9mm vs. .45 - but different!

[elktrout]

This debate (9 vs 45) will continue until the earth burns up. Your experience with the rubber blocks mirrors the famous Thompson LaGarde tests at the turn of the 20th Century when the US Army wanted a more decisive pistol after the poor results of the .38s they used in the Phillipines.

T&G shot into cadavers that were hung by a rope, so they could observe the amount of movement caused by each bullet's impact. Scientific? Hardly. Conclusive? In some respects. But it lead to the .45 ACP's development and subsequent adoption by the Army in the famous 1911 pistol.

Everyone either has their own stories or knows someone who has stories about certain rounds failing to stop someone. I believe Clint Smith got it correct when he said that you use your pistol to fight your way to your rifle. Obviously, we cannot always have a rifle close by, but his point was that all pistols can fail to stop someone in certain situations.

 

[ohwell]

I have both and I dont think either are as good as the 125 grain 357 jhp but if your really convinced big and slow is better than just throw baseballs. I think in reality it depends on the situation and what you have to shoot through to get at your target!

 

[GLOOB]

YES a .45 is bigger than a 9mm - BUT by only 1/10 of a square inch!!

YES A .45 @ 230gr is heavier than a 147gr 9mm - BUT by only 83gr!!

- The entire cross sectional surface area of a 9mm bullet is 0.126 square inches. It's barely more than 1/10 of a square inch, itself. A .45 cal bullet has 61% greater cross sectional surface area than 9mm bullet. But since you don't like percentages, let's just say a 9mm bullet is less than 1/10 square inch larger than a .177 pellet.

- 83 grains is more than half the weight of the heaviest 9mm bullet. So you're saying the heaviest .45 ACP bullet is more than 50% heavier than the heaviest 9mm bullet. And the most common .45 ACP bullet (230 grains) is 100% heavier than the most common 9mm bullet (115 grains).

Well done. You have clearly demonstrated a HUGE difference between the two projectiles. That was your point, right? Ooops.

If I place three 9mm bullets exactly where they need to be in the BG, what do you think will happen differently if I place three 45acp bullets in the exact same place?

NOW

If I place my three 9mm bullets in a non critical area of the bad guy, what do you think will happen DIFFERENTLY if I place three 45 bullets in the exact same place?

If you believe the word of soldiers who have experience shooting other human beings in combat, the difference is that the latter group will actually notice they've been shot. Course that's with FMJ. And the bad guys weren't made of ballistic gelatin, so it obviously doesn't mean anything.

 

[chieftain]

If I place three 9mm bullets exactly where they need to be in the BG, what do you think will happen differently if I place three 45acp bullets in the exact same place?

NOW

If I place my three 9mm bullets in a non critical area of the bad guy, what do you think will happen DIFFERENTLY if I place three 45 bullets in the exact same place?

Again, a non answer. I would like for you to document where folks shot in the vital spots with three rounds of 9mm or 45acp did not notice they were shot. It has happened, with every caliber that exists. Maybe the guy up in Idaho IIRC, when he was hit with 31 rounds of 230gr JHP 45acp?

I think you are dealing with unrealistic expectations.

If you believe the word of soldiers who have experience shooting other human beings in combat, the difference is that the latter group will actually notice they've been shot. Course that's with FMJ. And the bad guys weren't made of ballistic gelatin, so it obviously doesn't mean anything.

I believe the experience of this Marine. ME. The NVA I shot weren't made of Jello or Ballistic gelatin and neither was I when they shot me.

Now I only had two 13 month tours with the 3rd Marine Division in Vietnam. I don't doubt your combat experience is vastly superior and in much heavier combat than I ever saw.

Tell us about your combat experience with the two calibers and I will tell you mine. I carry either a Colt Government in 45acp, or a 9MM in a Browning Highpower for CCW these days. I feel equally at ease and effective with either cartridge.

Go figure.

Fred

 

[Tropical Buzz]

Actually...

Well done. You have clearly demonstrated a HUGE difference between the two projectiles. That was your point, right? Ooops.

GLOOB,
No oops at all. No one has denied that the .45 is both bigger and heavier than the 9mm. The point was - and still is - that while the difference looks "huge" on paper or percentage-wise if you prefer, the actual numerical value of the difference compared to the mass of a man-size target is tiny! Hence no "huge" net difference in terminal ballistic performance or effectiveness against 175lb living targets.

Obsessing over the paper specs of the rounds and comparing them in isolation from the specs of the intended target is just a way to "spin" the data in support of the romanticized, mythical "hugeness" of the .45 round. Flying ashtray, bowling ball and all that.

