9mm vs. .45 sidearms

[The Canuck]

I say that the best one is the one you use best.

 

[JaxNovice]

I think that if you ever really had to rely on your sidearm in a military combat situation you are really screwed and I am not sure it matters if it is a 9mm or
.45 . Things are not looking good. Having to rely on the sidearm is about as comforting as your Lt. looking down the line and yelling "fix bayonets". Things are about to get very uncomfortable.

 

[hankdatank1362]

hahahahaha!

 

[Silvanus]

That would make for a great sigline

Having to rely on the sidearm is about as comforting as your Lt. looking down the line and yelling "fix bayonets".

 

[Quiet]

9x19mm and .45 ACP are both fine and will get the job done when employed properly (ie. shot placement).

Sure, the US Military used the .45 ACP for over 70 years and replaced it with the 9x19mm. However, after about 20 years in service, the US Military is now contemplating a return to the .45 ACP.

 

[slow944]

I remember our Lt saying those exact words. Then the napalm started falling and everybody was running like hell to get away from it.

 

[David904]

Somebody stated earlier in the thread that SpecOps units see pistols as backup or secondary weapons.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Pistols are seen as tools to be used where the situation dictates their advantage over a longarm. In many CQB sitations, battlespace is so restricted that a pistol is the best way to go. Prisoner handling is often accomplished with a sidearm, etc.

Anyway... from what I have seen and been told, no pistol cartridge is the wondrous man-stopper that we all want it to be. Unless you hit something truly vital and or structural, the BG is going to keep functioning.

I like both 9mm and .45 ACP, but I'll continue to carry my Sig226 in 9mm. Lots of rounds for me to use to finally hit the "sweet spot" on the BG when under extreme duress. Plus, I get quicker follow-up shots than I do w/ the .45ACP.

YMMV

 

[HiroProX]

Which is better?

Well, I'd say it's the one that goes "BANG!" and goes where you aim it.

 

[mrtoadzwildride]

Long time lurker... First time poster. The biggest reason I could see to owning a 9mm is that a large portion of NATO forces use this caliber. That would make it much easier to come by in the case of a civil uprising.

---Food for thought-----

 

[rantingredneck]

I own both and want to be shot with neither.

 

[goon]

I've owned 9mm, .45 ACP, .357, and .40 handguns.
Last week I traded the .40 for another 9mm.
For me, the 9mm is the best choice.

 

[spankaveli]

I own a G34 & a 1911 and have no problem carrying either.

 

[TomN]

I like both and think both will do the job. Which one would I choose if I knew I was going to a gunfight? I'd choose to stay home.

If the gunfight was at my house? I'd choose the 12 gauge.

 

[rantingredneck]

I agree with everything the previous gentleman said.

 

[Alphazulu6]

oops double post.

 

[Alphazulu6]

Does the greater stopping power of the .45 outweigh the 9mms lower recoil and increased clip capacity? Or is a compromise like the .40S&W superior all-around?

The .40 is no compromise (only numerically)... the .40 S&W is a definite upgrade of the two in stopping power and ballistic capabilities. I believe the .40 cal is 15-20% more powerful than the .45. The .40 has 30-35% more power than the 9mm. Its ballistically superior. Though if you do not go with the .40 then go with the .45 ... unless you love cheap ammo then get the 9mm. Good Luck!

 

[Ready2Defend]

What a great question! Whichever you choose make sure you load it with hollowpoint. I am very partial to the 45, but my wife shoots her 9 mm very well. At least don't get less powerful than a 9 mm.

I have been known to call the 9 mm, 223, and 20 gauge as girly guns. But obviously any of these is better than going unarmed.

 

[the pistolero]

FWIW, I've read here and elsewhere that JMB did indeed proclaim the Hi-Power as the superior design (or was it his favorite?), though I don't know if the caliber entered into his assessment.
And everybody knows 10mm is the answer to the 9mm vs. .45 debate, even if they don't wanna admit it.






....and yes, that was partially tongue-in-cheek....

 

[moxie]

Actually, I prefer back inflation to jacket style....oops!!, wrong forum!

