View Full Version : Am I dumb for having a .45? Obsolete?
BoringGuy45
07-06-14, 23:32
It seems like the general consensus here and many other places in the know is:
1) Pistols suck as fight stoppers and should only be used when long guns are not an option.
2) For all intents and purposes, there's literally no difference that will be made between any pistol cartridges in a firefight.
With that in mind, is there ANY reason why I should continue to own and carry my M&P 45? It seems like switching to a 9mm is all pros and there is absolutely no advantages to owning a 45. I'm seriously thinking that whenever I get some money (if pigs fly that is), I should trade in my 45 and get the 9. Thoughts?
Why switch if that's the case???
BoringGuy45
07-06-14, 23:56
Why switch if that's the case???
Cheaper ammo, larger magazine capacity, less recoil with the 9mm.
I guess what I'm asking is if I'm missing anything. Is there anything I'm getting with my 45 that I would be lacking in a 9mm. Aside from not being able to afford a new pistol at this time, is there any reason for me to keep it when I can get a new one?
Well, a 45 is a proven man-stopper, you have experience with it, 1/3rd less cost is not really significant in a HD/SD role.. Now getting a new pistol is something else altogether.. Don't be a "one gun Charlie" get the 9mm and keep the 45.. JMO
Coal Dragger
07-07-14, 01:21
Cheaper ammo, larger magazine capacity, less recoil with the 9mm.
I guess what I'm asking is if I'm missing anything. Is there anything I'm getting with my 45 that I would be lacking in a 9mm. Aside from not being able to afford a new pistol at this time, is there any reason for me to keep it when I can get a new one?
The modern advancements in self defense and duty ammunition have made 9mm a much more capable platform, but all the 9mm fan boys seem to not mention (or refuse to acknowledge) than the same advancements in bullet design have also been applied to the .45ACP as well. Given equal bullet technology a bigger bullet at typical handgun velocities is going to do more damage to a target.
Personally I am not overly concerned with having as many rounds possible crammed into a magazine, when statistics bear out that most violent encounters are resolved within the first 5 rounds. If you really think you're going to get involved in a running gun battle armed only with a pistol, where you will expend even one full magazine of 15-17 rounds much less additional magazines I'd say you're probably either really foolish for only being armed with a pistol, or really worried about a situation that is very unlikely to occur.
With that in mind I am comfortable carrying .45ACP, since I tend to shoot them well, and I would rather make those first shots that will probably decide the matter be as decisive as I can. I like 9mm's too although I don't currently own one. I don't feel under gunned with either caliber under most circumstances, unless I'm hunting or in an area with large carnivores. In which case I want a magnum revolver anyway.
I disagree with point #2. I think that a larger bullet or a faster bullet could mean the difference between ending the fight or not. For example, there might be a situation where 9mm would not have enough energy to get the job done but .357 Sig would. It would depend on the specific details of the fight.
In general, I would advise picking the gun first and the caliber second. What I'm saying is, I prefer my M1911s in .45 ACP and my Berettas and Hi Powers in 9mm.
In my opinon, an M&P in 9mm is better than an M&P in .45 ACP. I think in some situations the larger round of the 45 would be of benefit, but the advantages of lower recoil and 7 greater rounds of the 9mm are probably more significant. I would probably switch to the 9 or 40 if I were you. It's hard to say anything for certain of course. There could conceivably be a scenario in which the 45 would work out better than the 9.
The M&P45 makes more sense in a state that has a ban on magazines over ten rounds.
In my mind, the only benefit to .45 is in states with magazine capacity laws, like was said above.
I don't know your situation enough to say whether iI think you should make the change. If you can afford it with no hardship, then it's probably worth considering. If money is tight, though, and you're already stocked with ammo and magazines in .45 then it might not be worth it.
It seems like the general consensus here and many other places in the know is:
1) Pistols suck as fight stoppers and should only be used when long guns are not an option.
2) For all intents and purposes, there's literally no difference that will be made between any pistol cartridges in a firefight.
With that in mind, is there ANY reason why I should continue to own and carry my M&P 45? It seems like switching to a 9mm is all pros and there is absolutely no advantages to owning a 45. I'm seriously thinking that whenever I get some money (if pigs fly that is), I should trade in my 45 and get the 9. Thoughts?
Goes back to the age old adage...... shooter's preference. If you are comfortable with the. 45 then stick with it. If you don't have the available funds and had to pick, pick the one you shoot the best. I carry a 1991A1 CDR in 45 with a spare mag. As already mentioned, the first few rounds will decide the situation. This is not Iraq or Afghanistan. The 1911 is designed to be defensive.... with that in mind I would feel more comfortable explaining to a jury of my peers of only carrying the necessary amount of rounds as opposed to a pistol with more than ten rounds. Now in the sandbox it is a different story. Glock 19 or my M9. I was able to carry a M11 Sig during OCONUS and it was a nice pistol.
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2
BoringGuy45
07-07-14, 07:08
In my mind, the only benefit to .45 is in states with magazine capacity laws, like was said above.
I don't know your situation enough to say whether iI think you should make the change. If you can afford it with no hardship, then it's probably worth considering. If money is tight, though, and you're already stocked with ammo and magazines in .45 then it might not be worth it.
I live in a state with no magazine capacity laws (yet), but I often travel to CT, where my parents live and I do have a permit to carry there. As of 2013, I'm limited to 10 rounds there.
What got me thinking about this was shooting an IDPA match and having to reload constantly with my 10 round magazines. Granted, even if you have higher capacity, you're limited to loading 10 rounds to keep it fair. However, when I think about it more, if I were in a real life situation where I was engaging that many targets, I would hope to have a rifle or shotgun to turn to!
I shoot and carry both a G19 and a M&P 45 Middy. I really have no preference of one over the other. I will carry either depending upon the situation and what I'm wearing. When I'm in a class situation I bring both and train with both. I definitely don't see dropping one caliber or the other anytime soon. I'm sure you will get 50 million different opinions and most all of them will make sense. Ultimately you will have to decide what you want to do.
I'm actually heading the other direction - a new M&P45c will likely take the place of my long-time M&P40c for cold weather carry. I'll keep with my Shield 40 for warm weather, at least until a Shield 45 is released. ;)
My reasoning? Winter. If I'm going to have a Gold Dot plug up with outerwear and go all ball on me, I want it to be 230g ball instead of 180g.
Crow Hunter
07-07-14, 08:35
I don't think there is any "magic" involved in pistol rounds that gives the .45 more "stopping power" than a 9mm or any other cartridge as long as there is enough mass and energy to penetrate into the vitals. That being said, a .45 does make a bigger hole than a .355 as the area goes up by the square of the diameter and as such will "let more blood out and more air in" and I believe will give better results with identical shot placement and number of hits.
My decision making has always been which gun/round combination I am the most "effective" with. In other words which one can I get the highest number of fight stopping hits in a vital area in the shortest amount of time.
For me, to date, that has been a Glock 19.
I am always on the lookout for improvements. I actually thought I was going to do that with a M&P9c as I was quite a bit more precise with it slow fire and I thought it felt much better in the hand than my Glock 19 but I was not as accurate shooting quickly or on the move or from odd positions as the Glock seems to line up with my forearm bones a little better. (Prior to settling on the Glock 19 eight or so years ago I went from Glock 21/30, to 23/27, to 19/26 and prior to the Glock I did Sig (.45/.40/9mm) and prior to the Sigs I did Taurus PT92.
So to answer your question, which one will you be more effective with?
Can you run some drills with your .45 and then try someone elses 9mm (or other caliber) in preferrably the same platform?
More capacity is great but not if you actually miss more with the 9mm than the .45 and the same in reverse, if you miss more with the .45 a bigger bullet won't be as effective as a smaller .355 bullet.
If you are like me and can get 3-3.5 or so .355 bullets in the target for every 1.5-2 .45 bullets then the 9mm might make more sense. If you can get the same number in the same amount of time, the .45 makes more sense leaving all the "stopping power" and Taylor index and "One Shot Stops" etc out of the equation.
You need the knock down power.
Cheaper ammo, larger magazine capacity, less recoil with the 9mm.
All great reasons to start with a 9mm. But something made you choose 45 to start with?, maybe that was a valid reason for you. What was it?
The only two reason I see to get a 45 is if you can't get HP ammo or if you have a mag limit in your state.
Shoot what you like. True everyone I have seen is faster with a 9mm compared to a 45acp but if you can be proficient and hit what you need to, by all means carry a .45. Caliber debates are pretty stupid and any trainer worth their paycheck will know that. If he can't teach you to "effectively" run that .45 then he may suggest another caliber but to open up a debate or class by saying "OH, 45's suck." (Yeager) then he's just a short sighted canary.
It's all about how things die and..
Can you hit your target where you need to?
Can you do it weak hand?
Can you do it while moving and at echelon?
I was Die Hard 9mm for years and I'd even argue with people about 9mm over 45, .40 or 10mm. What changed is after carrying for a few years and not having any SD shootings I got bored being so myopic with my gun choices. A dozen+ 9mm's later I bought an hk45 and to my amazement, I enjoyed it and I didn't feel undergunned. 29 out of 30 days I carry 9mm but sometimes i just want something different.
