Out of all of em' 9mm is hard to beat.

[ku4hx]

Unless you count an aircraft carrier (USS Ranger CVA 61) during the Vietnam conflict, I've never used a weapon in any offensive action.

 

[Mike J]

There is a reason I like having guns chambered for what I consider the most common service calibers. During the Obama panic when all the other calibers were sold out & no 9mm or .45 was to be found I could always round up some .40. I like the idea of being able to shoot what is available even if my first choice is not.

 

[BobWright]

The question was "What is your favorite caliber, and why?"

For me, its the .44 Magnum, in one of these:



The .44 Magnum is one of the most versitle cartridges around. Loaded with light bullets at high veolocity, makes a most excellent varmint combination. Heavy loads with heavey bullets and it is capable of taking anything in North America. And with light loads, or .44 Special cartridges, it remains a very accurate and pleasant shooting revolver for anyone to shoot.

Unlike the ultra-heavy .460s and up, doesn't require dropping one round from the cylinder, nor a heavy befed up frame and cylinder. The Super Blackhawk is about the largest size revolver, and shares that attribute with the N-Framed S&W Model 29, that can truly be called a practical sidearm, one that can be carried comfortably all day and be brought into action with one hand.

Much of the foregoing can be said for the 45 Colt, but the old Colt rquires handloading to obtain maximum versitility whereas the .44 Magnum can achieve the same results with factory ammunition.

And the fact that this round is found in the most handsome of revolvers is certainly one of its endearing characteristics.


Bob Wright

 

[ljnowell]

The question was "What is your favorite caliber, and why?"



For me, its the .44 Magnum, in one of these:







The .44 Magnum is one of the most versitle cartridges around. Loaded with light bullets at high veolocity, makes a most excellent varmint combination. Heavy loads with heavey bullets and it is capable of taking anything in North America. And with light loads, or .44 Special cartridges, it remains a very accurate and pleasant shooting revolver for anyone to shoot.



Unlike the ultra-heavy .460s and up, doesn't require dropping one round from the cylinder, nor a heavy befed up frame and cylinder. The Super Blackhawk is about the largest size revolver, and shares that attribute with the N-Framed S&W Model 29, that can truly be called a practical sidearm, one that can be carried comfortably all day and be brought into action with one hand.



Much of the foregoing can be said for the 45 Colt, but the old Colt rquires handloading to obtain maximum versitility whereas the .44 Magnum can achieve the same results with factory ammunition.



And the fact that this round is found in the most handsome of revolvers is certainly one of its endearing characteristics.





Bob Wright

Great post and very true. The 44 magnum is a great cartridge.

 

[Walkalong]

My favorite caliber(s) are the ones I pick out to take to the range that day.

My favorite carry caliber is .45 ACP, but I gave carried .22 Mag, .32 ACP, .380, 9MM, & .45 ACP.

People make to much about one caliber only. Mindset, situational awareness, willingness, and shot placement are far more important.

 

[gun_with_a_view]

327 MAG Coogan.

 

[TreeDoc]

38/357 for many years, but moved to the 9 as many did for the same reasons and cost was a major one for me. I got set up to reload, but couldn't find the time to do it. Enter the 9mm. I still have a 357 or two and I'll never give my snubbies, but the 9 is where I spend my time.

 

[gun_with_a_view]

I would dearly like to see a jacketed 9mm HP bullet of appropriate weight with expansion limited to the diameter of a wadcutter. Comments?

 

[MCgunner]

I like the 9 as a pocket gun caliber. My Kel Tec P11 is a favorite. I own other calibers, handload for every center fire I own. I do shoot a lot of 9. I have a Ruger P85, big beefy DA auto and I have a Ruger Blackhawk 9mm/.357 magnum convertible. I like plinking with it and 9mm 105 grain cast (from a Lee mold) SWCs over 3.2 grains Bullseye. Nice light plinker and costs nearly nothing. Brass lasts forever. This load has just enough pop that it ejects 100 percent from my autos, yet drops the brass just to my right. I stand at the edge of an 8x12 plastic tarp and I'll drop 'em all on the tarp.

My carry load involves a compressed load of Unique and a 115 grain Hornady XTP, listed as a +P load in the Speer number 11 manual. It pushes 1263 FPS out of my Kel Tec and is quite accurate shooting to POA. I carry my .38 snub a lot and the P11 is a bit more compact even than that.

 

[C0untZer0]

I would dearly like to see a jacketed 9mm HP bullet of appropriate weight with expansion limited to the diameter of a wadcutter. Comments?

Ya, they'd be great in 9mm revolvers.

 

[.45cultist]

I started rotating what I carry doing chores, I've only fired MILES equipped rifles at people. Sometimes within the danger area, but the grass was over our heads.

 

[AStone]

I'm reading. Not as carefully as I'd like -- it's a very busy time for me (prepping for another cross continental move next month and busy with work) -- but reading.

