Considering Switching from .45 Auto to 9mm

Status
Not open for further replies.
I never found carrying the full-size guns to be much of a problem. I carried Government Model and Commander 1911's probably more than anything else in my life, and did so on a daily basis.

Even these days with 9mm, I carry a Glock 17 daily, and often a Glock 26 along with it. I base what I carry on what I shoot best with, not what I find easier to carry.

I too have a 1917 S&W, and it is pretty big, but I dont think Id Ive to much trouble with it if I used a proper holster. The larger revolvers are generally more of a pain to hide than the autos though. Ive carried 4" K and N frame Smiths for a time back in the 70's, and while its still very doable, the Colt Government Model, was always a bit easier.
 
In my opinion but 9-40-45 is pretty well equally effective in practical terms. The on-target energy difference is really minor, less than the difference between different loads in the same rifle caliber. I like 9mm because it's the easiest to shoot, I'm faster with it, I can carry more rounds and it's the cheapest to practice with by a pretty good margin (I don't reload). Cheap to shoot is important because more practice makes me better and, although often overlooked in these discussions, shooting is fun.

I usually carry my Shield because it's super easy to conceal with any clothing and I'm not really interested in wearing baggy clothes to hide a big gun. But this time of year my 2.0C gets a lot of carry time because I have a coat on when I'm out.
 
Just purchased my very first GI style 1911. I see what ya'll dig so much about it.

I shall go put a box or 2 through it when I get over this flu.
 
I know a very respected trainer. I heard him lecture us years ago on why carrying a Glock 9mm was insufficient given the Miami shootout. Nowadays his carry gun is a --- wait for it - a 9mm Glock. Better ammo and more capacity. Said trainer made a point of how much time are you in the fight before you have to reload (this assumes a higher intensity interaction, so spare us the 3's and 5 is enough mantra). A Glock 19 or 17 gives you much more time that the 9 round typical 1911.
 
<Grumpy curmudgeon mode>

30-06 Rifleman said:
I've been an avid .45 advocate and carrier since I was old enough to buy pistols. Up until recently, I never considered any smaller pistol caliber worth my time. This past weekend, I went to the range with a friend's shot timer and compared my shooting between my Glock 21 Gen 4 and my friend's Glock 17 Gen 5. I've carried my Glock 21 every day for several years now, and a 1911 before that.

I'm very quick and accurate with the .45, but there's no getting around that my shot strings were faster with the 9mm while retaining accuracy. The 9mm also held 4 more rounds.

I started looking into 9mms more. It seems like it's becoming quite popular again as a self defense and duty cartridge, and is widely considered to be on par with the .45 in effectiveness. It's also a hell of a lot cheaper.

I swear I'm not trying to start another .45 vs 9mm thread,
Click to expand...

:D ROFL

but I just want to see the opinions of those around me right now. Back in the late 80s and 90s, it seemed like the 9mm was considered decidedly inferior to the .45, 10mm, etc.

Have things really changed? I have a hard time wrapping my head around the difference in effectiveness between a .35 caliber bullet and .45 caliber bullet being negligible, but if that's true, it seems like 9mm is a no-brainer for self defense since it has higher capacity, lighter recoil (thus smaller split times), cheaper ammunition, and a more easily concealable handgun.
Click to expand...

Buy what you want, shoot what you want.

.45 now doesn't do anything less than it did 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. Unarmored miscreants aren't any tougher now, than then.

it seems like 9mm is a no-brainer for self defense since it has higher capacity, lighter recoil (thus smaller split times), cheaper ammunition, and a more easily concealable handgun.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but do these things make the decisive difference? I suspect folks on the Innernet that argue these things are arguing over the last tiny percentage of difference in a once in 5 lifetimes gunfight.

cheaper ammunition
Click to expand...

And here's where we get into why I think a lot of people like 9mm.

And, all social purposes ammo is expensive.

</Grumpy curmudgeon mode>
 
Last edited:
The difference between 9mm and the .45 out of like pistols(barrel lengths) isn't enough to matter. I do find there's more muzzle blast with 9mm out of my Inglis BHP vs my Colt with 1" barrel length difference.
"...master it..." Exactly. Shot placement is far more important.
"...Arthritis in my wrists and thumb joint..." Using 9mm isn't going to help.
 
While I still can and occasionally do carry a 1911 in .45 I made the switch to 9mm a while back for a couple of simple reasons.

1. I am not convinced, given proper shot placement, the .45 offers significant enough advantage ballistically to justify the greater recoil and lower capacity.
2. I shoot my 9mms over 30% faster, with better rapid fire accuracy over my .45s. Given the need of my gun (unlikely at best) I will likely be shooting rapidly, I want as many rounds on target as fast as I can.
3. My Sig 226 is the same size (roughly) as my bobbed 1911, yet carries 10 more rounds before reload. I recognize I will likely not need them, but I'd rather have them.

I think both are good carry calibers (as are .40 and .357 sig) but the 9mm works well for me.

Yes, 9mm is cheaper, but since I reload it's a difference of 3-5 cents a round so its definately not my primary, secondary or even tertiary motivator.
 
YES!

More and more people dumping their .40's and .45's for 9mm. LOVE IT.

Last year I picked up 3000 .40 cases for $40 because the guy couldn't move them.