BoringGuy45
07-07-14, 09:30
All great reasons to start with a 9mm. But something made you choose 45 to start with?, maybe that was a valid reason for you. What was it?
The only two reason I see to get a 45 is if you can't get HP ammo or if you have a mag limit in your state.
I started with a 45 because I had the chance to buy a 1911 at a price that was too good to pass up. In keeping with chambering commonality, when I decided to get a duty grade pistol that would be acceptable in my police academy, I went with an M&P 45. This was before Sandy Hook, so the price on 45 was much less of an issue.
The M&P 45 is just fine. Train up your skills as much as possible and put away spare ammo as you can afford. Don't be distracted by non issues.
jpgm
Voodoo_Man
07-07-14, 09:50
...but .45 kills the soul!
Seriously though, ive seen .22s .380s and the like kill with one shot. It's not the caliber, its the accuracy. Train to be accurate under stress and what caliber you carry doesnt matter.
Run what you brung or join the caliber of the month club.
richiecotite
07-07-14, 10:00
You need the knock down power.
I see what you did there....:cool:
If you are strictly asking a home defense question I would have to say sleep with whatever you can hit with the best.
Have you ever heard the old saying "I'd rather be missed with a .45 than hit with a .22"
Big holes mean nothing if they are in the walls and not the bad guy.
But if you are out on the range shoot whatever makes you smile the most.
Best,
Mike
BoringGuy45
07-07-14, 10:58
Well, I CAN shoot follow up shots pretty quickly with my .45 and I'm quite accurate with it. I've been through classes and competition with it and did quite well in both, so I guess that answers my question.
That said, the HK P2000 LEM in 9mm is next on the list of pistols to get. I was quite impressed with it; I just don't have the money.
I started with a 45 because I had the chance to buy a 1911 at a price that was too good to pass up. In keeping with chambering commonality, when I decided to get a duty grade pistol that would be acceptable in my police academy, I went with an M&P 45. This was before Sandy Hook, so the price on 45 was much less of an issue.
Seems like a good enough reason to stick with .45 unless the lack of capacity bothers you.
Well, I CAN shoot follow up shots pretty quickly with my .45 and I'm quite accurate with it. I've been through classes and competition with it and did quite well in both, so I guess that answers my question.
That said, the HK P2000 LEM in 9mm is next on the list of pistols to get. I was quite impressed with it; I just don't have the money.
The P2000's a great gun. LEM takes a bit getting used to for some. If there were only one LEM to have in the rotation, it's the 2000 or SK.
donlapalma
07-07-14, 11:14
It's not dumb to have and carry .45. However, it is dumb to not understand the costs/benefits of each particular caliber and to make your choices in an uneducated manner. So it seems you're headed down the right path by asking the question and being proactive in your research. Like others have already expressed, it's going to be boil down to what's important to you (i.e., mag capacity, cost to train, etc. etc.). I consolidated down to 9mm long ago and I'm glad that I did. Doesn't mean that I won't go and buy a .45 next month because, you know, I love guns and shooting. :D
WickedWillis
07-07-14, 13:12
I'm a 9mm guy, I own 3 of them, and my future handgun purchases will be chambered in 9mm. I shoot it accurately, range ammo is everywhere and inexpensive, plus great capacity in the magazines. All that being said, I absolutely love shooting .45's. I always have. I don't carry one, but there is an HK45 with an X300U on my nightstand. I love both calibers, and I would not buy another caliber other than 9 and 45. If nothing at all, I know I can count on the .45 if I need to, plus it's nice to shoot something different at the range and training sessions once in awhile.
MountainRaven
07-07-14, 13:52
I like to carry a 45 in Winter, when the heavy coats come out. I also prefer the 45 for the woods: More effective with shotshells for whacking rattlers and more effective for dealing with most four-legged threats short of a bear.
But I'll usually pick a 9mm for Summer - which lasts about two months around here. I figure that I'm more likely to need the capacity in Summer than in Winter and there's virtually no need for a cartridge to perform better through heavy clothing.
Besides, so long as MARSOC Marines and Navy SEALs are packing 45s with 8-10 round magazine capacities, one is not necessarily an idiot to carry one, too. Although your 22422- and 1-through-5 drill times will suck balls. And just because one carries a 45 - or a 9mm - does not mean that one is not an idiot, either.
Don't be a "one gun Charlie" get the 9mm and keep the 45.. JMO
I'm not nearly as experienced as most on this forum, but I agree with the above. I like my .45s, but switched initially to Glock (now Walther PPQ) because of the higher capacity and simplified battery of arms. While I know that my .45 will be very effective, it has a more complex battery of arms. Yes, this becomes second nature with enough practice, but comparably striker fired pistols are much quicker and easier to operate under stress.
Why didn't I go with a Glock in .45? Because of the additional capacity allows me to be ready for a worst case scenario. Sure the average might be 3-5 shots fired, but I am not going to plan for the average, I plan for worst case.
Nothing wrong with a .45, but I think striker fired 9mm or 40 is a better option. I shoot 9mm pistol, but prefer 5.56 carbines. I keep my .45s just in case.
MountainRaven
07-07-14, 14:04
I'm not nearly as experienced as most on this forum, but I agree with the above. I like my .45s, but switched initially to Glock (now Walther PPQ) because of the higher capacity and simplified battery of arms. While I know that my .45 will be very effective, it has a more complex battery of arms. Yes, this becomes second nature with enough practice, but comparably striker fired pistols are much quicker and easier to operate under stress.
Why didn't I go with a Glock in .45? Because of the additional capacity allows me to be ready for a worst case scenario. Sure the average might be 3-5 shots fired, but I am not going to plan for the average, I plan for worst case.
Nothing wrong with a .45, but I think striker fired 9mm or 40 is a better option. I shoot 9mm pistol, but prefer 5.56 carbines. I keep my .45s just in case.
According to your thingy, you live in California. So the additional capacity is pretty much irrelevant, unless you have some pre-ban mags.
Crow Hunter
07-07-14, 15:30
Well, I CAN shoot follow up shots pretty quickly with my .45 and I'm quite accurate with it. I've been through classes and competition with it and did quite well in both, so I guess that answers my question.
That said, the HK P2000 LEM in 9mm is next on the list of pistols to get. I was quite impressed with it; I just don't have the money.
Let me add an addition to my point, that reinforces what you mention above.
Even though I have standardized on Glock 19 for carry/home defense I kept both my Glock 30 and my G23 w/G32 bbl.
During the last ammo shortage I was still able to shoot more without needing to dip into my stash as much because I could buy (and shoot) whatever happend to be on the shelf at Wally world, which for some reason was usually .357 Sig, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, and finally 9mm in that order. I just bought a couple of boxes of whatever was available and used that to practice fundamentals and followed up with a couple magazines of 9mm to finish out drawing from concealment.
So I think if you decide to get a 9mm it should be to supplement what you already have rather than a replacement if at all possible.
I too would LOVE to have a P2000 but they are so very rare and expensive that I just can't make myself buy one. There is one at a local (45 Miles away) Gander Mtn in .40 S&W V3 that I have fondled several times but it still hasn't sold in over a year.
brushy bill
07-07-14, 17:48
During the last ammo shortage I was still able to shoot more without needing to dip into my stash as much because I could buy (and shoot) whatever happend to be on the shelf at Wally world, which for some reason was usually .357 Sig, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, and finally 9mm in that order. I just bought a couple of boxes of whatever was available
Didn't think anyone was going to bring this up. In addition to better performance if all you can locate is FMJ, wintertime clothing performance, and the other reasons pointed out, Crowhunter's point about having some options to feed different calibers during ammo shortages is an important one. I thought I was being clever by "standardizing" and "simplifying" logistics by getting rid of .40, .357 Sigs, 10mms, 45acp, etc and going to primarily 9mm. Guess what? Many times here there was plenty of 45, 40, etc, but NO 9mm. Options are a good thing. Keep the M&P and pick up a 9mm when funds permit.
Well, I CAN shoot follow up shots pretty quickly with my .45 and I'm quite accurate with it. I've been through classes and competition with it and did quite well in both, so I guess that answers my question.
Indeed, I think it does. You should keep it and drive on, sounds like what you got is working for you.
Let me add an addition to my point, that reinforces what you mention above.
Even though I have standardized on Glock 19 for carry/home defense I kept both my Glock 30 and my G23 w/G32 bbl.
During the last ammo shortage I was still able to shoot more without needing to dip into my stash as much because I could buy (and shoot) whatever happend to be on the shelf at Wally world, which for some reason was usually .357 Sig, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, and finally 9mm in that order. I just bought a couple of boxes of whatever was available and used that to practice fundamentals and followed up with a couple magazines of 9mm to finish out drawing from concealment.
So I think if you decide to get a 9mm it should be to supplement what you already have rather than a replacement if at all possible.
I too would LOVE to have a P2000 but they are so very rare and expensive that I just can't make myself buy one. There is one at a local (45 Miles away) Gander Mtn in .40 S&W V3 that I have fondled several times but it still hasn't sold in over a year.
