Caliber war if you were limited


PDA






KegCommando
December 12, 2008, 03:22 PM
I know the normal arguments for 9 vs 40 vs 45, but if peoples choices would change if you remove the higher capacity out of the equation for the 9 and 40.

If you were limited to the same amount of rounds for each, how many of you would you always take the 45 or would the other factors such as cheaper to shoot still have you choosing the 9? Would there be any reason to bother with the 40, and if so why would you still choose it?

The amount of rounds is unimportant, but lets say for the sake of argument you were restricted to 5 rounds.

I'm curious what people's logic will be on this one.

I'd like to see your thought process rather than a response that just says "45!" You have 20 mins. Class, you may begin now! :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Caliber war if you were limited" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
indoorsoccerfrea
December 12, 2008, 03:31 PM
45 hollowpoints. bigger hole. the difference in velocity at SD ranges in negligable, and with 5 rounds each caliber, reloading would be same (unless we're talking wheelguns and auto)

Agent-J
December 12, 2008, 03:36 PM
.40s&w

Higher mag capacity, more punch than 9mm.

KegCommando
December 12, 2008, 03:42 PM
Somebody wasn't paying attention to the teacher :)

The mag capacity is fixed the same for all in this test.

Jason M
December 12, 2008, 03:44 PM
.40s&w

Higher mag capacity, more punch than 9mm.

The hypothetical limits us to 5 rounds, so capacity is irrelevant.

I would go with .45. Less felt recoil than .40 and makes a larger wound cavity.

CoRoMo
December 12, 2008, 03:55 PM
Yep. I suppose the .45 would be my pick because one of the reasons I like 9mm is the hi capacity. Take that away and I'm not as interested anymore.

Agent-J
December 12, 2008, 03:57 PM
hypothetical or not, even NY doesn't have limit you to 5 round mags.

Whats the point of this hypothetical? If you take away the obvious benefits, you're introducing bias into the decision.

Would you choose 9mm, .40, or .45 assuming the .45's are made out of jello?

Boba Fett
December 12, 2008, 04:07 PM
.308

Or did you mean from a handgun?

In that case, 30 Carbine from a AMT Automag III.


OK, OK, seriously now.
It is a good question you ask.

I like the 9mm but it has a higher velocity. This is not always good for CCW since it can go through the bad guy and into by standers behind them. In a situation like a war it doesn't matter so much. I always remember in Indiana Jones III (and yes, I know it's just the movies) where he shoots three Germans lined up with one shot with a Luger P08.

But it is small (see the image chart below). And I am not aware of any military that still uses 9mm as it's primary handgun round. (if anyone does know, I'd be interested to know...I like that sort of useless but fascinating info :D )

Because of size, I carry 45. Also because it expands to about double its original size.

But ultimately, since CCW isn't a restrictive factor, I'd go with 44 Magnum. I've been very impressed with the 44 Magnum from my friend's revolver. He even has a lever action rifle that shoots the same rounds so that is some added versatility. Great round if you don't have to worry about blinding yourself at night or going deaf.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/CartridgeComparison.jpg

JImbothefiveth
December 12, 2008, 04:07 PM
9mm would still be cheaper and have less recoil.


That said, I'd carry .40 or .45 even if the magazine capacity wasn't limited.

And I am not aware of any military that still uses 9mm as it's primary handgun round
The U.S. and NATO. Probably why it's as cheap as it is.

KegCommando
December 12, 2008, 04:08 PM
The reason for the hypothetical is to see if peoples responses confirm what I suspect. I can't tell you that because it would invalidate the test.

If you want to start your own hypotheticals, by all means start a new thread.
BTW, if they were made out of a jello I'd choose the 45 so I would get more of it, unless it was lime flavored, then I'd take the 9mm.

BlindJustice
December 12, 2008, 04:14 PM
It's CARTRIDGE geez

HKIWB
December 12, 2008, 04:18 PM
Since I practice frequently with all three calibers, I'd probably go with the .45 because I shoot it as well as the others and its been my most reliable pistol so far. If Mrs. HKIWB or any other novice is doing the shooting, then I'd hand them my 9mm because they'd shoot it better than the other two.

BlindJustice
December 12, 2008, 05:14 PM
I'll go with .400 CorBon
1400 FPS with a 155 gr. Speer Gold Dot.

