Sell My 9mm and Go All Out with .45. What do People Think?

[JSmith]

Sell My 9mm and Go All Out with .45. What do People Think?

I think you done good.

Let's face it, guys. The 9mm is, well, ... it's European, that's what it is.

I drive a Swedish car, and my electronics are Japanese, but my firearms have always been American - S&Ws and Colts - with the sole exception of a Webley .455 I owned for a while, back in the late 70s.

 

[cleetus03]

My oh my, it is 2009 and both forces in the War of 9mm vs .45 have yet to breakthrough the stalemate of their vicious campaign towards victory!

 

[4Freedom]

Personally, I think you are going the wrong way. Until you can shoot little tiny groups and shoot multiple magazines full of cartridges on a small target at 20 yds then you are fixated too much on caliber and you need to practice your shooting. Once you can hit where you are shooting without fail, it won't matter so much what caliber you are using.

As far as shooting is concerned, I am equally good with the Wonder 9 or One-Shot Dropper .45.. LOL.. Actually the 9mm is a bit tougher to shoot, because I always have to think a bit more what I am doing, since the gun tends to snap a bit. Once I get the mind control correct, I am shooting tight groups with that Sig. However, with the .45, I point, aim and hit. I am a glutton for punishment and dont mind the loud explosion and pressure it puts on my hand. Even, I love shooting it one handed for more fun . I think in a stressful situaiton, I have a lot easier time hitting the target with the .45..

As far as the guy who says the 9mm is better for taking out a group, I like to see some evidence of that. First of all, what good is the extra 5-9 rounds of my 9mm versus a .45 if I am nervous and I hit the guy 4 times and he still is coming after me. If I flatten the guy on round 1, most likely the other guys won't want to be next. I just don't see how you will have time to unload 19 rounds on a group of guys anyway, if you are getting jumped. If they are far enough away, I would think you would then easily have time to reload ur mags or dump in a speed loader even.


Anyhow, this discussion has penetrated the deepest dimensions of my mind and I am pondering if I should keep the SIg 9mm or go all out with .45. I have also considered the .357, 10mm and .44 route to the .45, but seeing that I have a .45 and lot of .45 ammo, I would like to consolidate my .45 stash and not have to worry about maintaining to differnet types of guns and ammo. Some say buy two S&W M&Ps , well I rahter not.. I just really think the H&K 45 is very snazzy, fits like a glove in my hand and I am in love with it; I will pursue it if I get rid of my Sig. I do plan on getting a .44 for my backwoods hiking this summer and was also thinking of getting rid of the 9mm to fund this purchase, money is tight.

One reason I may keep my 9 is that I got a lot of ammo for it and seeing how hard and expensive it is to get ammo right now, maybe it be more rational to keep it. The price I paid for my .45 ammo two months ago has gone up considerably and almost nobody I can find even sells .45 or 9mm ammo anymore .

 

[hso]

10mm!

or

Perhaps it would be best to quit fixating on equipment and spend some time and money on professional training and range time so you can make your hits count.

 

[BHPshooter]

Wow. We'd better check the altitude of this thread -- it's FULL of HOT AIR.

We are two years short of the .45 ACP having 100 years of documentation. No one has proven any sidearm to be a superior man stopper in that time.

FWIW, the .45 ACP has been around since 1905, making it 104 years old.

I do not own a 9mm Parabellum. I do not own a .40 S&W or a 10mm. I have two shelves lined with pistols chambered in .45 ACP. I'll never drink the 9mm Kool Aid again. Even the FBI figured out it will get you killed.

Yes, because the caliber of their guns was the reason why the FBI royally screwed the pooch in Miami. What it boils down to is this: The Feeb botched it bad, and having a bigger hole in the end of their pistols wouldn't have saved them.

There's always a hardware solution to a software problem.

*sigh*
Wes

 

[AllAmerican]

I love caliber wars because they show the ignorance of many of the folks posting.

 

[jackdanson]

TO disable a threat in home defense situation or in urban scenario, which order would you choose between the three calibers:
9mm, .44 and .45

.44,.45,9mm That is by no means the "whole story" though.