If your intended target is golf balls, rubber blocks, young squirrels and old mufflers, I will grant you that there is a "big" difference between .45 and 9mm - how's that? .

Let's not get silly with the .177 pellet thing. Different ballistic ballpark altogether. But since you brought it up, be sensible and compare it to a .22 pellet instead. My point will remain valid. Against a squirrel weighing a few ounces, there will be a "huge" difference in effectiveness. Against any animal weighing 75lbs and up there will be almost none..

 

[Tropical Buzz]

Actually...

Sorry - double tap, apparently.

 

[GLOOB]

Let's not get silly with the .177 pellet thing. Different ballistic ballpark altogether. But since you brought it up, be sensible and compare it to a .22 pellet instead. My point will remain valid. Against a squirrel weighing a few ounces, there will be a "huge" difference in effectiveness. Against any animal weighing 75lbs and up there will be almost none..

Why not get silly and compare pellets?

Silly mental masturbation to follow:

Most popular .22 pellet weights are around 14-15 grains
Most popular .177 pellet weights are around 7-8 grains

A .22 pellet is about twice the weight of .177 pellet.

.22 cal is 54% more surface area than .177 cal

The difference between a .177 pellet and a .22 pellet is almost identical to The difference between a 9mm parabellum projectile and a .45 ACP projectile! Intriguing, isn't it?!?!

Comparing the weight of a 15 grain .22 pellet to a 230 grain .45 ACP bullet, the pellet is 15.3 times lighter. So 175lb/15.3 =11.4 pounds. Hmm. Notice the BOLD type I highlighted in your post. You mentioned 75 pounds and up. Well, from these ratios, we should be comparing effectiveness on animals weighing only 11.4 pounds as a basis of comparison! What animal weighs 11.4 pounds? A racoon maybe? A large hare? Modern PCP air rifles have been used to humanely and legally hunt turkey and coyote.. average weight of either is probably about 20-25 pounds. So do you think there'd be a notable difference in performance between these pellets on these types of animals, given an equal kinetic energy? Honestly, I don't know. And what would it prove anyway?

I just like to point out the errors in false logic. If you read any of my posts, all I have written is either fact, or the subjective opinion of other people which I admit I cannot verify. No I have never shot anyone with a pistol. Have you? And I don't mean that with any disrespect. What I mean is that running out of ammo and charging/defending against bayonet charges up close and personal seems to have last occurred in WWII.

I don't have a favorite pistol caliber. But I am NOT convinced that ballistic gel tests showing 9mm ALMOST as good means 9mm is JUST as good. And AFAIK, what statistics that are available seem to show .357 and .45 to be at the top of the 1 shot stop statistics. Again, I don't put TOO much stock in that. But how in the face of all that do people end up saying, "There's only a small difference in weight, surface area, ballistic gel wound channels, and statistics... therefore 9mm is as good or even better than .45 ACP in terms of speed of incapacitation?" I say you add in the lower recoil, higher capacity, and quicker followup shots, and you start having an argument. But not until then.

 

[Tropical Buzz]

Lol! Let's just agree that you believe in flying ashtrays and some of us don't.

 

[GLOOB]

Did we both just managed to pull ourselves out of a bucket of trollbait and emerge on the high road!?!??

Yea!!!!

Looking forward to the next time.

 

[BushyGuy]

9mm has better penetration then the .45 fmj period, there was testing on a kevlar vest the 9mm penetrated more layers of kevlar then the .45 .9mm also penetrates more gelatin then the .45 too the only differnce is the .45 dumps more energy when used in HP bullets then the 9mmbut when it comes to Kevlar the 9mm NATO round beats any .45 bullet in penetration. at 1200 fps its gonna drill a very deep hole.

 

[GLOOB]

Warning. Pure, speculative conjecture to follow.

Knockdown power. What is it?
If it doesn't exist, where did the term come from?

My theory: knockdown power is not about literally knocking people off their feet. It's a difference in target reactiveness.

Fantasy simulation alert: Imagine you're in the heat of military combat, being charged by 8 enemy soldiers wielding bayonets. You start shooting with a 9mm loaded with FMJ. You're in the jungle. It's dark. The enemy is in green camo. You start shooting. Miss. Miss. Damn, you start to panic. Now you hastily unload your pistol not even aiming, facing iminent death. Then you die. But you took one down with you.

What you didn't realize is that you actually hit with every shot. That first target was like the muffler that never budged despite several penetrating shots. Or the deer that took off running - putting doubts in your head, only to see it fall dead after 20 feet. In reality, your first shot hit the bulls eye. But it took the guy a few seconds to keel over dead, and in the meantime you thought you missed. You panicked, continued firing on him, and then were overwhelmed by his friends.