& yeah I have the Bar-Sto Barrel for my 1911

6 capacity in my 625 .45 ACP revolver = 5 mag + 1 chambered

R-

Boba Fett
December 12, 2008, 05:18 PM
If Mrs. HKIWB or any other novice is doing the shooting, then I'd hand them my 9mm because they'd shoot it better than the other two.

This is another good consideration.
Question for the OP: are we talking novices shooting or practiced shooters? The ability to handle the caliber being shot is an important factor. If someone can't shoot 45 worth spit because they can't handle the recoil, but are able to shoot 9mm with no problem, then they should use the 9mm.

In a defense situation, it doesn't matter how big the caliber is if you can't hit the target.

So are we considering the shooters ability in caliber choice, or are we just assuming the shooter is a good shot and can handle anything and going from there with caliber choice?

KBintheSLC
December 12, 2008, 05:23 PM
I would hypothetically take 5 rounds of .22 Short out of a 1.5" snub nosed revolver... the ultimate mouse gun for mice.

f4t9r
December 12, 2008, 05:23 PM
I would pick the 45 shooting my 5 rounds out of the 1911 model.
I shoot it well and it makes a bigger hole

chuckusaret
December 12, 2008, 05:46 PM
I'll take the middle road .40 caliber out of SA XD

KegCommando
December 12, 2008, 07:00 PM
If Mrs. HKIWB or any other novice is doing the shooting, then I'd hand them my 9mm because they'd shoot it better than the other two.
This is another good consideration.
Question for the OP: are we talking novices shooting or practiced shooters? The ability to handle the caliber being shot is an important factor.

Shooter is up to you. If you are the only one, fine, if someone else is a consideration, that is a perfectly valid reason.

If you think Martians are going to invade, and they have .40's, and want take the ammo from their corpses, no problem.

I'm interested in the responses, and the reasoning behind the decision, and how it relates to the "normal" responses given for the typical caliber war threads. And in the end I'd like to compare those responses to what I typically see in my real world.

So far I'm not surprised by the 45 responses. It is what I expected. I do enjoy the few responses regarding 9mm because they seem to have considered other factors other than bigger is better. I'm a bit surprised to not see some of the other advantages cited in "normal" threads come up yet, which tells me that of the other advantages often listed, capacity is the most important. Interesting, but not too surprising. I've said too much and probably skewed further responses.

Marcus L.
December 12, 2008, 07:12 PM
9mm would still be cheaper and have less recoil.


That said, I'd carry .40 or .45 even if the magazine capacity wasn't limited.


Quote:
And I am not aware of any military that still uses 9mm as it's primary handgun round

The U.S. and NATO. Probably why it's as cheap as it is.

Not to mention that the primary service caliber for both Russia and China is now the 9x19mm. It is highly probable that the 9mm will be the only handgun cartridge still in use in 100yrs.

If I were limited to a 5rd capacity in an auto loader:

Subcompact with barrel length 3.5": 9x19mm. The pistol can be more slender, lighter, and still maintain a high degree of durability and serivice life. Handling is also much better with 9mm considering the subcompact pistol characteristics.

Compact with barrel length of 4": Provided that the pistol has a adequate amount of slide mass to slow recoil velocity, and that it has enough mass overall have good durability....40S&W since the .40S&W JHP design is still optimized around the 4" barrel.

Full Sized with barrel length of 5": .45acp


Given no capacity limit laws:

Subcompact: 9mm
Compact: 9mm or .40S&W
Full Sized: .40S&W

AKGuy
December 12, 2008, 07:26 PM
Gimme the 40. 9mm doesn't cut it stopwise, and the 45 has always been less pleasant to shoot (for me and my hands) than the 40. I don't own any 45s nor have I ever, but I've got a 40 that I can shoot decently and believe I can count on to do what needs to be done.

That having been said...I'm a 357 wheelgunner myself...

Matrix187
December 12, 2008, 07:26 PM
44 special for the win :evil: I can shoot them so accurately (anyone probably can).

ConstantineJ9
December 12, 2008, 07:35 PM
45acp

Boba Fett
December 13, 2008, 12:53 AM
The U.S. and NATO. Probably why it's as cheap as it is.

I wasn't aware the US still used it. The retired army guy at my local gun store was talking about how most of the people he knew in the service were using some form of 45 pistol (Sig or H&K mostly).

Learn something new every day ^_^

Big Boomer
December 13, 2008, 03:08 AM
45 caliber for sure, but...how about a 460 Rowland or the 45 Super?