I'm interested in this because I'm about to make an epic (for me) transition back to 9. I started handgun ownership in the late 80's with .38 spl after an attempted break in. Within a year, I switched to 9. First SW (too big for me; I was a total novice then), then Kahr K9, which I liked a LOT, but it was heavy.

So about 7 - 8 years ago, I sold it and went with SW 642 .38 spl +p. (Why didn't I keep the 9? Longer story than I want to tell here involving both my quasi-nomadic lifestyle that rarely includes what most here would call "home", and a philosophical perspective. Maybe some other thread ....)

I added a .357 mag (mod 65) for HD.

Due to a complex set of reasons, I'm now switching back to 9 again: specifically, a Ruger SR9c. As early as next week, but before November. (Click on the "9" in my sig line for details.)

I already sold my .357, and will soon put my trusty 642 up for sale. Sorry to see it go, but it has to help fund the 9 and ... see above for other reasons.

So, I'm reading here with interest as I dust off my 9 knowledge, and review ammo preferences (leaning strongly toward Hornady Critical Defense in 115 gr).

(For the record, I'm in the "there is no best round for everyone camp". What ever works for you. But those 9mm v .45 ACP debates of yesteryear were almost as fun to watch as female MMA fights.)

I read MCgunner's comment with interest.

I like plinking with it and 9mm 105 grain cast
(from a Lee mold) SWCs over 3.2 grains Bullseye.

Question: for those of us who don't reload, are such rounds available commercially?

 

[C0untZer0]

Probably the softest shooting widely available commercial, sub 115gr round would be the Winchester Super Clean NT 105gr jacketed soft point. It is going to have muzzle velocity somewhere around 1200 feet and 336 ft-lb of muzzle energy which is right around what most 115gr practice rounds have.

Most of the other rounds lighter than 115gr that I know of are SD rounds like Gaurd Dog EFMJ or Hornady 100gr FTX 9mm Lite, 90gr TAC XP, 95gr CorBon DPX, Magsafe and stuff like that.

All of it is pretty expensive compared to the 20¢ - 25¢ per round 115gr run-of-the-mill practice ammo.

 

[AStone]

All of it is pretty expensive compared to the 20¢ - 25¢ per round 115gr run-of-the-mill practice ammo.

Dude, you ain't just whistling Dixie.

Just checked out those Winchester 105's. $50+ per 50.

 

[C0untZer0]

Ya, if I didn't think I'd blow myself up I'd reload.

 

[AStone]

^ Ha!

I'd love to try reloading. Researched it years ago, but ...

.. my professional existence forces me to be quasi-nomadic. I'm all over the map, and have to have a minimal set of belongings that can travel. Reloading just isn't possible for me.

 

[contactcole]

Choosing 9mm needs no validation

I often carry a 6+1 9mm because it's small and light. And a 17+1 is my HD.

However, I don't need to delude myself to justify my choice by saying 9mm offers "the same performace" as 40sw or .45ap. While it's always been very good, and is good enough for sure, comparing premium HP ammo, 9mm remains, as it always has, an inferior round shot-vs-shot (compared to 40sw and 45acp). And, I'm okay with that because 9mm strengths outweigh its weaknesses to me.

The recent 9mm praise-train is a funny beast to me, as are all the petty and inane arguements (e.g. all suck compared to a rifle) to validate it. It really is okay to choose 9mm just because it's higher capacity, lower cost and a lighter recoil round, often in a smaller/ligher gun, and to still acknowledge that 40sw and 45acp are superior rounds shot-vs-shot.

Excluding NATO standardization, who is really going to pick 9mm over 40sw/45acp if cost, capacity, weight, gun size and recoil were the same, or if none of those considerations mattered?

 

[ljnowell]

Excluding NATO standardization, who is really going to pick 9mm over 40sw/45acp if cost, capacity, weight, gun size and recoil were the same, or if none of those considerations mattered?

That's a false point. Using that to discredit the 9mm would be no different than me saying that if none of those things matter who would choose a 45 over a 500 mag?

Those things do matter and that's why the 9mm is a good choice.

 

[contactcole]

That's a false point. Using that to discredit the 9mm would be no different than me saying that if none of those things matter who would choose a 45 over a 500 mag?

Those things do matter and that's why the 9mm is a good choice.

I disagree it's a false point, especially as it often forms the basis for those that select .45acp (i.e. performance gain is worth cost, weight, capacity, recoil, etc.). Regardless, phrased the way I did no one's going to argue they are "the same" shot-vs-shot comparing premium ammo. I'd take a 10mm over 9/40/45 if it made sense, but it does not. I believe however 9mm offers the best compromise, but it is in fact a compromise to 40/45 performance.

On the rest, we agree. However, that the other things for 9mm, as a whole, matter more is a very different statement than many on the 9mm praise-train that say shot-vs-shot 9/40/45 are the same/identical/equal/whatever, to which my comments were directed. Example:

... With advancements in ammunition and today's technology, 9mm hollow points perform as good as the rest. ... I love .40S&W as well; I think it's an awesome round but today's 9mm is as good if not better in certain tests...

