9x19 vs .45ACP visual

[chuckpro]

kilibreaux

I think we were typing at the same time. I like the 45 and while i don't carry my 1911 much i do carry a 45 and like the comfort of it. The 9mm will get the job done and enjoy the higher capacity. I love shooting my 500 and .44 but they are not very practical for a defensive tool on thin skinned attackers. ( is that Politically correct?)

 

[481]

Im not sure if I have posted this before but I figured with new members and with many that dont visit everyday this could be interesting for them to see. If its the wrong forum, I apologize.

These are some blocks that I shot a little over a year ago. I wanted to see side by side how my two favorite full size carry handguns did concerning terminal ballistics. The handguns used were a Rock Island 5' 1911 .45ACP and a Glock 19 4" 9x19mm. I tested two different types of ammo. In the first test I compared FMJ in each caliber (124 grain NATO and 230 grain WWB) and in the second test I compared Speer Gold Dot JHPs (124 grain +P and 230 grain +P).

This picture shows a single 9mm FMJ and .45 FMJ entering from the right. Both passed completely through. The 9mm is the one on the bottom.


This picture shows a single 9mm GD fired from the left, and a single .45 GD fired from the right.


You can draw your own conclusions on the test, but I just thought it would be interesting for people to see side by side a somewhat fair comparison of the two most popular handgun calibers. I carry either with confidence, occasionally with a P32.

Looking at the test block that had the 9mm and .45 FMJs shot through it, I would have thought that the .45ACP FMJ made the bottom -and more significant- permanent cavity. The 9mm's permanent cavity is slightly larger/wider all the way across the block especially at the left side where it appears to have tumbled.

Both the .45 and 9mm JHP's produced nearly identically sized permanent cavities which is all the more impressive given the improvements of the last 30 years.

Thanks for the illuminating test.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Looks about the same to me.

It only really matters to the military, everyone else shoots what they want.

 

[kilibreaux]

Chuckpro: I think you're on the right track. My everyday carry gun is a Glock M20SF loaded with Underwood 155 grain 10mm that I have personally chronographed at just over 800 lb-ft of kinetic energy! They are simply BEYOND anything a 9mm or .45ACP can even pretend to deliver, more powerful than any .357 Mag from a 4" or shorter barrel, and basically running neck and neck with a short barrel .44 Magnum! Plus, the G20 carries SIXTEEN of them compared to just SIX from a revoler!

While it takes a bit of dedication to carry concealled on the person, I often carry an S&W M500 Magnum 4" with speed loaders in my car "just in case." My "logic" is simple...when a human is hit with just ONE round of 7.62x51 they GO DOWN and the damage to tissue must be SEEN to be believed! Well, the M500 - even in 4" barrel delivers 2,000 lb-ft of kinetic energy with a 440 gr. (over one ounce of lead) hardcast SWC that equates directly to a hit from a high powered rifle! While people can and have taken multiple hits of 9mm and .45ACP and were still walking and talking, just ONE solid torso hit from a .500 Magnum IS INDEED a "one-shot-stop" with no BS hyperbole.

 

[jimbo555]

Even if you miss with that .500 magnum, the wind should cause a knockdown! Seriously, any caliber that has enough penetration to hit the vitals will work!

 

[Lj1941]

If is isn't broken,don't fix it. I own both. The 45 is more accurate in my hands so I carry that more often.

 

[Carne Frio]

I have both, but prefer the 10mm.

 

[Robert]

Why is it this subject makes otherwise normal shooters lose their minds? And then we get the whole "real men shoot 10mm" folks chiming in and well, we are done. Look, shoot what works best for you and don't worry what the internet thinks. As long as you are safe and capable I don't care what you carry.