FlaChef
December 13, 2008, 04:45 AM
nine is fine.
In modern hollowpoint and frrangible ammo the 9mm is not what you father's 9mm was and it is still cheaper to practice with.

Unless it is a 1911, that's just a classic for the .45 (nothing wrong with 1911 9mm either, i'm building one).

76shuvlinoff
December 13, 2008, 09:28 AM
9 is ok, my XD40sc has more muzzle flip than my steel 1911 45.

Are we talking steel guns vs steel guns?

At self defense ranges with all things being equal except the cartridge I'd be waffling between .40 and 45. Then I'd choose the .45

XD-40 Shooter
December 13, 2008, 11:52 AM
If the mag capacity is fixed at 5 rounds, then I'd want the 45 ACP, biggest, heaviest bullet around.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
December 13, 2008, 11:55 AM
Capacity IS a factor, so yes, I would always carry a .45, whereas now I usually carry a 9x19, and occasionally a .45.

mavracer
December 13, 2008, 01:32 PM
if your worried about caliber and capacity you need more practice and training.what gun you carry means little.it's the software that will keep you alive.
that said I have no problem carrying my taurus 905. 5 shots 9mm and I don't even use +p.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
December 13, 2008, 01:53 PM
if your worried about caliber and capacity you need more practice and training.

Then you must carry a .14 caliber with one shot, since caliber and capacity don't matter.

38 Super Auto
December 13, 2008, 02:09 PM
I'd choose the 45 ACP in model 1911. Ammo, magazines, and parts are available. It has good stopping power in a self defense situation. Need more if you are around bears or other large aminals and...

It can be silenced in a doomsday scenario. :rolleyes:

mavracer
December 13, 2008, 02:17 PM
Then you must carry a .14 caliber with one shot, since caliber and capacity don't matter.
I don't even have a gun on me right now:neener:

mavracer
December 13, 2008, 03:04 PM
and by the way
what gun you carry means little.
does not mean the same as this.

caliber and capacity don't matter.

.41Dave
December 13, 2008, 04:33 PM
If I were limited to 5 rounds I'd forget about self-loaders entirely and carry a .41 magnum or .357 magnum revolver. However, if I'm limited to a choice between 9mm, .40 S&W , or .45 ACP, then give me the .45 ACP.

GTSteve03
December 13, 2008, 04:49 PM
If I were limited to 5 rounds I'd forget about self-loaders entirely and carry a .41 magnum or .357 magnum revolver.
This is the correct answer. The reason I carry a self-loading 9mm is capacity. If capacity goes away, I go back to a revolver.

KegCommando
December 13, 2008, 08:01 PM
Thank you all for playing so far.

I was hoping for a few more responses though :(

Do I have to reveal my hand now or any more want to ante up?

crebralfix
December 13, 2008, 09:50 PM
RE: 9mm vs 40 S&W vs 45 ACP vs Other

("Other" includes 38 Special, 357 Magnum, various other magnums, 10mm, 45 Colt, etc)

Doesn't matter with high quality defensive ammunition.

I'm not going to provide citations because it's a HUGE topic with lots of controversy. You must do the research yourself. Just remain skeptical and keep in mind that "foot pounds of energy" and "ballistic gelatin" tests do not necessarily translate into excellent terminal ballistics.

Boba Fett
December 14, 2008, 03:43 AM
...it's a HUGE topic with lots of controversy. You must do the research yourself. Just remain skeptical...

I don't know what the OP's intent is for this thread, but what crebralfix said above is ultimately what any caliber discussion boils down to.

Most of what you read on forums and the like are people's opinion or preference which is all too often based on too little fact. And many will simply look for evidence that supports what they want to believe instead of searching for all information about the subject regardless of whether it supports or contradicts their opinion.

In my case, when I started getting interested in guns, I believed that the 9mm was the best round hands down. I liked it. It was the first caliber I shot with regularity. But I kept an open mind and asked questions and learned what was and wasn't good about the 9mm.

And I found my information not only on forums, but with those who have had far more experience with more calibers than I have (i.e. military personnel, law enforcement, firearm experts).

And what I have heard from them the most is: practice, comfort with a gun and caliber, knowledge of your firearm, and practice. The people I talk to often favor a caliber, but they always include that caveat.

I said that if I could have 5 rounds of any caliber and I didn't have to worry about going deaf or blind at night, I'd go with 44 magnum. Why did I say 44 magnum? Why not? I like the 44 because I can use it in a wheel gun and lever action. And because the OP's question is so open ended (no offense meant, just pointing out the obvious), I simply chose a practical round that has some added versatility.

