9mm, .357 Sig, .40 or .45 ACP?

Which caliber?

  • 9mm, you can never have too many of them

    Votes: 60 39.5%

  • .357 Sig

    Votes: 10 6.6%

  • .40 S&W

    Votes: 18 11.8%

  • .45 ACP

    Votes: 64 42.1%
  • Total voters
    152
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just going by caliber and specific guns, my ranking would look like this. ..

My first vote is 357 sig
second would be is 45acp
third would be 40sw
last would be 9mm
 
Everyone should have a semi-auto .22. I know it wasn't one of your choices, but really, you should consider it. I'm actually shocked that it hasn't been suggested yet.
 
9mm. There's nothing wrong with any of the other's, but 9mm is a great combination of effective, inexpensive and ubiquitous. Especially if you rely on factory ammo, it is just the most practical choice.
 
10 mm is great--but it does hit harder on recoil compared to it's water-down brethren and I've found it to be tricky to reload for--especially the full-power rounds. I think the past year has seen some great new 10's introduced which I assume/hope address at least some of these issues.
 
I have carried for over 20 years, I have carried 9mm, 10mm, 45acp, 40 S&W, and .357mag, as a primary carry caliber. For the last 15 years, 95% of the time its a 9mm. I have heard and seen all the "45 vs 9mm" stuff over the years, and in my opinion the only time that comes into play, is if you are using FMJs.
 
I think the past year has seen some great new 10's introduced which I assume/hope address at least some of these issues.
Click to expand...

Still waiting for this one:

maxresdefault.jpg


YouTube vid here:

"10mm CZ 97B." ;) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIK6cFPevmE
 
Last edited:
9mm. I like only having one caliber to deal with for my auto loaders. Now that I reload, keeping track of various powders, etc is simplified. It's also nice to work up a load and then to be able to try it out in several guns at one time.
 
Everyone needs a large caliber. 40 or 45 will fit the bill. Both will put out 600ftlbs with Double Tap ammo. Both will get 500 ftlbs from over the counter ammo. Both 40 and 45 have a large selection of bullet weights to choose from. The 357sig is too limited and is ONLY good with the 125 grain bullet. That bullet is not heavy enough for woods use and you can get close enough to the 357Sig with high quality 9mm+p ammo. The 9mm is good but not in the same league as a large caliber pushing over 500 ftlbs. The bullet is bigger and the energy transfer is bigger. The legend and effectiveness of the 45acp was established with FMJ ammo on the battle fields. Update the 45acp with modern bonded hollow points and better powder and it is significantly better than the establish effectiveness of decades of military use.
As much as I like the 9mm and carry it, I am not under any illusion that it will be as effective as a big caliber but size of gun and magazine capacity makes it a good compromise for most applications.

http://youtu.be/iWW2Y-IZpyE
 
Last edited:
I voted 45acp. Everyone needs a 45acp. I would also consider looking to see if the 320 will every get the slide swap for a .22 conversion. Then you need that too lol.
 
Go to a range that rents guns. Try each out and decide for yourself what you shoot and like the best. Any other recommendation is meaningless. What I like and shoot may not be what is best for YOU.

Stay safe and be well.
Jim
 
9mm is the least expensive. It is all you need for self-defense (against a human).

The benefit of the other calibers is that they have more momentum. That means they are harder to stop and deflect less when they hit windows and walls, which is more important to law-enforcement than civilians. But, that might be important to you. The downsides are the cost of ammunition, increased recoil, and reduced magazine capacity.

You can mitigate the recoil by getting a heavier gun, but you can't do much about the other two issues.
 
Last edited:
If you're going to be a GUN GUY, there are two you've got to have, both from Colt: a 1911 in .45ACP and an AR-15. Fact: Sooner or later, you have to have both of them. So, you can start now with the 1911, and there's your caliber decision.

OTOH, if you are a practical thinking concealed and home protection guy, you need to look at this real world study of 1,800 actual shootings that found that, regardless of caliber, 2-3 hits were on average required to stop an adversary. http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/handgun-stopping-power

If the typical street robbery or home invasion is three perps, and you miss one of three shots, then you need 3-4 shots per perp X 3 perps, or 9-12 rounds minimum on tap (forget reloading; that's when you get killed). So whatever you decide, be sure it holds enough ammo.

Also worthy of note. It seems the law enforcement agencies that years ago abandoned the 9mm for the .40 or .357Sig, are moving back to 9. Improvements in defensive ammo is the usual cited reason, with ability to carry more ammo at a lower cost, usually added as another consideration.

Three years ago I sold my last 9mm, a Glock 19, and went all 45acp. A Colt XSE (8+1 rds), Springfield Armory XDM-45 4.5" (13+1), and then last year, a Sig P227 (10+1 or 14+1)--my Deluxe handgun. Then in March, I won a Glock 19 in a drawing I didn't even know I had entered. Since the price was right, I sprung for a Cominolli thumb safety and TruGlo TFX combo tritium/fiber sights, and I like that "improved" G19 so much (15+1 rd), I've re-adopted it as my carry pistol. I still like shooting a .45, but that G19 is the ultimate all-purpose carry/home pistol, and now that 9mm is back in fashion...

