Whats your favorite caliber between...9mm...40..and 45 ??

Go ahead...Pick your favorite caliber...

  • 9mm

    Votes: 59 32.8%

  • 40

    Votes: 30 16.7%

  • 45

    Votes: 91 50.6%
  • Total voters
    180
  • Poll closed .
DocSWAT - You claim to have seen autopsies that show the .45 doing more damage, including damage outside the wound channel to distal tissues from hydrostatic shock or somthing. You cite war heroes who used the .45 as if that made them more effective than if they had a Luger in their hand and that is your proof that the .45 is more effective. You claim to have seen shootings where people dropped with a couple rounds of .45, while there are countless incidents of people dropping from a couple rounds of 9mm so that means nothing.

Well, I have seen autopsies and studied the best examiners in the world who disagree with you and say that the 9mm and .45 make an identical wound and are of the same effectiveness. I can cite studies left and right showing time and again that the .45 is not the hammer of Thor, nor more effective than everytthing else. I have seen a guy take 5 rounds of .45 and not be phased by it. I have seen guys take all calibers, and I have never seen a direct trend in which calibers worked better. Some guys drop to one 9mm, some guys are not phased by 5 .45's. 355sigfan is a cop and I have heard him many times tell of his buddy who plugged a guy 4 times with a .45 and his fellow officer was then killed by said man.

So, we have two experiences in the same areas that contradict each other. Leave it to everyone else, I suppose, to decide whose experiences are more valid.
 
for you war hero buffs

ok let's look at some fuzzy numbers dealing with ww2 and the .45.

German troops issued and used the 9mm

US/Allied troops issued and used the .45

Hmmm, let's see there were 12 Allied troops Killed for every german that was killed.

Just better training!? or could it maybe have someting to do with equipment and caliber choice as well as training. I would venture a guess that Lots of the lead flying around during the big one came flying out of smg's not pistol's anyways.

The very unpolitically correct way I look at things is that The German's make some of the best killing machines ever devised by man and continue to do so. MP5 anyone...I may just go so far as to say this the .45 may be the all american manstopper but I can be pretty sure that if the germans picked the 9mm it is probably because they saw it as most efficient manstopper when you are looking at the big picture. The germans planted alot of god loving, tough as nails, aint gonna ever give up, .45 totin, red blooded Americans.

Yeah, we won the war(of attrition) but I will ask the guy's that did the most killin about what works best. As matter of fact, a country the size of missouri was well on the way to beating the crap out of the entire world....with 9mm's and bolt action rifles. That is an impressive record. Go figure.

Large scale wars and the holy .45

wwI --the flu ended that one for both sides.

ww2 --12 to 1 aint no fun, gotta give the germans the tech advantage.

Korea --a draw .45 breaking even

Nam --got our asses kicked out hard .45 no help there.

Desert Storm --9mm and we are back on top baby. Whew, it's been a long time. We aint never kicked ass like that before.

Me, I like both calibers, but I can carry more 9mm so that means I get to shoot more. The more I shoot the happier I am. 9mm= more shooting= better shot placement= more happiness. Always a plus. As for .40 I'm suprised it is still around. -ddt
 
.45ACP = To shoot BGs
.357 magnum = To shoot BGs in their cars
.223 = To shoot BGs that are in great numbers
.308 = To shoot BG from afar
:D
 
I look at it this way. I can't afford a bunch of premium bullets like cor bon 9mms or bullets of similar quality from other makers. I can afford .45 FMJ. The FMJ is probably not as good as the premium 9mm or .40 bullets, but it is still a proven round. That can not be said of non premium bullets used with other calibers.
 
When I leave the house carrying one of these three calibers in the pistols I have, I feel about equally well armed with 13 9mm's or 10 .40's. I feel a little less well armed with 7 or 8 .45's, but just a little. I still feel good about being able to have any of them. In pistols of equal capacity, I would prefer the .40. But I really like all three better than a sharp stick, and I doubt the practical difference on humans as opposed to bowling pins or paper plates is very meaningful. I've been reading and listening to this topic by "experts" and amateurs alike for over 30 years and isn't it funny, we haven't gotten to the bottom of it yet? I doubt we ever will. I think we should feel fortunate in this country, (most parts anyway) that we even have the option for this to be a meaningful discussion. Lighten up and respect the opinions of others. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
My choice is the good old .45acp, if if was good enough for great grand pappy in the war to end all wars, it's good enough for me. ;)

7th
 
Ed2000


45 ball is proven allright proven to fail at least 40% of the time. The rounds you speak of the premium are proven to work 90 + % of the time. I know of one good cop that died after he shot a bad guy 4 times with 45 ball. Don't tell me that stuff works because it don't
PAT
 
"If I put 5 rounds of 45 in a person and he is still coming at me I'm am going to empty my other 5 into him...if he is still coming..." I'm aiming for the head too, to change my shorts!:D

Sam ...9x23!:rolleyes: ... :D
 
Its true the .45 has a 40% failure rate, but that's lower than other calibers when using non premium bullets. Those people shot with 5 rounds of .45 FMJ with no effect, would in all probability, have been unphased by 5 rounds of .355 Sig or any other round, with or without the latest and greatest expanding cartridge.

