Today is 7-11-23. Some think “7-11” is a lucky number. Stream of consciousness takes us to Lucky Gunner, a deservedly successful company, which hosts Chris Baker as a resident expert. Chris is not only a nice guy, but a rising star in the firearms world – an excellent shot, an articulate writer, and an innovative thinker. Here’s the result of a test he did on a hotly-debated concept in shooting. Definitely worth a read for the thinking shooter.
That was a very interesting article. Good information, although it won’t change what I carry. As an instructor, it is helpful to know more about how different action types and barrel designs can affect felt recoil and recovery.
I don’t care for Chris and he’s made very clear in multiple video’s he has an irrational hatred for 357Sig, 357Mag, revolvers, 44Mag etc. He’s a 9mm apologist and cultist. I once challenged him with facts on the Lucky Gunner forum on the effectiveness of properly loaded 357Sig ammo and the conversation rapidly regressed until he deleted all his comments. My issue with this “rising star” and especially his Lucky Gunner Labs tests is he rigged the tests in a way that would show the outcome he wanted by excluding ammo he knew would upset his bias. For example he refused to test Cor-Bon, Double Tap, Buffalo Bore or Underwoods 357 Sig ammo, all readily available at the time, and then concluded with…357Sig isn’t as good as 9mm and barely had higher velocity! That’s enough to prove his clown status however he excluded, again widely and readily available Federal 125gr (S)JHP 357b, and then on the outset gave a failing grade to the Remington 125gr SJHP 357mag because it only went 13.5″ inches and didn’t meet his liking…and then said 357Mag had too much recoil and it’s benefits aren’t enough to choose over a 9mm. Anyone with 5 minutes of knowledge and experience knows what the legendary 357mag 125g SJHP is capable of from Mas to Marshal and Sanow and an unknown number of LEOs who’ve unfortunately/fortunately has to use this particular round, I’ve literally spoke with a few BP and one Texas DPS Trooper who’ve all said the same thing…one shot with the 357mag 125gr SJHP and their perps dropped ! This guys another fraud that’s passing as an “expert” or “knowledgeable” and reputable voice in the “2a community”…nothing can be further than the truth.
Biker Bob,
Your resorting to personal attacks on Chris Baker—“clown” and “fraud”—only undermines the rationality of your own arguments and casts a somewhat negative view upon what you’ve written, so much so that it is the primary reason for this response. A review of Chris’ quest to find the “world’s best revolver” showed him testing a variety of .357s before settling on his preferred carry gun(revolver), an S&W spec’d out to his preferences. It seems unlikely that a true “hater” of the .357 would have spent countless hours testing a variety of wheel guns with the .357. In addition, a fast glance of the ballistic tests on Lucky Gunner reveals no obvious negative biases against the .357. Calling out the Remington’s 13.5” penetration performance in ballistic gel is fair, for it can be viewed as marginal penetration, but this is only one factor when evaluating a round—that said, there are other rounds clearly superior to the Remington you happened to cite. And the recoil issue between the .357 and the 9mm is “a real thing,” as they say, a valid consideration which does not necessarily mean that someone opting for the 9mm over the .357 for a particular use is dismissing the .357 as a viable cartridge—definitely one of the best (arguably “the” best, depending on how one defines “best”) round when used by truly capable shooters. Furthermore, your mention of the iconic 125gr SJHP .357 magnum as a “one-shot stopper,” conveys an anachronistic point-of-view which serious research has for the most point refuted. I’m a big fan of the .357, and the 125gr SJHP is indeed one of the best rounds ever created for that caliber (as is the 158gr .38 lead hollow point), and it has no doubt served in some instances with one-shot stopping power, as evidenced by the examples you offer; however, ballistic research, tests, and even empirical evidence all show that your examples are the exception, not the rule. Your accusation that Chris is a 9mm “cultist,” is says more about you than about Chris, Biker Bob. Based on ballistic evidence from the mid-1980s forward, and significantly improved ammunition, the 9mm has evolved into a legitimate round (Speer’s 124+P Gold Dot and Federal’s 124 HST are two often-used