Buffalo Bore. its not bad. Does pretty good making a uniform hole and good penetration. I probably wouldnt use it on people because it would through and through but is a bit nicer than just using a .44
Printable View
When I first starting carrying, I was .45acp or bust. My first handgun was a Glock 21 and I carried that for years. Now it sits in a drawer.
There was a guy last summer that got stitched multiple times up by two officers with 5.56 and one officer with a G21 after he decided to go on a rolling gun battle through town and thought it was a good idea to shoot at a bearcat. He lived.
Anecdotes.
If you want to talk vehicle ballistics in regards to pistol and rifle calibers. Hit up William Petty. Far and away the subject matter expert. (I'll give you a hint: .40 and 45 perform considerably worse than most would like to believe)
In terms of Joe Blow walking down the street with his CCW Taurus, I'm of the opinion that any service caliber is adequate. More people need GOOD competent training than caliber debates. I'd rather have a dude with good quality training under his belt and a .380 bersa on my 6 vs a dude who shoots 50 rounds a year with a Roland Special.
The American in me that likes big things and big holes will always have a soft spot for .45acp. In terms of practicality, actual ballistics, and because reasons, 9mm is my go to. With my G45 I can get 18 rounds in the gun, in a smaller package and real world terminal ballistics are near identical to what I would get in my MUCH larger G21 with 14 rounds in a gun that's heavier.
I love shooting 45. I love the thump I feel, and there's something classic about those big 230gr slugs. Every now and then I'll even take it through a class. But I believe in practicality and reality and it will always take precedence over nostalgia and feels.
Bottom line, I don't think you can go wrong with any service caliber. But there's a reason there's been a pendulum swing to 9mm and it's not just because of the FBI or people with weak hands.
It occurs to me that the next model Glock announces should be a G48 in .45 AARP. I’ll buy one, just for funsies.
This has been done to death and you can find statistics to support whatever you believe.
I shoot and carry 9mm because it's affordable, the guns tend to hold more rounds, and it's easy to shoot accurately.
I've also shot and enjoyed .45 ACP but not having to pay more for it.
Choose your pill and rock on.
Entertaining read. Over the years I never shot a deer in the hunting fields with a rifle. I was a a fan of Skeeter Skelton and always used handguns. Over the years I've used all three 44's, 45 ACP, auto rim, and of course .45 Colt. My last hunting handguns were a S&W 610 and a Glock 20. They were all effective on white tails depending on range and cartridge. I've seen my own hard cast 250 grain Keith wadcutters go through deer end to end at about 1150 FPS.
I started in law enforcement in 1990 and carried a S&W 25-7 or 625-2 for several years till I went to a 1911. In 1999 I was issued a Glock and been with plastic ever since. We had a dirtball about 1995 robbing a pharmacy that got shot in the nose from 5 feet with a Glock 27 and was in our jail within 3 days with a hole the size of a quarter in the bridge of his nose. He never had to blow his nose again. Ballistics are still a large part art vs. science because we are all different, external barriers, and everything else.
I'm old and like simplicity now. After a few tours and decades of life logistics are important to me. I can buy a case of 1000 9mm ball for around 180.00. I don't even own anything other than 9's now with the exception of a single suppressed .22. What you're saying makes sense but my pistol requirements now are met with a Glock 45, 19, or 43 100% of the time. We all make our choices based on our own knowledge, experiences, and lifestyle, and are all captive to our own reality, good or bad. Rifles are great but rarely available when we need them. I'm not a law enforcement precision rifleman anymore and gave up the SWAT team at 50 years old, so form me 99% of the time it's a 9mm.
For me, the single biggest plus is ammo cost for training. 9 practically is free and I can blast and blast and blast and as a result I have had life crippling come to Jesus moment about 1911s, HPs, CZs et. al. They blow.
Seriously the polymer striker is the DA/SA of 1990. I was ogling over 9mm Custom Shop and saving up $100/week until I could afford that or a EDC X9. Absolutely beautiful guns, truly pieces of art. But one day I went to the range with my 19 and a 1911 and about halved my groups with my 19, because I practice with it. I also realized, I can land dome pieces literally every time with my 19 at 25 yards. In theory I could do better with a different handgun but, how much better? Not enough. I realized that they're just tools and you gotta have a lot of luck. SRT guys can be sitting at lunch and get smoked for wearing county brown. That's it, lights out. Then you can get a dude who is running away shooting without looking at his target and split the difference between some dudes eyes. Dumb luck.
It's an effed up world, and whether you got AKs and ARs with laser sights and brass catchers and everything, or you're rocking a rattle trap with a hair trigger, you're probably never gonna shoot it in anger. If you do, mentality is gonna carry you through it. Force on force is vital but making small holes at 50 yards with a 9 or 45 or 10mmasterrace it pails in comparison to being competent with a solid handgun.
This legit messed me up, cause I could have a sick looking holster and be the prettiest boy with the shiniest boots in all the land but it means nothing if i can't hit shit. My G21 is great but my 19 is better, for me. Had I bought $2,000 in ammo instead of $1200 in a 19/RMR and holsters/accessories I would probably be a better shooter.
Pick your poison and stop buying guns. Buy ammo, get training and find a better hobby than keeping up with the tactical Jones's.
All else being equal, larger bullets and more velocity give better terminal ballistics. But how much larger/faster does one need to go before there is a practical difference? Back before the FBI tested the terminal ballistics of bullets in gelatin blocks, it was accepted the 45 had better ballistics than the 9mm and second only to the 357. Bullet technology and meeting terminal performance standards set forth by the FBI went a long way towards closing the performance gap of the various service handgun calibers. As there is little difference in terminal ballistics between the modern 9mm and modern 45 ACP, the 9mm has become the more practical choice.
You're not wrong in choosing the 45 ACP. You're not wrong in choosing the 9mm. There are times when nothing satisfies the itch like the 45 ACP. There are times when noting will do except to shoot the 1911. It's the handgun my father taught me to love and I think of him whenever I pick it up and strap it on. Sometimes I want my PPQ 45 and the 12 Angry Men waiting in the magazine.
Change your mind? No. Not my job. It's your choice and your responsibility:big_boss:
There's some wisdom here.
I do wonder why everything is so carbine centric these days - Instagram, training, marketing, forums, etc. It's 90% carbines over pistols, when the potential use case is the inverse. I'm speaking specifically of the majority of shooters being non-LE.
I want to say it's just LARPing the GWOT stuff and playing imaginary patriot, but that hits me in the feels a little bit.