They also chose a smaller .357sig bullet when heavier ones (more similar to the 147gr 9mm they chose) are available with equally as high velocity ratings. Those 9mm rounds also seem to be towards the high end of what the round is capable of and not the low end like the other calibers. Especially that 147gr 9mm. Anyone have any info regarding this photo and why such "mismatched" representations where chosen? It almost seems like the photo was meant to be very "pro-9mm."

NoAim · Dec 25, 2009

PlayboyPenguin said:
Regarding the often used picture above, I see it all the time but never see any info as to what manufacturer was used. I also never see any info as to why they chose lower velocity .40S&W rounds when much more comparable (to the 9mm velocities) ones are available? In fact I have never even seen a .40S&W with that low a velocity before. Every rating I have ever seen in in the 950-1500 range (depending on grain) and I have never personally chronographed one under 970. They also chose a smaller .357sig bullet when heavier ones (more similar to the 147gr 9mm they chose) are available with equally as high velocity ratings. Those 9mm rounds also seem to be towards the high end of what the round is capable of and not the low end like the other calibers. Especially that 147gr 9mm. Anyone have any info regarding this photo and why such "mismatched" representations where chosen? It almost seems like the photo was meant to be very "pro-9mm."

You say you've never chrono'd any .40 under 920 fps, but the lowest velocity shown on that chart is close to 1000fps.

147gr Fiocchi is about 1130 fps.

I'm not sure I understand? Most of the loads I've chrono'd at 8 feet (180gr) have been 920-1080fps (CCI = 920, AE = 1080).

YFZsandrider · Dec 25, 2009

Most have propably seen this... jus thought I'd ad it for humor

coctailer · Dec 25, 2009

crosse · Dec 25, 2009

PlayboyPenguin said:
Regarding the often used picture above, I see it all the time but never see any info as to what manufacturer was used. I also never see any info as to why they chose lower velocity .40S&W rounds when much more comparable (to the 9mm velocities) ones are available? In fact I have never even seen a .40S&W with that low a velocity before. Every rating I have ever seen in in the 950-1500 range (depending on grain) and I have never personally chronographed one under 970. They also chose a smaller .357sig bullet when heavier ones (more similar to the 147gr 9mm they chose) are available with equally as high velocity ratings. Those 9mm rounds also seem to be towards the high end of what the round is capable of and not the low end like the other calibers. Especially that 147gr 9mm. Anyone have any info regarding this photo and why such "mismatched" representations where chosen? It almost seems like the photo was meant to be very "pro-9mm."

iunno. when i see this chart i always take away that each caliber does something different. the wound channels are different. the permanent wound channels are different. penetration seems to be about equal throughout. just depends on what you believe and want from a round. of course not all hp ammo is created equal.

when i look at the chart it seems that it favors the 357 sig, the 40, and the 45 over the 9mm

and of the selections, the lighter bullets seem to do more "damage". a swat spd cop recommend the 124gr in 9mm for gold dots for my personal carry. i'm not sure if they carry 165 or 180 in off duty carry.

warnerwh · Dec 27, 2009

That chart looks to me like it is anti 9mm. The other 4 rounds' wound channels are similar but the 9mm rounds wound channels are significantly smaller. I'm missing on how you would think that chart is "pro 9mm".