Reenter fantasy simulation with a .45 loaded with magical bullets:
You shoot. This time you know you hit your target. He didn't fly off his feet or stop dead in his tracks, but you definitely noticed some target reactance. You manage to keep your wits about you and put a bullet in 7 of the baddies. Then you capture the enemy officer and receive a medal of valor.

Now, for the sake of argument, let's say the .45 didn't cause the guys to drop any faster than the 9mm. The only difference is that the shooter had a little more immediate visual feedback from hits.

Is this the real "knockdown power?"

BTW, I read that story somewhere, years ago, and apparently it's true. 1 guy with a 1911 and 8 enemy soldiers charging with bayonets = 1 American hero with a medal of valor, 1 captured enemy officer, and 7 enemy soldiers down with 7 shots fired. As I recall it, the story said he started at the back line and worked his way to the front, so the enemy wouldn't realize what was happening until it was too late.

 

[Tropical Buzz]

Debate resolved - High speed photo evidence...

I hope no one goes ballistic over this conclusive evidence...

 

[KBintheSLC]

I can't believe this thread is still going. I had to post again just to keep the dream alive... even longer. One day we can dream to have a 9 vs 45 thread that really is "different".

 

[Supertec]

I have just one simple question

I haven't read any of these actual real world studies by some of these doctors where criminals and bad guys were shot on the streets and in home invasions. So all I wanna know is based on all these actual real life shootings what cartridge/caliber performed the best as far as stopping power goes? I currently have an XDm .40 cal. loaded with 155 and 165 speer gold dot ammo but who knows maybe I'm carrying a below average weapon, LOL.

 

[chieftain]

I haven't read any of these actual real world studies by some of these doctors where criminals and bad guys were shot on the streets and in home invasions. So all I wanna know is based on all these actual real life shootings what cartridge/caliber performed the best as far as stopping power goes? I currently have an XDm .40 cal. loaded with 155 and 165 speer gold dot ammo but who knows maybe I'm carrying a below average weapon,

All the science and experience gets to the same place. Your 40 is as good as my 45's or my 9's. NO DIFFERENCE. You are the weapon, the gun/caliber is the hammer. Learn how to use it effectively and caliber, or which caliber will be a question that never crosses your lips.

The part that is hard to get right is yourself. There are no shortcuts. Mindset, tactics, ROE (Rules of engagement) training, training, training, (as much as you can afford, then quality practice, not recreational shooting at your local range), practice practice, practice, maintaining your weapon PROPERLY. And once your are truly trained, and possibly experienced, you will usually now, understand the actual problem, caliber will sink in your mind to simply a convenience based on the most reliable platform that fits you. Not you to it, and I recommend always get that gun/platform in the caliber it was originally designed for no matter what it is of the "fighting calibers". (Most guns/platforms are usually most reliable in the originally designed barrel length/size and caliber.)

Good luck.

Fred

 

[CDW4ME]

How do you quote on this forum?

Tropical Buzz:
".45 Hornady 230gr XTP
Velocity 881 fps
Best penetration 12.7"
Expanded diameter .736"
Wound channel volume* 5.4 cubic inches

9mm Remington 147gr Golden Saber
Velocity 959 fps
Best penetration 14.5"
Expanded diameter .627"
Wound channel volume* 4.5 cubic inches

The 45 hole is less than 1 cubic inch bigger than the 9mm hole. Not really very significant in terms of blood loss or tissue damage. Exactly what part of the body these holes are made in and not the size of the holes will determine the lethality of the hits."

It's less than a cubic inch, but 5.4 cubic in. is 17% greater than 4.5''
Given equal shot placement seems that 17% more is worth considering.

 

[Tropical Buzz]

It's less than a cubic inch, but 5.4 cubic in. is 17% greater than 4.5''
Given equal shot placement seems that 17% more is worth considering.

Sure. less than 1 cubic inch is still less than one cubic inch though, no matter how much more impressive the 17% figure looks on paper.

If the point of exploring the facts is to reinforce a comforting preconception instead of looking for an objective answer, there are many ways of spinning the data, depending on how you want the comparison to stack up.

With a 17% larger wound channel, for example, one could (without the complication of considering all the variables) conclude the following:

If the 9mm wound incapacitates through blood loss in 1 second, the same shot from a .45 would incapacitate in .83 seconds. .17 seconds faster.

At a 5 second incapacitation time by the 9mm the .45 would do it .85 seconds quicker.

