45 acp relevance idea

ThomasT said:
I shot just behind the left foreleg for a heart shot same as on a deer or other game. Do you really think I shot some dog in the ass 5 times? Wrong round, wrong bullet. The point was to the OP that for animal control there are better guns and rounds than the 45acp with FMJ bullets loaded in it.

And with that I am through in this thread. If you are going to shoot an animal do it in a way it doesn't suffer.
Click to expand...

A heart shot isn't as humane as you think it is. Heart shots are ultimately fatal, but they're a far cry from an instant or painless death. A .45 to the brain on the other hand, would have settled things faster and more humanely.
As others have mentioned previously in this thread, even deer whose hearts have practically exploded after being stuck by high powered rifle rounds can still run quite a distance before the wound actually incapacitates them.

I'm terribly sorry for what you had to go through, but you'll feel much better about it if you accept the fact that the cartridge you chose wasn't to blame. You could have shot that dog in the exact same spot with anything and the result would have been the same.

So if you truly advocate shooting animals in such a way as to minimize their suffering, then you need to accept that shooting an animal in the heart is counterproductive to that goal.
 
44 AMP said:
What "thicker skinned" animals are you referring to?

The only native thick skinned threat I can think of is Bison.
Click to expand...
Thicker than a human's skin which pretty much includes every 4 legged animal out in the woods. That's the 'thicker skinned' I was referring to because the .45acp was developed as an anti personnel round rather than hunting round.
 
Keep in mind for EVERY caliber there is a cheer leader who one shot stopped a threat and is alive today. There is also somebody who has mag dumped a 10mm, .45, .50 BMG who didn’t put the threat down quick enough.

It’s the nature of the beast.

It’s also why I am perfectly fine with a 9mm (GlockSIGHKEtc) but if the worst should come to pass anything short of a 40mm Bofors will likely fill my pants. Who am I kidding. Even with the Bofors I am still screaming like a little girl and calling for my brown pants. :)

What?!.....I am a realist. A mans gotta know his limitations and I have many. :)
 
"Since you weren't there you really don't know what the hell you are talking about do you? I had 5 shots tight behind the shoulder in a group that could be covered by a coffee cup."

No Sir, I wasn't there. But I DO know enough to humanly dispatch / euthanize animals with brain shots at close range. The shot group you mentioned may be perfect for hunting, but not for humanly euthanizing an animal at close range. I have heart shot deer and had them run 80 yards or more. It's not an Instantaneous game stopper. A shot that severs the brain stem shuts the power off immediately, be it a .22 or a .45.
Not trying to pick a fight with you, just pointing out poor shot placement is not an accurate manner in which to judge the preformanace of the .45 (or any other caliber).
 
Last edited:
Thicker than a human's skin which pretty much includes every 4 legged animal out in the woods. That's the 'thicker skinned' I was referring to because the .45acp was developed as an anti personnel round rather than hunting round.
Click to expand...

If we think on it some most handgun rounds were developed as self defense (military) rounds rather than hunting rounds. This would include the 45 Colt, the 44 Special and Russian, the 38 Spl. the 9mm, 45 acp, 38 Super, 10mm and the 40 S&W and 357 Sig. The possible and partial exception to these are the 357 Mag and the 44 Mag. That's because semis were developed for military purposes and only gradually found acceptance as sporting and personal defense guns.

Now some important cultural and historical facts influences our thinking. The first is that for decades, much of the 20th century, most Americans thought of semis as military guns and not fit for law enforcement or hunting. Also true that there were few rounds for semis other than ball for most of the 20th century. Ball ammo is not best for hunting.

So with revolver ammo any shaped bullet was reliable and this led to many useful bullet shapes for handgun hunting and self defense. So with an appropriate bullet up against the right game any revolver ammo from the 38 Spl. on up was good to go. Both the 44 Spl. and 45 Colt in standard velocity loads, with the right bullet, were considered good rounds for hogs and deer at appropriate distances and good bear defense in a tight spot.

We still have a certain prejudice against semi auto rounds and calibers as decent hunting guns. Some anyway.

With the right bullet the 45 acp will do anything the 44 Spl. will or the 45 Colt in standard loads out to the same distances. Nowdays there are more and better bullets than there used to be.

The 45 acp can be a decent hunting caliber with the right bullet. That's true without having to jerk around with the 45 Super or other niche rounds in it.

It may be,
the nice thing about a pistol chambered in 45 acp is that most likely it can also shoot 45 Super and 450 SMC,
Click to expand...
...
but we don't need to do that for it to be a decent hunting round and superbly accurate. the standard 45acp can do just fine.

tipoc
 
Personally, I read about people that have been there and done that. You know people like Jeff Cooper, or Elmer Keith, or Skeeter, and see what they used and liked. What were the real life stories in the West, the wars like WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Korea, Philippines ... What do GIs like to carry (not necessarily what they were 'told' to carry) . The Seals, the Army Rangers, the Green Berets. Then, looking for a woods gun, turn to big game hunters like Ross Seyfried, Max Prasac, and others. I don't 'fight' for a living, nor do I actively hunt... So this is where I go my information. People that have been there, done that. Then I draw my own conclusions... And I know what I will carry.... different situations will mean a different sidearm. There is not one gun fits all, while a few overlap. And yes, it has shaped my preferences...
 
