These 9mm get no repect threads got me thinking

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do any of you get into naval history? The whole 9 vs 45 debate that keeps popping up is strangely similar to the American 16inx50cal Mk 7 vs the Japanese 18.1x45cal type 94 debate. Many of the same arguments are made.

By the way the x50cal and x45cal is not the same as in small arms. It means the length of the gun in relationship to the bore. A 16inx50cal barrel would be 50 x the 16in bore.
 
I don't think the metric connection has anything to do with it for me. I grew up before the 9mm was popular in the U.S. and so learned to shoot a .45 ACP. Since I was already used to the recoil of the .45 the 9mm didn't make much of an impression upon me when it started gaining popularity here. The more recent advent of very compact poly nines intrigued me for awhile, but then a very small .45 poly came along and I bought it instead.

I will own a nine soon, just hasn't been high enough on my wish list. When the ammo get plentiful again and the prices go down I'll sneak up on a Browning Hi Power.
 
The metric designation just makes it more
specific. Someone referes to the 9mm Parabellum
aka popular name of 9mm Luger as the 9x19 I'd say
they have a better handle than many these days who
don't know the original 9mm Parabellum was it's first
name ( German "For War" I think.

Heck going to the WOrld Stage on a site that listed a
bunch of different military and LEO organizations pistols
it listed strictly by metric.
9x19 for the 9mm parabellum/9mm Luger
10x21 for .40 S&W
& 11.43x23 for .45 Automatic Colt Pistol (ACP)

except the .357 Mag was referred to as that for
French SPecial forces and a couple of other
EUro LEO agencies.

FYI my handguns in order of my preference
1911 full size .45 ACP
I'm ex-USN and carried one on duty/on watch back
during my time of service so it's no contest
CZ 75B in 9x19 - Great pistol, I'd use without qualms
as to it's capabilities.
S&W Rvolvers
( first handgun back in the mid-60s was a
model 18 4" Bbl. in .22 LR )
625 5" Bbl. in .45 ACP/.45 Auto Rim hmm, 11.43x23R heh
- Fun range gun
617 6" Bbl. 10 shot cyl. .22 LR
60 3" Bbl. .357 Mag
686P 4" bbl. .357 Mag.
for longer sessions I'll go to the .38 Special
for the.357 Mags - recoil and muzzle blast/flash
gets a bit much unlike the lower pressure .45 ACP

Thelocal city cops use Glock G17/9x19
but the county Sheriff's Dept. have Kimber 1911s .45 ACP

There's also the culture of over 100 years of the revolver
with the .38 SPecial & 80 years of the .357 Mag. as well
as over 125 years of a .45 - the Single Action Army followed
by the 1911. Modern Hollowpoints and semi-auto platforms
with higher copacity mags have only been around for 30
some years

If you like the 9x19 great, other people making a
different choice doesn't discount your choice.

Randall
 
I have a .380 auto, a 9x19 and a .38 Super. One of my shooting buddies refers to them as .380, .380 Magnum, and .380 Ultra Magnum. :)
 
Of course. A 9x19 and .357 mag are the same diameter (or extremely close), and out of a snubbie revolver for example, are going roughly the same speed, but one is a devastating one-shot-American-stopper, and one is a pansy wimp round - or so the bubbas would have you believe.
 
A hit is a hit, and a miss is a miss, no matter what caliber you're using. I'm gonna fire at least 2 rounds at an bad guy, no matter what caliber I'm using, whether it be .380 or a .50cal M2 machine gun. So that being said, I would much rather have 15+ rounds in the mag than 8. I know none of us plan on missing, but reality tends to set in at the worst moments. More rounds = a higher chance of getting out alive. You can have the most powerful death ray caliber you want, but if you miss and run out of rounds, you're SOL. And the fact is, you have twice as many chances of hitting your target at least once with most 9mm than you do with most .45s.
 
People weren't designed with random holes punched all over them...I detest the FMJ 9mm as a defensive round, but when carrying JHPs, I think it's a fine little bullet that does the job and does it well. As do many other calibers.
 
Since I own a 9mm pistol and enjoy shooting it, I am OK with 9mm getting no respect, if it means the ammo costs less! :)
 
Metric. English. Whatever.

They're all just "Click Bang Boomsticks that Hold the Spiting God of Thunder" to me.
 
I like 9mm. And frankly, what we have here in the US is more a healthy debate on the merits of different handguns than aversion. I don't think the metric system has a thing to do with it. I think the size and weight of the round does.
 
remember, if metric names made us turn up our noses and 'standard' names made us happy, then the 38 super would spank the 9mm in terms of sales.

Another example is the 10mm. It didn't loose out to the 40SW because one was metric and one was 'standard'
 
Domestics are virtually 100% metric these days. The mix-n-match stuff was a headache, though. But with the big three having dropped virtually every component from the last century, all the new stuff is SI. Dodge was the last hold out, running LA blocks in trucks up until 2004.