I agree with most of the replies, there are valid reasons for both calibers, but I would not get rid of one to get the other. I keep a 40 that I do not shoot anymore because I feel that the more options of calibers I have the better. I have always believed a 45 that does not expand is as big as a 9 that does. I would now opt for over penetration vs over expansion, not say that I would choose FMJ over JHP It boils down to shot placement, so stick with what you shoot the best, and Good Luck
OP. You are not missing anything. All main pistol calibers basically do the same thing. Because 9 is cheaper, you can practice more, and not give up anything with term ballistics. Any advantage of 45 is outweighs by capacy, shoot ability, especially 1 handed, ammo cost, and weight for most people. All that said, bullets trump caliber. A good 9mm load outperforms crappy loads in any service cal, and vice-versa.
...For example, there might be a situation where 9mm would not have enough energy to get the job done but .357 Sig would. It would depend on the specific details of the fight.
Such a situation does not exist, assuming one is carrying good hollow points and the target is human, because they all penetrate about the same. Differences in penetration vary round to round, and are pretty independent of caliber.
Barrier penetration(holding together) and deflection varies a little bit, but that is with 40 and 45 having the advantage. 357sig doesn't really offer anything.
Energy is completely pointless to bring up when discussing terminal ballistics.
OP, I'd try to keep the 45 and add a 9. The 45 would be nice for low cap states.
I'm a total 9mm fanboy. I was a 9mm guy before being a 9mm guy was cool. That being said, I'm buying a Glock 22 right now. Why? Ammo availability. Maybe it's just my area, but 9mm, like .22lr is still sort of hit and miss and when it's around, the price gap between it and .40 have narrowed to almost nothing. Meanwhile the shelves are overflowing with .40. Through most of 2013, 9mm was unobtanium in my area, and while .40 was hard to find in January, by mid year there was plenty. I had gone the 9mm only route in 2012 and regret it almost immediately when I couldn't shoot. Diversity of caliber isn't necessarily a bad thing, I'd hang on to your .45 and get a 9mm as well. The 9mm is great until you have nothing to feed it with.
Lots of people get hurt or dead by hand gun bullets. Here in Richmond there is a story almost every day.
I choose a handgun that I like, and make sure it's chambered for what it was designed for, and works best with.
And 9mm certainly does not perform like 45. It can perform as well, but it doesn't do so as consistently.
I would be less concerned about switching calibers than switching platforms. P2000 LEM is a great gun, but the trigger is going to take some getting used to. M&P caliber switch makes more sense to me as there will be less of a "train up" period.
anachronism
07-08-14, 10:05
9mms may (or may not) expand, but a 45 will never shrink.
I just went the opposite direction, I gave my 9mms to my kids, and kept all the 45s. There are some pretty reasonably sized 45s not available for CC. If you absolutely must have the smallest possible CC handgun, there are a lot of small .22s and .25s. As stated earlier, the progresses in small arms ammunition have been applied to the 45 as well.
The modern advancements in self defense and duty ammunition have made 9mm a much more capable platform, but all the 9mm fan boys seem to not mention (or refuse to acknowledge) than the same advancements in bullet design have also been applied to the .45ACP as well. Given equal bullet technology a bigger bullet at typical handgun velocities is going to do more damage to a target.
Personally I am not overly concerned with having as many rounds possible crammed into a magazine, when statistics bear out that most violent encounters are resolved within the first 5 rounds. If you really think you're going to get involved in a running gun battle armed only with a pistol, where you will expend even one full magazine of 15-17 rounds much less additional magazines I'd say you're probably either really foolish for only being armed with a pistol, or really worried about a situation that is very unlikely to occur.
With that in mind I am comfortable carrying .45ACP, since I tend to shoot them well, and I would rather make those first shots that will probably decide the matter be as decisive as I can. I like 9mm's too although I don't currently own one. I don't feel under gunned with either caliber under most circumstances, unless I'm hunting or in an area with large carnivores. In which case I want a magnum revolver anyway.
you have to determine what your use is going to be. the calculus is very different between someone that's a ccw and someone who's in law enforcement. when anyone gets into an encounter it is pretty assured that they will be dumping whatever they have into the person threatening his or her life and the surrounding barriers, whether or not the situation "is resolved in the first 5 rounds."
What's the deal with switching to .45 for the winter?
But who was penetration?
BoringGuy45
07-08-14, 17:43
I would be less concerned about switching calibers than switching platforms. P2000 LEM is a great gun, but the trigger is going to take some getting used to. M&P caliber switch makes more sense to me as there will be less of a "train up" period.
I like the LEM. You're right though, it would take some getting used to. I'm pretty sure that I'm going to end up getting one; I've been coveting it for years and just waiting for the money. If it did become my main carry piece, it would only be after quite a bit of training that I make the switch.
For the time being though, my M&P45 has been good and will continue to be on my hip.
And the circle has closed.. ;)
warpedcamshaft
07-08-14, 20:38
A lot of this has been beat to death, but I'll add my 2 cents...
From a terminal ballistics standpoint, there is a lot of info out there... So I won't touch that. Just be sure to use high quality defensive ammunition in whatever caliber you choose.
If you can take your M&P45 and shoot above a 250 on the Hackathorn Standards (or a decent score on another well respected proficiency test) in one continuous cold run... Then pat yourself on the back and move on.
If you are unable to shoot at that level... and identify that recoil control or cost of practice ammunition is what is holding you back... then it may be time to look at a 9mm.
After years of these types of discussions, it seems to boil down to one thing for people who have to buy their own ammo: The 9mm holds enough of an edge in economics, that any advantages of a larger caliber (quantifiable or not) are not worth the added cost. When you add increased recoil to the mix... "the juice ain't worth the squeeze" for a lot of people.
Such a situation does not exist, assuming one is carrying good hollow points and the target is human, because they all penetrate about the same. Differences in penetration vary round to round, and are pretty independent of caliber.
Barrier penetration(holding together) and deflection varies a little bit, but that is with 40 and 45 having the advantage. 357sig doesn't really offer anything.
Energy is completely pointless to bring up when discussing terminal ballistics.
If you have a chance would you mind referring me to relevant data or studies on the subject?
Well About 2 years ago I switched from 45 to 9mm and never looked back. The way I saw it, I could shoot more practice rounds, for less money. Practice, practice, practice. I carry Federal HST 147, and from all the data I have seen this round is more than capable of stopping someone. Also, I can shoot 9mm much faster, more accurately and I have higher capacity in my magazines. I sold My HK45 and that funded a Glock 19 Gen 4 and Glock 34 Gen 4. Both at LEO pricing. I do mis my HK45 and will probably pick up a HK45 Tactical in the next year or so just because its one bad ass pistol. In the end, there is no right or wrong answer as there are arguments that can be maid for 9mm and 45. Get what works for you and you feel comfortable with.
Caliber wars are just silly. Honestly.
Shoot what you shoot best, often.
No such thing as magical "stopping power" with any handgun round.
Shot placement. Shot placement. Shot placement.
Put a round directly into a guy's head right between his eyes, with any caliber, you have a "man stopper."
9, 40, 45, .380, 44, 38, heck, even a 22LR can do that.
Train with what you can shoot the most accurately and train often.
Put a round directly into a guy's head right between his eyes, with any caliber, you have a "man stopper."
If it were that easy then a whole host of circumstances would be different regarding firearms. Luckily for us they aren't designed with the expectation that every shot will be a perfect one.
If it were that easy then a whole host of circumstances would be different regarding firearms. Luckily for us they aren't designed with the expectation that every shot will be a perfect one.
You entirely missed my point.
I'm not suggesting it is easy, far from it. That's why talking about "man stopper" and other such talk is rather silly when discussing handgun caliber.
My point is that "man stopper" mythology with handguns are just that: mainly myths. The only way to put a person truly down and out with a single shot it so put one right into the brain box.
Otherwise, a person can put up a fight after taking a round even to the heart, given the adrenalin pumping through a person and who knows what else.
"Stopping power" and "man stopper" and "one shot, one kill" are largely the stuff of Hollywood when we are discussing handgun calibers.
MountainRaven
07-13-14, 14:11
You entirely missed my point.
I'm not suggesting it is easy, far from it. That's why talking about "man stopper" and other such talk is rather silly when discussing handgun caliber.
My point is that "man stopper" mythology with handguns are just that: mainly myths. The only way to put a person truly down and out with a single shot it so put one right into the brain box.
Otherwise, a person can put up a fight after taking a round even to the heart, given the adrenalin pumping through a person and who knows what else.
"Stopping power" and "man stopper" and "one shot, one kill" are largely the stuff of Hollywood when we are discussing handgun calibers.
As a number of incidents have shown, even putting a reasonably powerful (handgun) round into the "brain box" will not necessarily incapacitate a threat.
MorphCross
07-13-14, 14:19
As a number of incidents have shown, even putting a reasonably powerful (handgun) round into the "brain box" will not necessarily incapacitate a threat.