Other calibers. [Personal opinions here] The .357Sig has extraordinary ballistics, but I've found it just too darned loud and painful to shoot much. Also expensive and usually with not much of a selection of ammo types. Those characteristics make it a practice inhibitor, and that's bad. The .40 has been a popular compromise between 10mm (which female FBI agents couldn't handle; and the .40 was designed for them) and the 9mm. Always a good choice, but not IMO for a small gun, as I don't like the hard muzzle rise. Also more expensive than 9mm.

The .45acp is the all-American round. When you say, "I carry a .45", people know you are serious and dangerous. :) OTOH, if they know much, they also know that a .45 in a big handgun like a 1911 is really a joy to shoot. Moderate recoil and nice big Texas-sized bullets. I personally really like the .45acp. It's also not cheap to shoot, but reasonable. Often cheaper than .40 and almost always cheaper than .357Sig.

Bottom line. You don't have to store as much ammo, if you have just one caliber. That was my .45 rationale. Three rounds: .45acp, 5.56mm, and 20-gauge. Now I have four, and I'm really enjoying shooting the economical 9mm again, even if it has increased my inventory levels.
 
A couple of folks have suggested 9mm is "cheaper" or "inexpensive". I'm sorry, but the modern, premium hollowpoints that have facilitated the resurgence of the cartridge are absolutely necessary for its effectiveness.....and more expensive then good old .45 hardball, or the 170 - 180 grain truncated cone rounds that have been the mainstay of the. 40 S&W or even 10mm.

Not knocking 9mm......I've got a few. But my concern about the vociferous recommendations on 9mm is that it is based on modern high-performance hollowpoints. And then the newb goes to the store, feels his wallet ache......and reaches for that cheap 115gr fmj.

Just trying to keep it real.
 
Currently I have a 9mm Sig Sauer P320 Compact. I am looking for another handgun, perhaps the same type as I have now but probably in another caliber. I am looking for suggestions to the other calibers relative to my current 9mm. Things I am mainly looking at are cost and anything significant in performance that may set a caliber apart from the others. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Not this, uh, "stuff", again.

Pick one. It really doesn't matter much. If you can buy it at your local Walmart or farm store, you're good.

If you're going with a really small gun, you probably want to avoid .40. (If a full size gun, have at it. .40 is fine.)

(I have no experience with .357 Sig)
 
@Arizona Fusilier:
9mm FMJ is great for defense as long as you are okay with bullets being more likely to pass completely through your attacker. While I'm sure some people believe that only hollow point 9mm bullets are passable for defense, that isn't true. 9mms performance is great all of the time. Once a bullet can pass through a person the deciding factor comes down to which vital organs are hit (which is the shooter's responsibility, not the round's).

A 9mm FMJ easily passes completely through a human. Hollow points are used just to mitigate hurting people who may be behind the person you are trying to shoot. Hollow points aren't popular because they improve terminal effectiveness by a meaningful amount, but because they minimize collateral damage. Well, I take that back, many people believe hollow points are substantially deadlier than their FMJ counterparts. However, that isn't true.

.45 FMJ is even more likely to pass completely through a human because it has more momentum. So, it would be even more important for one to buy hollow points for a .45 if collateral damage was a concern.

Furthermore, bullet wounds cause death by blood loss or damage to the central nervous system. A .45 ACP does not cause the heart to pump blood faster and does not cause the CNS to be "deader." A bullet in the brain is a bullet in the brain. A bullet in the heart or other vital organ is a bullet in the vital organ. I can't find anything that shows that a .45 caliber hole in a vital organ causes death faster than a 9mm caliber hole in a vital organ (i.e. equivalent shot placement). If the .45 or the 9mm hits the heart or brain, those organs will stop working and death will follow just the same.

'What if it doesn't hit them in a vital organ?'
Then that shot will not be enough to stop the fight in a timely fashion. You will have to shoot them again. Which is why recoil and magazine capacity are more important to consider than how much just one shot will do (even before you consider the fact that missing is something that actually happens when you aren't on the range).

Finally, let's assume that .45 ACP does have markedly better terminal ballistics. You will practice with cheap ammo and carry self defense ammo anyway. The cheap 9mm practice ammo will easily offset the cost of carrying more expensive self defense ammo. You will still spend far less than you would if you bought .45 ACP ball ammo all the time for both practice and to carry. They do make cheap 124 grain FMJ 9mm ammo that would be even more effective than inferior hollow point designs from yester-year that suffer from the flaw of inadequate penetration.

Again, the increased recoil and reduced magazine capacity objectively hurt more than any subjective terminal effectiveness .45 ACP may or may not provide.

The benefit of .40, .45, and 10mm is that they have more momentum. Which is useful if you intend to shoot through windshields or other obstacles that might cause the bullet to be deflected. But, police and military have more of a reason to consider that benefit than civilians who wouldn't be likely to need to shoot at someone out of sight or in their car. But, some people might have to take that into consideration depending on their situation.

Just trying to keep it real.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top