John Joseph
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2016
- Messages
- 1,441
Which caliber are you more accurate with?
One Caliber?
- Thread starter USMC1775
- Start date
- Status
Zerodefect
member
Heavy subsonics, apparently.
230/45 and 180/40
230/45 and 180/40
Hugger-4641
Member
As already mentioned, the expected threats and environment determine what I carry on any given day. I ALWAYS have a .380 as back up, either in ankle or belly holster. If I'm going to the movies, I'm probably carrying a 9mm as primary. If I have to stop a person or a car, it's good for the job. On my property at night, I'm probably carrying my XD40. I'm not expecting to stop any cars with it, so it's probably better for whatever else I might face in that situation than a 9mm.
LEO traffic stop, or shooting a car?
Garandimal
member
Given the omniparameter of the OP...?
9mm/147 gr std pressure.
Good for a micro, adequate for a compact, minimum acceptable for a GTW pistol.
If the .40/180 gr. was available in the current micro/compact 9mm offerings?
... by all means, as it is the better cartridge.
GR
9mm/147 gr std pressure.
Good for a micro, adequate for a compact, minimum acceptable for a GTW pistol.
If the .40/180 gr. was available in the current micro/compact 9mm offerings?
... by all means, as it is the better cartridge.
GR
Boarhunter
Member
^^^^^
I agree with the poet!
BOARHUNTER
I agree with the poet!
BOARHUNTER
Anchorite
Member
Great reasoning here and my thoughts as well .... what’s the best/your choice cartridge for [insert]?
I have 9/40/45. Prefer to carry the 9, and range work with the 45. But sometimes those roles are reversed.....depending on the circumstances.
Only 2 40s I have are because I was in the right place at the right time and literally stole them for a song.
Remember, everything is a compromise.
Last edited:
USMC,
A couple of years ago, I decided to reduce the number of calibers I had. I shot 9m.m. the most and like 9m.m. for off duty carry, so I sold my .45ACP pistols and most of my .40 S&W pistols. I have owned full size 9m.m. pistols like the BERETTA 92 and M9A3, SIG 226 and a really large 6 inch barreled target 9 based on the BROWNING Hi-Power. Mostly I prefer mid size9m.m. pistols like the BERETTA 92 Compact, GLOCK 19, SIG 225 and 229. I can also get compact 9m.m. pistols like the GLOCK 26 and my favorite, the SPRINGFIELD ARMORY XD9 Sub Compact. The 9m.m. can cover all the bases for my needs.
Then we went through the ammo scares. I could not find reasonably priced 9m.m. and .380ACP ammo. So I bought a pair of BERETTA model 82 pistols in .32ACP, for under $400.00 total and a pair of STOEGER 8040 pistols for about $550.00 total.
Now when I go to my local range or gun shop, no one has 9m.m., but two shops have lots of .40 S&W ball and sometimes have .32ACP. So now I shoot .40 S&W a lot.
The moral of the story is buy whichever caliber best fits your needs and stock up in the good times and also buy a gun chambered for an out of favor round. I had stocked up on 9m.m., but I can only buy .40 S&W at reasonable prices (if at all).
Jim
A couple of years ago, I decided to reduce the number of calibers I had. I shot 9m.m. the most and like 9m.m. for off duty carry, so I sold my .45ACP pistols and most of my .40 S&W pistols. I have owned full size 9m.m. pistols like the BERETTA 92 and M9A3, SIG 226 and a really large 6 inch barreled target 9 based on the BROWNING Hi-Power. Mostly I prefer mid size9m.m. pistols like the BERETTA 92 Compact, GLOCK 19, SIG 225 and 229. I can also get compact 9m.m. pistols like the GLOCK 26 and my favorite, the SPRINGFIELD ARMORY XD9 Sub Compact. The 9m.m. can cover all the bases for my needs.
Then we went through the ammo scares. I could not find reasonably priced 9m.m. and .380ACP ammo. So I bought a pair of BERETTA model 82 pistols in .32ACP, for under $400.00 total and a pair of STOEGER 8040 pistols for about $550.00 total.
Now when I go to my local range or gun shop, no one has 9m.m., but two shops have lots of .40 S&W ball and sometimes have .32ACP. So now I shoot .40 S&W a lot.
The moral of the story is buy whichever caliber best fits your needs and stock up in the good times and also buy a gun chambered for an out of favor round. I had stocked up on 9m.m., but I can only buy .40 S&W at reasonable prices (if at all).
Jim
huntsman
Member
Under current ammo situation I’m not comfortable with just one caliber so 9mm and.40S&W.
ApacheCoTodd
member
That's one way to look at it.
