.45 ACP, still viable for military or police?

jski said:

chicharrones, in that article you sent a link to: was that a .45 GAP or .45 ACP the cop was using? It didn't identify which one.

Click to expand...

From the article...

... his .45-cal. Glock 21.

Click to expand...

Since it specifies the gun as a Glock 21, the assumption is it is in .45 ACP.

jski said:

chicharrones, in that article you sent a link to: was that a .45 GAP or .45 ACP the cop was using? It didn't identify which one.

Click to expand...

The article mentions a Glock 21 which is .45 Auto aka .45 ACP.

I am 65 and a Viet Nam vet.

Sistema1927 said:

Personally (for what it's worth) I think that as long as the military is limited to ball ammo that there will still be a role for the .45 ACP.

Click to expand...

I totally agree. The rifle is the primary weapon and the handgun is the last ditch alternative if the rifle is out of service, for whatever reason, and the handgun is a means to stay alive until another rifle and/or ammo is attained.

Most grunts did not carry a handgun.

Is a .45 ACP viable? Absolutely. If anyone thinks that a wonder-nine can do better is in denial only because of more rounds. One needs to hit the target in a vital area.

All this talk about the how newer bullet designs for the 9mm have allowed that caliber to "approach" the .45 ACP is just looking at spec sheets. Maybe the cops have good 9mm ammo, but the military not so much.

I have owned pistols in 9mm (2), .38 Super (1), and .45 ACP (3) in my life and now own only one 1911 .45 ACP with good HP rounds, but I doubt that I will be facing any body armor if and when I pull the trigger for a home invasion.

They were Colt (Government and Commander), AMT Hardballer, Para-Ord, and Star PD pistols. Only the Para was a double-stack mag aluminum frame and I got rid of it.

To be truthful, my 1911 is the AMT Hardballer with a lot of modifications thanks to Jerry Kuhnhausen's book. I have had it since 1992 and it is not a factory pistol anymore. I have about $300 total in it, but that was a long time ago. It ain't pretty. It has been my HD/CC/SD/truck gun since then and its runs with anything it is fed with its correctly throated barrel.

And to all of you 9mm new ammo/bullet fanciers, it is loaded with Federal 230 grain Hydrashoks. It will outdo your 9mm loads.

Can't say the same about the other 1911 pistols I have owned.

I am not a big guy (5'-8" and 165#) and the recoil is not a problem. The .45 is more of a big "push" rather than the sharp recoil that many experience with the lighter 9mm and .40 S&W pistols, I have shot both, and don't care for either.

The military and police bean counters have decided to go with the 9mm insofar as cost. I'll bet they never shot them.

Jim

Some people are confusing "viable" with "optimum".

Viable is a threshold, it either works or it doesn't. .45 ACP is definitely "viable".

Optimum is relative, what is optimum for one individual, or department, may not be the case for another. .45 ACP may be optimum for some and not for others....

I don’t think anyone is taking about optimum or viable under any standard.
To say viable for military or police would suggest that we are talking about lethal. At least that is one standard.
Another group suggest that the weight of ammo is a concern, most with no military experience or concept of reality of how that goes. As I said before...weight is not a concern. You will have two, three mags max. That’s not a make it or break it weight factor.
If you carry more because you can, than that’s on you. Maybe carry more for your rifle.
You have another group saying cost, and that has some basis to it.
And another group says recoil and women. Interesting enough there is no correlation between the two nor should it impact a shooters ability to sufficently conduct a course of fire, however a lot of women...and men...in law enforcement AND military are not as well “trained” as media and the public think...and failure to midigate recoil is in fact a training issue. There’s often a unnecessary hesitation due to the very types of personalities that are on here, word gets around that a .45s mild push recoil is somehow so unmanagable to a wonder 9m snappy recoil. Either way it’s not a issue if you just midigate recoil as best you can anyways.

Viable? That's a strange descriptor. Both will do the job. I guess it depends on how good ones shot placement is.

Back in the day us tanker's was issued 45 cal grease guns.

Klint Beastwood said:

And another group says recoil and women. Interesting enough there is no correlation between the two nor should it impact a shooters ability to sufficently conduct a course of fire, however a lot of women...and men...in law enforcement AND military are not as well “trained” as media and the public think...and failure to midigate (sic) recoil is in fact a training issue. There’s often a unnecessary hesitation due to the very types of personalities that are on here, word gets around that a .45s mild push recoil is somehow so unmanagable to a wonder 9m snappy recoil. Either way it’s not a issue if you just midigate recoil as best you can anyways.

