What are the Pros and Cons of the .45 ACP?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the explanations, looking back, perhaps I should not have asked for an explanation of the math, as much as an explanation of this...

A 230 gr bullet at 850 fps has almost twice the recoil of a 124 gr bullet at 1200 fps. 7.7 ft lbs vs 4.7 ft lbs.
Click to expand...

I won't claim to have a good understanding of all the terms of the math, we are naught but humble pirates here... but it seems to be saying the .45 has near twice the recoil of the 9mm, and that is simply not what I experience when shooting them.

Is this one of those "tricks of math" things? Like when someone jumps into the pool, swims to the far end, then swims back, and the math "proves" that they didn't go anywhere???
 
Well, in an idealized gun (no muzzle brake, everything gets ejected forward, no moving parts).

Momentum of gun = momentum of bullet (known) + momentum of ejected gasses (pain in the backside to calculate without spending too much time)

Momentum is mass * velocity, so, eg. the 9mm firing 124 grain bullets at 1200 fps (in metric, 8g, 360 m/s) will impart 2.9 kg m/s of momentum to the bullet. A .45 firing 230 grain bullets at a leisurely 830 fps (in metric 15g, 250 m/s) has a bit less muzzle energy, but more momentum - about 3.8 kg m/s.

So, assuming we have two 1kg guns (2.2 pounds) they'll be launched back at 2.9m/s and 3.8m/s respectively. Well, hypothetically, since your arm will have to absorb this. However, assuming you are firing them from a Glock and 1911 respectively, the guns would be launched back at 3.5 m/s and 3.5 m/s respectively, because the 1911 is heavier.

Stopping a 0.8kg gun and a 1.1kg gun moving 3.5m/s isn't all that different in feel (and the kinetic energy of the recoiling 1911 in 0.45 is only 35-40% higher then a, say, 9mm Glock), and felt recoil depends on other factors, too. People are sensitive to acceleration (change of velocity over time) and even to higher derivatives of acceleration ("jerk", change of acceleration over time). Lightweight handguns firing rounds with high muzzle velocity feel "snappy" - they're accelerated quicker.

I don't know of any math model for "felt recoil" and the best way to determine it is to shoot and see for yourself, but some approximations can be made. All else being the same - heavier round = more recoil, heavier gun = less felt recoil, higher muzzle velocity = 'snappier' recoil.
 
Thanks for the explanations, looking back, perhaps I should not have asked for an explanation of the math, as much as an explanation of this...

Quote:
A 230 gr bullet at 850 fps has almost twice the recoil of a 124 gr bullet at 1200 fps. 7.7 ft lbs vs 4.7 ft lbs.
I won't claim to have a good understanding of all the terms of the math, we are naught but humble pirates here... but it seems to be saying the .45 has near twice the recoil of the 9mm, and that is simply not what I experience when shooting them.

Is this one of those "tricks of math" things? Like when someone jumps into the pool, swims to the far end, then swims back, and the math "proves" that they didn't go anywhere???
Click to expand...

It is not just total recoil energy that is a factor. Recoil velocity makes a big difference in perceived recoil.

Standard pressure 9mm Luger is loaded to the same case pressure as .40 S&W, but the .40 caliber round has a much steeper pressure curve resulting in higher recoil velocity for any given projectile muzzle energy. That is what makes the recoil feel "sharp" or "snappy" to many people.

The mass of the pistol also makes a huge difference. Some of the nastier recoil I have experienced was shooting little .380 Auto out of a small pocket pistol. This article explains why:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...n/measuring-recoil-comparison-pistols-part-1/

The Ruger LCP chambered in .380 Auto has much less recoil energy than either a 9mm Glock 17 or a .45 ACP Colt Model 1911, yet it has significantly greater recoil velocity.

Also look at the Colt Model 1911 shooting 230 gr .45 ACP compared to the first entry for the Glock 17 shooting standard pressure 124gr 9mm Luger (the second G17 entry was shooting a 9mm +P+ load). The 230gr .45 ACP of course has greater recoil energy but the recoil velocity for the two pistols is identical.
 
Pros:
1. Has a proven record of stopping power even with FMJ ammunition
2. In the M1911, a proven design, well thought out (Thank you, JMB). Easy to field strip and clean, spare parts readily available.
Cons:
1. The M1911 a little big for some people.
2. Requires somewhat more training to master. Not a good choice for beginners.
 
Here is why I like .45ACP and sometimes carry a SIG P250 Compact in .45ACP (when in a carry state) and before I went to DA and no external safeties used to sometimes carry a S&W 1911SC.

Recoil. The recoil of a .45 is heavier than that of a 9mm, but a 9mm is snappier. In a smaller pistol, I want a 9mm (or .40 but for different reasons) and not a .45, but in a larger pistol it is kind of a wash and/or based upon which you prefer (I don't have much preference as I find both to be pretty comfortable most of the time). The .45 is more of a push straight back, while the 9mm and .40 give a bit more muzzle flip (for me anyway) so in theory it should give quicker follow-up shots.

Size. Yes, with modern JHPs, .357SIG, 9mm, .40S&W and .45ACP should perform pretty similarly if the hollowpoint expands properly. The problem is, clothing can get clogged in the hollowpoint and prevent it from expanding (look at some of the FBI style tests in ballistic gel using 4 layers of denim to simulate heavy clothing, some of the 9mm and .38spl tests are pretty discouraging). With a .45, if it should fail to expand you still have a nearly 1/2" hole (which is close to what some of the 9mm JHPs will give you if they do expand).

