Why use a .45?

[NineseveN]

So many people out there want to bad-mouth the M16/M4/AR15 and the .223/5.56 but I had the opportunity to see the wound channel caused by a single .223 round in a human cadaver once. To those of you who want to argue about the round not causing enough damage, you really don't know what you're talking about. To see what that one little high-velocity piece of metal did was enough to ensure that I would never, ever speak of a .223 as not being "enough" (not that I did before, but that's beside the point).

Well, they heard it on the internet, it must be true!!!

The .223 depends on velocity when we're talking about SS109 or watever other military ball ammo. It has to have a certain amount of velocity to cause those wound effects. Out of a 20" or longer bbl, the military .223 performs rather nicely in a lot of cases. Out of the shorter bbls, well, the effective range of the round is reduced greatly. Now, when we get into JHP ammo and some of the ammo available to LEOs and such, it's a whole new ball game, a little less dependant on velocity. .308 is not so dependant on velocity in ball ammo. That's kind of like the 9mm and .45 comparison now that I think of it.

Sorry to get off track, found that interesting is all.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Quote:
In the late 80's a freind who happened to be an San Antonio TX leo told me that they were trading in their S&W model 65 because to many of the officers couldn't quality with the issued 357 mag ammo.

Maybe I shouldn't have said couldn't qualify when what I meant to say, had difficulty qualifying.

I would be suspect of someones abilities if they couldn't qualify with a 4" barreled .357. That just blows my mind.


I agree! But as my friend said. Most of the folks going through the academy weren't experienced shooters and a lot had never even fired a gun.

I've shot his service revolver some. It is a pussy cat with .38's but load it with
full power 125's and it starts getting an attitude.

 

[cookekdjr]

Rule of thumb from the EMT/paramedics/ER nurses/ER doctors that I've spoken with who have very much experience say that most people shot by handguns, regardless of caliber, tend to live. Those shot by rifles and shotguns have a marked tendency over and above those shot by handguns to die. The key factor with the handgun-inflicted wounds is simply stopping bleeding since there's normally not an awful lot of other damage (unless the heart, brain or spine is hit). Stop the bleeding, save the life.

I agree with the rule of thumb that most people shot with a handgun live. That is definately the case. More on that later.

I also agree people shot by longguns have a marked tendency above those shot by handguns to die. No doubt that is true. Huge understatement.

However, keep in mind that many in the group above (EMT/paramedics/ER nurses/ER doctors) deal with walk-in cases. Guy gets shot by 9mm, guy walks 5 blocks to hospital. Or drives there next day, etc. I have a number of cases where "victim" shoots defendant in the butt/leg with 9mm, the defendant never seeks medical attention (or seeks it the next day) and then the defendant kills the victim in revenge days later. Commonplace occurance.

In contrast, the EMT's I've talked to are ambulance drivers- they get called out to a scene where the subject is incapacitated, and appears to need critical care. It is from these test subjects that the rule of thumb appears ("guys shot by 9mm usually live, guys shot by .40/.45 usually die").

Now, what the medical professionals have told you about blood loss is true. Blood loss is what causes the majority of gunshot wound deaths. But therein lies the key to the .40/.45/.357's success. They cause far more blood loss than 9mm. That is why shot placement is more critical for 9mm (as you said above, generally handguns must strike the heart, brain, or spine to kill- you may want to add lungs or liver, but you get the idea). But since .40/.45/.357 make much more devastating holes, the gusnhot victim is much more likely to suffer massive, rapid blood loss. That, along with their ability to shatter bone, is why those calibers are more effective that 9mm.

By the way, saw another autopsy today. If you have to use a knife, stab, don't slash. Slashing looks ugly, but stabbing kills. Just ask the dead guy.

Have a good day,

David

 

[Kalashnikov]

Why use a .45?

Because S&W .500 isn't avalible in a semi auto

 

[buzz_knox]

Because S&W .500 isn't avalible in a semi auto

You bring up an excellent point. The S&W .500 isn't available, but the .50 GI is. So are we going to see people in the "I carry a .45 'cause they don't make a .46" crowd switching to the .50 GI, or will that be exposed for mere hyperbole with nothing backing it up?

 

[Kalashnikov]

How is the .50GI anyways? I've heard very little about it but I am interested since I like the idea of a .50 on a .45 body.

 

[dodging230grainers]

From what I've heard the .50 GI is 300 grains @ 700 FPS.

 

[NineseveN]

"You bring up an excellent point. The S&W .500 isn't available, but the .50 GI is. So are we going to see people in the "I carry a .45 'cause they don't make a .46" crowd switching to the .50 GI, or will that be exposed for mere hyperbole with nothing backing it up?"

I think most of us will wait until a well-known, reputable and reliable firearm is tooled up for it, and then for some good ballistsics data and more widespread acceptance. If the capacity is similar, the terminal ballistics are good, ammo is available in multiple brands/loads/configs and it comes in an HK, I'd buy it.

Can't speak for everyone though.

 

[Krag]

My friend in the UK is going to send me a double barreled .577 Howdah pistol the ultimate big bore handgun. Now I'll be able to show up all those .45 acp fans out there.

I know a guy who carries TWO 1911s: a full sized Gov't Model in a Yaqui slide holster and a light weight "Officers Model" in a shoulder holster - plus two extra magazines - all under a light weight vest. I don't know if he's putting us all on or is really that paranoid?

