Poll for shooters over 40 years of age

[Steve C]

I'm on the + side of 60. While I still own and shoot my .45's I haven't carried one regularly for 20 years. For self defense away from the house I switched to the 9mm Glock 19 loaded with +P or +P+ JHP's about 20 years ago. Not as nice looking or romantic to shoot as my 1911 .45's but a much better SD tool IMO being more compact, reliable, simple to operate, lighter weight with more rounds.

 

[Nom de Forum]

.....The 9MM hollow points of the 1970's - 1980's were shallow penetrators and poor performers.....

Many of the hollow points in both 9mmP and .45ACP of that era did not expand very well if at all and actually penetrated nearly or as much as FMJRN. Lack of expansion of hollow point pistol bullets was a large part of the argument of the proponents of .45ACP. In the 1970s FMJRN and SWC was touted more than HP for use in .45ACP.

 

[JohnBT]

"I am curious about the number of shooters who as children and adolescents during these years were influenced to choose the "

.357 Magnum.

Me. Born in 1950. I don't know that the "gun press" influenced me nearly as much as my father did after serving in the Pacific during WWII and then as a state trooper.

I've carried a 9mm since 2007, but it's a Rohrbaugh.

Hype is where you find it I suppose. I didn't vote.

John

edited to add: I have 2 full-sized .45s that I enjoy a great deal. I also have a CZ-75B Mil, BHP MKIII, Sig X-5 TAC TB & Sig P210-2 that I shoot quite a bit too. I still find the .45s easier to shoot; probably because I'm big and slow.

 

[JTQ]

Nom de Forum wrote,
Many of the hollow points in both 9mmP and .45ACP of that era did not expand very well if at all and actually penetrated nearly or as much as FMJRN. Lack of expansion of hollow point pistol bullets was a large part of the argument of the proponents of .45ACP. In the 1970s FMJRN and SWC was touted more than HP for use in .45ACP.

I think you're being disingenuous.

The reason we have the .40 S&W, and the common weight for most defensive 9MM rounds is now 124gr or 147gr. is because of the shallow penetration of the 115gr Winchester Silvertip used in the 1986 Miami Shootout.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout

Whether the ammo was really the problem in the shootout or not, is not the point, the fact that the decision to get a deeper penetrating round is.

The reason FMJRN and SWC were touted more than HP for 1911 use was the 1911's reputation for poor feeding with hollow point rounds. Heck, without trying very hard you can find folks on this forum making the claim today.

 

[fastbolt]

and no longer use .45ACP as my primary SD caliber because there are a better choices.

I'd substitute the word "other" for "better" in the language, and then pick choosing to carry other calibers as "primary".

When I became a young cop I was already of the opinion that .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum were better overall choices for defensive calibers than .45 ACP, but I'd owned a Colt Commander since the early 70's, and continued to carry one or another as an off-duty weapon as young cop. I did, however, continue to carry both issued and personally-owned .357 revolvers on my own time, and one or another .44 Magnum, clothing & activities permitting. I remember carrying my Magnum revolvers more often than my Commander (or later Star PD).

I still own 9 pistols chambered in .45 ACP, but only 6 guns in 9mm and 5 guns in .40 S&W, so I still like my .45's.

I just don't carry them as often, although I do spend just as much range/training time with them as with my other calibers.

I finished my career carrying an issued .45, but that was primarily because someone else had really wanted to carry the .40 I'd been carrying, and since we didn't have anymore of them in inventory at the time, I arranged to trade issued weapons with him, taking his .45 in exchange for him getting to have the .40 he wanted.

A little later I turned in that issued .45 (still carried due to becoming a reserve upon my retirement from a full-time peace officer career) ... for a 9mm, because I happened to like that slightly smaller & lighter 9mm better. Then, a little later I turned in that 9mm for a new .40 (transitioning to a different model guns). I didn't choose the slightly larger .45 available, and the available 9's were in high demand, so I just accepted a .40 and called it good.

Even though I'm a long time .45 ACP aficionado, owner & shooter, I'm not exactly a caliber snob.

My time, training and experience as a cop, who has also served as a firearms instructor since '90, has pretty much changed how I view "caliber effectiveness" as a primary factor when it comes to caliber selection for defensive handguns.

Nowadays? My "primary" caliber selection for off-duty/retirement CCW is most often either a .38 Spl or .380 ACP ... followed by one or another of my subcompact/compact 9's/.40's, if I feel the need for a belt gun, and sure, sometimes one of my smaller & lighter .45's.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

There was a very long time period within those years where the theory of "energy dump" was the guiding principal of ammo performance.

It took a while for the medical folks (doctors and coroners) and ballistic specialists to realize that while energy dump and temporary wound cavities do MATTER with rounds fired from longer-barreled military weapons, handgun rounds just don't have the same debilitating effect.

handguns just don't pack the wallop of rifle rounds, and while temporary wound cavities from handgun rounds do stretch muscle and connective tissue (with resulting damage to nerves, veins and arteries), that damage has less effect than hits to key organs or parts of the central nervous system.

In a handgun fight, you want to STOP the bad guy quickly, before he stops you -- and energy dumps don't seem to help that much, and the certainly don't do it quickly. (There are too many examples of bad guys who get hit, time and again, and keep coming!!) While temporary wound cavities may speed "bleed out," the bad guy who is bleeding out may still have time to kill you. That's why penetration is so important -- the round has to be able to penetrate deeply enough to hit something that matters.

 

[ku4hx]

I voted "no longer" but not because there are "better" choices now. There are just so many good additional choices as of the advent of the "wonder nines". More choices always seems to push something else out of the forefront. Without going into boring specifics, I voted the way I did for a variety of reasons, but not because the .45ACP has been "bettered". And, I'm WAY past 40.

 

[Lord Teapot]

Source?



How does one measure "man stopping capability?" Is it quantifiable? If so, what's used in that calculation?



Same.

On this forum, a lot of people get persnickety when asked to back their assertions. Nonetheless, bold claims require bold evidence, so it would be disingenuous to the discussion not to ask.

no problem, i thought it was common knowledge regarding the genesis of the .45acp and the 1911 itself, but here's the source;


http://www.browning.com/library/infonews/detail.asp?ID=301

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/background.htm#development



i quantify manstopping as the stopping of a man with one round of ammunition, consider it the same as how we quantify bear stopping, sure you could unload 10 rounds of .32acp into a bear and probably bring it down, or you could unload one round of .454 into it. no round is a sure bet, but the .45acp simply dumps more energy into the target than the 9mm, more than would be apparent by calculating its energy; mass*velocity, because the .45acp is a poor penetrator, and so releases its energy in a much shorter span of time than a round like the 9mm which is a good penetrator. modern HP 9mm ammo may negate this compared to .45 ball, but then .45acp comes in hp too, and allows it to dump its energy that much faster as well.

 

[minutemen1776]

I am 43. Growing up, most of my pistol shooting was with a .22 or .38 revolver. I knew no one who owned a .45, and I had just one friend who owned a 9mm Beretta. Despite this, I was VERY enamored with 1911 pistols, all of which were .45 ACP. Some of this came from my exposure to gun magazines, to which I subscribed as early as middle school. Mostly, though, the 1911 was what I saw on TV and in movies. Whether it was MASH or John Wayne, there was the ubiquitous 1911 Government Model. I HAD to have one, and so my first-ever handgun purchase was a Springfield Armory mil-spec .45. I can honestly say I've never had a more rotten handgun since then. It was big, heavy, unreliable, and inaccurate. I never knew what that pistol's problem was; I can only assume I bought a lemon. Eventually, an older gent bought it from me (with knowledge of my issues with the gun) for a fraction of what I'd paid. I then bought a .38 revolver, and later a high-cap 9mm. Though I'm probably being unfair to the 1911 platform, that bad taste from my Springfield Armory .45 has never completely left my mouth. I have not owned another .45 pistol since then, though I've had LOTS of .38/.357 revolvers and 9mm pistols.

 

[JohnBT]

30 minutes ago I said I own 2 .45s. Those are 1911 pattern guns. I also own an FNP-45 USG. Love the gun and the 15-round mags.

John

 

[HammsBeer]

With FMJ vs FMJ the .45 wins over 9mm. Simply bigger holes.

But now it's the cutting and ripping of surrounding tissue and faster blood loss caused by modern hollow points with expanding pedals cutting like razor blades that has blurred the lines between .45 and 9mm. A bedside full size .45 will still have an edge in brute force per round, but most carry guns are small and light, meaning a 9mm will be easier to shoot and cheaper to practice.

I'm not quite 40, so didn't vote.

 

[Nom de Forum]

I think you're being disingenuous.

I am being completely sincere, honest and accurate in that statement. If you do a little checking in materials published in the 1970's proof of what I have written can be found. For example, it only took a minute to find a quote from the High Master, Supreme Guru, of the Cult of the .45ACP to give an example - “I have a case record of a .36 caliber (sic) JHP bullet that traversed a target with no deformation at all and two others where the same bullet burst on a belt and a wallet full of credit cards without much further effect” - Jeff Cooper, Cooper on Handguns.

Photos of non-expanded pistol hollowpoints were common in the 1970’s. Back then hollowpoints for SD Pistols were erratic in performance, many often did not expand, some slightly expanded, and a few, being too fragile, would blow-up.

BTW, 9mmP 124gr loads were not that difficult to get in the 1970s. Ammunition loaded with 124s at 1100fps were available.

The reason FMJRN and SWC were touted more than HP for 1911 use was the 1911's reputation for poor feeding with hollow point rounds. Heck, without trying very hard you can find folks on this forum making the claim today.

Sorry but that in not an entirely accurate statement. Nobody thought SWC feeding was better than HP. The SWC was touted because Jeff Cooper and others insisted it was more effective than FMJRN and HP, not because of superior feeding.

 

[Nom de Forum]

With FMJ vs FMJ the .45 wins over 9mm. Simply bigger holes.

Many people could reasonably argue: With FMJ vs FMj the 9mm wins over the .45. Simply more damage can be done with the more holes that can be made in the same amount of time.

 

[Evil-Twin]

Ill add something here.. I have been shooting since I was 10 years old.. Father uncles etc. all WWII vets, 45 was king.. In 1964 after a year old colledge and the Vietnam war was escalating I joined and was commission a second Lt. in the Army under the OCS college switch over program.
I carried a 45 ACP my whole career, IN combat ( two tours ) 65-66 and 66-67 11 months each, I depended on my Colt 45 ACP many times in close quarters. %0 years later I'm still carrying a 45 ACP...I know what it can do, in the 21 foot range... I also know what a 9mm can do in the same range... Ill take the 45 ACP any day over a 9mm.
I have both combat experience and civilian experience with it... I've seen too many reports on line, with camera cam video of bad guys carrying three 9mm rounds in the chest and still coming.. I wont argue this point because its a stupid thing to do... the kenetic shock of the mass of a 230 grain bullet over a bullet half its weight even when going faster does not put the target into shock.. Noting puts a person in shock more than the impact of a larger weight mass, tearing up your insides. Ive seen it and I live my life by it...Any combat Veteran who has taken a life will tell you the same thing.. at close quarters, they don't get up or continue to fight like so many cases of 9mm intervention.
I don't care what any one else uses... its their business. I know what works for me... and what Has worked for me...
BTW.. I have carried every caliber from 22 to 44 mag. I've holstered from ankle to arm pit,, The 45 ACP is my 50 year absolute carry caliber, and IM 70 years old.

I wont argue my position here, or defend it.... IM just answering the OP's topic ...

AS a point of view, when budget oversight is not an issue, and our special ops units can take any side arm they want... just research what they choose.... I wont tell you, but just do some in depth research.

 

[JTQ]

BTW, 9mmP 124gr loads were not that difficult to get in the 1970s. Ammunition loaded with 124s at 1100fps were available.

Sure, they were available since 1902 when the round was invented. However, in the 1970's - 1980's, it was lightweight (90gr - 115gr), high energy, shallow penetrators that were the choice of "knowledgeable" 9MM users. Based on the fact that heavier, deeper penetrating 9MM rounds are now the choice of "knowledgeable" 9MM users may mean the lightweight, shallow penetrators were probably not the best choice.

In regards to this thread, are you asking a question and taking a poll for folks to honestly respond to, or are you trying to make a point that a Beretta PX4 Compact or Glock 26 is the only rational choice as a personal defense handgun.

 

[Evil-Twin]

the blossom from a 45 ACP JHP is in the .773 to .780 range and in military ballistic gell. can penetrate 17 inches at 21 feet.

You tell me how far you can get with a 3/4 inch saw blade whirling though your abdomen will do... at a defensive posture of ten feet or so..

Ask all of these Baltimore hip hop guys who have been shot multiple times with 9mm and live to tell about it.. Ask Shug Night the rapper who took three 9mm in the chest and didn't even know it until he saw the blood, walked out of the club and into an ambulance, under his own power.. you hit someone with a 45 at 10/15 ft.and its like an explosion, and an electrocution at the same time.. getting hit with a 9mm is like taking a jolt from a 220 volt electric line.. take the same shot with a 45 and it like getting hit by a jolt of 440 Volts. 220 volts hurt like hell, 440 volts feel like someone hit you in the chest with a 20 lb sledge hammer, before you go unconscious.

i'll make one other point... with the slower but massive 45 ACP round, all of the energy is dispersed within the target.. with a small and fast 9mmm. many rounds are referred too as through and through, with much less kinetic shock. its the massive kinetic shock that puts a target down, so they don't advance or have the ability to get another round off.. 45 acp may not be light out all the time but it sends such a shock wave through the body that completely disorients the target.. I've personally seen both cases.

 

[GBExpat]

I am over 40 years of age, was a shooter as a child/adolescent,

.... and I carry a .45acp, .44spc, 9x19 or 9x17 depending upon circumstances.

In most cases the decision is rooted in what I can comfortably conceal.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Sure, they were available since 1902 when the round was invented. However, in the 1970's - 1980's, it was lightweight (90gr - 115gr), high energy, shallow penetrators that were the choice of "knowledgeable" 9MM users. Based on the fact that heavier, deeper penetrating 9MM rounds are now the choice of "knowledgeable" 9MM users may mean the lightweight, shallow penetrators were probably not the best choice.

I agree that in the 1970s and 1980s the lightweight HP was the darling of most 9mmP proponents, but not all. Some of those lightweight HPs were even constructed well enough to have consistent expansion and adequate penetration.

In regards to this thread, are you asking a question and taking a poll for folks to honestly respond to, or are you trying to make a point that a Beretta PX4 Compact or Glock 26 is the only rational choice as a personal defense handgun.

The former. In this thread I have zero interest in giving gun recommendations and will not be making any. I also have zero interest in anyone posting them to this thread. I am also not much interested in "War Stories" or things that belong on the American Rifleman's "The Armed Citizen" page. Why are you so suspicious of my intentions? Is it because we disagree on a few things? Please believe there is no hidden agenda in this thread to promote any pistol. This thread/poll is really only seeking the very simple information it is asking . The value of that information has yet to be determined and it may not have any value at all.

 

[Chuck R.]

Started shooting handguns when I was 15 and ALWAYS wanted a 1911.

Died in the wool 1911 ACP fan, was issued my first one when I was an 18 year old MP in 1978, bought my own the next year, and have always owned several since. Began CCing one back in 1995 in WA/OR when I was stationed there with a LW Comander, finished up carrying a Les Baer Stinger (CCO).

Transitioned to 9mm several years ago due to improvements in the ammo and taking several SD firearms classes. Now carry 9mm Tupperware, either Walther PPQ or PPS. Somewhere along the line I started looking at a CCW pistol as a tool (lighter, more capacity), my 1911s are strictly for range use.

Chuck

 

[HammsBeer]

With FMJ vs FMJ the .45 wins over 9mm. Simply bigger holes.

Many people could reasonably argue: With FMJ vs FMj the 9mm wins over the .45. Simply more damage can be done with the more holes that can be made in the same amount of time.

I'm exclusively a 9mm shooter, and even I can admit when a bigger heavier bullet is a better fight stopper. You are assuming that every situation will give you time to fire multiple shots, but if you are jumped in the dark then one or two might be all you get off.

If you reread my whole message I give a nod to the .45 if it's a full size handgun, and the 9mm if it's a compact carry. They both have their place, and each is a balance between capacity, shootability, and terminal performance.

 

[Nom de Forum]

the blossom from a 45 ACP JHP is in the .773 to .780 range and in military ballistic gell. can penetrate 17 inches at 21 feet.

You tell me how far you can get with a 3/4 inch saw blade whirling though your abdomen will do... at a defensive posture of ten feet or so..