Another, using my situation, is:
If all the semi-auto ammo that I have was for a single caliber - I wouldn't be anywhere near being concerned for years to come.
As it is, the caliber I that have the most in is 9mm and it represents under half of what I have.
While that doesn't necessarily mean that I'd have twice as much 9 - I would certainly have a LOT more.
Also, less dispersion of monies for; reloading components and equipment, magazines, ammo boxes, etc... Less space committed to the same as well.
Todd.
I enjoy shooting a number of different guns, regardless of the cartridge they are chambered in. There is no way that I would divest myself of those guns and the cartridges that they shoot.
For defense, I generally gravitate to one cartridge although it changes over time as I decide something would be a better cartridge. While I like 45 ACP, I'm currently using 9x19 for most of my defense services. It has more to do with what firearms are available than the effectiveness of the round. I do have some 380 ACP pistols that are kept for their self defense capabilities.
Additional information, I enjoy reloading so keeping "off cartridge" ammunition is no big deal for me. When my "stash" runs low of a particular cartridge, I load up some more.
Many folks just cannot keep something they perceived as not being used and that is OK but in my opinion short sighted. As my defense postures change and matures, I'm frequently pleased that I've kept firearms that at one time I considered undesirable.
Dump what ever guns that do not fit your "needs".
Don't complain when you cannot feed your choice of "needs"..
What ever floats you boat.
For defense, I generally gravitate to one cartridge although it changes over time as I decide something would be a better cartridge. While I like 45 ACP, I'm currently using 9x19 for most of my defense services. It has more to do with what firearms are available than the effectiveness of the round. I do have some 380 ACP pistols that are kept for their self defense capabilities.
Additional information, I enjoy reloading so keeping "off cartridge" ammunition is no big deal for me. When my "stash" runs low of a particular cartridge, I load up some more.
Many folks just cannot keep something they perceived as not being used and that is OK but in my opinion short sighted. As my defense postures change and matures, I'm frequently pleased that I've kept firearms that at one time I considered undesirable.
Dump what ever guns that do not fit your "needs".
Don't complain when you cannot feed your choice of "needs"..
What ever floats you boat.
mljdeckard
Member
I am down to 9mm. Cheaper to reload and shoot, easier on the wife, modern bullets work as well as any other service cartridge.
I somewhat disagree with your first comment , but admit to just tossing in my 9mm comment as as more of a humor statement as anything. I will still take the .45 over the 9mm , but will leave it at that.
TTv2
Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 4,987
Yup, sounds like you learned the lesson the hard way. Of course, once things settle down and you need money you'll probably sell those .32's and .40's and the process will repeat itself again.
I had that idea a long time ago.
I knew nothing about defensive shooting. I had never studied handgun wounding mechanics. I had never really looked at terminal ballistics test results. I thought that bigger bullet would surely make the .45 more effective. I believed in the idea of "energy transfer". I confused boom, blast, and recoil with "power". I thought about the stories of the Moros. I bought a .45.
I took it to my first defensive shooting class. The instructors told me I would be at a disadvantage. They were right.
It was the first time I had tried rapid rates of fire.
The guys with the .40s were much better at rapid controlled fire. The guys with the 9s were better still.
When I considered how far a charging attacker could move in half a second, I realized the importance of that.
I still have the .45, and it is better in terms of sound pressure indoors, but I do not carry it.
How many rapid fire 9mm bullets do you have to fire to stop a threat ? Did those instructors consider that ? Did the actual experiences of the faster recovery of the .38's against the Moros count for anything ? If it did then why did those who fought them decide to go to .45's . Just saying there is more to stopping a threat than how many bullets you can put down range on follow up shots. Not an argument on my part, just my reasoning for favoring the .45 no matter the opinions of others. Everyone can choose what they want to protect themselves. Your life, your choice for whatever reasons you use to make a it.
It depends primarily on the location and angle of entry of each bullet. The number is unlikely to depend on bullet diameter, within the range of service calibers..
The projectile technology of one hundred and twenty plus years ago is not relevant to today's situation.
It would be easy for me, .40 S&W. They each have their unique aspects and I do like the .45, I just think the generally larger sized guns make it less overall appealing to me, which is to say, the main problem I have with .45 is with a platform size that isn't as versatile. I like the 9mm (for me I have mostly .40 and some 9mm) but have no troubles admitting that I favor the .40 over the 9mm hands down. The 9mm shoots well and does recoil a little less, but the .40 is more powerful, moves around stuff noticeably better than the 9mm does (to me same as .45) and comes in the same size package as the 9mm does with similar capacity.