While all three are good, and can get the job done, they simple are not "equal" in aggregate on the relative comparative scale of service handgun calibers. And, that's okay.

---

p.s. I presume you did not intend to reference my quote in part only, excluding the KEY PRECEEDING POINTS, to take my closing statement out of context:

I often carry a 6+1 9mm because it's small and light. And a 17+1 is my HD.

However, I don't need to delude myself to justify my choice by saying 9mm offers "the same performace" as 40sw or .45ap. While it's always been very good, and is good enough for sure, comparing premium HP ammo, 9mm remains, as it always has, an inferior round shot-vs-shot (compared to 40sw and 45acp). And, I'm okay with that because 9mm strengths outweigh its weaknesses to me.

The recent 9mm praise-train is a funny beast to me, as are all the petty and inane arguements (e.g. all suck compared to a rifle) to validate it. It really is okay to choose 9mm just because it's higher capacity, lower cost and a lighter recoil round, often in a smaller/ligher gun, and to still acknowledge that 40sw and 45acp are superior rounds shot-vs-shot.

Excluding NATO standardization, who is really going to pick 9mm over 40sw/45acp if cost, capacity, weight, gun size and recoil were the same, or if none of those considerations mattered?

 

[Edcnh]

I would have to say 9mm due to the availability of cheap ammo. I use a 9mm S&W Shield as a carry gun. I love shooting my 45 and 357 but use mainly reloads for both of those calibers.

 

[ggood45auto]

Don't think after shooting for 35 years 9mm is in any close to a 1911 45 as far as stopping power or accuracy for that matter especially if one reloads but to each his own. GOOD Shooting

 

[MCgunner]

Quote:
I like plinking with it and 9mm 105 grain cast
(from a Lee mold) SWCs over 3.2 grains Bullseye.

Question: for those of us who don't reload, are such rounds available commercially?

Probably the softest shooting widely available commercial, sub 115gr round would be the Winchester Super Clean NT 105gr jacketed soft point. It is going to have muzzle velocity somewhere around 1200 feet and 336 ft-lb of muzzle energy which is right around what most 115gr practice rounds have.

Most of the other rounds lighter than 115gr that I know of are SD rounds like Gaurd Dog EFMJ or Hornady 100gr FTX 9mm Lite, 90gr TAC XP, 95gr CorBon DPX, Magsafe and stuff like that.

According to my notes, my 105 grain/3.2 grains bullseye load clocks 1113 fps/289 ft lbs. I think that was shot from a 9mm Norinco Tokarev 5" barrel which I no longer own. It's as light as I could get and still function the autos, which was my desire with this load.

This is one of the advantages of handloading, custom loading for a niche use or desire. You hamstring yourself relying on the commercial stuff. For me, handloading is not just about high power and/or accuracy. I load other light stuff like 2.3 grains bullseye behind that same cast bullet in .38 special which I tailored for my Rossi 92 Carbine. It shoots 900 fps out of the rifle and does anything a .22LR can do, but is reloadable. That load came in handy while .22LR was hard to get. It's still kinda hard to get, but I have a good stash of .22 now. But, this load is a reason I never desired a lever action rimfire. Same rifle that mimics .22 with those .38 loads mimics a .30-30 with a hot 158 grain magnum. Pretty versatile gun/loads.

 

[CajunBass]

The 9mm is the only semi-auto cartridge I bother with.

 

[MCgunner]

I do "bother" with .45ACP. Have one Ruger auto in the caliber, but also have a Howell .45ACP conversion for my '58 Remmy. So, it's a revolver cartridge, too, like 9mm. It'd be a goofy choice over .45 Colt, though, if I didn't cast for it. Those conversions warn against shooting jacketed bullets in the guns. I already had a .45 Colt blackhawk, though, so I kinda wanted the conversion cylinder in .45ACP. I also load for 9x18 mak and 9x17 aka .380, but hardly ever shoot those nor do I carry 'em.

 

[Schwing]

Personally, my caliber migration has been opposite of most of those on this thread. For years I owned mostly 9mm hand guns and used them for recreational shooting and for CC. For me, the less expensive nature of the caliber was a huge draw. I was able to practice far more with it than say my .45s.

Then I started reloading and then casting my own bullets and my thoughts changed a bit. I still have no problem with the 9mm but I have found far greater accuracy and consistency for my reloads in 45. Being a lower pressure round, it is much easier (at least for me) to achieve good accuracy and reliability than 9mm. My cost difference per box from 9mm to 45 is about $1.25 too which makes it much less of an issue.

Over all, however, my favorite caliber by far is the .357. Back when I was buying ammo, I shot .357 maybe a couple of times per year. Now, being able to cast and reload, I shoot it nearly every week. I love the fact that I have light loads down in the 600fps range all the way up to heavy rounds in the high 1400s. As I get older, picking up brass becomes less and less appealing as well.