Poll for shooters over 40 years of age

I am over 40 years of age, was a shooter as a child/adolescent,

  • and still use .45ACP as my primary SD caliber.

    Votes: 41 44.6%

  • and no longer use .45ACP as my primary SD caliber.

    Votes: 51 55.4%
  • Total voters
    92
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nom de Forum

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2008
Messages
2,769
Location
Arizona
During the late 60’s to mid 90’s the hyping of .45ACP superiority over all other common self-defense calibers was at its high point in The Gun Press. I am curious about the number of shooters who as children and adolescents during these years were influenced to choose the .45ACP for self-defense carry but are no longer carrying a .45ACP as their primary SD caliber.

I REALLY HOPE PEOPLE WILL HONOR THE REQUEST FOR ONLY SHOOTERS OVER 40 YEARS OF AGE WHO WERE SHOOTERS AS CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS TO REPLY TO THE POLL.
 
Last edited:
I would say that during much of that time, the hype was right. Ammunition and capacity have come a long way since the olden days. I carry 9mm, but not because I dislike .45. I just like my 9mm carry options.

A person drives his Honda Accord daily (HK P30SK) because it runs well, is cheap with the gas, and has few to no mechanical issues. However, their passion may lie with the 1960s muscle cars (1911) which require a little more TLC, are fun for recreational purposes, and are more expensive to feed. The like of one does not equal a dislike of another.
 
I still shoot .45 Auto. I don't own, and have never owned a 9MM pistol, though it doesn't mean I won't. As I get older, my desire for a lighter recoiling handgun increases. I suspect I'll end up with a 9MM in the near future.
 
guyfromohio said:
I would say that during much of that time, the hype was right. Ammunition and capacity have come a long way since the olden days. I carry 9mm, but not because I dislike .45. I just like my 9mm carry options.

A person drives his Honda Accord daily (HK P30SK) because it runs well, is cheap with the gas, and has few to no mechanical issues. However, their passion may lie with the 1960s muscle cars (1911) which require a little more TLC, are fun for recreational purposes, and are more expensive to feed. The like of one does not equal a dislike of another.
Click to expand...

During the years in question I certainly believed the hype was right. I have since come to the conclusion it never was right. The superiority of the .45ACP to the 9mmP as ammunition for a SD pistol never existed except in the minds of some people. Effectiveness has always been about penetrating deeply enough in the correct locations of the body, and predictable one shot stops exist as literary invention and not reality. The thread/poll is not about liking or disliking the .45ACP. There is nothing wrong with people who choose to carry the .45ACP. I am just curious about how much choices have changed in people of a specified age group and type.
 
Last edited:
...predictable one shot stops exist as literary invention and not reality.
Click to expand...
I agree.
Effectiveness has always been about penetrating deeply enough in the correct locations of the body...
Click to expand...
I also agree.
I have since come to the conclusion it never was right. The superiority of the .45ACP to the 9mmP as ammunition for a SD pistol never existed except in the minds of some people.
Click to expand...
However, I disagree with this statement. There was a very long time period within those years where the theory of "energy dump" was the guiding principal of ammo performance. High energy, rapid expanding, shallow penetrating ammo ruled the day. Since the technology at the time couldn't get any .45 Auto round to penetrate as shallow as those very light 90 - 115 9MM rounds, simply by the failure to reach the desired goals of performance in the 1970's - 1980's, the .45 Auto was actually a better performing round.
 
The hyping of .45ACP in The Gun Press was led by one Jeff Cooper who spouted mostly irrational nonsense. Said hype was proven to be nonsense in a series of tests done by rational people long before Cooper came along. Proved that physics is always right and that no handgun round will stop a BG with one shot. Worse if said shot in not placed correctly in a vital spot. Even then there's no guarantees.
What pistol/cartridge combination you use has nothing to do with your age or anything else. It's just a personal choice. And how well you can shoot whatever it happens to be.
In my case, no CCW, but none of the 'Wonder Nines' new in the 80's/90's fit my hand. Nearly cried when I picked up a CZ 75 for the first time(CZ's were in Canada long before they got Stateside. Came with a factory target and everyone of 'em shot an easy 2". Forget how far.) and I couldn't reach the trigger properly. Oh well, Smith 'K' frames don't either. My BHP and my 1911A1 do.
 
JTQ said:
I agree.

I also agree.

However, I disagree with this statement. There was a very long time period within those years where the theory of "energy dump" was the guiding principal of ammo performance. High energy, rapid expanding, shallow penetrating ammo ruled the day. Since the technology at the time couldn't get any .45 Auto round to penetrate as shallow as those very light 90 - 115 9MM rounds, simply by the failure to reach the desired goals of performance in the 1970's - 1980's, the .45 Auto was actually a better performing round.
Click to expand...


