Paul Gomez on 9mm vs .45

Carry a double stack .45 - have the best of both.

b) that ammunition when expanded is very similar in diameter
Click to expand...

Only if you think over a tenth of an inch difference isn't significant between a 9mm and a .45.

What's even better - is all of the people who are so excited about the single stack guns coming out...meaning you've now taken the more rounds argument and decided that having the gun easier to conceal is better than more rounds.
 
Last edited:
Gomez didn't only argue in favor of capacity, he argued in favor of ability to put fast, accurate follow-up shots on target.

Many people can do that better with a 9mm than with a .45; for them, a high-cap .45 may not be better than (or as good as) a high-cap 9mm.

As far as concealability vs capacity... If in shorts and a t shirt for a Florida summer outing, can you conceal a Para 14.45 or an FNP45 effectively? More capacity is generally better, but other factors may take on greater importance depending on conditions.
 
As a general rule it is easier to accurately place a second shot with a 9mm than with a .45acp. That's a pretty big advantage.

Mr. Gomez makes an argument I've read or heard many times, including on this forum. I tend to agree with it to a point.

Still more fun to shoot the .45 though.
 
I generally don't think a high-capacity
magazine is very important in an SD weapon. You very rarely read about SD shootings involving more than a shot or two. 5-shot .38 snubbies have been serving admirably for ages. I also don't see a huge difference in recovery times / second shot times when I shoot 9, .40, and .45. 9 is certainly faster, but tiny, scant fractions of seconds that I don't really think matter.

This is for me only. Your mileage may vary.

I prefer bigger bullets in bigger guns, but I still like 9 in a subcompact capacity. It really shines in that role, for my two cents of hot air. :)
 
Defense

I really like high capacity pistols for carry. Some always use the term "spray and pray" to denigrate rapid fire. There are people (McCoolick that shoots for S&W - spelling???). He's quite accurate at rapid fire. In a fight if you gave him just one second, at room distance, you would have 11 rounds in your chest. I have little difficulty shooting 6-7 rounds or so in one second and keeping all on target at 8 yards. I think (never been there) that might be an effective tactic for close encounter defense.
 
Actually I think platforms summary is pretty accurate. I think the bears and spray and pray stuff is off target. Big difference between firing till aggression ends and pray and spray.

Paul did say he carries a 9mm. And suggested he does so due to increased capacity. And that all modern ammunition is being fine tuned to do the same thing. All pretty much in line with most peoples thinking.

As evidenced by the posts in this thread the video didn't help advance the age old argument. It should be viewed as one mans opinion on the subject.
 
Posted by dabluesguy: Oh great...another proponent of the "spray and pray" philosophy. .... Doesn't marksmanship count any more?
Click to expand...
Anyone who has availed himself or herself of any kind of high performance pistol shooting training relevant to SD skills understands that "marksmanship", as envisioned by those familiar with bullseye shooting at the range, is not a good analog for shooting to defend oneself.

High capacity mags are appropriate for LEOs but I don't know that it's a must for home defense. I've not heard of a homeowner having to empty a 17-round clip into an intruder.
Click to expand...
When one has to draw and fire extremely quickly when being attacked with minimal warning by a desperate attacker who is moving extremely fast and must land enough hits to stop him to prevent his own serious injury, and be prepared for a second attacker (as likely as not) at the same time), one starts to appreciate the advantages of a light recoiling handgun with a double column magazine.

Think five or more hits per second on a stationary steel plate at seven yards, commencing firing a little more than a second from the signal to draw from concealment.
 
Posted by LockedBreech: I generally don't think a high-capacity magazine is very important in an SD weapon. You very rarely read about SD shootings involving more than a shot or two. 5-shot .38 snubbies have been serving admirably for ages.
Click to expand...

Might I suggest this for a small sample of real world data.

Here are some other data that are consistent with Tom Givens'.

Tom's comments: (1) a minority of the encounters occurred at home; (2) the only students of his who were killed had not been carrying; (3) magazine cpacity became critical in several cases, and (3) "carry a 'real gun' ".
 
High capacity mags are appropriate for LEOs but I don't know that it's a must for home defense. I've not heard of a homeowner having to empty a 17-round clip into an intruder.
Click to expand...
These days, with the increase in home invasions by multiple intruders, it makes perfect sense to have a high cap handgun. Even better, an AR or AK.


Anyone who has availed himself or herself of any kind of high performance pistol shooting training relevant to SD skills understands that "marksmanship", as envisioned by those familiar with bullseye shooting at the range, is not a good analog for shooting to defend oneself.
Click to expand...
I think OldMarksman hit the nail on the head here. Its all about the "knowing", and the closer you get to reality in practice, the more you "know" and understand. Anybody can drill tight little groups in a bullseye target, what can you do when things get a little more athletic and there are more than one?


Basing your life on statistics is your business, but the old rule of threes, while cute, will likely get you killed in many situations. Personally, I prefer to carry a gun with 17 rounds and only need one round, that to carry a 5 shot gun, and need 6.

None of these things are the Sword of Todd, and regardless what you have, you shoot them to the ground with whatever it takes to get them there. If there are more than one, then it gets a little more complicated. Hope you have enough ammo on board to deal wit the problem, or are a world class speed reloader.