But were those actually "brainbox" aka CNS shots? Shooting a person in the face doesn't mean it goes in through the bridge of the nose. It could be in the cheek, the jaw, or across the temple. They'd bleed like a son of gun but wouldn't yield a full stop puppet with its strings cut drop.
All of that is purely academic, for serious defensive shooting, center of mass first, second, and always until the target crumples to the ground.
You entirely missed my point.
I'm not suggesting it is easy, far from it. That's why talking about "man stopper" and other such talk is rather silly when discussing handgun caliber.
My point is that "man stopper" mythology with handguns are just that: mainly myths. The only way to put a person truly down and out with a single shot it so put one right into the brain box.
Otherwise, a person can put up a fight after taking a round even to the heart, given the adrenalin pumping through a person and who knows what else.
"Stopping power" and "man stopper" and "one shot, one kill" are largely the stuff of Hollywood when we are discussing handgun calibers.
I didn't miss your point and certainly assume that as an experienced shooter you know it's not that easy. However your statement still simplifies a rather complex scenario, which granted you then elaborate a bit better above.
Either way while I'm not diving into this piranha filled lake I will say that for example a 9mm is not for me.
MountainRaven
07-13-14, 14:29
But were those actually "brainbox" aka CNS shots? Shooting a person in the face doesn't mean it goes in through the bridge of the nose. It could be in the cheek, the jaw, or across the temple. They'd bleed like a son of gun but wouldn't yield a full stop puppet with its strings cut drop.
All of that is purely academic, for serious defensive shooting, center of mass first, second, and always until the target crumples to the ground.
Or until you determine that the threat is wearing armor....
I think the most famous example would be Gabby Giffords. Shot in the head and survived. Needed major brain surgery, but still survived.
Coal Dragger
07-13-14, 14:43
As a number of incidents have shown, even putting a reasonably powerful (handgun) round into the "brain box" will not necessarily incapacitate a threat.
Anecdotally I had a friend of mine get shot in the face while we were in Iraq, with a 7.62X39 no less. Bullet hit the lip of his helmet, fragmented a little bit, and the main portion of the bullet ended up in his right eye socket with some of the bullet also traveling underneath his scalp to the back of his head and exiting. Really messy ugly looking wound. We couldn't figure out at first how he was even still alive. Got medivac'd out and made it to Germany for stabilization. Found out later the bullet hadn't managed to penetrate any further than it did.
I have read accounts of bullets actually making it to grey matter and not killing the victim/target/bad guy. Same for center mass hits.
Correct on all counts, all the anecdotes.
THE POINT remains:
Caliber wars are ultimately silly.
It is about how well a shooter is able to get rounds effectively into the target.
Two pictures pretty much sum up why caliber wars are silly:
27167
27168
Coal Dragger
07-13-14, 16:07
Assuming that I can shoot the one that makes the biggest hole as well as the one that makes the smallest hole.... I'll take the producer of larger holes more often than not. Your second photo is a good argument for going with a more powerful caliber when you shoot it well since the .357SIG on up produced noticeably larger wound tracks. If larger calibers didn't work better then we'd see a lot more people also hunting with medium bore handguns instead of big bores. Fact is they don't anchor game animals very well compared to larger calibers even those using relatively slow moving bullets. Now I will not suggest shooting deer or pigs is the same as having to shoot a person, but I'd venture a guess that we'll learn more from those results than shooting fancy Jello.
MorphCross
07-13-14, 16:11
Or until you determine that the threat is wearing armor....
I think the most famous example would be Gabby Giffords. Shot in the head and survived. Needed major brain surgery, but still survived.
Yeah, but besides the North Hollywood shootout, how common is it for thug-fo-life to have or use NIJ III-A vests? Home invasions are different and will be treated differently.
Congresswoman Giffords was an exception, not the rule, as I remember the news reports from that day having her as deceased (that may have just been senstational journalism) numerous times from numerous news outlets. As macabre as this question may be, was it ball ammunition or JHP?
Assuming that I can shoot the one that makes the biggest hole as well as the one that makes the smallest hole.... I'll take the producer of larger holes more often than not. Your second photo is a good argument for going with a more powerful caliber when you shoot it well since the .357SIG on up produced noticeably larger wound tracks. If larger calibers didn't work better then we'd see a lot more people also hunting with medium bore handguns instead of big bores. Fact is they don't anchor game animals very well compared to larger calibers even those using relatively slow moving bullets. Now I will not suggest shooting deer or pigs is the same as having to shoot a person, but I'd venture a guess that we'll learn more from those results than shooting fancy Jello.
And shooting a game animal on the side is different from shooting a person in the chest, not even taking the relative difference in positioning of major organs. What BJ testing gives us is a consistent media designed to offer a potential picture of how a bullet will perform.
Assuming that I can shoot the one that makes the biggest hole as well as the one that makes the smallest hole.... I'll take the producer of larger holes more often than not. Your second photo is a good argument for going with a more powerful caliber when you shoot it well since the .357SIG on up produced noticeably larger wound tracks. If larger calibers didn't work better then we'd see a lot more people also hunting with medium bore handguns instead of big bores. Fact is they don't anchor game animals very well compared to larger calibers even those using relatively slow moving bullets. Now I will not suggest shooting deer or pigs is the same as having to shoot a person, but I'd venture a guess that we'll learn more from those results than shooting fancy Jello.
Factually based logic is always a good thing even if it sounds somewhat boring to hear. Still as you likely know the effectiveness of the 5.56 over a .22 is nothing to shake a stick at, so we wisely meet somewhere in the well tested middle.
Two pictures pretty much sum up why caliber wars are silly:
Interesting because based upon cavity they seem to solidly justify the larger rounds in this particular case.
Point is the differences are not incredibly significant.
Caliber wars are and remain silly, but I grant they will continue to provide debate material ad naseum on gun forums.
Temporary cavity of service pistol rounds is not classified as a wounding mechanism. Caliber wars within service calibers is silly. However some rounds such as 357 sig have significant amounts of recoil and flash over 9mm with no quantifiable advantage. They do perform well, though, given a good load. 380 and smaller do not meet min penetration and expand, it's one or the other. Defending yourself with fmj makes as much sense as bow hunting with field points. I understand niche applications, but I am referring to day to day situations.
Outside of slight permanent cavity differences, all these rounds perform well. Im no expert, but the .40 looks like it may perform better than the 45 for this particular round.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uPlYhk7FoxUZZw4WciSD8nUT5QqyMCKK3Wl9j8QZbXI/edit#gid=1394733015
As for technology. A bullet has so much momentum. There is an inverse relationship of expansion and penetration depth. 9mm used to open up too much and penetrate shallow, shred through barriers, or not expand at all, 45 would open up reliably, and penetrate deep. Now all rounds(with good loads) perform within the optimal range of penetration, and expand reliably, and hold together well through barriers. 45 will never open up to 1" diameter and penetrate 12" in gel, we've reached a peak in performance with current duty rounds, any advances will be relatively slight.
Yes, in general 45 makes bigger holes and goes through barriers better, but its not across the board. It has some advantages, as well as disadvantages, and that's for the individual to decide which is better for them. No matter what round you carry, using a good bullet is paramount. 147gr 9mm hst outperforms .45 ball every time.
Coal Dragger
07-13-14, 17:35
Yeah, but besides the North Hollywood shootout, how common is it for thug-fo-life to have or use NIJ III-A vests? Home invasions are different and will be treated differently.
Congresswoman Giffords was an exception, not the rule, as I remember the news reports from that day having her as deceased (that may have just been senstational journalism) numerous times from numerous news outlets. As macabre as this question may be, was it ball ammunition or JHP?
And shooting a game animal on the side is different from shooting a person in the chest, not even taking the relative difference in positioning of major organs. What BJ testing gives us is a consistent media designed to offer a potential picture of how a bullet will perform.
Sure it's different, but a broadside shot on an animal is going to be fairly close to a chest shot on a person minus the presence of the spinal column being in the center. Quartering shots are even more challenging and this is where a larger (heavier) bullet is going to pay dividends in getting penetration through bone and muscle to reach vitals. While not maybe as common given human physiology the ability to reach vitals after penetrating or smashing bone and muscle (or other obstacles) is still a potential virtue.
I am a huge fan of the 45 caliber- the 45 ACP, 45 Colt and the 45-70, but I've got to go with ptmccain on this one. The ballistic gelatin tests show the terminal performance of the service pistol bullets designed to meet FBI criteria is nearly the same, enough that when a well respected name offers the opinion that the 9mm is a more practical choice than the 45 ACP, members on this site sit up and listen.
Yet when ptmccain offers the very same opinion, folks argue against it. Why? Because those folks feel ptmccain has taken some mis-steps in his opinions. It cannot go both ways. If the ballistic gelatin tests are enough to support the argument put forth by the well respected, it's good enough to support the very same argument when put forward by others.
It's one thing to call a member out on the carpet for getting something wrong. It's another entirely when it's a knee jerk reaction to everything they post and it's deplorable to defame them for putting forth the very same opinion others are lauded for.
