Paul Gomez on 9mm vs .45
- Thread starter drew332
- Start date
Unfortunately, with re: to accounts I'm familiar with, it's not THE intruder so much as THOSE intruders in many instances.
Frankly, it's sad to hear a fellow shooter say that "high capacity" magazines are for LE and not civilians. The "high cap" mag.s for my pistols are the STANDARD mag's desiged for the guns. The anti's popularized the "high cap" term to justify banning the magazines.
Yes, marksmanship counts, but it seems obvious that having the ability to accuracy place shots from a 15 rd. mag. could have advantages over doing the same with an 8 shot mag. Especially if you're standing in your shorts a 2am and you have to settle the issue with the weapon that's in your hand without benefit of reloading.
I read a post on the same site as the video where a poster didn't buy the larger mag. capacity argument because citizens "have no business" getting into gunfights where large numbers of shots are required. That's just for LE officers.
Good grief.If it's a matter of your choosing, avoid all gunfights and hastily depart before they happen. If you can't, you'll not likely be comforted by the thought that you had "no business" needing all that ammo.
Sometimes the thinking from our own camp is difficult to understand and digest. Perhaps it wasn't quite meant the way it sounded---hopefully.
SocialAnarchist
Moderator
I guess I will have to tell my wife, and youngest son, the fact that they can easily handle my .45, and both hate my 9mm that they must be wrong. Both complain about the sharpness of the recoil of the 9mm and much prefer the slower push recoil of the .45.
I have read over and over here about repeat target acquisition and following shots. To me that is less about the gun and the ammunition and more about practice, practice, practice. I do double and triple taps, but I also practice shooting as fast as I can, emptying the magazine, reloading, and doing it again. Not just to see how fast I can shoot, but how accurate I can be shooting fast.
To be brutally honest though, I don't feel inadequately protected whether carrying a .45 with 8 shots or a 9mm with 16.
I have read over and over here about repeat target acquisition and following shots. To me that is less about the gun and the ammunition and more about practice, practice, practice. I do double and triple taps, but I also practice shooting as fast as I can, emptying the magazine, reloading, and doing it again. Not just to see how fast I can shoot, but how accurate I can be shooting fast.
To be brutally honest though, I don't feel inadequately protected whether carrying a .45 with 8 shots or a 9mm with 16.
It has, but many seem to have stagnated, and not kept up with some of the changes, both in hardware, as well as some of the more recent training and social trends.
I dont think the trade offs are as much of an issue as they once were thought to be. Except in maybe a few marginal cases, I seriously doubt the difference in caliber is going to be an issue. All things being somewhat equal in that respect, I dont see that guns of a similar or smaller size, that carry twice the onboard ammo, can be a bad thing, especially if they are easier to shoot realistically with.
That likely comes from the hunting, trap, and bullseye side of the shooting community. Trust me, I know, Ive been a full auto owner for over 30 years, and have heard all the usual complaints and insults.
From what Ive seen, I truly believe, that unfortunately, when the time comes, many of "our own" will quickly give up anyone they think might be sacrificial lambs, that may allow them to keep theirs, after all, thiers do have a sporting use.
Ive shot more than my share of .45 over the years, and still do on a regular basis. A few years back, I saw the light and switched over to high capacity 9mm's, for most of the reasons discussed here. There is no doubt in my mind it was the right choice. I can shoot faster and more accurate with the 9mm's than I can the .45's, .40's, and a couple of others, and I can do it longer before I have to reload. In some cases, three times plus longer.
Being able to shoot the heavier calibers well just translates to shooting the lighter calibers even better. While the .45's may seem to be less snappy, they really arent, and they do take more time and effort to get back on target quickly with, no matter how much you practice. If you can do it quick with the .45, the 9mm will be just that much easier.
Don't take this personally, but physics doesn't care how much you practice.
Yes given the right gun and shooter and the right load a .45acp can be fired more quickly and more accurately than some 9mm.
But out of the same type and weight of gun with a shooter with the same amount of training the 9mm will have less recoil. Science is science.
mavracer, bullet design is also part of physics. Expansion being affected more by velocity than by mass is part of physics. Energy rising with the square of velocity is part of physics, too.