I only read the OP, not others, so I might repeat what they say. This is all typical gun guy repeated arguments over and over, it's ridiculous. Any of these calibers is sufficient for defense. The "bigger is better" argument has some truth to it, but everyone knows shot placement matters more than "energy". Keep in mind, many of the same guys that say "oooh you need a .357, it kills instantly" are the same guys that say the .30 carbine is worthless and will bounce off of a frozen jacket. (.357 and .30 carbine are balistically very similar)

The .45 is the ultimate killing machine, but a .223 is insufficient for a military arm. (ignore the fact that a .223 has the same amount of energy at 500 yards that a .45 does point blank)

Stick with what you like and what you feel comfortable with... bigger doesn't hurt. I'll stick with my 9's....

 

[James T Thomas]

second thoughts

I would keep the 9mm, and go with the 45 for most occasions.

Perhaps the 9mm might be the only ammunition you have available; under some certain circumstances. Perhaps a remote occurence, but none the less,
the 9mm is a universal cartridge.

Then too, you may just find your wife, daughter, son, or girlfriend prefers the somewhat milder 9mm. Sometime later in your life.

And also, what ever you would receive for the 9mm, I would think that down the road, it's value would increase.

It is good to have a second gun too. Just ask the "battery" collectors here in THR.

 

[Tropical Buzz]

Just one lil' question for those who chant "bigger is better":

Why does the "little" .357 Magnum (same "size" as the 9mm) out perform the "bigger" (by less than 1/10th of an inch, mind you!!!) .45 in every ballistic category imaginable - including the legendary "one shot stop"???

 

[BullitHolz]

Muzzle velocity?

 

[Tropical Buzz]

Correct - thank you. Plus superior sectional density of the projectile. It's NOT about size folks, when you're comparing bullets that differ by a relatively miniscule amount compared to the size of the organism being shot. In the elasticity of flesh, the permanent size of the wound channels actually differs by even less than difference in size of the bullets, expanded or not.
The .45 ACP is a great and venerable round, but it is not the be all and end all simply because it is a wee bit bigger. Otherwise we'd be using it instead of 300 Winchester magnums for punching "bigger holes" in moose..

 

[ArmedBear]

Otherwise we'd be using it instead of 300 Winchester magnums for punching "bigger holes" in moose..

The slow-moving, heavy .45-70 works GREAT on large game. It can be a PITA to hit a distant target with, though. The .300 WinMag offers a flat trajectory, not better performance on large game.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Muzzle velocity is not the end-all, either.

You see, you're thinking in two dimensions, but bullets work in four. Bullets also weigh something, and they move in certain ways in time. .45" may not be that much bigger than .35", but the bullets are a LOT heavier, and they can plow through in a very different way.

Heavy, slow bullets, or light fast ones, can work -- for different reasons. Light, slow ones, not so much, and even light, fast ones have limitations. You don't see too many people hunting moose with a .22-250, either.

The .357's "one shot stop" stats are a function of its use, as well. No doubt a good .44 Magnum would be even more effective, but it doesn't get used for self-defense much.

There's a lot to this.

 

[Tropical Buzz]

You're comparing apples and oranges. Muzzle velocity is not the end-all, either.

Precisely. I am only addressing the "bigger is better" issue as relates to the .45 vs. 9mm debate. I never said velocity is everything. It is important though and I have always maintained that a variety of factors, including caliber, velocity, weight, sectional density and penetration work together to determine the terminal effects of a given bullet against a given part of a given target. The difference in "size" alone as repeated by the .45 camp is not a significant enough factor in the context of this argument.

BTW the 300 mag was thrown in to illustrate that a big velocity increase can easily overcome a minor size advantage; as well an (unsuccessful?) attempt to poke fun at the use of extreme examples by others - bowling ball, flying ashtray, etc.

The .357's "one shot stop" stats are a function of its use, as well. No doubt a good .44 Magnum would be even more effective, but it doesn't get used for self-defense much.

There's a lot to this.

I don't buy into the "one shot stop" index either - hence the word "legendary" in my post. As you correctly state - there's a lot to this. There are also many variables from situation to situation and I maintain my position that typical, high quality .45 ACP and 9mm cartridges are so close in actual ballistic performance that placement, accuracy and follow up shots are far more important than the mere "size" of the bullet.