Click to expand...

The question does the department have the resources to implement this training? Staffing and funding play heavily into the amount of training an officer gets....

lysanderxiii said:

The question does the department have the resources to implement this training? Staffing and funding play heavily into the amount of training an officer gets....

Click to expand...

I whole hardely agree. If it was up to me, i’d love to see local law enforcements have the best training available to them. But...
I can’t speak to LEOs funding as I’m not a cop. I hardly grasp the funding between state law enforcement, city PD, and county sheriff dept and regional differences. However i suspect that the best training is reserved for specific job fields. Like how SWAT is trained vs how a Patrol Officer is trained for a simplistic example.


When it comes to military, if you aren’t in a combat MOS/rate then why would they dump extra money into schools to teach you to effectively kill with a gun? That’s not your job. You will be trained in being a refueler or aircraftmechnic or whatever the relevant job in question is.
How many of these not actual non-combatant types make up the military? Probably over 80%. So yeah basic training won’t teach these people anything more than gun safety and the general concepts of marksmanship. So they can stand armed watch. Any exceptions to that is non typical.
CQB, PSS/PSD, various types of combat pistol and rifle courses, sniper schools, etc are very specific to certain and few jobs.

The .45 ACP is an excellent round, and my SD/CCW choice.


That said, there is a criteria:

SD - Shootin' your way out of trouble.
HD/LEO - Shootin' your way into trouble.

By any reasonable standard, the subsonic .40/180 gr. will do the same work in a service pistol with twice the magazine capacity, both installed and reload.

For me, 13+1 w/ the G23, and a 13 round mag change or two, gives me peace of mind when I think a partner would be nice.




GR

The U.S. military used the 45 acp as their standard service handgun caliber much longer than any other nation did. That ended in 1986 which was 32 years ago. No nation that I know of uses the 45 acp as it's standard service sidearm caliber. This means that the story there is closed and decided on. The 45 acp no longer plays a role in a modern army in service sidearms.

Here and there some individuals, connected with special forces who can carry what they like, may use it in one or another capacity. Some like Chris Kyle, favored it and some still do. But that is increasingly rare.

It is still used in the U.S. by some in law enforcement. But it was always a minority round there and is increasingly more so. (The general curve there has been 38 Spl. to 9mm, to 40 S&W, back to 9mm.) I don't think it will vanish completely anytime soon.

These changes over the decades have little to do with the rounds themselves, or even the guns, but with the changing nature of warfare and military needs and the changing nature of police work. It's these latter things that have driven the changes in what ammo is used and what guns that ammo is used in.

Of the police forces that are giving up on .40S&W, I suspect the vast majority are switching to 9mm and not .45ACP, only because of cost and capacity. Is .40 still viable? LOL.

Coincidentally, this very question was asked at Forgotten Weapons Q&A yesterday (January 17). Ian's answer was that .45 is viable if and only if it is used in a suppressed firearm. I found that a curious take.

45 is obviously still viable, but the advantagesthat 45 has over 9mm are not significant enough to counter the advantages 9mm has 45.

Viable, yes. The best choice for military or law enforcement outside of Special Operations, not at all.

Klint Beastwood said:

I whole hardely agree. If it was up to me, i’d love to see local law enforcements have the best training available to them. But...
I can’t speak to LEOs funding as I’m not a cop. I hardly grasp the funding between state law enforcement, city PD, and county sheriff dept and regional differences. However i suspect that the best training is reserved for specific job fields. Like how SWAT is trained vs how a Patrol Officer is trained for a simplistic example.

Click to expand...

What I meant by this was that there may be a difference in the number of rounds and length of time required to get the same level of proficiency between different calibers of handgun. Further, these skills perish if not exercised. If a department has a limited number of officers and a limited budget, can they afford the cost of ammunition, and the non-availability of one or two officers at the range, instead of patrolling their "beat", sitting in court, or doing the required administrative paperwork that is part of the job?

I still agree that it’s a training issue. Not a .45 acp issue. We can’t say a bullet isn’t sufficient because people have a legitimate reason to suck using it. I know the San Bernardino sherrifs use glock 21s and people who can’t shoot it get some other 9mm. However it’s a large county, and they have the funds to do that apparently. As far as hard training, and going through a course like cqb where Uncle Sam is paying for you to shoot thousands of rounds a day for weeks... I get it, and even if you could, all those rounds shot won’t matter if you still aren’t learning recoil manangment if that’s the issue. My over all point is, it has no significance of the proficiency of the cartridge itself. That’s an individuals training issue, but people don’t want to believe they suck so they blame it on the “caliber” or “factory trigger” or whatever.
No one on here says “I suck, I can’t handle recoil, hence I like 9mm”

jski wrote:
Is the .45 ACP cartridge still a viable round for military or police use?