I like reading articles about police reports. Gel and water is not a convincing indicator to me even though I've shot a .38 Gold Dot in water and the expanded bullet looks convincing.
 
The 45 ACP was meant to incapacitate, take an enemy out of the fight. Its advocates have always cited its effectiveness for one shot stops.
 
Of course the 10mm is the best semi-auto to bring hunting. I used up some WSF for my brother's 10mm years ago. A huge flame came out of it at the indoor range and you could hear the sound if the bullet hitting the backstop. Plus, as an option, you can shoot 40 S&W through it. For hunting, yes the 10mm will work; better than my .40 in the power range.

Let's not forget, the thread is a question comparing 9mm to .45. The new 9mm Speer GDs are nice and it's cheaper to shoot 9mm hardcast lead bullets. The .45 GD makes a slightly bigger hole and hardcast lead bullets will cost more. Barring the cost of ammo or availability.. It depends on if your gun holsters properly for you needs and if you can hit what you're shooting at.
 
I don't know of those except the .357 which is not a semi-auto. Yes, those will do better for hunting but I don't own anything chambered for them.
 
COSteve said:
Thicker than a human's skin which pretty much includes every 4 legged animal out in the woods. That's the 'thicker skinned' I was referring to because the .45acp was developed as an anti personnel round rather than hunting round.
Click to expand...

Actually, .45 ACP was designed to duplicate the performance of the U.S. Army's "Model of 1887 Ball Cartridge for Cal. .45 Revolver", (Basically .45 S&W Schofield) which was a round designed for the cavalry with downing horses as well as men in mind.
 
Last edited:
relevance

I worked for quite a few years as one of those rural LE types. While I never had large dangerous bears or cats to deal with, I did have occasion to shoot a lot of different wild and domestic critters as feral, diseased or injured after some type of accident. I was never much impressed with the killing power of the various handguns in .38+P+, 9mm or .45acp that I was issued over the years. The best performing "killer" may have been the .357/125 that we carried for a handful of years before switching over to autopistols/ctgs. It was also noisy as all get out, flashed like an atomic device, and was a handful (too much gun) for about a third of the staff nationwide (my estimate).

If the animal was already down, it usually was a simple matter to approach to certain range, and brain it. Until HQ/Region got really picky about unauthorized weapons, myself and many others carried a "barn gun" .22lr rifle just for such purposes. Most Wardens and WCO's of my acquaintance over the years did the same thing. If the circumstances were known that an animal call involved a threat, say vicious feral dogs, a hog, maybe even a bull, you got out of the vehicle with a long gun, usually in those days a shotgun with slugs or buckshot. Until we got patrol carbines, my shotgun had slugs in it.

As much as I like(d) the .45 acp cartridge for patrol at that time (1995 forward) claiming it as a better animal cartridge does not match my observations and experience. I believe magnum handgun cartridges hold a slight edge, starting with the .357, and gaining advantage as bore size and weight increase. But as horsepower goes up, shootability goes down.
 
Bamaranger. Nice post, thank you. Does it make a difference whether the .357 is a 4" or 6" or maybe even a 2-1/2"?
 
I don't know of those except the .357 which is not a semi-auto.
Click to expand...

I have two different semi auto pistols in .357 Magnum, a Coonan and a Desert Eagle, and had two different ones in .44 Rem Mag, a Desert Eagle and an LAR Grizzly until I traded the Grizzly .44 for one in .45 Win Mag.

There are semi auto pistols for those two "revolver" cartridges.

The .45 Win Mag is essentially the .45acp lengthened to 1.198" and operating at a much higher pressure and has data showing it will push a 230gr to over 1,400fps from a 5" barrel.

The AMP (Auto Mag Pistol) rounds are based on a .308 rifle case cut to 1.298" and reamed to fit the bullet. At full throttle the .44AMP beats the .44 Magnum by about 100fps and the .357 AMP is the .44AMP case necked down, and beats the .357 Magnum by as much a 500fps or so.

Both appeared in the early 70s and never found commercial success and have been a handloader only proposition for decades.

Plenty for hunting big game.

The .45acp was never intended to be a hunting round though it will do a credible job within its limitations. It was specifically intended for putting down humans and dispatching wounded horses, and for that, it works quite well, if the shooter does their part properly.

I believe magnum handgun cartridges hold a slight edge, starting with the .357, and gaining advantage as bore size and weight increase. But as horsepower goes up, shootability goes down.
Click to expand...

I believe this also, but would question how you define "shootability".

