"Experts" choose 9mm over .45 ACP? Really?

[SF0059]

Not saying .45 is a bad caliber, but the "bigger is better" argument is akin to the "I only run 55w80 HDEO in my Civic because heavier is better" argument. Just like any tool, you have to pick the one that fits you and your application.

And smaller ammo can be pretty effective in and of itself. Case in point, .223.

 

[Panzerman]

Mantooth, you stated that policy requires and that is why you are exposed to and using the 9mm and surprise, you like it.
What I meant is most opinions on the .45 Auto are formed by military and police old timers passing information which is outdated.
I was in a gun store a couple weeks ago that hires all ex military and I heard the girl behind the counter tell a guy the .45 ACP was a biggest manstopper they had. The guy asked about a .44 Magnum and the girl said no, a .45 ACP is a bigger bullet and it's what the military used to use for better stopping power before they were " Forced" to except NATO 9 mm. I am thinking, Yep!
Alrighty then, I am just going to go now.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted By: BalticBob

15 rounds spent, did he miss a lot or what?
Or did he go back and double tap the perps?


You sure talk big.

I wonder how you'd do in the same situation.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted By: Mantooth
Going to back to the 9mm switch, our range guys performed testing using our current .40 S&W load against a quality 9mm load. When it was all said and done, they advocated for a policy update and switched to a 9mm. Everyone hired within the past 10 years or so have been required to purchase their own firearm. I've heard most of the newbies hired since last year are opting for the 9mm.


Not surprising, this ^^^^^

 

[Dyusik]

I shoot twice if not to e time to aim. Once as an aim shot, usually within 6 inches, second shot hits what I intend to. My 9mm is fine for what I can do with it, as a defence weapon I prefer it as I can shoot as straight as out of a rifle up to 20 yards without routine practice. If I'm shooting someone at a greater distance, then I would be up to other things than defence. Every Sig, Glock , etc I have shot in larger calibers I could not shoot half as good at less than half the distance. I can't care less about stopping power if I can't hit the target. My 9mm XD is a perfect shot, every time. Though it comes at a cost of difficult concealment with it's 5 inch barrel.

 

[OneEyeJack]

I'm getting older, now and I'm going to switch from the Colt 1911 I carried in the military with a tour in Vietnam to a 357 wheel gun. I want simple when I'm under stress, a bit older, maybe in the dark and just waking up. I've been working at the range a bit more than usual trying to sort this out and the hand gun whatever it might be, is augmented by a shotgun and a Winchester 94 in 30-30 just because that's what I have.

I'm at the point now of making sure to keep a perishable skill like using a gun with practice. I've also admitted to myself that some professional evaluation and instruction can help even though shooting has been a life long hobby.

 

[tomcat27]

just hold a 9 in one hand and a .45 in the other. way up over your head....

 

[Crispysea]

I've loaded and tested at least a dozen calibers. I've decided it's hard to beat .357 Mag or Sig. There's slightly more recoil than 9mm, with better penetration. .40S&W has too much snap, and .45 ACP is just too slow.

 

[OneEyeJack]

I've wondered why the 327 Federal Mag never seems to have caught on. I came across it doing my revolver research but have never seen one in person.

I read thru an autopsy of a man shot in the chest with the 327 and 2 9mm rounds and the 327 appeared to do a lot more damage and left a much larger wound track. I know that this is one sample and proves nothing really, but the difference was remarkable.

The 327 came from a convenience store owner and the 2 9mm's were from a police officer that was in line at the cash register. All shots were within 10 feet. The robber was armed with a 9mm and suffered from terminal stupid.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted By: Timo325
The metrics are outdated. Today's 9x19 is a far better round than 10, 20 or 30 years ago. That's why agencies are starting to migrate back to it from .40 and .45

http://www.guns.com/2016/06/30/fbi-goes-back-to-9mm-with-glock/


from that article:

Quote:
"The contract marks a milestone in the history of FBI weapons as the agency famously ditched 9mm in the mid-1980s for a larger .40-caliber handgun. The return comes after 30 years of ballistic improvements to 9mm ammunition."


The gap closes....

I wish the old myth about the .45 ACP being "so amazing" would just die already.

 

[ChrisD46]

Greatest number of rounds on center mass in the shortest time possible = 9mm for the win .
The best expert shooters can prove easily this point with their times as the 9mm gets back on target the fastest ... Still I have a fondness for .45 ACP .

