Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Beretta M9/92F: OSA's Opinion
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ez bake" data-source="post: 1615203" data-attributes="member: 229"><p>Understood but the thing is, I'll never shoot a FMJ or cheaper (read out-dated technology) JHP round for self-defense. I'd go a step further and say that I'd probably never use a non +P 9mm round for self-defense (and since the Beretta 92/M9 can easily handle +P rounds, that's what I'll shoot in it for SD). </p><p></p><p>So at that point, there is definitely a difference between what I'm shooting in my M9 vs. what others are shooting in their 1911s/G21s/etc., but is it significant with regard to stopping an enemy? I don't particularly think its significant enough to give up the lower recoil/muzzle-flip (especially for CCW) and capacity. I'm not super concerned with the weight issue (larger/stronger frame required and heavier ammo).</p><p></p><p>There's plenty of tests out there with everything from water jugs, to dry-wall, to dead animals that prove that a Speer Gold Dot +P 9mm (124Gr), or Federal HydraShok +P (124Gr), or even a Winchester Ranger +P+ 127Gr do more than enough damage to be considered good bad-guy stoppers. These are modern-day rounds that have proven that 9mm has come a long way since a lot of the bad-press it got in the 70s and 80s (and WW-II <img src="/images/smilies/biggrin.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" data-shortname=":D" /> ). </p><p></p><p>At that point, what good does a bigger/deeper hole in the bad-guy do you? Especially when you start having to give up things like capacity, and you add more recoil/muzzle-flip?</p><p></p><p>Why aren't we having the .45ACP vs. .500S&W / .454 Casull / .460 S&W debate? Because there is a balance between how much energy you need vs. how much capacity and control you need.</p><p></p><p>Whatever your caliber is, cool - but I'd love to read one of these threads without hearing all the bashing based on hearsay and 20 year old write-ups.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ez bake, post: 1615203, member: 229"] Understood but the thing is, I'll never shoot a FMJ or cheaper (read out-dated technology) JHP round for self-defense. I'd go a step further and say that I'd probably never use a non +P 9mm round for self-defense (and since the Beretta 92/M9 can easily handle +P rounds, that's what I'll shoot in it for SD). So at that point, there is definitely a difference between what I'm shooting in my M9 vs. what others are shooting in their 1911s/G21s/etc., but is it significant with regard to stopping an enemy? I don't particularly think its significant enough to give up the lower recoil/muzzle-flip (especially for CCW) and capacity. I'm not super concerned with the weight issue (larger/stronger frame required and heavier ammo). There's plenty of tests out there with everything from water jugs, to dry-wall, to dead animals that prove that a Speer Gold Dot +P 9mm (124Gr), or Federal HydraShok +P (124Gr), or even a Winchester Ranger +P+ 127Gr do more than enough damage to be considered good bad-guy stoppers. These are modern-day rounds that have proven that 9mm has come a long way since a lot of the bad-press it got in the 70s and 80s (and WW-II :D ). At that point, what good does a bigger/deeper hole in the bad-guy do you? Especially when you start having to give up things like capacity, and you add more recoil/muzzle-flip? Why aren't we having the .45ACP vs. .500S&W / .454 Casull / .460 S&W debate? Because there is a balance between how much energy you need vs. how much capacity and control you need. Whatever your caliber is, cool - but I'd love to read one of these threads without hearing all the bashing based on hearsay and 20 year old write-ups. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Beretta M9/92F: OSA's Opinion
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom