Let the Caliber wars begin!!

[ZWCoffindaffer]

Seriously though.. why is caliber always such a controversial subject? I was just looking at the ballistics of a 9mm vs .45 Auto, they are almost identical in terms of energy. I myself carry an XDs .45 so I'm not knocking the idea of a .45, but being that the ammo cost so much more, why not carry and shoot a 9mm? Its also "easier" to shoot for some people who do not handle recoil well. Does anyone have a real factual advantage to the .45?

Also on a side note, I would like to say I've recently become interested in the 10mm Auto. I dont hear of them or see them around here very often, but they produce around 50% more energy than a .45 and being that I handload, ammunition availability doesnt deter me much.

 

[chipcom]

Federal HST premium factory rounds cost the same in 9mm or 45acp and I see no difference in the cost of my reloading components between the two calibers, so I am not sure where you see 45 costing "so much more".

Shoot the biggest round you can shoot effectively.

 

[ATLDave]

Two reasons. One is that terminal ballistics/effectiveness is a murky subject. We can't do controlled experiments on humans, so research and scholarship on the topic has to proceed by various proxies or indirect methods. That means there is room for disagreement over what does or does not matter. For instance, at least one school of thought would shrug its shoulders at your reference to kinetic energy, arguing that KE is not a predictor of incapacitation power in handgun rounds.

The second is that people get emotionally involved in their guns and choices of same. It's a bit like the arguments of Ford-vs-Chevy, except that those doing the arguing feel that the stakes are life-and-death, not just towing capacity or repair bills or whatever.

So, (real or perceived) high stakes and uncertain answers lead to lots of heat but little light.

 

[420Stainless]

There is not precise data to tell what the effectiveness of each is when it comes to stopping aggressive humans of all shapes and sizes, so it comes down to experience, opinion, and preferences. Most of us don't have much experience in killing people with a variety of cartridges. Most that do have experience have used their preference (or what was required by their employer), so even among the experienced there are differing opinions. If you think it all comes down to energy, then by all means carry a 9mm and save you some money.

 

[ZWCoffindaffer]

I'm speaking in generals, not about my personal self. I reload, cost isnt an issue. A majority of people, especially those new to guns and ammo, go buy factory ammo off the shelf at a gun store, walmart, or big box outdoor store.

For example, Winchester USA FMJ(in the whitebox) cost $45/100 for .45 ACP yet it only cost $28/100 for 9mm. Thats over 50% higher cost for the .45. In the Remington UMC FMJ .45 cost $27/50 where as 9mm cost $27/100. Thats double!!

I've never seen .45 even close to the same price as 9mm in factory ammo.


Again, I'm not referring to myself and I'm not knocking .45 as I enjoy shooting and carrying a .45 and I reload, I'm speaking in general.

 

[Reloadron]

Also on a side note, I would like to say I've recently become interested in the 10mm Auto. I dont hear of them or see them around here very often, but they produce around 50% more energy than a .45 and being that I handload, ammunition availability doesnt deter me much.

When the 10mm first came out it soared in popularity, it was like a .45 ACP on steroids. I bought a Colt Delta Elite at the time. Roughly around 2,500 rounds into it the gun was getting real lose. While computer forums were not popular yet I began to earn I wasn't alone. Shooting factory loaded 10mm was beating the gun to death. I got rid of the gun on a real good offer. Then along came S&W and developed the .40 S&W by simply making the 10mm shorter. Then the 40 took off and from what I see of late seems to be falling from grace. I have no idea how much truth there is to that? I have not messed with the 10mm in decades but it was in my humble opinion a heck of a great round. If the guns made today can handle full load 10mm I would consider another one.

I have to strongly agree that terminal ballistics/effectiveness is a murky subject. Murkey enough I don't get into it. My carry gun is a .45 ACP simply because I like the round and collect the things.

Ron

 

[ZWCoffindaffer]

Though I do disagree with a couple things stated by chip, I do agree you should shoot the largest thing you can do so accurately and carry effectively. I just think for some a 9mm is more practical and is not subpar for protection like some say it is.

 

[ZWCoffindaffer]

I guess I can understand where terminal ballistics could be a bit of a murky subject. Plus, a bigger bullet makes a bigger hole right? Again, not in any way shape or form knocking .45. I love mine and its what I depend on in the event I needed to protect myself.

 

[SDGlock23]

It's touchy because folks want to defend what they're financially invested in. It's a strangely complicated subject because while 9mm, .40 and .45 will all kill, they're not equal in terms of the "numbers". A cartridge with more energy doesn't mean that one with less is ineffective, pretty simple but some get to the point where unless they have a certain amount of ft-lbs, they fell under gunned.

Energy (in terms of ft-lbs) isn't a good way of measuring power, it's just a numerical value that's dependent on velocity more than anything else. That said, high energy sells, which is why some get interested in the 10mm. It can put out some good energy numbers, but only in a relative sense. It's kind of like high HP cars, sure they're good for some things, but HP isn't the only important figure in a vehicle.

 

[MaterDei]

Welcome to THR, ZWCoffindaffer. Always nice to see new blood here.

Your original post is a good one but in my experience you are taking a couple of things for granted.

I, like you, own both calibers but frankly find the 'recoil' of a 45 more pleasant and controllable than most 9mm, especially the +p variety that generally align more closely to the performance of your average 45 round. Others may see it totally the opposite, it is really a matter of taste.

Speaking of taste, I feel strongly that people like guns more than calibers. For example, I really like the grip, trigger and feel of a 1911. Others, for reasons that I don't comprehend like the a Glock more. Since the 1911 is predominately a 45ACP platform that is what I like with that gun.

I also happen to really like the ergos of the hipower/cz75/clone pistols and in those guns I shoot 9mm.

I don't engage myself much in all the kinetic energy/physics debates. While I like both 45ACP and 9MM A LOT, it just seems to me that a bigger hole is better than a smaller one. Happy to carry either one in the proper platform though.

EDIT to add: you will find very few people on this site claiming that 9MM is 'subpar for protection' as you suggest.

 

[jmr40]

The concept goes back to the black powder and round ball era. With black powder it doesn't matter if you are shooting 35 caliber or 70 caliber the velocity is about the same. With round balls the only way to increase bullet weight is to go with a larger caliber. Life was simple then and larger calibers were more effective.

With the concept of conical bullets it became possible to make bullets longer to increase bullet weight and still use smaller calibers. The advent of smokeless powder meant much more speed was possible.

But with bullet technology in the early smokeless powder days small caliber fast bullets often failed so they were slower to catch on. It also took many years for shooters to wrap their minds around the concept that small caliber bullets could be every bit as effective. Some still don't understand the concept, but with bullet technology starting in the 1940's caliber in both handguns and rifles is far less important than it used to be. And within the last 10-20 years even less so.

There have been hundreds, maybe thousands of tests and research projects comparing all of the common handgun cartridges over the last 100 years. The data all shows, and always has shown that as long as comparable bullets are used there simply never has been much difference in any of them.

What matters is putting a bullet into the right spot with enough penetration to hit vital organs. Good expansion seems to solve problems faster, but not more surely. Against human threats 9mm, 45, 40 S&W, 357 mag and 375 Sig are all very close. Could probably throw in a few more.

I own and like 10mm, but don't see it offering any advantage against human threats. It will allow you to shoot heavier 180-200 gr bullets faster than you can shoot 124 gr 9mm bullets. This puts it in the same class as magnum revolvers shooting 180-200 gr bullets and is a legitimate round for hunting or bear defense.

 

[Warp]

I don't know why.

Personally, my favorite is when a fan of a larger cartridge tries to poke fun at the fan of a less-large cartridge...let's say a .45 guy and a 9mm guy...but the .45 guy is standing there unarmed and the 9mm guy has a loaded pistol holstered on his belt. Cracks me up like crazy.

Or my FIL who tries to rib me about being a 9mm guy...he loves his .45s...but I have never once known him to carry a pistol, just shoot it at the range.



So, my bottom line is probably...if you don't carry it...it doesn't count so sit down and be quiet.

If you do carry it, it's really about two things: Shot placement and penetration. Reliability is built into shot placement, you can't hit the threat if the gun fails. Expansion or wider starting diameter is great too, but...it's penetration that matters most.

 

[Old Dog]

why is caliber always such a controversial subject?