examples), and these developments have won over many to the use of the 9mm. However, advocating for the 9mm hardly makes one a “cultist.” You seem to be overly hung-up on the old this vs that cartridge comparison game, Biker Bob, in a time when research supports the fact that, within reason, shooters’ skills at hitting their targets trumps caliber choice. Convinced of its practicality and performance—impressive ballistics, pistol offerings with adequate round counts, and even relative cost—a growing number have elected to drink the 9mm Kool-Aid, and for good reason. That said, like many others, I remain an avid admirer of the .357 magnum but have no issues being so while continuing to make use of the 9mm as a more practical tool in some situations, and this admittedly considers shooters’ limitations. Your concluding statement can be taken as an insult to the 2A community, Biker Bob, for each member of that community is capable of evaluating voices competing for attention without unsound “filtering” help. Chris Baker and Lucky Gunner have has created an admirable body of work comprised stemming from countless hours of expense and hard work. Both he and Lucky Gunner are to be commended for having creating this invaluable resource and for freely sharing it with the 2A community. That said, please provide the readers of this blog with the URL which will take us to your body of work, Biker Bob.
Glen congratulations you typed out Biker Bob to point out what? You too are a clown , I also mentioned people from Mas to Marshal and Sanow and countless numbers of POs who had to use the 125gr SJHP 357mag where the one shot stop has been proven over and over . And no it’s not a this vs that caliber comparison…it’s fact vs fantasy. Again if you took the time to honestly review all his videos and posts he does in fact make himself a 9mm cultist…he proves this with every video whenever he compares or tests any caliber and finishes with a statement how 9mm is better than the rest. I’ve seen how ineffective 9mm is, unless you get a luck shot or mag dump someone, when I was on the NYC Housing Police and then the NYPD after April 30, 1995. So yeah this Biker Bob he’s been there and done that and I’ve listened and read Mas’ material who you are now invalidating as well as anyone else who’s written on the near excellence of the 125gr SJHP 357mag. Glen just stick to your fantasy and years of YouTube experience.
Bob,
Your first 5 words disqualify the rest of your post, if you are being honest. When you are talking about a post by someone like this one by Chris Baker here, you have to step away from your bias about the person and your feelings about him or her. I understand that you don’t trust his judgement on tests of this type, based on his methodology. That is fine discuss, but not really acceptable to say you dislike the man.
In my opinion on his research, I agree with you, but for different reasons. Like you, I think his sample size was too small, but I also find that the entire research is flawed, because the entire idea of recoil is just to subjective, and while my first handgun, a Radom P64, a straight blowback 9mm Makarov, kicked like a rented mule, taught me to handle recoil from every handgun that I have shot since with no problem, others who have fired it thought it was a monster that they hated.
We have of course all heard the stories of the 100 pound women who shoot heavy recoiling handguns with no problem. So for a test like this by Chris I find basically meaningless, and distracting of those who might take it as gospel and allow it to steer them away from choosing a combination of gun and ammunition that would be the best fit for their circumstances.
Please remember that I am not an expert, nor am I holding myself out as any kind of authority. I say all of this merely as an observer who has been shooting for some time, and studying the topic for the same time or longer.
I accurately pointed out that he is a fraud and added my opinion he is a clown…watch his videos he worships at the alter of 9mm and he doesn’t hide it…nor does his miss an opportunity to downplay and down talk every other round besides the 9mm.
Guys, let’s lighten up on the ad hominem stuff. I know Mr. Baker, and can tell you he’s an honorable, honest man and an excellent shot. Differences of opinion come from different test results and different research on different shootings. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t mean he’s a clown, it only means we disagree. Let’s do so respectfully please.