Something to consider, with the current "9mm does it all" mantra, the original 9mm Luger load was a 124gr @ 1050fps (4") Shortly before WWI that was changed to a 115gr @ 1150fps. You can get 115s@ 1150fps today, but no one with a choice is using them for self defense.

There has been a LOT of work put into the 9mm round in the past 40 years. Bullets have gotten better and velocity has been increased, some loads today go over 1,300fps.

The .45ACP is still doing what it always has, and at the same speeds and while better bullets and higher speed loads are out there, those never seem to be considered when 9mm fans discuss the two rounds.

I don't see where that makes it an less relevant today than it ever was.
 
"shootability"

OK, that's my own term, maybe I just invented it.:o What I am trying to describe is a cartridge and handgun combo that allows accurate and rapid fire across a wide span of skill levels. Thus, a .22lr semiauto handgun is very "shootable", but a .500 S&W is not. Recoil, flash and blast are the contributing factors determining the level of shootability. Certainly skill level of the individual matters. Jerry Miculek can outshoot us all with about anything he can put his hands on, but few are at that level.

The all up .357 mag revolver cartridges begins to approach the "shootable" limit (in my estimation) of what rank and file LEO's can manage. The .41 and .44 mags more so. I saw it when my agency went to true .357 loads after shooting .38's for years. The FBI saw it when they went to full power 10mm, and we ended up with the 10mmLite and eventually the .40 S&W. We are likely seeing it to some degree with the across the board adoption of the 9mm by LE led by the Bureau today. The 9mm is a very "shootable" cartridge. I think the .45acp is slightly less shootable than the 9mm, but ahead of all up .357.

I like the .45acp. Carried it, and still carry it, though in a different platform. No way consider it irrelevant. But the 9mm is a bit more shootable for some folks.
 
44 AMP. You have a lot of toys. Most of the handguns I chose was because I accumulated so much brass and needed a gun for it.

Bamaranger. I'm with you. Full charge .357 loads are about my threshold. Maybe other guys can shoot larger handguns and that's fine. The 9mm is more shootable so maybe you can put more holes in the Bad Guy so they bleed out quicker or you have a better chance of hitting vital organs? I don't know. Sometimes, I compare a gun to shovel or some other tool. I'll use whatever to defend myself if I have to. Maybe comparing the 9mm to the 45 is like comparing a numb chuck (in good hands) to a baseball bat. Which do you prefer to get hit by.
 
44 AMP. You have a lot of toys.
Click to expand...

Is that "toys" = good, or "toys" = bad? :D

I have more than just service class semi autos, and I use them for more than just defensive shooting practice.

And, now, I understand your definition of shootability includes rapid fire, and what most people can do, thank you for clearing that up, Bamaranger.

But the 9mm is a bit more shootable for some folks.
Click to expand...

I hear this a lot, and it has always baffled me a bit. Which doesn't mean it isn't so, I just never understood it, as I cannot tell any significant difference between shooting the 9mm and the .45 in guns of the same size and weight. In my hands, both guns feel about the same in recoil, muzzle rise is the same, though the 9mm seems to me to reach the peak of its flip a little quicker than the .45 does.

Perhaps I'm just not skilled enough to tell the difference. :rolleyes:

Another point I would mention, when discussing the merits and capabilities of different cartridges that is often overlooked, is the GUNS being used.

Different designs have different feels and people handle that differently. OR, at least I do. I had one 9mm with possibly the worst "shootability" around. Way less easily usable than any .45 I've had, And it the recoil was actually painful. THAT 9mm wasn't more "shootable" than a .45.

care to guess what it was??

I'll give a hint, it had a 4" barrel and a 10 rnd magazine...external hammer and is long out of production...


TO my way of thinking, its not just about the cartridge, its also about what gun it is being used in.
 
I've been fortunate in that I've had about every handgun I've ever been seriously interested in, along with a lot that just kind of "happened by and stayed". :D

I also have a problem with broad blanket statements (when I don't make them, :D) that have exceptions which I am personally familiar with.

The "poor shootability" 9mm I had was...(brace yourself..)

A C-96 Broomhandle Mauser Bolo
(rebored to 9mm Luger)

Grip size, and shape and a large metal slot in the back made it painful to shoot without a glove. Overall balance and handling were very poor, compared to more "conventional" designs. Really neat looking "period piece" but a very poor handgun for practical use (without the shoulder stock).

Other "poor" 9mm pistols I've had have been the Cobray M11/9 and the Tec-9. SMG lookalikes cool to look at and crappy to shoot. My other 9mms include P.08 Lugers, Walther P.38 (WWII guns) and a Browning Hi Power. All these and others are included when someone makes a blanket statement about 9mms this or that.

What you might get from a 9mm Glock isn't what I get from my P.08 Luger.

They aren't all the same.
The specific guns matter, and probably more than the cartridge fired from them, if you are speaking of the common "Duty Class" defense/military/police arms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top