Since choosing a caliber depends on so many things (gun type, person shooting the gun, intended use, cost, etc.), not having that information somewhat cripples the discussion.

Roadwild17
December 14, 2008, 11:42 AM
Reasons I can think of for each caliber:

.45: Bigger is better. The round is generally in heavier weights that either of the other two. This also makes it harder to carry spare ammo than the other two.
Decent ammo selection that is available almost everywhere due to the popularity of the round. I have never seen wallyworld out of all .45.
Recoil to me is a gentle push instead of a snap to me, but Im not recoil sensitive.
Ammo is the most expensive between the 3 (I think, I dont know much about the cost of .40 ammo)

.40: The hybrid. As some may know the .40 was developed from the 10mm round. The FBI had a lot to do with driving the development of this round because they wanted a gun with more power and still be the around the size of a 9mm (think femail officers and small handed individuals).
It is a hot round. Thus it has more kinetic energy that the 9mm and can have more kinetic energy than the .45 depending on specific loading. I suspect if you compare apples to apples you will ware out a .40 before you ware out a 9mm or .45 but this should be irrelevant in a quality fire arm.
Of the 3 I would say this is the worse round in terms of ammo avability. I have seen wallyworld be totally out of .40. I feel as there is less .40 that either 9mm or .45 in this country. However due to popularity, ammo if reality available although it doesn't have as much of a selection of the other two rounds.
Recoil is a bit snappy to my wife the few times she shot one. It felt a bit harder recoiling than my .45 and I guess snappy would be a good word to describe it.
I think pricing for ammo would be just order .45 pricing.

9mm. 9mm has been around for a long time. While some question is capability other have throurally embraced it.
It is the cheapest round by far. The round is considered to be the cheapest center fire round (along with .38) which mean more practice is possible and better hits are the end result.
Recoil is generally a non issue for most shooters.
9mm can be had in smaller sizes making for better comfort when CCW.
The round is EVERYWHERRE, go to ________ insert random country and try to buy 9mm, .40 and .45 and see what you can get.
The round is available in almost any loading you can think of for its standard bullet weights.
Shooting new HP designs will give you great results. The 9mm of 25 years ago did not have the power, modern rounds are g2g.
Once again I have never seen wallyworld totally out of 9mm


In all these I left out anything to do with capacity & I use wallyworld as a benchmark as to how the round has been embraced by the general population.

KegCommando
December 14, 2008, 12:57 PM
Ok, thanks all.

Now the meaning behind my madness.


As I suspected, the majority answer was .45, a few 9's and even fewer 40's.

I don't have any issue with what was chosen or why. Everyone has their criteria, and has to choose what best meets those.

The reason I was asking was to compare the answers of knowledgeable people here to what I believe is an anomaly here, and looking for some explanation for this anomaly.

I live in CA which you all know has 10 round capacity limit. I know more than my 5 but I wanted to limit the capacity as a factor.

I've been visiting the gun shops more than I should admit too in the past year.
I know that the majority of 45's are 1911 style and not the full 10 rounds, but there are 10 round options available.

I'm perplexed about why the 40's are the number one sellers, at least in my area.

I'd say that maybe 65-70% of the people I see making their purchases are maybe first-time owners.

I'm curious what factors could be influencing what I believe to be an anomaly.

Do they plan on obtaining higher capacity magazines, which begs the question what the point of that law is?

The shop owners often seem to recommend the 40 (from what I can overhear) so are they getting some kick-back?

Are people going based on info they read/hear that maybe perfectly applicable in other parts of the country but not so much here?


Please keep in mind I'm not questioning the choice of 40. I'm just trying to understand why here in CA where capacity has been virtually eliminated from the equation, why the .45 isn't the most common choice, and why the 40 is overwhelmingly chosen when the "normal" arguments aren't applied.
What I would expect is .45 to be the #1 choice if cost isn't a factor, or 9mm if cost is or some other factor like it being the most common worldwide. I would expect the 40 to be the least, and only chosen for a few with specific reasons.

GLOOB
December 14, 2008, 01:15 PM
Well, if you have a 10 round limit, you definitely lose one significant advantage of the 9mm over the .40 in several otherwise identically sized platforms. And in .45, you aren't reaching the maximum capacity with most guns, with few exceptions which are all very much larger than .40/9mm brethren. I'd say it boils down to the average hand size.