Uh, it's not really, anymore ... not since law enforcement and the military realized the advances in ammunition technology indeed make 9mm a worthy caliber. Maybe the only place people still talk about this is on the internet?

Maybe it was controversial back in 1991 when we had the incessant parade of gun rag covers, "9mm vs. .45," etc. ...

Gee, we haven't had a thread about Glock vs. 1911 lately either ...

 

[C0untZer0]

The 9mm vs .45 debate is tiresome. I find the arguments concerning .32 ACP, .327 Federal Magnum, .380 Auto, and 5.7x28mm more interesting.

 

[tarosean]

/end thread..
.50 BMG Pistol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMkiDguYtGw

 

[300Whspr]

The 9mm requires special technology in order to be an effective round... in and of itself, it is debateably "subpar".

.45ACP on the other hand, is effective all by itself without the need for technologically advanced projectiles and components. It stands on it's own.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Shoot the biggest round you can shoot effectively.

+1.

Deaf

 

[WestKentucky]

4 ga punt gun or nothing...wait, that's not what this thread is about...is it?

 

[Warp]

Shoot the biggest round you can shoot effectively.

This isn't particularly effective at making the decision, either.

Training/practice is the best way to be effective, and most people I know are limited by the cost of ammunition, so that needs to be factor.

And even then, how do you quantify and measure "effectively"? If you can shoot a smaller cartridge slightly faster, is it more effective?

Lots of variables, no concrete way to rank and compare those variables without getting subjective and opening up to different opinions.

 

[adcoch1]

9mm will kill a person. A 45acp will kill a person. Which one can YOU shoot more accurately and confidently? That is the defensive caliber for you. In a dangerous situation you need intimate knowledge that you can hit what you want so you can think about IF you need to hit something. Caliber probably doesn't even matter. But this is coming from a guy who loves 44mag, so I am used to having enough gun... ymmv

 

[Warp]

9mm will kill a person. A 45acp will kill a person. Which one can YOU shoot more accurately and confidently? That is the defensive caliber for you. In a dangerous situation you need intimate knowledge that you can hit what you want so you can think about IF you need to hit something. Caliber probably doesn't even matter. But this is coming from a guy who loves 44mag, so I am used to having enough gun... ymmv

Killing doesn't really have anything to do with it, though.

 

[adcoch1]

Killing doesn't really have anything to do with it, though.

You are correct, but the discussion always lands on what the gun is used for. Punching paper only, a 22 will work fine, but other than personal preference why would it matter what caliber is "BEST"? I personally like things that go bang, so the one in my hand is usually good enough. I also love variety, but no individual firearm or caliber/cartridge is " the best" unless it is the best at "..." bigger is usually better in the situations I use firearms, but I like little guns too[emoji1]

 

[tactikel]

Technology. Single shot pistols (think 76 cal flintlocks) had to stop with a single shot. Revolvers, black powder, .36 or .44, could stop with multiple shots if needed. Late 1800's it was recognized that a .45 cal 250 gr bullet at 850 fps was an absolute man stopper. 1911, FMJ mandate, and max bullet for the .45 ACP was 230 gr, ruled for 60 yrs.
Bullet technology changed everything, a .40 or 9mm with proper bullet selection could equal or outperform the .45 acp.
The controversy is about older truths versus newer truths.
I shoot/carry a .45 ACP but my next pistol will be a 9mm.

 

[Duvel]

What can be effectively shot, and carried.

I'm smaller in stature, and only 165lbs. I also handload for a G20 - 780ft lbs from an autoloader is grin inducing.

Would I carry it? No. Back on target faster with a more diminutive caliber.

Funny how modern bullet technology allow this or that caliber to now be considered effective, but with occasional doubt.

 

[JohnBiltz]

When I bought my first handgun real men only owned Magnum revolvers or 1911s. The wonder 9s had not yet been born. It was generally thought you would calmly stand and deliver a single shot that would vaporize the problem.

We don't train to shoot that way anymore because they did not really vaporize the problem. Handguns punch holes, they don't dump megatons of energy into the problem. The more holes the better which makes follow up shots important. I really enjoy shooting a .45 but I don't carry one. I don't like .40 at all, owned one and no thanks. More recoil than a .45 and less rounds than a 9mm. I'll take a 9mm. I have well over 10,000 rounds on my carry, I trust it.