magnum bullets in handguns: practical or impractical?




View Poll Results :practical or not?
yes 7 58.33%
no 5 41.67%
Voters: 12. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
 
July 29th, 2005  
ONERING
 

Topic: magnum bullets in handguns: practical or impractical?


Currently today the standard 9mm is doing no good in a battlefield. Has there been a consideration of putting more power bullets like .357, .44 .50 in pistols instead? Is this practical and i dont mean impractical like taking a desert eagle .50 into a battlefield. Has there been consideration of a standard caliber change and conversions for magnum bullets?
July 29th, 2005  
Armyjaeger
 
 
The whole idea of using pistol in combat sounds quite desperate to me but I woulnd't know, Im not an urban warfare expert. As for that desert eagle I don't think its very practical, not only that its damned heavy for a pistol but kicks like a beaten mule atleast from what I've seen.
July 29th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Well I've never been a fan of the 9mm but I'm sure a few millitaries would disagree with you. 'magnum' just means more than average powder behind the round so sure it's practical to see a 9mm magnum on the battlefield.

I'm happier with my .45 though.

EDIT: He knows the desert eagle isn't practical that's his point. He's asking is a magnum practical or is it just a show thing like a desert eagle?
--
July 29th, 2005  
bushpig1998
 
 
The problem with magnums are that they require re-inforced weapons to fire them, and that they kick quite a bit - not good if you want to do quick follow up shots.
The main problem with the 9mm is not the calibre, it is the design of the ammunition - and the fact that we can't us HP ammo. Look at the russian Tokarevs - cut through anything and not a whole lot of knockdown power, but it will cut through most body armour. Maybe we should switch to 9mm +p ammo - or just go to 10mm or .45 (again).
The 9mm and the 5.56 Nato are perfect for highly mobile forces. Light weapons systems with good range and easy to use.Ammo is also plentiful. I would, however, replace the M9 with something more robust - maybe a glock .
July 29th, 2005  
Missileer
 
 
I'd like to see a practical .40 or .45 magnum not only for stopping power but for penetration of various materials.
July 30th, 2005  
sleepyscout
 
 
magnums= weight for starters and larger magazines wich mean larger pistols wich means more bulk. bulk+weight=bad
The recoil generated by using a larger powder charge is going to mean less rounds on target because of the time taken to reaim. pistols are hard to aim and you cant expect first shot hits so when engaging a target with a pistol you want to get as many aimed shots as possible. I would rather hit the enemy 4times with a 9mm then ounce with a magnum.

I read in the army times that the army is looking to go back to a 45cal because 9mm ball ammo blows. Pistols have limited combat use, with limited take down potential and extremely short range. The m4 does the job just fine, nothing like shooting some one in the ass and having it come out his shoulder.
July 30th, 2005  
Kozzy Mozzy
 

Topic: Re: magnum bullets in handguns: practical or impractical?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ONERING
Currently today the standard 9mm is doing no good in a battlefield. Has there been a consideration of putting more power bullets like .357, .44 .50 in pistols instead? Is this practical and i dont mean impractical like taking a desert eagle .50 into a battlefield. Has there been consideration of a standard caliber change and conversions for magnum bullets?
Who said the 9mm is doing no good on the battlefield. Most problems with the M9 come from the magazines.
July 31st, 2005  
ONERING
 
9mm can't pierce through car doors. it takes an average of 4 shots at the torso to kill an average man unless you hit him in the heart or the lungs. while for example, if we were able to use 9mm hps then it will reduced the shots to one if aim at the torso. Because the fragments will piece through organs and tear at the flesh, quickly and painfully killing them and saving your life. maybe perhaps you could use flatheaded rounds which will add a more kick to a target.
July 31st, 2005  
Damien435
 
 
Yeah, I was really tired and my allergies were messing with my when writing this. I am just going to erase it because I made myself look like an idiot.
July 31st, 2005  
03USMC
 
 
Huh HP=Hollow Point. HE=High Explosive.

Actually a 9mm Parabellum with Jacketed or Semi Jacketed hollow point ammo has a pretty good knock down rate as compared to 9mm ball which generally over penatrates and fails to leave a tramumatic wound channel.Same thing with the 10mm round in a handgun over penatration, which is why the FBI discontinued the 1006 S&W as a duty weapon. Not to mention the fact the 10mm beats the heck out of the weapon slide and frame.

.45 ACP is a proven stopper. I carry one some of the time for certain details. The .40 S&W is good also thats my day to day weapon and has a good stop record.

As far as Magnums in the military. I could see the .357 for certain roles with the right ammo. Not the .44 or .41.