9mm vs .45ACP

The more I look at security camera videos of shooting incidents, and the more I read up on wounding characteristics of handgun rounds, the more I like the idea of a fairly high capacity of 147gr HST 9mm.

This, from a long-time .45 guy.
 
MLeake said:
The more I look at security camera videos of shooting incidents, and the more I read up on wounding characteristics of handgun rounds, the more I like the idea of a fairly high capacity of 147gr HST 9mm.

This, from a long-time .45 guy.
Click to expand...

^^^^^ this makes sense

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
 
The more I look at security camera videos of shooting incidents, and the more I read up on wounding characteristics of handgun rounds, the more I like the idea of a fairly high capacity of 147gr HST 9mm.
Click to expand...

I am leaning towards the 125 357 Sig at 1400 FPS, for about the same reasons.......
 
17 hits from a 45...officer switched to 9mm...
http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Pat...8-25-2008.aspx

2 to the torso and 1 to the abdomen. The shots to the head killed him. The reason the officer switched is because his shot placement sucked so he needs more rounds. Instead of more training on better shooting skills he needs more bullets. I hope you are not trying to say that the 9mm would have stopped the guy with the same shot placement?
 
No, I'm saying that as easy as it is to burn through rounds rapidly under an adrenaline rush, it's better to have more, all things being relatively equal.

Given that some 9mm rounds (such as 147gr HST) perform very comparably with high-end .45 rounds, it doesn't make sense to carry 8+1 or 10+1 of .45 in a gun big enough to carry 15+1 or 17+1 of the 9mm.

I can train all I want for accuracy (and actually, I train a lot, hundreds or sometimes thousands of rounds in a given month - and I'm pretty accurate), but I don't know what my accuracy will be if I'm taking fire. I have to assume it will be degraded.

That's not "spray and pray" mentality, that's simply accepting that folks don't tend to perform nearly as well when faced with a real threat as they do when faced with a training target.

Hunters often get nervous and pull shots on deer due to simple excitement. Imagine what would happen if the deer could shoot back?
 
I hear ya on that. My point is instead of the rediculous qualification tests that most LEOs are subjected to, it may be time for real training. I fail to see how standing in front of a peice of paper and shooting is supposed to qualify you for events like the one you mentioned. Shoot houses and scenerios that officers are thrown into are far better.
 
Hmmm, the 9mm seems to work just fine for the SAS and countless other spec ops types.
Click to expand...

In 2000, the Austin PD SWAT used HK USP's in 9mm. At the time they were issuing S&W 5906's to officers. Austin, TX is a fair sized city, but still small enough that they can avoid some stupid government oversight. The decision to use 9mm was supported by most of the active SWAT Officers.

I know police officers that continue to use 9mm sidearms.

I still prefer .45 ACP. After the North Hollywood Shootout I planned on carrying a .45 ACP when I graduated school. Long and boring story behind why I did not enter the law enforcement profession, but I did decide that if penetration wasn't going to work I at least wanted stopping power.

So why change that even if I am a civilian?

That said, I don't see any problem with 9mm. I definitely recommend it to new shooters. It is a good round. For experienced shooters? Why not? There is something to be said for why each person chooses the caliber they prefer.

I do take the stance that for combat shooting, whether police, military, or whatever, anything less than 9mm is unacceptable. I would only carry less if it was a BUG or if I was going to just carry something in my pocket.

I personally don't care for 40 S&W. I'd rather shoot either 9mm or .45. At the same time, I get the appeal. I don't get the obsession with 10mm either. To each their own.
 
I still prefer .45 ACP. After the North Hollywood Shootout I planned on carrying a .45 ACP when I graduated school. Long and boring story behind why I did not enter the law enforcement profession, but I did decide that if penetration wasn't going to work I at least wanted stopping power
Click to expand...

I don't think the North Hollywood shootout has any real lessons for pistol armed civilian CC'ers except this: when faced with opponents wearing body armor and weilding assault rifles, RUN AWAY... That was a fight for long guns, period.