I agree Bob, on all points. Not a fan of Chri or his work. I carry only 357 Sig and have for 20 years. Just my preference. God forbid I ever have to use my pistol but if I do I want every advantage
I’ll occasionally carry a 686+ with the proven 125gr SJHP 357mag however I EDC the majority of the time a P229 with Underwood 125gr Gold Dot 357Sig for the same reason as you! Stay safe out there.
Well….I find Chris Baker brings many refreshing perspectives to the subject of firearms, while one may not agree with all or any of his findings, I find his approach pretty fair minded and realistic. I’ve carried .45 auto for years, carried .357 off duty for years, shot a lot with both. Shot and carried 9mm, .380, .38 spl.
Now at 73, these guns are getting heavy, harder to shoot as well as they used to, and generally becoming a substantial issue where they once were not when it comes to carrying and accurately shooting them.
I now understand why .22’s and .22 magnums are viable carry firearms whereas before I had thought them irrelevant to the CCW community.
Chris Baker, Greg Ellifritz and others have shed some light on the realities of deadly encounters based on their research, which does much agree with what I experienced and what I am seeing now.
I think we can acquire knowledge from many different sources and thankfully draw our own conclusions based on the research of others.
I’ll listen to and learn from anyone who is knowledgeable and intelligent….I also pick up on alot of BS and inconsistencies when people start outing themselves, it’s the old cop in me I guess, so nonI don’t blindly trust anyone especially when they present a constant and consistent bias. As for heavier guns I agree and one day I may get there so I’ll cross that bridge before long. The problem with the accuracy argument is it’s not something the overwhelming majority of people can consistently count on or perform under intense stress and especially when they are getting shot at on that two way range. Yes accuracy is important however I’ve never seen one perp stop and stand still so a PO or citizen can get that perfectly placed shot. And that’s why the 125gr SJHP 357mag, and point shooting, are extremely effective…the SJHP does what no JHP can do or match period. As a matter of fact Mas did a great interview with Lieut. Bob Stasch Chicago PD(Ret) where he talks about his 14 +/- shootings and how he used point shooting every or almost every time.
Wondering if perhaps the “leaking” of some of the charge as it reaches the gap between the forward end of the cylinder and the rearward end of the barrel itself might be what seems to cause the more pronounced barrel lift in revolvers. If that is the case, lnger barrels will tend to accentuate the issue because of the lever effect. It is trapped in the barrel for a bit more time, but even if the barrel lifts the same angular distance when it is longer the actual lift at the muzzle will be greater,
If that’s the case, for a given shooter to stay with a more consistent barrel length he will likely do better at auto-compensating for different distances
Fun stuff, a tad on the nerdy side of things, but then when one is wanting the highest levels of accuracy nerdsville does need to be visited more frequently.
Tionico, you bring up an idea that MIGHT explain why a lighter load with a lighter bullet from a .45 Colt single-action revolver MAY print substantially HIGHER on a target than a much heavier load with a heavier bullet. Tightness of gripping of the handle could obviously be a factor, too, I am sure. Ideas to work on while you are trying to plan shots to print close to the same spot with a variety of loads without standing on your head. Careful doing this while you are riding one of the new 12-pound bicycles that you once mentioned. I have to try one of those light bikes, though. My old Schwinn mountain bike is sturdy, and not bad to shoot from (when necessary, legal, and appropriate, of course) but is a lot heavier than 12 pounds!
The camera work was interesting, but……………….. If you’re a revolver shooter you’re well aware that a heavier bullet impacts the target higher and a lighter bullet lower than the standard loads in caliber. Unless you change the sights. This suggests that rotation does start when the bullets still in the barrel. Height of the barrel axis might also affect this.
I never really saw all that much difference in shot placement with different loads in semis. Possibly because the changes in bullet weight/velocity were less percentage wise in combination with at least a somewhat lower bore axis. I vaguely recall testing for free 147 gr 9 mm ammo and was surprised to find it impacted a wee bit lower than the more common 115/124 gr bullets. Group was on the dots rather than top of the post. At least on that day.