Ask all of these Baltimore hip hop guys who have been shot multiple times with 9mm and live to tell about it.. Ask Shug Night the rapper who took three 9mm in the chest and didn't even know it until he saw the blood, walked out of the club and into an ambulance, under his own power.. you hit someone with a 45 at 10/15 ft.and its like an explosion, and an electrocution at the same time.. getting hit with a 9mm is like taking a jolt from a 220 volt electric line.. take the same shot with a 45 and it like getting hit by a jolt of 440 Volts. 220 volts hurt like hell, 440 volts feel like someone hit you in the chest with a 20 lb sledge hammer, before you go unconscious.

Evil-twin,

This type of post makes me question the age and experience of the poster. I strongly suspect your hyperbole ("like an explosion, and an electrocution at the same time.. getting hit with a 9mm is like taking a jolt from a 220 volt electric line.. take the same shot with a 45 and it like getting hit by a jolt of 440 Volts. 220 volts hurt like hell, 440 volts feel like someone hit you in the chest with a 20 lb sledge hammer, before you go unconscious") is an indication of you being very young and/or inexperienced. Regardless of that the "information" you provided is not very relevant to the thread. The thread is not about about terminal ballistic performance and I fear anymore comments like yours will turn it into another stopping power/9 vs .45 goat rope that will get it closed.

 

[Nom de Forum]

You are assuming that every situation will give you time to fire multiple shots, but if you are jumped in the dark then one or two might be all you get off.

Not really. What I am assuming is that a good hit with a 9mm is as good a hit as with a .45. You have an equal chance of making one good first shot hit with a 9mm as with a .45. You have a better chance of making more good hits with 9mm because of recoil recovery time and frequently magazine capacity. I am also assuming you will probably need more than one good hit because one good hit is not necessarily a off switch and if it is the caliber probably did not not matter.

 

[chicharrones]

I'm 50.

When I bought my first handgun, I went with a .357 magnum revolver back in the early 90's and never even owned anything that would chamber .45 ACP until I turned 45.

I didn't start reading gun mags until maybe 1990. My thoughts back then on firearms were more focused on uses for hunting. Self defense was secondary to me at the time.

EDIT: I did start shooting at age 7 with .22s and within a couple years a .410, but I never handled anything but long guns in my youth. The first time I recall firing a handgun I was in my lower 20s.

 

[C0untZer0]

When I first started reading Marshall and Sanow, I happened to be in college - taking a statistics class, and even though I didn't think that some of their ideas were correct, I remember them pointing out that many 45 hollow point designs didn't get going fast enough to expand consistently. I had already chosen 9mm - mainly because I thought the HKP7 M8 was so cool, (they didn't have a .40 S&W version of the P7 yet).

I was disappointed to see Marshall & Sanow's assessment of my chosen caliber - I only had an 83% chance of dropping an assailant with 1 shot with 124gr Federal Nyclad. That really sucked compared to .357 Magnum, but I wasn't about to go out and get a 357 Magnum revolver. Using the knowledge that I gleaned from statistic class I figured I would just shoot twice with the 9mm Nyclads and that would give me a 97% of a stop

 

[JTQ]

Nom de Forum wrote,
The former. In this thread I have zero interest in giving gun recommendations and will not be making any…

Why are you so suspicious of my intentions? Is it because we disagree on a few things? Please believe there is no hidden agenda in this thread to promote any pistol. This thread/poll is really only seeking the very simple information it is asking . The value of that information has yet to be determined and it may not have any value at all.

Why am I suspicious? You are arguing with people's opinions, and of course you and I seem to be arguing facts. You seem to remember the 1970's and 1980's differently than I or Walt Sherrill seem to remember them. I'd suspect a pollster would ask a question and let the responders, respond without making an argument for one side or the other.

For example…

During the years in question I certainly believed the hype was right. I have since come to the conclusion it never was right. The superiority of the .45ACP to the 9mmP as ammunition for a SD pistol never existed except in the minds of some people.

Of course you also included this earlier in the thread...

Nom de Forum wrote,
Keep reading the thread and you will probably come to understand the "earthly" use of the information. I have purposely not said more so as to not bias the responses to the thread/poll.

I'll suppose there is some "purpose" to the thread other than simply gathering a collection of people's experiences with either staying with a caliber or changing to another. I would guess you have a conclusion already determined, and are trying to steer the poll responses in a certain direction.