Caliber debates get tiring, but this one was useful enough for me to compare ballistics of my favorite carry ammo, Gold Dots, in 9mm and 45. I didn't realize there was so little difference in performance. Certainly not enough for me to justify paying more than twice as much money for .45 practice ammo over 9mm. I guess the Glock 30 I wanted will have to wait till I get into reloading.:o
I'll stick with my G26!
 
I hear ya on that. My point is instead of the rediculous qualification tests that most LEOs are subjected to, it may be time for real training. I fail to see how standing in front of a peice of paper and shooting is supposed to qualify you for events like the one you mentioned.
Click to expand...

It is not. It is designed to demonstrate a minimum standard of proficiency.
 
That's exactly correct as long as the bullets expend all their energy in the target medium. To make it accurate in the general case I'd modify it slightly to say "the higher the KE, the higher the potential for damage."

Of course, "higher potential for damage" and "more total damage" are relative terms. For perspective, on the low end of the energy spectrum, a service pistol caliber on average, might damage a couple of ounces of tissue. On the high end of the energy spectrum, maybe 3 ounces.
Click to expand...
I just want to add something about higher kinetic energy haveing the higher potential for damage. As John mentioned earlier, a temporary stretch cavity may or may not equate to damage. That's where some of the kinetic energy may be dumped so a bullet entering with higher kinetic energy does not necessarily create more tissue damage.

Some folks look to wound volume to estimate damage. I ran into a page today by accident which was authored by a member of this forum. Although the data is over ten years old, it is still quite revealing because it uses FBI ballistic gel tests and allows you to sort by several different criteria, including average wound volume (an average using bare gel and clothed gel). Fifteen of the top 20 loads using this criteria were .45 acp. None were 9mm. I am not beating the drum about this but want to emphasize the importance of considering more than just a bullet's kinetic energy. http://demigodllc.com/~zak/firearms/fbi-pistol.php?sort=grade1
 
a temporary stretch cavity may or may not equate to damage.
Click to expand...
Correct. If the tissue is elastic, it may stretch and then rebound with little damage other than to small blood vessels in the tissue--the equivalent of a blow or strain that results in bruising.
...want to emphasize the importance of considering more than just a bullet's kinetic energy.
Click to expand...
That's good advice. I'd also say that it's important to consider more than just any single parameter.

What's interesting about the FBI wound volume data is that they did not chose the caliber that provided the highest wound volume figures in their testing. It's clear that they took other parameters into consideration.

In my opinion, it's also important to consider more than just terminal performance as well. If you look at the wound volume figures across all the common service pistol calibers, they all provide estimated tissue damage figures that are very similar--not identical, of course--but similar. It's fairly common for people to get wrapped up in relatively minor differences in whatever terminal performance parameter (or parameters) they choose to espouse, while essentially ignoring other factors in handgun/caliber selection that can figure much more heavily into the outcome of a gunfight.
 
It's fairly common for people to get wrapped up in relatively minor differences in whatever terminal performance parameter (or parameters) they choose to espouse, while essentially ignoring other factors in handgun/caliber selection that can figure much more heavily into the outcome of a gunfight.
Click to expand...
Good point. I'm relearning this myself from a recent 10mm acquisition. With full 10mm loads, it has more recoil and muzzle flip than I would want to deal with in a defensive situation (at least at this point in time). For that, I'll stick with other calibers (.45 acp, 9mm, .38 spl +P).
 
the 45 would have more stopping power vs a human target "no armor" haven't you guys ever heard the saying: god made man, sam colt made them equal ? .45 have been putting people down since the 1800's
 
Today, 06:59 PM #77
Winchester_73

But a 45 acp is bigger than a 38 cal / 9mm which means it has to be better!...
Click to expand...

That is absolutely and empirically true as I have seen it said many times on these here 'internets.' ;)

-Cheers
 
I think that everyone should carry what ever caliber they feel comfortable with. IMHO shot placement will be the deciding factor. I don't carry either (10mm) but any of the proven defensive calibers will be effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top