Seems you want to pick and choose your science based solely on properties driven by mass...
Seems you want to pick and choose your science based solely on properties driven by mass...
Before things get off into quantum physics here, we are just talking about pistol bullets that are questionable in effect on a good day. People take much more powerful rifle hits and keep on going, arguing over slight differences between 9 and 45 seems a little silly.
Gomez's whole point was/is, there isnt enough of a difference between them to make any real world difference. They all meet the same criteria, so they will all perform similarly. Since all of them are poor stopers at best, your only logical option, is to just keep shooting until the threat or threats are down.
Picking the gun that will allow you to do this the quickest and easiest, and stay in the fight the longest without reloading, makes the most sense to me. Caliber is pretty much irrelevant.
Gomez's whole point was/is, there isnt enough of a difference between them to make any real world difference. They all meet the same criteria, so they will all perform similarly. Since all of them are poor stopers at best, your only logical option, is to just keep shooting until the threat or threats are down.
Picking the gun that will allow you to do this the quickest and easiest, and stay in the fight the longest without reloading, makes the most sense to me. Caliber is pretty much irrelevant.
Sectional density is a big player for penetration, yes.
But bigger bullets at lower speeds do not automatically make bigger holes. And if the shooter has more control with the lighter round, the odds of the hole being in a spot that will have immediate effect are higher.
Again, some shooters will have no penalty from the .45, in terms of accuracy and effective speed.
I have excellent accuracy with my .45s. I have equally good accuracy, but noticeably better effective speed (strings of controlled pairs, multiple targets) with my 9mm pistols - assuming roughly equivalent platforms.
I base that on timed events.
Go to a GSSF match sometime - that is a league where you will see a bunch of shooters with very similar platforms, shooting multiple calibers. The 9mm guys tend to beat the .357SIG, .40S&W, 10mm, .45ACP, and .45GAP guys, or at least that has been true in my limited experience, and in the experiences of friends who shot GSSF for years.
I used to think, because .45 recoil did not (and does not) bother me that I could shoot .45 as quickly as I could shoot 9mm. Experience (and somebody actually timing me) proved me wrong.
I wonder how many people who argue about this have actually put their theory to the test, with a side by side, similar platform, timed comparison?
But bigger bullets at lower speeds do not automatically make bigger holes. And if the shooter has more control with the lighter round, the odds of the hole being in a spot that will have immediate effect are higher.
Again, some shooters will have no penalty from the .45, in terms of accuracy and effective speed.
I have excellent accuracy with my .45s. I have equally good accuracy, but noticeably better effective speed (strings of controlled pairs, multiple targets) with my 9mm pistols - assuming roughly equivalent platforms.
I base that on timed events.
Go to a GSSF match sometime - that is a league where you will see a bunch of shooters with very similar platforms, shooting multiple calibers. The 9mm guys tend to beat the .357SIG, .40S&W, 10mm, .45ACP, and .45GAP guys, or at least that has been true in my limited experience, and in the experiences of friends who shot GSSF for years.
I used to think, because .45 recoil did not (and does not) bother me that I could shoot .45 as quickly as I could shoot 9mm. Experience (and somebody actually timing me) proved me wrong.
I wonder how many people who argue about this have actually put their theory to the test, with a side by side, similar platform, timed comparison?
OldMarksman
Staff
There are statements all over the web to the effect that momentum is the determinant in penetration, and people repeat them all the time. There are also links to aricles that state that sectional density, bullet shape, bullet construction, and energy are the drivers.
Which is true?
I haven't done any testing, but I do know that, all other things being equal, the distance required to stop a car is roughly proportional to the square of the velocity. Energy. WORK.
Yes, the kinetic energy is all converted to heat, but what we are measuring is distance.
I suggest that what stops the bullet is work.
Back when the .45-70 and .50-110 were the big players in the game fields, advertisements of the new 2000+ fps smokeless cartridges used to emphasize how many more pine boards were penetrated by the new .30 WCF, .30 Army, and .303 Savage rounds than by the old stand-bys with their much heavier bullets.