This is a link to an Ayoob article in American Handguner a few issues back. It deals with a one on one police shooting at point blank range. Both shooters had .45s. (bad guy SIG, cop Glock). 23 rounds expended in 5-10 seconds at 5 feet. Both shot to slide lock. The bad guy got one hit out of 9, the cop, 7 of 14. His comment at the end about why he thought his first rounds were probably "misses" is interesting.

Starts at page 32

http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/FMGPublications/AmericanHandgunner/AHMJ11/
 
Putting 2 rounds of 147 gain 9mm in said target both puts lots more lead then that one 230 grain round and raises the statistical chances of putting one in the bread basket.
Click to expand...
Of course what happens when your two 9mm hits are 30 seconds apart as in the 1986 Miami shootout referenced in the video. (I know the last hit on Platt was actually a 38 before somebody tries to argue details).
Power vs recoil, size vs capacity are always compramises.
 
He did say all modern ammunition performs to the same standards so by his logic a 9mm is every bit as effective as the largest hangun calibers. So Mr. Gomez apparently has no problem with carrying a 9mm for bear protection. Just sayin
 
Coldbeer. Here I think we need a bit of caution. If I remember correctly Paul took the time to count off some of the common self defense calibers. At that point I was waiting for him to mention .380. Which he did not. So I think he was qualifying his statement a bit. Also remember the video title. He was primarily focused on 9mm and .45. And looking at the FBI protocol for these calibers.

In the end I think his conclusion is pretty simple. With modern ammunition the two calibers are near enough to make no difference. So why not go with the added capacity.

ETA: Coldbeer. I lived on Birch off Gudith for years.
 
He said modern ammunition in duty calibers is designed to perform to the same penetration standards, though there are two similar standards that might be used, FBI or IBWA.

He also said that since 9mm, .40, and .45 are designed to penetrate to the same depths, and end up expanding to fairly similar diameters, then shootability and capacity matter more than specific caliber.

If somebody can shoot the .45 as well and as quickly, and if they can conceal a high-cap .45, then that might be their best choice.

For some, that will mean a high-cap .40 makes sense. (Remember, too, that the .45acp requires a longer grip frame than do the 9mm or .40, so hand size and trigger reach could rule out the .45 for some shooters who don't mind the recoil, itself.)

I am not a lot faster with a 9mm than I am with a .45 or a .40, but I am somewhat faster with the 9mm. Is it enough to make a difference? Not sure, but it might.

Another factor to consider is that the lower cost of 9mm ammo could mean more live fire practice for the 9mm shooter - and that practice could very well matter a lot more than recoil would matter.

This is one reason why it confuses me when people want to differentiate between range guns and carry guns. My carry guns all get a lot of trigger time. I am not comfortable with the idea of carrying a gun that I don't shoot a lot.
 
I really don't understand why this becomes such a hot topic. 9mm, 40, 45 with modern defensive ammo all perform really close to each other, so how is more capacity somehow worse than less? I get so sick of this argument that 8 rounds of 45acp out of the almighty 1911 is somehow far superior to 20 rounds of 9mm out of an XDM or SP-01. I have owned and carried 1911's for years, but I no longer due and one of the reasons I don't is the limited capacity. 20 is better than 8 and just like the oft quoted philosophy on carry: "It's better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it".
 
OldMarksman said:
Might I suggest this for a small sample of real world data.

Here are some other data that are consistent with Tom Givens'.

Tom's comments: (1) a minority of the encounters occurred at home; (2) the only students of his who were killed had not been carrying; (3) magazine cpacity became critical in several cases, and (3) "carry a 'real gun' ".
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff, thank you. :)
 
He also said that since 9mm, .40, and .45 are designed to penetrate to the same depths, and end up expanding to fairly similar diameters,
Click to expand...
Except in the real world the 45 on average has a 30% larger perminate cavity volume. So caliber won't matter unless it does:rolleyes:
 
mavracer, that depends on when the .45 starts expanding; it is not only a matter of ultimate diameter.

Velocity and energy have some import, too.

Meanwhile, the extra .05 to .10 inch radius the .45 will achieve may not be enough to make up for any negative impact the round or platform has on the shooter's practical accuracy. (IE, shot placement is still king, and some shooters score better hits with the lighter caliber.)

The bigger diameter helps cut more small blood vessels, if the round doesn't hit a vital structure. The difference in impact probably will be more of a deferred than an immediate effect.

OTOH, a shot to the CNS with a 9mm will most likely have exactly the same effect as a shot to the CNS with a .45.

Again, if one shoots the .45 as well as one shoots the 9mm, and if one can reasonably carry the high-cap .45, then one might be better off with the high-cap .45.

Personally, I don't like the G21; I find the FNP45 a bit on the large side, and same for the Witness .45 / CZ97 line; and one of the things I like about the 1911 (its slimness) goes out the window in the Para or STI high-cap grip mode.

So, a high-cap .45 for me would be the M&P45 (10+1). Then the question becomes, do I shoot it better than I shoot my PPQ (15+1 in the gun, with spare 17rd mags) or my PX4 .40 (14+1 with spare 14rd mags)?

From testing it in IDPA scenarios, I score good hits with the M&P45, but I score good hits, faster, with the PPQ. The PX4, not surprisingly, falls somewhere in between, but closer to the M&P45.

In my case, I feel perfectly comfortable with any of the three pistols. The PPQ is lighter, slimmer, and somewhat easier to conceal, though, and I do shoot it just a bit faster, and get a higher total capacity with it. So... why should I give more weight to caliber?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top