Some folks need to check their fire before posting further on this subject
packinaglock
07-13-14, 18:53
The modern advancements in self defense and duty ammunition have made 9mm a much more capable platform, but all the 9mm fan boys seem to not mention (or refuse to acknowledge) than the same advancements in bullet design have also been applied to the .45ACP as well. Given equal bullet technology a bigger bullet at typical handgun velocities is going to do more damage to a target.
Personally I am not overly concerned with having as many rounds possible crammed into a magazine, when statistics bear out that most violent encounters are resolved within the first 5 rounds. If you really think you're going to get involved in a running gun battle armed only with a pistol, where you will expend even one full magazine of 15-17 rounds much less additional magazines I'd say you're probably either really foolish for only being armed with a pistol, or really worried about a situation that is very unlikely to occur.
With that in mind I am comfortable carrying .45ACP, since I tend to shoot them well, and I would rather make those first shots that will probably decide the matter be as decisive as I can. I like 9mm's too although I don't currently own one. I don't feel under gunned with either caliber under most circumstances, unless I'm hunting or in an area with large carnivores. In which case I want a magnum revolver anyway.
True, but the .45 was already in the major leagues for stopping a bad guy, the 9mm was in the minor leagues with the old ammo designs. Modern ammo technology has just brought the 9mm up to the major leagues, he may not hit quite as many homeruns but he can now win ball games just like the .45.
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-13-14, 19:32
All I know is that I have been hearing, MY ENTIRE LIFE, that the 9mm has finally closed the gap. Back in the 70s it was super vel, then BAT rounds, then Silver Tips, etc. In the 80s everybody said, "back in the 70s they were junk, but now they are "just as good." In the 90s everybody said, "back in the 80s they were junk, but now they are "just as good." In the 00s every body said, "back in the 90s they were junk, but now they are "just as good." And here we are again. Maybe.
Amp Mangum
07-13-14, 19:36
Just as bullet technology has improved the 9mm, it has also improved the .45acp.
All I know is that I have been hearing, MY ENTIRE LIFE, that the 9mm has finally closed the gap. Back in the 70s it was super vel, then BAT rounds, (snip).
Just a little sidebar. In the early 90s I fired some BAT/Geco Safety rounds that I had bought in the 1980s. At least 20% failed to detonate while before I had fired at least 200 rounds of this ammo without a single failure to detonate. So if you happen to have any of these laying around, don't rely on them to fire if you need them to.
Assuming that I can shoot the one that makes the biggest hole as well as the one that makes the smallest hole.... I'll take the producer of larger holes more often than not. Your second photo is a good argument for going with a more powerful caliber when you shoot it well since the .357SIG on up produced noticeably larger wound tracks. If larger calibers didn't work better then we'd see a lot more people also hunting with medium bore handguns instead of big bores. Fact is they don't anchor game animals very well compared to larger calibers even those using relatively slow moving bullets. Now I will not suggest shooting deer or pigs is the same as having to shoot a person, but I'd venture a guess that we'll learn more from those results than shooting fancy Jello.
But, since more holes > bigger holes, can you make a larger number of more effective small holes? How much faster can you make small holes than large holes (with the same accuracy)? Is this time difference significant? This is the axle of the caliber argument. What it comes down to is can you shoot all service calibers the same, or extremely closely in performance? If yes, can you get comparable capacity? If yes, pick one - cheapest, biggest, or compromise of both?
We are talking about service calibers. However, bore size? 357mag is common. Also, you are completely changing the parameters, as game animals have much different anatomy than human beings, and hunting engagements are general very different than defensive ones.
Lastly, Jello shooting? Facts, science, and statistical analysis - what do scientists, doctors and engineers know? Instead we should base decisions on speculation and uncontrolled tests....
:suicide:
.357 sig is a vastly superior round
Joins forum June 2014.
In 7th comment declares a particular caliber "vastly superior."
Kudos for moxy.
:)
i'm sorry. do you have a problem???
Did you read the previous 68 posts or just dump your first thought after reading the thread title?
is there something wrong with being right?
Please provide the data to support your assertions.
MorphCross
07-13-14, 22:34
.357 sig is a vastly superior round
Define what you consider vastly superior. Is it penetration? Temporary wound cavity? On either account the .357 Sig "loses." Just so you know velocity difference at these levels doesn't make as much difference as some believe it does. When you put enough rounds into the center of mass, it is a success. One shot stops in self defense don't usually happen in the real world (there will always be exceptions). Enough rounds is when the attacker retreats or when he drops.
Phillygunguy
07-13-14, 22:54
I used to be a 45 guy, hell I shot and owned every caliber except 380 when I started shooting But I had the its bigger makes bigger holes, It is more powerful blah blah. But after time I went back to 9mm
I like the 45 in 1911, had one in M&P but switched over to glock. If you can shoot well with the 45 buy all means go for it.
In the end all hand gun calibers suck and fall short compared to a rifle.
Obsolete? maybe in time, Id say the 1911 is but the 45 may be around for quite some time
Phillygunguy
07-13-14, 22:57
Well, a 45 is a proven man-stopper,. JMO
There are plenty of stories where people have been shot with a 45 even multiple times and still continued to fight
There are plenty of stories where people have been shot with a 45 even multiple times and still continued to fight
My aunt worked in the ER in Anchorage as a trauma nurse for almost 20 years and she saw many shot with multiple 45's and survived and many that didnt survive .22 and 9mm gunshot wounds.
Rifles destroy shit, pistols poke holes.
Phillygunguy
07-13-14, 23:15
My aunt worked in the ER in Anchorage as a trauma nurse for almost 20 years and she saw many shot with multiple 45's and survived and many that didnt survive .22 and 9mm gunshot wounds.
Not surprised. If we were talking about fmj then 45 is probably better, but hp different story
Ive seen a good amount of people shot. Between 2 tours in Iraq and 7.5 years as a LEO, much of it working in the ghetto, I have seen people shot with everything from BB guns to 25mm.
Our duty rounds at work are 180 grn HSTs for the 40s and 230grn +p HSTs for the 45s. They just authorized 9mm and we are using 124 grn +p Golddots. However I dont think anyone has used that yet in a shooting.
One of our recent shootings had two officers shooting an armed robbery suspect who drew a handgun on them. One officer was carrying a 40, the other a 45. The first volley of fire they hit the bad guy about 11 times and he goes down. after a few seconds the guy grabs his gun and gets back up. The 45 guy then puts about 3 more in him and he goes down for good. I can think of several other shootings where officers have put multiple 40s and 45s into COM on bad guys and they continue to fight. We have about a 50 percent bad guy survival rate on our shootings which is supposed to be higher than the national average for PDs.
On the other end of things Ive seen several suicides using .22s, .25s and 38 snubbies that the people were DRT. I saw an Iraqi policeman shoot an AQ dude at about 85 yards (we measured it) with a Glock 19 using 124 grn FMJ and dropped him DRT in the street. hit the guy from the side in the arm pit and double lunged him. Ive been to multiple murders where the 9mm has dropped people with authority.
So my real life experience has shown me what most of the experts say is true. Service calibers suck and the biggest lesson is shot placement trumps caliber. By a lot. Ive spent a lot of time in hospitals guarding prisoners or checking on victims who were riddled with 9mm, .40 and .45 caliber holes and survived. Mostly because their heart, spine and brain were still intact. Ive also spent a good amount of time at some scene or empty ER room next to a corpse with one .22, .25, .35, .40 or .45 hole in them.
As to the OP. If you shoot the 45 well and can afford to shoot it enough to keep your skills up then stick with it. I carry a 45 at work. Only because Im not a fan of the recoil characteristics of the 40 in a Glock. I will be switching to a Glock 17 for work at the end of the month because my department recently stopped giving out practice ammo. I used to shoot about 2000+ rounds out of my duty handgun a year when most of it was given to me. However my skills have diminished now that I have to buy all my own ammo because I cant afford to shoot it that much. Going to a 9mm should help with that a bit along with giving me an easier shooting gun.
MorphCross
07-14-14, 00:20
Lets take a 3 different Glocks all of approximately the same size but one in 9mm, one in .40, and one in .45 caliber. Glock 17, 17 rounds of 9mm, Glock 22, 15 rounds of .40 S&W, Glock 21, 13 rounds of .45 ACP.
9mm bullets measure out at .355
.40 cal bullets measure out at .400
.45 cal bullets measure out at .4515
Following the standard measurement for figuring out the area of a circle
9mm is .099 of an inch
.40 is .13 of an inch
.45 is .16 of an inch
This is obviously worst case scenario wadcutting slugs with no bullet taper.
9mm shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 1.782 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
.40 shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 2.08 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
.45 shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 2.24 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
It tallies up to a mean difference of .458 of a square inch between .45 and 9mm, .16 of an inch between a .45 and a .40, and .298 of a square inch between .40 and 9mm.
This does not take into account penetration depth, merely the amount of surface area displaced by the bullet. So there is a case to be made that the size of the bullet even at a reduced capacity, will not hamper the exterior area displaced. Any inference beyond this needs to be dropped as any other comparison would require bullets of the same weight fired at the same velocity to get a comparative analysis of penetration.
