I know this type of debate has been going on forever, but now I am facing the question and having a tough time deciding. And, by the way, I wrote the subject line because I thought it was more likely to generate responses - NOT because I think it's true.
I plan to buy a handgun - probably an H&K USP Compact, although I'm also looking at other similarly sized guns. I'm having a tough time deciding on the caliber. Here are the tradeoffs as I see them:
.45 ACP - Bigger hole (starts as big as the .40 will probably get IF the hollow-point works), similar bullet weight (I'd probably use 185 grain HP's), slightly lower magazine capacity, most guns (USP Compact, S&W Chief's Special, etc.) are slightly larger and heavier in this caliber.
.40 S&W - Higher magazine capacity, slightly higher velocity/lower bullet weight (180 gr). Guns a little smaller (which I prefer).
In short, the .40 looks a little better "on paper", but that big .45 caliber hole is tempting. I assume that, for similar bullet weights, recoil and short-range accuracy will be about the same. If magazine capacity were the same, I'd go for the .45. If I could get 5 or 6 more rounds in the same size gun with a .40, I'd go that route (are "pre-ban" high capacity magazines available for the USP Compact?). But the difference in capacity is probably 2-3 rounds, so it's a tough call for me.
Am I missing anything? Would I be better off with a heavier (230 gr) .45 bullet or a lighter, faster .40? Your insights, opinions, and reasoning will be appreciated. Thanks.
I plan to buy a handgun - probably an H&K USP Compact, although I'm also looking at other similarly sized guns. I'm having a tough time deciding on the caliber. Here are the tradeoffs as I see them:
.45 ACP - Bigger hole (starts as big as the .40 will probably get IF the hollow-point works), similar bullet weight (I'd probably use 185 grain HP's), slightly lower magazine capacity, most guns (USP Compact, S&W Chief's Special, etc.) are slightly larger and heavier in this caliber.
.40 S&W - Higher magazine capacity, slightly higher velocity/lower bullet weight (180 gr). Guns a little smaller (which I prefer).
In short, the .40 looks a little better "on paper", but that big .45 caliber hole is tempting. I assume that, for similar bullet weights, recoil and short-range accuracy will be about the same. If magazine capacity were the same, I'd go for the .45. If I could get 5 or 6 more rounds in the same size gun with a .40, I'd go that route (are "pre-ban" high capacity magazines available for the USP Compact?). But the difference in capacity is probably 2-3 rounds, so it's a tough call for me.
Am I missing anything? Would I be better off with a heavier (230 gr) .45 bullet or a lighter, faster .40? Your insights, opinions, and reasoning will be appreciated. Thanks.