When the next ammo crunch comes got a feeling I'll be able to feed my .40's and .45 because everybody switched to 9mm.


Muwahhahahaha!!!

All the Best,
D. White
 
Thanks for the replies so far. The FBI's bad day in 1986 definitely had more to do with other factors than using 9mm. I also understand that today's 9mm ammo is lightyears ahead of the old Winchester Silvertip 115gr. Sounds like even FMJ would've had a better outcome for that particular shot.

And here's where we get into why I think a lot of people like 9mm.
Click to expand...

No doubt that's a reason, but it's directly tied to having a favorable outcome in self defense situation. Cheaper ammo means you can practice more (no matter what your personal ammo budget is), and more practice improves your odds of a successful outcome when it counts. Couple that with the larger calibers giving no significant advantage (something I'm still trying to wrap my head around and don't necessarily buy at this moment), and it is a compelling argument for 9mm.

Does anyone have a source on any of these PD's saying that their 9mm in officer involved shootings is performing on par with their larger calibers?
 
Limited to hardball, I think Cooper is right. Bill Jordan said the 38 Special is the most powerful round the average man-i.e. most of us-can master, the 9MMP is the semiauto version of the 38 Special. A 9MM in a steel frame is a pleasure to shoot. Bill Jordan also said that speed and power are fine, but accuracy is final. And Cooper noted that the Combat Mindset is all important.
Anyway, who says you are limited to just one caliber ?
 
How do you gauge though if one caliber is performing on par with another? You can't go back in time, replace the caliber, and try again. That's the problem. Every situation is unique and the shot placement on the target varies, with that shot placement having a high implication on the outcome.

There are any number of stories of officers surviving multiple hits with a 45 ACP, (Officer Reston https://youtu.be/ArDRg5SkuT0, http://m.policemag.com/article/1678/jacksonville-florida-01-26-2008), and there are stories of officers needing a lot of rounds to stop an attacker (Sergeant Gramins https://www.policeone.com/police-he...ne-cop-carries-145-rounds-of-ammo-on-the-job/). But these are, to be fair, anecdotal. I don't know how to generate meaningful statistics from this that accurately reflect all of the factors in the terminal effect of handgun rounds.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
SIGSHR said:
Limited to hardball, I think Cooper is right. Bill Jordan said the 38 Special is the most powerful round the average man-i.e. most of us-can master, the 9MMP is the semiauto version of the 38 Special. A 9MM in a steel frame is a pleasure to shoot. Bill Jordan also said that speed and power are fine, but accuracy is final. And Cooper noted that the Combat Mindset is all important.
Anyway, who says you are limited to just one caliber ?
Click to expand...
Except a 9mm out of even smaller semiautos will have significantly more muzzle energy than a 38 Special, even +P, from a snub. 357 magnum is a different story, but like you say that isn't particularly controllable.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
I threw the Lucky Gunner gel tests into Excel for kicks. If you delete the 7 (for 9mm and 40) or 9 (for 45) rounds that had no expansion, mostly these were lower end loads, here are the average penetration and expansion numbers:

9mm - 17.3" penetration, .54" expansion

40 - 17.2" penetration, .65" expansion

45 - 16.1" penetration, .69" expansion

Or if you include the loads that failed to expand, so all of the Lucky Gunner data:

9mm - 17.4" penetration, .51" expansion

40 - 18.6" penetration, .61" expansion

45 - 18.4" penetration, .62 expansion

In terms of hollow point expansion, 13% of the 9mm failed to meaningfully expand versus 18% for 40 and 26% for 45. This probably is directly related to average velocities - 1100 for 9mm, 1020 for 40 and 906 for 45.

I look at these numbers and see three awfully similar performers. Not quite like choosing between a 243 and a 300 Weatherby to go after a mulie.
 
T. O'heir wrote:

The difference between 9mm and the .45 out of like pistols(barrel lengths) isn't enough to matter. I do find there's more muzzle blast with 9mm out of my Inglis BHP vs my Colt with 1" barrel length difference.
"...master it..." Exactly. Shot placement is far more important.
"...Arthritis in my wrists and thumb joint..." Using 9mm isn't going to help.
Click to expand...

And you base this on, what? Keeping gun weights equal a 230 grain .45 at 850 FPS generates just slightly less than twice the recoil energy of a 124 grain 9mm at 1150. I've shot both and there is a distinct difference. Now if you have something more....
 
Carried a "compact", 6+1 .45 for many years, and am now carrying a 7+1 9mm that is literally half the size and weight.
I don't think I'll ever be convinced that 9 is a better defense round than .45, but ammo development has made the 9 good enough; marksmanship is still the most important factor.
 
9mm is cheaper, lighter, allows for more firepower and has a milder recoil.

.45 makes a slightly bigger hole.

Currently, I only use 9mm and .38 special.

I got rid of the .357 and never owned a .45.
 
"9mm is boring."

Yep! And EVERYONE knows that one's choice of a personal protection round should be driven primarily by how much entertainment it provides!

Clowns! Bells! Fireworks! Dancing Bears!

That's what's important!

Jesus wept... really?
 
OP - Caliber is not as important as being able to put the bullet where you want. The bad guy won't be able to tell the difference if hit in the vitals with a .35, 40, or .45 caliber round.
Carry and use whichever you are most comfortable with, can shoot the best, and can practice with the most.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top