Lets take a 3 different Glocks all of approximately the same size but one in 9mm, one in .40, and one in .45 caliber. Glock 17, 17 rounds of 9mm, Glock 22, 15 rounds of .40 S&W, Glock 21, 13 rounds of .45 ACP.
9mm bullets measure out at .355
.40 cal bullets measure out at .400
.45 cal bullets measure out at .4515
Following the standard measurement for figuring out the area of a circle
9mm is .099 of an inch
.40 is .13 of an inch
.45 is .16 of an inch
This is obviously worst case scenario wadcutting slugs with no bullet taper.
9mm shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 1.782 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
.40 shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 2.08 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
.45 shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 2.24 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
It tallies up to a mean difference of .458 of a square inch between .45 and 9mm, .16 of an inch between a .45 and a .40, and .298 of a square inch between .40 and 9mm.
This does not take into account penetration depth, merely the amount of surface area displaced by the bullet. So there is a case to be made that the size of the bullet even at a reduced capacity, will not hamper the exterior area displaced. Any inference beyond this needs to be dropped as any other comparison would require bullets of the same weight fired at the same velocity to get a comparative analysis of penetration.
Wow, extensive response. Thanks for putting things into perspective. I grew up shooting .45s and recoil has never been an issue. I'd rather have less but more damaging projectiles. My dad always told me 9mm was for women and squareheads (sorry, grandfather fought in WWII). I've personally seen a wild boar take a 147gr 9mm HP right between the eyes and it kept charging. I've never shot a hog with a .45 - even round nose and had it do that.
Grunt wrote: "Service calibers suck and the biggest lesson is shot placement trumps caliber. By a lot."
Yes, this is the point.
And it is why caliber wars get silly after a certain point.
OP, I don't believe anyone is dumb for having 45ACP handguns. Prior to joining LE where I was forced for a few years to use 40S&W, all my handguns were either 9mm or 45. In my mind, the 45ACP gives you options in sizes/types of handguns that the 9mm doesn't and vice versa. If you must restrict yourself to a single caliber, then 9mm would tend to win out based upon cost, platform size, capacity, and availability. But if you are not restricted, then the 45 allows you to own/enjoy 1911's, Glock 21's, HK45's, etc. I don't see a reason to have 40 (or 357Sig) because the weapons are the same as a 9mm dimensionally - they just wear out more quickly and are more difficult to get proficient with.
Having both 45 and 9 gives me plenty of options. I'm back now to where I was before - all my carry handguns are either 9mm or 45ACP. YMMV, but if you can afford to have more than one caliber, I consider 45 to be a great choice.
Wow, extensive response. Thanks for putting things into perspective. I grew up shooting .45s and recoil has never been an issue. I'd rather have less but more damaging projectiles. My dad always told me 9mm was for women and squareheads (sorry, grandfather fought in WWII). I've personally seen a wild boar take a 147gr 9mm HP right between the eyes and it kept charging. I've never shot a hog with a .45 - even round nose and had it do that.
My uncle traps hogs and then executes them with a 22 short. There is a specific spot on a pig's head to shoot them to get good penetration through the skull. Most other places will deflect a bullet, especially a handgun.
Same thing with humans too. I can think of three cases I was involved with where 45s have deflected off of a person's skull at close range. One of them was even a failed execution shot to the back of the head.
My uncle traps hogs and then executes them with a 22 short. There is a specific spot on a pig's head to shoot them to get good penetration through the skull. Most other places will deflect a bullet, especially a handgun.
Same thing with humans too. I can think of three cases I was involved with where 45s have deflected off of a person's skull at close range. One of them was even a failed execution shot to the back of the head.Behind the ear is where trappers pop em (any animal), hard to hit in legit face to face self defense situation.
i'm sorry. do you have a problem???
I have many problems.
You are going to have a problem on this forum if you have mistakenly assumed it is like GD on TOS.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
As long as you can shoot it well, 45 is a great round. Each of the defense rounds has its own set of benefits. Each also has its own detriments. Right? Some are more comfortable with one caliber and one platform. I don't personally subscribe to either of those thoughts, but everyone is different. I like all of them to some extent or another. Each gives something the others don't and each presents issues that the others don't. Everyone has to strike the balance for him or herself.
Coal Dragger
07-14-14, 14:36
But, since more holes > bigger holes, can you make a larger number of more effective small holes? How much faster can you make small holes than large holes (with the same accuracy)? Is this time difference significant? This is the axle of the caliber argument. What it comes down to is can you shoot all service calibers the same, or extremely closely in performance? If yes, can you get comparable capacity? If yes, pick one - cheapest, biggest, or compromise of both?
We are talking about service calibers. However, bore size? 357mag is common. Also, you are completely changing the parameters, as game animals have much different anatomy than human beings, and hunting engagements are general very different than defensive ones.
Lastly, Jello shooting? Facts, science, and statistical analysis - what do scientists, doctors and engineers know? Instead we should base decisions on speculation and uncontrolled tests....
:suicide:
I shoot .45ACP pretty well, honestly I'm not super fast on split times with anything. My background in bullseye pistol competition seems to force me to get a better sight picture than I absolutely need even at close ranges and it slows me down a bit, doesn't matter if it's a .22LR or a .45ACP. On the plus side I can make bullets go where I want them to go out of a handgun at extended distances most shooters can't. Shooting in some local IDPA style shoots at the range I have a membership to I am not as fast as some guys hosing down the target with 9X19's but they're dropping rounds out of the -0 area of the target with some frequency or totally missing steel plates at only 7-10 yards. I don't drop many rounds out of the -0 and haven't missed a plate yet, and I can keep everything in the -0 zone out to 35 yards, albeit I don't try to shoot the medium distance targets like those as fast as the close in stuff. I can still keep 75-80% of my rounds in the -0 of the IDPA target at 50 yards consistently and sometimes even shoot a clean one. Not that it matters since they never bother to post targets out that far, and bitch and whine like little girls when I suggest running out to 25 yards.... much less 35 yards.
The speed issue is something I've been working on though since training is the key. Currently I haven't noticed any significant difference in performance between my .45's and shooting a friend's 9X19 as far as time. I will note than I am more accurate with the .45's but that is likely largely due to familiarity.
I may be in an odd position compared to many on this site where ammo costs are concerned, I have been reloading .45ACP for the better part of 14 years now and have a lot of brass and other components, plus progressive reloading equipment. So ironically it is cheaper for me to shoot .45ACP than any other centerfire caliber just because of my stock pile of components. I currently have three handguns chambered in .45ACP, a Kimber Super Match II (evidently the only Kimber ever made that works if this site is to be believed), an HK45, and a Freedom Arms M83 that I had a spare cylinder made for in .45ACP.
I would like to add a 9X19 to the family though, and I like HK's so the new VP-9 may get the nod once supplies open up and some holsters and other accessories start to flow.
brickboy240
07-14-14, 16:11
No...there is one more Kimber that runs and it sits in my safe. According to the interwebs...I am supposed to hate my TLE II but the damn thing flat out runs. Made by the only guy at Kimber that knows what he is doing and on Monday morning....like yours! LOL
-brickboy240
OP,
Dumb? No.
I believe that some of us who like .45 ACP and 1911's are considered obsolete. I would be one of those individuals.
Shoot what you like and can use to make well placed shots.
T2C
Lets take a 3 different M&Ps all of approximately the same size but one in 9mm, one in .40, and one in .45 caliber.
9mm bullets measure out at .355
.40 cal bullets measure out at .400
.45 cal bullets measure out at .4515
Following the standard measurement for figuring out the area of a circle
9mm is .099 of an inch
.40 is .13 of an inch
.45 is .16 of an inch
This is obviously worst case scenario wadcutting slugs with no bullet taper.
9mm shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 1.782 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
.40 shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 2.08 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
.45 shot into a target assuming none of the shots overlap will take a surface area of approximately 1.6 square inches with a loaded mag and a round in the chamber.
Using M&Ps shows that what platform you run makes a difference.
Using HP expanded diameter:
45 = .43 | Mag = 4.73(6.02 in glock)
.40 = .36 | Mag= 5.76
9mm = .30 | Mag = 5.40
Shows why you should not use FMJ! I was shocked at the difference between fmj and hp.
(nice post btw)
Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement :)
Tough to do, tough to do, tough to do. Sometimes a generous reservoir lets you keep fighting if the first few rounds go a bit......ahem.....astray? I could see the .45 as the be all end all IF it was "19 out of 20" effective. Since the data doesn't support that, I say shoot whatever keeps the practice fun, you'll be the better prepared for it.
Oh my shot placement comment wasn't in support of a particular caliber. Just that you are more likely to hit your mark with whatever works best for the end user. It's all so terribly subjective I am not sure it is even possible to have a "best".
I see what you did there....:cool:
I like Roy Weatherbys' theory "take a big bullet and make it go really fast"!
MorphCross
07-16-14, 20:28
Using M&Ps shows that what platform you run makes a difference.
Using HP expanded diameter:
45 = .43 | Mag = 4.73(6.02 in glock)
.40 = .36 | Mag= 5.76
9mm = .30 | Mag = 5.40
Shows why you should not use FMJ! I was shocked at the difference between fmj and hp.
