I want to make sure that I understand the wounding mechanics of firearms correctly, therefore tell me if I got something wrong. So, tissue is not water, and we should forget this bullshit about ripples and whatnot. Animal tissue -as the name suggests- is rather similar to fabric; but it's not woven into a pattern, instead the cells are connected at a molecular level, therefore it's a lot more elastic, like a rope. You stretch it a bit, and maybe it gets a bit damaged, but still just goes back to its original form. You stretch it a lot more, and it "snaps". The temporary cavity is caused by this strechting, and it hardly matters if it's not enough to "snap" the tissue. If it's enough to "snap" the tissue, then nasty things happen. Rifle rounds have enough something to be "snappy", but pistol rounds lack it. Therefore the later can only rely on the damage done by the path of the projectile -the permanent wound cavity-, and in that case the wounding mechanism is roughly similar to stabbing someone with e.g. a screwdriver. Is this a fundamentally correct -albeit very unscientific- perspective?
>160 grains is awfully small for a 45. Even if it could reach that velocity it may not perform as well as you might think.
It's the kind of thing that has to be tested in practice. If my understanding is correct, and it has the speed, weight and energy to be "snappy", then it should work.