To summarize Mr. Baker’s findings:
1) He found that, with semi-automatic pistols, the frame did not rotate vertically until after the bullet had exited the bore. Thus, vertical frame movement did not affect the path of the bullet.
2) He found, with revolvers, that rotation did occur before the bullet exited the bore and that vertical frame movement could be a factor contributing to the path of the bullet.
If you think about it, this is exactly what one should expect given the Laws of Physics.
We know from Newton’s Third Law of Motion that the gas pressure that forces the bullet down the bore acts, with equal force, against the firearm.
However, with semi-automatic handguns, there is a delay in transmitting this force to the frame of the pistol. The initial force is used to:
A) Unlock the breech (if a locked breech design).
B) Move the slide backwards and eject the spent cartridge.
C) Compress the recoil spring.
Only after doing these initial actions does the recoil force finally get transmitted into the frame of the firearm. These actions delay the opening of the breech until the bullet exits the bore. Otherwise, it would be an unsafe design.
So, naturally, with semi-automatic pistols, the bullet will exit the bore before the recoil force gets transmitted into the frame so as to cause vertical rotation. The small time delay in transmitting recoil force into the pistol frame is what allows semi-auto pistol frames to remain stationary until after the bullet exits.
With revolvers, the barrel and frame are monolithic. There are no “moving parts” to delay transmission of recoil force into the frame. The frame “feels” recoil immediately and, thus, starts to recoil backwards (and vertically) immediately. Therefore, revolvers do move vertically before the bullet can exit the bore. There is no “time delay” to provide a “grace period” before a revolver gets hit with recoil forces.
I expect that any monolithic barrel/frame handgun design would react the same as a revolver. For example, if Mr. Baker had tested a single shot pistol design, say a T/C Contender, I expect that he would have found that the Contender also rotates vertically (a bit) before the bullet exits the bore. A Contender would be like a revolver. It also does not have any moving parts to make for a time delay in transmission of recoil force to the pistol frame.
It is all physics, folks!
TN_MAN,
Thanks for solving the mystery, Magic Man!
Different loads have different points of impact, particularly different bullet weights. Assuming the target is close enough that gravity’s effect on the bullet is negligible, heavier bullets tend to print higher.
So it appears that he’s trying to use high speed cameras to observe the recoil raising the muzzle upwards slightly before the bullet has left the barrel.
Well I like Chris. But seeing as how revolver barrel length and auto barrel lengths are measured differently, I would think he would need to compare to a shorter snubby revolver to make all things equal. I could be wrong.
Think it was the late great Chuck Taylor who wrote:
‘The laws of physics are a bit hard to argue with’.
Ignoring EVERYTHING else. Can you carry, hit anything, afford, practice, buy, carry more rounds……
Is it as simple that the more foot pounds a bullet has, the more damage it does?
I again am not an expert, but I think that it is much more complicated than that. Expansion is also a factor, since a bullet with more foot pounds that punches through a target does not cause as much damage as a bullet that expands and stays within the target, leaving a wider wound channel.
I say again, I am not an expert, and I might be totally wrong. I also apologize to both Bob and Mas for my perhaps curt words in my first response. I did not mean to be so harsh in my phrasing, and am sorry at my poor manners.
“Is it as simple that the more foot pounds a bullet has, the more damage it does?”
No, it is not that simple. Bullet performance/wounding ability is an extremely complex subject. Numerous factors (bullet material, bullet shape, bullet design, bullet momentum, bullet kinetic energy, impact velocity, location of hit, size/health of target, mental state of target, etc. etc. etc.) go into bullet performance.
Even today, after more than a century of study, we only have a limited handle on this complex topic.