The schools I went to more than 50 years ago were teaching the metric system. I think they were ahead of the curve.

both true. Most US automakers went metric in the 80s, and many schools have taught metric for decades -- the MKS standards that the teachers learned in college physics drove a lot of that. But I am old and don't change easily.

Go to any hardware store and compare the selection of standard to metric fasteners... plumbing... carpentry....

Most US people don't think in metric.

That said, I think Skeeter Skelton's impressions (and a bunch of others like him) mattered more than that. Before good feeding JHP, the 9mm FMJ just didn't seem up to the job.
 
It makes no difference to me whether a caliber is metric or English; I only care about its properties. I use 9mm for concealed carry, and .45ACP for open carry.
 
the metric name of the .45ACP would be 11,43×23mm, but we dont use the metric because of the comma in it.
is it that mutch biger then the 9x19mm?

Not so much when you look at it that way, but 230 gr is twice 115 gr! Twice as much lead with each round!!
 
That said, I think Skeeter Skelton's impressions (and a bunch of others like him) mattered more than that. Before good feeding JHP, the 9mm FMJ just didn't seem up to the job.

Skeeter and other earlier well known writers were respectful but not enthusiastic toward the 9mm P. They were, of course, comparing it as a military hardball cartridge to the hardball .45ACP. The .45 as a military cartridge is simply better and no amount of rationalizing will change that.

I listened to the stories my father told me about the Lugers he owned as a young man in the 1920's and 1930's. They included a Stoegers "Safe" & "Loaded" 7.65mm, a mint 1915 DWM Artillery model, a commercial DWM 7.65mm Artillery model and several other DWM military models. The 7.65mm P. with a hollow point bullet was "wicked" while the hardball was rather anemic. The 9mm was better but the available ammunition wasn't the best; surplus German WW1 cartridges and domestic hardball made by Western, Winchester, Peters and Remington mostly. He stayed with the American-made ammo because it was non-corrosive.

So, somewhere around 1956 my father and I went together and bought a 9mm Luger. It was a WW2 Mauser and was not reliable. It rarely fed more than two cartridges before it would jam. The worst part was trying to find cartridges. Not one store in the area carried 9mm and it had to be ordered.

Later, "Ye Olde Hunter" sold 9mm surplus ammo for $4 and $5 per 100 pounds. The $4 stuff was corrosive while the $5 ammo was non-corrosive Winchester. About 1960 YOH also sold a massive number of Lugers for $29.95 ~ $39.95 and brand new surplus 1911A1 autos (Colt, Ithaca & Remington-Rand) for $39.95! They usually ran a full page ad in the American Rifleman every month.

A second Luger was added a few years later; an S/42 Mauser and it wasn't any more reliable than the first one. Eventually it was traded off for an Erfurt rework in 7.65mm and it's VERY reliable. I've loaded both hollow point and 85 grain Hornady softnose HP bullets for it and it feeds them fine. The biggest problem has been getting the softnose bullets to slide up the magazine as the lead drags and may even catch on the latch cutout. The all metal hollowpoints work beautifully.

In the years since, I've owned many, many 9mm pistols and most have been more than satisfactory but my home defense pistol is a .45ACP.

With the proper bullet the 9mm cartridge is very good. With the proper bullet the .45ACP is better.
 
I know some people believe the 45 has magical one shot, even if you miss them, knock them dead/back 50ft/through walls/sinks battleships/destroys planets Deathstar like power.

Now that's funny :D

Sig'd :)
 
I tend to prefer the metric system... but I may be biased since I was born overseas. 9mm and 10mm for my pistols, 7.62 X whatever for my rifles.
 
Quote:
I know some people believe the 45 has magical one shot, even if you miss them, knock them dead/back 50ft/through walls/sinks battleships/destroys planets Deathstar like power.
Now that's funny

Sig'd
__________________

Thanks, maybe when I get over this flu (my mind clears) I may tweak that a little.
 
I almost bought a .45 until I noticed that the ammo is twice as expensive as 9mm ammo. Yeah..the 9mm will do thank you.
 
Many extraordinary encounters took place in the skies of World War II but none more bizarre than this.