All other things being equal, I believe that energy is the important factor. But unless all other things are equal, one will not see a square of the velocity relationship. And all other things are rarely equal.
I would not discount the advantage of a 147 grain 9mm bullet over a 115 grain projectile. But I will not simply repeat what I have seen on the web regarding penetration and momentum, without knowing more, either.
Yeah, higher momentum will push the target farther; basic physics. The question is, what happens inside the target.
Science is science yes, the impulse of the 9mm is quicker than the longer push of the 45.... But no where that I am aware of that a faster push is easier than a longer push... In fact by spreading out the impulse it would seem to make sense that the deflection is less as ones muscles have more time to deal with the impulse....
In car accidents we seek to increase the time the body has to deal with the impact, which is why car bodies deform more than they otherwise would. why do we do it? Because longer impulse is easier.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
That wasn't what I heard in the video. What I heard was that all modern self-defense rounds are designed to provide similar penetration -- between 12" and 18". He then showed an image that showed all the cartridges penetrating almost exactly the same depth, and creating almost exactly the same wound channel.AK103K said:
My problem is, I have seen other, similar comparative illustrations in which the 9mm, .40 S&W and .45 ACP did NOT all penetrate to exactly the same depth, and did NOT create almost exactly the same size and shape of wound channel.
So to me what he said boils down to, "I'd rather carry the round that lets me shoot more before I have to reload."
Statisticly speaking the difference in split times, accuracy, and effectiveness of rounds 14-18 are also very insignifigant.
One other thing I would point out speed and accuracy is even less signifigant when dealing with full size guns, Going to smaller guns where the difference in controlability increases the capacity advantages decreases.
We must always keep in mind that handguns are a compromise. As Gomez said we carry handguns because they are relatively small and light weight compared to a long arm. However, defensive handguns are weak compared to long arms.
Starting your analysis from that premise, you then go on to evaluate various factors to choose which handgun upon which you are willing to bet your life. You assign a value to each factor and decide which is best for you.
We are fortunate that we are able to make that choice. Most adults throughout the world are denied this basic human right to the necessary tools of self-defense. (The U.S. adult population is something like 210,000,000 and the world adult population is something like 5,000,000,000 [near 70% of 7,000,000,000])
One basic tenant of defensive handgun training that seems to be taught widely is to shoot at least twice to center of mass, evaluate the situation and proceed as necessary. Some training says for 9mm shoot three times to COM, and with .40 and up shoot twice before assessing, then proceed. (assuming a single threat)
Starting your analysis from that premise, you then go on to evaluate various factors to choose which handgun upon which you are willing to bet your life. You assign a value to each factor and decide which is best for you.
We are fortunate that we are able to make that choice. Most adults throughout the world are denied this basic human right to the necessary tools of self-defense. (The U.S. adult population is something like 210,000,000 and the world adult population is something like 5,000,000,000 [near 70% of 7,000,000,000])
One basic tenant of defensive handgun training that seems to be taught widely is to shoot at least twice to center of mass, evaluate the situation and proceed as necessary. Some training says for 9mm shoot three times to COM, and with .40 and up shoot twice before assessing, then proceed. (assuming a single threat)
Im a little confused here. What you didnt hear was exactly what he said?
The rounds in question here are rounds designed to meet a specific criteria, which the rounds in that pic in the video show. You can always go outside the criteria to try and make your point, which often happens in these type threads, but it really doesnt change anything.
There, I fixed it for you.
In what context? One target, multiple targets, misses on targets that are moving or while you were moving, or both, things that happen in the real world that dont normally happen on a static range in unrealistic practice?
Then theres always those people who just blow your mind, and arent impressed with your choice in firearm and/or caliber, or how well your bullets are supposed to work, that dont seem to want to go down, for whatever reason, and you need to keep shooting them until they do.
Capacity has nothing to do with time (except for the running dry/reload part) or accuracy, it "may" have a good deal to do with effectiveness and outcome though.
I would think it would be the other way around. If the gun is to hard to shoot, you may well need those additional rounds to make up for your poor choice in weaponry.