 

[Snapping Twig]

The only time I ever put a gun in a goblin's face, it was 2 goblins and I had a .45.

I never had to pull the trigger, I thank God for that, they went away and all was well and my family lived.

I've had a couple other occasions to carry a pistol when I thought I might need it, and I put my faith in a .45.

I prefer the .45, but that's me. I've been through Jeff Cooper's school since and now I am firmly in the .45 camp. When I hunt, in addition to a rifle I carry a .44, so for me it's all about the big piece of lead.

 

[eltorrente]

People always talk about, "oh it doesn't really matter, all that is important is the shot placement". Yeah, of course, but that isn't really what is important *to me*. I would just carry a .22 and go for head-shots if that's all that is important.

The key thing is what is your bullet gonna do if you don't hit him in the optimum spot. I like the knowledge that my heavier round is gonna give me more ability to shatter a bone(s) if I shoot at a "bad" angle. A 9mm will indeed bust up a bone, but as you start decreasing the angle that you hit the bone, the chance becomes more and more likely that it will skip off. A .45 allows for a measurable decrease in the angle that you can strike a bone and still break it.

I know that my rounds will give more opportunities to bust his body up- maybe shatter his pelvis or his femur, or shoulder blade. Perhaps a shot at an angle that hits a rib or sternum may bounce off that a .45 would break thru and get into the vital area.

Too bad dangerous encounters happen nothing at all like at your range or wherever you got your training. They will likely be desperate situations involving movement and perhaps physical contact. You will pull your gun and start firing at the center of mass and hope for the best. Maybe you'll be firing from the hip at close range at an upward angle or something like that. Training for the event is awesome and useful, but the fact is that most people lose their cool in these situations when that fight/flight response kicks in.

I imagine it's similar to getting into a serious fist-fight, at some level. The first few fights I got into, I was in a rage and just swinging like crazy and my normal thinking went to the wayside for a few minutes. After being in a few like that (some rough neihborhoods/schools/attitude growing up), I noticed that I would keep my cool and could actually think about what I was doing in the middle of the fight. Conversely, I saw/see many others get into fights and I can see them completely lose control as the powerful insticts take over. I'm not saying I'd be calm in a fire-fight, because I've never had one thank God, but my point still stands in regards to controlling emotions in a scary situation. You have to actually be exposed to that sort of activity to KNOW that you will perform.

You might THINK you are gonna shoot accurately and be in full control, but you're not. I'm sure battle-hardened soldiers experience that same sort of thing- after a few fire-fights they remain calmer and more efficient, despite being scared, because they've had their baptism by fire already and survived.

That's my theory, anyway. I think policeman are the ones that get more opportunites to stand a distance away and draw their weapons and get into their stances, but you can't go around drawing on everyone you think might be up to no good. Seems like on the occasions that you would be able to draw on someone and keep your magical 21-foot distance or whatever, there wouldn't be any shooting anyway.

 

[rkh]

I think this thread warrants further discussion.

*bump*

 

[RNB65]

I'm still holding out for a return to the .45 Colt and the Single Action Army.

 

[Redneck with a 40]

I choose neither. I'll take the 357 magnum Jeff Quinn has a story on his site, www.gunblast.com of when he had to shoot a thug, shot him with a 357 mag, said he stumbled about 6 feet and left his guts behind him. He said the 125 grain lead hollowpoint in 357 mag is absolutely devastating, I believe it.

My choice in auto-pistol calibers is 40 S&W. In my opinion, the 40 S&W has the velocity of the 9mm in the lighter weight bullets (155 grain) and it has a larger frontal area, the best of both worlds in my book. I'm not a fan of the 45's sedate velocity, especially when your dealing with barriers such as car doors or windshields, 45 is ineffective. Cor-Bon has a 135 grain load in 40 S&W that clocks 1325 fps. Pretty impressive.

 

[jkomp316]

the thing with bad guys, scaring them is better than shooting them. if you pull out a pink gripped .22 and cowardly ask them to leave you alone... they most likley wont.

if they're looking at a full framed .45 hole, and your screaming at the top of your lungs... they most likely WILL leave you alone.