Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by wgp, May 18, 2016.
I have two guns in .45acp, but nary a 1911.
Taking it a little further...
The area of a circle is pi X the radius (1/2 the diameter)squared, so the area of the 9mm is 3.1416 X .177 squared (.0316). Thus, 9mm = .0989 sq.inch. .45 cal diameter = .1597 sq. inch. So the area (size of the hole) of the .45 is 1.6X the area of the 9mm.
Think about that.
yes, this may be true. But, keep in mind, E=M(V squared), so when deriving the kinetic energy that an object has, the velocity component of the equation has a larger effect on the product. But, 0 times anything is 0, so the mass of the projectile is relevant.
I'm NOT trying to pick a fight here, just point out that there are more variables in play than simply the diameter of tissue displaced by said object. We can do all the math and physics we like, but real-world testing into things like meat products (say a side of pig) or a block of known-density ballistic gel will show things that may be difficult to 'calculate'.
My Uncle Sam loaned me an OD green Colt 1911 in the early '70s; the color matched the clothes he gave me - I felt macho and invincible - but looking back, I was just young and naive. It was a fairly accurate and reliable thing - I always qualified "Expert" at the range. He made me give it back (I got to keep the clothes) and I never thought about owning one again until a few years back. Now have a WC, LB and a good old Colt 70 - they all shoot better than I can - I carry the LB daily. All of the modern stuff is probably good but I am a .45 1911 guy because that is what I am comfortable with and all I know. Old soldiers carry 1911s and tell boring war stories (well maybe just only me). Good shooting.
Honestly I think a lot this is the marketing in the gun industry, its funny but you can track the trends of the gun market by perusing the ads on Armslist or similar sites or your LGS/pawnshop used gun counter.
I remember back in 2011 the 1911 graced the cover of every gun magazine, and people raved about them and how great they were and combat proven, people went out and bought them, in piles. All except a couple Ken Hackathorn and Larry Vickers I recall warned people that the 1911 was a maintenance queen.
Then came the rise of the tactical gun fighter classes and people decried the platform, and how a $500 high capacity striker fired plastic fantastic was all you needed, and that you MUST have 15-17 rounds in a magazine for CCW/EDC to be properly prepared. 1911's "sucked" and were old, heavy, outdated and low capacity.
Now we have the "but the FBI says all you need is 9mm" and Im seeing 40 and 45 platforms on the used market being sold at great deals. I think its marketing hype to sell guns, and get you to buy more guns. Not that there is a problem with that, but marketing has to tell you, you need something else.
I love the 1911, its not my only handgun, and its not my only EDC firearm. Ive owned plastic guns, quite a few actually, but they never provided me the shooting experience my 1911 has, and none them shot 45 Super. Yes I have sent my 1911 to a smith for work, and tuning but nothing wrong with that. Especially when people are paying upwards of $1k for people to melt holes and mill cuts in their Glocks.
I can't tell you what the next trend in the gun industry will be, but there will be another just around the corner. The 1911 has fallen in and out fashion a couple times, but it seems to have the staying power in the gun industry and devoted following that other platforms don't.
That's not what I remember lol
And no, double stack polymer frame striker fired pistols chambered in 9mm are not a tempory trend that will change for something else around the corner...not...even...close
I like pistols with a nice high tight bore axis and despise beaver tails. In a nut shell those are my only reasons for having no interest in 1911's.
I think there's only two areas where the plastic guns really do well:
1) is when you've got a bunch of pseudo-trained cops that need to have "something" in the holster, but when you get right down to it the primary objective of the department is to save money. Then a Glock starts looking pretty good (up until the first "Glock leg" incident). I suspect over time we'll see departments trying to figure out how to move to Hi-points and the like.
2) is when you've got a gun in the ultra-compact size range. If Sig could ever get it together with the 938 (or another, better manufacturer emerge) this application would go away.
For all other applications, give me a steel gun. Preferably a 1911 but a CZ75 or BHP type will do in a pinch.
Finally we're at least getting close to the real reason which is that only manly men carry 1911 and shoot the 45 acp as JMB meant it to be.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Bottom line, .45 is obsolete as a defensive round, which is the reason (or a least the stated reason) that most people buy handguns. You are giving up 50% of the capacity, increasing weight, and increasing cost vs. a plastic 9mm, for virtually nothing in return.
I'm sure the 1911 will still be around for shooters long after all of us are dead though.
The M1911 will never die as long as I'm alive.
Marketing shows that manufacturers and the public see a role for .45 in today's realm of pocket plastic. The XD-s frame was designed around .45 and later utilized a 9MM barrel (and most recently .40), and S&W is now making their Shield in .45. Yeah, I don't see it going anywhere soon.
That would be a big NO!
That's a point some people obviously missed...
Wheel guns, plastic, steel, etc. whatever your heart desires from 2rds to 15+, can be had in 45acp.
I remember that 6 weeks after Sandy Hook the only ammo I was able to find with any sort of consistency was .45
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
One thing to consider: governments, federal and state, love .45 and 1911s in general because they know that most people carry them with a 7 or 8 round mag therefore NO "high capacity" mags or ammo.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I really enjoy shooting my 1911, but I don't carry it.