My arguement is simply that .45 FMJ isn't bad, its just not the "best". The same can't be said of 9mm or similar rounds with FMJ.
 
Ed2000

40 fmj has a 70% street record better than the 45. Why use fmj when there are so many good jhp's available. The 45 is a wonderfull round but feed it a good bullet. I prefer the 357 sig. I just got hired with a different department and I will be turning in my department issued 45 and carring my own GLock 31 in 357. I will be extreemly happy to make the change.
PAT
 
Hey,

I must question the .40 FMJ being better than the .45 FMJ. There is no rational reason for such a finding except maybe a problem with the sample from which the finding is drawn. I say this simply because the rounds travel at similar speeds, don't expand, and the .40 is of course smaller. I don't want to start and arguement, but I just don't believe that claim.

Anyway, the answer to your question is simply - MONEY.

In the past, I normally carried .45 JHPs. Unfortunately, I traded guns and calibers and have just gone back to the .45. I have FMJ that I know works (in many respects). I can't afford to function test my gun with JHPs right now. Until I can, I'll feel OK with FMJ at half the price.
 
The 9X19 followed by the .45. Why? Because the 9mm and .45 are the only cartridges mentioned in the survey that have had pistols specifically designed for them. The .40 has been retrofit into pistols for the 9mm (and the .357SIG also).

The 9mm penetrates better than the .45. I can carry more rounds of the 9mm over the .45, and I personally can shoot the .9mm a heck of a lot more effectively than a .45. But still if I shoot a .45 in a gun designed for a .45, I can be assured of reliability.

Modern 9mm cartridges are very very effective and with low recoil combined with effectiveness, I hit what I am aiming at. I like the 9mm.
 
The 9X19 followed by the .45. Why? Because the 9mm and .45 are the only cartridges mentioned in the survey that have had pistols specifically designed for them. The .40 has been retrofit into pistols for the 9mm (and the .357SIG also).

Thats crap. The usp was designed as a 40 then downgraded to a weak 9mm later. The sig 229 was built as a 40. The glocks have had the necessary changes to handle the 357 sig and 40. Your limiting yourself based on what a gun happened to be chambered in first. The people that design the guns know a bit more than you and are more educated I am sure they know what their doing. Thats like saying you should not buy a car with a v 8 if it was first offered as a straight 6. Give me a break.
PAT
 
The .45 was designed for one thing - Knock down power. Our men needed to knock down the Moros during the war in the Phillippines. This was needed because smaller calibers weren't doing this and our men were being killed AFTER shooting the enemy. The round was such a success that it has been used since. I believe our military switched to the 9mm to be more standard with NATO. Although, our special forces, who are more concerned with getting the job done than with other issues, have stuck with the .45

I shouldn't let myself get sucked into the argument that the 9mm has the same knock down power as the .45, but I just couldn't help myself.

So, there's stories about men being shot 4-5 times with a .45 and still able to shoot back. So what? People have been struck by lightning and lived. This is EXTREMELY RARE.

I'll stick with the design of John Moses Browning thank you.
 
Last time I checked, 9 and 45 both have 63% OSS in FMJ, and 40 has around 70% in FMJ. I don't think the military lost much, if anything, switching to 9 FMJ from 45 FMJ. And they gained more rounds and NATO compatability.

I seem to recall the best JHPs are somewhere in the high 80's to low 90's for 9 and low to mid 90's for 40 and 45. Do I care? No. I count myself among those who don't worry about the small differences in OSS between the major calibers.

My vote went to 9. It's cheap (and I like to shoot all I can!), I personally enjoy shooting 9 more than 40 or 45 (did I mention I like to shoot?), I shoot 9 better than 40 or 45, and I believe it has more than adequate defensive performance. For every 100 one shot gunfights I get into in my lifetime, well shucks, I might just lose 5.567323432 of them. Maybe I should give myself some extra credit for shot placement with all that extra practice-make that 5.0 of them ;-)
 
For me, it's gotta be the 9. Perceived recoil has nothing to do with it - I can handle all 3, just fine. The difference is cost - I can afford to practice more with the 9 than I can with either of the others. Cost is also the reason I carry Silvertips - I can't afford enough hydra-shocks for a steady diet during practice...I can afford silvertips. I'd much rather have a gun/cartridge combo that I've put enough rounds through that I know I'm competent, and that the gun can handle. As for stopping power, I put faith in any of these 3 choices.
 
effective caliber

If you do your part, the bullet will do its part. I've fired the 9mm and the .45ACP. I simply cannot hit anything with a .45, and I'm a fairly decent shot and I can shoot accurately with a .44 Magnum, not that I'd want to all the time. Can't speak on the .40, never fired it.

For me the calibers that I can shoot accurately are

9x18mm Makarov
.38 Special,
9mm Parabellum
.357 Magnum
.44 Magnum

Your mileage may vary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top