What you are implying made the .45ACP better in terminal ballistic performance (deep penetration) was equally possible by numerous other calibers using available bullets. That is all besides the point, because being a better choice of ammunition for a SD pistol is about more than the terminal ballistic qualities of one shot from one bullet if the different calibers of ammunition are nearly identical in sufficient terminal ballistic performance.
 
I never bought into the Cult of the 1911. Nor the Cult of the Glock, either.

The way I look at it, accuracy matters most. You have to hit the opponent where it does the most damage. And the 9mm isn't half the flinch-maker the .45ACP is. The one advantage of the 1911 is that you can gunsmith a decent trigger into one.

Which is why I don't regard any of the popular guns as The Ultimate Fighting Pistol. As far as I'm concerned, they all fall short.
 
.45acp was designed to drop terrorists in 1 hit. particularly those of the Moro ethnicity in the Philippines. Purpose built for that goal. It is a superior man stopper to 9mm, whether that is outweighed by reduced ammo capacity and penetration depth, is the debate, not the man stopping capability itself. i'm under 40 so i will not vote in the poll.
 
Last edited:
I still carry a 45 on occasion. I was an LEO for overy 30 years and when given a choice I carried a 45. Did not feel undergunned with a 9, 38, or 357 just liked a 45 better. I no longer have to put myself in dangerous situations on a regular basis. Right now I'm carrying a 327 magnum and a 380. I don't feel undergunned for what I'm doing today.

Some feel you need to carry something to deal with the Zombie apocalypse all the time. I don't.
 
I have since come to the conclusion it never was right. The superiority of the .45ACP to the 9mmP as ammunition for a SD pistol never existed except in the minds of some people.
Click to expand...

This.

The story about the 38 Colt revolvers failures in the Philippines against Moro natives is often quoted. And how the Army requested 45 Colt revolvers be sent. No one ever tells the rest of the story about how it made no difference.

The military got a good look at 9mm vs 45 ACP during 2 World Wars and even they concluded 9mm was a better option after WW-2. It has nothing to do with better loads today than years ago.

One reason why 9mm was slow to catch on here vs the rest of the world is because of anemic loads offered by manufacturers here. The common 9mm loads everywhere else has always been what we call +P. I can see why few had faith in a 115 gr bullet @ 1100 fps. But the rest of the world, as well as current military loads are 125 gr at 1200-1300 fps. That is right with 357 mag loads from 4" or shorter barrels.

I own some 45 Pistols because I like them, but don't put any faith in 1 round of 45 being a bit better than 1 round of 9mm.
 
Wil Terry said:
I DO NOT GET IT. Of what earthly use is such information/data/etc ??

And so iot goes...
Click to expand...

Keep reading the thread and you will probably come to understand the "earthly" use of the information. I have purposely not said more so as to not bias the responses to the thread/poll.
 
Last edited:
40 is an interesting age cut off. I'm 50 and joined the Marines at 17. We had 1911 .45's for the first 5 years I was in. Only got the 9mm Beretta's after that. My MOS wasn't first on the list to get the new guns! I was enlisted and so I wasn't high enough rank to qualify with the 1911, but did fire them a few times in familiarization.

Point being, in the military, most guys younger than 50 would have only limited exposure to 1911's, but likely had more time with the Beretta M9.

As a kid I only shot .22's and rifles.

I do not own, nor have ever owned a 1911 .45, it just isn't very appealing to me. I have owned and own several .22's, 25's, 9mm's, 40's, .357's, 38's, 44's.
If I did buy a 1911, it would likely be in 38 super.
 
GRIZ22 said:
I still carry a 45 on occasion. I was an LEO for overy 30 years and when given a choice I carried a 45. Did not feel undergunned with a 9, 38, or 357 just liked a 45 better. I no longer have to put myself in dangerous situations on a regular basis. Right now I'm carrying a 327 magnum and a 380. I don't feel undergunned for what I'm doing today.

Some feel you need to carry something to deal with the Zombie apocalypse all the time. I don't.
Click to expand...
i'd say for zombies you'd need a lot of smaller bullets more than a few big ones.
 
Well, because of the two limited options, I cannot cast a vote. I never carried a .45. I just turned 49 this past weekend, and I remember all the hype around the caliber wars (which are still going strong, as far as I can tell).

Although legal carry just became a reality for me this year (Illinois), my SD choice has always been .357 Magnum or .38 Special. My EDC is a .38 snubbie. My nightstand gun is a .357.

I have a 1911 in .45ACP. For me, it's really just a range toy.
 
jr_watkins said:
40 is an interesting age cut off. I'm 50 and joined the Marines at 17. We had 1911 .45's for the first 5 years I was in. Only got the 9mm Beretta's after that. My MOS wasn't first on the list to get the new guns! I was enlisted and so I wasn't high enough rank to qualify with the 1911, but did fire them a few times in familiarization.