There is good to be said about slightly faster follow up shots with 9mm, I don't completely downplay that, but I also feel that focusing on that one single aspect where the 9mm shines has clouded peoples thinking. To me the "I carry a 9mm for faster follow up shots" mindset is not really applicable to real life, that's something that competitive shooters care about, meaning a half second faster 5 shot string means jack-diddly in the real world. The .40 pokes bigger holes, expands larger, destroys more tissue, simply hits harder and does so in the same size package.
Maybe what I'm about to say is considered too simple by some, but if I carry in order to stop potential threats, shouldn't I care more about damage dealt to the target instead of how I perceive the recoil? With adrenaline pumping, nobody would notice the difference anyhow. We're not talking about a huge difference in recoil or capacity in the first place, which means some people are making a big deal over nothing at all.
I'm not trashing 9mm, I have several and enjoy them and honestly I don't feel under gunned when carrying one of them, I'm just saying why I overall prefer the .40.
There is good to be said about slightly faster follow up shots with 9mm, I don't completely downplay that, but I also feel that focusing on that one single aspect where the 9mm shines has clouded peoples thinking. To me the "I carry a 9mm for faster follow up shots" mindset is not really applicable to real life, that's something that competitive shooters care about, meaning a half second faster 5 shot string means jack-diddly in the real world. The .40 pokes bigger holes, expands larger, destroys more tissue, simply hits harder and does so in the same size package.
Maybe what I'm about to say is considered too simple by some, but if I carry in order to stop potential threats, shouldn't I care more about damage dealt to the target instead of how I perceive the recoil? With adrenaline pumping, nobody would notice the difference anyhow. We're not talking about a huge difference in recoil or capacity in the first place, which means some people are making a big deal over nothing at all.
I'm not trashing 9mm, I have several and enjoy them and honestly I don't feel under gunned when carrying one of them, I'm just saying why I overall prefer the .40.
Last edited:
It's not about "faster follow-up shots". It's about the number of hits in the very short time available. One more hit can mean the difference, in real life.
The most authoritative studies have concluded that, with today's premium defensive leads, the .40 is no more effective, on a per round basis, in terms of wounding effectiveness than the 9, when it comes to human targets.
Keep in mind that there were significant improvements in bullet technology after the ,40 became popular.
Bullets do not wound by "hitting harder".
According to the FBI Training Academy at Quantico, there is no meaningful difference in damage to the human target--again, speaking on a per-round basis.
Perceived recoil might matter at the range, but real recoil, as it affects the number of hits on the target in the same time interval, is important in defensive shooting.
The defender cannot decide what internal body parts to destroy and aim for them. The results depend on luck, and more hits provide more luck.
"The projectile technology of one hundred and twenty plus years ago is not relevant to today's situation."
I understand the advances of todays projectiles over what was used in the past. The thread however is about the cartridge and that has not changed over time. Just like the 9mm the projectile advancements of both these cartridges have advanced to the benefit of both when considering the time period. We are still shooting the same .45 cartridge today as what was fired 120 years ago. We simply advanced the projectiles. So in fact I do consider the relevance of the cartridge's to be unchanged IMO. FMJ's are still here , and advancements in projectile technology enhances the effectiveness of all the cartridges being spoke of.
I understand the advances of todays projectiles over what was used in the past. The thread however is about the cartridge and that has not changed over time. Just like the 9mm the projectile advancements of both these cartridges have advanced to the benefit of both when considering the time period. We are still shooting the same .45 cartridge today as what was fired 120 years ago. We simply advanced the projectiles. So in fact I do consider the relevance of the cartridge's to be unchanged IMO. FMJ's are still here , and advancements in projectile technology enhances the effectiveness of all the cartridges being spoke of.
Bcwitt
Member
I have my 9mm paired up w my AR, & my 45 paired up w my AK. Problem solved.
I reload my ammo, so do not see a plus to reducing the number of cartridges I load for, or the reducing the number of guns that utilize them.
I load for, and shoot, the following:
9mm Luger
.38 Special
.357 Magnum
.40 S&W
10mm Auto
.41 Magnum
.44 Magnum
.45 ACP
.45 Auto Rim
.45 Colt
I enjoy all of them. Can some fill in for others? Sure they can. But who wants a world of just brunettes when there are also blondes and redheads?
I load for, and shoot, the following:
9mm Luger
.38 Special
.357 Magnum
.40 S&W
10mm Auto
.41 Magnum
.44 Magnum
.45 ACP
.45 Auto Rim
.45 Colt
I enjoy all of them. Can some fill in for others? Sure they can. But who wants a world of just brunettes when there are also blondes and redheads?
- Status
Similar threads