The Tenth Air Force in India was, 5 throughout most of its life, the smallest of the AAF’s combat air forces but with a large geographical area of responsibility and an important mission. It was responsible for helping to defend the supply line from India to China and for interdicting the Japanese supply net running from Rangoon, Burma, to the north of that country. Its heavy bomber force – consisting of a few B-24s – was the 7th Bomb Group, based at Pandaveswar, northwest of Calcutta, whence it flew very long missions to targets mostly in Burma. On March 31, 1943, the 7th BG’s 9th Bomb Squadron was dispatched to destroy a railroad bridge at Pyinmana, about halfway between Rangoon and Mandalay and near two active enemy fighter bases. The formation was led by Col. Conrad F. Necrason, 7th BG commander, The B-24 on his right wing was piloted by 1st Lt. Lloyd Jensen whose copilot was 2d Lt. Owen J. Baggett. On that mission, Baggett was to earn a distinction believed to be unique in Air Force history. Before reaching the target, the B- 24s were attacked by fighters. Colonel Necrason was severely wounded, and Jensen’s aircraft was fatally damaged. Oxygen bottles were shattered, intensifying a fire in the rear of Jensen’s bomber. Nineteen-year-old Sgt. Samuel Crostic slid out of his top turret, grabbed two fire extinguishers, and fought the fire in the rear of the aircraft while standing on a catwalk over the open bomb bay. The plane still was under attack by enemy fighters, taking many hits along its fuselage. To help defend the aircraft, copilot Baggett took over the top turret until Sergeant Crostic had emptied his fire extinguishers, giving the crew time to prepare for bailout. Smoke and fumes filled the 8-24. Jensen ordered the crew to bail out.

With the intercom inoperative, Baggett hand-signaled the gunners to hit the silk and, nearly overcome by fumes, put on his own chute. He next remembers floating down with a good chute. He saw four more open canopies before the bomber exploded. The Japanese pilots immediately began strafing the surviving crewmen, apparently killing some of them and grazing Lieutenant Baggett’s arm. The pilot who had hit Baggett circled to finish him off or perhaps only to get a better look at his victim. Baggett pretended to be dead, hoping the Zero pilot would not fire again. In any event, the pilot opened his canopy and approached within feet of Baggett’s chute, nose up and on the verge of a stall. Baggett, enraged by the strafing of his helpless crew mates, raised the .45 automatic concealed against his leg and fired four shots at the open cockpit. The Zero stalled and spun in.

After Baggett hit the ground, enemy pilots continued to strafe him, but he escaped by hiding behind a tree. Lieutenant Jensen and one of the gunners landed near him. All three were captured by the Burmese and turned over to the Japanese. Sergeant Crostic also survived the bail-out. Baggett and Jensen were flown out of Burma in an enemy bomber and imprisoned near Singapore. In the more than two years he was held prisoner, Owen Baggett’s weight dropped from 180 pounds to ninety. He had ample time to think about his midair dual. He did not at first believe it possible that he could have shot down the enemy while swinging in his chute, but gradually pieces of the puzzle came together. Shortly after he was imprisoned, Baggett, Jensen, and another officer were taken before a Japanese major general who was in charge of all POWs in the area and who subsequently was executed as a war criminal. Baggett appeared to be treated like a celebrity. He was offered the opportunity of and given instructions on how to do the "honorable thing" – commit hara-kiri, a proposal he declined.

A few months later, Col. Harry Melton, commander of the 311th Fighter Group who had been shot down, passed through the POW camp and told Baggett that a Japanese colonel said the pilot Owen Baggett had fired at had been thrown clear of his plane when it crashed and burned. He was found dead of a single bullet in his head. Colonel Melton intended to make an official report of the incident but lost his life when the ship on which he was being taken to Japan was sunk. Two other pieces of evidence support Baggett’s account: First, no friendly fighters were in the area that could have downed the Zero pilot. Second, the incident took place at an altitude of 4,000 to 5,000 feet. The pilot could have recovered from an unintentional stall and spin. Retired Colonel Baggett, now living in San Antonio, Tex., believes he shot down the Japanese pilot, but because that judgment is based on largely indirect and circumstantial evidence, he remains reluctant to talk much about it. We think the jury no longer is out. There appears to be no reasonable doubt that Owen Baggett performed a unique act of valor, unlikely to be repeated in the unfolding annals of air warfare.

Thanks to Colonel Baggett and to Charles V. Duncan, Jr., author of B-24 Over Burma.

AIR FORCE Magazine / July 1996
 
Well, I have to say that I dont like the metric system but I love my 9mm. With that said, I would trust my life to my 9mm anyday of the week. With the right ammo I believe it to be very affective. If the BG can take 20 147gr Hydra-Shoks then I am not so sure a .40 or .45 will make any difference. I also like the idea of having more ammo capacity. I would rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it.
 
W L Johnson,
Sir, I think this thread shows more of a bias on your part about Americans and what you think of us than how Americans feel about calibers named with a metric number.

Just to clear up something. Americans refer to the 5.56mm as the .223 or the 7.62X51mm as the .308 because the metric rounds are military rounds and the numbered rounds are the commercial variants. They are different and should be called what they are.

I don't care what a round is called, if it fills a need I have I'll shoot it. If it doesn't fill that need I'll pass. If Americans were really against metric rounds why is the 7mm-08 one of the most popular rounds in America?
 
S&W had a .35 cal proprietary pocket pistol (unless thats another way to say .380). It failed too.

9mm's popularity has waxed and waned several times. I still like mine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top