The Best Handgun Caliber - A Real World Study

[Jonnyuma]

Small break from our regularly scheduled programming...

Actually, those big bore revolvers were horse stoppers. If it worked to stop the animal, it was considered enough to drop a man.

Horses were considered enemy combatants and subject to all of the violence and indignities of battle as soldiers. It wasn't unusual to butt-stroke a hated cavalry mount right in the teeth or spike it w a lance to get the equally hated and feared soldier on his feet... off his high horse, you might say.

Please... continue

 

[Certaindeaf]

As my dad would say, " it's not the noise that kills them.."

Yeabut as the great Sgt. Nambu always said, "The louder the boom, the deeper the tomb!".

Amen

 

[Certaindeaf]

Small break from our regularly scheduled programming...
Horses were considered enemy combatants and subject to all of the violence and indignities of battle as soldiers. It wasn't unusual to butt-stroke a hated cavalry mount right in the teeth or spike it w a lance to get the equally hated and feared soldier on his feet... off his high horse, you might say.

Please... continue

This is why Buffalo Soldiers came into being.













not really

 

[OldBroad44]

I didn't look at the sample sizes for the different calibers, but if you consider they are in the hundreds or thousands per caliber, the effectiveness of the different bullet designs averages out over the sample.

I DID look at the sample sizes per caliber, and they are only tens to a few hundred per caliber, not thousands per caliber. Half the calibers are less than 100. The total for all calibers is less than 1800. The conclusion that caliber doesn't matter depends upon differences less than 10% being statistically not significant. (Not the 5% video guy mentions.) However neither video or original study show any statistics.

However, if a research question is improperly formulated or the study design is flawed, the results are flawed, no matter how large the sample size.

How can we tell that the results or conclusions of a study are flawed? One way is when it omits factors we expect to be relevant without including data to show the factors don't matter. In this case, for example, we should believe this study only if we believe that hardball ammo is just as effective at killing or incapacitating as jhp bullets designed for self defense. And there is no reason to assume that different designs would average out over calibers. For a study to be valid, you have to prove factors that are known to matter don't affect your results before you omit them, not assume it.

A second indicator that a study is flawed is when one or more of the conclusions are contrary to fact. When this happens, all the results are questionable. This study says that .22 is just as effective at incapacitating or killing than any of the larger calibers, if anything more effective than all of them. If you reject that, you have to reject the entire study as fatally flawed. If you accept that .22 is just as effective as all the larger calibers, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

One other thing to remember is that numbers and some studies do not take into account what a bullet will actually do on real live flesh and bone.

Case in point...though not directly a "self defense" example.
If you look at ballistic charts , tables , videos etc... of a muzzleloading round ball ...it does not seem near as effective as a modern bullet when viewed thru a chart , table etc...
But....
Folks have kept themselves fed for centuries with a muzzleloading firearm.
I myself have killed game with a muzzleloader...the critters are just as dead with my round ball , as if they were hit with the newest and most proficient bullet ( on paper ) .
Don't be swayed by numbers , charts and such alone....

Where the projectile hits is very important...just what it actually does while hitting the body is just as or even more important.
Andy

 

[revjen45]

The results depend on the quality of the input (like, duh), and the input on bullet types wasn't part of the available information. In the absence of reliable data informed conclusions will have to do. Given sufficient MV to penetrate and open up a JHP is "better" than FMJ. .32ACP really IS a mousegun, a .380 a bit less so, and anything <.45 (according to the Cooperite branch of the faith). I find that arthritis limits the weight of what I can carry, so at home I sacrifice power for convenience (long guns and bigger sidearms available). If faced with 240# angry methhead (I think it's one word) my choice would be 12 ga with #00 or #000 but that's not easy to carry.

 

[GRMPS]

The Best Handgun Caliber - A Real World Study









Fail rate basically the same rate – regardless 14% fight through pain/damage and keep on coming





Rifle & Shotgun 2 out of 3 times












22 worst possible choice by far—fail to stop 1 in 3 attackers



45 lags behind pistol average for 1 shot stops



380 beast hand gun averages in lethality and 1 shot stops to the head or torso



Stay away from the mouse calibers their failure rate is just to high





357 mag slight advantage in 1 shot stops

 

[GRMPS]

Only rifle penetrate level 3 body armor

 

[CHLChris]

I watched this video. Thanks so much for putting all of this visual information on this thread.

I think the bottom line is that they did NOT answer the first question. There really is no best handgun caliber. Carry every day and whatever you have chambered on the day the balloon goes up is the best caliber!!

 

[Geardo]

So based on the 1 shot stop, I should carry a .32 acp with a binary trigger

 

[GRMPS]

According to the video and data.

380 has the best handgun averages in lethality and 1 shot stops to the head or torso

You need to watch the video for a better understanding

 

[DuneHopper]

I was kinda surprised, while the 357 does well, really interesting stuff. Surprised at the list on some items.

 

[thorborg]

I'm disappointed he didn't include my bugout gun in the stats: 45-70 with reflex.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Didn't have to click.

 

[Cerberus Group]

According to the video and data.

380 has the best handgun averages in lethality and 1 shot stops to the head or torso

You need to watch the video for a better understanding

Someone else posted the same video / info a week or so ago.

Problem with the data, not enough info. No bullet performance, crush cavity damage, distance to target, media bullet encountered etc. Without the above, easy to skew the results.

Example...if most of the 380 rounds were head shots, it would read that the 380 is a superior caliber due to one shot stops.

 

[DirectDrive]

The Best Handgun Caliber - A Real World Study
See post #3

 

[Certaindeaf]

.
Example...if most of the 380 rounds were head shots, it would read that the 380 is a superior caliber due to one shot stops.

Most people probably commit suicide with a .380 because it's a loser cartridge to begin with.











lol JK

 

[Cerberus Group]

The Best Handgun Caliber - A Real World Study
See post #3

See posts 10 & 14

 

[Cerberus Group]

Most people probably commit suicide with a .380 because it's a loser cartridge to begin with.

lol JK

Uh...hmmmmm....I have no words.
But....yep, kinda sorta roughly

 

[edzz]

Someone else posted the same video / info a week or so ago.

Problem with the data, not enough info. No bullet performance, crush cavity damage, distance to target, media bullet encountered etc. Without the above, easy to skew the results.

Example...if most of the 380 rounds were head shots, it would read that the 380 is a superior caliber due to one shot stops.

But, but, he did charts and made a video...

He also seems to assume that in a bug out situation the .22 rifles purpose would be for defense. Want to bet he's a city boy?

Why on earth would anyone want a good small game rifle that is easy for most anyone to use and have good hits at ranges that are difficult for most people with a handgun.

He also apparently lumps all .22's into the same bar on his graph. I'm sorry to point out that a bullet fired from my Bernardelli vest pocket .22 short is going to perform quite differently than a CCI .22 Stinger from my Mossberg 146b.

I could ramble on and on (as the video did) and dispute most of the "points" made in this "study". If he wanted to describe his published report as his personal / opinions observations based on a statistically small and flawed batch of somewhat random data I'd find it much easier to swallow than trying to represent it as a "study".