 

[Triple_Se7en]

I parked my 9mm in favor of a 45 ACP, all because of bears roaming in the forests where I hunt.

Otherwise, my 9mm with Ruger ARX+p ammo, works just fine in controlling the people-population that may threaten to harm me someday.

 

[28oz]

Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: Timo325
The metrics are outdated. Today's 9x19 is a far better round than 10, 20 or 30 years ago. That's why agencies are starting to migrate back to it from .40 and .45

http://www.guns.com/2016/06/30/fbi-goes-back-to-9mm-with-glock/


from that article:

Quote:
"The contract marks a milestone in the history of FBI weapons as the agency famously ditched 9mm in the mid-1980s for a larger .40-caliber handgun. The return comes after 30 years of ballistic improvements to 9mm ammunition."


The gap closes....

I wish the old myth about the .45 ACP being "so amazing" would just die already.



The "gap", if it exists, is still there. That "30 years of ballistic improvements to 9mm ammunition" ALSO APPLIES TO .45 AMMUNITION. Sorry for "shouting", but that argument is ridiculous. That being said, neither one is best in all situations. Shoot what you're comfortable with, and shot placement probably trumps all other considerations.

 

[Tom NJ]

Whether the key is shot placement or more power, I'll still take more bullets over either. The 17 rounds of 9mm in my CZ 75BD make up for any caliber differences, allowing me more chance for good placement and stopping a threat.

 

[Crispysea]

Originally Posted By: 28oz

The "gap", if it exists, is still there. That "30 years of ballistic improvements to 9mm ammunition" ALSO APPLIES TO .45 AMMUNITION. Sorry for "shouting", but that argument is ridiculous. That being said, neither one is best in all situations. Shoot what you're comfortable with, and shot placement probably trumps all other considerations.


The problem is that .45 is still subsonic. Bullets just don't expand that well until they hit the speed of sound. Don't get me wrong; I love 45 ACP. The first pistol I ever shot was a 1911. I still have a 1911, but only for target practice.

 

[28oz]

Originally Posted By: Crispysea
Originally Posted By: 28oz

The "gap", if it exists, is still there. That "30 years of ballistic improvements to 9mm ammunition" ALSO APPLIES TO .45 AMMUNITION. Sorry for "shouting", but that argument is ridiculous. That being said, neither one is best in all situations. Shoot what you're comfortable with, and shot placement probably trumps all other considerations.


The problem is that .45 is still subsonic. Bullets just don't expand that well until they hit the speed of sound. Don't get me wrong; I love 45 ACP. The first pistol I ever shot was a 1911. I still have a 1911, but only for target practice.


That doesn't make any sense. Are you saying the bullet construction/design doesn't take into account the lower velocity? Also, I never said the .45 was better. Just that neither one was best in all circumstances. Bullet technology advancements apply to all calibers and given velocity is considered in bullet construction and design.

 

[CourierDriver]

Funny how this thread would sound the same if we were talking about oil and such,,,so many selections, weights, and so on...

 

[28oz]

Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
Funny how this thread would sound the same if we were talking about oil and such,,,so many selections, weights, and so on...


You could be right. 9mm == AFE, thin / .45 == HM, thick?

The .40 == Monograde 30. "Hey guys! I'm still relevant!"

 

[CourierDriver]

Originally Posted By: Linctex
ALL handguns SUCK for "stopping power".

A handgun is only useful for:
1) concealment
2) fighting your way back to get a much better weapon.

I read an article where someone with a 9mm spent all 15 rounds against a mob of 4 or 5 assailants (it's been a while since I read it)

After that, I realized magazine capacity of the 9mm is better than whatever TINY bit more effectiveness you get with .45 ACP.

If .45 was still so good, then it would be STANDARD issue with many police & military all over the world.

It isn't..... for good reason.
It's got nothing to do with eating Wheaties.

Now that does not make sense, if you were to shoot a 2x4 at 4 ft away , using a 9mm or 45, it would go thru no problem,,,your chest or head would not stop those rounds..imho. I could be wrong...

 

[CourierDriver]

Originally Posted By: ammolab
Your ability to defend yourself does not depend on the caliber of your pistol..

It is the caliber of your marksmanship that will make a difference. I feel confident with a 9mm and today's ammo.
Your statement is right on,,great statement..the 9mm and 38 are 2 of my favorites for target practice,,they are controllable , no jumping around,,the glock 40 is to much for me, it sits in the drawer now...