If you are interested in this topic, the best reference (that I know) is the book ‘Bullet Penetration’ by Duncan MacPherson. The ebook (Kindle) version of this book can be found at this link:
https://www.amazon.com/Bullet-Penetration-Modeling-Incapacitation-Resulting-ebook/dp/B00L7CSV7E/ref=sr_1_1?crid=GGJ373J16K9B&keywords=bullet+penetration&qid=1689192089&s=books&sprefix=bullet+penetration%2Cstripbooks%2C107&sr=1-1
However, I should warn you that Mr. MacPherson is, literally, a “Rocket Scientist”. He has done work for NASA. His book includes the technical mathematics of a bullet penetrating soft semi-solid materials like gelatin or human tissue. I hold degrees in both Mechanical and Civil Engineering and, still, I found the book took effort to wade through and understand.
Still, it is the best technical reference, on this topic, that I know. Even so, I don’t take everything that he writes as gospel. He uses a linear method to translate amount of tissue damage, in cattle, down to human scale. I disagree with this approach which he supports only with Occam’s razor rather than with firm science.
nicholas kane,
Mas taught us that stopping power is unpredictable. He knows of one instance where, if memory serves, a mutant was shot with two loads of 12-gauge buckshot, and then a slug. He lived. He was able to remain a threat for so long because he was on drugs that dulled the pain.
My opinion is, I want .45 ACP in a full size semi-auto, .357 Magnum in a full-size revolver, 9mm Luger in a small semi-auto, and .38 Special +P in a snubnose revolver. Will I consider .25 ACP and .22 Magnum if I become feeble? You bet I will. Also, my preferences are not set in stone. I would be happy with any gun that goes bang when I pull the trigger.
Conclusion = Keep aiming at vital areas, and keep firing, until the threat goes away.
I would like to offer an engineer’s perspective. Momentum of the firearm must be conserved. At the instant the gun is fired and the bullet has just stared to move, the momentum of the gun is zero, i.e., it is not moving. Until there is an outside force, the momentum must remain zero.
Just before the bullet leaves the barrel, the bullet has increased in velocity and hence, has momentum, but the total momentum of the gun and bullet must remain zero, because there has been no force on the gun to change its momentum.
Since the momentum of the bullet is not zero, the momentum of the gun must be equal and opposite to that of the bullet, so that the total momentum remains zero. This requires that the gun begins moving before the bullet leaves the barrel.
I just want to put our little disagreements in perspective. The reason we can argue about everything gun-related, is because the people who came before us created a wealthy country, so we can think about more than just clean water and abundant food. We are blessed with so many choices. I’m sure many people in most nations would be happy to have ANY gun that worked. Having single shot weapons might be a big step up for them. So yeah, we have First World problems, and that is a beautiful thing!!! I hope we are always so spoiled.
Although Mr. Baker’s article attempts to offer some insight into the relationship between recoil, muzzle rise, & the point of bullet impact, I fail to see why any of this is relevant to practical shooting. Regardless of whether or not a bullet exits a barrel before or after the muzzle begins to rise, it should make little or no difference to the shooter.
For instance, if the firearm has adjustable sights, you simply sight it in at a gun range so that the bullets impact where you want them to with whatever ammunition & sight picture you choose to use. If the firearm does not have adjustable sights & does not shoot to point of aim with the ammunition that you want to use, you make note of where they do impact & adjust your aim accordingly to make the bullets impact where you want them to, or switch to a different type of ammunition that comes closer to impacting at the point of aim.
As far as accuracy is concerned, that can certainly be affected by how the firearm is being held, but I think the effect of recoil on accuracy is more likely to be noticed if it causes the shooter to flinch or to be distracted from having a proper trigger pull before the gun has actually fired. As for shooting in self-defense, it seems to me that the speculations which have been offered so far would be the least of a shooter’s concerns, especially when trying to hit a moving assailant (or assailants) while trying to avoid being injured or killed himself.
From this perspective, Mr. Baker’s findings, while entertaining, seem to me to be irrelevant.
“From this perspective, Mr. Baker’s findings, while entertaining, seem to me to be irrelevant.”