At 10 seconds, the .45 victim goes down 1.7 seconds sooner.

You could say that beyond a certain point, the difference becomes significant because the perp could use the extra time to inflict damage on you. But that conclusion ignores the likelihood that one would continue with follow up shots until the attacker is stopped. Which caliber in a given platform delivers quicker, more accurate follow up shots?

You could also look at the additional 1.8" (14%!! ) of penetration from the 9mm. That just might be the extra mile that hits the spinal cord or that vital organ in a semi-obstructed shot. And then again it might not.

Lots of data to have fun with and nitpick over. Bottom line is the actual differences just ain't that big at all. To be bopped by a bowling ball/flying ashtray or ventillated by high velocity marbles - pick your poision and be happy!

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

It's analygous to a bowling pin gun - big bores with big heavy hollowpoints move heavy hard objects better - very little to no correlation to stopping power, however, as has been mentioned.

In any event, sounds like a recipe for disaster, shooting hard rubber targets at 10 yards - did everyone make it home intact? Those things shoot back.

 

[flyboy1788]

Ever since my dad told me about how his dad's(my grandpa's) war buddy who was an officer in the PTO during WWII would tell him stories about hitting japanese soldiers with the 1911 and spinning them around and knocking them down, the seed was planted. Granted, the average japanese soldier wasnt very big, but still... to spin someone around, it takes a good amount of power, size, and energy. .45 for life. Granted, I have a 9mm as well, but it just doesnt make me feel all warm and happy inside like my 1911

 

[bigfatdave]

Ever since my dad told me about how his dad's(my grandpa's) war buddy who was an officer in the PTO during WWII

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Real-world experience counts, but that experience would have been with ball ammunition, and the observation conducted through a mix of adrenaline, fatigue, and passed time.
Now if the story went something like -

I was defending our foxhole with a .45, while Jenkins only had a captured 9mm ... ..."

- then you might have a decent comparison of two particular firearms firing two loads, but you still wouldn't have a scientific study of modern loads in modern guns, and it wouldn't take into account capacity, follow-up shot speed, or concealment issues.

If you want "stopping power", pack a .500 magnum, and be ready for someone to tell you that you need to be packing .460/.454/.577 ... or realize that any firearm is a compromise, and that there is no magic bullet.

 

[kyo]

There are advantages and disadvantages of both. pick yours and be done with it. I pick the 230 g 45 /thread

 

[Dan Crocker]

I have two guns in my desk as we speak: Glock 19 and XD 45 compact.
Who cares?

 

[docmagnum357]

The whole thing was solved for me a long time ago. I loaded some 200 grain 38 bullets up to 45 velocities, and shot a bunch of stuff. (2400, 4227 will get you there easily and safely). Obviously, the 38 bullets penetrate like nobody's business, while the 45 would make a bigger hole, with more of a splatter in mud, etc. Bull frogs shot with the 38 were edible, even shot through the leg. 45 was marginal. 44 mag would vaporize them. Shoot them through the boddy with a magnum and I couldn't find the legs.

Bigger game, like huge coons, bobcat, coyotes were definately more impressed by the 45. 45 ball and the hardcast 200 grain 38 would pass through each one but the 45 seemed to impart more thump to the victim.

Bowling pins, trees, etc were hands down 38 territory.

Insofar as deer were concerned, I never shot enough to be scientific, but i can assure you neither was a one stop shot everytimer. Personally, I couldn't tell the difference in wound tracks, and the 38 penetrated more, so...
I would feel better about it. Neither was even close to a good flat point 44 round, or a good stay together hollow point like a n xtp in 44 mag.

What do I shoot? On security duty I carry a Cz75, stoked with 124 grain Gold dots. On my own time, A 6.5 " 629 with 180 grain xtps. I can make the hits with it, just not quite as fast as with the Cz. Incidently, I am almost identical in my times with a 44 mag as with my .45acp. Go figure.

 

[flyboy1788]

big fat dave, I wasnt ripping the 9 millimeter, or stating that the .45 is the be all end all pistol cartridge, nor was I trying to be scientific in my post in any way. It was just something interesting that my grandpas good friend told my dad when he was young. Nothing more, nothing less. Personally, I prefer the .45 and that post was just meant to be a neat glimpse of the 1911s military track record from a source close to home. Sometimes, statistics and reading about ballistics and all the other technical aspects of ammunition get boring. IMHO

 

[chieftain]

bigfatdave,

no, no, no.

Everyone knows any true "War Story" begins with:

"This ain't no Sh*T, I was.........."

Got to get the details straight.

Go figure.

Fred