Loyalist Dave
Member
all ammo used in war has to be fmj or of a non expanding design.
I thought sniper ammunition for many years was 168 grain spitzer, boat tail, hollow point, in .308 or 7.62 Nato, while machine gun ammunition is 147 grain FMJ?
Back in WWI they used the best pistol round they had - .45 ACP. However, these days they use the superior 9MM. That's just the way it is!
Um, no I was around the USMC at Quantico when the debate over the .45 acp to the 9mm was going on, and it was all about logistics, NOT "superiority". In fact I made some high ranking enemies when I pointed out that the real reason was our NATO allies had switched from 7.62 NATO rounds to 5.56mm in their rifles, and they didn't want to foot the bill for the handguns and subguns too (they having so much sub-gun ammo stockpiled), so the USA ate the bill when it came time for handguns. FYI it was the Beretta shooting "superior" 9mm rounds that kept blowing up when using "hot" 9mm ammunition, and the NATO specs for their subgun ammo was above SAAMI specs for 9mm rounds. The Marine Corps pistols were literally 45+ years old, and they were comparing them to new, out-of-the-box Berettas..., not very "fair", and a fallacy when I demonstrated what could be done with my new out-of-the-box 1911A1. (I didn't make friends doing that either..., or when I pointed out that lots of the high rankers suddenly started showing up at skeet and trap ranges with very nice Beretta shotguns... I wondered about that out loud a bit too loud )
SO..., IF it's so "superior" then why are we switching back to .45 acp in many units?
Lets avoid the traditional .45 vs 9mm debate?
FYI the British SAS has had wonderful success with the Browning Hipower in 9mm in the past for many decades, as have the Israeli's unto this day. Neither round trumps the other; there are pros and cons to both depending on the mission, especially if you are only discussing the FMJ bullets.
In answer to the original question..., the .45 acp got a good rep in the trenches of WWI, as did the 12 ga shotgun. Stock "GI" 1911's don't like any other bullets than FMJ (im-ex). The original purpose in The Great War for the 1911 was to arm cavalry soldiers (and officers), and later it was used as a backup gun for crew served weapons such as machine gunners. Americans do have the tradition of officers carrying pistols, BUT the majority of handguns used by American soldiers in the field is as a backup to their primary arm. Europeans have a much stronger tradition of only officers carrying side arms, and they are not as much for shooting the enemy as they are for keeping discipline among their own troops. Rommel only mentions pulling his pistol once in his book (iirc), and he points it at his own machinegun squad and orders them to kill the French (who were at that time charging with bayonets). Otherwise Rommel mentions carrying a rifle. The Germans put the 9mm round in their subguns, and the MP40 made it really famous. A great gun. The British used Tommy Guns for a long while before going to the Sten in 9mm, and other 9mm subguns in the future.
Military questions often are impacted by tradition as well. Think about the Spaniards use of 7mm Mausers vs the USA and trap door Springfields.
LD