(nice post btw)
Basic geometry and a little spare time. I can't imagine how much time it took to research the frontal surface area of hollow points after expansion. Yeah platform definitely affects the outcome. The primary reason I went with Glock was simply because it was the platform that offered the greatest similarity in size across the spectrum of full size service pistols.
beschatten
07-18-14, 07:34
I'm not nearly as experienced as most on this forum, but I agree with the above. I like my .45s, but switched initially to Glock (now Walther PPQ) because of the higher capacity and simplified battery of arms. While I know that my .45 will be very effective, it has a more complex battery of arms. Yes, this becomes second nature with enough practice, but comparably striker fired pistols are much quicker and easier to operate under stress.
Why didn't I go with a Glock in .45? Because of the additional capacity allows me to be ready for a worst case scenario. Sure the average might be 3-5 shots fired, but I am not going to plan for the average, I plan for worst case.
Nothing wrong with a .45, but I think striker fired 9mm or 40 is a better option. I shoot 9mm pistol, but prefer 5.56 carbines. I keep my .45s just in case.
Wow. This is an awesome post. You are being thoughtful in how you choose your caliber, given conditions. I think this is really smart. I will probably copy you lol.
To even the playing grounds a little, Todd G, ran a sub 2.0 Bill drill with a HK45. Aside from Todd's obvious talents, I think it speaks volumes that with correct training, getting back on target isn't a problem with 9 or 45. Unless you have physical conditions that may be irritated with the .45 ACPs recoil, both are very manageable. One will just require better fundamentals and strength.
When I shot .45 HST and PDX1 JHP at water jugs at a distant range, I noticed expansions closing in on .80 inches with a caliper. Not to mention this is after the JHP has fully opened and retracted. At it's apex of expansion I could see it approaching .90 inches.
This of course is made up for with 9mm, by the additional rounds you can carry, which equate to more surface area being ruptured at expansion (given that you use them all).
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer here. Shoot what you like, and pick a quality SD ammo. I am personally a fan of both, and as ScottsBad said, different choices for different reasons.
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer here. Shoot what you like, and pick a quality SD ammo. I am personally a fan of both, and as ScottsBad said, different choices for different reasons.
Yes, 9mm for SMGs and .45 for handguns.
Bad shot placement still = bigger hole, which = faster bleed out.
montanadave
07-18-14, 08:01
Did I miss it or has someone stated the obvious: "I shoot a .45 because they don't make a .46"?
C'mon, somebody had to say it.
Why bother with the 46? Or the 47, 48 or 49 when I can simply upgrade directly to the 50 GI?
SaintMike49
07-18-14, 12:01
+1 on the argument.... While 9MM has been improved, the same can be said for larger calibers.
WickedWillis
07-18-14, 12:10
Did I miss it or has someone stated the obvious: "I shoot a .45 because they don't make a .46"?
C'mon, somebody had to say it.
Or "I shoot .45 because shooting twice is just silly." I am impressed neither of those have been stated.
I have a Dillon Square Deal B.
I buy Nosler 185 grain Bullets over 4.5 of Bullseye powder and starline brass price is about the same as buying 9mm ammo.
Love my 45's and the accuracy I get even with polymer pistols .
M&P 45 (25) yards with my reloads .. also have M&P 45c that I use some times for a carry pistol.
2734027341
I shoot .45ACP pretty well, honestly I'm not super fast on split times with anything. My background in bullseye pistol competition seems to force me to get a better sight picture than I absolutely need even at close ranges and it slows me down a bit, doesn't matter if it's a .22LR or a .45ACP. On the plus side I can make bullets go where I want them to go out of a handgun at extended distances most shooters can't. Shooting in some local IDPA style shoots at the range I have a membership to I am not as fast as some guys hosing down the target with 9X19's but they're dropping rounds out of the -0 area of the target with some frequency or totally missing steel plates at only 7-10 yards. I don't drop many rounds out of the -0 and haven't missed a plate yet, and I can keep everything in the -0 zone out to 35 yards, albeit I don't try to shoot the medium distance targets like those as fast as the close in stuff. I can still keep 75-80% of my rounds in the -0 of the IDPA target at 50 yards consistently and sometimes even shoot a clean one. Not that it matters since they never bother to post targets out that far, and bitch and whine like little girls when I suggest running out to 25 yards.... much less 35 yards.
The speed issue is something I've been working on though since training is the key. Currently I haven't noticed any significant difference in performance between my .45's and shooting a friend's 9X19 as far as time. I will note than I am more accurate with the .45's but that is likely largely due to familiarity.
I may be in an odd position compared to many on this site where ammo costs are concerned, I have been reloading .45ACP for the better part of 14 years now and have a lot of brass and other components, plus progressive reloading equipment. So ironically it is cheaper for me to shoot .45ACP than any other centerfire caliber just because of my stock pile of components. I currently have three handguns chambered in .45ACP, a Kimber Super Match II (evidently the only Kimber ever made that works if this site is to be believed), an HK45, and a Freedom Arms M83 that I had a spare cylinder made for in .45ACP.
I would like to add a 9X19 to the family though, and I like HK's so the new VP-9 may get the nod once supplies open up and some holsters and other accessories start to flow.
Or "I shoot .45 because shooting twice is just silly." I am impressed neither of those have been stated.
At today's ammo prices, shooting only once is good economy!
Ready.Fire.Aim
07-18-14, 18:15
I bought a MP45 about a year after they first came out and keep it in my truck. Although the rest of my defensive pistols are 9 mm, I shoot the most accurate when "cold" with the MP45. It is what I use to qualify with for concealed carry.
I would keep it.
There is nothing wrong with a .45. I have never tried to keep up with what everyone else was doing. It's funny how everything comes full circle. I was shooting a 9mm when everyone said they suck and swore by the .40. I've never liked the .40 and never bought into the hype. I think it's a great cartridge but so is the 9mm and .45. They will all do the job with good ammo and proper sight placement. I have always and will always keep a .45 in my stable.
Outlander Systems
07-18-14, 20:13
For me, when I was old enough to purchase a handgun, there was a nationwide AWB in effect.
I was limited to 10 rounds, no matter what. I picked up an HK USP45T.
After the ban expired, I was too invested in the platform, both from trigger time and materiel. If I was turning 21 today, I'd most likely pick up a 9, and call it good.
The best thing about a 9, as a civilian, is that one can carry a tremendous amount of firepower with simply a spare mag and one on the smoke wagon.
YMMV
Coal Dragger
07-18-14, 21:32
I have a Dillon Square Deal B.
I buy Nosler 185 grain Bullets over 4.5 of Bullseye powder and starline brass price is about the same as buying 9mm ammo.
Love my 45's and the accuracy I get even with polymer pistols .
M&P 45 (25) yards with my reloads .. also have M&P 45c that I use some times for a carry pistol.
2734027341
I started on a Dillon Square Deal B, and used it right up until a few months ago. My lovely wife bought me an XL650 because I wanted to load 5.56 progressively. Well once I had the case feeder on and used it I then immediately bought another tool head and all the other stuff to load .45ACP on it. It is ridiculously fast compared to the SDB... now the old one is packaged up and ready to ship as soon as I receive payment from a friend.
MorphCross
07-18-14, 21:55
All of this is relative to whether or not the shooter can accurately hit what they are aiming for under stress/pressure. If you've ever taken part in stressed shooting (shooting under a timer) especially when it is combined with a short bursts of strenuous activity and you find that you can put all your rounds within the confines of an 8"x11" sheet of paper at 7-10 yards you'll be on well on your way. Add movement to the activity to see how well you shoot and move and you find that you can still put it in the paper sheet at 7-10 you'll be doing great.
Just so you notice I make no mention of splits or times, the focus is using the combined stress of the timer and the workout to simulate a self defense scenario. Accuracy is still the key and then you work up the speed while maintaining the accuracy. I would also make sure you practice this drill with your EDC whether it is service pistol size or not.
Apart from the objective, scientific reality of the effectiveness of different rounds, there is something to be said for continuing to shoot the handgun you have shot for many years. My go to handgun for the last thirty years has been the Browning Hi-Power. Its certainly not the best or most modern handgun on the planet, however I have shot many, many thousands of rounds through it and I find its use "second nature." Switching one's carry gun all the time is counterproductive. The stopping power debates are fun to observe, but stay with what you are comfortable.
Outlander Systems
07-19-14, 11:18
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b04_1337719658
Shot placement...
Can someone define the following terms
(1) Man stopper
(2) Knock down power
Thanks
;)
SeriousStudent
07-19-14, 11:47
Can someone define the following terms
(1) Man stopper
(2) Knock down power
Thanks
;)
Manstopper - Smoking hot redhead, whose father owns a liquor store and has a heart condition.
Knock down power - see also: JDAM.
Hope that helps.