Noise. Any round shot indoors can/will cause hearing issues (certainly temporary ringing, possible permanent damage), but the .45 is more mild in this respect than most other decent defensive calibers.

Cons:
Others have mentioned most of them: capacity, cost, weight, possible reliability issues in a subcompact gun (especially a 3" 1911).

Another, in a subcompact gun (under 3.5") they can fail to give the round enough velocity for the hollowpoint to reliably expand. For this reason, my carry/HD .45 is a larger compact gun and not the smaller subcompacts. In a subcompact, I prefer 9mm (summer) and .40S&W (the rest of the year).
 
It's hard to think of many cons. It's a bit more expensive than the 9mm or .40 but that's it as far as I'm concerned. The pros are a legion.
 
Pro's: It's a very effective handgun cartridge.

Con's: Most 45acp's have a smaller capacity than, say 9mm or .40. Also, I find that 9mm from my Sig X-Five is consistently more accurate at longer ranges than .45acp from my custom STI compensated 2011 pistol. This has lead me to believe that you can probably get a little more accuracy using 9mm than 45 at longer distances.
 
I'm going to start a thread titled "Grapefruit vs Oranges vs Tangerines what is better". 45 vs 9mm gets old quick. They both (all) serve a useful purpose and that's why I have both along with a 40. There are pro's and con's for all three. If I had to choose only one, it would be the grapefruit. :D
 
They both (all) serve a useful purpose and that's why I have both along with a 40.
Click to expand...

Someone needs to invent a 3-barreled, high capacity, semi-auto pistol that can fire all three: 9mm, 40 and .45 In fact, they are 2/3rds of the way there with the AF 2011 - they should have made it in both 9mm and .45acp!!!:D
 
stonewall50 said:
I shot a .45 ACP today and I have to say, it was easy to control. I'm good with recoil. I'm developing stronger arms. But it just makes me wonder what others think about their .45s and why they use them for defensive guns, and why they don't. What they enjoy about the caliber, and what they hate. :)
Click to expand...
I carry a Sig P220 45 acp sometimes. I like 9mm but prefer 45. And my big Sig handles recoil very well. Feels good in my hand
 
distance

I'm going to keep a safe distance from the ballistics/stopping power issue.

I do believe that full size pistols chambered in .45 acp, Sig P220, Glock 21, any 1911 in Gov't Model dimesions, are easiest to shoot, but most difficult to conceal. Same could be said for the Berretta 92, the Sig P226 of course.
 
Only con for me is the recoil of my PT-145; however, it's my carry piece. I'll take the recoil for an 11 shot platform weighing 22 ounces and conceals under a tee shirt.
 
I carry a Sig P220 45 acp sometimes. I like 9mm but prefer 45. And my big Sig handles recoil very well. Feels good in my hand
Click to expand...

I agree with every part of this, except for the Sig being a "big" pistol.

It's not. Its the approximate size of a Commander, considerably smaller than a Government Model 1911A1.

I realize that attitudes change over time, and the "small" Sig seems big compared to the more recent micro mini compact models out there. I don't consider the P220 to be "big". A 1911A1 is "standard" size, a 7.5" Ruger Blackhawk is "big", and a Desert Eagle is "freakln' HUGE", in my book. :D

Over 100 years ago the Army spec'd a caliber, bullet weight and speed that they knew from experience would stop a man, or a horse (with a proper hit).

It will still do that today, although we seldom have the need to stop horses anymore. TO me, the biggest drawback to the .45ACP is the myth that it is a magic bullet. Nothing is, nor can be.

The .45 has a long history of working pretty well (not perfectly but pretty well) with the least effective bullet possible (in terms of stopping power,) the FMJ RN.

It suits my needs, and I like it. That's good enough for me. Its fine with me if you have a different opinion. I'm not in your shoes, and won't tell you what's best for you. Do the same for me, and we'll get along fine. ;)
 
Over 100 years ago the Army spec'd a caliber, bullet weight and speed that they knew from experience would stop a man, or a horse (with a proper hit).
Click to expand...
I hear similar all the time, is there any actual evidence that .45 performs any better than .45 9MM ect. A hit from any of the popular calibers will stop a man. ( with a proper hit ). Tought so. :)
 
Last edited:
...a .45 because they don't make a .46...

I should start off saying, I prefer a .45. That said; the correct caliber and even gun for the job, is the one in your holster.

The listed energy of both a .45 230 grain ball round @ 830 fps and a 9mm 115 grain ball round @ 1250 fps, is almost the same.

The old adage, "big and slow" has proven to be true through the years, but I think if you resurrected everyone ever killed by a 9mm, they would all declare it to be a deadly round.

Point being; it really is a personal choice, and the thing that truly makes the difference in a fight, is how accurately you place that little projectile....
 
Pro - it won the Moro insurrection for us. Hit anywhere for knockdown and a kill

Con - fire one and it will tear your arm off.

- Knowledge from the Internet and people I know. :rolleyes:

I like to shoot it and I like the gun. My 1911 would be a pain to carry as compared to others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top