Point being, in the military, most guys younger than 50 would have only limited exposure to 1911's, but likely had more time with the Beretta M9.

As a kid I only shot .22's and rifles.

I do not own, nor have ever owned a 1911 .45, it just isn't very appealing to me. I have owned and own several .22's, 25's, 9mm's, 40's, .357's, 38's, 44's.
If I did buy a 1911, it would likely be in 38 super.
Click to expand...

I almost chose 50 as the age cut-off. I chose 40 because people that young as children/adolescents would still be exposed to the time period of the greatest hyping of the .45ACP and denigration of other calibers, especially 9mmP.

Many shooters were exposed to the .45ACP as youths through the Press and shooting before or without being a member of the military. I certainly was. I was in the Army before and during the transition to the Beretta 9mmP.
 
PJSprog said:
Well, because of the two limited options, I cannot cast a vote. I never carried a .45. I just turned 49 this past weekend, and I remember all the hype around the caliber wars (which are still going strong, as far as I can tell).

Although legal carry just became a reality for me this year (Illinois), my SD choice has always been .357 Magnum or .38 Special. My EDC is a .38 snubbie. My nightstand gun is a .357.

I have a 1911 in .45ACP. For me, it's really just a range toy.
Click to expand...

I have a very good reason for the limited poll choices. It has nothing to do with not valuing your choice and similar individuals' choices. I am very specifically looking for information on what I asked. Thanks for posting though, the information about your choices is interesting.
 
.45acp was designed to drop terrorists in 1 hit.
Click to expand...

Source?

It is a superior man stopper to 9mm, whether that is outweighed by reduced ammo capacity and penetration depth, is the debate, not the man stopping capability itself.
Click to expand...

How does one measure "man stopping capability?" Is it quantifiable? If so, what's used in that calculation?

i'm under 40 so i will not vote in the poll.
Click to expand...

Same.

On this forum, a lot of people get persnickety when asked to back their assertions. Nonetheless, bold claims require bold evidence, so it would be disingenuous to the discussion not to ask.
 
Nom de Forum wrote,
What you are implying made the .45ACP better in terminal ballistic performance (deep penetration) was equally possible by numerous other calibers using available bullets.
Click to expand...
Sure, I also agree with that, but I was replying to what you said…
The superiority of the .45ACP to the 9mmP as ammunition for a SD pistol never existed except in the minds of some people.
Click to expand...
I stand by my belief, and agree with your earlier point…
Effectiveness has always been about penetrating deeply enough in the correct locations of the body
Click to expand...
The 9MM hollow points of the 1970's - 1980's were shallow penetrators and poor performers.

In regards to all defensive handgun performance measures though, there are far too many variables for most of the studies/testing to be of much value. If you are always attacked by ordnance gelatin, and have the opportunity to shoot it at 10 feet, I think performance can be adequately gauged.

There is a huge differences between various humans size, musculature, clothing, and will to fight on. The other problem is I'm pretty sure there are no LE or defensive training doctrines that teach you to shoot once, see if the bad guy stops, then shoot one more time, check again, and so on. The typical doctrine is to shoot until the threat stops.

How many rounds would you have expended before you realize the threat has stopped? Three, five, ten, etc. How do you know which round actually stopped the threat? Was it the first one, and you were able to shoot four more rounds before you noticed the threat had stopped, or was it the fifth round?
 
I'm 20+ years beyond 40.

There seems to be no place for those of use who used the 45acp as one choice for self defense and continue to use it as one choice.

I did not pay much attention to the gun press till I was in my 50s.

I learned to shoot a 1911 when I was 18 and it was in 45 acp. I was not influenced by the gun press in that choice nor by Jeff Cooper. I never heard of Jeff Cooper till the 1990's. I did not live in his world. I did not read the gun press. The 1911 and the 45 acp were one option I used.

tipoc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
  • Poll
45 Acp ?&poll Glock Vs Kimber Pls Read Thread Before Vote
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
kptaylor
K
C
  • Locked
Preferred caliber: 9mm or 40 for personal defense?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
4K
StrikeEagle
S
R
  • Locked
Military Monday; Glock 21 gen 04 .45acp/LE trade-in.....
Replies
5
Views
755
RustyShackelford
R
B
  • Locked
  • Poll
Would you donate money for legal defense of self-defense shooter?
2 3
Replies
61
Views
2K
Bill_Rights
B
R
  • Locked
27 or 33, yes, a .40 S&W or a .357 sig.
Replies
7
Views
556
Rich357
R
Back
Top