Outlander Systems
07-19-14, 12:02
Can someone define the following terms
(1) Man stopper
(2) Knock down power
Thanks
;)
(1) Man stopper: Hits to CNS
(2) Knock down power: running threat over with vehicle
scoutchris
07-19-14, 16:11
Keep the 45. You'll want and appreciate the variety.
teutonicpolymer
07-20-14, 10:34
The Federal HST .45 ballistics make a compelling case
.45 recoil is not bad but the ammo cost is still there (the brass costs more than 10mm brass...)
Like with most things, at the end of the day you have trade offs
(1) Man stopper: Hits to CNS
(2) Knock down power: running threat over with vehicle
Perfect explanation
I don't shoot them often but still keep two .45s, my first handgun a German P220 and a German HK45C that I picked up a couple of years ago.
Could I survive without them? Sure. But I like them.
BoringGuy45
07-20-14, 12:27
I guess the thing I always remind myself when it comes to "stopping power" and such, is that a bullet is nothing more than a ball of lead and copper. It's essentially a pebble that is only deadly when it's traveling at high speed and hitting a part of the body that, if damaged or destroyed, will kill the rest of it. 9, 40, 45, 5.56, even 50 cal are all just pieces of metal. They aren't some kind of Harry Potter killing spell that simply kills you the second the magic hits you (sorry for the nerd reference :D ).
Well, my M&P 45 will be my carry piece until further notice. I'm still getting a P2000 sometime in the future because...well, why not?
MorphCross
07-20-14, 16:24
I guess the thing I always remind myself when it comes to "stopping power" and such, is that a bullet is nothing more than a ball of lead and copper. It's essentially a pebble that is only deadly when it's traveling at high speed and hitting a part of the body that, if damaged or destroyed, will kill the rest of it. 9, 40, 45, 5.56, even 50 cal are all just pieces of metal. They aren't some kind of Harry Potter killing spell that simply kills you the second the magic hits you (sorry for the nerd reference :D ).
Well, my M&P 45 will be my carry piece until further notice. I'm still getting a P2000 sometime in the future because...well, why not?
I wonder if I could get someone to custom engrave "Avada Kedavra!" on the slide of my M&P40c...probably shouldn't do that. May look bad to a prosecutor when deciding to charge and well, it would just plain look bad.
I view pistol calibers as the compromise you make for concealable and controllable firearms for self defense outside of home. Get proficient, get accurate, and get auto-programmed with it.
HST comparisons show some interesting stuff... like the 9mm 147gr that didn't open up well through plywood, or the 45 that was smaller than, and penetrated less after passing through glass than the 9mm.
Interestingly enough, the 357 had the smallest expanded diameter in 5 categories, and failed penetration depth in 3(bare gel, steel, and glass).
9mm failed penetration in 1(safety glass), .45 failed 1(safety glass), and 40 failed 1(steel).
Bullet to bullet variation causes the different loads to overlap in performance(with 357 being significantly below the other 3 in these test). Sure 45 is generally better shot to shot, but sometimes, as is shown here, that is not always the case. This does show again, why .357 is a waste of recoil and blast these days.
Again, the main thing is load(and bullet), not caliber. Nothing wrong with rocking a .45 if you fill it with good ammo.
http://le.atk.com/wound_ballistics/load_comparison/load_comparison.aspx
I stick with what I know. Started out with a 1911 in the mid 70s. I now daily carry a XDS 45 or a 1911 in a shoulder rig. As long as I can keep my follow up shots on center mass at 50 feet I'll stick with this.
I think the person should carry what the are comfortable with. alot of good points brought so far. one problem i've seen around my end is that there is almost no 45acp ammo in the stores locally. i will carry a 45 when i retire from LE because i can not because i feel the need to. i like the 9mm it works well for us, i've seen it used on the street and have used it myself and have no issues carrying the 9mm.
Coal Dragger
07-22-14, 15:14
I think the person should carry what the are comfortable with. alot of good points brought so far. one problem i've seen around my end is that there is almost no 45acp ammo in the stores locally. i will carry a 45 when i retire from LE because i can not because i feel the need to. i like the 9mm it works well for us, i've seen it used on the street and have used it myself and have no issues carrying the 9mm.
Ammo availability is a valid concern, especially for those of us now in the civilian world who don't get ammo issued to us from departments/Uncle Sugar with plenty on hand. During the late post Sandyhook unpleasantness you could barely find any auto pistol ammo of any description anywhere. Thankfully I reload and had plenty of components squirreled away or I would have been SOL. If you can't even find a caliber in good supply locally during normal market conditions I would be hesitant to use it as a carry gun or duty duty gun.
I think the person should carry what the are comfortable with. alot of good points brought so far. one problem i've seen around my end is that there is almost no 45acp ammo in the stores locally. i will carry a 45 when i retire from LE because i can not because i feel the need to. i like the 9mm it works well for us, i've seen it used on the street and have used it myself and have no issues carrying the 9mm.
Surprisingly I'm in the opposite position, I cannot find 9mm in my area at all for quite some time, but .45 has been plentiful so I ended up buying a .45 so I can actually shoot more often. Although I still prefer 9mm, at least I can actually practice now.
Eurodriver
07-22-14, 16:34
Who buys ammo locally if you're in a state that allows online purchases? Do you really get good deals on it locally?
I save almost $0.10/round of 9mm ordering online even with shipping.
zombiescometh
07-22-14, 17:33
Who buys ammo locally if you're in a state that allows online purchases? Do you really get good deals on it locally?
I save almost $0.10/round of 9mm ordering online even with shipping.
What are you paying per round and how much is shipping?
The Dumb Gun Collector
07-22-14, 20:02
Around here we were fortunate that .45 was only second to .40 in availability. For a long time there was little or no 9mm. I presume we will be in the same boat during the next panic. I prefer .45 because bullet for bullet the data appears to show that it is more effective. A FMJ 9mm appears to be inferior to a FMJ .45, and a Gold dot 9mm appears to be inferior to a Gold dot .45. My splits are in the mid teens with either so I am going to stick it out with the bigger bullet--not to mention I find the 1911 to be the easiest platform to shoot well.
richiecotite
07-23-14, 14:36
ammo availability is a major reason I switched to .45. I figured if i was gonna pay $18 a box for range fodder, might as well get the 'fo fif
BoringGuy45
08-12-14, 11:05
Well, my next purchase won't be a P2000. I'm going with a VP9. Got a chance to handle it and oh boy, that was impressive!
Now, if only a very large police agency will please adopt the VP9 and get Safariland to make some 6360s and 6378s, and I'll be happy as a clam!
Who buys ammo locally if you're in a state that allows online purchases? Do you really get good deals on it locally?
I save almost $0.10/round of 9mm ordering online even with shipping.
Right? Ammo availability is a non-consideration.
You'd think everyone around here would have at least several cases put back at all times.
Going Wal-Mart hopping looking for cheap ammo is just not cool.
Around here we were fortunate that .45 was only second to .40 in availability. For a long time there was little or no 9mm. I presume we will be in the same boat during the next panic. I prefer .45 because bullet for bullet the data appears to show that it is more effective. A FMJ 9mm appears to be inferior to a FMJ .45, and a Gold dot 9mm appears to be inferior to a Gold dot .45. My splits are in the mid teens with either so I am going to stick it out with the bigger bullet--not to mention I find the 1911 to be the easiest platform to shoot well.
Well said, and my thinking runs similar. Without going into "9 vs 45" caliber debates (we know that all the service calibers are similar in terminal effects when comparing modern HP ammo), I agree with the reasoning summarized here. And while I'll continue to own pistols in both 9 and 45, I am seriously considering moving back to .45 for my primary carry and HD guns. For a short while I considered consolidating all my pistols down to 9mm platform and getting rid of my last 2 1911's and my M&P 45. Less calibers, pistols, and parts to keep track of, and train with. But recently I'm leaning toward keeping the .45, and in fact returning to it. Like Gregg says, I actually shoot better with the 1911 (and with my factory M&P 45) than I do with even my 2 M&P 9's that were custom-fit for SL barrels. Plus there's the issue Gregg raises that sometimes the ammo supply situation means you can't get a lot in one caliber but you can in another. You certainly increase your odds of finding factory ammo by having one than one caliber on hand.
I don't think it's "dumb" at all to keep a .45. For serious pistol shooters, it's probably a good idea and well worth stocking pistols and ammo in two of the major service calibers if you can afford it. For me, it's 9 and 45.
IMO get what you really want. If you settle for your second choice, your first choice is always on your mind and one will give in time and purchase what one wanted in the first place. So like the infamous race engine builder/parts supplier I used know favorite motto, "buy once, cry once.".
http://youtu.be/06aRQ-ejqmU. Fo fifv vs da 9, just for poo's & coo's.:p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tku8YI68-JA
I enjoyed this video as I think that while there are some areas that are problematic, on the whole it is a good round up of the 45 vs 9mm from a medical perspective. A 454 casull or 500 S&W magnum have real "knock down" power, but neither would make a reasonable self defense round for daily carry unless you are the rock and carry the pistol to seek vengeance on your foes. So I have endorsed the 9mm for greater carrying capacity and the affordability of shooting and practicing more. I have had no issues reloading for the 9mm and factory ammo is coming down in price again.
The 45 is never a bad choice.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.