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "viable"?

Do you mean to ask whether the round is capable of doing what the shooter in a police or military environment wants the bullet to do to the target? Then the answer is "Yes". The cartridge did so for essentially a hundred years and circumstances have not changed so dramatically as to alter that.

Do you mean is the cartridge still competitive for military and police forces to acquire on the basis of the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) over the life of the guns? Then, the answer is increasingly, "No". While there are some exceptions, military and police forces that previously used the 45 have largely spent the last 30 years converting to other cartridges.

I work with several officers who prefer the 45 ACP.

Carl N. Brown said:

As much as I like my .45, that is reality: for the average person the 9mm would be a better general issue sidearm.

Click to expand...

but i am not a average folk person i like my 40 cal and 45 for man stopping

To each there own, I have both, I carry the 45 cus I'm more accurate and comfortable with it.
JD

No.... Only because it needs to be upgraded to be .45 Super as standard to keep up with the super-titan-ultimate-atomic 10mm. I don't want to see it soft-loaded like the 45LC when it should be a magnum round!!!

I do love the .45 ACP

I always laugh at these discussions as they end the same. This one is at a point that people are rehashing the rehashed stuff that’s been rehashed over and over and over.

Personally I like both. To me they serve different purposes. But I’m not military or LE. So I have the luxury of carrying what I want and/or can afford.

Frankly anyone that says a 9mm or 45 ACP aren’t effective need to be invited to stand in front of one. Funny how no one will do so willingly. To play on a saying Both Will Kill

I don’t think Folks here have mentioned that not all 45s are 1911s. I know that’s shocking and not all of us need to carry a zillion rounds. In fact most days, what I carry doesn’t matter as I’m out in the country and the biggest threat is a tick getting on my dog. Anything won’t kill a tick (without insanely good aim and harming my dog) and the reality is my gun will not be fired unless I go to the range.

So, the reality is that I normally carry my XDs45. I carry a smaller 9mm if I’m wearing dress clothes. And If I felt I needed more rounds I can open carry a full size if I like.

I’m pretty sure I’m not atypical with all of the guns sold. So yes 45 is “viable” and not going anywhere anytime soon, but then neither is 9mm. And while 40 S&W is losing popularity in LE there are so many around I’d say it’s not going any place either anytime soon. So all are “viable”.

Hokie_PhD said:

I always laugh at these discussions as they end the same. This one is at a point that people are rehashing the rehashed stuff that’s been rehashed over and over and over.

Personally I like both. To me they serve different purposes. But I’m not military or LE. So I have the luxury of carrying what I want and/or can afford.

Frankly anyone that says a 9mm or 45 ACP aren’t effective need to be invited to stand in front of one. Funny how no one will do so willingly. To play on a saying Both Will Kill

I don’t think Folks here have mentioned that not all 45s are 1911s. I know that’s shocking and not all of us need to carry a zillion rounds. In fact most days, what I carry doesn’t matter as I’m out in the country and the biggest threat is a tick getting on my dog. Anything won’t kill a tick (without insanely good aim and harming my dog) and the reality is my gun will not be fired unless I go to the range.

So, the reality is that I normally carry my XDs45. I carry a smaller 9mm if I’m wearing dress clothes. And If I felt I needed more rounds I can open carry a full size if I like.

I’m pretty sure I’m not atypical with all of the guns sold. So yes 45 is “viable” and not going anywhere anytime soon, but then neither is 9mm. And while 40 S&W is losing popularity in LE there are so many around I’d say it’s not going any place either anytime soon. So all are “viable”.

Click to expand...

I often suspect that these ''9mm v. .45ACP'' threads are more prevalent in the winter months when folks are less likely to be outside and get a tad bored with being inside.

I reckon that it is ''something to do"...

481 said:

I often suspect that these ''9mm v. .45ACP'' threads are more prevalent in the winter months when folks are less likely to be outside and get a tad bored with being inside.

I reckon that it is ''something to do"...

Click to expand...

Maybe but I’ve seen many during the summer too.

I think people just like to debate and argue. Thankfully most of the folks here are more on the debating side with very few arguing.