In CA you cannot CCW. So concealment is a non factor. So it's between a maxed out .40 which is a normal sized pistol, or a .45 capped out at 7-8 rounds in a normal sized pistol. Then there's the much larger gripped .45 for only 2 extra rounds... The 9mm and the .45 are both gimped pretty bad by CA law if you look at is from this angle.

.40: maximum limit (10) of the most powerful rounds you can get in a standard sized pistol.

If I could only get 10 rounds into the Glock 21, I woulda gotten a P220, instead. But maybe there are some others who would choose a smaller framed .40 if faced with the same dilemna.

shamus
December 14, 2008, 02:19 PM
88 magnum.



:p

but seriously: 9mm. It's accurate, it's cheaper, and the difference between the 9mm, 40, and 45 is very negligible.

TimboKhan
December 14, 2008, 06:17 PM
.45. Bigger hole, lots of experience shooting the round.

Practically speaking, my carry pistol is a 5 shot revolver in .357, so I guess in a way saying I would pick .45 is a lie from the get-go!

JImbothefiveth
December 14, 2008, 06:27 PM
The .40 and .45 both have very good stopping power, with the .45 slightly leading, I believe.

The 40's advantage might be better penetration, for instance, if you need to shoot and the guy has winter clothing on, or his arms blocking. Thus the .40 would be a safer bet, in case you need a bit of extra penetration.

hankdatank1362
December 14, 2008, 08:49 PM
44 mag revolver... big enough for bear, can be stoked with .44 Specials for any two-legged predators.

Roadwild17
December 14, 2008, 10:36 PM
+ 1 Gloob

With your average .45, your only get 7 or 8 rounds, with the .40 you can get all 10 (which the OP is actually limited to, not his hypothetical question)

You can "pack" the most in a .40 is what it would boil down to in my eye.

But I have big hands and would still go for the .45.

HKIWB
December 15, 2008, 02:09 PM
"I'm perplexed about why the 40's are the number one sellers, at least in my area.

I'd say that maybe 65-70% of the people I see making their purchases are maybe first-time owners."


My theory, and the reason I bought a .40 for my first, is that a new shooter with no practical experience is making a decision based on what looks good on paper. They read about police departments upgrading to .40 from 9mm, and conclude that the 9mm isn't powerfull enough. American folk lore leads them to believe that a .45 is too powerful for a novice, and something to work up to. The .40 becomes the default.

dbarile
December 15, 2008, 02:21 PM
9mm. Because it is the one I am most familiar. That would change if I owned a 1911 (or maybe not).

.303
December 15, 2008, 02:41 PM
.40 has higher velocities than .45, so you can reliably expand hp's through a 3'' bbl, instead of 4 or 5''.

HexHead
December 15, 2008, 02:43 PM
"With your average .45, your only get 7 or 8 rounds, with the .40 you can get all 10 (which the OP is actually limited to, not his hypothetical question) "

Since the 1911 is designed to be "cocked & locked", an 8 round mag + 1 in the chamber. Close enough to 10 for me.

Aka Zero
December 15, 2008, 03:26 PM
If I was limited to 5 shots..... 454 cassull, single action.

Make every shot count.

If it was just pick you favorite. 9mm, all day every day. It's used by most of the world. And it come in a CZ75 form. Athough I might get a 97 (CZ in .45) because 10 rounds of .45 is pretty fun too.

atblis
December 15, 2008, 03:38 PM
40 S&W Magnum for me please.

gglass
December 15, 2008, 05:34 PM
460 S&W Magnum if I have to follow the rules of this game. The 500 S&W has a bigger punch, but I've just had a preference to the in-flight characteristics of the 460 S&W Magnum.

2250 fps is just a turn on.

http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/691/sw460vrv1.jpg

I'd just put 5 bullets in since that's all that will fit.

towerclimber37
December 15, 2008, 05:51 PM
I believe I would have to choose a .45. not because of the "bigger is better" idea..though that can't hurt, but because it's a common round. the 1911 has been used by so many countries that it's hard to keep track of em.
it's also a pretty darn good round.
if you're wanting to blow their arm off or something, go with a 454 Casul.

I'll stick with .45 simply because speed is fine but accuracy is final. I can shoot a 1911 with a modicum of ease and with a fine accuracy. 9mm's would do the trick I guess..but I want the bad guy to bleed out quickly or slip his mortal coil from shock due to his head being turned into a canoe. :D

If you enjoyed reading about "Caliber war if you were limited" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!