 

[skeeter_08]

IMHO, .45 acp is a better defensive caliber than 9mm, however I would never give up my niners, and I still regret selling my own P228, but if I just had to give up something like a Sig P229 Elite as well as all my 9mm ammo and then replace it with either a 1911 or an HK45, these and the P220 are all real good .45acp handguns, especially if you have a good store of 45 ammo, so go for it! - skeeter_08

 

[ArmedBear]

I maintain my position that typical, high quality .45 ACP and 9mm cartridges are so close in actual ballistic performance that placement, accuracy and follow up shots are far more important than the mere "size" of the bullet.

And I maintain my position that you are thinking too much of ballistic gelatin, and not enough about the real world.

In the real world, doubling the bullet weight means a hell of a lot. Raising the velocity a little bit doesn't. The real world includes odd angles, leather jackets, bone, amphetamines, etc.

All other things being equal, the modern 9mm is not the equal of the modern .45 ACP in terms of how a given shot will affect a target.

You can argue that the modern 9mm is as good as the .45 ACP of WW II and you'd likely be right. You can argue that the 9mm is good enough for self-defense, and in most cases, you'd likely be right.

But a single .45 HST round is still going to do significantly more to stop an attacker than a single 9mm HST round -- and the .45" vs. .35" comparison does not represent that reality.

The correct statement that the modern 9mm can be quite effective in a self-defense role has somehow morphed into the belief that it's the equal of the modern .45 ACP. This isn't so.

 

[JohnnyOrygun]

As Kwanger pointed out, the problem with the 9mm in Military use isn't the caliber, its the ammo type. All our military is allowed to use is FMJ, 9mm hole in and a 9mm hole out. With the those kind of constraints I would also choose 45ACP, but as a civilian I am allowed to use HP's and I have them for both my 9mm and 45acp. Variety is the spice of life and it only makes sense to diversify, so I also have 38/357 and 22. I love my 45, but is much cheaper to shoot 9mm for plinking and practice. One of these days I will get in to reloading, but not now... other more pressing issues.

I really recommend keeping your 9mm and 45, just chose proper hollow points for self defense use.

YMMV and IMHO
JohnnyOrygun

 

[BullitHolz]

And to take it all a bit farther....

Handgun cartridges are anemic anyway in the real world, especially compared to rifle or shotgun performance.

I watch that show "Gangland" on the History channel and every week they do an interview with some of the street punks in prison. ALL of these guys have been shot multiple times, usually with 9MM weapons, and survived to fight again and again. Heck most of them will tell the tale and then show off their scars for the camera. One guy had been hit 19 times in his 23 scummy years.

Every time the story is the same, they start shooting each other and the rounds are flying everywhere, virtually no aiming at the target is being done. In most of these type of encounters are where gang members are trying to kill each other, it's obvious that virtually none of them know anything about guns or marksmanship and they weild their weapons accordingly, spray and pray. The high capacity 9MM, it seems, was practically made for these idiots.

My point is, there is NO substitute for accuracy and quality ammo. If it was solely about the chosen caliber or the gun there would be far fewer gang members walking our city streets and eating our prison food these days.

Just imagine what the world would look like if they were all using Garands on each other instead of Glocks.

 

[ArmedBear]

Just imagine what the world would look like if they were all using Garands on each other instead of Glocks.

Ever see "rounds expended per kill" stats for WW II?

 

[BullitHolz]

good point but you can't really walk up to somebody with a Garand and get the drop on them like you can with a Glock now can you?

 

[ArmedBear]

Harder to shoot a Garand while holding it sideways.

 

[Tropical Buzz]

But a single .45 HST round is still going to do significantly more to stop an attacker than a single 9mm HST round

Like what, exactly? Knock him off his feet? Hydrostatic shock? Thunderbolt from heaven? Not, not and not - sorry. If you are talking about penetration, the 9mm actually penetrates just as well and in some cases even better. Does the .45 "smack" the target harder? Yes, but not nearly enough so to do any damage or to even push a man one step backwards. The tales about Japanese soldiers spinning and doing back flips in the Pacific theater are, well... you get my point.

-- and the .45" vs. .35" comparison does not represent that reality.