My advice to him was "Stay away from deep water!"

 

[Marshall]

I dunno? I carry a 357mag J-Frame the majority of the time, a 9mm BHP a fair amount, an XD-40 some and a few others from time to time. I would much rather have a .45 in a defensive gun fight, I just don't have a .45 I like carrying, yet.

Do I feel under armed with a 357 mag? Uh, not a chance. Do I think today's premium 147gr 9mm defensive cartidges won't get the job done? No way. But no one will get me to believe that a 230gr 45 caliber bullet isn't going to stand better odds of ruining someones day more than the 9mm would.

 

[TheGoodLife]

question from newbie - cost and availability

I have a few questions about what I'm reading, and I appreciate your patience in listening.

I don't want to redirect the thread, but would anyone care to respond to the following. For me, it will have some bearing on my choice of a CCW.

1) Cost factor - of the ammo for any of the weapons that are mentioned in this thread- 45, 9mm, 357, etc

Which costs more?

I plan to purchase something, but I don't want to go broke trying to learn how to shoot.

2) Availability of ammo for the weapons mentioned-45, 9mm, 357, etc

Are all equally available, or are some harder to find?

Thanks.

 

[NineseveN]

It depends on your budget. If you are scraping pennies together, for target practice I'd suggest .22. If you must have a carry/defense gun and .22 is ruled out, 9mm is your best bet. If you have a little free money, but not much, any of the big 4 will do. Over the long haul it may be more expensive, but only by 200-300 hundred dollars per year (unless you shoot A LOT).

If you buy your plinking ammo in bulk (500 rounds or more), this is what I typically pay (excluding Wolf ammo or great deals):

.45 = $140 for 500
.40 = $110 for 500
.357sig = $120 for 500
9mm = $75 for 500
So what it comes down to is the frequency at which you shoot.

If 500 rounds will last you 5 range sessions over a 4 month period, then for the year, .45 is only $195 more expensive per year ($16.25 per month) than 9mm. If 500 rounds lasts you only one month or less, then .45 becomes MUCH more expensive.

None of the big 4 should be hard to find, even at Wallyworld.

If you're new to shooting, a .22 is a GREAT learning tool and VERY inexpensive (like $150 for 5,000 rounds hehe). The 9mm is very mild in recoil and almost every popular handgun has a model chambered in it.

I'd suggest you find a range where you can rent some handguns in different calibers to both get a feel for each round and see how well each model sits in your hand. Or have some of us THR members near you take you to a range and check out some of our gear.

 

[Rinspeed]

I have a few questions about what I'm reading, and I appreciate your patience in listening.

I plan to purchase something, but I don't want to go broke trying to learn how to shoot.

If you want something for carry and to help you learn to be a good shot there is no comparison. The 357 is the most versatile of those listed. You can shoot inexpensive light .38 special loads with almost no recoil or full house 357 loads for protection or hunting.

 

[NineseveN]

Yes, if you are considering a revolver, .357magnum/.38special is a great choice.

 

[355sigfan]

We found out long ago as cops that its a poor idea to shoot 38's and carry 357 mag ammo. Practice with a load with recoil that is about the same as your carry load. You also want a simular point of impact as well.
Pat

 

[NineseveN]

But the load doesn't change trigger technique, correct? So, make sure to not ONLY plink with .38, make sure you keep yourself in on .357 as much as possible, but shooting some .38 too is no different than having 2 handguns you shoot in different calibers. If you're on a budget and can't buy two firearms, it's a good compromise, provided you don't crutch one round over the other (i.e. you must shoot your carry round regularly for optimal results).

 

[TheGoodLife]

Thanks NineseveN, Rinspeed, and 357sigfan

Very helpful!

You just don't know how much when you are first getting started in these areas.

 

[Rinspeed]

We found out long ago as cops that its a poor idea to shoot 38's and carry 357 mag ammo. Practice with a load with recoil that is about the same as your carry load. You also want a simular point of impact as well.

First you have to learn the fundamentals. It doesn't matter what load you are using in your carry gun if you can't hit with it. You have to learn trigger control first and the best way is with light loads. Different points of impact have very little if anything to do the discussion when you are talking about self defense.

 

[NineseveN]

That's kinda what I thought Rinspeed, but perhaps he was speaking from the standpoint of a police officer. I mean, we may never need our CCWs, LEOs are in a different situation because they are in harm's way every day simply by the nature of thier profession. They are a lot more likely to need to use their firearm than we are, and much, much, much more likely to need it more than once. We use ours as last-ditch resorts, they use thiers as a tool of their profession. I still think it's a bit off, but perhaps that's the perspective.

 

[bigmike45]

A thread like this is always going to cause some hurt feelings between its participants. Instead of chastizing mabey we should all support each others choice, whether its from the heart or actual printed evidence that was used to formulate an informed decision.

If you look at what is being used by law enforcement, it is pretty much skewed to the smaller calibers. There is obviously many reasons for the choice. As long is the shooter is proficient enough to hit the intended target and stop the threat the caliber is irrelivant. It just may take more shots.

You drive a Ford and I drive a GM product. Each gets us to the same location but in different ways with different means. I have a radio you have a stereo, I have a big engine, yours is smaller. Mine is red and yours is blue.....comeon!