I carry mine -- and have been for more than 50 years.
I actually got a PDF copy of the FBI's Jello tests back when I was in college. I was in a statistics class at the time and was learning a spiffy new TI-89 calculator so I pounded the numbers for another forum. At the time I was on the other side of the argument, trying to defend a recently acquired USP Tactical 45. I was rather surprised when I discovered the .45, based on actual test results not theoretical (and in this case, wrong) high school math exercises, only showed about 15 to 20% more wound volume than competing lower caliber rounds. What your math exercises fail to account for is the fact that none of us are using non-expanding FMJs for personal defense (I hope). Our current crop of defensive JHP is pretty good at expanding across the board. This expansion is largely determined by velocity, however, so a round with a velocity of 1100 fps will always expand faster, more violently than a similar round with 850 fps. Because the 9mm has a velocity advantage of, watch this, 29% over the .45, it has benefited more from the advances in hollow point technology.
And again, even beyond the math and physics exercises, it is a fact that in real world situations, neither victim nor coroner can tell much of a difference between a 9mm JHP and a .45 JHP. Neither is a 100% shot stopper. You should probably train to prosecute your threats until they are no longer threats to you either way, and whether you're shooting a Glock or a 1911, a 9mm gives you more opportunities to save your life than a .45.
The 1911 is a living legend, a masterpiece, and properly built and assembled as much a work of art as a machine. Our country owes JMB and the 1911 a lot. A few years ago I had a chance to maybe pick up a 1911 for several hundred bucks off the sticker price. I was tempted and did some research. What I found appalled me. Even on forums dedicated to the 1911, there were a surprising number of people who admitted to loving the 1911 and having enough invested in their collection to pay off their mortgage, but who readily admitted that they left their 1911s in the safe when they strapped on their CCW or duty piece. Their will be collectors of the 1911, aficionados, and those who enjoy them for their history and nostalgia for generations to come. But all but the most ardent and stubborn out there fully realize that the 1911's time as a premier defensive and combative handgun is waning.
And for those who want real performance that starts with a .4 from a handgun, there is the 10mm Auto...
MTM above ^^ did a nice job describing a few things, and it would seem I agree with his post. I absolutely LOVE my 1911s, and share fondness for JMB's design, as well as it's importance in American combat history.
I don't have access to the algorithm to calculate the shock waves that any projectile will send through the body of a bad guy. I suspect there is a significant difference between the NATO/military issue cartridges that the military hands out to the troops, and what we, as private citizens can use as self-defense. So, when I hear a slogan like:"people who kill people for a living tend to prefer .45s" were (likely) referring to military issue cartridges. I was never in the military, (I wish I had, but that's another topic) but nobody I've spoken with yet has told me they were able to use something other than a NATO load. (if this is inaccurate, PLEASE correct me) ... basically, where I'm trying to go with those points, is we need to be sure we're actually comparing apples to apples when the topic of 'round potency/effectiveness' is discussed.
It would be expensive, but make for a heck of a BBQ after, but it would be interesting to see the results of a few different DEFENSIVE rounds effects on sides of a pig. Again, math is math, but sometimes its just easier to shoot something, and compare the darn holes.
I'll volunteer to help cook....
Military ammo, under the provisions of the Hague Convention cannot be "designed to cause unnecessary suffering." This is interpreted to mean, no soft points, hollow points and so on. As a result civilian pistol ammo is far more effective than military FMJ.
Not to quibble the maths, but diameter of the bullet is somewhat irrelevant...
The circumference of the hole is the true measure of the wounding effect.
Pistol rounds are traveling much slower than rifle rounds and for the most part they lack the high velocity temporary wounding effect. For pistol rounds it comes down to the blood loss of the wound. When you want to measure the wound surface of a pistol round you need to measure the circumference of the hole being cut.
Circumference = pi x diameter
I have a 1911 45. and a East German Mak and a XDs 9 mm and I like them all.
I am a carpenter and I like to have the correct tool for the job at hand.
You bring up a great point! If you take a look at the hole a projectile (bullet) makes, it's somewhat cylindrical shaped, right? (yes, I know, it's not perfectly straight, but in general... it's a 'tube' AKA, Cylinder) So, while the SURFACE area of that tube (cylinder) is the 'now-opened space, that didn't used to have a hole'... sure.. But.. the surface area of said 'cylinder' is in direct proportion to the diameter of the object that makes that hole. I know, I know... you don't want to quibble the math, I saw that, but my 13yo is bringing home geometry homework these days, and I get to step in when my bride lets me.
yes, the circumference is found as Pi x D, and yes, the AREA of the-dimensional hole is Pi x (radius squared)... when measuring various aspects of the 'hole' in the bad guy, the surface area x length of the hole will give the volume of the hole created, where Edmo is spot on, is that a likely better measurement of the damage a hole does won't be the volume of the hole, but rather the surface area the hole creates. So... surface area of a cylinder formula would get us there... Circumference x length of cylinder (aka length of hole created by bullet.
Sorry to geek out here, the engineer portion of my noggin kinda took over.. I still just thing we'd all get a better idea shooting some pig sides and having that BBQ.
Separate names with a comma.