Why - because it doesnt support your argument? It is generally accepted that the lighter, smaller and faster .357 magnum delivers superior real world ballistic performance to the heavier, bigger and slower .45 ACP.
Remember, I am only taking issue with the "bigger is better" mentality - NOT championing the 9mm over the .45.
My main point is that both calibers are perfectly adequate (as far as handguns go) for personal defence and any additional magical properties surrounding the "over .40" myth are bragging rights and fluff.
The majority of shootings here are done with .45's and 9mm's and a close friend who worked on autopsies for many years says that they used to make each other try and ID the caliber that did the deed by examining the wound. Guess what? They could usually tell HP from ball, but caliber? Forget it. The difference is largely indistinguishable and the person with the holes in him really didn't give a hoot either way.

There's just way too much emotion and rigid polarization in this debate and we're not accomplishing much here, so I respectfully bow out. Take care.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Well...something about "bigger" is better.

The 45acp stops deer WAAAAY better than 9mm (pretty much the same shot placement, range, size of deer, and more than 1 test subject, etc.)

The 45 penetrated the shoulder blades better (both sides)...but that is more a function of momentum and sectional density than it is "caliber".

Push a 230 grain .355 caliber bullet to 850 fps and see what happens.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

Answer...energy is the same.
Momentum is the same.
Taylor KO factor is different...9 for the 9mm, 12 for the 45acp.

Diameter does matter...not quite as much as shot placement, but diameter does matter.

 

[timberbeast63]

I would concede that 45ACP and 40S&W are going to do a better job, round for round, than 9mm when the bullet hits.

That being said, if you like shooting a 38spl or 9mm, can better handle it, and practice with it more, than that is what you should use and feel comfortable. If you don't like a gun, you won't practice with it a lot and at a critical momemt, you might fail to use it properly.

I'd rather shoot and hit a BG with a 9 than shoot and miss with a 45ACP or 44mag.

1. Have a gun. 2. Know how to use it well. 3. Long guns are better, but rule #1 sometimes means a handgun. 4. Larger calibers are better, but rule #2 applies.

If you like 45s and are proficient, then you are well prepared!

 

[altitude_19]

My line of thinking

Here are the rules I live by:
1.) Carry a weapon you shoot well. If you shoot several equally well, it never hurts to have a backup (the fact that you have one good gun does not preclude you from owning a second). Decide which one to carry based on the following:
2.) Carry your most reliable, lightest, and probably lowest capacity weapons AS A MINIMUM. The most important thing is to HAVE A RELIABLE GUN. Low capacity=simple mechanism=reliable. Lightweight=more fun to carry=will at least HAVE A GUN when trouble comes a callin'. Low threat means you can carry low-capacity (regular errands around town and the like).
3.) Defensive iron (for muggers and the like) should use rounds that avoid over-penetration (45 ACP excells at CONTROLLED penetration) and must be reliable above ALL ELSE (capacity/weapon complexity is inversely proportional to reliability).
4.) Carry high-capacity for extended engagements. Hopefully, you'll never need it, but capacity is CRUCIAL in true combat environments. The meanest cartridge won't make a lick of difference if you are out of them after 7 rounds and a riot is in progress.
Given the above, one can produce this catharsis:
45 ACP: Carry in crowded areas (controlled penetration) where there is a limited threat (low capacity) and the most important thing is making sure youre assailant knows he has been shot (hard not to notice with 230 grains of lead diplomacy hitting you in the sternum).
9mm: Carry in general combat or times of civil unrest when you anticipate heavy engagement (running out of ammo is probable with lower capacity weapons) and over penetration is not a concern (controllable with good projectiles, but still more likely with 9mm than 45).
44 Mag: Recoil is brisk to say the least, so I'd only recommend this in a heavy gun, which you won't likely enjoy carrying. Moreover, magnum rounds CAN overpenetrate (depending on your projectile, this can be hard to mitigate at magnum velocities). 44 special can be used and is a fine defensive cartridge, but is also somewhat less plentiful than 45 ACP and 9mm. I recommend 44 mag for a home defense cartridge if you have no reason to concern yourself with overpenetration (live alone/isolated area), but not for a carry weapon.