True or False: "However well you shoot a .40 or .45, you'll shoot a 9mm better".

[militarymoron]

So maybe the second question needs to be rephrased, as from what I understood, this question is based mostly on recoil management. Given the same pistol in different calibers, most shooters who obey the laws of physics should be able to shoot the lower recoil caliber faster with the same accuracy. What would prevent that from happening?

The second question should be: It's false - someone who shoots .40 or .45 will not be able to shoot better using 9mm in the same pistol.

We all know people who shoot their .40 or .45 better than other people who shoot 9mm, but will all of them not be able to improve their split times with 9mm in the same pistol? What about .22 LR?

One of my pet peeves is folk saying '9mm has no recoil', which is of course incorrect. Anything that fires a projectile has recoil. But, when I ask them 'so, if a 9mm pistol has no recoil, why are you able to fire a .22 LR conversion of the same pistol faster?' then they backpedal and say 'well, a .22LR has no recoil, a 9mm has a bit'. But that bit makes a difference.

So, for those who voted 'It's false', I'm really curious to hear an explanation why the same shooter cannot fire the same pistol faster with the same accuracy in 9mm (or .22LR) than when chambered in .40 or .45, given the ammo and barrels have the same accuracy.

[ramairthree]

The other thing I have noticed is for a given power factor, the heavier, slower bullet,
Even though math is exactly the same, has a better feel.

Say you are shooting a Glock 23 with a 9mm barrel.
A 115 grain 9mm moving 1150 FPS

You put the 40 barrel back in and shoot your 165 grains at about 770 FPS.

Many are going to prefer the identical recoil of the 40.

Some are going to find it sluggish.

[tb-av]

I shoot my 1911 better than any full sized 9MM I've ever had my hands on. I have not however had a 9MM 1911 style. I'm talking about full sized VP9, Sig, Glock, Makarov style... that may not be considered full size. I also had a .40 compact H&K and after a lot of get used to the trigger I was able to shoot it well. It really didn't transfer over though.

I guess if the pistols were of equal style, quality of operation and function.... then I guess it would transfer over but to be guaranteed a "better" ... I'm not so sure. I guess the better shooter you are to begin with has a lot to do with it. Better you are the more true the statement is.

[tb-av]

So, for those who voted 'It's false', I'm really curious to hear an explanation why the same shooter cannot fire the same pistol faster with the same accuracy in 9mm (or .22LR) than when chambered in .40 or .45, given the ammo and barrels have the same accuracy.

Bold== It's not that they cannot in your specific scenario. They likely might. But... now add another specific... Take their hearing protection off... I would have to think the guy with the .45 is going to be the happier camper in the long run.

I do agree with your perfect world recoil theory though. Then again, what about the shooter that has been well trained to control recoil equally for each caliber? After that it's like he said above the actual recoil impulse may be favored one over another. It's kinda unfair to the poll though to specify exactness because that's not how we ever find pistols in our hands. We almost always have a somewhat different to decidedly different pistol when the caliber switches. Even though they may be considered equal quality and size, etc.. Similar tool for the job. In theory you are probably right and the more specific you make it the more right you will be but in reasonable real world use I don't think your results can be guaranteed across all shooters.

[26 Inf]

The other thing I have noticed is for a given power factor, the heavier, slower bullet,
Even though math is exactly the same, has a better feel.

Say you are shooting a Glock 23 with a 9mm barrel.
A 115 grain 9mm moving 1150 FPS

You put the 40 barrel back in and shoot your 165 grains at about 770 FPS.

Many are going to prefer the identical recoil of the 40.

Some are going to find it sluggish.

This is spot on. Generally folks will shoot the 9mm (out of a comparable/the same pistol better) but there are variables.

I prefer to shoot 9mm 147gr over 115 or 124gr, the recoil 'feels' right to me, obviously others feel differently.

I think an easy way to test the theory is get any .40 Glock and shot it then get a 9mm conversion barrel and shoot it. Before I started buying a lot of guns, I did exactly this with a Glock 22. My feel is that I shot it better.

During our firearms program we sometimes switched shooters from .45 to 9mm because of grip size (and after clearing it with their agency) invariably those officers shot better, but obviously there were several factors at work - the smaller frame size, the 'smaller bullet, less recoil' mindset in addition to the physics.

I have to say, as a rule of thumb most folks, all other things being equal, will shoot the 9mm better than .40 or .45.

[Firefly]

Pistol caliber discussions are like religious debate..

Or midget fights. Or Fat Lesbians arguing over who is the man today.

Not very interesting, someone gets in their feelings and it doesn’t ultimately matter

[Ron3]

Pistol caliber discussions are like religious debate..

Or midget fights. Or Fat Lesbians arguing over who is the man today.

Not very interesting, someone gets in their feelings and it doesn’t ultimately matter

I think it's going pretty good and I'm enjoying it.

[Diamondback]

I think most of the time yes, but have heard people mention .45 ACP was easier for them to shoot than 9/40 because the recoil impulse was slower/less snappy and they had some kind of wrist or firearm nagging injury. Not sure if they ever tried that on a timer though.

Purely subjective, but that's been my perception every time I hit the range. Maybe 9mm gives better split times, but I find I'm better and more accurate with .45, specifically from a 1911. Different people have different biomechanics and wrists that hinge at different angles, but this is the combination that seems to fit me personally best.

Somebody bring a 5" 1911 in 9mm to the range, and I'll furnish the .45 counterpart for apples to apples, and we can put it to the test.

[YVK]

Getting an objective answer to that requires a timer. Most people don't own timers. A lot of shooters can't shoot fast no matter what caliber; having something that returns back on target faster doesn't matter if they over aim on every shot. There are too many contextual differences that may affect individual opinions.

I am yet to see a strong shooter who can run 40 or 45 gun faster than the same gun in 9. Chat with competitive shooters who switch between major and minor pf.

[Texaspoff]

When I was out shooting the other day with some folks, one of the guys had a Wilson EDC-X9 and a Professional 45 model. When I ran it compared to his Wilson Professional, 1 round then a pair, till dry, I was able to keep my groups slightly smaller with the EDC-X9. While it wasn't much, and probably would make much difference in a real world situation, it was visually noticeable.


Shot to shot, the difference between 45 and 9mm is negligible. When the pace starts picking up, the difference usually becomes more obvious. There are a lot of guys that shoot 45's and 40's extremely well, professional shooters, etc.

While it may be almost impossible to tell if their was an improvement in their shooting with a 9mm, the difference would likely have to be measured milliseconds, or thousandths of an inch, but would probably show an improvement.

While recoil management is independent per shooter, the laws of physics and less recoil with a smaller caliber and load are irrefutable.


TXPO