You are correct. By adjusting the sights and/or selecting brand/type of ammunition, an experienced shooter can generally make ANY handgun shoot to the desired point-of-aim with adequate accuracy for defensive purposes. Therefore, this test by Mr. Baker is largely irrelevant from a practical point-of-view.
However, it is interesting from a technical point-of-view.
There is one practical point of application. The “time delay” in transmitting recoil force into the pistol frame due to the design of semi-automatic handguns acts to spread the recoil impulse over a greater period of time. Thus, the hand of the shooter receives a slower shove versus the “hard punch” of recoil from a revolver.
Combine this with the fact that semi-auto designs generally have a lower bore axis than revolver designs which also works to limit vertical climb. As a result, most people generally find that semi-auto pistols are easier to control, under recoil, and easier to shoot faster than revolvers of comparable power levels.
However, does this actually give an advantage under combat condition? Is shooting fast important? It may be very important if facing multiple attackers. If facing a single threat, perhaps less so.
Back in 1989, the magazine ‘Police Marksman’ did a reader survey to collect a database of accounts of actual shooting incidents. They looked at such things as (a) number of rounds fired per caliber and (b) single-shot effectiveness given a torso hit.
The findings are interesting especially when comparing the 357 magnum caliber (revolver round for the most part) with the 9mm Luger caliber (semi-auto for the most part).
For the 357 magnum users, the average number of shots fired, per incident, was 2.3 rounds. For 9mm users, the average number of shots fired, per incident, was 5.5 rounds. For 357 magnum users, the single shot effectiveness (irrespective of specific brand/type of ammo) was 71.4% with a torso hit. For 9mm, the number was 55.5%.
These numbers seem to suggest that, generally, one can end a fight, with fewer rounds expended, by using a 357 magnum revolver than with the fast shooting 9mm Luger semi-auto’s. Given that there is a “lawyer attached to every round fired” in a defensive shooting, the lower round count is a liability bonus too.
However, if facing multiple attackers, the fast shooting/controllable recoil, and larger magazine capacity of the 9mm semi-auto’s would be a clear advantage.
So what to think? It seems that in a self-defense situation where one is facing a single (or at most two) opponents, the old fashioned 357 magnum revolver may be the superior equipment choice. Facing a mob or a gang with multiple opponents, the large capacity 9mm would likely be superior.
The police have dropped the revolver in favor of the semi-auto for general duty use. Is that because the police expect to have to deal with mobs or organized criminal gangs in today’s World? Or is it because the new generation of semi-automatics are lighter to carry (polymer frame), easier to shoot, and (generally) cheaper to purchase than duty-size revolvers.
Everyone seems to assume that revolvers are “old technology” and have been made totally obsolete by the latest polymer-frame wonder-nines. I question as to whether this is true or not.
For the record, my last handgun purchase was a S&W 686-Plus in 357 Magnum. Read into that what you will! 🙂
Just noting that he acknowledged this:
“I’ll go ahead and tell you up front that, regardless of the answer, there is not a whole lot of practical application here for the average shooter. This is something gun nerds debate on occasion. We’re going to have fun finding out the answer. But for shooting handguns at typical handgun distances, it doesn’t matter much.”
That does it! I can’t carry a snubby anymore…..
As i was perusing the comments i was starting to wonder if Mas’s interview of Lt. Bob Stasch from Chicago PD was still available on the pro arms podcast channel on YouTube. For some reason I’m reminded of it any time i hear anything about proven loads in handguns, same for the nypd stakeout squad interviews any time i hear about shotguns. If nothing is everything, but everything is something, then I’d like to make sure i can bring everything to bear whenever i do anything, and the article by Mr. Baker was definitely worth something.
Still available on the ProArms Podcast YouTube channel.
I am 73 and started carrying a 9mm LCR because my 3” 357 SP 101 was getting too heavy to carry and too hard to shoot. I see a 38 in my future. I enjoy reading the comments, if thoughtful and backed up by some science. The personal attacks just make the person spouting them seem small minded and bitter, they don’t win any arguments.
Comments are closed.